How do you practically assess the contribution of a "specific" input to the NS? - page 9

New comment
 
Swetten:

Recognising what? Drawing a ZZ?

I wish you success in this difficult endeavour.

Oh, I almost forgot -- NS is not a panacea, it's just a tool, albeit a very subtle one.

And it will not do wonders, especially when paired with a TZ.

Why drawing? You were taught not to draw.
 
faa1947:
Forward is kind of like valerian. Convince yourself and treat your heart attacks. I've written on the forum many times. The basic test gives one figure of profit. Forward gives another profit figure. A total of two digits is the entire profitability statistics of the system. Don't make my slippers laugh.

Forward is what is behind the right-hand edge of the graph. The data that the NS has not seen.

And on which it should confidently work to the upside.

faa1947:
Why is it drawing? You were taught not to draw.

ZZ is a doodler by nature.

Anything that draws is a waste.

 
Swetten:

Forward is what is behind the right-hand edge of the graph. The data that the NS has not seen.

And on which it should confidently work to the plus side.

Even thirty in the plus does not say anything, and 30 is the number of observations at which t-statistics can be transferred to z-statistics (normal). I am writing that there is no such thing as a two-observation statistic.
 
faa1947:
Even thirty does not say anything, and 30 is the number of observations at which the t-statistics may be passed to the z-statistics (normal). I am writing that there is no such thing as a statistic from two observations.

Well, you know best.

Good luck.

 
Swetten:

Forward is what is behind the right-hand edge of the graph. The data that the NS has not seen.

And on which it should confidently work to the plus side.

ZZ is by nature a drawer.

Everything that draws - to hell with it.

It's too late. That's it. See you tomorrow.
 
faa1947:
Don't make my slippers laugh.
Your regressions are funnier, believe me.
 
faa1947:
I have written on the forum many times. The main test gives one digit of profit. The forward one gives another profit figure. A total of two digits is the entire profitability statistics of the system. Don't make my slippers laugh.
I even answered you once. There are no other options anyway. Mathematical proof of future profitability of the system is a matter of faith. If you don't like 2 figures, fine, I don't like it either, do 100 tests and 100 forwards, 200 (less than 200 - do 1000) figures - and this is statistics, and statistics is already mathematics, and mathematics is little more than faith.
 
Swetten:

ZZ is by nature a drawer.

Anything that draws -- to hell with it.


I'll say this, too -- you're wrong. So it draws,so what? This bogeyman is not so scary if you think about it.... He shows what he has, the situation has changed and he shows what he has again. You just have to take into account his tendency to draw, and no "burning" of ZZ)

 
Figar0:


I'd say you're wrong here, too. So he draws,so what? This scarecrow is not so scary if you think about it.... He shows what he has, the situation has changed and he again shows what he has. You just have to take into account his tendency to draw, and no "burning" of ZZ)

Then ZZ should go into politics. That's the kind of thing they like. :)

But in real trade, in my opinion, it doesn't work.

 
faa1947: Once again, TA and NS have confirmed that TA and NS are an art. 5% can do it, they've got it, and 95% have failed. Nothing to do with science.
There are probably hundreds of thousands of graduates in Russia who have studied the science of econometrics. You are the only one among them so far. And the rest don't come here, because they became millionaires long ago, applying the science.
1234567891011121314
New comment