Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Metastock 6.0 for Window -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Craig DeHaan who wrote (2897)	3/8/1999 9:48:00 PM
From: TA2K	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4056

Craig, You brought up the peak/trough ratio suggestion -- I noticed fairly quickly in the system I was experimenting with that not all mountain ranges are equal, and that appears to make a difference. In other words, I think that a shallow preceding trough tends to lead to different subsequent price behavior than does a deeper trough -- yet my system didn't take trough characteristic into account. I'm not sure yet whether a shallow trough is better or worse than a deeper one, but I do think it statistically makes a difference, and has to be further explored. I'll try out your other suggestions. One additional observation: I use fml(" ") fairly extensively, and sometimes one fml(" ") calls another -- remember the space limitations, etc., in each custom formulation.... Well, as I run the system test right now, I can actually count along with the test for each iteration -- one-one thousand, two-one thousand, three-one thousand, etc.... Thus, optimization across about 4000 iterations/combinations takes over an hour!!! On a 350 MHz Pentium II. My gosh. The manual does say that custom function calls will take longer, but this is ridiculous. I wish Windows 98 had some good disk caching algorithm, or I could do something.... Any ideas?? Thanks, Nicholas