optimizer parameters iterator

Section for discussions related to indicators, use of indicators, and building of trading stategies using indicators.

Moderator: admin

optimizer parameters iterator

Postby TakisGen » Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:23 am

In addition to the current syntax and as an expansion to it, please consider introducing an alternative method accepting a table as values to iterate from.
For example, the user could enter 10;30;5 as usual or {10;15;20;25;30} or even {"m12";"m15";"m30"}. Then, you would pass #t values in table.

One more thing i would like you to consider is adding a custom column in the results that could be written programmatically by the strategy from within the ReleaseInstance() function.

I have found very useful in identifying harmonics that in the Graphic you are showing parameter values against the result, but this is true only in case there is just one optimizable parameter. Please consider adding "Result" in both axis comboboxes so that this future is always selectable.

Thx
TakisGen
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:09 am

Re: optimizer parameters iterator

Postby moomoofx » Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:21 pm

I second this post. These are good suggestions and I would certainly use these enhancements if they existed.

In the past when optimizing non-linear sequences, I have had to convert the parameter (or introduce a new temporary parameter for the purpose of optimization only) that is in the form of a drop-down (stringalternative, integeralternative etc) with all possible values I wish to optimize for. The optimizer then allows me to select all of them as possible inputs for optimization.

Similarly, I have had to do the same for parameter combinations that are not valid. For example, if I have two boolean parameters, there are 4 possible combinations: FF, TF, FT, TT. However, suppose TT is an invalid state, I don't want the optimizer to ever try to run this state. If my strategy asserts and/or errors in this state, the optimizer may switch off due to too many errors.

Allowing me to explicitly specify a complete series of parameter values would be ideal.

Additionally/Alternatively, the introduction of a new optimizer-specific flag that could be set during the prepare if the parameters are not valid. This flag would let the optimizer know to ignore this run without it being interpreted as an "error". This would allow the developer to filter the runs themselves.

Thanks,
MooMooFX
User avatar
moomoofx
FXCodeBase: Confirmed User
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2013 10:26 pm
Location: Okinawa, Japan. http://moomooforex.com


Return to Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests