|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
I think that you can
do this with V 7.2
<FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----From: Nicholas Kormanik
[mailto:nkormanik@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 1:03
PMTo: Metastockusers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE:
[Metastockusers] Question of simple logicMetaStock
Version 8 will let you do multiple explorations at once, and youcan use the
results of one to feed into a later one. Perhaps you canmasterfully
combine a series of explorations, and reach a conclusion. Eventhough
you would be running a series of explorations, to you, with version8, it
will be just as easy as running a single exploration.If you want, you
can then change the order of the exploration series, andthus compare the
number of securities resulting at the end of the process.Nicholas
-----Original Message-----From: Yarroll
[mailto:komin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 4:24 AMTo:
Metastockusers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: [Metastockusers] Question of simple
logicHello List,I have a question which may look silly to
most or all of you but the more Ithink about it, and especially the
combinations of it, the less clear itseems to me :-((I'm trying to
use the Explorer to find occurrences when events are containedwithin the
other events. Let's
say:Event1:=C>ref(C,-1);Event2:=C>ref(C,-1) and
C>mov(C,5,S);As you can see Event2 is completely contained within the
more generalEvent1, ie. Event1 is the bigger set here and Event2 is
completely containedin it, or there are many cases when Event1 is true while
Event2 is not, butnot vice versa.This stuff is obvious. But there
are indicators and settings not so visuallyobvious. The right way to explore
for these would be to enter the followingintoExplorer:cum(
Event1=0 and Event1=1 )and this would yield always 0. So far so
good.Important to note here is the sequence here, from the general event
to theparticular. What if I don't know which is more general? Should I then
runthe exploration both ways, ie.first:cum( Event1=0 and
Event1=1 )and if it yields a number greater than 0, the
reverse:cum( Event1=1 and Event1=0 )and if this one yields
greater than 0, then the conclusion would be thatEvent1 and Event2 are
either mutually exclusive or overlapping.But in order to do that I'd
have to run 2 explorations, would it be possibleto have just one? I have
lots of such explorations to run :-((The only thing I can think of is to
first run the exploration to get thetotal number of occurrences of Event1
and Event2, this tells me which isgreater.Or maybe a formula
like:cum( Event2) / cum( Event1 AND
Event2)if this one yields 1, then we can conclude that Event2 is simply
a subset ofEvent1. Which is exactly what I'm after.Anything else?
Please, even if you have no better idea then pleaseacknowledge if all this
argument makes sense to you at all. I've beenthinking of sets and subsets of
events for a while and I'm afraid I'm losingit :-((Thanks, all
the bestYarroll***<A
href="">http://republika.pl/yarroll999/To
unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:Metastockusers-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxYour use of Yahoo!
Groups is subject to <A
href="">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
To
unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:Metastockusers-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxYour use
of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <A
href="">Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Metastockusers-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
|