If what you term as raw ( which I assume you mean to be exhaustive search ) says there are 75 steps then I'm not sure why you'd bother using any intelligent optimizer ...
----- Original Message ----- From: Ken Close Date: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 12:33 pm Subject: RE: [amibroker] Optimizing Rotational - Curious Result To: [email protected] > I stopped the optimization after several minutes. The est time was > increasing as I watched. > > TJ said this was a trivial case which the cmae was not designed for. > > _____ > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of cstrader > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 9:56 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [amibroker] Optimizing Rotational - Curious Result > > > But did the cmae approach actually increase or decrease the time > when you > ran it? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Ken Close > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 9:19 AM > Subject: [amibroker] Optimizing Rotational - Curious Result > > I thought this was a curious development---I wondered if it was > possible to > optimize a rotational model. Of course it is. > > To test, I stuck three variables into a fairly long afl code (complex > positionscore calculations). > Raw optimization said 75 steps, estimated time ~ 4 minutes. > > I added the cmae engine statement at the beginning and the > optimize screen > said 9662 steps with est time of ~ 6 hours. > > I thought the "cmae" optimization step would decrease time, not > increase the > time so dramatically. > > What do you think was going on? > > Have any of you optimized a rotational strategy? > > Ken > > > >
