Pages:
Author

Topic: Top 20 days for Bitcoin - page 145. (Read 110340 times)

hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500
January 23, 2013, 07:45:11 PM
#13
    would love to see this on a log scale, starting at zero.

    What do you mean by this?



    Another possible assumption is that the top 100 days is somehow different than the top 101,102, etc days. Why stop at 100? If you plot all the days then the log curve definitely does not fit. This is originally why I asked what assumptions were usually made with the king effect model. The outliers are only outliers in that they don't fit the proposed model (price=log(rank)). Its not clear from that wikipedia page why we should expect such a relationship between rank and price.

    the wikipedia page has a good graph of population-ranking data behaving in a similar way. the idea is that the few very large data points represent statistical aberrations, as evidenced by that the rest of the price data correlate (with an extremely good r- value) on that scale.

    from this, one assumes: The price events at the top of the list represent behavior that is abnormal in relation to the rest of the [top 100]* trading days.

    *disclaimer: this data only regards the top 100 trading days and makes no prediction about the behavior of any other data set

    from this assumption, we can reason from history that these outlier price events all relate to an event generally regarded as a bubble (i.e. high prices, low stability). the full number of predictions extendable from this assumption was made clear in the OP:

    • Price remains below ~$25, with stability
    • Price rises above ~$25, then quickly collapses below ~$25, with some stability
    • Price rises above ~$25, then continues rising to around $40 before returning to the $25 to $30 level, with little stability
    • Price rises above ~$25, then continues rising to far above $25 before collapsing but remaining above $25, with almost no stability

    The king effect means that it is unlikely we will see both new highs and stability. One has to go.
    [/list]

    Ok, but why does the price=log(rank) (of top 100 prices) imply stability? What is the mechanism behind this? Stability is something that is assessed over time, a factor which the above graph ignores. I'm not trying to say its wrong, just that I don't know if I follow the assumptions that need to be made to draw inferences from it.
    sr. member
    Activity: 448
    Merit: 250
    this statement is false
    January 23, 2013, 07:39:15 PM
    #12
      would love to see this on a log scale, starting at zero.

      What do you mean by this?



      Another possible assumption is that the top 100 days is somehow different than the top 101,102, etc days. Why stop at 100? If you plot all the days then the log curve definitely does not fit. This is originally why I asked what assumptions were usually made with the king effect model. The outliers are only outliers in that they don't fit the proposed model (price=log(rank)). Its not clear from that wikipedia page why we should expect such a relationship between rank and price.

      the wikipedia page has a good graph of population-ranking data behaving in a similar way. the idea is that the few very large data points represent statistical aberrations, as evidenced by that the rest of the price data correlate (with an extremely good r- value) on that scale.

      from this, one assumes: The price events at the top of the list represent behavior that is abnormal in relation to the rest of the [top 100]* trading days.

      *disclaimer: this data only regards the top 100 trading days and makes no prediction about the behavior of any other data set

      from this assumption, we can reason from history that these outlier price events all relate to an event generally regarded as a bubble (i.e. high prices, low stability). the full number of predictions extendable from this assumption was made clear in the OP:

      • Price remains below ~$25, with stability
      • Price rises above ~$25, then quickly collapses below ~$25, with some stability
      • Price rises above ~$25, then continues rising to around $40 before returning to the $25 to $30 level, with little stability
      • Price rises above ~$25, then continues rising to far above $25 before collapsing but remaining above $25, with almost no stability

      The king effect means that it is unlikely we will see both new highs and stability. One has to go.
      [/list]
      hero member
      Activity: 728
      Merit: 500
      January 23, 2013, 07:15:12 PM
      #11
      would love to see this on a log scale, starting at zero.

      What do you mean by this?



      Another possible assumption is that the top 100 days is somehow different than the top 101,102, etc days. Why stop at 100? If you plot all the days then the log curve definitely does not fit. This is originally why I asked what assumptions were usually made with the king effect model. The outliers are only outliers in that they don't fit the proposed model (price=log(rank)). Its not clear from that wikipedia page why we should expect such a relationship between rank and price.
      legendary
      Activity: 1246
      Merit: 1077
      January 23, 2013, 03:59:35 PM
      #10
      would love to see this on a log scale, starting at zero.

      What do you mean by this?

      i believe we have a new one
      Weighted Avg:$17.19569
      UTC day isn't over yet.
      legendary
      Activity: 2072
      Merit: 1006
      this space intentionally left blank
      January 23, 2013, 03:48:12 PM
      #9
      would love to see this on a log scale, starting at zero.
      420
      hero member
      Activity: 756
      Merit: 500
      January 23, 2013, 03:26:26 PM
      #8
      i believe we have a new one
      Weighted Avg:$17.19569
      hero member
      Activity: 868
      Merit: 1008
      January 22, 2013, 11:49:40 PM
      #7
      This make sense to me.  If you buy into this analysis, it basically says we need to fill in some more data points around $16 - $18 before moving higher with any stability.  For the price to move higher with stability, it has to happen at a measured pace...basically to give the people that want or need to sell at these lower prices a chance to sell.  If you quickly move to much higher prices (say $50), then you'll still have a lot of people that may have been willing to sell at lower prices that are still holding.  As the price bounces around at $50, they may start to sell...and continue selling as the price experiences a substantial decline.
      legendary
      Activity: 1246
      Merit: 1077
      January 22, 2013, 10:48:58 PM
      #6
      Interesting, what assumptions would you say are being made with this model? E.g., Why should price be modeled as the log of the rank?
      This is the King effect. While the majority of data points fit onto the line, the top few are above it. This suggests that we are unlikely to have the top 10 days having a similar price, i.e. there will be a significant reduction after the top is reached. This has been particularly applicable to Bitcoin so far.

      They clearly don't though. The line overestimates price around 20 and underestimates around 14.

      That's cause my line is slightly distorted by the three kings. Slightly tilting it towards the horizontal axis would illustrate it better.
      hero member
      Activity: 728
      Merit: 500
      January 22, 2013, 10:44:18 PM
      #5
      Interesting, what assumptions would you say are being made with this model? E.g., Why should price be modeled as the log of the rank?
      This is the King effect. While the majority of data points fit onto the line, the top few are above it. This suggests that we are unlikely to have the top 10 days having a similar price, i.e. there will be a significant reduction after the top is reached. This has been particularly applicable to Bitcoin so far.

      They clearly don't though. The line overestimates price around 20 and underestimates around 14.
      legendary
      Activity: 1246
      Merit: 1077
      January 22, 2013, 10:22:33 PM
      #4
      Interesting, what assumptions would you say are being made with this model? E.g., Why should price be modeled as the log of the rank?
      This is the King effect. While the majority of data points fit onto the line, the top few are above it. This suggests that we are unlikely to have the top 10 days having a similar price, i.e. there will be a significant reduction after the top is reached. This has been particularly applicable to Bitcoin so far.
      hero member
      Activity: 728
      Merit: 500
      January 22, 2013, 09:58:24 PM
      #3
      Interesting, what assumptions would you say are being made with this model? E.g., Why should price be modeled as the log of the rank?
      legendary
      Activity: 1246
      Merit: 1077
      January 22, 2013, 08:51:46 PM
      #2
      Going a bit more in-depth, we have the king effect clearly seen in Bitcoin prices:


      The king effect means that when Bitcoin goes back up above $30, it will either continue to rise before a sizable collapse, or collapse immediately. For example, all of the following are plausible scenarios:

      • Price remains below ~$25, with stability
      • Price rises above ~$25, then quickly collapses below ~$25, with some stability
      • Price rises above ~$25, then continues rising to around $40 before returning to the $25 to $30 level, with little stability
      • Price rises above ~$25, then continues rising to far above $25 before collapsing but remaining above $25, with almost no stability

      The king effect means that it is unlikely we will see both new highs and stability. One has to go.
      legendary
      Activity: 1246
      Merit: 1077
      January 22, 2013, 08:19:04 PM
      #1
      1. 2011-06-09 W. Avg: 29.58
      2. 2011-06-08 W. Avg: 27.25
      3. 2011-06-10 W. Avg: 24.67
      4. 2011-06-13 W. Avg: 20.11
      5. 2011-06-07 W. Avg: 19.90
      6. 2011-06-15 W. Avg: 19.68
      7. 2011-06-14 W. Avg: 19.25
      8. 2011-06-16 W. Avg: 18.86
      9. 2011-06-06 W. Avg: 18.46
      10. 2011-06-19 W. Avg: 17.77
      11. 2011-06-11 W. Avg: 17.61
      12. 2011-06-05 W. Avg: 17.32
      13. 2013-01-22 W. Avg: 17.15
      14. 2011-06-27 W. Avg: 17.01
      15. 2011-06-28 W. Avg: 16.93
      16. 2011-06-29 W. Avg: 16.88
      17. 2011-06-30 W. Avg: 16.51
      18. 2011-06-04 W. Avg: 16.41
      19. 2013-01-21 W. Avg: 16.38
      20. 2011-06-12 W. Avg: 16.21

      (w. avgs rounded to 5 decimal places (mBTC) or 2 decimal places (BTC), Mt. Gox USD data before June 10, 2013; Bitstamp USD data after June 10, 2013)

      Every one of the entries is in June 2011 except for the two previous days, which now rank 13th and 19th. I have a feeling that we'll break top ten soon.
      Pages:
      Jump to: