Nano robot fish38 comments
Ghs bitcoin buy
Theory says  if the model is a good fit, then the residual process minersville be homogenous and should have interevent times the bitcoin between two process event hawkes which are exponentially distributed. This should be clear for anyone bitcoin has been watching an orderbook for some time. Process, you can use an R package such as ptproc , which is what I am going hawkes use in this article. A High Frequency Trading Perspective ssrn. The R package contains minersville function evalCIF to do this evaluation, we only have to provide a range of timestamps to evaluate it at.
This generates the following plots: Sign up using Facebook. I think we have to rescale time and then do a QQ plot against the exponential distribution. Bitcoin exchange data and its price discovery has not been studied well or at all? Multi-dimensional Point Process Models in R pdf. Similarly, the same trade signs tend to cluster together and result in a sequence of buy or sell orders.
But, from programming standpoint, this is how you can go about all this. OK, so first thing that you may wish to do is to plot the data. Walk through homework problems step-by-step from beginning to end. Thanks, I'm glad process was useful. This is high given that the hours studied are relatively quiet with the price bitcoin upwards. This is also mentioned in the article in Fitting Bitcoin Trade Arrival to a Hawkes Process section with hawkes proposed way to overcome this problem: Bitcoin say they use an R package called ptproc but I can't find a python equivalent.
Could you at least say what minersville is you're trying to do exactly without hawkes everyone to read the documentation of the process you're minersville to? The evalCIF code seems somehow to compare the empirical intensites that is the data with the fitted model.
I know statsmodels does QQ plots but this doesn't help create the residuals sadly. Alright, why not just fit a model through the data you have and compare the empirical data to it? Do you have such a model at all? If not there are ways around it, I've found Gaussian mixtures to be really good at fitting them through literally anything and there seems to be an implementation in Python untested by myself: AleksanderLidtke The two models that I am testing are the Poisson process which has only one parameter, the intensity and the Hawkes model, which has three.
The only way I know how to compare those models to the empirical data is by either plotting the thing they do with evalCIF or computing the residuals and doing a QQ plot. But I can't work out how to do it in python. Are Gaussian mixtures relevant for self-exciting point processes? All events that occur after t have no contribution. This is incorporated in the following code: Deal with many events occurring at the same time - need to distinguish between them by splitting each batch of events into distinct events taking place at almost the same time.
Sample at much higher frequency than the events occur at. All events that occur after time of interest t have no contribution. This enables you to find quantiles of both empirical and fitted data and plot them against each other thus generating the QQ plot: Make sure all the NANs are filtered out and both arrays have the same size.
Aleksander Lidtke 1, 2 13 I am not sure the method is right however. I really want your code to be in GitHub. Is it already in some GitHub repository? The literature describes different ways to address this [4, 10] but extending the timestamps to millisecond is a common one.
This is high given that the hours studied are relatively quiet with the price trending upwards. It would be interesting to apply this to more turbulent regimes e. The aim is now to compute the actual conditional intensity for the fitted model and compare it against the empirical counts. The R package contains a function evalCIF to do this evaluation, we only have to provide a range of timestamps to evaluate it at.
This range is between the min and max timestamp of the original data set, for every point within the range the instantaneous intensity is calculated. This leads to the following plot comparing empirical counts from the first plot of this article and the fitted, integrated intensities. Purely visually, it appears to be quite a good fit. Notice that the historical intensities are often above the fitted ones, which has already been observed in  in the appendix. The authors addressed this by introducing influential and non-influential trades, which effectively reduces the number of trades which are part of the fitting procedure.
Another reason for this slight mismatch in jump sizes between empirical and fitted data could be the randomisation of timestamps within the same second; over out of the original trades share a timestamp with another trade. This results in a lot of trades within the same second losing their order, which could influence the jump sizes. There are many ways of evaluating the goodness of fit. One is by comparing AIC values against a homogenous Poisson model which shows, as visible in the R summary above, that our Hawkes model is a considerably better fit for the data.
Another way to test how well the model fits the data is by evaluating the residuals which are kind of hard to obtain for a Hawkes process, thankfully ptproc does the job. Theory says  if the model is a good fit, then the residual process should be homogenous and should have interevent times the difference between two residual event timestamps which are exponentially distributed.
A log-survivor plot of the interevent times as suggested by  , or equally in our case a QQ-plot against an exponential distribution, confirms this. The plot below shows an excellent R 2 fit. Now that we know the model explains clustering of arrivals well, how can this be applied to trading? The next steps would be to at least consider buy and sell arrivals individually and find a way to make predictions given a fitted Hawkes model.
These intensity predictions can then form a part of a market-making or directional strategy. Let us have a look at the literature to get some ideas. The paper in  describes very clearly how to fit and evaluate Hawkes processes in a financial setting. Florenzen also treats the different ways of disambiguating multiple trades in the same timestamp and evaluates the result on TAQ data.
Hewlett  predicts the future imbalance of buy and sell trades using a bivariate self- and cross-excitation process between buy and sell arrivals.
The author devises an optimal liquidation strategy, derived from a price impact formula based on this imbalance. In  the authors use the buy and sell intensity ratio of a bivariate Hawkes process as an entry signal to place a directional trade.
In  the authors develop a high frequency market-making strategy which distinguishes between influential and non-influential trades as a way to get a better fit of their Hawkes model to the data I assume.
A further ingredient in the model is a short-term midprice drift which allows placement of directional bets and avoids some adverse selection. Their placement of bid and ask quotes then depends on the combination of the short-term drift, order imbalance asymmetric arrivals of buy and sell , and inventory mean reversion. The loglikelihood function of a Hawkes process has a computational complexity of O N 2 as it performs nested loops through the history of trades.
This is very expensive and leads to a fitting time of 12 minutes for trades on my Macbook pro. Still other authors consider two alternative brands of univariate Hawkes processes, one the so-called intensity-based Hawkes process and the other the so-called cluster-based version, which are equivalent though are studied in different contexts Dassios and Zhao In this case, the intensity-based process is a temporal point process on which has a nonnegative exponentially-decaying - stochastic intensity of the form.
This is equivalent to the cluster-based version in which is viewed as a marked Poisson cluster process , the only difference being that from the cluster-based perspective:. The set consists of elements known as immigrants which are distributed as an inhomogeneous Poisson process with rate. The set of marks associated to the immigrants are independent of the immigrants and are distributed as independent random variables according to some distribution.
Each immigrant generates a single cluster independent of other clusters where here, each is viewed as a random set subject to a certain branching structure Dassios and Zhao which satisfies the property that. In addition to these ambiguities, several authors e. One example includes adapting so that the process has different exciting functions, the result of which is a collection of non-explosive simple point processes for which:. For every , is a simple point process with intensity.
For every , is an inhomogeneous Poisson process with intensity conditional on. In this context, the function is said to be a univariate Hawkes process with excitation functions while is called the immigrant process and the th generation offspring process Merhdad and Zhu.