Advance Block - Explained
What is an Adjustment Bond?
If you still have questions or prefer to get help directly from an agent, please submit a request.
We’ll get back to you as soon as possible.
- Marketing, Advertising, Sales & PR
- Accounting, Taxation, and Reporting
- Professionalism & Career Development
Law, Transactions, & Risk Management
Government, Legal System, Administrative Law, & Constitutional Law Legal Disputes - Civil & Criminal Law Agency Law HR, Employment, Labor, & Discrimination Business Entities, Corporate Governance & Ownership Business Transactions, Antitrust, & Securities Law Real Estate, Personal, & Intellectual Property Commercial Law: Contract, Payments, Security Interests, & Bankruptcy Consumer Protection Insurance & Risk Management Immigration Law Environmental Protection Law Inheritance, Estates, and Trusts
- Business Management & Operations
- Economics, Finance, & Analytics
Table of ContentsWhat is an Advance Block?How Does an Advance Block Work?Academics Research on Advance Block
What is an Advance Block?
The advance block is a candlestick pattern that reflects a bearish reversal signal. An advance block can be seen on candlestick charts, it is a three-candle bearish reversal pattern in which the first is a large candlestick followed by two others with small structures but high wicks. All the three candlesticks are green; showing an uptrend or bullish pattern, they often lead to the continuation of a bullish trend.
How Does an Advance Block Work?
The advance block candlestick pattern is common at this present time, although it was a rare pattern before the introduction of algorithm trading. This pattern is often used to describe temporary uptrends and drawbacks within the downtrends, which are often long-termed. Typically, the advance block candlestick pattern as four major characteristics that reflects the attributes of the candlesticks. This chart pattern shows how the market is in an uptrend or in a pullback within a downtrend. Despite being a bearish reversal signal, traders are not expected to build total reliance on the advance block, as they need to take buy and sell signals from other chart patterns.
Academics Research on Advance Block
- Positioning and energy response of PET block detectors with different light sharing schemes, Tornai, M. P., Germano, G., & Hoffman, E. J. (1994). Positioning and energy response of PET block detectors with different light sharing schemes. IEEE transactions on nuclear science, 41(4), 1458-1463. Two state-of-the-art modular PET block detectors using either discrete or pseudo-discrete BGO crystals coupled to two dual PMTs, utilizing different light sharing schemes, were evaluated. Both detectors were approximately 30 mm thick, while each element of the GE 6/spl times/6 block detector was 4 mm/spl times/8.4 mm, and each element of the CTI 8/spl times/7 block detector was 2.8 mm/spl times/5.8 mm. In addition to measurements with gamma sources, the detectors were also irradiated with a Sr/Y-90 beta source to evaluate the performance of the block detectors without inter-element scatter of annihilation photons. The best and worst energy resolutions of individual elements at 511 keV were 21.8% and 44.2% for the GE detector and 22.7% and 42.5% for the CTI detector. The peak to valley ratios in the detector identification ratio histograms were generally better than 3 to 1. Measurements with beta sources indicate that light sharing in both detectors is a large component of event mispositioning along with inter-detector scatter of the annihilation photons.
- Image blurring due to lightsharing in PET block detectors, James, S. S., & Thompson, C. J. (2006). Image blurring due to lightsharing in PET block detectors. Medical physics, 33(2), 405-410. The spatial resolution in PET is poorer than that of CT or MRI. All modern PET scanners use block detectors, i.e., clusters of scintillation crystals coupled to four photomultiplier tubes. Some of the loss of spatial resolution in PET is attributed to the use of block detectors, because a photon that interacts with one crystal in the cluster may be incorrectly positioned, resulting in blurring of the reconstructed image. This is called the block effect. The block effect was measured for detectors from the CTI HR+ scanner, and the GE Advance scanner; two popular clinical PET scanners. The effect of changing the depth of first interaction of a gamma ray in the scintillation crystals was also studied to determine if it may be a contributor to the block effect. The block effect was found to be for the central crystals and negligible for the edge crystals in the CTI HR+ block. It was in the central crystals of the GE Advance detector, and in the edge crystals of the GE Advance detector. In the CTI HR+ detector, a depth dependence on the positioning of the event was observed, as was a dependence on the crystal location (edge versus center). In the GE Advance detector events that occurred at different interaction depths were positioned consistently. The percentage of events that may be positioned inaccurately was also calculated for both detectors. In the CTI HR+ detector as many as 16% of all events in the block detector may be positioned incorrectly. In the GE Advance detector as many as 13% of all events in the block detector may be positioned inaccurately. These results suggest that the depth of interaction of an annihilation photon may contribute to the block effect in detectors that use crystals cut from a single scintillation crystal (pseudodiscrete crystals), and is less dominant a factor for detectors that use discrete crystals with light sharing between the crystals. Investigating the effect of changing photon interaction depth in PET detectors can lead to better detector design, and an intuitive explanation of what sources of blurring may exist in the detector examined.
- QUIKSIM-a block structured simulation language written in SIMSCRIPT, Weamer, D. G. (1969, December). QUIKSIM-a block structured simulation language written in SIMSCRIPT. In Proceedings of the third conference on Applications of simulation (pp. 1-11). Winter Simulation Conference. Users of simulation languages have historically had to choose between one of two types of language. On the one hand, they could choose a block type language such as GPSS. Languages of this type have the advantage that the learning and programming of the language is both quick and relatively easy. Also, since the number of de-bugging runs is usually small, turn around time is likely to be quite rapid. However, the block structuring of the language may also create some difficulties. The fixed nature of the blocks, both as to the types of blocks available in the language and the manner in which the blocks simulate a particular activity, may render the language unsuitable for the simulation of certain types of systems. In addition, the need to pre-allocate much of the available memory space of the computer may make the use of a block structured language impossible on a small computer. The alternative to a block structured language is an algebraic language, such as SIMSCRIPT or FORTRAN. It would be desirable to have a language which combines the advantages of both types of language without some of the disadvantages. QUIKSIM represents an attempt to produce such a language.
- GPSS-finding the appropriate world-view, Henriksen, J. O. (1981, December). GPSS-finding the appropriate world-view. In Proceedings of the 13th conference on Winter simulation-Volume 2 (pp. 505-516). IEEE Press. Every simulation language embodies a world-view which heavily influences approaches taken in building models in the language. In most applications for which a given language is used, the world-view of the language enforces a discipline of programming which results in models which are time- and space-efficient, reflecting the usefulness of the language and the appropriateness of language choice by the programmer. For some applications, however, the programming style encouraged by the world-view of a language can lead to programs which are time- and space-inefficient, even though the programs are natural, straightforward solutions to the problem at hand. In such cases, one may be forced to consider alternative languages or to alter one's approach in application of a given language. This paper briefly summarizes the world-view of the GPSS language and gives two examples of systems which, when modelled with conventional GPSS approaches, result in inefficient programs. For each system, two GPSS models are presented: a straightforward model which is inefficient, and a clever model which is efficient. In both cases, the clever models are easily programmed in GPSS and require only marginally more skill on the part of the programmer than do the straightforward models. Once an appropriate alternative to the obvious GPSS world-view is found, the rest is easy. A working knowledge of GPSS is required to read this paper.
- A general purpose systems simulation program, Gordon, G. (1961, December). A general purpose systems simulation program. In Proceedings of the December 12-14, 1961, eastern joint computer conference: computers-key to total systems control (pp. 87-104). ACM. Recent years have seen a very rapid growth in the use of digital computers for simulation work, particularly in the field of system studies. The need for such simulation has been generated by the ever-increasing complexity of systems that are being designed, while the speed and capacity of modern digital computers have provided the means by which to expand simulation efforts. The amount of simulation and the complexity of the studies that are being conducted have presented several difficulties in organizing the use of simulation.