Optimization Control will not let me enter integers as default value for parameters that have non-integers steps. For example, I have a parameter with Start=1, Stop=10, Step=0.1. I want the default value to be 5.0 But if I enter 5 as the Default value, WealthLab changes it to 5.1. I can get the desired value of 5 by entering 4.9, which then is changed to 5. Why?

The topic title is confusing. There can be no "integers" when Step is a double value.

It's a different case and you can easily prove it by entering different values like 5.1, 5.2 etc. If you Tab your way through the input fields, Wealth-Lab will change the Default to 5.2, incrementing it all the way until it reaches 6.199. This quirk doesn't happen if one types in 3, 4 or 4.8 in the Default field. For different Start/Stop values, the behavior is the same just the final Default value will be different.

It's a strange adjustment behavior but all in all is a very minor nuisance since you have the workaround.

I guess I am more confused now. The default values I want to enter are the values I want to be used as fixed values for certain parameters that will not be varied (although others will be varied) in a genetic optimization. My understanding, from a previous post, is that when using the genetic optimizer the step values are ignored and that the GA algorithm chooses its own floating point (double) values for the parameter values. If that is correct then how is the step value related to the default value when using GA?

It does not have anything to do with what you're talking about (optimization). It's just a GUI quirk not affecting the optimization process.

The behavior I observe in the software seems to be different. I ran a genetic optimization with multiple parameters being varied. Several parameters I set to vary from 0.0 to 10.0 with step = 0.01. On one parameter I mistakenly set the step = 4.01. In the optimization results I can see that the params with step = 0.01 do vary at increments of 0.01 but the parameter with step = 4.01 varies with increments of 4.01. Here are the first several values in the Results tab for that parameter:
4.01
0
4.01
12.03
0
8.02
0
4.01
. . .
It appears that the genetic optimizer is using the step values rather then choosing its own values.

Also, the optimizer chose a value (12.03) that is outside of the allowed range (0-10).

Am I doing something wrong?

QUOTE:
My understanding, from a previous post, is that when using the genetic optimizer the step values are ignored and that the GA algorithm chooses its own floating point (double) values for the parameter values.

That previous conversation stated that for the Monte Carlo method, the Step value is meaningless. Here you're talking about GA.

QUOTE:
Also, the optimizer chose a value (12.03) that is outside of the allowed range (0-10).

Yes, looks like a known issue (QC 515). It's easy to avoid it by choosing a proper Step that aligns with the Stop value selected.