************Forum EA Contest .... Lets Have Some Fun************** - page 2

New comment
 

Btw... I've updated my profile with up-to-date information about contests held. That'll be the place for current information because the OP will eventually not allow me to edit it.

If anyone doesn't want to be on that list ... please pm me and I'll remove you promptly. Or simply do-not post an expert advisor.

I'm still looking for the host volunteer ........... hopefully I wouldn't have to take the job by default.

The contest doesn't have-to happen this Monday. If could be 2-weeks from now for that matter.

I'll be more than happy should we get 5+ Participants ........ that'll be more than Awesome!!

 
ubzen:
Like Money? If so how much?
What else could substitute?
This is clearly just for fun ... there's allot of garbage EA's within the code-base and around the Internet. That's why my initial idea is throw one into the contest ... nothing to lose. Something to gain = bragging rights / entertainment. But now we have something of a bigger idea which is Human Evolution of expert advisor ... isn't that worth it?

Ever heard of GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out)?

If there is a not clear incentive that will motivate a quality participation, the result will be just that - Garbage Out!

Part of the fun, is if something is worthwhile to do, otherwise it will not be fun and you will not achieve the desired results.

The prize could be money - that is usually why people get into Forex Trading in the first place, but maybe there could be other forms of prizes (I'm just not sure what that could be right now).

 
FMIC:Ever heard of GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out)? If there is a not clear incentive that will motivate a quality participation, the result will be just that - Garbage Out! Part of the fun, is if something is worthwhile to do, otherwise it will not be fun and you will not achieve the desired results. The prize could be money - that is usually why people get into Forex Trading in the first place, but maybe there could be other forms of prizes (I'm just not sure what that could be right now).
I Obviously disagree a little-bit. We do-not get Paid to help people on this forum ... however we do anyway ... for Goodness Reward.
But I do agree to a small extent and I'm still thinking about a good reward ... If I had a Product in Market, I'd give a to the winner free.
If you stumble upon a good reward ...... please don't be shy about letting us know. Thanks.
 
ubzen:

Btw... I've updated my profile with up-to-date information about contests held. That'll be the place for current information because the OP will eventually not allow me to edit it.

If anyone doesn't want to be on that list ... please pm me and I'll remove you promptly. Or simply do-not post an expert advisor.

I'm still looking for the host volunteer ........... hopefully I wouldn't have to take the job by default.

The contest doesn't have-to happen this Monday. If could be 2-weeks from now for that matter.

I'll be more than happy should we get 5+ Participants ........ that'll be more than Awesome!!



I could help out on the Hosting, but very clear rules will have to be setup in order to be able to verify results.

For example, each EA would have to have equal access to allotted RAM, CPU, cycles etc. and each will have live publishing to MyFXBook or something of the sort.

However, that all depends on how many contestants. Running 100 EA's at the same time will not be very practical, so all EA's would first need to pass a BackTest and then only the top 5 would be allowed to go into the live forward test.

 
FMIC:I could help out on the Hosting, but very clear rules will have to be setup in order to be able to verify results.For example, each EA would have to have equal access to allotted RAM, CPU, cycles etc. and each will have live publishing to MyFXBook or something of the sort. However, that all depends on how many contestants. Running 100 EA's at the same time will not be very practical, so all EA's would first need to pass a BackTest and then only the top 5 would be allowed to go into the live forward test.

Once we hit 5 people we'll be ready to go .... thats enough to keep everything simple the first week.
I want to work with the host to establish those kinds of rules and what they're capable of.
I want to keep the host work to a minimum ... like all he/she have to do is open the demo-accounts ... attach the ea ... register it on Signals*.
Also I want to limit the number of Indicators to 1 or 2 .... and no overly complex ea setups ... but again the host have the decision here.

all EA's would first need to pass a BackTest and then only the top 5 would be allowed to go into the live forward test.

I like this suggestion... but for 1st_week would like to avoid it. My reason is because... In my mind, the #1 reason to get allot of people to stay-away is the feeling that this is trying to get Profitable* Algorithms from them. Plus, A weeks time isn't enough to determine if some winner got Lucky or just had a Superior System. If this person shows a constant trend of winning week-after-week then that'll be much more interesting.

 

Alternatively, hosting could be done by each participant. Each EA will be run by the owner, as long as the "Investor" credentials are given to a select group who will monitor and verify the results as well as use the same credentials to setup the "MyFXBook" account so all can view the data.

I mentioned "MyFXBook" because that's the one I use and know. I've never used "Signals" so have no idea how that works.

At the end, backtests could be run for each EA on the same data as the live trades, in order to compare how they would differ. That could be part of the evaluation process on deciding which EA should win.

As for Indicators or Libraries, one condition could be - NO INDICATORS/LIBRARIES ALLOWED (except MT4 built-in ones) - All other indicator/library functionality would have to be within EA code (part of how MQL4 is structured, allows for writing Indicators inside EA's).

The idea is that there should be no outside dependency making the EA's totally self-contained.

 
I would also hold the contests every two weeks and running forward only one week. That way, coders would have the one week "off" for coding. Most people have other "jobs" and do not have that much time free.
 
Obviously when I said, participants would run their own EA's, I meant that they still submitt their code so that anyone could run it simultaneously and verify the results with the participants in real-time. In other words, other participants would serve as "monitors" to make sure everything is being honestly run.
 
FMIC: Alternatively, hosting could be done by each participant. Each EA will be run by the owner, as long as the "Investor" credentials are given to a select group who will monitor and verify the results as well as use the same credentials to setup the "MyFXBook" account so all can view the data.

I mentioned "MyFXBook" because that's the one I use and know. I've never used "Signals" so have no idea how that works.

At the end, backtests could be run for each EA on the same data as the live trades, in order to compare how they would differ. That could be part of the evaluation process on deciding which EA should win.

As for Indicators or Libraries, one condition could be - NO INDICATORS/LIBRARIES ALLOWED (except MT4 built-in ones) - All other indicator/library functionality would have to be within EA code (part of how MQL4 is structured, allows for writing Indicators inside EA's).

The idea is that there should be no outside dependency making the EA's totally self-contained.


Sounds good to me ... you're the Host. But I think Signals should be used to keep it True to the site.

I was afraid of letting each person Host their own EA for the following reasons ...

- Modifying EA behavior ... like changing the lot_management when they're behind.

- People falling behind might dis-continue the EA. And become un-responsive.

- They may not know how to setup Signals || fxBook || others.

- Adds another layer of Communication between Host and Participants.

.

.

But like you said ... you can verify the end results by performing a back-test to confirm.

If they become un-responsive of course you being the Judge just dis-qualify them.

I really like the self-contain idea ... of course "no .dll allowed".

however my fear is the more this become a coding||guru exercise the less people will participate.

I do-not have much faith in people to perform simple directions.

Even attaching a Self-Contained EA within this post may prove too difficult for some.

***Of course I would help you with the Signals* thing. And everything else for that matter.

 

The idea of the evolution of EA's seems a good one, but by the second contest, it would cut out all other new ideas and only leave one going.

I would make contests be a mix. In other words, by the second contest, I would allow for example 4 mutations of the original winner, and 2 new independent EA's to compete.

In real life, that's how things would evolve (species competing with other species that have evolved differently). That way, a new comer could come up on top of the previous winner/mutation and start a totally new "species" - such as "dinosaurs" dying out to make room for "mammals".

12345678910
New comment
Reason: