Machine learning in trading: theory, models, practice and algo-trading - page 3699
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
To make it even simpler, he just took their probabilities instead of class labels to determine the "reliability" of predictions. That is, my code already implements partially the logic of conformal predictions, but without probabilities.
I'll compare the results now.
My code:
His code:
Too weak an improvement, often works worse than the original.
Again AI didn't make my life better :) although in the comments he keeps saying that the second approach is the most state-of-the-art and no better has been invented yet
But in terms of coding quality Gemini 2.5 is now definitely better than ChatGPT models and somewhere on Claude's level or higher. Probably this is the most correct and useful conclusion from everything that happened :)My code:
His code:
Too weak an improvement, often works worse than the original.
Again AI didn't make my life better :) although in the comments he keeps saying that the second approach is the most state-of-the-art and no better has been invented yet
But in terms of coding quality Gemini 2.5 is now definitely better than ChatGPT models and somewhere on the level of Claude or higher. Probably this is the most correct and useful conclusion from everything that happened :)I use a Chinese - deepseek. Very often happy, but did not try to improve something of my own. Maybe you can try and post the result?
PS. By the way, Chinese is much superior to alice and chatgpt.
I use a Chinese guy - deepseek. I am very often happy with it, but I have not tried to improve something of my own. Can you try it and post the result?
PS. By the way, Chinese is much superior to alice and chatgpt.