entrance point - page 9
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
One EA per chart.
I got it all thanks to FION.
Each EA is a strategy, you need to collect all the strategies (from those EAs) and combine them, and then adjust the total collection of strategies to each other, which cannot be done in Russia, and which is a very important fact in this idea.
I already hinted at this but had to clarify:
ok;)
If you do not know why I reacted so badly to the idea of an EA, you will get an EA with lots of different peculiarities, but you will get an EA with lots of different peculiarities.
no, you don't get it... I'm fine with the idea, but only if you "know how to cook" it... I just don't understand why you need a set of EAs...
I can't understand why you need an Expert Advisor set ... But the main difference between them is that they do not allow to give trade orders, and the fact that you can put a set of indices on one chart but not many Expert Advisors ...
I don't think you should put anything on the chart ... You need to prescribe all indicators (they are experts) in one EA as separate functions ... No one will do it for you ... If you're too bored to write the code, then what about the rest of us ... Everybody has their own problems...
I finally found the fucking grail.
I'm talking about convergence, so to speak, of the convergence of signals. I've tried it out manually, by the way, the methods rule here, but the selection based on efficiency should be done: one classical advisor, another one based on the stars, the third one on folk omens - they all depend on the laws of the world and are all based on one source of knowledge (data) based on one regularity of the world (subjective human representation is a regularity itself).
Independence really has nothing to do with it, it was mentioned in the context of the reasonableness of calculating the resultant probability of signals from several TS. And what has "something to do with it" is the need for rationality in the selection of TS for "collective" work. The selection of TS should be guided by some idea. And it should be based on this idea. For example, 'Non-standard Automatic Trading'. Technically, it is not a problem to build several strategies, and even mathematical calculations and calculations can be replaced by testing .....
But here's a question for you: why at p=0.5 the probability does not grow?
I'm sorry, I did not specify that p varies from 1/2 - random signal (50/50), to 1 - 100% accuracy. Therefore, when p=1/2 do not combine indicators, you get 1/2 or random input. If we assume that parameter varies in the range 0-1, then the formula for cumulative probability will be the same as in your post above.
no, you don't get it... I'm fine with the idea, but only if you "know how to cook" it... I just can't understand why you need a set of EAs...
I don't understand why you need a set of Expert Advisors... The only difference between indicator and Expert Advisor is the prohibition to give trading orders, as well as the fact that you can put a set of indices on one chart, but you can't put several Expert Advisors...
i don't think you should put anything on the chart ... All indicators (aka experts) should be registered in one EA as separate functions... No one will do it for you ... If you're too bored to write the code, then what about the rest of us ... Everybody has their own problems...
I did not try to make someone write what I wanted to know and it would be nice to put everything in one chart as an option and it may be the best and most convenient.
the indicator is an Expert Advisor is a powerful TS and the Expert Advisor is just an eyepiece
Vinsent_Vega what would be the disadvantages in such an association?
Vinsent_Vega well at this point can you tell in your opinion logically what the negatives might be in such a merger
There is a postulate in systems theory (I don't remember exactly how it sounds, but I will give the meaning): Productivity of a system is greater than a sum of productivities of its elements separately...
the negative aspects can lie in two things:
- in a character of connections of these elements (experts in our words)
- in the number of elements (too many EAs will decrease, not increase "productivity")
sorry for being so abstract... I myself have all these ideas only at the development stage...
In systems theory there is a postulate (I can't remember exactly how it sounds, but I'll give you the meaning): the performance of a system is greater than the sum of the performance of its elements individually...
Uh, less?
No, more! I remember that... It's been a long time since I studied theory and skipped lectures, but I couldn't have learned it so badly :)