Gathering a team to develop an IO (decision tree/forest) in relation to trend strategies - page 10
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
I have already made my library publicly available, which satisfies 90% of the requirements described by the topicmaster.
But instead of searching for flaws in my library, it is proposed to create another one, but no one has understood the subject area.
In any case, it's easier than coming up with a market model and your own fiches.
I would see it as an extra fiche or a special type of fiche. I don't know how to prepare them, but it's interesting.
You have to be closed and you have to exclude useless participants. Otherwise, it is no better than scattering beads on a forum. Or the useless pay a fee. By an example of a branch of machine learning we have already seen that you write normal things and then you are treated badly. What is the point?
It's too early to talk about payment, there's nothing to monetise yet, but it's worth thinking about how the work can be protected from random people. In any case, there's nothing yet...
About the attitude of others to public thoughts - here I have only one sadness - clever thoughts are lost because of it. A person who comes up with something new and probably effective may just get upset and give up on his ideas - people are different.
I've already publicly posted my library, which 90% meets the requirements described by the topicmaster.
Great! So you have an opportunity to show how to use your library for these tasks! Because I, and probably many others, just couldn't grasp the vastness of its functionality. Personally, I was prevented from understanding something by lack of help in Russian - I saw unknown words and closed everything.
But instead of looking for bugs in my library, it's proposed to create another one, but no one has understood the subject area.
So, why don't you become a member of the team, and work with those on the project who are interested and help them figure it all out?
I have already made my library publicly available, which satisfies 90% of the requirements described by the topicmaster.
But instead of searching for flaws in my library, it is proposed to create another one, but no one has understood the subject area.
It's too early to talk about payment, there's nothing to monetise yet, but it's worth thinking about how the work can be protected from random people. In any case, there's nothing yet...
About the attitude of others to public thoughts - here I have only one sadness - clever thoughts are lost because of it. A person who comes up with something new and probably effective may just get upset and give up on his ideas - people are different.
I have only one weakness - the use of obsolete alglib :) If you use third-party software, going back to algoib is not good. I was just very handy, because it's not necessary to leave mql sandbox.
The question is not straightforward. Personally, I only need the software to achieve tasks, and it doesn't make any difference what kind of software it is. With alglib I don't understand how to organize enumeration of predictors using genetics, and moreover to parallelize this task to agents. MT5 has a significant advantage of using agents for computation without much complication.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/232666/page28#comment_7944607
Thanks. I follow the answers to my questions :)
The only flaw there is the use of obsolete alglib :) if you use third-party software, then return to algoib is somehow not good. It was very convenient because you don't have to leave the mql sandbox.
But it seems the author of this thread has a completely different goal...