2026-01-05 04:00:17

Many friends engaged in on-chain trading have encountered this pitfall: wanting to develop an automated arbitrage robot for prediction markets with clear and solid logic, but when it comes to having AI write the code, they get stuck. Which framework to choose? How to connect data? How to drive orders with real-time market data? A bunch of pitfalls.

Actually, the problem isn't with the idea itself, but with the limitations of individual AI tools. Today, I want to share a cross-model combined development workflow that can almost handle the entire process from architecture design to trade execution.

The core idea is simple: let different AIs do their own jobs. Use one for architecture planning, another for core logic, and yet another for debugging and optimization—collaborative effort. This not only doubles efficiency but also elevates code quality.

Even beginners can get started, as long as they find the right rhythm. I’ve organized a complete practical process, including model selection, prompt design, code integration, and testing strategies.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

16 Likes

Reward
16
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

StakeTillRetire

· 01-07 18:05

It's so realistic. A single AI really sucks; I've been scammed before. --- The idea of multi-model collaboration is good, but the prompt words need to be refined repeatedly. It's so annoying. --- Starting from zero? Ha, let's see. --- I need to try separating architecture structuring, logic, and debugging. --- Doubling efficiency sounds pretty uncertain. How many times can it actually be increased? --- Improving code quality... the prerequisite is writing the prompts correctly, and that's where the problem lies. --- Handling the entire process end-to-end sounds great, but the details are the devil. --- Choosing the right framework is really tricky. Are there any reference solutions domestically? --- It's not enough to just have the idea; you also need to explore the model's temperament. --- Feels like another "I got it" routine explanation.

View OriginalReply0

LongTermDreamer

· 01-07 13:36

Oh no, it's the same old story. Someone said this three years ago, and then they lost everything... But on the other hand, AI writing trading code is indeed a trap. I've been there before—frameworks, data, and drivers are all problematic. It’s really exhausting. Using multiple AIs in rotation? Sounds pretty smart, but I’m not sure if it can survive in real trading... Can a complete beginner get started? Then I can finally relax. I’ve been wanting to set up a system. I only half believe the claim that code quality doubles. The key is whether you can handle it yourself.

View OriginalReply0

MEVictim

· 01-05 04:30

I need to try this approach; relying solely on an AI can easily lead to failure.

View OriginalReply0

fork_in_the_road

· 01-05 04:29

I've been wanting to try multi-model combinations for a long time. If one AI can't handle it, it's really a hassle.

View OriginalReply0

unrekt.eth

· 01-05 04:29

I need to try this combination, individual AIs are indeed prone to failure.

View OriginalReply0

BearMarketLightning

· 01-05 04:19

Have you tried this multi-model combination? It's really awesome. The idea of AI writing code with each doing its part is good, but can it actually work? It sounds great, but in practice, it's a pitfall. Multiple AIs collaborating sounds appealing, but debugging can be exhausting. Separating architecture, logic, and debugging feels a bit over-engineered. If this process could really be used by beginners with zero experience, I would believe it. Data integration is always the most annoying part; no matter how many AIs you have, it can't be fixed.

View OriginalReply0