Oh c__p, Roger. Even I should have seen that coming.  

 

Yes, Nick, what ever do you MEAN by a GENERATED RANDOM number?  

 

Seems like an oxymoron, doesn’t it?

 

Ok.  Can’t I just ask that we stipulate that the stream of numbers on the 
screen of the computer is random and let it go at that?  

 

Nick 

 

PS  Roger, I hear that the high temp in Boston will be 19 degrees?  How is it 
in the bubble?  

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

 <http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/> 
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Eric Charles
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 6:50 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Model of induction

 

Roger, this seems to get the heart of the matter! I think we must wonder your 
final sentence is not begging the question: "This was discovered because the 
random numbers were used in simulations which failed to simulate the random 
processes they were designed to simulate." 

 

I'm not saying that is it begging the question, I'm just saying it seems to me 
like we are peering deep into the rabbit hole. Presumably, we must have rather 
extreme confidence that the process we are trying to simulate is, in fact, 
"truly random", AND rather extreme confidence that our simulation it is not 
simply having a "bad run", as one would expect any random system to have every 
so often.  Maybe our simulation is doing great, but the process we are trying 
to simulate is not random in several subtle ways we have not anticipated. How 
would we know? 

 

(P.S. In hindsight, this is either right at the heart of the matter, or a 
complete tangent, and I'm not as confident which it is as I was when I started 
replying.) 

 

 





-----------
Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Supervisory Survey Statistician

U.S. Marine Corps

 

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Roger Critchlow <r...@elf.org 
<mailto:r...@elf.org> > wrote:

You have left the model for the untainted computers unspecified, but let's say 
that they are producing uniform pseudo-random numbers over some interval, like 
0 .. 1.  Then your question becomes how do we distinguish the tainted 
computers, which are only simulating a uniform distribution?

 

This problem encapsulates the history of pseudo-random number generation 
algorithms.  A researcher named George Marsaglia spent a good part of his 
career developing algorithms which detected flaws in pseudo-random number 
generators.  The battery of tests is described here, 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diehard_tests, so I won't go over them, but it's 
a good list.

 

But, as Marsaglia reported in 
http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fowlkes/class/cs177/marsaglia.pdf, we don't even know 
all the ways a pseudo-random number generator can go wrong, we discover the 
catalog of faults as we go merrily assuming that the algorithm is producing 
numbers with the properties of our ideal distribution.  This was discovered 
because the random numbers were used in simulations which failed to simulate 
the random processes they were designed to simulate.

 

-- rec --

 

 

On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Nick Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net 
<mailto:nickthomp...@earthlink.net> > wrote:

Everybody, 

 

As usual, when we “citizens” ask mathematical questions, we throw in WAY too 
much surplus meaning.  

 

Thanks for all your fine-tuned efforts to straighten me out.  

 

Let’s take out all the colorful stuff and try again.  Imagine a thousand 
computers, each generating a list of random numbers.  Now imagine that for some 
small quantity of these computers, the numbers generated are in n a normal 
(Poisson?) distribution with mean mu and standard deviation s.  Now, the 
problem is how to detect these non-random computers and estimate the values of 
mu and s.  

 

Let’s leave aside for the moment what kind of –duction that is.  I shouldn’t 
have thrown that in.  And  besides, I’ve had enough humiliation for one day.  

 

 

Nick 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

 <http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/> 
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com 
<mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com> ] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 12:06 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com 
<mailto:friam@redfish.com> >
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Model of induction

 

Mathematical induction is a method for proving theorems.  "Scientific 
induction" is a method for accumulating evidence to support one hypothesis or 
another; no proof involved, or possible.

 

Frank

Frank Wimberly
Phone (505) 670-9918 <tel:(505)%20670-9918> 

 

On Dec 12, 2016 11:44 AM, "Owen Densmore" <o...@backspaces.net 
<mailto:o...@backspaces.net> > wrote:

What's the difference between mathematical induction and scientific?

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_induction

 

   -- Owen

 

On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Robert J. Cordingley <rob...@cirrillian.com 
<mailto:rob...@cirrillian.com> > wrote:

Based on https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/peirce/#dia - it looks like 
abduction (AAA-2) to me - ie developing an educated guess as to which might be 
the winning wheel. Enough funds should find it with some degree of certainty 
but that may be a different question and should use different statistics 
because the 'longest run' is a poor metric compared to say net winnings or 
average rate of winning. A long run is itself a data point and the premise in 
red (below) is false.

Waiting for wisdom to kick in. R

PS FWIW the article does not contain the phrase 'scientific induction' R

 

On 12/12/16 12:31 AM, Nick Thompson wrote:

Dear Wise Persons, 

 

Would the following work?  

 

Imagine you enter a casino that has a thousand roulette tables.  The rumor 
circulates around the casino that one of the wheels is loaded.  So, you call up 
a thousand of your friends and you all work together to find the loaded wheel.  
Why, because if you use your knowledge to play that wheel you will make a LOT 
of money.  Now the problem you all face, of course, is that a run of successes 
is not an infallible sign of a loaded wheel.  In fact, given randomness, it is 
assured that with a thousand players playing a thousand wheels as fast as they 
can, there will be random long runs of successes.  But the longer a run of 
success continues, the greater is the probability that the wheel that produces 
those successes is biased.  So, your team of players would be paid, on this 
account, for beginning to focus its play on those wheels with the longest runs. 

 

FWIW, this, I think, is Peirce’s model of scientific induction.  

 

Nick

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ 
<http://home.earthlink.net/%7Enickthompson/naturaldesigns/> 

 

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

 

-- 
Cirrillian 
Web Design & Development
Santa Fe, NM
http://cirrillian.com
281-989-6272 <tel:(281)%20989-6272>  (cell)
Member Design Corps of Santa Fe


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

 


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

 


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

 


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Reply via email to