For background, Random123 was developed for a supercomputer that does
molecular dynamic simulations. In particular, for the Anton supercomputer,
complete reproducibility of simulations was/is an important constraint. In
concept, in that context, you might want to "jump to timestamp 1 billion,
and
On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 at 00:14, David Mertz, Ph.D.
wrote:
> In general, all PRNGs are deterministic, and by relying on a known seed,
> the Nth element in a sequence of random numbers can always be
> reconstructructed. However, if a large number of random numbers are used,
> certain replication sce
On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 07:58:09PM -0500, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
> You have an error in the code you posted. You never use R2 after one
> call to SystemRandom.
Ah so I do, thanks for picking that up!
James, see how *easy* it is for experts to notice bugs, at least some of
them, in a short p
Thanks for posting your code, but at 178 lines (most of which are either
commented out or irrelevent to your question) its a hard slog to work out what
you're doing.
And as for the seemingly endless sequence of "Random number ... Value entered",
what did information did you think we would get f
Thanks
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 10:39 AM Wes Turner wrote:
> > google/paranoid_crypto has a number of Randomness Tests:
>
>> google/paranoid_crypto has a number of Randomness Tests in Python IIR
>> From grep '^#'
>> https://github.com/google/paranoid_crypto/blob/main/docs/randomness_tests.md
>> :
> google/paranoid_crypto has a number of Randomness Tests:
> google/paranoid_crypto has a number of Randomness Tests in Python IIR
> From grep '^#'
> https://github.com/google/paranoid_crypto/blob/main/docs/randomness_tests.md
> :
>
> ```md
> # Randomness tests
> ## Goal of the tests
> ## Non-goal
Yes, I ran a simulation where 4 repeated values are not counted as 2, and
found something close to 5.38.
There is also a slight inaccuracy in my formula when counting repeated
values that are (or not) at the beginning/end of the sequence.
Le mar. 6 déc. 2022 à 11:54, Benedict Verhegghe a
écrit :
On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 21:39, Benedict Verhegghe wrote:
>
> I used a brute force method to check the probability. Counted the number
> of triples in 600 random numbers 0-9, repeated that 1 times and took
> the mean: 5.99
> So it looks like Chris's number is more accurate.
Calling my number "mo
The difference is probably because I count 4 repeated values as 2
triples, etc..., while the 5.382 value counts them only once?
Benedict
Original Message
From: Benedict Verhegghe
Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2022 at 10:38 UTC
To: python-ideas@python.org
Subject: [Python-ideas] R
I used a brute force method to check the probability. Counted the number
of triples in 600 random numbers 0-9, repeated that 1 times and took
the mean: 5.99
So it looks like Chris's number is more accurate.
Benedict
Op 6/12/2022 om 09:25 schreef Alex Prengère:
@Chris Indeed the true figure
@Chris Indeed the true figure, if my math is correct, is a bit under 5.98
because of the "non-independence" of triplets.
I computed it and found 5.382, so finding 6 is entirely normal.
For the details: calling L = 600 and n = 3
* number of possible sequence of L digits: 10^L
* if a specific digit
> . . .
> ... for _var in list(globals()):
> . . .
> ... exec(f"del {_var}", globals())
> . . .
> ...globals()...
There's a more complicated solution that uses only the locals that requires
getting the previous frame and using `ctypes.pythonapi.PyFrame_LocalsToFast`,
b
12 matches
Mail list logo
