That's all right. Thanks.
On Sat, Oct 30, 2021 at 12:29 AM Marc Schwartz wrote:
> Ken Peng wrote on 10/29/21 2:39 AM:
> > I saw runif(1) can generate a random num, is this the true random?
> >
> >> runif(1)
> > [1] 0.8945383
> >
> > What's the other better method?
> >
> > Thank you.
> >
> Hi,
>
Ken Peng wrote on 10/29/21 2:39 AM:
I saw runif(1) can generate a random num, is this the true random?
runif(1)
[1] 0.8945383
What's the other better method?
Thank you.
Hi,
You do not indicate your use case, and that can be important.
The numbers generated by R's default RNGs are "pseudo
It is difficult to do "truly random" number generation with computers, but
fortunately number sequences that appear random but progress consistently from
an initial seed value (?set.seed) are actually much more useful for analysis
purposes than true randomness is.
On October 28, 2021 11:39:07 P
It might not be random, depending upon a seed being used (usually by
set.seed or RNGkind).
However, it's the best method for generating a random number within a
specified range without weights.
If you want weights, there are many other random number generation
functions, most notably rnorm. You c
I saw runif(1) can generate a random num, is this the true random?
> runif(1)
[1] 0.8945383
What's the other better method?
Thank you.
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
h
5 matches
Mail list logo