Is there any non-global method of generating a seeded random number in LUA?
The function math.randomseed() sets the seed for the whole application (which is less than ideal) and if the code is executed async there is a risk that other parts of the application "steals" numbers from the sequence.
One good example from C# is the Random class where you can initialize a Random instance with a seeded number rather than setting the seed for the whole application: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.random.-ctor?view=netcore-3.1
No.
You might find some third-party library that does this though.
My lrandom library provides independent streams of random numbers. It can also reset and clone streams.
lrandom is a C library. For a plain Lua solution, see mt19937ar-lua.
Related
I'm using the random_number subroutine from Fortran, but in different runs of program the number which is being produced doesn't change. What should I include in my code so every time I compile and run the program the numbers change?
The random number generator produces pseudo-random numbers. To get different numbers each run, you need to initialise the random seed at the start of your program. This picks a different starting position in the pseudo-random stream.
The sequence of pseudorandom numbers coming from call(s) to random_number depends on the algorithm used by the processor and the value of the seed.
The initial value of the seed is processor dependent. For some processors this seed value will be the same each time the program runs, and for some it will be different. The first case gives a repeatable pseudorandom sequence and the second a non-repeatable sequence.
gfortran (before version 7) falls into this first category. You will need to explicitly change the random seed if you wish to get non-repeatable sequences.
As stated in another answer the intrinsic random_seed can be used to set the value of the seed and restart the pseudorandom generator. Again, it is processor dependent what happens when the call is call random_seed() (that is, without a put= argument). Some processors will restart the generator with a repeatable sequence, some won't. gfortran (again, before version 7) is in the first category.
For processors where call random_seed() gives rise to a repeatable sequence an explicit run-time varying seed will be required to generate distinct sequences. An example for those older gfortran versions can be found in the documentation.
It should be noted that choosing a seed can be a complicated thing. Not only will there be portability issues, but care may be required in ensuring that the generator is not restarted in a low entropy region. For multi-image programs the user will have to work to have varying sequences across these images.
On a final note, Fortran 2018 introduced the standard intrinsic procedure random_init. This handles both cases of selecting repeatability across invocations and distinctness over (coarray) images.
I am using the rgsl library in Rust that wraps functions from the C GSL math libraries. I was using a random number generator function, but I am always getting the same exact value whenever I generate a new random number. I imagine that the number should vary upon each run of the function. Is there something that I am missing? Do I need to set a new random seed each time or such?
extern crate rgsl;
use rgsl::Rng;
fn main() {
rgsl::RngType::env_setup();
let t = rgsl::rng::default();
let r = Rng::new(&t).unwrap()
let val = rgsl::randist::binomial::binomial(&r, 0.01f64, 1u32);
print!("{}",val);
}
The value I keep getting is 1, which seems really high considering the probability of obtaining a 1 is 0.01.
The documentation for env_setup explains everything you need to know:
This function reads the environment variables GSL_RNG_TYPE and GSL_RNG_SEED and uses their values to set the corresponding library variables gsl_rng_default and gsl_rng_default_seed
If you don’t specify a generator for GSL_RNG_TYPE then gsl_rng_mt19937 is used as the default. The initial value of gsl_rng_default_seed is zero.
(Emphasis mine)
Like all software random number generators, this is really an algorithm that produces pseudo random numbers. The algorithm and the initial seed uniquely identify a sequence of these numbers. Since the seed is always the same, the first (and second, third, ...) number in the sequence will always be the same.
So if I want to generate a new series of random numbers, then I need to change the seed each time. However, if I use the rng to generate a set of random seeds, then I will get the same seeds each time.
That's correct.
Other languages don't seem to have this constraint, meaning that the seed can be manually set if desired, but is otherwise is random.
A classical way to do this is to seed your RNG with the current time. This produces an "acceptable" seed for many cases. You can also get access to true random data from the operating system and use that as a seed or mix it in to produce more random data.
Is there no way to do this in Rust?
This is a very different question. If you just want a random number generator in Rust, use the rand crate. This uses techniques like I described above.
You could even do something crazy like using random values from the rand crate to seed your other random number generator. I just assumed that there is some important reason you are using that crate instead of rand.
I want to generate a sequence of random numbers that will be used to pick tiles for a "maze". Each maze will have an id and I want to use that id as a seed to a pseudo random function. That way I can generate the same maze over and over given it's maze id. Preferably I do not want to use a built in pseudo random function in a language since I do not have control over the algorithm and it could change from platform to platform. As such, I would like to know:
How should I go about implementing my own pseudo random function?
Is it even feasible to generate platform independent pseudo random numbers?
Yes, it is possible.
Here is an example of such an algorithm (and its use) for noise generation.
Those particular random functions (Noise1, Noise2, Noise3, ..) use input parameters and calculate the pseudo random values from there.
Their output range is from 0.0 to 1.0.
And there are many more out there (Like mentioned in the comments).
UPDATE 2019
Looking back at this answer, a better suited choice would be the below-mentioned mersenne twister. Or you could find any implementation of xorshift.
The Mersenne Twister may be a good pick for this. As you can see from the pseudocode on wikipedia, you can seed the RNG with whatever you prefer to produce identical values for any instance with that seed. In your case, the maze ID or the hash of the maze ID.
If you are using Python, you can use the random module by typing at the beginning,
import random. Then, to use it, you type-
var = random.randint(1000, 9999)
This gives the var a 4 digit number that can be used for its id
If you are using another language, there is likely a similar module
I have some parallel Fortran90 code in which each thread needs to generate the same sequence of random numbers.
I have a random number generator that seems to be thread-unsafe, since, for a given seed, I'm completely unable to repeat the same results each time I run the program.
I surfed unsuccessfully (almost) the entire web looking for some code of a thread-safe RNG. Could anyone provide me with (the link to) the code of one?
Thanks in advance!
A good Pseudorandom number generator for Fortran90 can be found in the Intel Math Kernel Vector Statistical Library. They are thread safe. Also, why does it need to be threadsafe? If you want each thread to get the same list, instantiate a new PRNG for each thread with the same seed.
Most repeatable random number generators need state in some form. Without state, they can't do what comes next. In order to be thread safe, you need a way to hold onto the state yourself (ie, it can't be global).
When you say "needs to generate the same sequence of random numbers" do you mean that
Each thread needs to generate a stream of numbers identical to the other thread? This implies choosing the seed before peeling off threads, then instantiating the a thread-local PRNG in each thread with the same seed.
or
You want to be able to repeat the same sequence of numbers between different runs of the programs, but each thread generates it's own independent sequence? In this case, you still can't share a single PRNG because the thread operation sequence is non-deterministic. So seed a single PRNG with a known seed before launching threads, and use it to generate the initial seeds for the threads. Then you instantiate thread-local generators in each thread...
In each of these cases you should note what Neil Butterworth say about the statistics: most of the usual guarantees that the PRNG like to claim are not reliable when mix streams generated in this way.
In both cases you need a thread-local PRNG. I don't know what is available in f90...but you can also write you own (lookup Mersenne Twister, and write a routne that takes the saved state as a parameter...).
In fortran 77, this would look something like
function PRNGthread (state)
double state(statesize)
c stuff happens here which uses and manipulates the state vector...
PRNGthread = result
return
and each of your threads should maintain a separate state vector, though all will use the same initial value.
I understand you need every thread to produce the same stream of random numbers.
A very good Pseudo Random Generator that will generate a reproducable stream of numbers and is quite fast is the MT19937. Just make sure that you generate the seed before spawning off the threads, but generate a separate instance of the MT in every thread (make the instance of the MT thread local). That way it will be guaranteed that every MT will produce the same stream of numbers.
How about SPRNG? I have not tried it myself though.
I coded a thread-safe Fortran 90 version of the Mersenne Twister/MT19973. The state of the PRNG is saved in a derived type (randomNumberSequence), and you use procedures to seed the generator or get the next element in the sequence.
See http://code.google.com/p/i3rc-monte-carlo-model/source/browse/trunk/Code/RandomNumbersForMC.f95
The alternatives seem to be:
Use a synchronisation object (such as
a mutex) on the generator's seed
value. This will unfortunately
serialise your code on accesses to
generator
Use thread-local storage in the
generator so each thread gets its own
seed - this may cause statstical
problems for your app
If your platform supports a suitable
atomic operation, use that on the
seed (it probably won't, however)
Not a very encouraging list, I know. And to add to it, I have no idea how to implement any of them in FORTRAN!
This article https://www.cmiss.org/openCMISS/wiki/RandomNumberGenerationWithOpenMP does not only link to a Fortran implementation, but mentions key points needed to make a PRNG usable with threads. The most important point is:
The Fortran90 version of Ziggurat has several variables and arrays with the 'SAVE' attribute. In order to parallelize the uniform RNG, then, it appears that the required changes are to make these variables arrays with a separate value for each thread (beware of false sharing). Then when the PRNG function is called, we must pass the thread number, and use the corresponding state value.
I came across an article about Car remote entry system at http://auto.howstuffworks.com/remote-entry2.htm In the third bullet, author says,
Both the transmitter and the receiver use the same pseudo-random number generator. When the transmitter sends a 40-bit code, it uses the pseudo-random number generator to pick a new code, which it stores in memory. On the other end, when the receiver receives a valid code, it uses the same pseudo-random number generator to pick a new one. In this way, the transmitter and the receiver are synchronized. The receiver only opens the door if it receives the code it expects.
Is it possible to have two PRNG functions producing same random numbers at the same time?
In PRNG functions, the output of the function is dependent on a 'seed' value, such that the same output will be provided from successive calls given the same seed value. So, yes.
An example (using C#) would be something like:
// Provide the same seed value for both generators:
System.Random r1 = new System.Random(1);
System.Random r2 = new System.Random(1);
// Will output 'True'
Console.WriteLine(r1.Next() == r2.Next());
This is all of course dependent on the random number generator using some sort of deterministic formula to generate its values. If you use a so-called 'true random' number generator that uses properties of entropy or noise in its generation, then it would be very difficult to produce the same values given some input, unless you're able to duplicate the entropic state for both calls into the function - which, of course, would defeat the purpose of using such a generator...
In the case of remote keyless entry systems, they very likely use a PRNG function that is deterministic in order to take advantage of this feature. There are many ICs that provide this sort of functionality to produce random numbers for electronic circuits.
Edit: upon request, here is an example of a non-deterministic random number generator which doesn't rely upon a specified seed value: Quantum Random Number Generator. Of course, as freespace points out in the comments, this is not a pseudorandom number generator, since it generates truly random numbers.
Most PRNGs have an internal state in the form of a seed, which they use to generate their next values. The internal logic goes something like this:
nextNumber = function(seed);
seed = nextNumber;
So every time you generate a new number, the seed is updated. If you give two PRNGs that use the same algorithm the same seed, function(seed) is going to evaluate to the same number (given that they are deterministic, which most are).
Applied to your question directly: the transmitter picks a code, and uses it as a seed. The receiver, after receiving it, uses this to seed its generator. Now the two are aligned, and they will generate the same values.
As Erik and Claudiu have said, ad long as you seed your PRNG with the same value you'll end up with the same output.
An example can be seen when using AES (or any other encryption algorithm) as the basis of your PRNG. As long as you keep using an inputs that match on both device (transmitter and receiver) then the outputs will also match.