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.
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.
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.
I am confused between these three functions and I was wondering for some explanation. If I set the range how do I make the range exclusive or inclusive? Are the ranges inclusive or exclusive if I don't specify the range?
In addition to the answer from #dave_59, there are other important differences:
i) $random returns a signed 32-bit integer; $urandom and $urandom_range return unsigned 32-bit integers.
ii) The random number generator for $random is specified in IEEE Std 1800-2012. With the same seed you will get exactly the same sequence of random numbers in any SystemVerilog simulator. That is not the case for $urandom and $urandom_range, where the design of the random number generator is up to the EDA vendor.
iii) Each thread has its own random number generator for $urandom and $urandom_range, whereas there is only one random number generator for $random shared between all threads (ie only one for the entire simulation). This is really important, because having separate random number generators for each thread helps you simulation improve a property called random stability. Suppose you are using a random number generator to generate random stimulus. Suppose you find a bug and fix it. This could easily change the order in which threads (ie initial and always blocks) are executed. If that change changed the order in which random numbers were generated then you would never know whether the bug had gone away because you'd fixed it or because the stimulus has changed. If you have a random number generator for each thread then your testbench is far less vulnerable to such an effect - you can be far more sure that the bug has disappeared because you fixed it. That property is called random stability.
So, As #dave_59 says, you should only be using $urandom and $urandom_range.
You should only be using $urandom and $urandom_range. These two functions provide better quality random numbers and better seed initialization and stability than $random. The range specified by $urandom_range is always inclusive.
Although $random generates the exact same sequence of random numbers for each call, it is extremely difficult to keep the same call ordering as soon as any change is made to the design or testbench. Even more difficult when multiple threads are concurrently generating random numbers.
This question is NOT about how to use any language to generate a random number between any interval. It is about generating either 0 or 1.
I understand that many random generator algorithm manipulate the very basic random(0 or 1) function and take seed from users and use an algorithm to generate various random numbers as needed.
The question is that how the CPU generate either 0 or 1? If I throw a coin, I can generate head or tailer. That's because I physically throw a coin and let the nature decide. But how does CPU do it? There must be an action that the CPU does (like throwing a coin) to get either 0 or 1 randomly, right?
Could anyone tell me about it?
Thanks
(This has several facets and thus several algorithms. Keep in mind that there are many different forms of randomness used for different purposes, but I understand your question in the way that you are interested in actual randomness used for cryptography.)
The fundamental problem here is that computers are (mostly) deterministic machines. Given the same input in the same state they always yield the same result. However, there are a few ways of actually gathering entropy:
User input. Since users bring outside input into the system you can take that to derive some bits from that. Similar to how you could use radioactive decay or line noise.
Network activity. Again, an outside source of stuff.
Generally interrupts (which kinda include the first two).
As alluded to in the first item, noise from peripherals, such as audio input or a webcam can be used.
There is dedicated hardware that can generate a few hundred MiB of randomness per second. Usually they give you random numbers directly instead of their internal entropy, though.
How exactly you derive bits from that is up to you but you could use time between events, or actual content from the events, etc. – generally eliminating bias from entropy sources isn't easy or trivial and a lot of thought and algorithmic work goes into that (in the case of the aforementioned special hardware this is all done in hardware and the code using it doesn't need to care about it).
Once you have a pool of actually random bits you can just use them as random numbers (/dev/random on Linux does that). But this has downsides, since there is usually little actual entropy and possibly a higher demand for random numbers. So you can invent algorithms to “stretch” that initial randomness in a manner that makes it still impossible or at least very difficult to predict anything about following numbers (/dev/urandom on Linux or both /dev/random and /dev/urandom on FreeBSD do that). Fortuna and Yarrow are so-called cryptographically secure pseudo-random number generators and designed with that in mind. You still have a very good guarantee about the quality of random numbers you generate, but have many more before your entropy pool runs out.
In any case, the CPU itself cannot give you a random 0 or 1. There's a lot more involved and this usually includes the complete computer system or special hardware built for that purpose.
There is also a second class of computational randomness: Plain vanilla pseudo-random number generators (PRNGs). What I said earlier about determinism – this is the embodiment of it. Given the same so-called seed a PRNG will yield the exact same sequence of numbers every time¹. While this sounds idiotic it has practical benefits.
Suppose you run a simulation involving lots of random numbers, maybe to simulate interaction between molecules or atoms that involve certain probabilities and unpredictable behaviour. In science you want results anyone can independently verify, given the same setup and procedure (or, with computing, the same algorithms). If you used actual randomness the only option you have would be to save every single random number used to make sure others can replicate the results independently.
But with a PRNG all you need to save is the seed and remember what algorithm you used. Others can then get the exact same sequence of pseudo-random numbers independently. Very nice property to have :-)
Footnotes
¹ This even includes the CSPRNGs mentioned above, but they are designed to be used in a special way that includes regular re-seeding with entropy to overcome that problem.
A CPU can only generate a uniform random number, U(0,1), which happens to range from 0 to 1. So mathematically, it would be defined as a random variable U in the range [0,1]. Examples of random draws of a U(0,1) random number in the range 0 to 1 would be 0.28100002, 0.34522, 0.7921, etc. The probability of any value between 0 and 1 is equal, i.e., they are equiprobable.
You can generate binary random variates that are either 0 or 1 by setting a random draw of U(0,1) to a 0 if U(0,1)<=0.5 and 1 if U(0,1)>0.5, since in theory there will be an equal number of random draws of U(0,1) below 0.5 and above 0.5.
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.