similar to: random number generator?

R-ians: After some effort I coerced my code to do what I want but my syntax is a kludge. Suggestions on more elegant syntax? par <- NIM.results$par do.call("Draw.NIM.POD.curve", list(par[1], par[2], par[3], par[4], par[5], a.hat.decision, .... et cetera ... It seems that I should be able to avoid defining the variable "par" and then specifying each of its elements,

Gabe As mentioned on Twitter, I think the following behavior should be fixed as part of the upcoming changes: R.version.string ## [1] "R Under development (unstable) (2019-02-25 r76160)" .Machine$double.digits ## [1] 53 set.seed(123) RNGkind() ## [1] "Mersenne-Twister" "Inversion"??????? "Rejection" length(table(runif(1e6))) ## [1] 999863 I don't

Before the next release we really should to sort out the bias issue in sample() reported by Ottoboni and Stark in https://www.stat.berkeley.edu/~stark/Preprints/r-random-issues.pdf and filed aa a bug report by Duncan Murdoch at https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17494. Here are two examples of bad behavior through current R-devel: set.seed(123) m <- (2/5) * 2^32

Ralf I don't doubt this is expected with the current implementation, I doubt the implementation is desirable. Suggesting to turn this to pbirthday(1e6, classes = 2^53) ## [1] 5.550956e-05 (which is still non-zero, but much less likely to cause confusion.) Best regards Kirill On 26.02.19 10:18, Ralf Stubner wrote: > Kirill, > > I think some level of collision is actually

Hi All, I have k identical parallel pieces of code running, each using n.rand random numbers.? I would like to use the same RNG (for now), and set the seeds so that I can guarantee that there are no overlaps in the random numbers sampled by the k pieces of code.? Another side goal is to have reproducibility of my results.? In?the past I have used C with SPRNG for this task, but I'm hoping

Dear all, Recently I am generating large random samples (10M) and any duplicated numbers are not desired. We tried several RNGs in R and found Wichmann-Hill did not produce duplications. The duplication problem is the interesting birthday problem. If there are M possible numbers, randomly draw N numbers from them, the average number of dupilcations D = N(N-1)/2/M. For Knuth-TAOCP and

Full_Name: Wolfgang Huber Version: 1.8.0 OS: Linux Submission from: (NULL) (193.174.58.146) The man page for RNGkind says that the default is Mersenne-Twister, and when I start R interactively, I get in fact > RNGkind() [1] "Mersenne-Twister" "Inversion" However, during the execution of "R CMD check" I get > > ### ** Examples > > > > RNGkind()

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 3:25 PM, Gary Black <gwblack001 at sbcglobal.net> wrote: (Sorry to be a bit slow responding.) You have not supplied a complete example, which would be good in this case because what you are suggesting could be a serious bug in R or a package. Serious journals require reproducibility these days. For example, JSS is very clear on this point. To your question >

I sent this to R-devel early last month, but have received no response, so I guess it really is a bug. This looks like a bug to me, and is a bit hard to describe, but easy to reproduce. ? Basically, if RNGkind is saved as something other than the default, and if the first operation in a session is a set.seed(), the default is reverted to. ?Reproduce by: cafe-rozo> ?R --vanilla R version

The following helps identify when .GlobalEnv$.Random.seed has changed: rng_tracker <- local({ last <- .GlobalEnv$.Random.seed function(...) { curr <- .GlobalEnv$.Random.seed if (!identical(curr, last)) { warning(".Random.seed changed") last <<- curr } TRUE } }) addTaskCallback(rng_tracker, name = "RNG tracker") EXAMPLE: >

Dear list, I have noticed surprisingly big performance differences of runif() between Windows XP and (Debian) linux on similar CPUs (Pentium D 3.0GHz (WinXP)/3.2GHz (Linux)) and I wonder if there is a simple explanation for the difference. On a linux system (with a slightly better CPU and 1GB more RAM), execution of runif() seems to consume about 80% more CPU time than on a Windows XP

On 30 August 2016 at 18:29, Duncan Murdoch wrote: | I don't see evidence of a bug. There have been several versions of the | MT; we may be using a different version than you are. Ours is the | 1999/10/28 version; the web page you cite uses one from 2002. | | Perhaps the newer version fixes some problems, and then it would be | worth considering a change. But changing the default RNG

On 04/03/2018 5:54 PM, Henrik Bengtsson wrote: > The following helps identify when .GlobalEnv$.Random.seed has changed: > > rng_tracker <- local({ > last <- .GlobalEnv$.Random.seed > function(...) { > curr <- .GlobalEnv$.Random.seed > if (!identical(curr, last)) { > warning(".Random.seed changed") > last <<- curr

This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. ---559023410-851401618-1218751024=:15885 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE I didn't describe the problem clearly. It's about the number of distinct=20 values. So just

I am wondering whether there is a bug in rnorm. When generating rnorm(1000000) and counting the cases > 4 and the cases < (-4) I get rather unexpectedly low counts for the latter. The problem goes away when using qnorm(runif(1000000)). Fritz Scholz, PhD Applied Statistics Group Boeing Phantom Works fritz.scholz at pss.boeing.com 425-865-3623 Tu/We 206-542-6545 (most likely)

Hi, Our department has detected a bug in the implementation of the Kinderman-Ramage generator for normal random variates in version 1.7.0, which can be seen from the below R session. (Consecutive calls for chisq.test(...) always gives p-values very close to 0.) We have already encountered this bug in version 1.6.2 The error is in file R-1.7.0/src/nmath/snorm.c Here is a patch for this file to

Today I struggled for hours to understand some unexpected package test results. It turned out that this is because package "parallel", buried deep in my dependencies, calls runif() during it's initialization and in this way changes the random number sequence. This seems to be a part of a more general question--which kind of functions can we trust if we want to preserve random

Dear list, For the implementation of a particular optimization algorithm it is very important the random number generator. I would like to know if somebody could tell me what is the random number generator used by default in the 'runif' function. >From the help page of 'runif' and '.Random.seed' I guess that the default algorithm is 'Mersenne-Twister', but I

Thank you, everybody, who replied! I appreciate your valuable advise! I will move the location of the set.seed() command to after all packages have been installed and loaded. Best regards, Gary Sent from my iPad > On Mar 4, 2018, at 12:18 PM, Paul Gilbert <pgilbert902 at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 3:25 PM, Gary Black <gwblack001 at sbcglobal.net> >

Greetings R-ians: Searching the Searchable Mail Archives I discovered that ctrl L will clear the Rgui screen, which is what I'd like to do from a print (or some similar) statement. Is there a mechanism to use the ctrl L clear-screen sequence in a script, or print statement? Thanks for your counsel. Charles Annis, P.E. Charles.Annis at StatisticalEngineering.com phone: 561-352-9699 eFax:?