That's a super cool idea, but my data have no similar size. Anyway, that's both simple and always better than what I do.(At worst it has an expected complexity of O(n) if all the mass is in one value and the n-1 are zero-ish).
I think you can solve the holes on delete by permuting the removed element with the last element and keeping a map from value to their index. Thanks you very much for these suggestions. On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 10:04 PM, Garth Sheldon-Coulson <g...@mit.edu>wrote: > Well, my idea involves rejection sampling. In order to sample an element > from the set in a mass-weighted fashion, you can sample an element in a > uniform fashion and then reject the sample with a certain probability (more > below). If you do reject the sample, you keep drawing from the uniform > proposal distribution until you get an acceptance. This can be quite > efficient if the most massive element in the set is not too much more > massive than the majority of the other elements. If, however, the elements > have very different masses, then it can be inefficient. Regardless, my > intuition is that you can't do better than rejection sampling in this case, > because the probability distribution from which you're sampling is > constantly changing and not of any particular functional form. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
