On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 15:20 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Computers + random = can of worms.
Has anyone seen this: http://home.southernct.edu/~pasqualonia1/ca/report.html#files They are claiming impressive speed and high quality for a random number generator. The code is compact and small, much nicer than mt19937 and the speed seems to blow mt19937 out of the water. I haven't looked at any papers on this and I'm wondering how good it is. Here is quote: The cellular automaton outperforms the GSL random number generators, being more than three times as fast as the GSL generators. The following table shows the mean time for 10 runs of each generator, with each run producing 10 million integers. Source code for both the GSL generators and the cellular automaton was compiled using GCC version 4.1.0 with the -O2 optimization flag. RNG: Mean time to produce 10 million integers: cellular automaton 0.062000 seconds gsl_rng_taus 0.200000 seconds gsl_rng_gfsr4 0.200000 seconds gsl_rng_mt19937 0.223000 seconds gsl_rng_ranlxd1 2.652000 seconds - Don
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
