3 ms·
xoshiro's response: http://pcg.di.unimi.it/pcg.php http://pcg.di.unimi.it/pcg.php
by nightcracker 8y ago
xoshiro's response: http://pcg.di.unimi.it/pcg.php http://pcg.di.unimi.it/pcg.php
- smaddox 8y agoInteresting read, thanks! The deflection about xoshiro is not particularly convincing, though. It's much more likely that you'll want to multiply your random stream by a multiple of 57 than you'll want to xor it with a 43-bit-shifted version of itself. He also doesn't appear to counter the complaint about the generator getting stuck around 0: http://www.pcg-random.org/posts/xoshiro-repeat-flaws.html http://www.pcg-random.org/posts/xoshiro-repeat-flaws.html The other parts of the post definitely concern me about using the PCG's described, though. Also, it's interesting to see how PCG can be predicted. I would not have known how to attack it.
- zeeboo 8y agoHis "attack" is literally a brute force of 32 bits of state. It would not scale to PCG with 128 bits of internal state.
- modeless 8y agoMelissa O'Neill's response back: http://www.pcg-random.org/posts/on-vignas-pcg-critique.html http://www.pcg-random.org/posts/on-vignas-pcg-critique.html
- smaddox 8y agoThanks. This completely allays my concerns about the PCG's I would actually use. Edit: And I like that MCG with 64-bit multiplicand that she shows. I might switch to that for Monte Carlo applications.