The empirical pseudorandomness testing situation seems kind of sad. The suite used in the paper discussed here is unmantained for many years, while its "competi

The empirical pseudorandomness testing situation seems kind of sad. The suite used in the paper discussed here is unmantained for many years, while its "competitor" PracRand/PractRand is not maintained for the last couple of years. It seems like the author of PractRand is the only one who tried to keep their pseudorandomness testing suite relevant, but just the compiler warnings that one gets while trying to compile it are quite scary, so it seems that there's really no project in this space that's in a remotely healthy condition :( Here's a link to a Git mirror of PractRand, in case somebody wants to contribute or fork it: https://github.com/tylov-fork/PractRand https://github.com/tylov-fork/PractRand More broadly, it feels like the situation with non-cryptographic pseudorandom generators and/or hashes isn't in a good place. I have a hunch that making progress on that front requires effort from expert scientists, but presumably the work isn't considered grant-worthy, so there's not a lot of it? On another note, a quite possibly stupid question; but why were the Xoshiro PRNG variants not considered in the paper?