Re: RandomReplacement
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg51380] Re: RandomReplacement
- From: sean kim <sean_incali at yahoo.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 02:47:44 -0400 (EDT)
- Reply-to: sean_incali at yahoo.com
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
Hi Andrej, Ok. this new fix seems to get rid of all the bugs I have seen in this group. http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&safe=off&threadm=b8vrqe%24dit%241%40smc.vnet.net&rnum=3&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26newwindow%3D1%26safe%3Doff%26q%3Drandom%2Bcorrelation%26meta%3Dgroup%253Dcomp.soft-sys.math.mathematica http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&safe=off&threadm=a61v9o%24gq4%241%40smc.vnet.net&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26newwindow%3D1%26safe%3Doff%26q%3Drandom%2Bfishy%26meta%3Dgroup%253Dcomp.soft-sys.math.mathematica thank you so much for making the fix.(there was no need to give me credit for pointing out the problem, it's not liek I helped with the fixing the code, o_0) i'll keep my eye out for anything strange as i use it. the timing doesn't seem to be too different om my machine. (Dell Inspiron 4150 laptop. 1.7ghz, 1gig ram, windows XP, Mathematica 5.0) without RandomReplacement loaded, i get In[6]:= Timing[Table[RandomArray[NormalDistribution[5, 2]],{10^7}];] Out[6]= {3.375 Second,Null} In[7]:=Timing[Table[RandomArray[NormalDistribution[5, 2]],{10^8}];] Out[7]={33.999 Second,Null} with RandomReplacement loaded, In[5]:= Timing[Table[RandomArray[NormalDistribution[5, 2]],{10^7}];] Out[5]= {3.545 Second,Null} In[6]:= Timing[Table[RandomArray[NormalDistribution[5, 2]],{10^8}];] Out[6]= {34.58 Second,Null} i can't evaluate Timing[Table[RandomArray[NormalDistribution[5, 2]],{10^9}];] No more memory available. Mathematica kernel has shut down. Try quitting other applications and then retry. I wonder why the timing increases exponentially... but anyway, thank you so much the fix! sean --- Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz at mimuw.edu.pl> wrote: > > Dear Sean > > I am sending you a new version of the package, which > I think now works. > It is a lot slower than the using the built in > Random[] but it gives > the right answer in the example that you tested it > on last time. > > There may still be some bugs in it so I would be > grateful if you'd let > me know if you observe anything strange. > > Thanks a lot for spotting that problem and for > suggesting the cause! > > With best regards > > Andrzej > > > ATTACHMENT part 2 application/octet-stream x-unix-mode=0644; name=RandomReplacement.m _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com