[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: Re: RandomReal gets stuck
*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
*Subject*: [mg100410] Re: [mg100380] Re: RandomReal gets stuck
*From*: "A. B." <functionalcoatings at gmail.com>
*Date*: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 01:08:37 -0400 (EDT)
By the way, is the use of "indexed" variable names in the form x[i]
encouraged in Mathematica ? It doesn't make sense in mathematical notation
(as far as I am aware) and is not coherent with the use of brackets in
Mathematica.
A.B.
>> The code above uses Maximize in a non-sensical way, particularly
>> when the function y hasn't been defined. This usage asks
>> Mathematica to find the maximize the sum of n things with
>> respect to each of the n things. It appears there is an attempt
>> to use the notation y[n] to mean an array indexed by n rather
>> than a function of n. So, Maximize correctly generates error
>> messages. What is unexpected is poor input to Maximize appears
>> to cause a problem for RandomReal.
>
> Bill,
>
> I don't think you understood what I was trying to do. I merely
> simplified Bas' code to something that had the same effects on random
> number generation. The use of y[i] was taken from Bas' example. I
> don't think he meant to index an array. You can use y[1], y[2] etc.
> just as any other variable.
>
> The error message in Maximize is not material to the problem. I ask
> Mathematica to maximize an unbounded sum of variables. It's a
> perfectly legal (though unsolvable) problem. That it responds with an
> error message doesn't matter (I can -and have- come up with more
> elaborate functions that have the same problem with random numbers but
> don't cause Maximize to generate a warning). The problem is that
> Maximize with 31 or more variables resets the random number generator.
> In the mean time, Wolfram has confirmed this is indeed the case and it
> will be fixed in a new realease.
>
> Cheers -- Sjoerd
>
>
>
> On Jun 1, 1:11 pm, Bill Rowe <readn... at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> On 5/31/09 at 6:34 AM, sjoerd.c.devr... at gmail.com (Sjoerd C. de
>>
>> Vries) wrote:
>>> I can confirm this bug.
>>> Executing an even simpler version, namely
>>> Maximize[Plus @@ Table[y[i], {i, 31}], Table[y[i], {i, 31}]];
>>> will also set the random generator to a fixed starting point. The
>>> number 31 is crucial, as lower values do not appear to cause the
>>> bug, while higher values do. Changing Plus to Times appears to
>>> prevent the bug.
>>> In[394]:= Table[
>>> Maximize[Plus @@ Table[y[i], {i, 31}], Table[y[i], {i, 31}]];
>>> RandomReal[], {20}
>>> ]
>>
>> When I execute the code above, I do get the same result as you
>> report. Clearly, there is a problem here somewhere. But it isn't
>> clear the issue is with RandomReal.
>>
>> The code above uses Maximize in a non-sensical way, particularly
>> when the function y hasn't been defined. This usage asks
>> Mathematica to find the maximize the sum of n things with
>> respect to each of the n things. It appears there is an attempt
>> to use the notation y[n] to mean an array indexed by n rather
>> than a function of n. So, Maximize correctly generates error
>> messages. What is unexpected is poor input to Maximize appears
>> to cause a problem for RandomReal.
>>
>> On my system, changing Plus to Times eliminates the effect on
>> RandomReal even though there is still a non-sensical input to
>> Maximize. Alternatively, defining y then executing the code does
>>
>> In[5]:= y[n_] := n^2 - n
>>
>> In[6]:= Table[
>> Maximize[Plus @@ Table[y[i], {i, 31}], Table[y[i], {i, 31}]];
>> RandomReal[], {20}]
>>
>> During evaluation of In[6]:= Maximize::ivar: 0 is not a valid
>> variable. >>
>>
>> During evaluation of In[6]:= Maximize::ivar: 0 is not a valid
>> variable. >>
>>
>> During evaluation of In[6]:= Maximize::ivar: 0 is not a valid
>> variable. >>
>>
>> During evaluation of In[6]:= General::stop: Further output of
>> Maximize::ivar will be suppressed during this calculation. >>
>>
>> Out[6]= {0.877054,0.833103,0.703786,0.0482118,0.226066,0.230746,0.07380=
> 72=
>> ,0.680963,0.53264,0.989333,0.418793,0.951114,0.963168,0.870439,0.926361,0=
> .267113,0.195084,0.810066,0.875896,0.579076}
>>
>>> This is very nasty, as a lot of people critically depend on random
>>> functions to be random. I would urge you to report this to wolfram
>>> support.
>>
>> I agree many people including myself depend on the random
>> functions to be random. And I would also like Mathematica to
>> fail gracefully when given non-sensical input and provide useful
>> error messages. But I am never surprised when software does
>> something other than fail gracefully given non-sensical input or
>> provides less than useful error messages.
>>
>> Entering
>>
>> Table[
>> Maximize[Plus @@ Table[y[i], {i, 31}], Table[y[i], {i, 31}]];
>> RandomReal[],
>> {20}
>> ]
>>
>> into a new session and expecting useful output simply isn't a
>> reasonable expectation.
>>
>> Note, this in no way says what the original poster was doing is
>> unreasonable or non-sensical. The rest of the information needed
>> to determine whether what the original poster was attempting is
>> sensible hasn't been provided. I would also note, that sending a
>> bug report to Wolfram without the additional information is
>> probably pointless.
>
>
Prev by Date:
**Re: Sidebar Tools**
Next by Date:
**Re: Re: RandomReal gets stuck**
Previous by thread:
**Re: RandomReal gets stuck**
Next by thread:
**Re: Re: RandomReal gets stuck**
| |