Python:有一个简单的两行答案，它使用空间代数和模量的组合。这不是直观的。我对它的解释令人困惑，但却是正确的。

知道5*7=35 7/5 = 1余数为2。如何保证余数之和始终为0?5*[7/5 = 1余数2]——> 35/5 = 7余数0

想象一下，我们有一条丝带，缠在一根周长为7的杆子上。丝带需要35个单位才能均匀地缠绕。随机选择7个色带片段len=[1…5]。忽略换行的有效长度与将rand5()转换为rand7()的方法相同。

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
# display is a notebook function FYI
def rand5(): ## random uniform int [1...5]
    return np.random.randint(1,6)

n_trials = 1000
samples = [rand5() for _ in range(n_trials)]

display(pd.Series(samples).value_counts(normalize=True))
# 4    0.2042
# 5    0.2041
# 2    0.2010
# 1    0.1981
# 3    0.1926
# dtype: float64
    
def rand7(): # magic algebra
    x = sum(rand5() for _ in range(7))
    return x%7 + 1

samples = [rand7() for _ in range(n_trials)]

display(pd.Series(samples).value_counts(normalize=False))
# 6    1475
# 2    1475
# 3    1456
# 1    1423
# 7    1419
# 4    1393
# 5    1359
# dtype: int64
    
df = pd.DataFrame([
    pd.Series([rand7() for _ in range(n_trials)]).value_counts(normalize=True)
    for _ in range(1000)
])
df.describe()
#      1    2   3   4   5   6   7
# count 1000.000000 1000.000000 1000.000000 1000.000000 1000.000000 1000.000000 1000.000000
# mean  0.142885    0.142928    0.142523    0.142266    0.142704    0.143048    0.143646
# std   0.010807    0.011526    0.010966    0.011223    0.011052    0.010983    0.011153
# min   0.112000    0.108000    0.101000    0.110000    0.100000    0.109000    0.110000
# 25%   0.135000    0.135000    0.135000    0.135000    0.135000    0.135000    0.136000
# 50%   0.143000    0.142000    0.143000    0.142000    0.143000    0.142000    0.143000
# 75%   0.151000    0.151000    0.150000    0.150000    0.150000    0.150000    0.151000
# max   0.174000    0.181000    0.175000    0.178000    0.189000    0.176000    0.179000

通过使用滚动总数，您可以同时

保持平均分配;而且 不需要牺牲随机序列中的任何元素。

这两个问题都是简单的rand(5)+rand(5)…类型的解决方案。下面的Python代码展示了如何实现它(其中大部分是证明发行版)。

import random
x = []
for i in range (0,7):
    x.append (0)
t = 0
tt = 0
for i in range (0,700000):
    ########################################
    #####            qq.py             #####
    r = int (random.random () * 5)
    t = (t + r) % 7
    ########################################
    #####       qq_notsogood.py        #####
    #r = 20
    #while r > 6:
        #r =     int (random.random () * 5)
        #r = r + int (random.random () * 5)
    #t = r
    ########################################
    x[t] = x[t] + 1
    tt = tt + 1
high = x[0]
low = x[0]
for i in range (0,7):
    print "%d: %7d %.5f" % (i, x[i], 100.0 * x[i] / tt)
    if x[i] < low:
        low = x[i]
    if x[i] > high:
        high = x[i]
diff = high - low
print "Variation = %d (%.5f%%)" % (diff, 100.0 * diff / tt)

这个输出显示了结果:

pax$ python qq.py
0:   99908 14.27257
1:  100029 14.28986
2:  100327 14.33243
3:  100395 14.34214
4:   99104 14.15771
5:   99829 14.26129
6:  100408 14.34400
Variation = 1304 (0.18629%)

pax$ python qq.py
0:   99547 14.22100
1:  100229 14.31843
2:  100078 14.29686
3:   99451 14.20729
4:  100284 14.32629
5:  100038 14.29114
6:  100373 14.33900
Variation = 922 (0.13171%)

pax$ python qq.py
0:  100481 14.35443
1:   99188 14.16971
2:  100284 14.32629
3:  100222 14.31743
4:   99960 14.28000
5:   99426 14.20371
6:  100439 14.34843
Variation = 1293 (0.18471%)

一个简单的rand(5)+rand(5)，忽略那些返回大于6的情况，其典型变化为18%，是上面所示方法的100倍:

pax$ python qq_notsogood.py
0:   31756 4.53657
1:   63304 9.04343
2:   95507 13.64386
3:  127825 18.26071
4:  158851 22.69300
5:  127567 18.22386
6:   95190 13.59857
Variation = 127095 (18.15643%)

pax$ python qq_notsogood.py
0:   31792 4.54171
1:   63637 9.09100
2:   95641 13.66300
3:  127627 18.23243
4:  158751 22.67871
5:  126782 18.11171
6:   95770 13.68143
Variation = 126959 (18.13700%)

pax$ python qq_notsogood.py
0:   31955 4.56500
1:   63485 9.06929
2:   94849 13.54986
3:  127737 18.24814
4:  159687 22.81243
5:  127391 18.19871
6:   94896 13.55657
Variation = 127732 (18.24743%)

并且，根据Nixuz的建议，我已经清理了脚本，所以您可以提取并使用rand7…材料:

import random

# rand5() returns 0 through 4 inclusive.

def rand5():
    return int (random.random () * 5)

# rand7() generator returns 0 through 6 inclusive (using rand5()).

def rand7():
    rand7ret = 0
    while True:
        rand7ret = (rand7ret + rand5()) % 7
        yield rand7ret

# Number of test runs.

count = 700000

# Work out distribution.

distrib = [0,0,0,0,0,0,0]
rgen =rand7()
for i in range (0,count):
    r = rgen.next()
    distrib[r] = distrib[r] + 1

# Print distributions and calculate variation.

high = distrib[0]
low = distrib[0]
for i in range (0,7):
    print "%d: %7d %.5f" % (i, distrib[i], 100.0 * distrib[i] / count)
    if distrib[i] < low:
        low = distrib[i]
    if distrib[i] > high:
        high = distrib[i]
diff = high - low
print "Variation = %d (%.5f%%)" % (diff, 100.0 * diff / count)

#!/usr/bin/env ruby
class Integer
  def rand7
    rand(6)+1
  end
end

def rand5
  rand(4)+1
end

x = rand5() # x => int between 1 and 5

y = x.rand7() # y => int between 1 and 7

．．尽管这可能被认为是作弊。

我觉得你们都想多了。难道这个简单的解决方案行不通吗?

int rand7(void)
{
    static int startpos = 0;
    startpos = (startpos+5) % (5*7);
    return (((startpos + rand5()-1)%7)+1);
}

我玩了一下，我为这个Rand(7)算法写了“测试环境”。例如，如果你想尝试哪种分布给你的算法，或者需要多少次迭代才能生成所有不同的随机值(对于Rand(7) 1-7)，你可以使用它。

我的核心算法是:

return (Rand5() + Rand5()) % 7 + 1;

和亚当·罗森菲尔德的分布一样均匀。(我将其包含在代码片段中)

private static int Rand7WithRand5()
{
    //PUT YOU FAVOURITE ALGORITHM HERE//

    //1. Stackoverflow winner
    int i;
    do
    {
        i = 5 * (Rand5() - 1) + Rand5(); // i is now uniformly random between 1 and 25
    } while (i > 21);
    // i is now uniformly random between 1 and 21
    return i % 7 + 1;

    //My 2 cents
    //return (Rand5() + Rand5()) % 7 + 1;
}

这个“测试环境”可以采用任何Rand(n)算法并测试和评估它(分布和速度)。只需将代码放入“Rand7WithRand5”方法并运行代码片段。

一些观察:

亚当·罗森菲尔德(Adam Rosenfield)的算法并不比我的算法分布得更好。不管怎样，两种算法的分布都很糟糕。 本机Rand7(随机的。Next(1,8))完成，因为它在大约200+迭代中生成了给定间隔内的所有成员，Rand7WithRand5算法的顺序为10k(约30-70k) 真正的挑战不是编写从Rand(5)生成Rand(7)的方法，而是生成几乎均匀分布的值。

这个答案更像是一个从Rand5函数中获得最大熵的实验。因此，T有点不清楚，几乎可以肯定比其他实现慢得多。

假设0-4为均匀分布，0-6为均匀分布:

public class SevenFromFive
{
  public SevenFromFive()
  {
    // this outputs a uniform ditribution but for some reason including it 
    // screws up the output distribution
    // open question Why?
    this.fifth = new ProbabilityCondensor(5, b => {});
    this.eigth = new ProbabilityCondensor(8, AddEntropy);
  } 

  private static Random r = new Random();
  private static uint Rand5()
  {
    return (uint)r.Next(0,5);
  }

  private class ProbabilityCondensor
  {
    private readonly int samples;
    private int counter;
    private int store;
    private readonly Action<bool> output;

    public ProbabilityCondensor(int chanceOfTrueReciprocal,
      Action<bool> output)
    {
      this.output = output;
      this.samples = chanceOfTrueReciprocal - 1;  
    }

    public void Add(bool bit)
    {
      this.counter++;
      if (bit)
        this.store++;   
      if (counter == samples)
      {
        bool? e;
        if (store == 0)
          e = false;
        else if (store == 1)
          e = true;
        else
          e = null;// discard for now       
        counter = 0;
        store = 0;
        if (e.HasValue)
          output(e.Value);
      }
    }
  }

  ulong buffer = 0;
  const ulong Mask = 7UL;
  int bitsAvail = 0;
  private readonly ProbabilityCondensor fifth;
  private readonly ProbabilityCondensor eigth;

  private void AddEntropy(bool bit)
  {
    buffer <<= 1;
    if (bit)
      buffer |= 1;      
    bitsAvail++;
  }

  private void AddTwoBitsEntropy(uint u)
  {
    buffer <<= 2;
    buffer |= (u & 3UL);    
    bitsAvail += 2;
  }

  public uint Rand7()
  {
    uint selection;   
    do
    {
      while (bitsAvail < 3)
      {
        var x = Rand5();
        if (x < 4)
        {
          // put the two low order bits straight in
          AddTwoBitsEntropy(x);
          fifth.Add(false);
        }
        else
        { 
          fifth.Add(true);
        }
      }
      // read 3 bits
      selection = (uint)((buffer & Mask));
      bitsAvail -= 3;     
      buffer >>= 3;
      if (selection == 7)
        eigth.Add(true);
      else
        eigth.Add(false);
    }
    while (selection == 7);   
    return selection;
  }
}

每次调用Rand5添加到缓冲区的比特数目前是4/5 * 2，所以是1.6。 如果包括1/5的概率值，则增加0.05，因此增加1.65，但请参阅代码中的注释，我不得不禁用它。

调用Rand7消耗的比特数= 3 + 1/8 *(3 + 1/8 *(3 + 1/8 *(… 这是3 + 3/8 + 3/64 + 3/512…大约是3.42

通过从7中提取信息，我每次调用回收1/8*1/7位，大约0.018

这使得每次调用的净消耗为3.4比特，这意味着每一次Rand7调用到Rand5的比率为2.125。最优值应该是2.1。

我可以想象这种方法比这里的许多其他方法都要慢得多，除非调用Rand5的代价非常昂贵(比如调用一些外部熵源)。