Here is a solution that tries to minimize the number of calls to rand5() while keeping the implementation simple and efficient; in particular, it does not require arbitrary large integers unlike Adam Rosenfield’s second answer. It exploits the fact that 23/19 = 1.21052... is a good rational approximation to log(7)/log(5) = 1.20906..., thus we can generate 19 random elements of {1,...,7} out of 23 random elements of {1,...,5} by rejection sampling with only a small rejection probability. On average, the algorithm below takes about 1.266 calls to rand5() for each call to rand7(). If the distribution of rand5() is uniform, so is rand7().

uint_fast64_t pool;

int capacity = 0;

void new_batch (void)
{
  uint_fast64_t r;
  int i;

  do {
    r = 0;
    for (i = 0; i < 23; i++)
      r = 5 * r + (rand5() - 1);
  } while (r >= 11398895185373143ULL);  /* 7**19, a bit less than 5**23 */

  pool = r;
  capacity = 19;
}

int rand7 (void)
{
  int r;

  if (capacity == 0)
    new_batch();

  r = pool % 7;
  pool /= 7;
  capacity--;

  return r + 1;
}

这里是我的一般实现，在给定一个范围为[0,B-1]的均匀发生器的情况下，生成范围为[0,N-1]的均匀。

public class RandomUnif {

    public static final int BASE_NUMBER = 5;

    private static Random rand = new Random();

    /** given generator, returns uniform integer in the range 0.. BASE_NUMBER-1
    public static int randomBASE() {
        return rand.nextInt(BASE_NUMBER);
    }

    /** returns uniform integer in the range 0..n-1 using randomBASE() */
    public static int randomUnif(int n) {
        int rand, factor;
        if( n <= 1 ) return 0;
        else if( n == BASE_NUMBER ) return randomBASE();
        if( n < BASE_NUMBER ) {
            factor = BASE_NUMBER / n;
            do
                rand = randomBASE() / factor;
            while(rand >= n);
            return rand;
        } else {
            factor = (n - 1) / BASE_NUMBER + 1;
            do {
                rand = factor * randomBASE() + randomUnif(factor);
            } while(rand >= n);
            return rand;
        }
    }
}

不是特别高效，但一般和紧凑。对基生成器的均值调用:

 n  calls
 2  1.250 
 3  1.644 
 4  1.252 
 5  1.000 
 6  3.763 
 7  3.185 
 8  2.821 
 9  2.495 
10  2.250 
11  3.646 
12  3.316 
13  3.060 
14  2.853 
15  2.650 
16  2.814 
17  2.644 
18  2.502 
19  2.361 
20  2.248 
21  2.382 
22  2.277 
23  2.175 
24  2.082 
25  2.000 
26  5.472 
27  5.280 
28  5.119 
29  4.899 

int getOneToSeven(){
    int added = 0;
    for(int i = 1; i<=7; i++){
        added += getOneToFive();
    }
    return (added)%7+1;
}

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

这个解决方案不浪费任何熵，并给出了范围内第一个可用的真正随机数。随着每一次迭代，得不到答案的概率可证明地降低了。在N次迭代中得到答案的概率是0到max (5^N)之间的随机数小于该范围内7的最大倍数(max-max%7)的概率。必须迭代至少两次。但这对所有解都是成立的。

int random7() {
  range = 1;
  remainder = 0;

  while (1) {
    remainder = remainder * 5 + random5() - 1;
    range = range * 5;

    limit = range - (range % 7);
    if (remainder < limit) return (remainder % 7) + 1;

    remainder = remainder % 7;
    range = range % 7;
  }
}

数值上等价于:

r5=5;
num=random5()-1;
while (1) {
   num=num*5+random5()-1;
   r5=r5*5;
   r7=r5-r5%7;
   if (num<r7) return num%7+1;
}

第一个代码以模形式计算。第二个代码只是简单的数学。或者我在某个地方犯了错误。: -)

rand25() =5*(rand5()-1) + rand5()

rand7() { 
   while(true) {
       int r = rand25();
       if (r < 21) return r%3;         
   }
}

为什么这样做:循环永远运行的概率是0。