给定一个函数,它产生的是1到5之间的随机整数,写一个函数,它产生的是1到7之间的随机整数。
当前回答
下面是一个利用c++ 11特性的答案
#include <functional>
#include <iostream>
#include <ostream>
#include <random>
int main()
{
std::random_device rd;
unsigned long seed = rd();
std::cout << "seed = " << seed << std::endl;
std::mt19937 engine(seed);
std::uniform_int_distribution<> dist(1, 5);
auto rand5 = std::bind(dist, engine);
const int n = 20;
for (int i = 0; i != n; ++i)
{
std::cout << rand5() << " ";
}
std::cout << std::endl;
// Use a lambda expression to define rand7
auto rand7 = [&rand5]()->int
{
for (int result = 0; ; result = 0)
{
// Take advantage of the fact that
// 5**6 = 15625 = 15624 + 1 = 7 * (2232) + 1.
// So we only have to discard one out of every 15625 numbers generated.
// Generate a 6-digit number in base 5
for (int i = 0; i != 6; ++i)
{
result = 5 * result + (rand5() - 1);
}
// result is in the range [0, 15625)
if (result == 15625 - 1)
{
// Discard this number
continue;
}
// We now know that result is in the range [0, 15624), a range that can
// be divided evenly into 7 buckets guaranteeing uniformity
result /= 2232;
return 1 + result;
}
};
for (int i = 0; i != n; ++i)
{
std::cout << rand7() << " ";
}
std::cout << std::endl;
return 0;
}
其他回答
int rand7()
{
int zero_one_or_two = ( rand5() + rand5() - 1 ) % 3 ;
return rand5() + zero_one_or_two ;
}
我不喜欢从1开始的范围,所以我将从0开始:-)
unsigned rand5()
{
return rand() % 5;
}
unsigned rand7()
{
int r;
do
{
r = rand5();
r = r * 5 + rand5();
r = r * 5 + rand5();
r = r * 5 + rand5();
r = r * 5 + rand5();
r = r * 5 + rand5();
} while (r > 15623);
return r / 2232;
}
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)。
为什么不除以5再乘以7,然后四舍五入呢?(当然,你必须使用浮点数no.)
它比其他解决方案更简单、更可靠(真的吗?)例如,在Python中:
def ranndomNo7():
import random
rand5 = random.randint(4) # Produces range: [0, 4]
rand7 = int(rand5 / 5 * 7) # /5, *7, +0.5 and floor()
return rand7
这不是很容易吗?
亚当·罗森菲尔德正确答案的前提是:
X = 5^n(在他的例子中,n=2) 操作n个rand5次调用以获得范围[1,x]内的数字y Z = ((int)(x / 7)) * 7 如果y > z,再试一次。否则返回y % 7 + 1
当n = 2时,有4种可能:y ={22,23,24,25}。如果你使用n = 6,你只有1个扔掉的东西:y ={15625}。
5^6 is 15625 7 times 2232 is 15624
你又给rand5个电话。但是,您获得一个丢弃值(或无限循环)的机会要低得多。如果有办法让y没有可能的一次性值,我还没有找到它。