http://www.pcg-random.org/enContents © 2017 <a href="mailto:oneill@pcg-random.org">M.E. O'Neill</a> Sun, 30 Jul 2017 00:56:55 GMTNikola (getnikola.com)http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rsshttp://www.pcg-random.org/posts/pcg-passes-practrand.htmlM.E. O'Neill<div><p>There were various questions that people asked when PCG first started being discussed on the Internet; one those questions was whether I had also tested PCG with <a href="http://pracrand.sourceforge.net/">PractRand</a>. I hadn't. I had done my testing using <a href="http://simul.iro.umontreal.ca/testu01/tu01.html">TestU01</a>, which is considered by most to be the “gold standard”, with the broadest range of tests. Back in 2014, PractRand hadn't been on my radar, but looking into it I discovered that it is TestU01's closest competitor. I put testing with PractRand on my to-do list, but it wasn't a very high priority because I knew that all my PCG family members had been designed to pass TestU01's <em>BigCrush</em> test battery with plenty of headroom, which gave me good reason to believe they would do well in any set of statistical tests.</p> <p>Finally, this summer I was discussing the best practices for testing random number generators with a colleague and I realized that it was high time for me to finally get around to testing PCG (and a few other recent PRNGs, too!). The short version is, it passes just fine. But for the details, read on…</p> <p><a href="http://www.pcg-random.org/posts/pcg-passes-practrand.html">Read more…</a> (26 min remaining to read)</p></div>draft pcg splitmix xoroshiro practrand testinghttp://www.pcg-random.org/posts/pcg-passes-practrand.htmlSat, 29 Jul 2017 04:24:58 GMT