Python's random.uniform() in C++? - c++

I've been ripping my hair out for a while now with these random numbers in C++.
In Python, I had the awesome:
random.uniform(0, 1)
Which churned out a new random number each time I called it.
C++ has to have something like this. I Googled for a long time, and found erand48(), which I plan to implement into my raytracer (I'm translating it from Python to C++).
I tried a simple test case, but I was hoping to create a random_uniform() function which always spits out a new random number (using time() isn't going to work AFAICT, as this will be running really quickly)
unsigned short Xi[3] = {0, 1, 27};
std::cout << erand48(Xi);
And the output was (and will be every time I call the program):
0.174529
I tried using the previous output as the new Xi, like this (Xis initial value was defined):
float random_uniform() {
long generated = erand48(Xi);
int temp = generated * 1000000;
unsigned short Xi[3] = {temp - 16, temp - 7, temp - 18};
return generated;
}
But that doesn't seem like it would generate random enough numbers (and it only spits out 0. I', not sure why...).
Is there any way that I could make a function which spits out a new random number each time?

Not being familiar with python, I'm going to assume that random.uniform(0, 1) spits out a random number from a uniform distribution between 0 and 1?
If so, try the following:
srand(time(NULL));
float myRand = ((float) rand( )) / RAND_MAX;
Note that your mileage may vary though - rand() is not guaranteed to be a very high quality random number source. You may get visual artifacts depending on the implementation and how you're using it. I use a Mersenne Twister random number generator in my raytracer.
EDIT: Just to be a little clearer, that's:
...
void init_program ( )
{
...
srand(time(NULL));
...
}
...
float random_uniform ( )
{
return ((float) rand( )) / RAND_MAX;
}
...
If you call both srand and rand at the same time, you're likely to get the same "random" number each time, because unless the time has changed in the meantime you'll seed the generator with exactly the same seed, and hence get exactly the same first random number.

Is there a reason you're not just using rand(), which is part of the C++ standard library? The function you refer to is part of the Single UNIX Specification, but is probably not portable...
The reason you're getting the same value over and over is because you're not seeding the random number generator, so it behaves deterministically. Use srand() or srand48() if you're OK with the UNIX-specific functions and need the 48-bit precision. Only call it once at the beginning of your program, and pass it time(NULL). Don't worry about using time(), since you're only calling this function once, you don't need to worry about always getting the same time value.
You may also want to refer to this page about how to take the return value from rand() and scale it to the range you want effectively:
USING THE C OR C++ rand() FUNCTION
EDIT: Go back and read the docs for erand48 again. You'll notice it returns a double in the range [0, 1). You're putting that in a long, which is probably why you're always seeing zero (the value is truncated to an integer). I also think that it's probably updating the values of the unsigned long array for you with the current number in the sequence -- you provide the storage, it uses it to "keep track" of the sequence.
Try:
unsigned short xsubi[3] = { 0, 1, 27 };
for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i)
{
double value = erand48(xsubi);
printf("%f\n", value);
}

Yeah- it's called std::rand(), comes as Standard and ships in <cstdlib>.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/398ax69y(v=VS.100).aspx

Might want to look into Boost.Random.

Related

Why use "time" in srand?

I like to learn by screwing around with code, recently I copied and pasted a random number generator code. Then I removed all the lines of code that were not "necessary" to make the executable work to generate a random number. The final straw was me deleting "time" from srand.
srand((unsigned) time(0));
What is the point of "time(0)" here?
Does it use the time that the program is opened to generate the seed for the random number? Is that why removing it (time) makes it not work? Because then it doesn't have a seed?
Also...
include <stdlib.h>
include <stdio.h>
include <time.h>
int main()
{
srand((unsigned) time(0));
printf("Your dice has been rolled! You got:");
int result = 1 + (rand() % 20);
printf("%d", result);
}
that's the whole code and I noticed it used the "rand" result for output. Does the "rand" pull the seed from "srand"?
If you don’t “seed” the random number generator (or if you use the same seed value), you’ll get the same set of pseudorandom numbers.
Using the current time is an easy way to get a different seed every time.
The effect of srand cannot cross threads, so the random number seed should be set once on each thread. #Buddy said that using time(0) is the most convenient way to do this, and each call will get a different seed.Of course you can use an atomic variable .
std::atomic<int> seek(2374213); //init whatever you like
void thread1fun()
{
srand(++seek);
//...
int rand_num = rand();
}
void thread2fun()
{
srand(++seek);
//...
int rand_num = rand();
}

How to improve this random number generator code in c++?

I am C++ student and I am working on creating a random number generator.
Infact I should say my algorithm selects a number within a defined range.
I am writing this just because of my curiosity.
I am not challenging existing library functions.
I always use library functions when writing applications based on randomness but I am again stating that I just want to make it because of my curiosity.
I would also like to know if there is something wrong with my algorithm or with my approach.
Because i googled how PRNGs work and on some sites they said that a mathematical algorithm is there and a predefined series of numbers and a seed just sets the pointer in a different point in the series and after some intervals the sequence repeats itself.
My algorithm just starts moving to and fro in the array of possible values and the seed breaks the loop with different values each time. I don't i this approach is wrong. I got answers suggesting a different algorithm but they didn't explain What's wrong with my current algorithm?
Yes,there was a problem with my seed as it was not precise and made results little predictable as here:-
cout<
<
rn(50,100);
The results in running four times are 74,93,56,79.
See the pattern of "increasing order".
And for large ranges patterns could be seen easily.I got an answer on getting good seeds but that too recommended a new algorithm(but didn't say why?).
An alternative way could be to shuffle my array randomly generating a new sequence every time.And the pattern of increasing order will go off.Any help with that rearranging too will also be good.Here is the code below.And if my function is not possible please notify me.
Thanking you in anticipation.
int rn(int lowerlt, int upperlt)
{
/* Over short ranges, results are satisfactory.
* I want to make it effective for big ranges.
*/
const int size = upperlt - lowerlt; // Constant size of the integer array.
int ar[size]; // Array to store all possible values within defined range.
int i, x, ret; // Variables to control loops and return value.
long pointer = 0; //pointer variable. The one which breaks the main loop.
// Loop to initialize the array with possible values..
for (i=0, x=lowerlt; x <= upperlt; i++, x++)
ar[i]=x;
long seed = time(0);
//Main loop . To find the random number.
for (i=0; pointer <= seed; i++, pointer++)
{
ret = ar[i];
if (i == size-1)
{
// Reverse loop.
for (; i >= 0; i--)
{
ret=ar[i];
}
}
}
return ret;
}
Caveat: From your post, aside from your random generator algorithm, one of your problems is getting a good seed value, so I'll address that part of it.
You could use /dev/random to get a seed value. That would be a great place to start [and would be sufficient on its own], but might be considered "cheating" from some perspective.
So, here are some other sources of "entropy":
Use a higher resolution time of day clock source: gettimeofday or clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME,...) call it "cur_time". Use only the microsecond or nanosecond portion respectively, call it "cur_nano". Note that cur_nano is usually pretty random all by itself.
Do a getpid(2). This has a few unpredictable bits because between invocations other programs are starting and we don't know how many.
Create a new temp file and get the file's inode number [then delete it]. This varies slowly over time. It may be the same on each invocation [or not]
Get the high resolution value for the system's time of day clock when the system was booted, call it "sysboot".
Get the high resolution value for the start time of your "session": When your program's parent shell was started, call it "shell_start".
If you were using Linux, you could compute a checksum of /proc/interrupts as that's always changing. For other systems, get some hash of the number of interrupts of various types [should be available from some type of syscall].
Now, create some hash of all of the above (e.g.):
dev_random * cur_nano * (cur_time - sysboot) * (cur_time - shell_start) *
getpid * inode_number * interrupt_count
That's a simple equation. You could enhance it with some XOR and/or sum operations. Experiment until you get one that works for you.
Note: This only gives you the seed value for your PRNG. You'll have to create your PRNG from something else (e.g. earl's linear algorithm)
unsigned int Random::next() {
s = (1664525 * s + 1013904223);
return s;
}
's' is growing with every call of that function.
Correct is
unsigned int Random::next() {
s = (1664525 * s + 1013904223) % xxxxxx;
return s;
}
Maybe use this function
long long Factor = 279470273LL, Divisor = 4294967291LL;
long long seed;
next()
{
seed = (seed * Factor) % Divisor;
}

Variables always the same after first execution?

I'm porting a python script to C++, which calls a function over thousand times. I've never programmed in C++ so i'm not sure what's happening and couldn't figure out a better title to the question.
This is not my actual function, but it reproduces the same error
int maior_sequencia()
{
int random;
srand(time(NULL));
int maior_sequencia = rand() % 6+1;
printf("%i", maior_sequencia);
return 1;
}
int main()
{
for(int i = 1; i<=100; i++)
{
maior_sequencia();
}
return 1;
}
If the first result from maior_sequencia() is 3, then it will output 3333333...
If i run the program again, and the first result is for is 5, it will output 555555...
Why is this happening?
int maior_sequencia()
{
int random;
srand(time(NULL));
//^^This will reset random seed every time you call this function
int maior_sequencia = rand() % 6+1;
printf("%i", maior_sequencia);
return 1;
}
Since you reset the random seed every time you call the maior_sequenciafunction, therefore, it will give you same value.
Try to put
srand(time(NULL));
inside main before the for loop instead.
The problem is two fold. First your use of srand and your use of time. When you seed a random number generator using time(), time is the number of seconds from some date in 1973, I forget the exact date, but it's known as linux time. Since you seed every time, you're resetting the random number generator, this is a good practice, however, since you're seeding it with something returning a number in seconds, it is likely your program is taking less than a second to run. Either do as someone else suggest, and seed the random number generator only once, or seed in something with a finer granularity... ms is probably acceptable.

error when i give sleep(1000), to make srand() work, in visual C++

i have following program:
srand((unsigned) time(NULL));
for (int w = 0; w < 10; w++) {
int ran_x;
ran_x = rand() % 255;
cout << "nRandom X = " << ran_x << endl;
//some more lines of code
Sleep(1000);
}
I am running it on visual c++ 2008, When I run this program, it doesnt show any errors or warnings. But when I run it, some of the times it runs fine, and some of the times it stops in the middle and gives this error "This application has requested the Runtime to terminate it in an unusual way.
Please contact the application's support team for more information."
What shall I do? Is it possible to do it with out using Sleep() function and still get randomly generated values. Because if I remove Sleep(1000), it doesnt give any error but it doesnt gives random values either
Obviously you shouldn't have to sleep. Code looks sane to me, as long as you only call srand() once. If you call this entire block of code multiple times intra-second, then time(NULL) will be returning the same second value and srand() will start the pseudo-random number generation at the same number, selecting the same set of 10 subsequent numbers....
Works without any problems with gcc
#include <iostream>
#include <cstdlib>
int main (int argc, char *argv[])
{
srand( time(0) );
for (int w = 0; w < 10; w++)
{
int ran_x = rand() % 255;
std::cout<<"\nRandom X = " << ran_x << std::endl;
sleep(1);
}
return 0;
}
Seems to me your program should work perfectly without the sleep call. In fact seems to work for me on VS2008 perfectly. I believe your problems must be in code that you have removed thinking it irrelevant.
The code snippet you posted is hardly responsible for your application terminating, Sleep or not.
Because if I remove Sleep(1000), it
doesnt give any error but it doesnt
gives random values either.
Well, rand() certainly gives you pseudo-random numbers, although the PRNG implementation might not return random values evenly distributed along the bits of the returned value, i.e. in many implementations, the higher bits are changing more often than the lower bits, which is why your code is a poor choice for selecting a random value between 0 and 255.
In general, I'd recommend switching from your standard library's rand/srand to an implementation like boost's mersenne twister (boost::random), or at least see
http://c-faq.com/lib/randrange.html
What's the content of "some more lines of code"?
<psychic debugging>I bet you have code that there that, directly or indirectly, depends on the random value you generated earlier. This code will likely be a division, or involve setting the length of some container, and borks when the generated random number is 0.</psychic debugging>

Recommended way to initialize srand?

I need a 'good' way to initialize the pseudo-random number generator in C++. I've found an article that states:
In order to generate random-like
numbers, srand is usually initialized
to some distinctive value, like those
related with the execution time. For
example, the value returned by the
function time (declared in header
ctime) is different each second, which
is distinctive enough for most
randoming needs.
Unixtime isn't distinctive enough for my application. What's a better way to initialize this? Bonus points if it's portable, but the code will primarily be running on Linux hosts.
I was thinking of doing some pid/unixtime math to get an int, or possibly reading data from /dev/urandom.
Thanks!
EDIT
Yes, I am actually starting my application multiple times a second and I've run into collisions.
This is what I've used for small command line programs that can be run frequently (multiple times a second):
unsigned long seed = mix(clock(), time(NULL), getpid());
Where mix is:
// Robert Jenkins' 96 bit Mix Function
unsigned long mix(unsigned long a, unsigned long b, unsigned long c)
{
a=a-b; a=a-c; a=a^(c >> 13);
b=b-c; b=b-a; b=b^(a << 8);
c=c-a; c=c-b; c=c^(b >> 13);
a=a-b; a=a-c; a=a^(c >> 12);
b=b-c; b=b-a; b=b^(a << 16);
c=c-a; c=c-b; c=c^(b >> 5);
a=a-b; a=a-c; a=a^(c >> 3);
b=b-c; b=b-a; b=b^(a << 10);
c=c-a; c=c-b; c=c^(b >> 15);
return c;
}
The best answer is to use <random>. If you are using a pre C++11 version, you can look at the Boost random number stuff.
But if we are talking about rand() and srand()
The best simplest way is just to use time():
int main()
{
srand(time(nullptr));
...
}
Be sure to do this at the beginning of your program, and not every time you call rand()!
Side Note:
NOTE: There is a discussion in the comments below about this being insecure (which is true, but ultimately not relevant (read on)). So an alternative is to seed from the random device /dev/random (or some other secure real(er) random number generator). BUT: Don't let this lull you into a false sense of security. This is rand() we are using. Even if you seed it with a brilliantly generated seed it is still predictable (if you have any value you can predict the full sequence of next values). This is only useful for generating "pseudo" random values.
If you want "secure" you should probably be using <random> (Though I would do some more reading on a security informed site). See the answer below as a starting point: https://stackoverflow.com/a/29190957/14065 for a better answer.
Secondary note: Using the random device actually solves the issues with starting multiple copies per second better than my original suggestion below (just not the security issue).
Back to the original story:
Every time you start up, time() will return a unique value (unless you start the application multiple times a second). In 32 bit systems, it will only repeat every 60 years or so.
I know you don't think time is unique enough but I find that hard to believe. But I have been known to be wrong.
If you are starting a lot of copies of your application simultaneously you could use a timer with a finer resolution. But then you run the risk of a shorter time period before the value repeats.
OK, so if you really think you are starting multiple applications a second.
Then use a finer grain on the timer.
int main()
{
struct timeval time;
gettimeofday(&time,NULL);
// microsecond has 1 000 000
// Assuming you did not need quite that accuracy
// Also do not assume the system clock has that accuracy.
srand((time.tv_sec * 1000) + (time.tv_usec / 1000));
// The trouble here is that the seed will repeat every
// 24 days or so.
// If you use 100 (rather than 1000) the seed repeats every 248 days.
// Do not make the MISTAKE of using just the tv_usec
// This will mean your seed repeats every second.
}
if you need a better random number generator, don't use the libc rand. Instead just use something like /dev/random or /dev/urandom directly (read in an int directly from it or something like that).
The only real benefit of the libc rand is that given a seed, it is predictable which helps with debugging.
On windows:
srand(GetTickCount());
provides a better seed than time() since its in milliseconds.
C++11 random_device
If you need reasonable quality then you should not be using rand() in the first place; you should use the <random> library. It provides lots of great functionality like a variety of engines for different quality/size/performance trade-offs, re-entrancy, and pre-defined distributions so you don't end up getting them wrong. It may even provide easy access to non-deterministic random data, (e.g., /dev/random), depending on your implementation.
#include <random>
#include <iostream>
int main() {
std::random_device r;
std::seed_seq seed{r(), r(), r(), r(), r(), r(), r(), r()};
std::mt19937 eng(seed);
std::uniform_int_distribution<> dist{1,100};
for (int i=0; i<50; ++i)
std::cout << dist(eng) << '\n';
}
eng is a source of randomness, here a built-in implementation of mersenne twister. We seed it using random_device, which in any decent implementation will be a non-determanistic RNG, and seed_seq to combine more than 32-bits of random data. For example in libc++ random_device accesses /dev/urandom by default (though you can give it another file to access instead).
Next we create a distribution such that, given a source of randomness, repeated calls to the distribution will produce a uniform distribution of ints from 1 to 100. Then we proceed to using the distribution repeatedly and printing the results.
Best way is to use another pseudorandom number generator.
Mersenne twister (and Wichmann-Hill) is my recommendation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mersenne_twister
i suggest you see unix_random.c file in mozilla code. ( guess it is mozilla/security/freebl/ ...) it should be in freebl library.
there it uses system call info ( like pwd, netstat ....) to generate noise for the random number;it is written to support most of the platforms (which can gain me bonus point :D ).
The real question you must ask yourself is what randomness quality you need.
libc random is a LCG
The quality of randomness will be low whatever input you provide srand with.
If you simply need to make sure that different instances will have different initializations, you can mix process id (getpid), thread id and a timer. Mix the results with xor. Entropy should be sufficient for most applications.
Example :
struct timeb tp;
ftime(&tp);
srand(static_cast<unsigned int>(getpid()) ^
static_cast<unsigned int>(pthread_self()) ^
static_cast<unsigned int >(tp.millitm));
For better random quality, use /dev/urandom. You can make the above code portable in using boost::thread and boost::date_time.
The c++11 version of the top voted post by Jonathan Wright:
#include <ctime>
#include <random>
#include <thread>
...
const auto time_seed = static_cast<size_t>(std::time(0));
const auto clock_seed = static_cast<size_t>(std::clock());
const size_t pid_seed =
std::hash<std::thread::id>()(std::this_thread::get_id());
std::seed_seq seed_value { time_seed, clock_seed, pid_seed };
...
// E.g seeding an engine with the above seed.
std::mt19937 gen;
gen.seed(seed_value);
#include <stdio.h>
#include <sys/time.h>
main()
{
struct timeval tv;
gettimeofday(&tv,NULL);
printf("%d\n", tv.tv_usec);
return 0;
}
tv.tv_usec is in microseconds. This should be acceptable seed.
As long as your program is only running on Linux (and your program is an ELF executable), you are guaranteed that the kernel provides your process with a unique random seed in the ELF aux vector. The kernel gives you 16 random bytes, different for each process, which you can get with getauxval(AT_RANDOM). To use these for srand, use just an int of them, as such:
#include <sys/auxv.h>
void initrand(void)
{
unsigned int *seed;
seed = (unsigned int *)getauxval(AT_RANDOM);
srand(*seed);
}
It may be possible that this also translates to other ELF-based systems. I'm not sure what aux values are implemented on systems other than Linux.
Suppose you have a function with a signature like:
int foo(char *p);
An excellent source of entropy for a random seed is a hash of the following:
Full result of clock_gettime (seconds and nanoseconds) without throwing away the low bits - they're the most valuable.
The value of p, cast to uintptr_t.
The address of p, cast to uintptr_t.
At least the third, and possibly also the second, derive entropy from the system's ASLR, if available (the initial stack address, and thus current stack address, is somewhat random).
I would also avoid using rand/srand entirely, both for the sake of not touching global state, and so you can have more control over the PRNG that's used. But the above procedure is a good (and fairly portable) way to get some decent entropy without a lot of work, regardless of what PRNG you use.
For those using Visual Studio here's yet another way:
#include "stdafx.h"
#include <time.h>
#include <windows.h>
const __int64 DELTA_EPOCH_IN_MICROSECS= 11644473600000000;
struct timezone2
{
__int32 tz_minuteswest; /* minutes W of Greenwich */
bool tz_dsttime; /* type of dst correction */
};
struct timeval2 {
__int32 tv_sec; /* seconds */
__int32 tv_usec; /* microseconds */
};
int gettimeofday(struct timeval2 *tv/*in*/, struct timezone2 *tz/*in*/)
{
FILETIME ft;
__int64 tmpres = 0;
TIME_ZONE_INFORMATION tz_winapi;
int rez = 0;
ZeroMemory(&ft, sizeof(ft));
ZeroMemory(&tz_winapi, sizeof(tz_winapi));
GetSystemTimeAsFileTime(&ft);
tmpres = ft.dwHighDateTime;
tmpres <<= 32;
tmpres |= ft.dwLowDateTime;
/*converting file time to unix epoch*/
tmpres /= 10; /*convert into microseconds*/
tmpres -= DELTA_EPOCH_IN_MICROSECS;
tv->tv_sec = (__int32)(tmpres * 0.000001);
tv->tv_usec = (tmpres % 1000000);
//_tzset(),don't work properly, so we use GetTimeZoneInformation
rez = GetTimeZoneInformation(&tz_winapi);
tz->tz_dsttime = (rez == 2) ? true : false;
tz->tz_minuteswest = tz_winapi.Bias + ((rez == 2) ? tz_winapi.DaylightBias : 0);
return 0;
}
int main(int argc, char** argv) {
struct timeval2 tv;
struct timezone2 tz;
ZeroMemory(&tv, sizeof(tv));
ZeroMemory(&tz, sizeof(tz));
gettimeofday(&tv, &tz);
unsigned long seed = tv.tv_sec ^ (tv.tv_usec << 12);
srand(seed);
}
Maybe a bit overkill but works well for quick intervals. gettimeofday function found here.
Edit: upon further investigation rand_s might be a good alternative for Visual Studio, it's not just a safe rand(), it's totally different and doesn't use the seed from srand. I had presumed it was almost identical to rand just "safer".
To use rand_s just don't forget to #define _CRT_RAND_S before stdlib.h is included.
Assuming that the randomness of srand() + rand() is enough for your purposes, the trick is in selecting the best seed for srand. time(NULL) is a good starting point, but you'll run into problems if you start more than one instance of the program within the same second. Adding the pid (process id) is an improvement as different instances will get different pids. I would multiply the pid by a factor to spread them more.
But let's say you are using this for some embedded device and you have several in the same network. If they are all powered at once and you are launching the several instances of your program automatically at boot time, they may still get the same time and pid and all the devices will generate the same sequence of "random" numbers. In that case, you may want to add some unique identifier of each device (like the CPU serial number).
The proposed initialization would then be:
srand(time(NULL) + 1000 * getpid() + (uint) getCpuSerialNumber());
In a Linux machine (at least in the Raspberry Pi where I tested this), you can implement the following function to get the CPU Serial Number:
// Gets the CPU Serial Number as a 64 bit unsigned int. Returns 0 if not found.
uint64_t getCpuSerialNumber() {
FILE *f = fopen("/proc/cpuinfo", "r");
if (!f) {
return 0;
}
char line[256];
uint64_t serial = 0;
while (fgets(line, 256, f)) {
if (strncmp(line, "Serial", 6) == 0) {
serial = strtoull(strchr(line, ':') + 2, NULL, 16);
}
}
fclose(f);
return serial;
}
Include the header at the top of your program, and write:
srand(time(NULL));
In your program before you declare your random number. Here is an example of a program that prints a random number between one and ten:
#include <iostream>
#include <iomanip>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
//Initialize srand
srand(time(NULL));
//Create random number
int n = rand() % 10 + 1;
//Print the number
cout << n << endl; //End the line
//The main function is an int, so it must return a value
return 0;
}