On Sep 15, 2009, at 11:10 AM, Anirban Mukherjee wrote:
Thanks everyone for your replies. Particularly David.
The numbers are pseudo-random. Repeated calls should/would give the
same output.
As I said, this package is not one with which I have experience. It
has _not_ however the case that repeated calls to (typical?) random
number functions give the same output when called repeatedly:
[1] -0.8740195 2.1827411 -0.1473012 -1.4406262 0.1820631 -1.3151244 -0.4813703
0.8177692
[9] 0.2076117 1.8697418
[1] -0.7725731 0.8696742 -0.4907099 0.1561859 0.5913528 -0.8441891 0.2285653
-0.1231755
[9] 0.5190459 -0.7803617
[1] -0.9585881 -0.0458582 1.1967342 0.6421980 -0.5290280
-1.0735112 0.6346301 0.2685760
[9] 1.5767800 1.0864515
[1] -0.60400852 -0.06611533 1.00787048 1.48289305 0.54658888 -0.67630052
0.52664127 -0.36449997
[9] 0.88039397 0.56929333
I cannot imagine a situation where one would _want_ the output to be
the same on repeated calls unless one reset a seed. Unless perhaps I
am not understanding the meaning of "random" in the financial domain?
--
David
Currently, Halton works fine when used to just get the
Halton sequence, but the random deviates call is not working in 64
bit
R. For now, I will generate the numbers in 32 bit R, save them and
then load them back in when using 64 bit R. The package maintainers
can look at it if/when they get a chance and/or access to 64 bit R.
Thanks!
Best,
Anirban
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 9:01 AM, David Winsemius <dwinsemius at comcast.net
wrote:
I get very different output from the two versions of Mac OSX R as
well. The 32 bit version puts out a histogram that has an expected,
almost symmetric unimodal distribution. The 64 bit version created a
bimodal distribution with one large mode near 0 and another smaller
mode near 10E+37. Postcript output attached.
--
Anirban Mukherjee | Assistant Professor, Marketing | LKCSB, SMU
5062 School of Business, 50 Stamford Road, Singapore 178899 | +65-6828-1932