<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Physical tests for Random Numbers in Simulations · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/cond-mat_9406054/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/cond-mat_9406054/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Physical tests for Random Numbers in Simulations — mentioned by hcs</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32370453</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:cond-mat_9406054:32370453</guid><pubDate>Sat, 06 Aug 2022 18:31:41 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s a lagged Fibonacci generator https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagged_Fibonacci_generator In the third edition (1998) there are a few more notes, most importantly: &amp;quot;Lagged Fibonacci generators have been used successfully in many situations since 1958, so it came as a shock to discover in the 1990s that they actually fail an extremely simple, non-contrived test for randomness&amp;quot; with reference to exercise 3.3.2-31 asking &amp;quot;prove that if we generate 79 consecutive random bits ... starting at a random point in the period, the probability is more than 51% that there are more 1s than 0s&amp;quot;. The…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/cond-mat_9406054/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cond-mat</category></item></channel></rss>
