float x1, x2, w, y1, y2;
do {
x1 = 2.0 * ranf() - 1.0;
x2 = 2.0 * ranf() - 1.0;
w = x1 * x1 + x2 * x2;
} while ( w >= 1.0 );
w = sqrt( (-2.0 * ln( w ) ) / w );
y1 = x1 * w;
y2 = x2 * w;
Gaussian Random Number Algorithm
Author
I found this page which seems to be what I want, but I'm a little confused:
The algorithm is:
1: The random function should return a new random number on each call. Thus, calling it twice, as in the do-while-loop, shall return two different numbers for x1 and x2.
2: The Box-Müller algorithm generates two random numbers per iteration. First time you calculate y1 and y2, and return y1. Second time, you just return y2. Third time, you generate two new values for y1 and y2, and return y1. Fourth time, you return y2. And so on...
2: The Box-Müller algorithm generates two random numbers per iteration. First time you calculate y1 and y2, and return y1. Second time, you just return y2. Third time, you generate two new values for y1 and y2, and return y1. Fourth time, you return y2. And so on...
You'll probably find the Ziggurat algorithm to be a more efficient method for generating numbers from a Gaussian distribution than any other method; though it's a little more complex to implement than the Box-Müller algorithm and it requires initialisation. On the whole (except in a few percent of drawn numbers) it avoids expensive trigonometric or logarithm functions.
Wikipedia entry
I have an implementation in C somewhere if you want it.
Wikipedia entry
I have an implementation in C somewhere if you want it.
Author
I should've posted back here!
I came up with a different method that relies on the Central limit theorem. I can't copy and paste the code directly because it's "codified" in a list on the site, but if you visit this page you can see it:
Approximate Gaussian Random Number Generator
That one generates n uniform, random numbers (default n = 4), and converts them to the right scale given mu and sigma. I think it's pretty efficient for my purposes. What do you think?
I came up with a different method that relies on the Central limit theorem. I can't copy and paste the code directly because it's "codified" in a list on the site, but if you visit this page you can see it:
Approximate Gaussian Random Number Generator
That one generates n uniform, random numbers (default n = 4), and converts them to the right scale given mu and sigma. I think it's pretty efficient for my purposes. What do you think?
You didn't tell us what you are trying to do, so there's no way we can tell if this approximation is reasonable in your case.
Author
I explain it in the link there, actually. I know it's reasonable: it's just a way for me to randomize the traits of enemies. For example, the average goblin might be 4 feet tall, but I generate a random height based on maybe a 6" sigma, which means they tend to be about 4' but they could be as short as 2' or as tall as 6'. That's perfectly acceptable for my purpose.
Yes, approximating a gaussian with a few uniform random samples averaged together is more than gaussian enough for that sort of purpose. Even with only two random samples the accuracy may be good enough for your purposes.
I would say that such an approximation may even be better than using a true Gaussian distribution.
When approximating it with two uniform random variables, you have a triangular distribution with well defined lower and upper bounds for the random numbers. You know for sure what the smallest and largest goblins can be. A Gaussian distribution have no lower or upper limit, so sometimes, although perhaps very rarely, you may end up with an enormous goblin, or a goblin with negative height.
When approximating it with two uniform random variables, you have a triangular distribution with well defined lower and upper bounds for the random numbers. You know for sure what the smallest and largest goblins can be. A Gaussian distribution have no lower or upper limit, so sometimes, although perhaps very rarely, you may end up with an enormous goblin, or a goblin with negative height.
Author
Quote:Original post by Brother Bob
I would say that such an approximation may even be better than using a true Gaussian distribution.
When approximating it with two uniform random variables, you have a triangular distribution with well defined lower and upper bounds for the random numbers. You know for sure what the smallest and largest goblins can be. A Gaussian distribution have no lower or upper limit, so sometimes, although perhaps very rarely, you may end up with an enormous goblin, or a goblin with negative height.
I completely agree. Here's an excerpt from the linked page:
Quote:...The most you’ll ever get is 160, which is +4 sigma (n = 4, sigma = 15, 4 * 15 = 60). +4 sigma is greater than 99.9968% of the population, so it’s actually a really wide range for an approximate value. It’s helpful in my situation to know the upper and lower limits with certainty, because it allows me to plan my art accordingly. For example, if I know that Enemy X will never be larger than 200px tall on screen, then I’ll create the sprites that big. That way, that enemy will never look fuzzy.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement