Simple Matlab Random Number Generation
2 vues (au cours des 30 derniers jours)
Afficher commentaires plus anciens
I have to get 5 random numbers a1, a2, a3, a4, a5 where each a1, a2, a3, a4, a5 should be between [-0.5, 0.5] and sum i.e. a1 + a2 + a3 + a4 + a5 = 1.
How should I do it?
4 commentaires
Paulo Silva
le 28 Fév 2011
I deleted my answer (the one that was accepted but it wasn't the best one) and voted on Bruno's and Matt's answers.
Please reselect (Sam or someone who can (admins?!)) the best answer, thank you.
Réponse acceptée
chris hinkle
le 27 Fév 2011
Create 5 arrays that have all possible combinations of these numbers then generate a random number that is between 1 and length of array and then use that value as the index for the array and viola, there's your number. The size of these arrays can be controlled by the resolution you go to.
0 commentaires
Plus de réponses (2)
Bruno Luong
le 27 Fév 2011
To generate true uniform distribution, the correct method is not quite straightforward. I strongly recommend Roger Stafford's FEX,
http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/9700-random-vectors-with-fixed-sum
3 commentaires
the cyclist
le 27 Fév 2011
Agreed that this is the definitive answer. Specifically for Sam's solution:
X = randfixedsum(5,10000,1,-0.5,0.5);
Matt Tearle
le 27 Fév 2011
How about a brute-force approach?
ntot = 0;
n = 10000;
x = zeros(n,5);
while ntot<n
r = rand(100,4)-0.5;
r5 = 1 - sum(r,2);
idx = (r5>-0.5) & (r5<0.5);
tmp = [r(idx,:),r5(idx)];
nidx = min(size(tmp,1),n-ntot);
x(ntot+1:ntot+nidx,:) = tmp(1:nidx,:);
ntot = ntot + nidx;
end
1 commentaire
the cyclist
le 28 Fév 2011
My first reaction to this solution was that, as a rejection method (with a loop, no less!), it would be much slower than Roger's method. The reality is that is does comparably well, speed-wise. I haven't done a full-blown comparison, but I think the reason is two-fold. First, you "semi-vectorized" by pulling chunks of random numbers at a time. Second, and I think more importantly, the accept/reject fraction is pretty good. (It might not be so favorable otherwise, like if the marginals were on [0,1] and still had to sum to 1.)
This solution is highly intuitive, and I believe leads to marginal distributions and correlations between summands that are identical to Roger's solution.
Voir également
Community Treasure Hunt
Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!
Start Hunting!