⚠️ Warning: This is a draft ⚠️

This means it might contain formatting issues, incorrect code, conceptual problems, or other severe issues.

If you want to help to improve and eventually enable this page, please fork RosettaGit's repository and open a merge request on GitHub.

We really ought to use a [[wp:Pearson's chi-square test|chi-squared test]] for this, as that can be made self-calibrating. After all, we've got the tools for calculating the [[Gamma function]], needed for generating the related distribution for a single random variable. Too early in the morning for heavy math for me though… —[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 06:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC) :After reading your link, and being up early creating the task in the first place (I'm in Bristol), I also would not want to tackle the maths ;-) ::Please, feel free to add another task to run a chi-square test on the results of [[Seven-dice from Five-dice]], but write the task in such a way that enough languages would be able to compute it if possible. (But then, if mathematica or R have a built-in function, shouldn't they be able to shine)? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 07:27, 8 August 2009 (UTC) ::: And why shouldn't they shine at something they're good at? —[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 11:56, 8 August 2009 (UTC) ::: Now over at [[Verify Distribution Uniformity with Chi-Squared Test‎]]. Go knock yourselves out. ;-) —[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 12:15, 9 August 2009 (UTC) ==What is Delta?== It would be nice if the interpretation of the delta parameter were more clearly specified. I don't feel comfortable improvising. —[[User:sluggo|Dennis Furey]] 21:54, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

:"...check bin counts are within +/- delta % of repeats/bincount" (From the Python example). :I kinda knew that people with more experience probably wouldn't do it that way, (See the Chi-square comment above); but thought that if you took a fixed sample of a million, any fitness metric should be able to be translated into this form, so went with it. I have no idea of what is good-enough, and also didn't want to parrot some figure of fitness that I did not understand. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 05:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

:: Of course a random number checker like this will report a perfect random distribution if your "RNG" returns the sequence "1234567123456712345671234567...". BTW, shouldn't the function also be given info about what values are to expected? Because if a random number generator intended to emulate a normal six-sided dice actually returns a flat distribution of numbers from 1 to 7 or from 1 to 5, it's certainly not very good :-) --[[User:Ce|Ce]] 21:26, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

:I guess I knew that greater minds would tear the statistical foundations of this task apart. But that is why I put simple in the task name. The really clever alternative is to write something both more accurate ''and'', easier to understand ;-)