How can I regenerate random decimal from -0.0010 to 0.0010 with php rand() or some other method?
Divide rand() by the maximum random numer, multiply it by the range and add the starting number:
<?php
// rand()/getrandmax() gives a float number between 0 and 1
// if you multiply it by 0.002 you'll get a number between 0 and 0.002
// add the starting number -0.001 and you'll get a number between -0.001 and 0.001
echo rand()/getrandmax()*0.002-0.001;
?>
.
$val = (rand(0,20)-10)/10000;
This uses two rand() calls but I think that the readability makes up for it tenfold.
The first part makes either a -1 or +1. The second part can be anything between 0 and your limit for +/- numbers.
$rand = (rand(0,1)*2-1)*rand(0, 100);
echo $rand;
Unless you require LOTs of random numbers in a gigantic loop, you probably won't even notice the speed difference. I ran some tests (50.000 iterations) and it came up to around 0.0004 milliseconds to get a random number by my function. The alternatives are around half that time, but again, unless you are inside a really big loop, you are probably better of optimizing somewhere else.
Speed testing code:
$start = microtime();
$loopCount = 50000;
for($i=0;$i<$loopCount;$i++)
{
(0*2-1)*rand(0, 100);
}
$end = microtime();
echo "Timing: ", ((($end-$start)*1000.0)/((float)$loopCount)), " milliseconds.";
This will return any possible number between -0.001 and +0.001
$random = ((rand()*(0.002/getrandmax()))-0.001)
// or without paranthesis:
$random = rand()*0.002/getrandmax()-0.001
$randselect=rand(0,(array_sum($adarray)*100000000));
$cumilativevalue=0;
foreach ($adarray as $key => $value) {
$cumilativevalue=$cumilativevalue+$value*100000000;
if($randselect<$cumilativevalue){$selectedad=$key;break;}
}
Random float with one decimal between -1,1
$random = round((rand(0,1) - floatVal('0.'.rand(0,9).rand(0,9))), 1);
Related
I wrote a code which is generating 3 random unique numbers from the range. It seems working, but I want to know is it working correctly and is my code suitable for a bigger range. For example, if I want to generate not 3, but 300 random unique numbers from a 1 to 10^6 range. How my code will perform in terms of memory usage and execution time?
The code is working, but I'm not sure about it. Just want to be sure, that I'm not missing something.
<?php
$array=range(1,100);
$rand = array_rand($array,3);
echo "Random number 1: ".$array[$rand[0]]."\n";
echo "Random number 2: ".$array[$rand[1]]."\n";
echo "Random number 3: ".$array[$rand[2]]."\n";
?>
As a result I want working code which is good in terms of performance.
Recursive function will help in this case
$r = f(1,1000000,300);
print_r($r);
function f($min, $max, $total, $current=[]){
if(count($current) == $total){
return $current;
}
$n = rand($min,$max);
in_array($n, $current) ? '' : ($current[] = $n);
return f($min, $max, $total, $current);
}
This might seem like a very simple thing, and maybe I'm just not understanding the question? Anyway. $a and $b are random numbers from 1000 to 10000. I need to take the largest one and round it to the nearest hundred.
Is this supposed to be like so:
$a = 5;
$b = 10;
echo mt_rand($a,$b);
But then, how do I get the largest number and round it?
I don't know why this confuses me so much.
Also, apparently, I am supposed to use max somewhere.
You need to add the values to an array then use max of the array.
To round the value to closest 100 you need to use the following formula round(x/100)*100
This example makes 10 random numbers and echo the max value and the rounded max value.
For($i=0;$i<10;$i++){
$a[] = mt_rand(1000,10000);
}
//Var_dump($a);
Echo max($a). "\n"; // max number
Echo round(max($a)/100)*100; //max number rounded
https://3v4l.org/NRWiH
I want to create user accounts with a public_id which is always a unique, integer random (not incremental) value.
I can use loops to check if the random integer is unique, but that doesn't seem like a really nice solution.
I found some alphabetic-numeric generators, and I guess I could convert them to integers using some string to integer converter, but are there an integer -specific ways?
I also worry about possible collisions, but it looks like the chance will be always there in a long run.(?)
You can either use one of native php functions like mt_rand or use more reliably way - generating integer based on microtime function.
To ensure that the value is unique you need to add a unique index on a column in DB and write 'ON DUPLICATE UPDATE' to insert/update queries which will add some digits to the value if it is not unique
There are 2 possible solutions:
1) If your "long run" is really really long - it means this is
possible, that you are out of PHP_INT_MAX and there is no
only-integer-specific way.
2) If you are not out of PHP_INT_MAX - then you need some storage for
checking the ids.
In case of 1 you can use library hashids. To avoid collisions - you'll need some incremental counter on input. Then you can convert strings by each letter back to integer.
In case of 2 - you can use some in-memory database like redis for performance.
Using timeStamp will really do a great job since it uses time to generate it random numbers .you can also concatenate the below function with other random generated numbers.
function passkey($format = 'u', $utimestamp = null){
if (is_null($utimestamp)) {
$utimestamp = microtime(true);
}
$timestamp = floor($utimestamp);
$milliseconds = round(($utimestamp - $timestamp) * 1000000);
return date(preg_replace('`(?<!\\\\)u`', $milliseconds, $format),$timestamp);
}
echo passkey(); // 728362
You can use a linear congruential generator with a large period.
Here is one that generates unique integers which always have 6 digits. It will not generate duplicates until it has generated all numbers between 100000 and 996722, which gives you almost 900 000 different numbers.
The condition is that you can provide the function the number it last generated. So if you store the number in the database, you have to somehow retrieve the last assigned one, so you can feed it to this function:
function random_id($prev) {
return 100000 + (($prev-100000)*97 + 356563) % 896723;
}
$prev = 100000; // must be a 6 digit number: the initial seed.
// Generate the first 10 pseudo-random integers.
for ($i = 0; $i < 10; $i++) {
$prev = random_id($prev);
echo $prev . "\n";
}
The above generation of the first 10 numbers yields:
456563
967700
331501
494085
123719
963860
855744
232445
749606
697735
You can do this for other ranges by following the rules in the referenced article on getting a full period in linear congruential generators. Concretely, if you want to generate numbers with n digits, where the first digit cannot be zero (so between 10n-1 and 10n-1), then I find it easiest to find a large prime just below 9⋅10n-1 to serve as the last number of the formula. The other two numbers can then be any positive integer, but better keep the first one small to avoid overflow.
However, PHP integers are limited to PHP_INT_MAX (typically 2147483647), so for numbers with 10 or more digits you will need to use floating point operators. The % operator should not be used then. Use fmod instead.
For example, to generate numbers with 12 digits, you could use this formula:
function random_id($prev) {
return 100000000000 + fmod((($prev-100000000000)*97 + 344980016453), 899999999981);
}
$prev = 100000000000; // must be a 12 digit number: the initial seed.
// Generate the first 10 pseudo-random integers.
for ($i = 0; $i < 10; $i++) {
$prev = random_id($prev);
echo $prev . "\n";
}
I'm doing a calculation in PHP using bcmath, and need to raise e by a fractional exponent. Unfortunately, bcpow() only accepts integer exponents. The exponent is typically higher precision than a float will allow, so normal arithmetic functions won't cut it.
For example:
$e = exp(1);
$pow = "0.000000000000000000108420217248550443400745280086994171142578125";
$result = bcpow($e, $pow);
Result is "1" with the error, "bc math warning: non-zero scale in exponent".
Is there another function I can use instead of bcpow()?
Your best bet is probably to use the Taylor series expansion. As you noted, PHP's bcpow is limited to raising to integer exponentiation.
So what you can do is roll your own bc factorial function and use the wiki page to implement a Taylor series expansion of the exponential function.
function bcfac($num) {
if ($num==0) return 1;
$result = '1';
for ( ; $num > 0; $num--)
$result = bcmul($result,$num);
return $result;
}
$mysum = '0';
for ($i=0; $i<300; $i++) {
$mysum = bcadd($mysum, bcdiv(bcpow($pow,$i), bcfac($i)) );
}
print $mysum;
Obviously, the $i<300 is an approximation for infinity... You can change it to suit your performance needs.
With $i=20, I got
1.00000000000000000010842021724855044340662275184110560868263421994092888869270293594926619547803962155136242752708629105688492780863293090291376157887898519458498571566021915144483905034693109606778068801680332504212458366799913406541920812216634834265692913062346724688397654924947370526356787052264726969653983148004800229537555582281617497990286595977830803702329470381960270717424849203303593850108090101578510305396615293917807977774686848422213799049363135722460179809890014584148659937665374616
This is comforting since that small of an exponent should yield something really close to 1.0.
Old question, but people might still be interested nonetheless.
So Kevin got the right idea with the Taylor-polynomial, but when you derive your algorithm from it directly, you can get into trouble, mainly your code gets slow for long input-strings when using large cut-off values for $i.
Here is why:
At every step, by which I mean with each new $i, the code calls bcfac($i). Everytime bcfac is called it performs $i-1 calculations. And $i goes all the way up to 299... that's almost 45000 operations! Not your quick'n'easy floating point operations, but slow BC-string-operations - if you set bcscale(100) your bcmul has to handle up to 10000 pairs of chars!
Also bcpow slows down with increasing $i, too. Not as much as bcfac, because it propably uses something akin to the square-and-multiply method, but it still adds something.
Overall the time required grows quadraticly with the number of polynomial terms computed.
So... what to do?
Here's a tip:
Whenever you handle polynomials, especially Taylor-polynomials, use the Horner method.
It converts this: exp(x) = x^0/0! + x^1/1! + x^2/2! + x^3/3! + ...
...into that: exp(x) = ((( ... )*x/3+1 )*x/2+1 )*x/1+1
And suddenly you don't need any powers or factorials at all!
function bc_exp($number) {
$result = 1;
for ($i=299; $i>0; $i--)
$result = bcadd(bcmul(bcdiv($result, $i), $number), 1);
return $result;
}
This needs only 3 bc-operations for each step, no matter what $i is.
With a starting value of $i=299 (to calculate exp with the same precision as kevin's code does) we now only need 897 bc-operations, compared to more than 45000.
Even using 30 as cut-off instead of 300, we now only need 87 bc-operations while the other code still needs 822 for the factorials alone.
Horner's Method saving the day again!
Some other thoughts:
1) Kevin's code would propably crash with input="0", depending on how bcmath handles errors, because the code trys bcpow(0,0) at the first step ($i=0).
2) Larger exponents require longer polynomials and therefore more iterations, e.g. bc_exp(300) will give a wrong answer, even with $i=299, whyle something like bc_exp(3) will work fine and dandy.
Each term adds x^n/n! to the result, so this term has to get small before the polynomial can start to converge. Now compare two consecutive terms:
( x^(n+1)/(n+1)! ) / ( x^n/n! ) = x/n
Each summand is larger than the one before by a factor of x/n (which we used via the Horner method), so in order for x^(n+1)/(n+1)! to get small x/n has to get small as well, which is only the case when n>x.
Inconclusio: As long as the number of iterations is smaller than the input value, the result will diverge. Only when you add steps until your number of iterations gets larger than the input, the algorithm starts to slowly converge.
In order to reach results that can satisfie someone who is willing to use bcmath, your $i needs to be significantly larger then your $number. And that's a huge proplem when you try to calculate stuff like e^346674567801
A solution is to divide the input into its integer part and its fraction part.
Than use bcpow on the integer part and bc_exp on the fraction part, which now converges from the get-go since the fraction part is smaller than 1. In the end multiply the results.
e^x = e^(intpart+fracpart) = e^intpart * e^fracpart = bcpow(e,intpart) * bc_exp(fracpart)
You could even implement it directly into the code above:
function bc_exp2($number) {
$parts = explode (".", $number);
$fracpart = "0.".$parts[1];
$result = 1;
for ($i=299; $i>0; $i--)
$result = bcadd(bcmul(bcdiv($result, $i), $fracpart), 1);
$result = bcmul(bcpow(exp(1), $parts[0]), $result);
return $result;
}
Note that exp(1) gives you a floating-point number which propably won't satisfy your needs as a bcmath user. You might want to use a value for e that is more accurate, in accordance with your bcscale setting.
3) Talking about numbers of iterations: 300 will be overkill in most situations while in some others it might not even be enough. An algorithm that takes your bcscale and $number and calculates the number of required iterations would be nice. Alraedy got some ideas involving log(n!), but nothing concrete yet.
4) To use this method with an arbitrary base you can use a^x = e^(x*ln(a)).
You might want to divide x into its intpart and fracpart before using bc_exp (instead of doing that within bc_exp2) to avoid unneccessary function calls.
function bc_pow2($base,$exponent) {
$parts = explode (".", $exponent);
if ($parts[1] == 0){
$result = bcpow($base,$parts[0]);
else $result = bcmul(bc_exp(bcmul(bc_ln($base), "0.".$parts[1]), bcpow($base,$parts[0]);
return result;
}
Now we only need to program bc_ln. We can use the same strategy as above:
Take the Taylor-polynomial of the natural logarithm function. (since ln(0) isn't defined, take 1 as developement point instead)
Use Horner's method to drasticly improve performance.
Turn the result into a loop of bc-operations.
Also make use of ln(x) = -ln(1/x) when handling x > 1, to guarantee convergence.
usefull functions(don't forget to set bcscale() before using them)
function bc_fact($f){return $f==1?1:bcmul($f,bc_fact(bcsub($f, '1')));}
function bc_exp($x,$L=50){$r=bcadd('1.0',$x);for($i=0;$i<$L;$i++){$r=bcadd($r,bcdiv(bcpow($x,$i+2),bc_fact($i+2)));}return $r;}#e^x
function bc_ln($x,$L=50){$r=0;for($i=0;$i<$L;$i++){$p=1+$i*2;$r = bcadd(bcmul(bcdiv("1.0",$p),bcpow(bcdiv(bcsub($x,"1.0"),bcadd($x,"1.0")),$p)),$r);}return bcmul("2.0", $r);}#2*Sum((1/(2i+1))*(((x-1)/x+1)^(2i+1)))
function bc_pow($x,$p){return bc_exp(bcmul((bc_ln(($x))), $p));}
What would be a good way to generate 7 unique random numbers between 1 and 10.
I can't have any duplicates.
I could write a chunk of PHP to do this (using rand() and pushing used numbers onto an array) but there must be a quick way to do it.
any advice would be great.
Create an array from 1 to 10 (range).
Put it in random order
(shuffle).
Select 7 items from the array (array_slice)
Populate an array with ten elements (the numbers one through ten), shuffle the array, and remove the first (or last) three elements.
Simple one-liner:
print_r(array_rand(array_fill(1, 10, true), 7));
Check out the comments in the php manual, there are several solutions for this.
An easy one is this one:
$min = 1;
$max = 10;
$total = 7;
$rand = array();
while (count($rand) < $total ) {
$r = mt_rand($min,$max);
if (!in_array($r,$rand)) $rand[] = $r;
}
Whole numbers? Well, if you want 7 out of 10 then you more efficiently DON'T want 3 out of 10.
Feel free to use any of the other responses but instead of creating 7 numbers start with 10 and eliminate 3. That will tend to speed things up by more than double.
The "shuffle" method has a MAJOR FALW. When the numbers are big, shuffle 3 billion indexs will instantly CAUSE 500 error. Here comes a best solution for really big numbers.
function getRandomNumbers($min, $max, $total) {
$temp_arr = array();
while(sizeof($temp_arr) < $total) $temp_arr[rand($min, $max)] = true;
return $temp_arr;
}
Say I want to get 10 unique random numbers from 1 billion to 4 billion.
$random_numbers = getRandomNumbers(1000000000,4000000000,10);
PS: Execution time: 0.027 microseconds