tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17357607.post115726237092794050..comments2024-02-15T21:52:45.899+08:00Comments on Just some Gibberish: Busy and of randomnessJHhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08394839226963298178noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17357607.post-1157448381428525712006-09-05T17:26:00.000+08:002006-09-05T17:26:00.000+08:00Well actually that sequence and question are from ...Well actually that sequence and question are from my stats gem class.<br /><br />For pure randomness, the occurence of 0 or 1 is 0.5. Or to put it another way, it means that the probablility of switching from 0 to 1 or 1 to 0 is 0.5. Since there are 31 numbers, the max number of switching is 30, meaning that the number of switch for a random sequence is 15. For the 1st sequence, the number of switch is 17 and the 2nd one is 14. Thus the 2nd sequence is more random.<br /><br />By intuition, i would also have thought that the 2nd one is more random cos if i were to type a sequence of 1's and 0's out while keeping in mind the occurence of 1 and 0 to be 0.5, i will probably have a large number of switching, like the 1st sequence..<br /><br />Did i make any sense? lol<br /><br />Oh yea, thks for dropping by! Heh.JHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08394839226963298178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17357607.post-1157394664299887552006-09-05T02:31:00.000+08:002006-09-05T02:31:00.000+08:00Pardon me for dropping in but I am so stoned that ...Pardon me for dropping in but I am so stoned that I went clicking on Technorati links. <BR/><BR/>And on randomness, I can safely say that none of the above sequences are random. Because you put them there for a purpose. Therefore it can be said that they were generated purposefully albeit in different manners. <BR/><BR/>230am. And it's only the 4th week. Bloody Hades.tussandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04695942381279486194noreply@blogger.com