The idea is that there will be 1000 numbers posted in separate groups of 100 numbers, some will be RNG (not TRNG from random.org) and the remainder will be actuals (numbers taken from a real wheel). The challenge is to identify which groups belong to which category. Many people claim there is a difference, but no-one has ever stepped up to the plate to prove it :diablo: until now that is :clapping: Mr Chips has agreed to give it a try.
Mr Chips,
It looks as though Herb isn't interested. I can provide and post the numbers, but you might prefer a global moderator or administrator to do it - it's up to you. :pleasantry:
I'll be looking forward to the results.
Tangram,
I should say from the out set that I do trust you to provide the numbers. Can you confirm that the RNG will definitely be PRNG.
Also will you be stating that 3 or 4 for example of the groups will be PRNG or will that give me an unfair advantage?
I look forward to the challenge. I have got my complex calculations ready and a back up crystal ball ;) ;D
Mr Chips
I must say that I am definitely interested to see how this turns out.
To prevent any controversy on this challenge, you guys should discuss and agree on a few things before the challenge takes place...such as:
What qualifys as PRNG numbers? - RXtremes numbers, numbers downloaded from a particular website...if so, what website?
How many sets of numbers are you going to use?
The question Mr. Chips just asked (does he get to know ahead of time how many sets of the numbers are PRNG and how many are live table spins)
etc.
Whether or not you guys do the above doesn't matter to me. I just wouldn't want you guys to end up in an argument at the end of this....
But, as I said, I can't wait to see how this goes...
As I said in my threads: There is absolutely no difference.
Quote from: Winkel on June 13, 2009, 09:03:03 PM
As I said in my threads: There is absolutely no difference.
I'm of the opinion that there is absolutely no difference as well. I think that if a system works on RNG it will work on a live wheel and vice versa because the distribution of numbers is the same. I believe that a good PRNG algorithm produces results identical to a live wheel...this is the reason that I can't wait to see how this goes...I would love to be proved wrong.
Thanks for the interest guys. I too, am of the opinion that there's no significant difference, but it'll be interesting to see how Mr Chips performs. Mr Chips, I was planning to use 3 sets of PRNG spins. Whether this makes things harder or not I've no idea, my intuition tells me that it shouldn't matter, if you have a way of identifying them then it shouldn't make any difference what proportion of the sets are of one type or the other. ;)
The actuals will come from spielbank wiesbaden. The RNG spins will be generated from a programming language I use. If you're happy with this let me know and we'll start. Shall I post all 10 sets of numbers in one go? also is 100 numbers in each group enough?
One thing I'm not sure about is how to interpret the results, which is why I was hoping to get Herb's input on this. If this was a test of "predicting" the numbers (like a system test) there are techniques for telling you how "significant" the results are. ie; how likely it is that your results would have occurred due to chance alone, so if the results fall within certain parameters then you haven't really proved anything, because this could have happened whether you were using a system or not. But in this case it's not the same scenario; there are two "populations" (RNG and actuals) and the task is to match samples with populations. So if the sets of numbers from 1-10 are 1(RNG), 2(Actuals), 3(Actuals), 4(Actuals), 5(RNG), 6(RNG), 7(Actuals), 8(Actuals), 9(Actuals), 10(Actuals)
and Mr Chips' final decisions are that:
set 1 (RNG) are Actuals :(
set 2 (Actuals) are RNG :(
set 3 (Actuals) are Actuals :)
set 4 (Actuals) are Actuals :)
set 5 (RNG) are RNG :)
set 6 (RNG) are Actuals :(
set 7 (Actuals) are RNG :(
set 8 (Actuals) are Actuals :)
set 9 (Actuals) are Actuals :)
set 10 (Actuals) are Actuals :)
There are two ways of being wrong; you could identify an RNG set as Actuals or an Actuals set as RNG. The results above give a "score" of 6 out of 10, but you have to take into account that there are only 3 RNG groups. Another point which just occurred to me from doing this is that if Mr Chips knows that there are a fixed number of RNG sets then this is going to affect the results. If you look at the above, at set 7 there are 3 RNG sets identified, and whether this is correct or not is irrelevant, but at this stage Mr Chips would know there are no more sets of RNG spins because the quota has been used up! ;D This should not happen, so it might be a better test to not tell you how many sets of RNG spins there are. There may be 10 sets, or zero sets, the challenge is supposed to be about identifying them, so you shouldn't be distracted by any info which might skew the results one way or the other.
Tangram,
I think we are close to an agreement on the conditions for the test. I agree with the PRNG from the programming language you use
and the actuals from spielbank.
My preference is for more than 100 numbers in the group and therefore can I ask for 234 numbers, yes I know a strange request,
but if it's possible that would suit me.
I agree don't say how many of the 10 groups are PRNG or actuals for the reason, if I am undecided on a group, which I mentioned
in a previous post about the "mirror effect" on groups of numbers, then I will leave it to one side and decide at the end of the test,
or even before, as I won't know if it's PRNG or actuals.
As I have requested more numbers, perhaps we could do it one group at a time and I will try to give a reply as soon as I can and you
can award your :) or :(
Mr Chips
Quote from: Winkel on June 13, 2009, 09:03:03 PM
As I said in my threads: There is absolutely no difference.
In my humble opinion, at the end of each sample of 100/234,etc spins (too small really) there will be minimal if any identifiable difference between the two. But the wheel scatter patterns that develop for each as each number is considered may well show different measurable properties.
Bombus,
I think you're right about the scatter patterns. I've no idea what methods Mr Chips is going to use or whether 234 spins is enough, but he seems fairly confident. Perhaps he will share his knowledge if the test is successful.
Mr Chips,
Ok, let's get the show on the road! :clapping: Here is your first set of numbers (234) :
Set #1
14
20
10
35
13
13
14
8
12
34
36
12
2
28
0
23
0
20
18
0
20
11
20
9
30
15
31
3
7
21
4
35
20
31
13
1
5
17
14
31
22
28
34
32
15
31
25
36
3
13
16
23
3
5
28
5
15
33
25
35
31
2
4
14
22
25
8
20
5
26
18
5
3
31
22
5
32
29
18
15
22
23
27
3
3
23
0
28
10
10
11
29
2
24
8
23
3
18
9
24
20
31
31
17
31
36
5
26
11
33
25
3
12
32
4
21
17
8
35
1
34
23
35
3
27
35
2
22
34
1
29
30
17
2
33
34
31
17
35
3
4
2
10
26
31
13
5
24
36
25
6
29
3
23
6
33
0
27
4
2
28
14
5
25
33
17
5
14
0
12
34
21
11
0
34
10
21
27
10
12
32
10
25
6
35
28
20
1
29
35
30
29
29
27
26
10
21
6
2
7
31
3
10
35
15
20
36
0
17
31
31
9
21
7
36
24
28
19
22
10
1
20
8
6
16
22
34
2
7
10
20
11
2
13
Let's break the ice set 1 = PRNG
Mr Chips
Sorry Mr Chips, they were actuals.
Set 1 (Actuals) identified as PRNG :(
Next set:
Set #2
9
5
8
24
30
23
10
28
8
2
6
8
7
19
35
8
2
11
11
5
17
34
30
25
20
8
8
2
24
31
1
31
30
23
7
14
19
25
25
30
5
31
28
3
35
24
16
10
31
8
1
8
17
23
22
11
36
13
27
10
35
4
28
18
13
21
2
2
6
11
23
15
9
30
20
1
13
34
31
6
25
2
7
27
28
1
11
10
31
8
26
30
28
11
5
17
14
6
4
24
26
13
32
3
34
33
27
18
26
22
25
7
1
17
12
5
8
32
1
14
3
5
27
4
24
18
19
2
34
16
21
28
12
30
29
10
31
14
12
28
1
34
24
2
15
3
28
16
30
25
19
26
29
36
5
14
8
2
29
15
16
30
36
21
33
8
31
12
21
18
25
10
9
22
15
5
14
23
30
21
27
33
14
18
33
15
18
34
15
11
24
36
34
33
32
35
34
5
31
27
17
27
35
12
28
11
12
35
12
5
26
10
15
33
22
6
10
16
20
32
8
11
18
20
19
28
6
14
26
30
27
34
29
20
29
23
5
22
29
30
7
12
14
16
21
28
36
24
28
13
13
9
9
7
18
13
15
21
21
18
8
15
32
29
5
29
21
14
12
28
12
36
25
19
9
32
4
24
6
2
11
26
27
9
2
15
35
35
12
24
1
2
18
13
13
16
22
19
30
5
12
16
26
26
33
18
11
18
27
34
1
9
9
24
23
34
20
27
35
28
35
1
20
29
23
15
36
32
9
15
36
5
18
14
Tangram,
I am genuinly surprised by that result, but will carry on to set 2.
Mr Chips
Mr Chips,
I've been using a set of spins from spielbank but I wouldn't be able to say which table they're from or when they were recorded (they have been merged into one file), so if you like we can re-start the test and I can get fresh spins from wiesbaden making sure to note the details (table no and date) that way everything can be verified (at least for those sets which are actuals). I'm not suggesting that you think I may be "cheating" or anything like that, it's just to keep things as "above board" as possible. :good:
Tangram,
Don't worry I will carry on with the test set 2. In my estimation set 1 conformed to PRNG. Wouldn't it be funny if all the results I gave for PRNG
were actuals and visa versa, I would definitely have to book into a rest home for people suffering from a numerical breakdown :swoon: ;D
Mr Chips
Tangram,
I will put the degree of certainty by my choice and will examine the results at the end of the test. In set 1 it would have been 90%.
Set 2 = actuals 70%
Mr Chips
I'll say RNG for set 2.
Set #1 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% :(
Set #2 (Actuals) identified as Actuals with DOC 70% :)
where DOC = "degree of certainty"
Set #3
22
31
10
21
12
14
22
10
34
10
16
29
31
15
23
2
33
25
3
19
28
29
28
13
15
11
32
13
35
25
30
7
30
8
18
15
3
32
13
35
18
14
6
21
1
19
15
30
26
32
33
30
35
12
19
5
35
18
23
7
19
27
19
35
30
19
28
23
29
2
24
29
16
2
17
36
34
20
5
12
23
11
17
7
35
18
9
16
17
4
6
2
7
32
27
10
8
11
19
33
32
11
9
17
13
23
20
20
29
3
12
29
9
11
15
19
2
4
36
9
4
9
36
34
17
25
11
23
11
5
25
8
6
22
22
11
13
1
17
24
33
19
21
26
26
35
25
34
24
6
36
35
10
35
14
33
5
23
5
19
26
4
22
9
18
22
31
7
33
24
25
27
25
10
10
6
8
8
30
20
18
30
7
2
14
29
17
5
30
33
18
32
15
29
7
26
19
19
6
26
3
23
22
16
19
6
2
25
30
34
29
33
31
13
31
14
19
4
5
28
35
13
15
29
35
35
1
28
8
18
9
26
28
2
Set 3 - RNG. (2 units)
This is guesswork.
Where are the hints that show you to be RNG or actual?
How do you identify them?
br
winkel
Winkel,
As far as I am concerned it's not guesswork, I do apply a certain methodology and consider certain other factors as well. I would not say it's
perfect, but then I don't have a system that wins on every occasion either.
The test has just started and what I would find helpful is examining a group of PRNG numbers which Tangram will produce at some point.
Mr Chips
Tangram,
Set 3 is tricky, as at the moment I can't progress past 50:50. 0 is the sleeper in this group, did you forget to program it ;) ;D I don't
rely on such considerations, but having arrived at a 50:50 from my usual method I then look for further clues.
If it's ok with you I will delay a decision on set 3 and move on to set 4.
Mr Chips
No problem Mr Chips, make your decision when you're ready.
Quotedid you forget to program it
Ah, now that would be a clue wouldn't it. :nono: ;D
Set #1 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% :(
Set #2 (Actuals) identified as Actuals with DOC 70% :)
Set #3 - decision deferred
Set #4
5
12
32
3
17
33
9
18
36
35
29
30
15
24
11
2
35
33
28
8
0
33
25
36
15
19
7
11
10
9
1
28
27
29
23
15
32
34
19
5
2
4
6
7
15
0
24
20
18
29
10
4
20
35
4
29
33
33
1
36
12
1
19
2
18
25
21
30
25
9
31
13
22
15
6
12
9
9
36
14
32
9
21
22
2
35
14
11
8
33
30
13
36
36
19
18
4
14
27
32
33
25
34
10
6
3
27
35
23
23
8
34
20
36
13
0
26
2
30
13
27
19
11
25
24
3
33
17
13
26
5
17
17
17
33
7
26
15
10
18
0
18
35
33
26
20
29
27
6
27
1
28
1
18
11
15
22
16
4
0
11
5
20
32
25
11
8
15
10
3
17
7
21
13
33
32
21
18
16
28
20
33
1
34
19
0
30
10
35
17
6
11
13
33
4
17
27
5
18
20
1
3
19
24
32
16
24
9
15
9
26
32
30
22
3
17
13
5
15
29
2
2
34
23
1
17
13
19
5
11
28
31
18
14
Set 4 = actuals DOC 60%
Mr Chips
Set #1 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% :(
Set #2 (Actuals) identified as Actuals with DOC 70% :)
Set #3 - decision deferred
Set #4 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 60% :(
Set #5
17
33
25
24
33
16
2
10
35
2
18
25
34
24
19
30
31
28
10
34
14
20
7
29
18
32
8
3
28
30
35
22
34
12
3
10
34
4
17
31
9
28
34
34
13
30
36
20
35
2
6
15
23
10
6
32
33
13
28
17
20
36
22
18
21
14
6
34
16
17
18
26
1
18
28
13
17
10
23
22
22
26
8
24
36
2
2
12
18
26
21
11
6
20
26
31
27
1
6
23
12
24
22
1
2
20
28
15
28
31
19
12
26
23
18
5
7
17
24
19
19
21
4
33
15
19
32
21
2
24
23
11
8
30
6
33
8
12
29
32
6
29
12
29
4
13
18
30
6
26
19
18
18
27
20
4
33
30
26
31
13
22
35
34
34
18
17
20
16
27
30
31
30
3
24
29
6
27
9
6
12
14
35
34
27
31
36
18
1
30
32
36
15
15
32
1
7
22
15
18
20
17
2
9
28
20
11
28
18
35
18
5
19
25
23
32
36
12
13
8
24
18
19
21
8
20
16
21
12
10
19
17
5
13
Tangram,
On this occasion I don't mind being wrong. My methodology told me PRNG hence the 60% DOC and the other clues came on the side
of actuals. So I'm pleased my methodology proved correct. The other clues certainly mirrored actuals in many respects.
I should really have asked you for a couple of examples of your PRNG before the test, but at least I have got an example now.
This will be a very interesting test for me, as I have done a bit of research some time ago and some PRNG appear easier to identify
than others and if your PRNG proves a tough nut to crack, it will greatly enhance my research.
Cheers
Mr Chips
Set 5 = PRNG DOC 90%
Sorry Mr Chips :'(
set #5 was actuals. Maybe you'll put on a spurt in the final furlong. :clapping:
QuoteI should really have asked you for a couple of examples of your PRNG before the test, but at least I have got an example now.
We can always carry on, no need to stop at 10 sets. It's a good RNG though. >:D
Set #1 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% :(
Set #2 (Actuals) identified as Actuals with DOC 70% :)
Set #3 - decision deferred
Set #4 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 60% :(
Set #5 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% :(
Set #6
26
26
1
24
13
21
5
6
9
27
1
16
10
12
10
15
34
34
24
8
18
29
36
24
9
14
14
4
28
34
23
32
11
36
31
16
12
15
23
23
17
21
2
13
12
29
34
2
33
7
16
29
35
32
4
0
14
7
30
21
7
34
7
22
6
1
15
4
13
24
7
1
6
3
22
24
23
4
15
35
18
1
1
14
1
35
11
0
29
16
9
25
21
11
20
0
25
24
27
14
30
13
24
14
9
18
32
25
20
30
7
29
11
25
22
10
23
Tangram,
Same result as set 1 with DOC of 90%, I certainly wouldn't place bets on that Table :o
When I get to set 10 I will see if I can make any sense of the results.
Mr Chips
Bravo! :)
Set #1 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% :(
Set #2 (Actuals) identified as Actuals with DOC 70% :)
Set #3 - decision deferred
Set #4 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 60% :(
Set #5 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% :(
Set #6 (PRNG) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% :)
Set #7
15
7
24
24
16
9
34
24
9
11
31
20
36
20
6
23
19
8
31
4
12
5
7
10
10
34
11
25
16
30
24
2
19
23
31
27
16
24
24
1
9
34
21
8
16
28
13
11
26
8
10
16
35
13
21
34
26
18
36
25
20
9
26
15
6
14
13
16
0
36
27
1
29
5
28
11
18
7
0
13
29
18
25
35
22
32
33
18
6
28
20
34
7
1
22
28
14
27
19
20
21
36
2
12
12
10
36
5
12
14
32
19
14
22
6
29
14
8
23
28
33
0
0
20
5
35
21
8
22
9
0
16
31
5
23
10
33
9
15
0
8
36
6
27
12
11
14
5
8
12
9
26
26
18
28
24
30
26
1
12
3
35
27
3
33
27
7
1
13
34
15
6
6
20
36
22
23
1
23
10
9
6
1
4
11
25
6
0
14
2
35
14
28
23
11
21
19
25
14
23
27
21
18
25
3
36
18
24
29
35
1
28
23
5
28
14
11
34
2
9
10
26
34
8
1
28
0
31
9
6
3
30
35
19
Tangram,
I have been looking back on the previous posts and did not pick up on the following:
QuoteI was planning to use 3 sets of PRNG spins. Whether this makes things harder or not I have no idea, my intuition tells me
it shouldn't
I was wondering why 3 different sets and what are the differences. I did mention in a previous post that some PRNG are easier
to identify than others. I am happy to carry on as things are, but I would be grateful if you could explain about the different sets.
Back to the test, again 90% DOC and it's actuals.
Mr Chips
Mr Chips,
I should make clear that I'm only using one PRNG. When I said "3 sets of PRNG spins", I was referring to our initial decision to specify how many sets would be PRNG, then I realised that this wouldn't be good idea. Sorry if this was confusing, I should have deleted the part at the beginning of that post. :-[
Set #7 was PRNG I'm afraid. :'(
Set #1 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% :(
Set #2 (Actuals) identified as Actuals with DOC 70% :)
Set #3 - decision deferred
Set #4 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 60% :(
Set #5 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% :(
Set #6 (PRNG) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% :)
Set #7 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 90% :(
Set #8
13
32
22
24
22
33
5
7
25
12
2
23
23
7
8
17
3
25
13
2
24
2
7
23
33
32
10
28
23
25
11
12
16
25
26
17
33
26
33
22
36
10
19
21
1
3
8
1
36
6
26
11
32
13
19
3
22
20
34
21
5
22
24
21
20
30
9
34
5
10
31
30
30
31
14
18
1
26
34
8
13
24
19
24
1
36
14
2
2
16
10
27
14
3
36
23
35
30
2
9
1
34
3
6
6
33
27
24
25
34
31
21
9
13
13
21
36
28
32
4
20
19
26
28
28
0
13
12
31
34
17
36
18
8
12
13
29
12
12
2
22
15
18
11
7
11
9
35
20
9
36
35
13
1
31
4
7
28
20
1
25
25
34
3
9
0
3
22
26
19
34
2
9
34
17
13
16
6
34
8
12
13
19
3
36
34
29
22
31
36
32
24
31
30
14
2
20
5
33
7
0
5
29
29
24
0
27
36
31
16
20
26
24
36
27
9
23
17
5
10
22
15
34
36
27
0
7
20
9
23
0
27
2
20
Set 8 = actuals, Doc 80
Mr Chips
Set #1 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% >:(
Set #2 (Actuals) identified as Actuals with DOC 70% :)
Set #3 - decision deferred
Set #4 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 60% >:(
Set #5 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% >:(
Set #6 (PRNG) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% :)
Set #7 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 90% >:(
Set #8 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 80% >:(
Set #9
33
19
1
35
24
24
16
18
11
33
20
1
8
19
34
5
30
33
9
8
11
12
11
6
14
26
9
2
7
11
7
18
22
1
16
19
31
2
17
11
15
19
5
22
27
21
16
32
23
14
15
30
3
9
35
22
34
7
3
5
2
13
22
24
31
14
12
32
21
33
6
23
7
25
15
4
21
14
3
9
18
23
24
6
13
22
11
11
9
7
23
5
17
31
26
29
6
18
34
2
3
30
29
17
5
18
15
4
20
3
3
1
7
20
27
19
6
13
11
35
10
30
14
15
29
32
35
26
14
12
36
3
25
14
6
30
16
6
24
10
8
2
17
7
34
22
3
22
6
17
23
19
29
2
9
21
30
9
12
18
29
1
17
18
32
2
31
35
27
20
12
9
32
15
33
23
34
36
35
35
28
13
11
9
20
10
32
25
27
26
2
2
1
3
18
26
12
29
34
20
9
9
34
12
31
29
34
24
9
5
10
26
10
34
9
21
12
22
1
14
27
32
34
16
29
6
32
3
15
9
27
26
6
21
set 9 = actuals DOC 95%
Determining whether these streams are from actual wheels or RNGs is really tough. Especially since they are so short.
Looking at this stream, my guess is that it's from a real wheel.
They are RNG, i guess.. :-\
Set #1 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% >:(
Set #2 (Actuals) identified as Actuals with DOC 70% :)
Set #3 - decision deferred
Set #4 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 60% >:(
Set #5 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% >:(
Set #6 (PRNG) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% :)
Set #7 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 90% >:(
Set #8 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 80% >:(
Set #9 (Actuals) identified as Actuals with DOC 95% :)
Mr Chips, would you like me to post a new set for #3, or are you happy using the same one?
@ Herb,
Do you think it's possible to tell RNG from Actuals? how many spins would you need to be "pretty sure"?
Set #10
9
8
9
28
10
4
2
0
13
20
12
11
30
18
33
27
28
35
1
0
2
32
30
30
2
24
14
8
11
9
17
33
1
18
30
36
30
28
0
21
0
2
32
29
23
17
4
34
12
12
24
10
21
15
31
33
10
20
3
5
22
3
4
7
35
29
36
1
5
2
10
12
7
6
3
10
18
11
25
15
3
4
9
3
9
7
3
18
30
23
34
11
22
28
15
33
27
1
22
5
10
31
10
33
33
27
2
30
19
14
31
1
30
0
17
23
32
10
16
33
0
36
34
21
4
18
21
7
33
8
20
18
13
6
13
17
1
32
36
10
11
32
27
0
19
7
17
1
17
14
33
4
17
33
32
7
0
36
4
7
23
8
0
20
9
11
25
24
20
36
34
20
3
8
24
36
15
13
31
28
30
34
29
12
28
35
32
2
15
4
19
18
9
16
22
22
22
17
30
5
31
16
3
28
2
36
23
31
26
11
22
15
26
35
14
12
25
35
28
10
5
15
9
6
3
32
26
21
12
4
6
6
9
5
Hi Tangram,
I will stick with set 3 and post after set 10.
Herb is correct about the streams being short, but it would take a fair bit of time and work to fully analyse a long set of spins.
I admit this challenge was more difficult than I had originally imagined. What I hadn't bargained for was the degree of difficulty
with the actuals. If you had said set 9 was PRNG I would have been very surprised, as the 95% DOC reflected that every
indication pointed to actuals. At first I look for a certain strong indication, which was present in set 9, but absent in the other
actual sets. It then follows to examine the secondary indications and I suppose realistically, it requires a number of sets to
differentiate between the different sets of actuals and PRNG.
Despite the degree of difficulty, I am pleased to have participated in this challenge and it has given me some ideas to improve
on my existing method.
If possible some time I would grateful if you could let me have say 1000 PRNG spins to work on.
I will let you have set 10 and 3 tomorrow.
Mr Chips
Set 10 = actuals doc 90%
Set 3 = PRNG doc 70%
Mr Chips
This set 10 is most likely RNG, or a rather random wheel. Usually real wheels don't look quite this random.
My vote for set 10 is RNG
Any chance you can give us about ten sets at a time?
By the way, set 3 looks more like a real wheel to me.
My vote for set 3 is real wheel
Ok, that brings this test to an end. Final result:
Set #1 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% >:(
Set #2 (Actuals) identified as Actuals with DOC 70% :)
Set #3 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 70% >:(
Set #4 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 60% >:(
Set #5 (Actuals) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% >:(
Set #6 (PRNG) identified as PRNG with DOC 90% :)
Set #7 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 90% >:(
Set #8 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 80% >:(
Set #9 (Actuals) identified as Actuals with DOC 95% :)
Set #10 (PRNG) identified as Actuals with DOC 90% >:(
Mr Chips,
I'll upload 1000 PRNG spins for you a little later. ;)
@ Herb,
I'm impressed, that's 3 out of 3 correct so far :thumbsup:
QuoteAny chance you can give us about ten sets at a time?
Sure, likewise I'll upload them later today - do you mean the same number of spins in each set (but 10 of them), or 10 x the number of spins in each set?
Give us some more. Let's keep the spin sample sizes the same. I'm curious as to whether I can keep above 60%.
Mr Chips,
I've attached a file with 1000 PRNG spins. I'll post another 10 sets (a mixture of PRNG and Actuals) a little later for Herb. :thumbsup:
250 spins in each column.
Set #1 Set #2 Set #3 Set #4 Set #5 Set #6 Set #7 Set #8 Set #9 Set #10
3 6 5 5 2 32 11 35 17 14
27 30 27 14 36 2 12 33 30 6
15 35 35 12 17 24 6 34 28 24
22 20 22 27 32 4 18 2 5 10
2 22 21 6 2 14 33 35 2 28
25 30 5 31 28 10 24 8 9 22
14 13 17 7 27 3 23 27 24 25
31 2 11 3 24 30 15 7 24 29
28 5 35 32 33 11 10 27 5 21
26 29 36 32 13 26 12 1 17 28
0 21 7 1 31 3 26 2 34 0
6 35 24 36 15 19 29 15 34 1
25 11 0 1 22 22 14 30 7 35
36 35 9 28 14 36 15 31 35 36
24 20 18 8 11 15 11 1 19 2
9 12 35 8 9 26 13 36 18 10
19 34 11 14 23 2 20 14 36 35
34 1 20 36 5 13 11 36 24 27
18 13 13 22 9 5 6 7 15 0
6 31 19 2 7 20 22 25 3 0
32 7 13 20 9 29 35 19 1 14
10 1 2 22 34 5 0 2 26 12
28 17 26 9 11 17 22 3 13 7
14 34 35 35 4 12 27 30 28 28
22 32 20 7 2 24 21 21 16 1
22 13 28 6 9 36 5 23 27 11
19 36 15 15 2 17 19 6 21 13
17 4 2 2 30 2 22 22 6 36
36 9 25 5 3 9 34 25 31 15
19 10 31 14 1 15 34 30 18 19
15 32 8 13 3 19 10 11 12 13
35 18 18 14 25 29 9 11 0 17
28 10 27 11 24 21 17 30 27 15
11 2 3 16 18 19 33 13 4 14
28 4 5 11 8 10 25 4 14 0
17 24 9 29 9 24 10 21 10 25
21 21 0 8 11 31 26 23 27 4
26 30 23 32 0 13 10 5 33 8
20 30 13 18 28 4 10 23 2 7
14 33 3 34 26 22 11 6 8 32
21 17 17 13 8 8 7 29 30 36
14 31 27 26 18 24 31 0 1 16
15 18 22 18 25 14 24 5 13 16
23 16 16 29 15 14 8 3 26 20
18 8 22 2 2 4 27 32 29 27
15 6 29 3 10 14 34 34 20 7
12 26 22 5 11 10 18 2 13 29
31 20 13 14 36 9 7 24 33 16
5 27 2 20 34 10 5 29 8 24
2 34 0 9 26 3 8 26 0 21
9 1 27 15 5 30 14 12 27 27
23 3 10 24 6 15 27 12 36 11
34 24 20 1 13 4 33 13 27 8
22 9 1 29 32 2 14 13 4 4
4 32 34 7 31 0 26 19 16 18
27 15 9 19 22 16 11 7 36 19
19 11 0 10 13 7 21 32 35 29
10 24 27 11 23 15 7 17 14 20
23 34 19 14 22 19 9 7 13 31
29 1 6 23 10 28 11 30 20 27
17 27 34 25 10 28 9 14 19 35
0 7 35 34 18 2 6 33 29 6
18 18 22 6 27 8 35 24 26 15
1 2 12 10 21 0 4 34 1 30
7 1 36 2 2 25 3 31 3 30
32 36 30 2 17 4 23 32 26 30
18 35 31 28 26 30 21 31 11 3
35 9 0 6 21 20 30 16 19 0
0 27 23 17 5 7 20 35 16 34
8 24 0 20 19 31 14 29 2 20
20 17 14 4 16 8 35 16 27 15
26 21 1 8 4 20 5 17 5 32
22 17 11 19 35 4 19 36 3 31
11 12 15 18 2 29 13 15 33 29
35 33 12 2 28 14 6 21 10 21
30 1 9 35 10 28 13 2 23 10
12 2 18 18 13 4 2 32 25 25
30 2 26 7 35 10 12 19 16 9
5 7 0 2 30 23 33 18 18 2
3 3 24 5 4 20 3 3 10 12
0 36 16 4 26 1 27 31 20 1
3 9 14 9 8 34 23 16 35 26
30 23 32 21 21 28 16 28 21 14
15 4 30 29 28 25 23 3 15 10
15 6 14 8 29 20 24 33 25 1
22 36 32 10 31 20 13 33 35 16
25 19 22 24 32 7 29 25 15 34
33 4 5 13 27 34 28 32 1 6
28 33 18 33 20 31 27 3 0 32
14 13 20 13 31 26 22 13 23 21
24 3 16 7 1 30 25 8 7 31
2 3 18 25 18 9 12 35 16 5
19 28 18 6 35 0 29 1 26 30
31 9 10 23 18 24 2 3 33 23
1 7 0 22 30 2 30 3 14 6
3 5 19 24 22 33 22 18 28 10
33 23 24 15 9 0 6 35 32 25
15 34 12 28 2 36 33 17 33 5
32 35 23 18 8 32 7 19 19 9
16 17 11 14 33 21 33 31 29 27
22 35 2 31 8 9 21 21 28 36
4 31 28 30 19 12 11 22 21 10
21 36 5 13 31 9 36 22 34 36
1 18 16 32 6 14 4 12 14 35
17 1 12 9 31 27 3 15 30 1
36 16 3 29 14 13 31 13 12 4
12 29 0 17 5 6 25 12 1 26
15 10 10 29 26 7 29 16 5 5
15 35 33 22 29 24 23 17 36 19
19 31 36 33 34 2 21 28 16 23
0 7 28 33 34 3 35 26 20 31
34 33 17 32 19 2 34 26 10 29
25 29 33 23 27 27 9 18 6 26
34 2 26 22 29 35 15 9 25 35
18 19 32 11 3 28 7 6 9 4
7 30 35 22 21 29 18 29 3 32
33 14 27 9 18 0 20 15 32 16
22 28 33 34 31 6 18 18 22 34
1 36 33 36 5 29 13 14 22 18
5 32 22 12 18 33 4 32 2 10
36 11 33 16 34 22 19 1 15 1
26 16 18 29 4 9 26 4 10 30
9 16 6 20 15 21 32 0 14 8
11 25 1 25 12 8 36 13 25 20
13 28 14 13 20 15 16 9 24 21
36 22 25 33 28 23 32 33 28 20
23 17 0 21 31 24 28 13 20 27
23 34 20 33 13 14 31 1 9 36
17 13 10 12 22 11 24 6 21 36
3 15 3 14 19 28 24 0 4 26
20 20 13 26 30 9 18 7 25 6
3 3 20 15 0 15 1 23 29 14
14 9 12 36 2 8 3 10 14 26
25 32 23 13 30 15 11 25 31 3
1 28 23 19 28 35 9 15 8 16
19 18 29 6 2 15 18 11 35 17
36 21 3 28 10 6 9 32 5 9
22 27 6 27 27 35 14 10 1 8
28 9 32 4 9 33 29 5 11 0
3 16 30 28 23 30 21 36 27 27
11 13 34 20 28 8 33 6 31 8
31 18 17 23 29 13 14 3 20 16
0 31 35 34 16 34 13 24 20 29
23 0 36 2 16 6 1 5 19 4
21 11 0 0 31 22 16 34 23 0
17 0 27 30 35 7 2 7 14 4
16 25 12 32 18 8 29 31 31 14
28 2 35 16 2 15 25 23 12 22
1 20 7 12 15 13 20 6 12 30
16 3 11 9 1 34 36 24 4 27
13 7 0 14 30 11 29 13 33 25
22 5 1 29 15 22 28 22 27 16
12 5 10 33 11 10 32 7 5 17
30 6 31 17 17 17 17 6 22 22
11 3 27 2 26 21 10 10 8 12
1 28 4 13 35 9 14 26 4 22
19 18 15 19 1 26 1 24 2 3
17 32 10 36 22 36 10 20 7 8
33 12 24 5 19 1 10 23 2 35
6 0 24 27 23 19 11 31 17 2
11 29 13 4 1 21 8 22 27 21
4 20 8 33 18 19 12 6 14 34
9 29 26 2 35 36 5 34 23 32
13 8 20 13 28 22 13 7 34 23
34 0 34 14 13 36 10 3 3 21
4 31 4 21 9 21 13 19 29 21
6 28 23 34 14 30 2 18 10 29
0 19 11 25 8 18 8 15 32 1
22 17 1 25 9 26 25 35 25 30
35 10 3 32 26 14 33 22 8 6
6 25 2 14 19 35 3 20 25 12
36 21 34 1 1 30 4 26 34 2
14 11 24 17 6 16 22 20 7 32
27 18 36 29 14 3 7 24 27 32
33 24 28 16 1 34 17 4 13 13
25 2 5 33 35 9 13 23 4 34
24 19 33 13 6 14 0 32 4 9
34 2 6 14 12 36 6 21 30 5
4 9 8 10 0 9 32 8 31 30
5 13 11 1 2 3 0 7 31 25
22 32 1 27 27 35 5 21 6 26
14 5 16 3 13 27 15 2 25 32
0 33 1 33 35 9 0 15 15 22
4 6 33 1 36 25 4 7 35 15
33 3 0 23 30 16 21 35 34 1
0 16 22 2 32 35 26 7 10 15
28 32 20 35 8 33 31 7 11 27
2 15 9 33 13 21 7 24 4 35
6 17 19 4 17 3 24 25 27 36
5 29 29 35 15 33 28 29 26 17
18 19 22 9 30 1 23 24 7 19
16 34 14 3 30 9 30 16 12 30
17 24 24 16 24 33 14 7 20 9
8 16 8 15 22 3 4 4 32 4
29 8 0 11 12 6 3 19 26 28
25 27 15 3 22 3 5 24 11 20
2 8 1 9 34 27 13 19 17 33
33 20 7 14 2 4 4 2 14 27
21 6 13 33 28 5 9 27 26 9
30 32 18 30 29 15 11 9 7 15
15 18 9 27 24 4 8 19 26 12
20 7 33 8 14 33 24 29 14 8
33 3 23 1 23 28 26 23 30 25
0 31 4 9 15 18 36 28 28 35
14 11 30 5 34 19 21 11 14 28
9 25 10 15 34 0 0 35 22 29
15 24 13 0 15 30 11 11 27 21
23 11 31 25 25 3 16 31 32 16
27 15 4 13 33 0 6 28 19 8
0 29 19 15 5 26 13 25 16 34
29 8 25 8 19 19 10 30 17 9
15 28 28 8 34 19 1 13 21 10
15 7 17 24 19 22 31 10 32 1
11 33 35 2 33 21 6 33 4 7
30 16 14 13 32 20 19 11 13 32
20 5 20 2 16 8 10 35 25 8
24 10 29 18 5 14 17 2 3 35
15 33 11 28 36 16 26 1 31 15
27 35 28 19 26 25 16 20 2 4
27 10 0 21 10 36 34 11 3 7
12 6 17 17 2 19 31 32 1 31
3 33 16 3 30 8 4 31 3 11
25 0 36 8 19 16 16 1 29 19
31 25 23 10 6 7 16 26 22 19
16 27 13 31 17 22 27 11 15 11
12 35 11 17 19 34 12 15 9 24
17 9 16 24 28 16 8 17 34 10
10 35 24 3 31 34 32 3 24 5
20 17 24 35 34 21 20 25 23 4
34 11 22 33 36 28 22 29 26 27
11 7 34 27 20 6 13 6 5 19
24 17 20 13 24 28 8 35 17 5
22 32 2 21 36 30 19 15 15 2
33 11 20 5 27 33 30 17 32 14
0 24 16 32 16 21 4 7 10 15
10 7 27 19 5 30 30 29 31 24
3 3 12 13 6 17 5 31 27 29
9 30 28 15 31 2 34 9 14 26
25 35 0 28 22 8 14 30 12 10
34 16 5 21 31 26 18 6 22 36
19 23 11 30 31 22 6 11 35 34
29 1 2 17 23 15 1 11 23 30
7 1 19 22 19 21 13 4 8 28
2 26 0 32 2 33 16 32 17 33
12 7 21 33 21 0 7 32 22 34
36 20 27 13 36 35 25 27 17 11
32 5 14 30 14 15 4 31 1 33
26 8 18 14 4 21 27 9 29 22
8 25 6 12 8 20 34 22 8 34
31 24 24 34 1 18 34 29 16 23
8)
Tangram,
When you post them, can you post them in a continuous column going down, with only one number on each line and no spaces between lines. Thanks. :)
Like this:
3
24
25
26
34
3
15
4
etc.
Tangram,
Thanks for the 1000 PRNG. I will see if I can make any improvement on my present method.
Mr Chips
I just noticed the posted sets in post #45. Here are my best guesses.
Set 1. Real
Set 2. Rng
Set 3. Real
Set 4. Real
Set 5. Real
Set 6. Real
Set 7. Rng
Set 8. Rng
Set 9. Looks real but pretty random looking. Unsure.
Set 10. Rng
Sets 1 and 3 are possibly the same wheel.
Set 4 and 5 are possibly the same wheel, but not likely related to wheels 1 and 3.
Set 6 appears non random, but the shape of the graph doesn't look like a real wheel. However, if it is real then it could be related to wheels 4 and 5 but not likely related to wheels 1 and 3.
Set 7 drove me nuts, because it looks like it could belong to the same wheel as set 4. But the wheel looks very random. So I chose RNG.
Set 8 Isn't overly random, but it doesn't look much like the other wheels.
Set 9 Has a graph like a real wheel, but it doesn't seem to match the other wheels. Pretty random looking though.
Set 10. This doesn't look much like a real wheel. However, it does look similar to sets 9 and 6.
Well, these are my guesses. It's tough with small samples. It was still fun trying.
What many people don't know, is if you run enough samples on an RNG, you will get some very strange looking samples. Samples that are virtually impossible to find when mixed with real wheels.
Regards,
Herb.
(PS. I hope my parents don't have to sign my report card.) /.\
I hope I read your box of data correctly. I'm looking to see if I pasted it correctly.
Set 1. Real no
Set 2. Rng yes
Set 3. Real yes
Set 4. Real no
Set 5. Real yes
Set 6. Real yes
Set 7. Rng yes
Set 8. Rng no
Set 9. Looks real but pretty random looking. Unsure. RNG
Set 10. Rng no
Since you were undecided with Set 9, that's 5 out of 9 correct, not bad Herb. :)
So Herb, are you of the opinion that it is possible to tell the difference with some consistency?
I'd be interested to know the techniques you use to analyze the spins.
Bigger samples would be easier. Real wheels will have a certain look to them that RNGs are often missing. If the samples were closer to 1k spins each then I could probably stay above 60%
Do you know what real wheels are in each sample?
Quote from: HerbDo you know what real wheels are in each sample?
If you mean what type of wheel (as in manufacturer) then no. The spins are from a file of Hamburg spins which kelly posted ages ago, I don't know whether they were all from the same wheel. The first batch of spins (the ones for Mr Chips' challenge) were taken from spielbank wiesbaden archive.