On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 10:50:35AM +0100, Robert Swain wrote: > > In that case though I think it would be nice if there was some additional > > information > > on the particular numbers used, and also mentioning that the last bit is > > always alternating > > for this kind of generator (so if possible, only the upper bits should be > > used). > > Believing some random guy on the internet: > > http://random.mat.sbg.ac.at/~charly/server/node3.html > > 2147001325*a+715136305 > > at least has some statistics, I could not find any for the current numbers > > on a quick search. > > A quick search for 'LCG 1013904223' throws a number of results.
Yes, what concerns me a bit that in difference to other LCGs none of those results seem to have analyzed this one, though maybe that is done in the book they are from. > I should probably >>16 the > values returned by lcg_random(). At least getting rid of the lowest bit probably is a good idea. I doubt it will be possible to hear, but it might cause weird effects when doing a spectrum analysis of the audio (though how much depends on how the noise is added exactly - probably it does not _really_ matter either way). _______________________________________________ FFmpeg-soc mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-soc
