Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 696793
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 14, 20262026-05-14T03:06:05+00:00 2026-05-14T03:06:05+00:00

I have a method, which uses random samples to approximate a calculation. This method

  • 0

I have a method, which uses random samples to approximate a calculation. This method is called millions of times, so its very important that the process of choosing the random numbers is efficient.

I’m not sure how fast javas Random().nextInt really are, but my program does not seem to benefit as much as I would like it too.

When choosing the random numbers, I do the following (in semi pseudo-code):

// Repeat this 300000 times
Set set = new Set();
while(set.length != 5)
    set.add(randomNumber(MIN,MAX));

Now, this obviously has a bad worst-case running time, as the random-function in theory can add duplicated numbers for an eternity, thus staying in the while-loop forever. However, the numbers are chosen from {0..45}, so a duplicated value is for the most part unlikely.

When I use the above method, its only 40% faster than my other method, which does not approximate, but yields the correct result. This is ran ~ 1 million times, so I was expecting this new method to be at least 50% faster.

Do you have any suggestions for a faster method? Or maybe you know of a more efficient way of generation a set of random numbers.

To clarify, here is the two methods:

// Run through all combinations (1 million). This takes 5 seconds
 for(int c1 = 0; c1 < deck.length; c1++){
    for(int c2 = c1+1; c2 < deck.length; c2++){
     for(int c3 = c2+1; c3 < deck.length; c3++){
        for(int c4 = c3+1; c4 < deck.length; c4++){
         for(int c5 = c4+1; c5 < deck.length; c5++){
             enumeration(hands, cards, deck, c1, c2, c3, c4, c5);
         }
            } 
      }     
   }
   }

// Approximate (300000 combinations). This takes 3 seconds
Random rand = new Random();
HashSet<Integer> set = new HashSet<Integer>();
int[] numbers = new int[5];
while(enumerations < 300000){
set.clear();
while(set.size() != 5){
    set.add(rand.nextInt(deck.length));
}
Iterator<Integer> i = set.iterator();
int n = 0;
while(i.hasNext()){
    numbers[n] = i.next();
    n++;
}

After some testing and profiling, I found this method to be the most effective:

Random rand = new Random();
int[] numbers = new int[5];
ArrayList<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>();
while(enumerations < 300000){
 while(list.size() != 5) {
     int i = rand.nextInt(deck.length);
        if(!list.contains(i)) list.add(i);
 }
 int index = 0;
 for(int i : list){ numbers[index] = i; index++; }
 enumeration(hands, cards, deck,numbers);
}
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-14T03:06:06+00:00Added an answer on May 14, 2026 at 3:06 am

    You can try using an existing Java implementation (or this one) for a Mersenne Twister.

    Keep in mind most MT’s are not cryptographically secure.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have a method which uses an index located in a specific directory. public
I have some code, which uses the ExecuteStmt method on the Axapta Object when
I have this method which lets me translate the position of an object, animating
I have this method which leaks ~ 6KB : + (EInspectorFacilityInfo*) newWithNode: (CXMLNode*) node
I have a method which uses a binarywriter to write a record consisting of
I have the following method which uses implicit scheduling: private async Task FooAsync() {
I have an ASP.NET MVC action method which uses model binding to accept a
I have an extension method which uses some configuration settings. I've declared these as
I have written a helper class which uses the Action - delegate as method
I have a public method which uses a variable (only in the scope of

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.