Reputation
Top tag
Next privilege 250 Rep.
View close votes
Badges
11
Impact
~4k people reached

Apr
25
comment How can I rearrange this logarithmic formula to be computer friendly?
@Pockets: The C# Decimal type doesn't support log(). Also, yes I need higher than 10^28. But perhaps most importantly to asking here, I was curious if the expression itself could be mathematically reformulated to say the same, but without the 1- bit. That's not a programming question any more.
Apr
25
accepted How can I rearrange this logarithmic formula to be computer friendly?
Apr
24
comment How can I rearrange this logarithmic formula to be computer friendly?
@Ian: Gotcha - sounds good. I just checked the link you provided, and it seems like an imperfect, but workable solution. I'm still curious if there's a more exact elegant answer though, but feel free to add it as an answer, and I'll at least upvote it for now. Here's some talk about the issue.
Apr
24
comment How can I rearrange this logarithmic formula to be computer friendly?
@Ian: Thinking about it, even log1p(x) wouldn't work as the number 0.999999....(17 times) can't be stored into x in the first place.
Apr
24
comment How can I rearrange this logarithmic formula to be computer friendly?
@Winther: Exactly. I want to avoid the 1- bit altogether if possible as that's what's causing the problem. Question is how...
Apr
24
comment How can I rearrange this logarithmic formula to be computer friendly?
@Ian: Alas the log1p function doesn't exist in C#.
Apr
24
comment How can I rearrange this logarithmic formula to be computer friendly?
@copper.hat: Good point. It's a bit of a hack though, and I think the error grows exponentially for deeper and deeper magnitudes.
Apr
24
comment How can I rearrange this logarithmic formula to be computer friendly?
@user1952009: It's not that $ln(b)$ is too small, but that the computer can't hold $0.99999999999999999$ (17 nines) as a number in memory for it to calculate the log in the first place.
Apr
24
revised How can I rearrange this logarithmic formula to be computer friendly?
added 146 characters in body
Apr
24
comment How can I rearrange this logarithmic formula to be computer friendly?
@user1952009: Yes, I tried that. I still get NaN unfortunately.
Apr
24
revised How can I rearrange this logarithmic formula to be computer friendly?
added 30 characters in body
Apr
24
revised How can I rearrange this logarithmic formula to be computer friendly?
added 73 characters in body
Apr
24
comment How can I rearrange this logarithmic formula to be computer friendly?
@copper.hat: Literally like Math.Log(1 - a, 1 - b) (C# code).
Apr
24
asked How can I rearrange this logarithmic formula to be computer friendly?
Feb
15
awarded  Popular Question
Nov
27
awarded  Curious
Sep
29
comment Expected travel of random walk in arbitrary game with multiple payouts
@ColmBhandal: Okay done!
Sep
29
revised Expected travel of random walk in arbitrary game with multiple payouts
added 418 characters in body
Sep
25
comment Expected travel of random walk in arbitrary game with multiple payouts
Sure. Here you go: pastebin.com/985eDTFh - Don't worry about the size - three quarters of it is code for a fast random class I pinched from Stackoverflow. You can use the default Random class if you prefer. Also, if you're not using C#, don't worry too much about converting the convertCSVtoPayoutTable() function as you can hard code the probability and payout arrays yourself if you prefer.
Sep
25
comment Expected travel of random walk in arbitrary game with multiple payouts
Aha, yes I get roughly around 9.38-9.4 after simulating 10M 'universes' (which you call experiments). Let me know if you'd like the code (it's in C# but is easily transferable to other languages).