Stories with Tag randomness

• Five Kinds of Nondeterminism

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-02-19 20:36:32

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hillel Wayne's post dissects the concept of "nondeterminism" in computer science, arguing that it's often used ambiguously and encompasses five distinct meanings. These are: 1) Implementation-defined behavior, where the language standard allows for varied outcomes. 2) Unspecified behavior, similar to implementation-defined but offering even less predictability. 3) Error/undefined behavior, where anything could happen, often leading to crashes. 4) Heisenbugs, which are bugs whose behavior changes under observation (e.g., debugging). 5) True nondeterminism, exemplified by hardware randomness or concurrency races. The post emphasizes that these are fundamentally different concepts with distinct implications for programmers, and understanding these nuances is crucial for writing robust and predictable software.

  Hillel Wayne's blog post, "Five Kinds of Nondeterminism," delves into the nuanced meanings of "nondeterminism" across different computational contexts, meticulously dissecting the term beyond its common association with randomness. Wayne argues that using the term vaguely can lead to confusion and miscommunication, especially in discussions about security and formal methods. He proposes a typology of five distinct categories of nondeterminism, providing clarity and precision to the concept.

  The first type is implementation-defined nondeterminism. This arises from specifications leaving certain aspects of a system's behavior deliberately unspecified, allowing for variation across different implementations. While the behavior isn't random for a specific implementation, it is unpredictable a priori without knowing the implementation details. Examples include the order of elements returned from a hash table or the specific optimizations a compiler chooses.

  Next, don't care nondeterminism emerges when a specification explicitly allows multiple valid outcomes for a given input, without preference for any specific outcome. The system can choose any of the allowed outcomes, and this choice does not affect the correctness of the system. This is often used in hardware design where certain signal transitions are irrelevant.

  Third, demonic nondeterminism pertains to situations where an adversary or malicious actor can influence the behavior of the system within the constraints of its specification. Formal methods, such as model checking, often utilize this type of nondeterminism to analyze worst-case scenarios and guarantee robustness against adversarial manipulation. A critical example involves assessing the security of a system against various attack vectors.

  The fourth category, probabilistic nondeterminism, is the type most commonly associated with the term "nondeterminism" in everyday usage. Here, system behavior is governed by probabilities, with different outcomes having specific likelihoods. Random number generators and stochastic processes are prime examples of this type. While individual outcomes are unpredictable, the overall distribution of outcomes is often known or can be statistically characterized.

  Finally, scheduler nondeterminism relates specifically to the order of execution in concurrent systems. Multiple processes or threads compete for resources, and the scheduler determines which process gets to execute at a given time. The precise interleaving of execution steps can influence the overall outcome, leading to nondeterministic behavior. This type of nondeterminism poses significant challenges for designing and debugging concurrent systems, necessitating careful synchronization mechanisms to avoid race conditions and other concurrency bugs.

  In conclusion, Wayne emphasizes that understanding these different facets of nondeterminism is essential for clear communication and accurate reasoning about complex systems. He provides concrete examples for each type, illustrating their distinct properties and implications. By disambiguating the term "nondeterminism," Wayne equips readers with a more sophisticated and nuanced understanding of the concept and its various manifestations in different computational domains.

  • nondeterminism
  • programming
  • Computer Science
  • concurrency
  • Parallelism
  • software engineering
  • determinism
  • Multithreading
  • distributed systems
  • randomness
  • Uncertainty
  • Semantics
  • formal methods

  Summary of Comments ( 17 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43107317

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users discussed various aspects of nondeterminism in the context of Hillel Wayne's article. Several commenters highlighted the distinction between predictable and unpredictable nondeterminism, with some arguing the author's categorization conflated the two. The importance of distinguishing between sources of nondeterminism, such as hardware, OS scheduling, and program logic, was emphasized. One commenter pointed out the difficulty in achieving true determinism even with seemingly simple programs due to factors like garbage collection and just-in-time compilation. The practical challenges of debugging nondeterministic systems were also mentioned, along with the value of tools that can help reproduce and analyze nondeterministic behavior. A few comments delved into specific types of nondeterminism, like data races and the nuances of concurrency, while others questioned the usefulness of the proposed categorization in practice.

  The Hacker News post titled "Five Kinds of Nondeterminism" linking to an article on buttondown.com has generated several comments discussing various aspects of nondeterminism in computer systems.

  Several commenters discuss the nuances and overlaps between the different categories of non-determinism outlined in the article. One commenter points out the difficulty in cleanly separating these categories in practice, arguing that many real-world systems exhibit characteristics of multiple types simultaneously. They use the example of a distributed database, which can have both implementation-defined (order of messages) and essential (concurrent user actions) non-determinism.

  Another commenter focuses on the performance implications of non-determinism, specifically in the context of compiler optimizations. They suggest that eliminating certain kinds of non-determinism can allow for more aggressive optimizations and improved performance predictability.

  The concept of "Heisenbugs" is brought up, with one commenter explaining how these elusive bugs are often a direct consequence of unintended non-determinism. They further link this to the increasing complexity of modern systems and the difficulty in controlling all sources of non-deterministic behavior.

  One commenter delves into the philosophical implications of non-determinism, touching upon the free will vs. determinism debate. They propose that the classification of non-determinism in the article could be applied to this philosophical discussion, offering a new perspective on the nature of choice.

  There's also a discussion about the role of testing and debugging in the presence of non-determinism. One commenter advocates for designing systems that minimize essential non-determinism, arguing that it simplifies testing and makes debugging easier. Another suggests techniques for reproducing and isolating non-deterministic bugs, emphasizing the importance of logging and careful analysis of system behavior.

  A few commenters offer specific examples of non-determinism in different programming languages and systems, illustrating the practical relevance of the article's categorization. They mention issues related to thread scheduling, memory allocation, and network communication, providing concrete examples of how non-determinism manifests in real-world scenarios.

  Finally, some commenters express appreciation for the article's clear explanation of a complex topic, finding the categorization helpful for understanding and addressing non-determinism in their own work. They also suggest potential extensions to the article, such as exploring the relationship between non-determinism and formal verification methods.

• Fat Rand: How Many Lines Do You Need to Generate a Random Number?

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-02-05 23:10:47

  Verbose tl;dr

  The blog post "Fat Rand: How Many Lines Do You Need to Generate a Random Number?" explores the surprising complexity hidden within seemingly simple random number generation. It dissects the code behind Python's random.randint() function, revealing a multi-layered process involving system-level entropy sources, hashing, and bit manipulation to ultimately produce a seemingly simple random integer. The post highlights the extensive effort required to achieve statistically sound randomness, demonstrating that generating even a single random number relies on a significant amount of code and underlying system functionality. This complexity is necessary to ensure unpredictability and avoid biases, which are crucial for security, simulations, and various other applications.

  The blog post "Fat Rand: How Many Lines Do You Need to Generate a Random Number?" by Armin Ronacher explores the surprising complexity hidden beneath seemingly simple random number generation in programming. The author begins by highlighting the deceptive ease with which we access randomness in high-level languages like Python, where a single function call, random(), produces a seemingly random floating-point number between 0 and 1. This simplicity, however, masks a substantial amount of underlying machinery.

  Ronacher then delves into the intricate details of how Python's random module generates these numbers. He explains that Python utilizes the Mersenne Twister, a widely-used pseudo-random number generator (PRNG) known for its good statistical properties and performance. He emphasizes that true randomness is difficult to achieve in deterministic computer systems, and PRNGs, like the Mersenne Twister, generate sequences of numbers that appear random but are ultimately determined by an initial "seed" value.

  The post further dissects the implementation of the Mersenne Twister, illustrating its core algorithm involving bitwise operations, array manipulations, and tempering functions to enhance the randomness of the generated output. This detailed walkthrough emphasizes the non-trivial nature of generating high-quality pseudo-random numbers, even within a seemingly simple function call. The author even presents the C code behind the Mersenne Twister implementation within Python, further highlighting the complexity hidden beneath the surface.

  Furthermore, the post touches upon the challenges of seeding the PRNG. While a common approach is to use the current system time, this can lead to predictable sequences if the seed is not sufficiently random. Python addresses this by incorporating system-specific sources of randomness, such as /dev/random on Unix-like systems, to ensure a more unpredictable initial seed. This underscores the importance of proper seeding for robust pseudo-random number generation.

  Finally, Ronacher concludes by emphasizing that the apparent simplicity of generating a random number in Python belies a complex underlying process involving sophisticated algorithms, careful implementation, and attention to system-specific details for seeding. This detailed exploration reveals the significant effort invested in ensuring the quality and reliability of even the most basic random number generation functions, a fact often overlooked by users at the high-level interface. The post serves as a reminder that seemingly simple operations often rest upon a foundation of intricate implementation details.

  • random number generation
  • rng
  • randomness
  • entropy
  • pseudo-random number generators
  • prng
  • software engineering
  • programming
  • algorithms
  • bit manipulation
  • Computer Science
  • performance
  • optimization
  • lines of code
  • code size
  • Efficiency

  Summary of Comments ( 34 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42956697

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users discussed the surprising complexity of generating truly random numbers, agreeing with the article's premise. Some commenters highlighted the difficulty in seeding pseudo-random number generators (PRNGs) effectively, with suggestions like using /dev/random, hardware sources, or even mixing multiple sources. Others pointed out that the article focuses on uniformly distributed random numbers, and that generating other distributions introduces additional complexity. A few users mentioned specific use cases where simple PRNGs are sufficient, like games or simulations, while others emphasized the critical importance of robust randomness in cryptography and security. The discussion also touched upon the trade-offs between performance and security when choosing a random number generation method, and the value of having different "grades" of randomness for various applications.

  The Hacker News post "Fat Rand: How Many Lines Do You Need to Generate a Random Number?" sparked a discussion with several interesting comments. Many commenters focused on the practicality and implications of the article's exploration of random number generation complexity.

  One commenter highlighted the contrast between the theoretical pursuit of perfect randomness and the practical needs of most applications. They argued that for many use cases, a simple pseudo-random number generator (PRNG) is sufficient, and the added complexity of a "true" random number generator (TRNG) isn't worth the effort. This commenter also pointed out the potential performance overhead of TRNGs, making them less suitable for situations where speed is critical.

  Another commenter discussed the importance of considering the specific requirements of an application when choosing a random number generator. They emphasized that security-sensitive applications, like cryptography, demand a higher level of randomness and unpredictability than, say, a simple game. Therefore, the choice between a PRNG and a TRNG, and the specific implementation, should depend on the context.

  The trade-off between randomness quality and performance was a recurring theme. One commenter mentioned the existence of hybrid approaches that combine PRNGs with a periodic injection of entropy from a TRNG. This strategy aims to balance the efficiency of PRNGs with the improved randomness of TRNGs.

  Several comments also touched on the difficulty of generating truly random numbers. One commenter pointed out the philosophical implications of defining "true" randomness, questioning whether it's even possible to achieve given our deterministic universe. Another commenter mentioned the challenges of building hardware-based TRNGs, which often rely on unpredictable physical phenomena like thermal noise or radioactive decay. Even these methods, they noted, can be susceptible to biases and environmental influences.

  Finally, some commenters shared practical advice and resources related to random number generation. They linked to libraries and tools that offer different levels of randomness and performance characteristics, allowing developers to choose the best option for their specific needs. One commenter even suggested consulting relevant standards and guidelines for best practices in random number generation, particularly for security-critical applications.