We Keep Coding

C# System.Random Next comes out sorted

I am trying to access random elements from an array, but the Random generator that I am using keeps on giving me numbers in order like so:
The numbers will always come out sequenced, never completely random (ie. the next number is always greater until the max is reached, then starts from low numbers again). This can be incremental or decremental as well.
I am using a seeded Random object and Random.Next(-100, 100).
This is not the same as the behaviour demonstrated on the MSDN Random.Next page
All I can think of is that the version of .Net packaged with Unity does not have the most recent Random? Any solutions to this confusion?
//Example
//Seed and ods set before the Awake method is called
public int seed;
public GameObject[] pathPartOds;
Random random;
GameObject[] path;
void Awake ()
{
random = new Random (seed);
}
void CreatePath (int length)
{
path = new GameObject[length];
for (int i = 0; i < length; i++)
path[i] = pathPartOds[random.Next (0, pathPartOds.length)];
}
Have used multiple seeds and they all give the same result, and I have been creating seeds using a random int

You need to create an instance of Random exactly once and pass that as a parameter into your function that draws a random number.
Else you'll ruin the generator's statistical properties due to it being seeded in a systematic (i.e. non-random) way. That explains the piecewise monotonicity of your output.

Why am I getting strange results when generating Random() numbers?

My program needs to:
a. Generate an array of 20 random integers from zero to nine. Search for the first occurrence, if any, of the number 7, and report its position in the array.
b. Repeat the computation of part a 1000 times, and for each position in the array, report the number of times that the first occurrence of a 7 in the array is at that position
However whenever I run the program I get strange results (different every time) such as:
No sevens found at any position
1000 sevens found at one position and no sevens found anywhere else
Hundreds of sevens found in 2 positions, and none found anywhere else.
Does anyone have an idea what is wrong with my program?
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Text;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
namespace Week_6_Project_2
{
class Program
{
static int intArrayLength = 20;
static int[] resultsArray = new int[intArrayLength];
public static Array generateRandomArray() {
int[] randomNumberArray = new int[intArrayLength];
Random random = new Random();
int popcounter = 0;
while (popcounter < intArrayLength) {
randomNumberArray[popcounter] = random.Next(0, 10);
popcounter += 1;
}
return randomNumberArray;
}
public static void searchForSevens()
{
int counter = 0;
int[] randomArray = (int[])generateRandomArray();
while (counter < intArrayLength)
{
if (randomArray[counter] == 7)
{
resultsArray[counter] += 1;
counter = intArrayLength;
}
counter += 1;
}
}
static void Main()
{
int searchCounter = 0;
while (searchCounter < 1000)
{
searchForSevens();
searchCounter += 1;
}
int displayCounter = 0;
while (displayCounter < intArrayLength)
{
Console.WriteLine("Number of first occurrence of 7 at position {0} = {1}", displayCounter, resultsArray[displayCounter]);
displayCounter += 1;
}
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
}

Your main problem is that each searchForSevens() test only takes a small fraction of time and the Random class uses auto-seeding from the clock. The clock however has a limited resolution. The result is that many (sometimes all) of your random sequences will be the same. And at most you will have 2 or 3 different result sets.
The simple fix for this single-threaded program is to use 1 static instance of Random.

You're instantiating a new instance of Random every time you call the generateRandomArray method. Since the random number generator uses the current time as a seed, instantiating two Random instances at the same time results in the same numbers being generated, which explains your unexpected results.
To solve your problem, you should only instantiate one Random instance, store it in private field, and reuse it every time you call the Next method.

The problem I assume stems from the fact, that Random() uses current time as seed. And the computation happens so fast, that each time new Random() is called, it uses same time. So you get same sequence of numbers.
To fix this, you simply need to set seed by yourself, incremmenting it every cycle should be enough.
long base = DateTime.Now.TotalMilliseconds;
Random rand = new Random(base+searchCounter);
.. something like that.

I will not answer but will try to give an analogy for the people that think that they need more then one Random instance...
Suppose that you need to fill 6 sheets of paper with random numbers from 1-6. Ask yourself this: do you need 6 dices or one to do the job? If you answer that you need more than one dice, ask yourself this: how different or more random is throwing different dice instead of same dice every time?
I mean, if you throw ONE on a dice, next throw of a dice won't have any less chance to be ONE again than it would be any other number. It goes against intuition, but it is mathematically and statistically so.

In your original code, you're calling the Random method in rapid succession [broken example based on OP's original code], thus seeding the method with the same number, resulting in duplicate "random" numbers. Creating a static member will ensure randomness simply because you're only creating a single instance of it.
Try creating a single static instance of random like this. [static member example].
static readonly Random Random = new Random();
Based on this, here's how I would solve your particular problem.
using System;
namespace Week_6_Project_2
{
class Program
{
// ******************************************
// THIS IS A SINGLE INSTANCE OF Random.
// read below as to why I'm seeding the instantiation of Random();
static readonly Random Random = new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode());
// ******************************************
private const int IntArrayLength = 20;
static readonly int[] ResultsArray = new int[IntArrayLength];
public static Array GenerateRandomArray()
{
var randomNumberArray = new int[IntArrayLength];
var popcounter = 0;
while (popcounter < IntArrayLength)
{
randomNumberArray[popcounter] = Random.Next(0, 10);
popcounter += 1;
}
return randomNumberArray;
}
public static void SearchForSevens()
{
var counter = 0;
var randomArray = (int[])GenerateRandomArray();
while (counter < IntArrayLength)
{
if (randomArray[counter] == 7)
{
ResultsArray[counter] += 1;
counter = IntArrayLength;
}
counter += 1;
}
}
static void Main()
{
var searchCounter = 0;
while (searchCounter < 1000)
{
SearchForSevens();
searchCounter += 1;
}
var displayCounter = 0;
while (displayCounter < IntArrayLength)
{
Console.WriteLine("Number of first occurrence of 7 at position {0} = {1}", displayCounter, ResultsArray[displayCounter]);
displayCounter += 1;
}
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
}
Further reading about Random()
Beyond the answer above, sometimes it is necessary to seed Random(int); (I like to use the HashCode of a Guid) to ensure further randomness. This is because the default seed uses the clock which from the docs [microsoft] has a finite resolution. If your class is instantiated multiple times in quick succession (< 16ms), you will get the same seed from the clock... this breaks stuff.
[example of seeded Random(int) run in rapid succession with random results]
"using the parameterless constructor to create different Random objects in close succession creates random number generators that produce identical sequences of random numbers."
hear me when I say that you should NOT instantiate a new Random on every iteration of a loop -- use a static member
Another valid reason to implement your own seed is when you want to recreate a random sequence [example of two identical lists based on same seed]. Re-using the same seed will recreate the sequence since the sequence is based on the seed.
note: others might say that seeding it is not necessary [link], but I personally believe that for the additional few keystrokes and the microscopic hit on the clock, you might as well increase the probability of a unique seed. It doesn't hurt anything, and in some situations it can help.

Random number behaves weird, not fully random

In my .NET game my rand function that are determining how much damage each out of the players five characters should take, however the 1st one always seems to be at the bottom of the scale and the last one at the top. So in my Character[0] the damage is rarely more than 1 more than the minimum rand value, and for each Character on higher index the damage taken is only randomized from higher up the scale.
public int GetDamage(int low, int high)
{
Random r = new Random();
int rand = r.Next(low, high);
return rand;
}
This is the randomizer I use. Then I update the health left like this:
int Damage = GetDamage(3, 10);
Characters[Target].Health = Characters[Target].Health - Damage;
In this example dmg is divided like this:
Number 1: 3-4
Number 2: 4-6
Number 3: 5-7
Number 4: 7-8
Number 5: 8-9

You have to reuse the same random instance otherwise you won't get really random values since it is created with the current time as seed. If you call GetDamage very fast(e.g. in a loop) you will get always the same values.
So either use a field/property in the class of GetDamage or pass the random instance to the method.
private Random _rnd = new Random();
public int GetDamage(int low, int high)
{
int rand = _rnd.Next(low, high);
return rand;
}
MSDN
The random number generation starts from a seed value. If the same
seed is used repeatedly, the same series of numbers is generated. One
way to produce different sequences is to make the seed value
time-dependent, thereby producing a different series with each new
instance of Random. By default, the parameterless constructor of the
Random class uses the system clock to generate its seed value, while
its parameterized constructor can take an Int32 value based on the
number of ticks in the current time. However, because the clock has
finite resolution, using the parameterless constructor to create
different Random objects in close succession creates random number
generators that produce identical sequences of random numbers. This
problem can be avoided by creating a single Random object rather than
multiple ones.

You need to make your Random instance static, this seeds it once and thereafter you will get a more random looking number.
static Random r = new Random();
public int GetDamage(int low, int high)
{
int rand = r.Next(low, high);
return rand;
}

You need to seed the random number generator.
See: How do I seed a random class to avoid getting duplicate random values
Literally hundreds of this question on here, have a look around.

C# Random number hits far often than expected

We have this random number generator:
Random rnd = new Random();
bool PiratePrincess = rnd.Next(1, 5000) == 1;
This is called on every page view. There should be a 1/5000 chance the variable is True. However, in ~15,000 page views this has been True about 20 times!
Can someone explain why this is the case, and how to prevent this so it is roughly 1/5000 times? It's not important at all for this to be truly random.
Edit: Should this do the trick?
Random rnd = new Random();
bool PiratePrincess = (rnd.Next() + ThisUser.UserID + ThisUser.LastVisit.Ticks + DateTime.Now.Ticks) % 5000 == 1;

How quickly are these pageviews coming in? new Random will initialize based on the current time, so many overlapping requests will get the same random seed. Randomize the seed based on the remote IP address hashed with the current time for more uniqueness.
That said, it is possible to flip a coin 20 times and get heads every single time. It's a legitimate random outcome.
Edit:this will do it
var r = new Random(
Convert.ToInt32(
(ThisUser.UserID ^ ThisUser.LastVisit.Ticks ^ DateTime.Now.Ticks) & 0xFFFFFFFF)
);
var isPiratePrincess = (r.Next (5000) == 42);

You only need instantiate a single instance of Random, thus:
public class Widget
{
private static rngInstance = new Random() ;
public bool IsPiratePrincess()
{
bool isTrue = rngInstance.Next(1, 5000) == 1 ;
return isTrue ;
}
}
Pseudo-random number generators implement a series. Each time you instantiate a new instance, it seeds itself based on (among other things) the current time-of-day and it starts a new series.
If you instantiate a new one on each invocation, and the instantiations are frequent enough, you'll likely see similarities in the stream of pseudo-random values generated, since the initial seed values are likely to be close to each other.
Edited to note: Since System.Random is not thread-safe, you probably want to wrap in such a way as to make it thread-safe. This class (from Getting Random Numbers in Thread-Safe Way) will do the trick. It uses a per-thread static field and instantiates a RNG instance for each thread:
public static class RandomGen2
{
private static Random _global = new Random();
[ThreadStatic]
private static Random _local;
public static int Next()
{
Random inst = _local;
if (inst == null)
{
int seed;
lock (_global) seed = _global.Next();
_local = inst = new Random(seed);
}
return inst.Next();
}
}
I'm a little dubious about seeding each RNG instance with the output of another RNG. That strikes me a liable to bias the results. I think it might be better to use the default constructor.
Another approach would be to latch each access to a single RNG instance:
public static class RandomGen1
{
private static Random _inst = new Random();
public static int Next()
{
lock (_inst) return _inst.Next();
}
}
But that has some performance issues (bottleneck, plus overhead of a lock on each call).

You're creating a new random number generator with a new seed every time you're generating a number. The distribution of the values you get will have more to do with the seed than it does with the distribution characteristics of the algorithm being used.
I'm not sure what the best way is to achieve a more even distribution. If your traffic volume is low enough, you could use a hit counter on the page on check for divisibility by 5000, but that kind of approach would quickly run into contention problems if you tried to scale it.

If the problem is really the seed (as many people including myself suspect), you can either persist an instance of Random() (which will cause concurrency issues under high volume, but is fine for ~15,000 hits per day), or you can introduce more entropy to the seed.
If this were for an application where you do not want determined people to break the pseudo-random characteristics, you should look into software or hardware that generates a good seed on your server (poker websites often use a hardware entropy generator).
If you just want a good distribution and don't expect people to try to hack your solution, consider just blending various sources of entropy (the current timestamp, hash of the user's user agent string, the IPv4 address or hash of the IPv6 address, etc.).
UPDATE: You mention you have the user ID too. Hash that for entropy along with one or more of the items mentioned above, especially the ticks from the current timestamp.

You can get exactly 1/5000 if you avoid Random altogether.
vals = Enumerable.Repeat(false, 4999).ToList();
vals.Add(true);
// this or an in-memory shuffle if that is a concern
isPiratePrincess = vals.OrderBy(v => Guid.NewGuid()).ToList();
// remove values as it's queried & reset when empty.
The problem with using Random here is that you could be in a state where 20 in 15K were legitimately hit. In the next several thousand iterations, you'll hit a cold streak that regresses you towards the expected mean.

The random number generator uses the current time as a seed for the random number generator. So, if two come in at the same time, they could theoretically have the same seed. If you want your numbers to be unique with each other, you might want to use the same random number generator for all instances of the page.

Array 2 method random generated number

For a part of a program i need the following 2 methods.
The first method listed will generated a random number.
where the 2nd method will "call" this method to fill the array.
The array has a max. number of elements defefined on 100 (and all the random generated numbers should be between 1-100).
The problem is i never get random numbers generated. (either i get 100 x the same value, 3 random numbers divided over the 100 max. elements of the array, or the same value 100 times all over again).
The problem should be in the first method, but i cannot seem to figure out the problem.
Been staring at this for quite some time now...
The problem should be with the return, cause it DOES create random generated numbers. But how do i return the generated value every time? (the int method has to be called with the 3 parameters).
private int ValidNumber(int[] T, int X, int Range)
{
for (byte I = 0; I < T.Lenght; I++)
{
Random RndInt = new Random();
X = RndInt.Next(1, Range+1);
}
return X;
}/*ValidNumber*/
public void FillArray(int[] T, int Range)
{
for (byte I = 0; I < T.Length; I++)
{
T[I] = ValidNumber(T, I, Range);
}
}/*FillArray*/
Console code:
public void ExecuteProgram()
{
ClsBereken Ber = new ClsBereken();
//const byte Range = 100;
const int Max = 100;
int[] T = new int[Max];
Ber.FillArray(T, Max);
DisplayArray(T);
}/*ExecuteProgram*/
private void DisplayArray(int[] T)
{
for (byte i = 0; i < T.Length; i++)
{
Console.Write("{0,4} ", T[i]);
}
Console.WriteLine();
}/*DisplayArray*/
Any help alot appreciated.
Kind Regards.

Re-use the Random instance. NOTE I've edited this to show passing the Random instance down, but I'm really not sure what ValidNumber is trying to do - it looks like it is juts burning up CPU cycles? I would suggest you can remove ValidNumber completely (and just use the next value from the Random in FillArray), but presumably you are trying to do something here - I'm just not sure what!
private int ValidNumber(int[] T, int X, int Range, Random random)
{
for (byte I = 0; I < T.Lenght; I++)
{
X = random.Next(1, Range+1);
}
return X;
}/*ValidNumber*/
public void FillArray(int[] T, int Range)
{
Random random = new Random();
for (byte I = 0; I < T.Length; I++)
{
T[I] = ValidNumber(T, I, Range, random);
}
}/*FillArray*/
When you create a Random, it is "seeded" using the system clock, but this is rounded heavily. If you create lots of Random in a tight loop, they all get the same "seed", so they all create the same next number.
If necessary you could move the Random further out (if you have other loops), or make it static (but if you do that you need to worry about synchronization too).

The problem is that you are reinitializing rndint over and over.
take the line:
Random RndInt = new Random();
and move it in front of the loop and see if that fixes it.
When you initialize a random object, it is assigned a seed (probably based on the time), and that seed is used to generate a series of seemingly random values. However, if you plug in the same seed to two random objects, you will get the same series of random numbers.
So, what is happening in your code is you are initializing a new random object with a seed, and then asking for the first random number in its series. Then, you are initializing another random object (even though it is assigned to the same name, it is a new object) and it is getting the same seed, and you are again asking for the first random number in the series. So naturally, you are getting the same random number over and over.

You are continuously creating an new Random object. I'm afraid this is seeded (randomized) by the timestamp of creation. Since this is really fast and happens multiple times, the seed is the same, and so is the result of the call RndInt.Next(1, Range+1);.
By the way, even though not incorrect, it's not a common practice in c#.net to start with a capital letter on names of local variables and parameters.

Any random number generation algorithm* is not truly random; it is simply a deterministic algorithm that has been specifically designed to output numbers that resemble randomness. (See Pseudorandom number generator.) Since the algorithm is deterministic, its output is completely dependent upon a starting "seed" value.
The Random class in .NET has two constructors: one which takes an integer seed, and another which takes no parameters. This one bases its seed off the current time.
From this information perhaps you can guess why creating a new Random instance for every value in your array results in the entire array being filled with the same number: every time you construct a Random object within a very small time frame, it will have the same seed value, which means it will generate identical output to another Random object constructed within the same time frame.
As Marc Gravell has already indicated, you should be using only a single Random instance to generate a sequence of random numbers.
*Well, almost any. I believe there are hardware implementations of random number generators that factor in random noise (taken from the surrounding environment) and may therefore be considered "truly" random. Whether you believe these are actually random
depends on your personal definition of "random" and whether or not you believe that we live in a deterministic universe.

You can pass Random() a seed but if you send it the same seed number you will get the same results. The way you are using it
Random rnd = new Random();
Is using an auto-generated seed based on time. But you may not get seemingly random results if you don't at least sleep for a second. (Source http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.random(VS.71).aspx)
As everyone has mentioned here already your biggest issue is the fact you keep recreating the random object each iteration.