From d@vidhughjone@ @ending from gm@il@com  Wed Sep 19 15:40:28 2018
From: d@vidhughjone@ @ending from gm@il@com (David Hugh-Jones)
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 14:40:28 +0100
Subject: [Rd] Bias in R's random integers?
In-Reply-To: <ffb74021-8d95-a820-8013-f0e51dc1a9b3@gmail.com>
References: <CAN_1p9wVX=AR8aYtC2LJo0bgN9cRW3XcbYJqnVHdCzA-QA1ceg@mail.gmail.com>
 <ffb74021-8d95-a820-8013-f0e51dc1a9b3@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAARY7khVi==mZs5o_8fZkTUDDuY-ABwE=gA45COX7qbRgBLhsg@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 at 13:43, Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> I think the analyses are correct, but I doubt if a change to the default
> is likely to be accepted as it would make it more difficult to reproduce
> older results.


I'm a bit alarmed by the logic here. Unbiased sampling seems basic for a
statistical language. As a consumer of R I'd like to think that e.g. my
bootstrapped p values are correct.
Surely if the old results depend on the biased algorithm, then they are
false results?
-- 
Sent from Gmail Mobile

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]



[Rd] Bias in R's random integers?
David Hugh-Jones