Author tim.peters
Recipients David MacIver, mark.dickinson, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka, tim.peters
Date 2020-08-01.21:07:18
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1596316038.61.0.31234840533.issue41421@roundup.psfhosted.org>
In-reply-to
Content
That text is fine, if you feel something needs to be said at all. I really don't. A Pareto distribution of this kind with parameter <= 1.0 has infinite expected value - VERY long tail. Anyone who knows what they're doing already knows that. The reason the implementation can't "blow up" for parameters >= (roughly) 0.1 isn't that IEEE doubles have such a large dynamic range but rather that they can't represent a number < 1.0 larger than 1 - 2**-53 (so u = 1 - random.random() is always at least 2**-53). The actual distribution has infinite expected value nonetheless, but the implementation is incapable of generating any of its very large values (which, while very rare, are also very large).
History
Date User Action Args
2020-08-01 21:07:18tim.peterssetrecipients: + tim.peters, rhettinger, mark.dickinson, serhiy.storchaka, David MacIver
2020-08-01 21:07:18tim.peterssetmessageid: <1596316038.61.0.31234840533.issue41421@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2020-08-01 21:07:18tim.peterslinkissue41421 messages
2020-08-01 21:07:18tim.peterscreate