mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

A Search for Good Pseudo-random Number Generators : Survey and Empirical Studies

arXiv 1811.04035 ↗First posted 3 Nov 2018cs.CR cs.MScited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

This paper targets to search so-called good generators by doing a brief survey over the generators developed in the history of pseudo-random number generators (PRNGs), verify their claims and rank them based on strong empirical tests in same platforms. To do this, the genre of PRNGs developed so far are explored and classified into three groups -- linear congruential generator based, linear feedback shift register based and cellular automata based. From each group, the well-known widely used generators which claimed themselves to be `good' are chosen. Overall 30 PRNGs are selected in this way on which two types of empirical testing are done -- blind statistical tests with Diehard battery of tests, battery rabbit of TestU01 library and NIST statistical test-suite as well as graphical tests (lattice test and space-time diagram test). Finally, the selected PRNGs are divided into 24 groups and are ranked according to their overall performance in all empirical tests.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 3 Nov 2018.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 0; 2024: 1; 2025: 2.

4 papers.