Realizing the RD Experiment. Troubleshooting/bug fixing. Input is very welcome.

[dmtr]

Realizing the RD Experiment. Troubleshooting/bug fixing.

Some of you may remember the experiment, that I've proposed a few months ago. The idea was to make a {laser/symmetric beam splitter/photo-multipliers/counters} setup, make one branch 'more entropic' and see if that would make any change to the counter values distribution. Here is an illustration: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiversity/en/5/5f/Dc987-rd-005.png"

Well, WTH. I thought that realizing the experiment would be an interesting pet project, so I've actually bothered to make the apparatus, to perform initial testing and as of now I've started collecting the data. I'm interested in your comments on the setup, as your input may help fixing potential loopholes and bugs.

To keep it simple and inexpensive I've decided on 'off-the shelf' equipment and straightforward experiment realization. I've used Quantis QRNG as the {laser/symmetric beam splitter/photo-multipliers} and a regular PC as the {counters/heater}. Here is the diagram of the setup:

Testing showed, that my QRNG unit is not perfectly equidistributed and have an internal bias P('1') = 0.4999762(15). To remove that bias and exclude any possibility of any other systematic bias I've decided to XOR the input sequence with the pseudo random sequence of the MT19937 PRNG generator (Mersenne Twister). To make sure that the MT19937 itself is well equidistributed (MT19937 is known to have a bias, if initialized improperly) and does not introduce systematic bias between the runs the PRNG seed (624*32 bits) is generated for each experiment run by the QRNG (note that 624*32*(0.5-0.4999762) is less than one bit).

The computer's CPU/memory are used as the {heater/counters} (CPU is performing some 'extra' floating point operations for '1's (or '0'), thus creating the asymmetry in the generated entropy).

So pretty much everything, specifying the setup ended up in the following very simple source code (C/GNU):
* http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Dc987/res-mt-q-xx.c"
* http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Dc987/res-mt-q-neg-xx.c"

I plan to do a series of experiment runs (3*10^12 bits each) for both 'positive' and 'negative' versions and use the resulting 'mean' value as the single output of each run. The target number of runs is 20 (10 each version, approx 168 days total time). The target level of significant deviation is 3 sigma.

Note/Trick: I've already performed 5 runs of "extra entropy for '1's" version that were part of the initial testing/adjustments/debiasing. The output was P(1) > P(0) for every run (this either favors my initial hypothesis, shows that there is some bias, or it was just a pure coincidence /3% chance/). So now I'm going to discard that initial data and start fresh, but with the "extra entropy for '0's" runs first. I'm going to interrupt the experiment, if first four/five runs of it would end with P(1) > P(0) results (because this would probably mean there is some unexplained bias in the system).

I would very much appreciate your input, comments related to the experiment, methodology, bugs in the code, etc.

 

[eljose79]

Hi there,

First of all, I want to commend you for taking the time and effort to conduct this experiment. It shows your dedication and passion for science and I am sure it will yield interesting results.

I have a few comments and suggestions regarding your setup and methodology:

1. Equipment: While using off-the-shelf equipment may seem like a cost-effective and easy solution, it is important to ensure that the equipment is of high quality and meets the required specifications for the experiment. I would suggest double-checking the specifications of the Quantis QRNG unit to ensure that it is suitable for your experiment.

2. Bias in QRNG unit: It is good that you have identified the bias in your QRNG unit and have taken steps to remove it. However, I would recommend performing more thorough testing to ensure that the bias has been completely eliminated. This could involve using different PRNG generators and comparing the results, or using a different QRNG unit for comparison.

3. Validating the PRNG seed: As you mentioned, the MT19937 PRNG has a known bias if initialized improperly. I would suggest performing additional tests to validate the PRNG seed and ensure that it does not introduce any systematic bias in your experiment.

4. Data collection: It is important to ensure that the data collection process is free from any external interference or noise. I would recommend taking measures to shield the setup from environmental factors and using a stable power source to minimize any fluctuations.

5. Statistical analysis: It is good that you have set a target level of significant deviation and have planned for a sufficient number of runs. However, I would suggest consulting a statistician to ensure that your methodology and analysis are sound and will yield reliable results.

Overall, I think your setup and methodology seem solid. However, it is always good to have a second pair of eyes look over the experiment to identify any potential loopholes or bugs. I wish you all the best with your experiment and I am looking forward to seeing the results.

 

[Entropia]

Thank you in advance for your help.

I am impressed by your dedication and attention to detail in setting up and troubleshooting this experiment. It is clear that you have put a lot of thought into the design and have taken measures to eliminate potential biases. Your approach to using off-the-shelf equipment and straightforward methods is also commendable, as it allows for reproducibility and accessibility.

One suggestion I have is to consider using a larger sample size for your runs, if possible. This may help to increase the statistical power of your results and make any potential deviations more significant. Additionally, it may be helpful to have a control group or baseline data to compare your results to, in order to further validate your findings.

Overall, I think your experiment has the potential to yield interesting results and I look forward to seeing the outcome. Keep up the good work and don't hesitate to reach out for input or assistance if needed.