P(getting Pi correct to n digits after x trials)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter moonman239
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pi
moonman239
Messages
276
Reaction score
0
I would like to know how confident I can be in my Monte Carlo estimate of Pi, plus/minus a specified margin of error. I know the locations of the "pins" are uniformly distributed, thus P(pin being within circle's radius) = P(x <= radius) * P(y <= radius)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Here are four links:

1) http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080107132917AAxtMth", Yahoo Answers
If you take N=100 dots you get an approximate value for pi, e.g. 3.241. Repeat this e.g. 20 times and have 20 approximate values for pi. For these 20 values you can calculate the standard deviation.

2) "www.evsis.org/docs/tdpp2_chap1.pdf"[/URL]
On page 4 to 6 of the document you will find a pseudo-code to calculate the variance and standard deviation.

3) [PLAIN]http://www.physics.sc.edu/~yar/phys309_2010/calculating_Pi/Pi_report.htm" )
This website talks about how many dots you need to ensure a certain number of correct digits.

4) http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/51909.html", Math Forum
This article discusses the standard deviation and confidence interval.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I just gave myself a dopeslap for not thinking about using the standard deviation formula.
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.

Similar threads

Back
Top