d_labes ★★★ Berlin, Germany, 20120710 13:02 (3386 d 15:02 ago) Posting: # 8914 Views: 8,038 

Dear All! In the Rpackage randomizeBE you can control the randomness of the list by a WaldWolfowitz runs test as Helmut has suggested in this post .This suggestion was aimed to avoid some 'ordered' lists beside the fact that such lists are of course obtainable by dicing, also with low probability. Internally randomizeBE uses the sequence numbers for the runs test. The runs test is originally formulated for dichotomous input only.It is generalized to other cases using the dichotomizing of the values via <=median and > median. See f.i. german wikipedia. The english version suggests to omit values = median. IMHO this is not appropriate here where we are dealing with sequences. Here some observations that the randomness control does not work that good in case of more than 2 sequences. Example: 3 sequences numbered 1, 2, 3 (substitute a character representation whatever fits your needs. F.i. latin square "ABC", "BCA" and "CAB"). The 'alternating' random lists analogous to the 2x2 case give the following results: list runs p.value Majority of them considered as compatible with null hypothesis: sequence is random. The ordered list on the other hand is correctly considered as 'nonrandom': list runs p.value BTW: You needn't dicing with function RL4() until you get one of the above lists to see the runs pvalue. Use the function runs.pvalue() and a numeric representation of the sequences.Example: rl < rep(c(1,2,3),4) BTW2: The runs test is implemented via normal approximation like the implementations in the Rpackages tseries or lawstat . The drawback is that it by design will give only approximate pvalues for such small lists as discussed here. If these approximate values are conservative or liberal I don't know.— Regards, Detlew 
Helmut ★★★ Vienna, Austria, 20120710 14:20 (3386 d 13:44 ago) @ d_labes Posting: # 8915 Views: 6,164 

Dear Detlew, interesting; I will chew on it time allowing. » BTW2: The runs test is implemented via normal approximation like the implementations in the Rpackages tseries or lawstat . The drawback is that it by design will give only approximate pvalues for such small lists as discussed here. If these approximate values are conservative or liberal I don't know.In my aged program I used exact values for N ≤200 according to Swed FS and C Eisenhart Part of the tables at Google books. — Diftor heh smusma 🖖 Helmut Schütz The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮 Science Quotes 
d_labes ★★★ Berlin, Germany, 20120710 16:58 (3386 d 11:06 ago) @ Helmut Posting: # 8917 Views: 6,225 

Dear Helmut, » Tables for testing randomness of grouping in a sequence of alternatives » Ann Math Statist 14, 66–87 (1943) These tables are reproduced in the “Wissenschaftliche Tabellen Geigy 3” p165, 8^{th} Ed 1983. If you you don’t have them let me know and I will send you a scan. Thanks for your kind offer. But working with critical values is against the spirit of the implementation. Here the user can choose an alpha value for the randomness control. — Regards, Detlew 
d_labes ★★★ Berlin, Germany, 20120712 10:34 (3384 d 17:30 ago) @ Helmut Posting: # 8938 Views: 6,238 

Dear Helmut, dear All, meanwhile I have tried to implement the exact runs distribution. If I had not made a a big mistake the results are as following for the above presented 'alternating' lists: (Also a little bug corrected if value==median) asymptotic asymptotic exact cc. denotes a continuity correction to the asymptotic normal distributed statistic like SPSS uses. For these lists it had to be concluded that the use of the exact distribution worsens the situation. It is more unlikely that the Null "list is a random sequence" is rejected. The use of cc. approximates the exact distribution well but also leads to a conservative test. The fact that the randomness control doesn't work in all cases seems known. Just to cite from: Ying Wang ECE 461 PROJECT REPORT, MAY 2003 "Nonparametric Tests for Randomness" online resource "... From the above analysis, most of the tests are vulnerable to a certain set of sequences, which are deterministic but accepted as random processes." — Regards, Detlew 
Helmut ★★★ Vienna, Austria, 20210715 16:07 (94 d 11:57 ago) @ d_labes Posting: # 22469 Views: 957 

Dear Detlew, excavating an old thread… Recently I saw a deficiency letter of a European assessor. The Applicant is asked to provide block length used in randomization as clear pattern cannot be deduced from randomization scheme. Single site, one group. The randomization was:
— Diftor heh smusma 🖖 Helmut Schütz The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮 Science Quotes 
Ohlbe ★★★ France, 20210715 17:59 (94 d 10:05 ago) @ Helmut Posting: # 22470 Views: 963 

Dear Helmut, » The Applicant is asked to provide block length used in randomization as clear pattern cannot be deduced from randomization scheme Well, can't the assessor count up to 8 ? SCNR — Regards Ohlbe 
Helmut ★★★ Vienna, Austria, 20210715 18:32 (94 d 09:32 ago) @ Ohlbe Posting: # 22471 Views: 940 

Dear Ohlbe, » » The Applicant is asked to provide block length used in randomization as clear pattern cannot be deduced from randomization scheme » » Well, can't the assessor count up to 8 ? Given from the remainder of the deficiency letter, I wouldn’t place a bet on it. — Diftor heh smusma 🖖 Helmut Schütz The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮 Science Quotes 
d_labes ★★★ Berlin, Germany, 20210718 11:15 (91 d 16:49 ago) @ Helmut Posting: # 22477 Views: 881 

Dear Helmut, as numerous times noticed: Assessors are a strange bunch of subjects — Regards, Detlew 