Wildly improbable - two abductions...?

[fwiffo]

In my legacy house, I've been trying to get sims abducted for five and a half generations.  I have any teens out there virtually every night for the whole abductable period (with occasional breaks to recharge/energize), and if I have space in the house, I also have any impregnable adult males out there too.  Up until today, bupkis.  Not surprising, abduction outside of the Curious house is really, really rare.  But then I finally had an adult male abducted and impregnated.  Then, the very next night, I had a teen female abducted.  The odds of this happening purely randomly are really, really small.  Obscenely small.  By my calculations, worse than 10,000:1.  I didn't use any cheats, and the only abduction related hack is my Multi-PT hack which does not, by itself, modify abduction odds at all.  I haven't installed any new downloads at all recently, so it's not possible that something slipped in.

My question is: Does an abduction on a lot increase the odds of further abductions on that lot (might make the absurd knowledge wants for multiple abductions actually possible)?  I have some familiarity with the abduction code, but my knowledge of simantics is spotty, so it's likely I might have missed some code that does that.  The two sims in question happened to be using different telescopes, so if there is such an effect, I presume it's lot-wide and not telescope specific (though the abduction odds are stored in a BCON on the telescope object.)  Is it just the sadorandom number generator creating a cluster effect?  Is it caused by nearby high-tension power lines?

[kutto]

I cannot speak on behalf of the coding, but I too notice such a trend. Though, I do use twojeff's abduction odds hack, but it seems the odds go up even further after the first abduction.

[Soylent Sim]

I'm tempted to blame sadorandomness, myself, as I've noticed no such correlation.  What's happened with me is that I've never had sims I wanted abducted get taken away.  Rather, the abductions I have had happened when some other sim snuck over to a telescope and triggered the whole scenario before I realized unauthorized personnel were stargazing.

More generally speaking, when you consider the number of situations where such a chain could have happened, your odds go way up.  Given that the first abduction happened without needing to be called, it's only the odds of the second that make this event noteworthy.  So while it still sounds sadorandom to me, the whole situation is more likely than it sounds at first brush.

[J. M. Pescado]

It's an artifact of the RNG: Due to the way computer-random numbers work in bad random number generators, things tend to occur in streaks. This is why you'll often see all 3 members of the family getting chance cards on the same day. Multi-abductions follow the same behaviors.

[dizzy]

Polynomial noise generators give you a nice distribution of randomness. Good random generators tend to give you hits in messy clumps.

[J. M. Pescado]

Good random generators tend to give you hits in messy clumps.

Isn't that inherently counter to "good"? It's not really "GOOD" when it comes in correlated clumps like that.

[fwiffo]

I think dizzy's saying that clumps in random sequences are normal, and RNGs that have very few of them are actually less random (though for some applications, that may be what you want.)

Truly random sequences will have non-random appearing clumps sometimes.  For example, flipping a coin 6 times and getting the same result each time seems improbable and non-random, but it's not that improbable, nor necessarily non-random.  It will happen now and then with a good RNG.  A good random number generator will produce these sorts of clumps at the frequency at which you'd expect them to occur.  Since humans are very good at spotting patterns, and very stubborn about accepting the randomness or non-pattern-ness of something, a truly random sequence of numbers usually has a lot of apparent clumpiness.

My clump was particularly improbable though, so that's why I asked the question.  On the other hand, there are an arbitrary number of improbable combinations of events that haven't happened in my game, so maybe I just got lucky.

[Frankenbeasley]

I think dizzy's saying that clumps in random sequences are normal, and RNGs that have very few of them are actually less random (though for some applications, that may be what you want.)

Truly random sequences will have non-random appearing clumps sometimes.  For example, flipping a coin 6 times and getting the same result each time seems improbable and non-random, but it's not that improbable, nor necessarily non-random.  It will happen now and then with a good RNG.  A good random number generator will produce these sorts of clumps at the frequency at which you'd expect them to occur.  Since humans are very good at spotting patterns, and very stubborn about accepting the randomness or non-pattern-ness of something, a truly random sequence of numbers usually has a lot of apparent clumpiness.

My clump was particularly improbable though, so that's why I asked the question.  On the other hand, there are an arbitrary number of improbable combinations of events that haven't happened in my game, so maybe I just got lucky.

Isn't this in danger of becoming a syllogism? Yes, random generation may provide messy clumps and streaks.  This does not mean that the appearance or absence of such clumps is a de facto qualitative statement as to the effectiveness of the generator. The fact is that 'random' is just that and any attempt to define tendencies is (or should be) self-defeating since any tendency towards particular results suggests the lack of randomness.

[KittKitt]

Then again, when you come right down to it, the only two numbers a computer understands are 1 and 0 anyway.  Couple this with the fact that ultimately, your computer's processor is simply a difference engine, and there really can be no such thing as 'random'.

By nature, a computer cannot give a truly random result.  It's all based on algorithms and over a large enough sample, you *will* eventually find patterns (and I do mean actual patterns, not seeing patterns because you 'want to').  The difference between 'good' and 'bad' RNGs then, is merely the number of samples required before human (end user) perception spots said patterns.  Ask any serious coder, and they'll be happy to tell you that computers definitely do not do random. 

Of course, this is all pretty moot, because the worst part about the sadorandom generator the Sims uses isn't the algorithm, but the way the seed is handled.  As any coder who's ever tried to generate X sets of random-seeming results one after another knows, the formula is key to the appearance of ONE sequence seeming random, but how and where you get your seed is a much bigger concern when it comes to sending the thing around again time after time.  If you start the same formula up 1000 times, but use the exact same input each time, you'll get 1000 identical results.

-Kitt

[fwiffo]

I am a serious coder, and I have to say, that's not quite true.  To say that a computer understands only 0 and 1 is like saying that you only understand the numbers 0 to 9.  It's not very meaningful.  Often, yes, computers use a pseudorandom number generator with a deterministic sequence.  However, true random number generation is possible (and is used all the time.)  Some processors (including some models of Intel and AMD processors) come with a true RNG built in that generate truly non-deterministic numbers from thermal noise.  There are also specialized pieces of hardware you can get for this purpose for high-security applicaitons.  You can also get true random numbers from sources like your sound card.  Linux and some other operating systems gathers "entropy" from things like keystroke timings, hard drive seek latency and other truly random sources to create a entropy pool from which it pulls truly random numbers when needed.

I don't know what this says about the Sims sadorandom numbers, but I just got a third abduction a little less than a week after the first two.  I just double checked to be sure, but there are no abduction-odds hacks.

[BeckerCheez]

In my first neighborhood, I had no natural abductions.  In my second neighborhood, I had one after I moved Stella Terrano, the alien college girl, into one of my dorms.  In my third neighborhood, after plopping the increased odds hack in there, I had two in a row:  one to my 2nd gen Legacy Challenge guy (right when he used the telescope too!) and then to one of my brother's Sims (it was a female). 

I've also noticed an interesting trend with pregnancies resulting in twins.  In my third generation, I had 2 twin pregnancies in a row.  In the first neighborhood I had, I had a family have 2 twin pregnancies in the same family tree: gen 1 had twins, the daughter of gen 1 had a single, the daughter of gen 2 had twins. 

[fwiffo]

There actually is a pregnancy modifier token that twins have (and I believe can pass off on to their offspring) that causes them to have increased odds of having twins.  Kaylynn the maid and the Caliente sisters have the token in Pleasantview, for example.

[BeckerCheez]

Hmm so I can assume that the townie that one Sim married had the token.  I can also assume that in the other family, either the female alien had the token, or the male that was adopted had the token.  Makes sense.   

[fwiffo]

You can find out by looking at them in SimPE.  It's also possible pretty easy for it to occur by chance now and then - twins aren't all that rare.

[kutto]

You can find out by looking at them in SimPE.  It's also possible pretty easy for it to occur by chance now and then - twins aren't all that rare.

Screw that. I've never had twins.

[Dark Trepie]

Don't CAS made sims also randomly get this token?

And yes, I've noticed some Maxis sims have a higher tendency for twins than others.  Both of the Caliente sisters each had twins the first time I played them.

[J. M. Pescado]

Twins aren't really that rare in the game, period. The odds are as high as 10% even without anything to encourage it, so once you already have a set, there's a pretty large 10% base chance of your next set being more twins, possibly much higher if anyone involved was a twin and thus might have the token.

[dizzy]

Of course, this is all pretty moot, because the worst part about the sadorandom generator the Sims uses isn't the algorithm, but the way the seed is handled.  As any coder who's ever tried to generate X sets of random-seeming results one after another knows, the formula is key to the appearance of ONE sequence seeming random, but how and where you get your seed is a much bigger concern when it comes to sending the thing around again time after time.  If you start the same formula up 1000 times, but use the exact same input each time, you'll get 1000 identical results.

-Kitt

Depends on your OS. In Windows, you use the current system time function. In Linux, you use the "/dev/random" device. It's a no-brainer.

[Avalikia]

IIRC, the odds of a twin birth in real life is 1 in 89, so the 1 in 10 odds in the Sims is rather frequent.  If your sims have just had a set of twins, you have a 1 in 10 chance that the next pregnancy will result in twins too and that is hardly bad odds.

[Jelenedra]

Once you have twins you double your chances of having twins again. Same for your offspring. A girl I work with is half of a twin, and her mom had another pair of twins before her and her brother. Grandmother had three sets of twins and so on.

Where exactly is the token in SimPe?

[ElviraGoth]

I've only had a couple of abductions in my first Pleasantview, just the preprogrammed one of Vidcund in Strangetown, and a couple in my first custom hood.  When I had one abduction, another followed pretty soon after, then no more after that.  Except, of course, my teens who were abducted and then evidently were taken again in the EDS at Uni.  And stupid me, I let the second guy who was abducted get on the EDS at his house after dark and he was just recently abducted again.  Doh!

As for twins, I have a whole lot of them in my custom hood, all descendants of my CAS sims.  And in my first Strangetown, Pascal had one girl, then Vidcund had twins (boy and girl), then Johnny and Ophelia had twin boys, and their second pregnancy also resulted in twins.  There have only been two other births in this ST, and they were both singles.

My other hoods haven't had anywhere near as many sets of twins.  My second ST has none yet.  I think I have had three or four besides the Curious bros. ands they've all been singles.  So the 10% chance is probably going to kick in pretty soon in my twinless hoods.

And, no, I don't have any abduction hacks and I don't do anything (cheesecake or otherwise) to increase the odds of twins.  They're too much of a PITA as babies and toddlers to actually TRY to get them!  I cringe everytime I check the status of a pregnancy and find there are 2 babies coming!

[J. M. Pescado]

My other hoods haven't had anywhere near as many sets of twins.  My second ST has none yet.  I think I have had three or four besides the Curious bros. ands they've all been singles.  So the 10% chance is probably going to kick in pretty soon in my twinless hoods.

Gambler's fallacy. You're not any more likely to have twins now than you were before.

And, no, I don't have any abduction hacks and I don't do anything (cheesecake or otherwise) to increase the odds of twins.  They're too much of a PITA as babies and toddlers to actually TRY to get them!  I cringe everytime I check the status of a pregnancy and find there are 2 babies coming!

I'm not unduly bothered by twins one way or another. I just see them as two for the price of one, with the impact being more on long-term population control than how bothersome they are as babies. One baby, two babies, no real difference, it's still one family to play. As long as the number of babies has not exceeded the number of docking bays, everything is under control. If for some reason I *NEED* a family to produce two spawn, twins are the way to go: One private school application gets them both in, and I don't have to watch the waddly-whale stage more than once!

[ElviraGoth]

I have the kind of gambler's luck that when I don't want something to happen, it will - more like Murphy's law.  So I wouldn't be surprised to have a bunch of twins suddenly show up in those hoods.

Ha!  That toddler walk reminds me of my own some 25-30 years ago.  Glad it's all over in real life.

The one thing I do think that's cute about toddlers is when they pick their noses and try to flick off the bugger.  I hadn't noticed any do this until recently, so I don't know it it's always been there and I just kept my toddlers too busy skilling or if it's a new thing.  But for now, it's making me chuckle - who knows how long that will last, though.

[jsalemi]

The one thing I do think that's cute about toddlers is when they pick their noses and try to flick off the bugger.  I hadn't noticed any do this until recently, so I don't know it it's always been there and I just kept my toddlers too busy skilling or if it's a new thing. 

Always been there, far as I know --  I usually see them do it when they're stuck in the crib waiting for someone to let them out.

[ElviraGoth]

Shows how close I pay attention, I guess.  I don't usually watch them when they're sitting in the crib, cuz I usually send someone to fish them out right away.

The first time I noticed it was when a toddler was waiting to be put IN the crib, though!  And I've probably only seen it three or four times.  Guess I just keep them too occupied!