Quake-III-Arena

Quake III Arena GPL Source Release
Log | Files | Refs

paranoia.1bk (7137B)


      1 Lest this program stop prematurely, i.e. before displaying
      2 
      3     `END OF TEST',
      4 
      5 try to persuade the computer NOT to terminate execution when an
      6 error like Over/Underflow or Division by Zero occurs, but rather
      7 to persevere with a surrogate value after, perhaps, displaying some
      8 warning.  If persuasion avails naught, don't despair but run this
      9 program anyway to see how many milestones it passes, and then
     10 amend it to make further progress.
     11 
     12 Answer questions with Y, y, N or n (unless otherwise indicated).
     13 
     14 
     15 Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 0          Page: 1
     16 
     17 Users are invited to help debug and augment this program so it will
     18 cope with unanticipated and newly uncovered arithmetic pathologies.
     19 
     20 Please send suggestions and interesting results to
     21 	Richard Karpinski
     22 	Computer Center U-76
     23 	University of California
     24 	San Francisco, CA 94143-0704, USA
     25 
     26 In doing so, please include the following information:
     27 	Precision:	double;
     28 	Version:	10 February 1989;
     29 	Computer:
     30 
     31 	Compiler:
     32 
     33 	Optimization level:
     34 
     35 	Other relevant compiler options:
     36 
     37 Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 1          Page: 2
     38 
     39 Running this program should reveal these characteristics:
     40      Radix = 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 16, 100, 256 ...
     41      Precision = number of significant digits carried.
     42      U2 = Radix/Radix^Precision = One Ulp
     43 	(OneUlpnit in the Last Place) of 1.000xxx .
     44      U1 = 1/Radix^Precision = One Ulp of numbers a little less than 1.0 .
     45      Adequacy of guard digits for Mult., Div. and Subt.
     46      Whether arithmetic is chopped, correctly rounded, or something else
     47 	for Mult., Div., Add/Subt. and Sqrt.
     48      Whether a Sticky Bit used correctly for rounding.
     49      UnderflowThreshold = an underflow threshold.
     50      E0 and PseudoZero tell whether underflow is abrupt, gradual, or fuzzy.
     51      V = an overflow threshold, roughly.
     52      V0  tells, roughly, whether  Infinity  is represented.
     53      Comparisions are checked for consistency with subtraction
     54 	and for contamination with pseudo-zeros.
     55      Sqrt is tested.  Y^X is not tested.
     56      Extra-precise subexpressions are revealed but NOT YET tested.
     57      Decimal-Binary conversion is NOT YET tested for accuracy.
     58 
     59 Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 2          Page: 3
     60 
     61 The program attempts to discriminate among
     62    FLAWs, like lack of a sticky bit,
     63    Serious DEFECTs, like lack of a guard digit, and
     64    FAILUREs, like 2+2 == 5 .
     65 Failures may confound subsequent diagnoses.
     66 
     67 The diagnostic capabilities of this program go beyond an earlier
     68 program called `MACHAR', which can be found at the end of the
     69 book  `Software Manual for the Elementary Functions' (1980) by
     70 W. J. Cody and W. Waite. Although both programs try to discover
     71 the Radix, Precision and range (over/underflow thresholds)
     72 of the arithmetic, this program tries to cope with a wider variety
     73 of pathologies, and to say how well the arithmetic is implemented.
     74 
     75 The program is based upon a conventional radix representation for
     76 floating-point numbers, but also allows logarithmic encoding
     77 as used by certain early WANG machines.
     78 
     79 BASIC version of this program (C) 1983 by Prof. W. M. Kahan;
     80 see source comments for more history.
     81 
     82 Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 3          Page: 4
     83 
     84 Program is now RUNNING tests on small integers:
     85 -1, 0, 1/2, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 27, 32 & 240 are O.K.
     86 
     87 Searching for Radix and Precision.
     88 Radix = 2.000000 .
     89 Closest relative separation found is U1 = 1.1102230e-16 .
     90 
     91 Recalculating radix and precision
     92  confirms closest relative separation U1 .
     93 Radix confirmed.
     94 The number of significant digits of the Radix is 53.000000 .
     95 
     96 Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 30          Page: 5
     97 
     98 Subtraction appears to be normalized, as it should be.
     99 Checking for guard digit in *, /, and -.
    100      *, /, and - appear to have guard digits, as they should.
    101 
    102 Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 40          Page: 6
    103 
    104 Checking rounding on multiply, divide and add/subtract.
    105 Multiplication appears to round correctly.
    106 Division appears to round correctly.
    107 Addition/Subtraction appears to round correctly.
    108 Checking for sticky bit.
    109 Sticky bit apparently used correctly.
    110 
    111 Does Multiplication commute?  Testing on 20 random pairs.
    112      No failures found in 20 integer pairs.
    113 
    114 Running test of square root(x).
    115 Testing if sqrt(X * X) == X for 20 Integers X.
    116 Test for sqrt monotonicity.
    117 sqrt has passed a test for Monotonicity.
    118 Testing whether sqrt is rounded or chopped.
    119 Square root appears to be correctly rounded.
    120 
    121 Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 90          Page: 7
    122 
    123 Testing powers Z^i for small Integers Z and i.
    124 ... no discrepancis found.
    125 
    126 Seeking Underflow thresholds UfThold and E0.
    127 Smallest strictly positive number found is E0 = 2.22507e-308 .
    128 Since comparison denies Z = 0, evaluating (Z + Z) / Z should be safe.
    129 What the machine gets for (Z + Z) / Z is  2.00000000000000000e+00 .
    130 This is O.K., provided Over/Underflow has NOT just been signaled.
    131 
    132 Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 120          Page: 8
    133 
    134 
    135 FLAW:  X = 3.05947655544740190e-308
    136 	is not equal to Z = 2.22507385850720140e-308 .
    137 yet X - Z yields 0.00000000000000000e+00 .
    138     Should this NOT signal Underflow, this is a SERIOUS DEFECT
    139 that causes confusion when innocent statements like
    140     if (X == Z)  ...  else  ... (f(X) - f(Z)) / (X - Z) ...
    141 encounter Division by Zero although actually
    142 X / Z = 1 + 0.375 .
    143 The Underflow threshold is 2.22507385850720140e-308,  below which
    144 calculation may suffer larger Relative error than merely roundoff.
    145 Since underflow occurs below the threshold
    146 UfThold = (2.00000000000000000e+00) ^ (-1.02200000000000000e+03)
    147 only underflow should afflict the expression
    148 	(2.00000000000000000e+00) ^ (-1.02200000000000000e+03);
    149 actually calculating yields: 0.00000000000000000e+00 .
    150 This computed value is O.K.
    151 
    152 Testing X^((X + 1) / (X - 1)) vs. exp(2) = 7.38905609893065220e+00 as X -> 1.
    153 Accuracy seems adequate.
    154 Testing powers Z^Q at four nearly extreme values.
    155  ... no discrepancies found.
    156 
    157 
    158 Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 160          Page: 9
    159 
    160 Searching for Overflow threshold:
    161 This may generate an error.
    162 
    163 * * * FLOATING-POINT ERROR * * *
    164 Can `Z = -Y' overflow?
    165 Trying it on Y = -8.98846567431157950e+307 .
    166 Seems O.K.
    167 Overflow threshold is V  = 1.79769313486231570e+308 .
    168 There is no saturation value because the system traps on overflow.
    169 No Overflow should be signaled for V * 1 = 1.79769313486231570e+308
    170                            nor for V / 1 = 1.79769313486231570e+308 .
    171 Any overflow signal separating this * from the one
    172 above is a DEFECT.
    173 
    174 
    175 Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 190          Page: 10
    176 
    177 
    178 What message and/or values does Division by Zero produce?
    179     Trying to compute 1 / 0 produces ...
    180 * * * FLOATING-POINT ERROR * * *
    181 
    182     Trying to compute 0 / 0 produces ...
    183 * * * FLOATING-POINT ERROR * * *
    184 
    185 Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 220          Page: 11
    186 
    187 
    188 
    189 No failures, defects nor flaws have been discovered.
    190 Rounding appears to conform to the proposed IEEE standard P754,
    191 except for possibly Double Rounding during Gradual Underflow.
    192 The arithmetic diagnosed appears to be Excellent!
    193 
    194 A total of 3 floating point exceptions were registered.
    195 END OF TEST.