Here's a solution that fits entirely within integers and is within about 4% of optimal (i.e. uses 1.26 random numbers in {0..4} for every one in {0..6}). The code's in Scala, but the math should be reasonably clear in any language: you take advantage of the fact that 7^9 + 7^8 is very close to 5^11. So you pick an 11 digit number in base 5, and then interpret it as a 9 digit number in base 7 if it's in range (giving 9 base 7 numbers), or as an 8 digit number if it's over the 9 digit number, etc.:

abstract class RNG {
  def apply(): Int
}

class Random5 extends RNG {
  val rng = new scala.util.Random
  var count = 0
  def apply() = { count += 1 ; rng.nextInt(5) }
}

class FiveSevener(five: RNG) {
  val sevens = new Array[Int](9)
  var nsevens = 0
  val to9 = 40353607;
  val to8 = 5764801;
  val to7 = 823543;
  def loadSevens(value: Int, count: Int) {
    nsevens = 0;
    var remaining = value;
    while (nsevens < count) {
      sevens(nsevens) = remaining % 7
      remaining /= 7
      nsevens += 1
    }
  }
  def loadSevens {
    var fivepow11 = 0;
    var i=0
    while (i<11) { i+=1 ; fivepow11 = five() + fivepow11*5 }
    if (fivepow11 < to9) { loadSevens(fivepow11 , 9) ; return }
    fivepow11 -= to9
    if (fivepow11 < to8) { loadSevens(fivepow11 , 8) ; return }
    fivepow11 -= to8
    if (fivepow11 < 3*to7) loadSevens(fivepow11 % to7 , 7)
    else loadSevens
  }
  def apply() = {
    if (nsevens==0) loadSevens
    nsevens -= 1
    sevens(nsevens)
  }
}

如果你将一个测试粘贴到解释器中(实际上是REPL)，你会得到:

scala> val five = new Random5
five: Random5 = Random5@e9c592

scala> val seven = new FiveSevener(five)
seven: FiveSevener = FiveSevener@143c423

scala> val counts = new Array[Int](7)
counts: Array[Int] = Array(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0)

scala> var i=0 ; while (i < 100000000) { counts( seven() ) += 1 ; i += 1 }
i: Int = 100000000

scala> counts
res0: Array[Int] = Array(14280662, 14293012, 14281286, 14284836, 14287188,
14289332, 14283684)

scala> five.count
res1: Int = 125902876

分布很好，很平坦(在每个箱子中，10^8的1/7大约在10k范围内，就像预期的近似高斯分布一样)。

什么是简单的解决方案?(rand5() + rand5()) % 7 + 1 减少内存使用或在较慢的CPU上运行的有效解决方案是什么?是的，这是有效的，因为它只调用rand5()两次，空间复杂度为O(1)

考虑rand5()给出从1到5(包括)的随机数。 (1 + 1) % 7 + 1 = 3 (1 + 2) % 7 + 1 = 4 (1 + 3) % 7 + 1 = 5 (1 + 4) % 7 + 1 = 6 (1 + 5) % 7 + 1 = 7

(2 + 1) % 7 + 1 = 4 (2 + 2) % 7 + 1 = 5 (2 + 3) % 7 + 1 = 6 (2 + 4) % 7 + 1 = 7 (2 + 5) % 7 + 1 = 1 .

(5 + 1) % 7 + 1 = 7 (5 + 2) % 7 + 1 = 1 (5 + 3) % 7 + 1 = 2 (5 + 4) % 7 + 1 = 3 (5 + 5) % 7 + 1 = 4 .

等等

(我剽窃了亚当·罗森菲尔德的答案，使其运行速度提高了7%左右。)

假设rand5()返回分布相等的{0,1,2,3,4}中的一个，目标是返回分布相等的{0,1,2,3,4,5,6}。

int rand7() {
  i = 5 * rand5() + rand5();
  max = 25;
  //i is uniform among {0 ... max-1}
  while(i < max%7) {
    //i is uniform among {0 ... (max%7 - 1)}
    i *= 5;
    i += rand5(); //i is uniform {0 ... (((max%7)*5) - 1)}
    max %= 7;
    max *= 5; //once again, i is uniform among {0 ... max-1}
  }
  return(i%7);
}

我们在跟踪这个循环在变量max中所能产生的最大值。如果到目前为止的结果在max%7和max-1之间，那么结果将均匀分布在该范围内。如果不是，则使用余数，余数是0到max%7-1之间的随机数，然后再次调用rand()来生成一个新的数字和一个新的max。然后我们重新开始。

编辑:在这个方程中，期望调用rand5()的次数是x:

x =  2     * 21/25
   + 3     *  4/25 * 14/20
   + 4     *  4/25 *  6/20 * 28/30
   + 5     *  4/25 *  6/20 *  2/30 * 7/10
   + 6     *  4/25 *  6/20 *  2/30 * 3/10 * 14/15
   + (6+x) *  4/25 *  6/20 *  2/30 * 3/10 *  1/15
x = about 2.21 calls to rand5()

这里允许作业题吗?

这个函数进行粗略的“以5为基数”的数学运算，生成0到6之间的数字。

function rnd7() {
    do {
        r1 = rnd5() - 1;
        do {
            r2=rnd5() - 1;
        } while (r2 > 1);
        result = r2 * 5 + r1;
    } while (result > 6);
    return result + 1;
}

面对这么复杂的答案，我觉得自己很蠢。

为什么不能:

int random1_to_7()
{
  return (random1_to_5() * 7) / 5;  
}

?

因为1/7是一个以5为底的无限小数，所以没有(完全正确的)解可以在常数时间内运行。一个简单的解决方案是使用拒绝抽样，例如:

int i;
do
{
  i = 5 * (rand5() - 1) + rand5();  // i is now uniformly random between 1 and 25
} while(i > 21);
// i is now uniformly random between 1 and 21
return i % 7 + 1;  // result is now uniformly random between 1 and 7

这个循环的预期运行时间为25/21 = 1.19次迭代，但是永远循环的概率非常小。