There are some charts that look so stunning and yet confusing. You cant make up your mind whether it tells a compelling story or it is just plain wrong.
Today, let me present you one such chart. I call this Pie of a Pie of a Pie chart (source: thiswoo, thanks to Nassar, our forum member for mentioning this)
Pie of pie of pie – What is good about it?
The idea of this chart is quite noble. Show how the water in this world is distributed. Obviously, with such large numbers, making one chart would be difficult. So make 3. The initial pie of salt vs. fresh water, which explodes to show the distribution of fresh water which explodes to show the spread of other water sources.
The chart narrates the story of how little water is available for consumption and where it is one simple picture.
And the pie leaking in to another pie metaphor works really well in this case.
What is not good about it?
To begin with, the 3D pies are very deceptive. It is not clear how much % of water is fresh water (other than the fact that it is very little). Also, compared to a 2d pie, the fresh water slice in 3d pie looks bigger (due to its orientation and 3d effects).
Then, no matter how good the colors are, the 2nd and 3rd pies are confusing. The colors imply that the blue slice (fresh water) corresponds to just ice caps and glaciers.
Since all 3 pies are of similar sizes, we immediately think that we have enough water. Only on closer inspection it becomes obvious that the size of lower pies has no relation to actual water amount (only angles convey the information).
Finally, I think this chart is bad because it takes excessively large amount of time to make in almost any software. That said, it is a good exercise to come up with this tinkering with various drawing shapes etc.
Aren’t there any alternatives?
The easiest and clear (and obviously not so exciting as pie of pie of pie chart) alternative is to just show the numbers like this:
Note: This table too is misleading as row heights wrongly indicate that we have more fresh water than salt water etc.
The next option is to use a variation of bar of bars, some thing like this:
One more option I can think of is a tree map. For hierarchical data like this Treemaps are also a very good option. That said, since the largest value is 390,000 times the smallest value, any treemap will be very large to show the smallest value clearly.
Do you like Pie of Pie of Pie chart?
What do you think? Do you love this or would you prefer some other chart to visualize this data? Share your opinion using comments.
Previously on Pie Charts
Pie charts are one of the most (mis)used charts in business world these days. That is why we talk about them from time to time. See these articles to learn more:
- An example where pie charts work well
- Alternatives to Pie charts
- Group smaller slices in pie charts to improve readability
- Do not make pie charts like these
PS: If you want to know to create this pie of pie of pie chart in excel, see here.
20 Responses to “Simulating Dice throws – the correct way to do it in excel”
You have an interesting point, but the bell curve theory is nonsense. Certainly it is not what you would want, even if it were true.
Alpha Bravo - Although not a distribution curve in the strict sense, is does reflect the actual results of throwing two physical dice.
And reflects the following . .
There is 1 way of throwing a total of 2
There are 2 ways of throwing a total of 3
There are 3 ways of throwing a total of 4
There are 4 ways of throwing a total of 5
There are 5 ways of throwing a total of 6
There are 6 ways of throwing a total of 7
There are 5 ways of throwing a total of 8
There are 4 ways of throwing a total of 9
There are 3 ways of throwing a total of 10
There are 2 ways of throwing a total of 11
There is 1 way of throwing a total of 12
@alpha bravo ... welcome... 🙂
either your comment or your dice is loaded 😉
I am afraid the distribution shown in the right graph is what you get when you throw a pair of dice in real world. As Karl already explained, it is not random behavior you see when you try to combine 2 random events (individual dice throws), but more of order due to how things work.
@Karl, thanks 🙂
When simulating a coin toss, the ROUND function you used is appropriate. However, your die simulation formula should use INT instead of ROUND:
=INT(RAND()*6)+1
Otherwise, the rounding causes half of each number's predictions to be applied to the next higher number. Also, you'd get a count for 7, which isn't possible in a die.
To illustrate, I set up 1200 trials of each formula in a worksheet and counted the results. The image here shows the table and a histogram of results:
http://peltiertech.com/WordPress/wp-content/img200808/RandonDieTrials.png
@Jon: thanks for pointing this out. You are absolutely right. INT() is what I should I have used instead of ROUND() as it reduces the possibility of having either 1 or 6 by almost half that of having other numbers.
this is such a good thing to learn, helps me a lot in my future simulations.
Btw, the actual graphs I have shown were plotted based on randbetween() and not from rand()*6, so they still hold good.
Updating the post to include your comments as it helps everyone to know this.
By the way, the distribution is not a Gaussian distribution, as Karl points out. However, when you add the simulations of many dice together (i.e., ten throws), the overall results will approximate a Gaussian distribution. If my feeble memory serves me, this is the Central Limit Theorem.
@Jon, that is right, you have to nearly throw infinite number of dice and add their face counts to get a perfect bell curve or Gaussian distribution, but as the central limit theorem suggests, our curve should roughly look like a bell curve... 🙂
[...] posts on games & excel that you may enjoy: Simulating Dice throws in Excel Generate and Print Bingo / Housie tickets using this excel Understanding Monopoly Board [...]
[...] Correct way to simulate dice throws in excel [...]
[...] Simulate dice throws in excel [...]
I'm afraid to say that this is a badly stated and ambiguous post, which is likely to cause errors and misunderstanding.
Aside from the initial use of round() instead of int(),.. (you've since corrected), you made several crucial mistakes by not accurately and unambiguously stating the details.
Firstly, you said:
"this little function generates a random fraction between 0 and 1"
Correctly stated this should be:
"this little function generates a random fraction F where 0 <= F < 1".
Secondly, I guess because you were a little fuzzy about the exact range of values returned by rand(), you have then been just as ambiguous in stating:
"I usually write int(rand()*12)+1 if I need a random number between 0 to 12".
(that implies 13 integers, not 12)
Your formula, does not return 13 integers between 0 to 12.
It returns 12 integers between 1 and 12 (inclusive).
-- As rand() returns a random fraction F where 0 <= F < 1, you can obviously can only get integers between 1 and 12 (inclusive) from your formula as stated above, but clearly not zero.
If you had said either:
"I usually write int(rand()*12) if I need a random number between 0 to 11 (inclusive)",
or:
"I usually write int(rand()*12)+1 if I need a random number between 1 to 12 (inclusive)"
then you would have been correct.
Unfortunately, you FAIL! -- repeat 5th grade please!
Your Fifth Grade Maths Teacher
Idk if I'm on the right forum for this or how soon one can reply, but I'm working on a test using Excel and I have a table set up to get all my answers from BUT I need to generate 10,000 answers from this one table. Every time, I try to do this I get 10,000 duplicate answers. I know there has to be some simple command I have left out or not used at all, any help would be extremely helpful! (And I already have the dice figured out lol)
Roll 4Dice with 20Sides (4D20) if the total < 20 add the sum of a rerolled 2D20. What is the average total over 10,000 turns? (Short and sweet)
Like I said when I try to simulate 10,000turns I just get "67" 10,000times -_- help please! 😀
@Justin
This is a good example to use for basic simulation
have a look at the file I have posted at:
https://rapidshare.com/files/1257689536/4_Dice.xlsx
It uses a variable size dice which you set
Has 4 Dice
Throws them 10,000 times
If Total per roll < 20 uses the sum of 2 extra dice Adds up the scores Averages the results You can read more about how it was constructed by reading this post: http://chandoo.org/wp/2010/05/06/data-tables-monte-carlo-simulations-in-excel-a-comprehensive-guide/
Oh derp, i fell for this trap too, thinking i was makeing a good dice roll simulation.. instead of just got an average of everything 😛
Noteably This dice trow simulate page is kinda important, as most roleplay dice games were hard.. i mean, a crit failure or crit hit (rolling double 1's or double 6's) in a a game for example dungeons and dragons, if you dont do the roll each induvidual dice, then theres a higher chance of scoreing a crit hit or a crit failure on attacking..
I've been working on this for awhile. So here's a few issues I've come across and solved.
#1. round() does work, but you add 0.5 as the constant, not 1.
trunc() and int() give you the same distributions as round() when you use the constant 1, so among the three functions they are all equally fair as long as you remember what you're doing when you use one rather than the other. I've proven it with a rough mathematical proof -- I say rough only because I'm not a proper mathematician.
In short, depending on the function (s is the number of sides, and R stands in for RAND() ):
round(f), where f = sR + 0.5
trunc(f), where f = sR + 1
int(f), where f = sR + 1
will all give you the same distribution, meaning that between the three functions they are fair and none favors something more than the others. However...
#2. None of the above gets you around the uneven distribution of possible outcomes of primes not found in the factorization of the base being used (base-10, since we're using decimal; and the prime factorization of 10 is 2 and 5).
With a 10-sided die, where your equation would be
=ROUND(6*RAND()+0.5)
Your distribution of possible values is even across all ten possibilities.
However, if you use the most basic die, a 6-sided die, the distributions favor some rolls over others. Let's assume your random number can only generate down to the thousandths (0.000 ? R ? 0.999). The distribution of possible outcomes of your function are:
1: 167
2: 167
3: 166
4: 167
5: 167
6: 166
So 4 and 6 are always under-represented in the distribution by 1 less than their compatriots. This is true no matter how many decimals you allow, though the distribution gets closer and closer to equal the further towards infinite decimal places you go.
This carries over to all die whose numbers of sides do not factor down to a prime factorization of some exponential values of 2 and 5.
So, then, how can we fix this one, tiny issue in a practical manner that doesn't make our heads hurt or put unnecessary strain on the computer?
Real quick addendum to the above:
Obviously when I put the equation after the example of the 10-sided die, I meant to put a 10*RAND() instead of a 6*RAND(). Oops!
Also, where I have 0.000 ? R ? 0.999, the ?'s are supposed to be less-than-or-equal-to signs but the comments didn't like that. Oh well.
How do you keep adding up the total? I would like to have a cell which keeps adding up the total sum of the two dices, even after a new number is generated in the cells when you refresh or generate new numbers.
So, how do you simulate rolling 12 dice? Do you write int(rand()*6) 12 times?
Is there a simpler way of simulating n dice in Excel?
I've run this code in VBA
Sub generate()
Application.ScreenUpdating = False
Application.Calculation = False
Dim app, i As Long
Set app = Application.WorksheetFunction
For i = 3 To 10002
Cells(i, 3).Value = i - 2
Cells(i, 4).Value = app.RandBetween(2, 12)
Cells(i, 5).Value = app.RandBetween(1, 6) + app.RandBetween(1, 6)
Next
Application.ScreenUpdating = True
Application.Calculation = True
End Sub
But I get the same distribution for both columns 4 and 5
Why ?
@Mohammed
I would expect to get the same distribution as you have effectively used the same function