As human randomness production has come to be more closely studied and used to assess executive functions (especially inhibition), many normative measures for assessing the degree to which a sequence is randomlike have been suggested. However, each of these measures focuses on one feature of randomness, leading researchers to have to use multiple measures. Although algorithmic complexity has been suggested as a means for overcoming this inconvenience, it has never been used, because standard Kolmogorov complexity is inapplicable to short strings (e.g., of length l ≤ 50), due to both computational and theoretical limitations. Here, we describe a novel technique (the coding theorem method) based on the calculation of a universal distribution, which yields an objective and universal measure of algorithmic complexity for short strings that approximates Kolmogorov–Chaitin complexity.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
The tables produced by Zenil and Delahaye are available online at the following URL: www.algorithmicnature.org.
Personal communication, November 6, 2012.
Aksentijevic, A., & Gibson, K. (2012). Complexity equals change. Cognitive Systems Research, 15–16, 1–16.
Barbasz, J., Stettner, Z., Wierzchon, M., Piotrowski, K., & Barbasz, A. (2008). How to estimate randomness in random sequence generation tasks? Polish Psychological Bulletin, 39(1), 42–46.
Becher, V., & Figueira, S. (2002). An example of a computable absolutely normal number. Theoretical Computer Science, 270, 947–958.
Brady, A. (1983). The determination of the value of Rado’s noncomputable function Sigma(k) for four-state Turing machines. Mathematics of Computation, 40(162), 647–665.
Brugger, P., Landis, T., & Regard, M. (1990). A “sheep-goat effect” in repetition avoidance: Extra-sensory perception as an effect of subjective probability? British Journal of Psychology, 81, 455–468.
Calude, C. (2002). Information and randomness. an algorithmic perspective (2nd, revised and extended éd.). Springer-Verlag.
Chaitin, G. (1966). On the length of programs for computing finite binary sequences. Journal of the ACM, 13(4), 547–569.
Champernowne, D. G. (1933). The construction of decimals normal in the scale of ten. Journal of the London Mathematical Society, 8, 254–260.
Chan, K., Hui, C., Chiu, C., Chan, S., & Lam, M. (2011). Random number generation deficit in early schizophrenia. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 112, 91–103.
Chapanis, A. (1995). Human production of “random” numbers. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 81, 1347–1363.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.
Delahaye, J.-P., & Zenil, H. (2007). Randomness and complexity. from Leibnitz to Chaitin. In (p 123-130). World Scientific Publishing.
Delahaye, J.-P., & Zenil, H. (2008). Towards a stable definition of Kolmogorov-Chaitin complexity. (Retrieved from arXiv:0804.3459v3 [cs.IT])
Delahaye, J.-P., & Zenil, H. (2012). Numerical evaluation of the complexity of short strings: A glance into the innermost structure of algorithmic randomness. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 219, 63–77.
Falk, R., & Konold, C. (1997). Making sense of randomness: Implicit encoding as a basis for judgment. Psychological Review, 104(2), 301–318.
Ginsburg, N., & Karpiuk, P. (1994). Random generation: Analysis of the responses. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79, 1059–1067.
Green, D. (1986). Children’s understanding of randomness: Report of a survey of 1600 children aged 7-11 years. In Proceedings of icots 2 (p. 287-291).
Hahn, U., & Warren, P. (2009). Perceptions of randomness: Why three heads are better than four. Psychological Review, 116(2), 454–461.
Heuer, H., Janczyk, M., & Kunde, W. (2010). Random noun generation in younger and older adults. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(3), 465–478.
Kidd, C., Piantadosi, S., & Aslin, R. (2012). The goldilocks effect: Human infants allocate attention to visual sequences that are neither too simple nor too complex. PLoS, 7(1), e36399.
Kolmogorov, A. (1965). Three approaches to the quantitative definition of information. Problems of Information and Transmission, 1(1), 1–7.
Lempel, A., & Ziv, J. (1976). On the complexity of finite sequences. IEEE Transactions in Information Theory, 22(1), 75–81.
Li, M., & Vitányi, P. (2008). An introduction to Kolmogorov complexity and its applications. Springer Verlag.
Loetscher, T., Bockisch, C., & Brugger, P. (2009). Eye position predicts what number you have in mind. Current Biology, 20(6), 264–265.
Loetscher, T., & Brugger, P. (2008). Random number generation in neglect patients reveals enhanced response stereotypy, but no neglect in number space. Neuropsychologia, 47, 276–279.
Martin-Löf, P. (1966). The definition of random sequences. Information and Control, 9, 602–619.
Mittenecker, E. (1958). Die analyse zuflliger reaktionsfolgen [the analysis of “random” action sequences]. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle und Angewandte Psychologie, 5, 45–60.
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to frontal lobe tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 49–100.
Nickerson, R. (2002). The production and perception of randomness. Psychological Review, 109(2), 330–357.
Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1951). La genèse de l’idée de hasard chez l’enfant. Presses Universitaires de France.
Proios, H., Asaridou, S. S., & Brugger, P. (2008). Random number generation in patients with aphasia: A test of executive functions. Acta Neuropsychologica, 6, 157–168.
Radò, T. (1962). On non-computable functions. Bell Sytem Technical Journal, 41(3), 877–884.
Rinehart, N. J., Bradshaw, J. L., Moss, S. A., Brereton, A. V., & Tonge, B. J. (2006). Pseudo-random number generation in children with high-functioning autism and Asperger’s disorder. Autism, 10(1), 70–85.
Schulter, G., Mittenecker, E., & Papousek, I. (2010). A computer program for testing and analyzing random generation behavior in normal and clinical samples: The Mittenecker pointing test. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 333–341.
Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press.
Shen, L., & Radó, T. (1965). Computer studies of turing machine problems. Journal of the ACM, 12(2), 196–212.
Simon, H. A. (1972). Complexity and the representation of patterned sequences of symbols. Psychological Review, 79, 369–382.
Soler-Toscano, F., Zenil, H., Delahaye, J.-P., & Gauvrit, N. (2012). Calculating Kolmogorov complexity from the output frequency distributions of small turing machines. (Retrieved from arXiv:1211.1302v1 [cs.IT])
Solomonoff, R. (1960). A preliminary report on a general theory of inductive inference (Rapport technique). Cambridge: Zator Co.
Stoffers, D., Berendse, H. W., Deijen, J. B., & Wolters, E. C. (2001). Motor perseveration is an early sign of Parkinson’s disease. Neurology, 57, 2111–2113.
Strenge, H., Lesmana, C. B., & Suryani, L. K. (2009). Random number generation in bilingual Balinese and German students: Preliminary findings from an exploratory cross-cultural study. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 109, 61–75.
Taylor, K. I., Salmon, D. P., Monsch, A. U., & Brugger, P. (2005). Semantic and phonemic effects in random word generation: A dissociation between Alzheimer’s and Huntington’s disease patients. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 11(3), 303–310.
Towse, J. N., & Cheshire, A. (2007). Random number generation and working memory. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19(3), 374–394.
Tubau, E., & López-Moliner, J. (2009). Knowing what to respond in the future does not cancel the influence of past events. PLoS ONE, 4(5), e5607.
Turing, A. (1936). On computable numbers, with an application to the entscheidungsproblem. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 2(42), 230–265.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1971). Belief in the Òlaw of small numbers.Ó. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 105–110.
Vandewiele, M., D’Hondt, W., Didillon, W., Iwawaki, S., & Mwamwendat, T. (1986). Number and color preferences in four countries. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 63(2), 945–946.
Zvonkin, A., & Levin, L. (1970). The complexity of finite objects and the algorithmic concepts of information and randomness. UMN = Russian Mathematic Surveys, 25(6), 83–124.
About this article
Cite this article
Gauvrit, N., Zenil, H., Delahaye, JP. et al. Algorithmic complexity for short binary strings applied to psychology: a primer. Behav Res 46, 732–744 (2014). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0416-0
- Algorithmic complexity
- Subjective probability