Deterministic vs. Stochastic Computing
The 2 Mindsets You Can Use
Deterministic vs. Stochastic Computing
We live in an era where our computing tools range from precise calculators to generative AI models that surprise us with unexpected creativity. The underlying difference between these systems lies in whether they are deterministic or stochastic. Understanding how each works—and how humans should work with them—is critical to making the most of today’s computational landscape.
What is Deterministic Computing?
Deterministic computing is the foundation of traditional digital systems:
Definition: The same input always produces the same output.
Examples: Arithmetic (
2+2=4), compilers, relational database queries, etc.Strengths: Predictability, verifiability, correctness and reliability.
Best suited for: Engineering, safety-critical control, reliable or repetitive tasks, formal verification tasks.
Example: If you enter a SQL query to retrieve all transactions from January 1st, you will always get the same set of rows from the database, regardless of how many times you run the query. Similarly, when an aircraft’s autopilot system calculates a control signal, it must be deterministic: the same inputs (altitude, velocity, direction) must always produce the same outputs to ensure safety.
What is Stochastic Computing?
Stochastic computing, especially in the age of generative models like LLMs and diffusion systems, works differently:
Definition: Outputs are sampled from a probability distribution, so the same input can yield different outputs.
Examples: Large Language Models generating diverse completions, diffusion models creating varied images, Monte Carlo simulations.
Strengths: Creativity, variety, approximation of intractable problems.
Best suited for: Language generation, brainstorming, probabilistic forecasting, scientific simulation.
Example: Asking a large language model, “Write me a poem about the sea,” may produce one response emphasizing tranquility and another focusing on storms, even with the same prompt. In scientific computing, Monte Carlo simulations are used to approximate the probability of financial risk scenarios by repeatedly sampling random variables, producing a distribution of possible outcomes rather than one exact number. Stochastic systems provide a range of possibilities rather than a single definitive answer.
How Your Decision-Making Changes
Deterministic computing: Humans act as specifiers and executors. They expect exact answers.
Example: a doctor calculating medication dosage or someone running Dijkstra’s algorithm on a graph, you will always get the same shortest path between two nodes.
Stochastic computing: Humans act as navigators, evaluators, and curators. They interpret varied outputs.
Example: a startup founder prompting an LLM to “draft a startup pitch,” one run might emphasize market opportunity, another might focus on technical innovation, and both could be valid depending on the goal of the pitch.
Example: In aviation, a pilot relies on deterministic navigation software to compute the plane’s exact trajectory. In contrast, a marketing professional might use a stochastic system like an LLM to generate 10 different ad slogans, then select and refine the best one. The former requires precision; the latter thrives on diversity.
Keep this in Mind with Stochastic Computing
Stochastic outputs are hypotheses, not ground truths. Example: An LLM may produce a convincing but incorrect historical date.
Biases in training data will surface. Example: If biased hiring data is used, a generative model for resumes may reflect those biases in its suggestions.
Repeatability requires controlling randomness (e.g., setting seeds). Example: In scientific simulations, fixing the random seed ensures reproducibility of results.
Human oversight is essential. Example: A stochastic model drafting a legal contract may miss critical clauses; a lawyer must validate them.
Evaluation requires judgment, not blind trust. Example: When multiple design variations are generated by a diffusion model, a human designer must choose which fits the client brief.
A Practical Framework for Choosing
Define the task type: Need exactness? Use deterministic. Need exploration? Use stochastic.
Example: Payroll processing (deterministic) vs. brainstorming marketing copy (stochastic).
Assess stakes: High stakes (aviation, medicine) demand determinism. Low stakes (drafting, ideation) allow stochastic.
Example: Radiation dosage calculation for patients must be deterministic, while exploring alternative treatment plans could involve stochastic tools.
Decide human role: Deterministic → specify & verify. Stochastic → guide, filter, curate.
Example: Engineers verify bridge load calculations deterministically; architects use stochastic rendering tools to explore design options.
Integrate: Let deterministic systems verify and execute; let stochastic systems generate and explore.
Example: A journalist drafts an article with an LLM (stochastic) and then fact-checks every claim against datasets and sources (deterministic).
Common Pitfalls
Over-trusting stochastic outputs as fact. Example: Students citing hallucinated references from an LLM.
Expecting repeatability where there is none. Example: A manager asking for the “same creative response” twice and getting different results, despite an identical prompt.
Neglecting oversight in high-stakes use. Example: Letting a stochastic model directly draft financial compliance reports without review.
Confirmation bias in selecting outputs. Example: Choosing only generated results that align with one’s preconceptions.
Treating stochastic models as deterministic tools. Example: Expecting an LLM to always produce consistent, factual summaries of legal cases.
Key Insights
Complementarity is the future: The most useful workflows combine deterministic precision with stochastic creativity. Example: A lawyer uses an LLM to draft multiple contract clauses (stochastic), then selects and validates them against statute databases (deterministic).
Mindset shift is essential: From “truth extraction” to “option evaluation.” Example: Instead of asking for the right answer, ask for many relevant answers.
Education matters: Probabilistic reasoning skills are increasingly necessary. Example: Data journalists interpreting polling results must communicate uncertainty, not just point estimates.
Explainability is harder: Deterministic systems are transparent; stochastic models often are not. Example: Debugging a SQL query is straightforward; explaining why an LLM produced a particular code snippet is not.
Summary
Deterministic computing = predictable, exact, best for correctness.
Stochastic computing = variable, creative, best for exploration.
Humans must adapt roles: from executors (deterministic) to evaluators/curators (stochastic).
Pitfalls include over-trust and misaligned expectations.
Strategic takeaway: deterministic computing is for execution, stochastic computing is for exploration.
I had a fascinating conversation with Paolo Sironi on THE BANKER’S BOOKSHELF exploring decision-making under uncertainty and data-driven value creation:
Thank you
for prompting these reflections based on a conversation we had in the car while you were in Munich.References
Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big?. FAccT 2021.
Bishop, C. M. (2006). Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer.
Doshi-Velez, F., & Kim, B. (2017). Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learning. arXiv:1702.08608.
Gigerenzer, G. (2002). Reckoning with Risk: Learning to Live with Uncertainty. Penguin.
Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y., & Courville, A. (2016). Deep Learning. MIT Press.
Hopcroft, J. E., & Ullman, J. D. (1979). Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation. Addison-Wesley.
Holtzman, A., Buys, J., Du, L., Forbes, M., & Choi, Y. (2020). The Curious Case of Neural Text Degeneration. ICLR 2020.
Jumper, J., et al. (2021). Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature, 596(7873).
Marcus, G., & Davis, E. (2019). Rebooting AI: Building Artificial Intelligence We Can Trust. Pantheon.
Shneiderman, B. (2022). Human-Centered AI. Oxford University Press.
 | A guest post by
|