Go back
Simple gambling problem

Simple gambling problem

Posers and Puzzles

k

Sigulda, Latvia

Joined
30 Aug 06
Moves
4048
Clock
09 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by mtthw
And this, folks, is a good example as to why this conditional probability stuff matters.
Too bad I haven't studied it. I tried to solve the problem logically, but didn't get to any result. Of course I'm not the wisest guy around.

P
Bananarama

False berry

Joined
14 Feb 04
Moves
28719
Clock
09 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by kbaumen
Too bad I haven't studied it. I tried to solve the problem logically, but didn't get to any result. Of course I'm not the wisest guy around.
Hint: think about how many people will get a positive result, and how many results will be false...

e
leperchaun messiah

thru a glass onion

Joined
19 Apr 03
Moves
16870
Clock
09 Apr 08
3 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by kbaumen
I'd like to post a problem also. I know that's not probability and is quite easy, but still I've heard some people answering wrongly.

Consider a bacteria in a sterile glass. Only the bacteria and the glass. Once in a minute, the bacteria reproduces and so the number of bacterias in the glass is doubled then. In an hour, the glass is full. Now two of these ...[text shortened]... kind of bacterias are placed in the glass. How long would it now take to have the glass full?
unless this is a trick question, then the solution is as follows:

after 1 min 2^1 bacteria

after 2 min 2^2 bacteria

after 3 min 2^3 bacteria...

after 60 min 2^60 bacteria

for 2 bacteria

after 1 min 2^2 bacteria

after 2 min 2^3 bacteria

after 3 min 2^4 bacteria...

after 59 min 2^60 bacteria

so the answer is 59 minutes.

m

Joined
07 Sep 05
Moves
35068
Clock
09 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by mtthw
And this, folks, is a good example as to why this conditional probability stuff matters.
Here's another example:

Can a bunch of lawyers and jurors understand a conditional probability question? Get it wrong and an innocent person goes to prison...

http://www.badscience.net/?p=318

k

Sigulda, Latvia

Joined
30 Aug 06
Moves
4048
Clock
09 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by eldragonfly
unless this is a trick question, then the solution is as follows:

after 1 min 2^1 bacteria

after 2 min 2^2 bacteria

after 3 min 2^3 bacteria...

after 60 min 2^60 bacteria

for 2 bacteria

after 1 min 2^2 bacteria

after 2 min 2^3 bacteria

after 3 min 2^4 bacteria...

after 59 min 2^60 bacteria

so the answer is 59 minutes.
Correct.

l

Joined
14 Dec 05
Moves
5694
Clock
10 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by PBE6
Lol. 🙂

OK, one more. The rate of infection from a particular disease is 1 in 1,000,000 in the general population. A hospital wants to administer a test that is 99% accurate (i.e. if 100 people who have the disease get tested, 99 will test "positive" and 1 will test "negative" falsely) and 95% specific (i.e. if 100 who don't have the disease get tested, 95 ...[text shortened]... ts a positive result on the test, what is the chance that they really have the disease?
Less than 1 in 50,000

l

Joined
14 Dec 05
Moves
5694
Clock
10 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by luskin
Less than 1 in 50,000
Assuming this person is randomly chosen.

T

ALG

Joined
16 Dec 07
Moves
6190
Clock
10 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

I think 0,00198%

Green Paladin

Pale Blue Dot

Joined
22 Jul 07
Moves
21637
Clock
10 Apr 08
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

100 in 100 000 000 have the disease. Of the healthy 99 999 900 5% test positive when actually negative (4 999 995). Since the subject has tested positive he/she has to be in one of these two groups.

So the probability of a correct test result is 100 in 4 999 995 or 0.00002%?

T

ALG

Joined
16 Dec 07
Moves
6190
Clock
10 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

no, it is 99 in 5.000.094
cause the test is only 99% accurate

Green Paladin

Pale Blue Dot

Joined
22 Jul 07
Moves
21637
Clock
10 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Thomaster
no, it is 99 in 5.000.094
cause the test is only 99% accurate
Can't we discount that information?

1. We know that 1 in a million have the disease independently of any test.
2. Because our subject tested positive we know that he is not in the 1% that test negative when actually positive.

According to the information provided, if the 100 in 100 million that have the disease are tested one will show a negative result. This doesn't impact on our subject though as he/she tested positive.

T

ALG

Joined
16 Dec 07
Moves
6190
Clock
10 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

The question is:
Given that a person gets a positive result on the test, what is the chance that they really have the disease?

Green Paladin

Pale Blue Dot

Joined
22 Jul 07
Moves
21637
Clock
10 Apr 08
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Green Paladin
100 in 100 000 000 have the disease. Of the healthy 99 999 900 5% test positive when actually negative (4 999 995). Since the subject has tested positive he/she has to be in one of these two groups.

So the probability of a correct test result is 100 in 4 999 995 or 0.00002%?
Yes, I think I missed a step in the logic.

Because the subject tested positive he/she must be one of the 99 out of the 100 out of the 100 million (or more likely the group of 4 999 995). He/she cannot be one of the hundred because one of them tested negative which we know is not the case with our subject.

So the probability of a correct test result is 99 in 4 999 995 (1 in 50505) or 0.0000198% ?

T

ALG

Joined
16 Dec 07
Moves
6190
Clock
10 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Green Paladin
Yes, I think I missed a step in the logic.

Because the subject tested positive he/she must be one of the 99 out of the 100 out of the 100 million (or more likely the group of 4 999 995). He/she cannot be one of the hundred because one of them tested negative which we know is not the case with our subject.

So the probability of a correct test result is 99 in 4 999 995 or 0.0000198%?
It is 99 in 5.000.094
99/5.000.094x100=0,001979962777%
This seems to be a useless test

m

Joined
07 Sep 05
Moves
35068
Clock
10 Apr 08
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Green Paladin
So the probability of a correct test result is 99 in 4 999 995 (1 in 50505) or 0.0000198% ?
1 in 50506. You must be missing one small step.

Remember the sample space is all those that would test positive. So it would be:

99/(99 + 4999995)

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.