MHB Probability of 3 people ending up on same team?

  • Thread starter Thread starter steve212
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Probability
AI Thread Summary
The probability of all three women ending up on the same team when forming two teams of ten from twenty people is calculated using combinatorial methods. The correct probability is determined to be 4/19, which accounts for scenarios where either team has all three women or none. When the team size increases, maintaining the same ratio of women to men, the probability approaches 0.25. This trend suggests a rule in probability that applies to larger groups, leading to similar outcomes. Overall, the discussion emphasizes the importance of combinatorial calculations in determining probabilities in team formations.
steve212
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
There are 20 people and we are forming 2 teams of 10 people. 3 of the people (3/20) are women, 17 (17/20) are men. Names are drawn from random, in alternating order for teams. What is the probability that all 3 women end up on the same team?

Initially I thought it was 25%. 100% probability for 1st woman and 50% for each of remaining 2, so .5*.5 = .25

Then I thought it was 17 choose 10 / 20 choose 10 = 0.105
or possibility 2*0.105 (accounting for 0 women on same team as equal probability)

any help!?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I think your second method is correct. Suppose we call the teams $X$ and $Y$...and now we need only look at one team, so let's look at team $X$. If there are to be 3 women on the same team, which we'll call event $A$, then that will happen if team $X$ gets zero women (in which case team $Y$ has three women) OR if team $X$ gets three women. So, I would state:

$$P(A)=\frac{{17 \choose 10}{3 \choose 0}}{{20 \choose 10}}+\frac{{17 \choose 7}{3 \choose 3}}{{20 \choose 10}}=\frac{4}{19}$$
 
Thanks! If I change the size of the team to 1000 (keeping the ratio of W:M the same) the result is 0.245 - very close to the 0.25 I also thought - is there a rule that explains why this is for large numbers?

MarkFL said:
I think your second method is correct. Suppose we call the teams $X$ and $Y$...and now we need only look at one team, so let's look at team $X$. If there are to be 3 women on the same team, which we'll call event $A$, then that will happen if team $X$ gets zero women (in which case team $Y$ has three women) OR if team $X$ gets three women. So, I would state:

$$P(A)=\frac{{17 \choose 10}{3 \choose 0}}{{20 \choose 10}}+\frac{{17 \choose 7}{3 \choose 3}}{{20 \choose 10}}=\frac{4}{19}$$
 
steve212 said:
Thanks! If I change the size of the team to 1000 (keeping the ratio of W:M the same) the result is 0.245 - very close to the 0.25 I also thought - is there a rule that explains why this is for large numbers?

If we have 2000 people, 300 of which are women, then the probability that all 300 women will be on the same team is given by:

$$P(A)=\frac{{1700 \choose 1000}{300 \choose 0}}{{2000 \choose 1000}}+\frac{{1700 \choose 700}{300 \choose 300}}{{2000 \choose 1000}}\approx 3.00417429967\,\times\,10^{-102}$$
 
MarkFL said:
I think your second method is correct.

I concur.

$$P(A)=2\cdot\frac{10\choose3}{20\choose3}=\frac{4}{19}$$

This method also gives the same result for your second example.
 
Sorry that wasn't exactly clear - I meant 2000 people of which 3 are women and 1997 are men, p~=0.25
MarkFL said:
If we have 2000 people, 300 of which are women, then the probability that all 300 women will be on the same team is given by:

$$P(A)=\frac{{1700 \choose 1000}{300 \choose 0}}{{2000 \choose 1000}}+\frac{{1700 \choose 700}{300 \choose 300}}{{2000 \choose 1000}}\approx 3.00417429967\,\times\,10^{-102}$$
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top