A game of roulette and generating functions

  • Thread starter Thread starter psie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Probability theory
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the application of generating functions to model losses in a roulette game, specifically analyzing bets on number 13 and the outcomes related to number 36. The geometric distribution is utilized to represent the number of bets, with the probability generating function (pgf) for losses derived as $$g_X(t)=g_N(g_Y(t))$$. The participants explore the complexities of calculating the overall loss, ultimately concluding that the pgf for the overall loss is $$g_N(t\cdot g_X(t))$$, where ##X=Y_1+\ldots+Y_N## represents the total losses from the bets.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of probability generating functions (pgf)
  • Familiarity with geometric distributions and their properties
  • Basic knowledge of random variables and their expectations
  • Experience with mathematical modeling in gambling scenarios
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of geometric distributions in depth
  • Learn about advanced applications of probability generating functions
  • Explore the relationship between independent random variables and their generating functions
  • Investigate mathematical modeling techniques in gambling and risk assessment
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, statisticians, and data analysts interested in probability theory, as well as game theorists and gambling enthusiasts looking to understand the mathematical foundations of betting strategies.

psie
Messages
315
Reaction score
40
Homework Statement
Consider a game of roulette and Charlie who bets one dollar until number ##13## appears, with the roulette wheel having numbers ##0,\ldots,36##. Then he bets one dollar the same number of times on number ##36##. Find the generating function of his loss in the second round. Try also finding the generating function for his overall loss.
Relevant Equations
The probability generating function (pgf) of a sum ##S_N## of random number ##N## of i.i.d. random variables ##X_1,X_2,\ldots## is ##g_{S_N}(t)=g_N(g_X(t))##.
Here's my attempt. So, let ##N\in \text{Fs}(1/37)## be the number of bets on number ##13## (here ##\text{Fs}(1/37)## is the geometric distribution that models the first success), and let ##Y_1,Y_2,\ldots## be the losses in the bets on number ##36##. Thus $$Y_k=\begin{cases} 1,&\text{if number 36 does not appear}\\ -35&(\text{i.e.} -36+1)\quad\text{otherwise}\end{cases},$$and ##Y_1,Y_2,\ldots## are independent with ##P(Y_k=1)=36/37## and ##P(Y_k=-35)=1/37## (note that a negative loss is a gain).

So Charlie's loss in the second round equals ##X=Y_1+\ldots +Y_N##. We know the generating function of ##X## is ##g_X(t)=g_N(g_Y(t))##. Computing the generating function of the geometric distribution is straightforward; it is ##\frac{tp}{1-(1-p)t}## where ##p=1/37##. But what is the generating function of ##Y##?

I have not yet been able to think about the total loss part of the problem.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maybe I didn't do it right. As before, let ##N\in\text{Ge}(p)##, with pdf ##f(n)=(1-p)^{n-1}p## for ##n\geq 1## and ##p=1/37##, be the number of bets on ##13##. If $$Y_k=\begin{cases} 1,&\text{if number 36 does not appear}\\ 0&\text{otherwise}\end{cases},$$ then ##P(Y_k=1)=1-p## and ##P(Y_k=0)=p##. Then the total loss in the second round is ##X=Y_1+\ldots +Y_N##. Applying the formula for ##g_X(t)=g_N(g_Y(t))##, with $$g_N(t)=\frac{tp}{1-(1-p)t},\quad g_Y(t)=p+(1-p)t,$$we have that the pgf of his loss in the second round is $$g_N(g_X (t)) = \frac{p(p + (1-p)t)}{1-(1-p)(p + (1-p)t)}.$$ I am unsure about the pgf for his overall loss though and would be really grateful for some help. I am not sure what the random variable is that describes his overall loss.
 
My educated guess is that the overall loss is ##X+N##. What complicates things is that I don't think they are independent. In what follows, it'll be clearer if we write ##X=S_N##. The pgf is (I think) $$Et^{S_N+N}=E\left(E\left(t^{S_N+N}\mid N\right)\right).$$ Now, ##E\left(t^{S_N+N}\mid N\right)## is the r.v. ##h(N)##, where $$\begin{align*}h(n)&=E\left(t^{S_N+N}\mid N=n\right) \\ &=E\left(t^{S_n+n}\mid N=n\right) \\ &=E\left(t^{S_n+n}\right) \\ &=t^nEt^{S_n} \\ &=t^n (Et^X)^n \\ &=t^n(g_X(t))^n.\end{align*}$$ So the pgf of the overall loss, i.e. of ##X+N##, is $$Eh(N)=E(t\cdot g_X(t))^N=g_N(t\cdot g_X(t)).$$ The formula at least makes sense if we write ##S_N+N = \sum_{n=1}^N (X_n+1)##.
 
I realize I abused the notation here in #3 compared to #2. So the pgf of ##X+N##, where ##X=Y_1+\ldots+Y_N##, is $$g_N(t\cdot g_Y(t)),$$ and not ##g_N(t\cdot g_{S_N}(t))##. Sorry.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K