MHB Actual vs Expected Number of Lottery Winners

  • Thread starter Thread starter fizzypig
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    lottery
fizzypig
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi,

My maths problem involves probability relating to lotteries.

The odds of winning a lottery jackpot are 1 in 14 million. Over a period of time 50 million tickets have been bought, so the expected number of jackpot winners would be 3.5. However the actual number of jackpot winners is 7.

Is it possible to calculate a p value to prove that although the actual number of winners is higher than expected, it is still within normal expected ranges? Or are there any other statistical models that would answer the question?

I've seen worked examples for calculating the p value where all the outcomes are listed in excel, before applying the T test formula, however I'm not sure how to go about doing this when there are 50 million outcomes!

Thanks,

Paul
 
Physics news on Phys.org
fizzypig said:
Hi,

My maths problem involves probability relating to lotteries.

The odds of winning a lottery jackpot are 1 in 14 million. Over a period of time 50 million tickets have been bought, so the expected number of jackpot winners would be 3.5. However the actual number of jackpot winners is 7.

Is it possible to calculate a p value to prove that although the actual number of winners is higher than expected, it is still within normal expected ranges? Or are there any other statistical models that would answer the question?

I've seen worked examples for calculating the p value where all the outcomes are listed in excel, before applying the T test formula, however I'm not sure how to go about doing this when there are 50 million outcomes!

Thanks,

Paul

Hi Paul, welcome to MHB!

We are talking about a proportion here, in which case we don't do a t-test but a z-test.
See for instance the One-proportion z-test in this wiki article.
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top