[Advanced] Probability of Union[n-elements]

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving a general formula for the probability of the union of n elements, building upon the known formula for two mutually non-exclusive events. Participants suggest starting with specific cases for three, four, five, and six sets to identify a pattern before generalizing. The importance of using mathematical induction to prove the derived formula is emphasized, although the initial approach is not considered bulletproof. The conversation also touches on the challenges of expressing the formula in LaTeX, particularly regarding intersections. Ultimately, the goal is to find a systematic way to express the union of multiple sets and confirm the findings through induction.
Bassalisk
Messages
946
Reaction score
2
Hello,

We are all familiar with the formula that relates union of 2 mutually NOT exclusive events formula:

P(A\cup B)=P(A)+P(B)-P(A\cap B)

For 3 sets its easily derived using this formula.

But I wanted to take this step further. I wanted to find a general formula, that represents union of n elements.

I don't know how to write that In LaTex.

If anybody knows the answer, please don't tell me. Tell me some guidelines to solution. I have tried, but I get stuck with recursive sums, and I can't get out of them.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Think of expressing a union of n elements as a union of a smaller number of elements,and then use the answer you already know, by using parentheses. I am trying to not be neither too obscure nor tell you the answer.
 
Bacle said:
Think of expressing a union of n elements as a union of a smaller number of elements,and then use the answer you already know, by using parentheses. I am trying to not be neither too obscure nor tell you the answer.

You mean like, doing for 3 4 5 and maybe 6 sets this union, then get my answer from that?

Is that mathematically bulletproof?
 
Bassalisk said:
You mean like, doing for 3 4 5 and maybe 6 sets this union, then get my answer from that?

Is that mathematically bulletproof?

It's certainly not bulletproof, but it's a nice start. Start by finding it for 3,4,5 and 6 and see if you can generalize it. Once you've found a candidate for a general solution, then you can apply induction to prove it.
 
micromass said:
It's certainly not bulletproof, but it's a nice start. Start by finding it for 3,4,5 and 6 and see if you can generalize it. Once you've found a candidate for a general solution, then you can apply induction to prove it.

Fun! On it
 
Here is what I got so far:

P(A\cup B\cup C)=P(A)+P(B)+P(C)-P(A\cap B)-P(A\cap C)-P(B\cap C)+P(A\cap B\cap C)

Assuming that:

P((A\cap B\cap C)\cup D)=P((A\cap D)\cup (B\cap D)\cup (C\cap D)

then:

P(A\cup B\cup C\cup D)=P(A)+P(B)+P(C)+P(D)-P(A\cap B)-P(A\cap C)-P(A\cap D)-P(B\cap C)-P(B\cap D)-P(C\cap D)<br /> +P(A\cap B\cap C)+P(A\cap C\cap D)+P(B\cap C\cap D)-P(A\cap B\cap C\cap D)Ok, I see a sum here \sum_{i=1}^{n} P(A_{i})

I also see that each set is intersected with every other set. I don't know exactly how to write that.

At least not in LaTex. I am thinking:

\bigcap_{i,j=1}^{n} A_{i},A_{j} i\neq j [idea]

I get stuck at those 3 intersections and 4.
 
Now, try to see if you can detect a pattern and try induction. If you want, I can give you the (an) answer with a spoiler warning, for when you're done' let me know.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
781
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K