I'm struggling with Bayes' theory. Please consider the following:(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Example 1:

Submarine sinks if one missile hits it. Two ships aim at submarine and fire one missile each. Ship 1 shoots missile X1, ship 2 shoots missile X2.

P(X1 hitting = 0.8)

P(X2 hitting = 0.5)

P(X1 and X2 hitting | submarine seen sinking) = P(submarine seen sinking | X1 and X2 hitting)*P(X1 and X2 hitting)/P(submarine seen sinking)

P(X1 and X2 hitting | submarine seen sinking) = 1*(.4)/(1-.5*.2) = .4/.9 = .444444...

Example 2:

Same as example one except:

P(X1 hitting = 0.5)

P(X2 hitting = 0.5)

Thus,

P(X1 and X2 hitting | submarine seen sinking) = P(submarine seen sinking | X1 and X2 hitting)*P(X1 and X2 hitting)/P(submarine seen sinking)

P(X1 and X2 hitting | submarine seen sinking) = 1*(.25)/(.75) = .3333....

However, some would argue that in example two, P(X1 and X2 hitting | submarine seen sinking) = 0.5 - since you could say we know for sure that 1 hit, thus the probability that the other one hit is still 0.5 (independent events). Who is correct?

The reason I showed the first example, is because I don't see how you could come up with an answer without Bayes' in the first example - you don't know which one hit???

Let me show you another example which I posted in an earlier thread (https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=607946):

Example 3:

2 fair dice. What is the probability of both showing six if I have observed

at least one six.

Thus, the way I did it was:

P(2 6's | observing at least 1 6) = P(observing at least 1 6 | observing 2 6's)*P(2 6's)/P(observing at least 1 6)

P(2 6's | observing at least 1 6) = 1*(1/36)/(1-25/36) = 1/11

However, as the person who replied to my post pointed out, an answer of 1/6 here would appear to be the logical answer - knowing that the first dice came up 6, the probability that the second dice came up 6 is still 1/6 - independent events.

So, as you can see, I really am struggling with Bayes' theory here. Could somebody please help me out of the darkness!

Thanks.

Nick.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Bayes' Theory Confusion

Loading...

Similar Threads - Bayes' Theory Confusion | Date |
---|---|

I Countability of ℚ | Feb 12, 2018 |

I Bayes again - how to interpret in vitro genotoxicity data | Jun 10, 2017 |

Is P(A,B|C) = P(A|C) P(B|C), if P(A,B) = P(A)P(B)? | Feb 12, 2016 |

Understanding conditional probability and Bayes' theorem | Nov 6, 2015 |

Factor analysis versus Baye`s estimates? | May 19, 2015 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**