Binomial Central Limit Theorem

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a probability problem involving a roulette wheel with 38 slots, where participants are tasked with approximating the probability of winning after a series of bets. The subject area includes concepts from probability theory, specifically the binomial distribution and the central limit theorem.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of the central limit theorem to a binomial scenario, questioning how to define "winning" in the context of the problem. There is an exploration of the relationship between wins and losses, and how to express winning conditions mathematically.

Discussion Status

Some participants are beginning to clarify their understanding of the problem and are engaging with the definitions of winning. There is an ongoing examination of the conditions that must be satisfied to determine if one is winning after a certain number of bets.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the ambiguity in the problem statement regarding what constitutes "winning" and are attempting to establish a clear mathematical expression for it. There is also a mention of the need for careful reading of the problem to avoid misinterpretations.

penguinnnnnx5
Messages
36
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Here are the problems:

A roulette wheel has 38 slots, numbered 0, 00, and 1 through 36. If you bet 1 on a specified number, you either
win 35 if the roulette ball lands on that number or lose 1 if it does not. If you continually make such bets, approximate the probability that

a. you are winning after 34 bets;
b. you are winning after 1,000 bets;
c. you are winning after 100,000 bets.

Homework Equations



(X - np) / sqrt(np(1-p))


The Attempt at a Solution



So I've tried to implement the central limit theorem with binomial properties.

n = 1000, p = 1/38, X = 500 based on an example from the lecture slides here and here

However, when I plug everything in, everything is way too high as shown:

(500 - 1000/38) / √(1000/38 * 37 / 38) = 93.57775

Since they are so high, I cannot use this normal distribution table I was provided.

I have no idea how to do these types of problems. If anyone can please kindly explain to me the process, it would be very helpful and I will be very grateful. You don't even have to tell me the answer, or you can only do one of the questions as an example. I just want to know how it's done please.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
penguinnnnnx5 said:

Homework Statement



Here are the problems:

A roulette wheel has 38 slots, numbered 0, 00, and 1 through 36. If you bet 1 on a specified number, you either
win 35 if the roulette ball lands on that number or lose 1 if it does not. If you continually make such bets, approximate the probability that

a. you are winning after 34 bets;
b. you are winning after 1,000 bets;
c. you are winning after 100,000 bets.

Homework Equations



(X - np) / sqrt(np(1-p))


The Attempt at a Solution



So I've tried to implement the central limit theorem with binomial properties.

n = 1000, p = 1/38, X = 500 based on an example from the lecture slides here and here

However, when I plug everything in, everything is way too high as shown:

(500 - 1000/38) / √(1000/38 * 37 / 38) = 93.57775

Since they are so high, I cannot use this normal distribution table I was provided.

I have no idea how to do these types of problems. If anyone can please kindly explain to me the process, it would be very helpful and I will be very grateful. You don't even have to tell me the answer, or you can only do one of the questions as an example. I just want to know how it's done please.

1) You might as well learn the correct terminology now: the central limit theorem applies to general random variables; the name of the result applied to the binomial is the DeMoivre-Laplace limit theorem. It is more powerful than the general central limit theorem, because it can be made to give error estimates, etc.

2) Writing down probability formulas should be your last step, not your first. You need to first figure out what probability you want to calculate; only then should you worry about what formula to use. So the first question you need to answer is: what do you mean by "winning", as in the phrase "winning after 34 bets""? Say in the 34 bets you win W times and lose L = 34 - W times. In terms of W, what do you mean when you say you are winning? (I know what I would mean by that, but I want to know what you mean.) Please deal first with this question; don't write down anything else until you have answered it.
 
Last edited:
In terms of W, what do you mean when you say you are winning?​

To me, it seems that the problem is stating that the player is winning for N amount of times over and over, where N is the number of consecutive bets the player makes.
 
penguinnnnnx5 said:
In terms of W, what do you mean when you say you are winning?​

To me, it seems that the problem is stating that the player is winning for N amount of times over and over, where N is the number of consecutive bets the player makes.

That's so vague as to be meaningless. Ray asked you to give an answer in terms of ##W##. That means an equation or inequality that ##W## must satisfy to be "winning" after 34 (or ##N##) plays.
 
LCKurtz said:
That's so vague as to be meaningless. Ray asked you to give an answer in terms of ##W##. That means an equation or inequality that ##W## must satisfy to be "winning" after 34 (or ##N##) plays.

Oh I didn't read that as closely as I should have... my apologies.

Things are starting to come together now that I've read the problem a few more times. I mistook "Winning after 34 bets" to be "winning consecutively 34 times".

I would say that ##35(W) > 1(N-W)## in order to be winning, where N is the number of times I've placed bets and W is the times I've won. This is because for every win, I receive $35 and for every loss, I lose $1. So I must win enough times to have more money than I've lost.

Am I going in the right direction now?
 
penguinnnnnx5 said:
Oh I didn't read that as closely as I should have... my apologies.

Things are starting to come together now that I've read the problem a few more times. I mistook "Winning after 34 bets" to be "winning consecutively 34 times".

I would say that ##35(W) > 1(N-W)## in order to be winning, where N is the number of times I've placed bets and W is the times I've won. This is because for every win, I receive $35 and for every loss, I lose $1. So I must win enough times to have more money than I've lost.

Am I going in the right direction now?

Right: your net winnings = 35W - (n-W) = 36 W - n, and this should be >=0 (or maybe >=1 if say we want to go home with at least $1 more than we came with). So we either have {36 W >= n} or {36 W >= n+1}, depending on which of the two definitions of "winning" you want to use---myself, I prefer the second one.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K