MHB Conditional Probability - Faulty Plumbing

newguy2
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
This question has been driving me crazy.

A large industrial firm uses three local motels to provide overnight accommodations for its clients.
From past experience it is known that 20% of the clients are assigned rooms at the Ramada Inn, 50% at the Sheraton and 30% at Lakeview. What is the probability that:

P(R) = 'Probability of being assigned to Ramada' = 20% = .20
P(S) = 'Probability of being assigned to Sheraton' = 50% = .50
P(L) = 'Probability of being assigned to Lakeview' = 30% = .30

P(F) = 'The probability of faulty plumbing' = ?

P(F | R) = 'Given room is at Ramada, prob. of faulty plumbing' = 5% = .05
P(F | S) = 'Given room is at Sheraton ...' = 4% = .04
P(F | L) = 'Given room is at Lakeview ...' = 8% = .08

Right?
So...:

A) What is the probability that a client will be assigned a room with faulty plumbing?

P(F) = P(R)P(F|R) + P(S)P(F|S) + P(L)P(F|L) = .20*.05 + .50*.04 + .30*.08 = 5.4% = .054
This makes sense...ok..
But...

B) What is the probability that a person with a room having faulty plumbing was assigned accommodations at Lakeview?

P(L | F) is what we are looking for, yes?
P(L | F) = 'Prob. of being assigned to LakeView, given room has faulty plumbing"
Right?

P(L | F) = P(L n F) / P(F) = P(F | L) P(F) / P(F) = P(F | L)...? This answer is not correct... how come?

P(L | F) = P(L n F) / P(F) = P(L) P(F) / P(F) = P(L)...? This answer is also not correct...

P(L | P(F|L)) = P(L n [F | L]) / P(F | L) = P(L)P(F | L) / P(F | L) = P(L) Still incorrect answer...

But this works...?

P(L | F) = P(L) P(F | L) / P(F) = correct answer?Please clarify all this for me.. What is happening.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hello, and welcome to MHB! (Wave)

I've moved your post into its own thread...this way the discussion will be all about your question only, and you'll be more likely to get help too. :)
 
P(L | F) = P(L n F) / P(F)

P(F | L) = P(F n L) / P(L)P(L n F) = P(L | F) P(F)
P(F n L) = P(F | L) P(L)

P(L n F) = P(F n L)

P(L n F) = P(F | L) P(L)
P(F n L) = P(L | F) P(F)

newguy said:
P(L | F) = P(L n F) / P(F) = P(F | L) P(F) / P(F) = P(F | L)...? This answer is not correct... how come?
Because P(L n F) != P(F | L) P(F)
it is P(L n F) = P(F | L) P(L)
or... P(L n F) = P(L | F) P(F)

newguy said:
P(L | F) = P(L n F) / P(F) = P(L) P(F) / P(F) = P(L)...? This answer is also not correct...
Because P(L n F) != P(L) P(F), ? How come? Independence thing?
so P(L n F) = P(L) + P(F) - P(L u F) ??

newguy said:
P(L | P(F|L)) = P(L n [F | L]) / P(F | L) = P(L)P(F | L) / P(F | L) = P(L) Still incorrect answer...
I get this is probably not even valid, this was just experimenting trying to see it gave the correct answer

newguy said:
But this works...?
P(L | F) = P(L) P(F | L) / P(F) = correct answer?
Please clarify all this for me.. What is happening.
I under stand why this works now anyways, because:
P(L n F) = P(F | L) P(L) = P(L) P(F | L)
 
newguy said:
This question has been driving me crazy.

A large industrial firm uses three local motels to provide overnight accommodations for its clients.
From past experience it is known that 20% of the clients are assigned rooms at the Ramada Inn, 50% at the Sheraton and 30% at Lakeview. What is the probability that:

P(R) = 'Probability of being assigned to Ramada' = 20% = .20
P(S) = 'Probability of being assigned to Sheraton' = 50% = .50
P(L) = 'Probability of being assigned to Lakeview' = 30% = .30

P(F) = 'The probability of faulty plumbing' = ?

P(F | R) = 'Given room is at Ramada, prob. of faulty plumbing' = 5% = .05
P(F | S) = 'Given room is at Sheraton ...' = 4% = .04
P(F | L) = 'Given room is at Lakeview ...' = 8% = .08

Right?
So...:

A) What is the probability that a client will be assigned a room with faulty plumbing?r

P(F) = P(R)P(F|R) + P(S)P(F|S) + P(L)P(F|L) = .20*.05 + .50*.04 + .30*.08 = 5.4% = .054
This makes sense...ok..
But...
Imagine 1000 clients. 20% of them, 200, are assigned to Ramada, 50% of them, 500, are assigned to Sheraton, and 30%, 300, are assigned to Lakeview.

Of the 200 assigned to Ramada, 5%, 10, have faulty plumbing. Of the 500 assigned to Sheraton, 4%, 20, have faulty plumbing. Of the 300 assigned to Lakeview, 8%, 24, have faulty plumbing. That is a total of 10+ 20+ 24= 54 or 54/1000= 0.054, 5.4% of the clients, have faulty plumbing.

B) What is the probability that a person with a room having faulty plumbing was assigned accommodations at Lakeview?
Of the 54 people who had faulty plumbing, 24, so 24/54= 0.4444 or 44.44%, were assigned to Lakeview.

P(L | F) is what we are looking for, yes?
P(L | F) = 'Prob. of being assigned to LakeView, given room has faulty plumbing"
Right?
Yes, that is correct.

P(L | F) = P(L n F) / P(F) = P(F | L) P(F) / P(F) = P(F | L)...? This answer is not correct... how come?

P(L | F) = P(L n F) / P(F) = P(L) P(F) / P(F) = P(L)...? This answer is also not correct...

P(L | P(F|L)) = P(L n [F | L]) / P(F | L) = P(L)P(F | L) / P(F | L) = P(L) Still incorrect answer...

But this works...?

P(L | F) = P(L) P(F | L) / P(F) = correct answer?Please clarify all this for me.. What is happening.
You seem to be assuming. when you write, for example, "P(L n F)= P(L)P(F)", that "faulty plumbing" is independent of which motel a client is assigned to- and that is clearly not true.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top