Counting Distinct Group Combinations

Gridvvk
Messages
54
Reaction score
1
Let's say you have a group of 22 people, which you would like to break into 5 different groups -- 3 groups of 4 and 2 groups of 5. How many distinct ways can you form such groups?

I don't want to double count groups. Let's say I number the people from A - V. The group ABCDE and ACDBE should be considered the same group since they have the same elements.

I imagine the numerator is
[(22 choose 4)(18 choose 4)(14 choose 4)(10 choose 5)(5 choose 5) ]

I'm not sure what to divide by to get rid of counting extras.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Order the 5 bins, and order each position in each bin; there are then clearly 22! permutations. The items in the first 3 bins can be ordered 4! different ways and the items in the last 2 bins can be ordered 5! different ways, so there are a total of 4!4!4!5!5! orderings within bins.

It is not clear whether {ABCD, EFGH, ...} and {EFGH, ABCD, ...} are to be considered the same: if so, you need to reduce further by a factor of 3!2!.
 
Last edited:
Observe that the familiar forumula for combinations ## \frac{n!}{k!(n-k)!} ## is derived in the same way where there are n objects and 2 bins containing k and n-k objects respectively, but when we use this we are not generally interested in the contents of the second bin.
 
Thank you. I wanted combinations not permutations though. So my first term would be [(22 choose 4)(18 choose 4)(14 choose 4)(10 choose 5)(5 choose 5) ]. If I understand correctly, then the inner ordering within the groups is already taken care of by the combination formula (dividing by k!). I did want to consider {ABCD, EFGH, ...} and {EFGH, ABCD, ...} to be the same, so I would divide by a factor of 3! 2! because I have 3 groups of size 4 and 2 groups of size 5. The 3! and 2! term are coming from the number of groups, not the sizes.

So the question:
How many ways to divide group of 22 people into 3 groups of 4 people and 2 groups of 5 people?

has the answer:
[(22 choose 4)(18 choose 4)(14 choose 4)(10 choose 5)(5 choose 5) ] / (3! * 2!) =
470531961900.
 
Gridvvk said:
Thank you. I wanted combinations not permutations though. So my first term would be [(22 choose 4)(18 choose 4)(14 choose 4)(10 choose 5)(5 choose 5) ]. If I understand correctly, then the inner ordering within the groups is already taken care of by the combination formula (dividing by k!). I did want to consider {ABCD, EFGH, ...} and {EFGH, ABCD, ...} to be the same, so I would divide by a factor of 3! 2! because I have 3 groups of size 4 and 2 groups of size 5. The 3! and 2! term are coming from the number of groups, not the sizes.

So the question:
How many ways to divide group of 22 people into 3 groups of 4 people and 2 groups of 5 people?

has the answer:
[(22 choose 4)(18 choose 4)(14 choose 4)(10 choose 5)(5 choose 5) ] / (3! * 2!) =
470531961900.

I have given you combinations, we get the same answer.

Note that a number of terms can be canceled from the expression you gave to arrive at the expression I gave: \frac{22!}{4!18!}.\frac{18!}{4!14!}.\frac{14!}{4!10!}.\frac{10!}{5!5!}.\frac{5!}{5!0!}.\frac{1}{3!2!} = \frac{22!}{4!^35!^2}.\frac{1}{3!2!}
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Right, that eases the computation. Thanks a lot for the help!
 
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