# Help interpreting question

## Main Question or Discussion Point

Hi,

I've run into a snag trying to read a textbook problem. Here is the original example, it's pretty straightforward. The problem I have is when I get to the exercise and it asks me to place a restriction on this example. This restriction seems to break the independence of two variables and renders all the probabilities in the original example useless to me. For example:

So, ignoring that it's asking for a code update here, I seem to have P(Butler = murderer, Maid = murderer) = 0 and so on. But it appears I can't recalculate P(K) (knife used) since B and M are no longer independent. So I really don't understand how to proceed. This leads me to believe I'm misinterpreting things so I thought I'd ask here. Thanks.

Related Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics News on Phys.org
mfb
Mentor
I don't see why you would need that independence. You have P(B, not M) and P(M, not B) and there are no other cases to consider.

Ok, I had thought since those probabilities had changed, the P(k|B,M) probabilities would also have to change, and without ndependence I wouldn't be able to recalculate. It seems I can set P(K|B=murderer,M=murderer)=0 and reuse the others unchanged, but that still makes me a bit uncomfortable?

pbuk