Inclusion-Exclusion Principle (Probability) - Bonferroni inequalities

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the inclusion-exclusion principle in probability, specifically focusing on proving upper and lower bounds as presented in Sheldon Ross's textbook. Participants are examining specific equations related to this principle and seeking clarification on certain terms and concepts mentioned in the text.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the meaning of "fixing i" as mentioned in the textbook and its relevance to the problem. There is also inquiry into the derivation of a specific probability inequality and the considerations involved in understanding terms like P(E_{i}E_{j}E_{i}E_{k}).

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the definitions of events and how to apply the probability inequalities, while others are still seeking clarity on the underlying assumptions and the implications of the equations presented. The conversation reflects an ongoing exploration of the topic without a clear consensus yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that different editions of the textbook may present varying content, which could affect their understanding of the material. There is also mention of difficulties in accessing attachments that contain relevant information.

icystrike
Messages
444
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Hi PF! I am studying from a book - A first course in probability by Sheldon Ross, and I have came across this section whereby the are trying to prove the upper bound (equations 4.1 and 4.3) and lower bound (equation 4.2) of the inclusion-exclusion principle from basic probability. The section has been attached below:

However, I have not clearly understood two parts that have been stated in the attachment. The two parts are stated below;

1) They have mentioned "fixing i " twice in the book, and what do they mean by that? I don't see the need for me to fix any "variable".

2) How can they simply get P(U_{j<i} E_{i}E_{j}) \geq \sum_{j<i}P(E_{i}E_{j}) - \sum_{k<j<i} P(E_{i}E_{j}E_{i}E_{k}) from (4.2)? What are the considerations that have to be made? My concern is towards the P(E_{i}E_{j}E_{i}E_{k}) of the equation.

Thanks in advanced :)
 

Attachments

  • photo (1).jpg
    photo (1).jpg
    39.2 KB · Views: 636
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
icystrike said:

Homework Statement



Hi PF! I am studying from a book - A first course in probability by Sheldon Ross, and I have came across this section whereby the are trying to prove the upper bound (equations 4.1 and 4.3) and lower bound (equation 4.2) of the inclusion-exclusion principle from basic probability. The section has been attached below:


However, I have not clearly understood two parts that have been stated in the attachment. The two parts are stated below;

1) They have mentioned "fixing i " twice in the book, and what do they mean by that? I don't see the need for me to fix any "variable".

2) How can they simply get P(U_{j<i} E_{i}E_{j}) \geq \sum_{j<i}P(E_{i}E_{j}) - \sum_{k<j<i} P(E_{i}E_{j}E_{i}E_{k}) from (4.2)? What are the considerations that have to be made? My concern is towards the P(E_{i}E_{j}E_{i}E_{k}) of the equation.

Thanks in advanced :)

There are numerous editions of Ross' books, and different editions have different numbers of chapters, sections, etc. I have two of his books remaining (after retiring and downsizing) but cannot find the information you speak of in either book. Please just write out here the actual material that is causing you problems.
 
Hi Ray!

Thank you for your reply. I have actually attached the cited material as attachment in my previous post. Please let me know if you are able to access the "jpeg" file.

With regards
 
icystrike said:
Hi Ray!

Thank you for your reply. I have actually attached the cited material as attachment in my previous post. Please let me know if you are able to access the "jpeg" file.

With regards

In my browser the attachments do not appear; are you sure you followed PF instructions about including attachements?
 
My apologies, I have updated the link again. Please refer to the first post again :)
 
icystrike said:

Homework Statement



Hi PF! I am studying from a book - A first course in probability by Sheldon Ross, and I have came across this section whereby the are trying to prove the upper bound (equations 4.1 and 4.3) and lower bound (equation 4.2) of the inclusion-exclusion principle from basic probability. The section has been attached below:

However, I have not clearly understood two parts that have been stated in the attachment. The two parts are stated below;

1) They have mentioned "fixing i " twice in the book, and what do they mean by that? I don't see the need for me to fix any "variable".

2) How can they simply get P(U_{j<i} E_{i}E_{j}) \geq \sum_{j<i}P(E_{i}E_{j}) - \sum_{k<j<i} P(E_{i}E_{j}E_{i}E_{k}) from (4.2)? What are the considerations that have to be made? My concern is towards the P(E_{i}E_{j}E_{i}E_{k}) of the equation.

Thanks in advanced :)

For (2): say we have ##E_1E_2 \cup E_1E_3 \cup E_2E_3.## Let ##A_1 = E_1E_2,\, A_2 = E_1 E_3,\, A_3 = E_2 E_3.## Now apply the inequality P(A_1 \cup A_2 \cup A_3) \geq \sum_l P(A_l) - \sum_{l < m} P(A_l A_m).
 
Thanks Ray!

Do you mean that I can define A_{i}=E_{i}E_{j} such that j<i and likewise, A_{j}=E_{j}E_{k} such that k<j.

Hence, P(\bigcup_{i=1}^{n} A_{i}) \geq \sum_{i=1}^{n} P(A_{i}) - \sum_{j<i} P(A_{i}A_{j})

P(\bigcup_{j<i}^{n} E_{i}E_{j}) \geq \sum_{j<i} P(E_{i}E_{j}) - \sum_{k<j<i} P(E_{i}E_{j}E_{j}E_{k})

P(\bigcup_{j<i}^{n} E_{i}E_{j}) \geq \sum_{j<i} P(E_{i}E_{j}) - \sum_{k<j<i} P(E_{i}E_{j}E_{k})
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K