Is P(A,B|C) = P(A|C) P(B|C), if P(A,B) = P(A)P(B)?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between joint and conditional probabilities, specifically questioning if P(A,B|C) equals P(A|C)P(B|C) when P(A,B) equals P(A)P(B). It is clarified that this is not true through a counterexample involving two independent coin flips, where the probabilities do not align as suggested. The example illustrates that conditioning on event C creates a dependency between A and B, contradicting the initial assumption of independence. The conclusion emphasizes that the introduction of a condition can alter the relationship between the probabilities. Thus, the proposed equality does not hold under the specified conditions.
natski
Messages
262
Reaction score
2
As stated in my subject line, I know that P(A|B) = P(A) and P(B|A) = P(B), i.e. A and B are separable as P(A,B) = P(A) P(B). I strongly suspect that this holds with a conditional added, but I can't find a way to formally prove it... can anyone prove this in a couple of lines via Bayes' rules? This is not a homework question, but part of my research and I can't find the answer anywhere.

Thanks to anyone who can help in advanced!
natski
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, this isn't true. Consider two fair coins flipped independently, let A be the event that the first coin comes up heads, B the event that the second coin comes up heads, and C be the event that at least one of the coins comes up heads. Then P(A) = P(B) = 1/2, P(A,B) = P(A)P(B) = 1/4, but P(A|C) = P(B|C) = 2/3 and P(A,B|C) = 1/3 \neq P(A|C)P(B|C) = 4/9
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
Citan Uzuki said:
No, this isn't true. Consider two fair coins flipped independently, let A be the event that the first coin comes up heads, B the event that the second coin comes up heads, and C be the event that at least one of the coins comes up heads. Then P(A) = P(B) = 1/2, P(A,B) = P(A)P(B) = 1/4, but P(A|C) = P(B|C) = 2/3 and P(A,B|C) = 1/3 \neq P(A|C)P(B|C) = 4/9
Even more obvious is C= exactly one coin is a head. Then the condition C forces a complete dependence between A and B.
 

Thread 'Two interesting number theory tricks'

First trick I learned this one a long time ago and have used it to entertain and amuse young kids. Ask your friend to write down a three-digit number without showing it to you. Then ask him or her to rearrange the digits to form a new three-digit number. After that, write whichever is the larger number above the other number, and then subtract the smaller from the larger, making sure that you don't see any of the numbers. Then ask the young "victim" to tell you any two of the digits of the...
View full post »

Similar threads

High School Why did it suddenly become subtractive? (Example of Bayes’ Theorem)
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
High School How to calculate this conditional probability?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
732
Undergrad Do These Probability Conditions Imply Independence of Events A, B, and C?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Undergrad Ways to put n balls in m boxes such that exactly k boxes are empty?
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
Undergrad How Can Bayes' Formula Help Understand Price Increases with Overseas Expansion?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
High School Are proofs needed for definitions? Conditional probabilities
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Undergrad Optimizing Defective Rates with Bayes' Formula
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
MHB Rules of Inference for Proving p→(p→q)→(p→q)
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Undergrad ##(A/\mathfrak{a})_{\mathfrak{p}/\mathfrak{a}}## and its isomorphism?
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
Understanding the Difference Between P (A, B) and P (B, A)
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K