Is there a Development of "Average Algebra"?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter WWGD
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algebra
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of adding fractions using the rule a/b + c/d = (a+c)/(b+d), particularly in contexts like academic grading and sports statistics. Participants explore the implications of this method, noting that it diverges from traditional arithmetic and introduces potential contradictions. The mediant of two rational numbers is identified as a related concept, highlighting its non-monotonic nature and connection to Simpson's paradox. The conversation also touches on the importance of maintaining information integrity when simplifying ratios.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic fraction operations
  • Familiarity with the concept of mediants in rational numbers
  • Knowledge of Simpson's paradox in statistics
  • Awareness of arithmetic mean and its applications in various contexts
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties and applications of mediants in mathematics
  • Study Simpson's paradox and its implications in statistical analysis
  • Explore alternative arithmetic systems and their definitions
  • Investigate the use of non-standard operations in grading and sports statistics
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, educators, statisticians, and anyone interested in exploring alternative arithmetic operations and their applications in real-world scenarios.

WWGD
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
7,778
Reaction score
13,019
Hi All, wondering if this below has been developed already:
There is a context in which adding fractions by the rule : a/b + c/d = (a+c)/(b+d) : say we are considering

the grade in a course where a lot of exams are administered, and the total is considered over, say 1000. Then, if we get 90/100 in one quiz and 47/50 , the total average so far is given by (90+47)/(100+50) , not the standard way of adding fractions. Just curious if there is some known structure in Mathematics using this as an operation.
Thanks.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Given this rule we get a/b + a/b = (a+a)/(b+b) = 2a/2b = a/b which isn't possible for a ≠ 0. One has to build a whole new arithmetic and I doubt that this can be done without contradictions.
 
fresh_42 said:
Given this rule we get a/b + a/b = (a+a)/(b+b) = 2a/2b = a/b which isn't possible for a ≠ 0. One has to build a whole new arithmetic and I doubt that this can be done without contradictions.
But you don't necessarily simplify by common factors here, because you lose information. This property would tell you that the average of two of the same ratio is the ratio. If you have 15/20 in an exam, this is not quite the same as 3/4. So we could define a/b -c/d as (a-b)/(c-d). But yes, this simplification issue needs to be addressed.

Interestingly, I think 0 here would be 0/0 : 0 successes in 0 trials means that the success ratio has not changed. Then 0/0 makes sense in this context, but a/0 for a>0 does not. I don't have the whole thing figured out yet, clearly.
 
WWGD said:
But you don't necessarily simplify by common factors here, because you lose information. This property would tell you that the average of two of the same ratio is the ratio.
But this is essentially what the ordinary arithmetic mean does: ## \frac{\frac{a}{b} + \frac{a}{b}}{2} = \frac{a}{b}##

One certainly has to begin at the start: which elements are considered, which operations with which rules are allowed. I think a neutral notation like a circle instead of the plus sign would help to distinguish between known operations in ℚ and the new one, for otherwise there will be too much confusion. E.g. algebras are defined in every thinkable way. I have to look it up but in genetics they use some funny algebras, multiplication rules, resp. These might come close to your rule.

(I once met some analysts who (seriously) wanted to apply your rule on their index calculations based on market capitalization.)
 
Numberphile has actually made a video on this

 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: WWGD
WWGD said:
Hi All, wondering if this below has been developed already:
There is a context in which adding fractions by the rule : a/b + c/d = (a+c)/(b+d) : say we are considering

the grade in a course where a lot of exams are administered, and the total is considered over, say 1000. Then, if we get 90/100 in one quiz and 47/50 , the total average so far is given by (90+47)/(100+50) , not the standard way of adding fractions. Just curious if there is some known structure in Mathematics using this as an operation.
Thanks.
Another context is "baseball arithmetic." A player who has 3 hits for 5 times at bat in one game has a batting average for that game of 3/5 (normally presented as .600). If he gets 1 hit out of 4 "at bats" in the next game (1/4 or .250), his average for the two games is 4/9 (= .444), calculated as ##\frac{3 + 1}{5 + 4}##.
 
WWGD said:
Just curious if there is some known structure in Mathematics using this as an operation.
Thanks.

It's called the mediant of two rational numbers. But it is not monotonic leading to the Simpson[/PLAIN] paradox: we can find ##\frac{a}{b} < \frac{A}{B}## and ##\frac{c}{d} < \frac{C}{D}## but ##\frac{a+c}{b+d} > \frac{A+C}{B+D}##.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mark44 said:
Another context is "baseball arithmetic." A player who has 3 hits for 5 times at bat in one game has a batting average for that game of 3/5 (normally presented as .600). If he gets 1 hit out of 4 "at bats" in the next game (1/4 or .250), his average for the two games is 4/9 (= .444), calculated as ##\frac{3 + 1}{5 + 4}##.
Yes, thank you, I was thinking scoring % in basketball, but same thing here. In some sense, 20/30 would simplify to 2/3, but not always, not necessarily: having 2 hits in 3 at bats is not the same as having 20 hits in 30 at bats.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K