Is this probability answer correct?

  • Thread starter Thread starter island-boy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Probability
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around conditional probability in the context of a joint probability distribution f(x,y) defined for positive values of x and y. The original poster questions whether the conditional probability P(x

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the interpretation of conditional probabilities and the implications of the joint distribution. There is a discussion on the correct notation, distinguishing between random variables and specific values, and the necessity of integrating over defined regions.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on how to approach the problem through integration, while others have questioned the assumptions made by the original poster. There is ongoing exploration of the implications of the joint distribution and the conditions under which the probabilities are evaluated.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of correctly visualizing the probability density function and the regions defined by the inequalities. There is also mention of potential confusion regarding the limits of integration and the behavior of the exponential function in the context of the problem.

island-boy
Messages
93
Reaction score
0
given a joint probability distribution f(x,y) which exists for every x, y > 0, and is 0 elsewhere. Is the conditional probability P(x<y | x<2y) always equal to 1 for any values of f(x,y)? Am I correct in this?

thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not quite sure what you're asking of what your answer is supposed to be. It is not true that P(x < y | x < 2y) = 1. x and y are just numbers, not probability distributions, so you can't talk about the probability that they take on particular values. It would make more sense to write P(X < Y | X < 2Y) = 1, but this is not true either. What do you mean "for any values of f(x, y)"? Are you visualizing the PDF correctly?

To answer the question asked, the way to do it is to find a function of x and y that integrates to some finite value over x > 0, y > 0, and normalize that function so it sums to 1 over that domain. Then let your PDF function equal 0 for all x or y < 0, and for x > 0, y > 0, let it be your other function.
 
I take it that (x<y)|(x<2y) means (x<y) OR (x<2y). Of course, if x< y then x< 2y for y>0 so you are really asking P(X<Y) (Orthodontist's point is correct, although I would say that X and Y {as opposed to the numbers x and y} are "random variables" rather than numbers). Certainly, it is possible for some probability distribution, f(x,y), that Y> X!
 
Usually P(A|B) means the probability of A given B, or
[tex]\frac {P(A \cap B)}{P(B)}[/tex]

although I would say that X and Y {as opposed to the numbers x and y} are "random variables" rather than numbers
Good point
 
Last edited:
I'll pose the original question:
if f(x,y) = e^(-x-y) for every x, y > 0 and is 0 otherwise, what is the conditional probability P(X<Y|X<2Y)?

my take is that since the area of X<2Y is inside the area of X<Y for x,y>0 then the probability is 1.

or said another way
P(X<Y|X<2Y)
=P(X<Y interection X<2Y)/P(X<2Y)
=P(X<2Y)/P(X<2y)
=1

so whatever the joint distribution given in the problem, the answer asked is always 1.

Is this correct?
 
No. Use the formula I gave. You have to integrate over the region where X < Y, and then integrate over the region where X < 2Y, and then divide one by the other. Intuitively you should know that your answer doesn't make sense. What if X = 3 and Y = 2?
 
if I did that, I would get 3/2, but all probabilities should be between 0 and 1...

ETA... DOH!
I think I figured out what I did wrong, instead of graphing X<2Y, I am using 2X<Y
let me try to solve that again...

EETA: got it, the answer is 3/4 right?

On a related note, in doing double integration for example:
solving for:
[tex]\int_{0}^{\infty} \int_{1}^{\infty} e^{-(x+y)} dx dy[/tex]
we get
[tex]\int_{0}^{\infty} \lim_{b\rightarrow\infty} [-e^{-y-x}]_{1}^{b}dy[/tex]
now my question is:
for this part: [tex]\lim_{b\rightarrow\infty} [-e^{-y-x}]_{1}^{b}[/tex] can we equate [tex]\lim_{b\rightarrow\infty}-e^{-y-b}[/tex] to 0 even if y is still a variable yet ot be integrated?
 
Last edited:
I think you got your answer right.
Now for your other question, i would just integrate your variables separately.
i.e. separate Exp(-(x+y)) in Exp(-x)*Exp(-y) and consideder Exp(-y) as a constant when you integrate Exp(-x). The subtle limit problem that arises is therefore avoided.
 
hey, yeah, that's a way to avoid the limit. thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K