Normal approximation to Poisson random variable

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the probability of finding more than 10,000 asbestos particles in a 10 cm² dust sample, given that the number of particles in 1 cm² follows a Poisson distribution with a mean of 1000. The expected value and variance for the total in 10 cm² are correctly derived as E(Y) = 10,000 and Var(Y) = 100,000. The probability P(Y > 10,000) is approximated using a normal distribution, yielding a result of approximately 0.498. There is clarification on the relationship between Y and X, emphasizing that Y does not equal 10X due to the nature of randomness in the distribution. The calculations and interpretations presented are deemed plausible and correct.
issacnewton
Messages
1,035
Reaction score
37

Homework Statement


Suppose that the number of asbestos particles in a sam-
ple of 1 squared centimeter of dust is a Poisson random variable
with a mean of 1000. What is the probability that 10 squared cen-
timeters of dust contains more than 10,000 particles?

Homework Equations


E(aX+b) = aE(X) + b
Var(aX) = a^2 Var(X)

The Attempt at a Solution


Let X = number of asbestos particles in 1\mbox{cm}^2. Define Y = number of asbestos particles in 10\mbox{ cm}^2. So we have Y=10X. Using the formula given above, we get E(Y)=10E(X) and Var(Y) = 100 Var(X). But since X is a Poisson random variable, we have E(X) = \lambda = Var(X) = 1000. So we get for Y variable, E(Y) = 10000 and Var(Y) = 100000. Then the probability we need to find is P(Y > 10000). Now we use the Normal approximation here. E(Y) = 10000 and Var(Y) = 100000. So P(Y \geq 10001.5). So we get the following expression
P\left(z \geq \frac{10001.5 - 10000}{\sqrt(100000)}\right)
So now I use pnorm function in R , to calculate this probability. It is

\mbox{pnorm(10001.5, 10000, sqrt(100000), lower.tail=F)}

which gives us 0.4981077. Is this right ? The solution manual for Montgomery and Runger says that E(Y) = \lambda = 10000 = Var(Y). Is that a mistake ?

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
IssacNewton said:

Homework Statement


Suppose that the number of asbestos particles in a sam-
ple of 1 squared centimeter of dust is a Poisson random variable
with a mean of 1000. What is the probability that 10 squared cen-
timeters of dust contains more than 10,000 particles?

Homework Equations


E(aX+b) = aE(X) + b
Var(aX) = a^2 Var(X)

The Attempt at a Solution


Let X = number of asbestos particles in 1\mbox{cm}^2. Define Y = number of asbestos particles in 10\mbox{ cm}^2. So we have Y=10X. Using the formula given above, we get E(Y)=10E(X) and Var(Y) = 100 Var(X). But since X is a Poisson random variable, we have E(X) = \lambda = Var(X) = 1000. So we get for Y variable, E(Y) = 10000 and Var(Y) = 100000. Then the probability we need to find is P(Y > 10000). Now we use the Normal approximation here. E(Y) = 10000 and Var(Y) = 100000. So P(Y \geq 10001.5). So we get the following expression
P\left(z \geq \frac{10001.5 - 10000}{\sqrt(100000)}\right)
So now I use pnorm function in R , to calculate this probability. It is

\mbox{pnorm(10001.5, 10000, sqrt(100000), lower.tail=F)}

which gives us 0.4981077. Is this right ? The solution manual for Montgomery and Runger says that E(Y) = \lambda = 10000 = Var(Y). Is that a mistake ?

thanks

E(Y) = Var(Y) = 10000 are correct, Whether or not those are equal to λ depends on how you define λ.

The figure 0.498 is plausible. Since the mean is so large, the Poisson distribution looks very much like the normal, and you are asking for values greater than the mean by 0.01 standard deviations or more (so the answer ought to be just a bit less than 1/2).
 
Hi Ray, But from the Y = 10X, we should have Var(Y) = 100 Var(X).
 
IssacNewton said:
Hi Ray, But from the Y = 10X, we should have Var(Y) = 100 Var(X).

No. ##Y \neq 10X##. The ##10X## figure could be true only if each of the ten 1 cm2 pieces had exactly the same number of asbestos particles, so that 10 of them had exactly 10 times as many as the single one, and that would mean that there is no randomness at all. That does not describe your system.
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K