Probability of at Least One Girl in a Five-Child Family | Independent Births

  • Thread starter Thread starter tramp
  • Start date Start date
tramp
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hi
I have some difficulties with following question.

A family has five children. Assuming that the probability of a girl on each birth was 1/2 and that the five births were independent, what is the probability the family has at least one girl, given they have at least one boy?

My solution is 1-(1/2)^4 = 15/16

However according to the book correct answer it 30/31.
Any ideas?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
tramp said:
Hi
I have some difficulties with following question.

A family has five children. Assuming that the probability of a girl on each birth was 1/2 and that the five births were independent, what is the probability the family has at least one girl, given they have at least one boy?

My solution is 1-(1/2)^4 = 15/16

However according to the book correct answer it 30/31.
Any ideas?

Look at material on the binomial distribution.

The conditions in the problem are satisified if the family has any of the following combinations of genders:
(exactly 1 boy and 4 girls)
(exactly 2 boys and 3 girls)
(exactly 3 boys and 2 girls)
(exactly 4 boys and 1 girl)

The conditions are not satisfied by the combinations of genders:
(exactly 5 boys and 0 girls )
(exactly 0 boys and 5 girls )

The problem says we are "given" that the family has at least one boy, so you should look at the formula for conditional probability.
 
Thanks a lot Stephen.
I figured it out. Your post was a great help.
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top