MHB Probability of White Ball Drawn Twice From Urn I & II

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jameson
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Balls
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating probabilities related to drawing balls from two urns, using Bayes' Theorem. For part (a), the probability that the first ball drawn is from urn I, given that it is white, is calculated to be 2/3. In part (b), the probability that the second ball is also white, given the first was white, is determined to be 5/12. The calculations involve breaking down the probabilities based on the outcomes of a coin flip and the composition of the urns. The participants confirm the correctness of the methods used and express confidence in their understanding of the problem.
Jameson
Insights Author
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,533
Reaction score
13
Basic problem:
Urn I has 4 white and 4 black balls. Urn II has 2 white and 6 black balls. Flip a fair coin. If the outcome is heads, then a ball from urn I is selected, whereas if the outcome is tails, then a ball from urn II is selected. Suppose a white ball is selected and the replaced. Denote this event by $W_1$. Now another ball is withdrawn at random from the same urn.

(a) What is the probability that the first ball is from urn I (given that it is white)?

My solution to part (a):
This can be solved by Bayes' Theorem in a pretty straightforward way. Let the notation $W_1$ mean that the first ball is white and let $U_1$ mean that it was chosen from urn I.

$$P \left( U_1|W_1 \right) = \frac{ P \left( W_1 \cap U_1 \right)}{P \left(W_1 \right)} = \frac{P \left( W_1|U_1 \right)P(U_1)}{P \left( W_1|U_1 \right)P(U_1)+P \left( W_1|U_2 \right)P(U_2)}$$.

Now plugging in the information I have into the last expression I get:

$$P \left( U_1|W_1 \right)=\frac{\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}}{\frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{4}\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{2}{3}$$

So my question is how does that look?

(b) What is the probability that the second ball is also white?

My solution to part (b):
This one I'm not 100% sure on. I think it should be similar to part (a) except the values of $$P(U_1)$$ and $$P(U_2)$$ will be different. Instead of $\frac{1}{2}$ and $\frac{1}{2}$ they will be $\frac{2}{3}$ and $\frac{1}{3}$ respectively. So the solution should be found using the same method just replacing those values, correct?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I think I solved it now. My above idea was wrong.

What I need to find is $$P(W_2|W_1)=\frac{P(W_2 \cap W_1)}{P(W_1)}$$. Both the numerator and denominator should be broken up into two cases. Once I do that I get the following:

$$P(W_2|W_1)=\frac{\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{4} \frac{1}{4}\frac{1}{2}}{\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}+ \frac{1}{4}\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{5}{12}$$
 
Last edited:
Jameson said:
Basic problem:
Urn I has 4 white and 4 black balls. Urn II has 2 white and 6 black balls. Flip a fair coin. If the outcome is heads, then a ball from urn I is selected, whereas if the outcome is tails, then a ball from urn II is selected. Suppose a white ball is selected and the replaced. Denote this event by $W_1$. Now another ball is withdrawn at random from the same urn.
My solution to part (a):
This can be solved by Bayes' Theorem in a pretty straightforward way. Let the notation $W_1$ mean that the first ball is white and let $U_1$ mean that it was chosen from urn I.

$$P \left( U_1|W_1 \right) = \frac{ P \left( W_1 \cap U_1 \right)}{P \left(W_1 \right)} = \frac{P \left( W_1|U_1 \right)P(U_1)}{P \left( W_1|U_1 \right)P(U_1)+P \left( W_1|U_2 \right)P(U_2)}$$.

Now plugging in the information I have into the last expression I get:

$$P \left( U_1|W_1 \right)=\frac{\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}}{\frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{4}\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{2}{3}$$

So my question is how does that look?

Looks fine!

Since the probability on urn I and urn II is equally likely, so any ball is equally likely, you can shorten it to:
$$P(U_1|W_1) = \frac{P(U_1 \wedge W_1)}{P(W_1)} = \frac{\frac 4 {16}}{\frac 6 {16}} = \frac 2 3$$
My solution to part (b):
This one I'm not 100% sure on. I think it should be similar to part (a) except the values of $$P(U_1)$$ and $$P(U_2)$$ will be different. Instead of $\frac{1}{2}$ and $\frac{1}{2}$ they will be $\frac{2}{3}$ and $\frac{1}{3}$ respectively. So the solution should be found using the same method just replacing those values, correct?

Jameson said:
I think I solved it now. My above idea was wrong.

What I need to find is $$P(W_2|W_1)=\frac{P(W_2 \cap W_1)}{P(W_1)}$$. Both the numerator and denominator should be broken up into two cases. Once I do that I get the following:

$$P(W_2|W_1)=\frac{\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{4} \frac{1}{4}\frac{1}{2}}{\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}+ \frac{1}{4}\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{5}{12}$$

Working it out mathematically:

$$\begin{aligned}
P(W_2|W_1)&=\frac {P(W_1 \wedge W_2)}{P(W_1)} \\
&= \frac {P((U_1 \wedge W_1 \wedge W_2) \vee (U_1 \wedge W_1 \wedge W_2))}{P(W_1)} \\
&= \frac {P(U_1 \wedge W_1 \wedge W_2) + P(U_1 \wedge W_1 \wedge W_2)}{P(W_1)} && \text{disjoint sum rule}\\
&= \frac {P(W_2|U_1 \wedge W_1)P(U_1 \wedge W_1) + P(W_2|U_2 \wedge W_1)P(U_2 \wedge W_1)}{P(W_1)} && \text{product rule} \\
&= \frac {\frac 4 8 \cdot \frac 4 {16} + \frac 2 8 \cdot \frac 2 {16}}{\frac 6 {16}} && \text{rule for equally likely outcomes}\\
&= \frac 5 {12} \\
\end{aligned}$$
 
Last edited:
Thank you for your reply I like Serena! :)

I am leaving now for a study session so will have to reply later but I feel like my method is correct. Also, I think you might be interpreting the problem as without replacement but it's with replacement. Again, my apologies that I can't answer in more detail now but trust me I will later tonight and really appreciate the help!

I broke down the numerator as follows: $$P(W_1 W_2)=P(W_1 W_2|U_1)P(U_1)+P(W_1 W_2|U_2)P(U_2)$$ and the numbers I wrote follow. Do you see any flaw in this reasoning?
 
Last edited:
Jameson said:
Thank you for your reply I like Serena! :)

I am leaving now for a study session so will have to reply later but I feel like my method is correct. Also, I think you might be interpreting the problem as without replacement but it's with replacement. Again, my apologies that I can't answer in more detail now but trust me I will later tonight and really appreciate the help!

I broke down the numerator as follows: $$P(W_1 W_2)=P(W_1 W_2|U_2)P(U_2)+P(W_1 W_2|U_2)P(U_2)$$ and the numbers I wrote follow. Do you see any flaw in this reasoning?

Yes. Sorry. I had just realized my mistake and corrected it.
And your reasoning is flawless (although you made a typo with $U_1$ and $U_2$ ;)).

$$P(W_1 W_2)=P(W_1 W_2|U_1)P(U_1)+P(W_1 W_2|U_2)P(U_2)$$
 
Typo fixed and we now get the same answer, $\frac{5}{12}$, so I am marking the thread solved. :)

I feel confident about my midterm tomorrow. :D
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top