Probability of White Ball Drawn Twice From Urn I & II

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jameson
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Balls
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating probabilities related to drawing balls from two urns, specifically focusing on the probability of drawing a white ball twice under certain conditions. The problem involves the application of Bayes' Theorem and conditional probabilities, with participants exploring the implications of drawing with replacement.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation
  • Homework-related
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes using Bayes' Theorem to find the probability that the first ball drawn is from urn I given that it is white, calculating it as \( P(U_1|W_1) = \frac{2}{3} \).
  • Another participant suggests that the second part of the problem, finding the probability that the second ball is also white, should follow a similar method but with adjusted probabilities based on the first result.
  • A later reply indicates a correction in the approach to finding \( P(W_2|W_1) \), breaking it down into cases based on which urn the first ball was drawn from.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about their method but believes it to be correct, emphasizing the importance of considering that the draws are with replacement.
  • Another participant acknowledges a typo in their previous reasoning but ultimately agrees with the corrected approach, confirming the same probability result of \( \frac{5}{12} \).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the application of Bayes' Theorem and the method of calculating the probabilities, but there are moments of uncertainty and corrections regarding the specific calculations and interpretations of the problem. The discussion reflects a collaborative effort to refine understanding rather than a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the importance of distinguishing between drawing with and without replacement, which affects the calculations. There are also references to potential typos and corrections in reasoning that highlight the iterative nature of the discussion.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students studying probability, particularly those interested in conditional probabilities and applications of Bayes' Theorem in practical problems involving multiple scenarios.

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?
 
Physics 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
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K