Probability sports store problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter dontdisturbmycircles
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Probability Sports
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a probability problem related to a survey conducted for a sports store to determine the likelihood of customers participating in skiing, skating, and racket sports. Participants are tasked with calculating the probability that a randomly chosen individual only engages in skiing, given various overlapping participation rates in these sports.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore different methods to calculate the probability of exclusive participation in skiing, questioning how overlapping participation in multiple sports affects the calculations. Some suggest using set notation to clarify relationships between the events, while others express uncertainty about the implications of the provided probabilities.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants sharing their thoughts and approaches. Some express confusion regarding the definitions and implications of the probabilities, while others offer insights into set theory and Venn diagrams as potential tools for understanding the problem better. There is no clear consensus on the best approach yet, as various interpretations are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity introduced by the overlapping probabilities and the need for clarity on whether certain groups include individuals who participate in all three sports. There is also mention of differing educational backgrounds regarding probability concepts, which may influence their approaches to the problem.

dontdisturbmycircles
Messages
592
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement


A survey was done to determine whether a sports store should carry stock for skiers. The proportions of people who participate in skiing, skating and racquet sports are as follows.

skiing: 0.40
skating: 0.55
racket sports: 0.35
skiing and skating: 0.05
skiing and racket sports: 0.15
skating and racket sports: 0.15
all 3 sports: 0.05

What is the probability that a person chosen at random only participates at skiing

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


I want to say that it is

P(only skiing) = P(skiing) - P(skiing and skating) - P(skiing and racket sports)

, that would be all fine and dandy if people only played 2 sports, but then I have the all 3 option... does the "skiing and racquet sports" include people who play all three? I would find it hard to believe since all people whom ski and skate would NEED to also play racket sports in order for the all 3 sports to be true. But can that be ruled out?

I am basically just thinking as I post so if it doesn't make sense, excuse it please. :P

Argggggh! The probability of me going nuts is nearing 1 at this point. lol
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Nevermind I think I have it...

P(skiing only) = p(skiing)-p(skiing and skating) - p(skiing and racket) - p (all 3) since the ones like "skiing and skating" must mean skiing, skating and not racket sports..

I don't know what is with this probability stuff, I just am not that great at it... I'll have to practice more.
 
Last edited:
Probabilities are about sets.

First let's label the events with letters for brievety. For instance call

E1: a given person likes skiing
E2: a given person likes skating
...

In set language then, what event are you looking for? You want the probability that

A: a given person likes skiing but does not like skiing and skating nor skiing and rackets nor skiing and raquet and skating

So

[tex]A=E_1\cap E_4^c\cap E_5^c\cap E_7^c[/tex]

Then you got to find how to find the probability of that with what you know. Hint: Poincaré's formula.
 
I see what you are getting at. Although this is a different way of thinking about it then taught in my high school course, I am still interested since it makes sense. All of these probabilities make up sets. Thus I am interested in the probability that a value lies in set 1 but not set 4 5 or 7.

I would like to avoid using Poincare's formula if possible since I haven't learned it yet. Although I am interested. How exactly would one go about finding out the probability that a value lies in set 1 but not set 4 5 or 7... I am still thinking about it.
 
I think I am right... if 50% of people like the letter B and 25 % like only B and C and 7% like B and C and D then 0.5-0.25-0.07=0.18 is the probability that a randomly selected person only likes BSince if I take 100 people, and put them in barrels (sets?) 50 people will be placed in barrel B but then 25 people will say they belong in barrel "B and C" and 7 people will say they belong in barrel "B C and D"... so I have 18 people left in barrel B.

Lol, okay yea, I am right. Sorry for using this thread as a think tank. lol
 
Last edited:
Be careful. When they write that the proportion of people who like skiing and skating is 0.05, it does not mean that the proportion of people only like skiing and skating. Some of them might enjoy racket sport as well.

In the set notation I introduced in post #3,

(people who like skiing and skating)=[itex]E_1\cap E_2[/itex]

Do you mean to say you don't use a set approach at all in your class?!
 
Because you said you were interested, in set notation, the solution is as follow:

[tex]A=E_1\cap E_4^c\cap E_5^c\cap E_7^c=(E_1^c\cup E_4\cup E_5\cup E_7)^c[/tex]

(By DeMorgan's laws)

[tex]\Rightarrow P(A)=P((E_1^c\cup E_4\cup E_5\cup E_7)^c)=1-P(E_1^c\cup E_4\cup E_5\cup E_7)[/tex]
[tex]=P(E_1^c)+P(E_4)+P(E_5)+P(E_7)-P(E_1^c\cap E_4)-P(E_1^c\cap E_5)-P(E_1^c\cap E_7)-P(E_4\cap E_5)-P(E_4\cap E_7)-P(E_5\cap E_7)[/tex]
[tex]+P(E_1^c\cap E_4\cap E_5)+P(E_1^c\cap E_4\cap E_7)+P(E_1^c\cap E_5\cap E_7)+P(E_4\cap E_5\cap E_7)-P(E_1^c\cap E_4\cap E_5\cap E_7)[/tex]

etc.

Most of the terms are 0 because for instance, [itex]E_1^c\cap E_4[/itex] is the set of all people who don't like skiing but who like skiing and skating. This is empty because either you like skiiing or you dont.
 
Last edited:
pretty much. we started by reviewing the counting rule. Then moved onto permutations and combinations and factorial notation. Then when we are solving probability questions we started using sample spaces but then moved onto using the addition rule (for probability questions with the word OR) and the multiplication rules (for the word and)... They actually called one of the multiplication rules (P(A and B) = P(A)*P(B|A) "Bayes' formula"... I don't know whether or not this is an appropriate name for it but I had to learn Bayes' Theorem [tex]P(A|B)=\frac{P(A)*P(B|A)}{P(A)*P(B|A)+P(\overline{A})*P(B|\overline{A})}[/tex]

on my own.. I picked up a probability textbook from the library but haven't really had time to read a lot of it. Have been reading a university level calculus book as well as browsing a physics with calculus university level text... and doing that alone on top of normal HS stuff is hard enough.
 
Last edited:
It might be easier to understand and find the solution if you use a Venn diagram.
 
  • #10
I understand your post quasar, thanks. I am going to go make a coffee and then will come back and look this problem over again.
 
  • #11
The word "OR" is written mathematically as the union "[itex]A\cup B[/itex]" and the world "AND" is the intersection: "[itex]A\cap B[/itex]".

And Poincaré's formula is just the "addition rule".

It says how you can decompose the probability of a union into a sum of probability of intersection.

The smart way of doing this problem though is through Venn's diagrams as drpizza suggested. (Have you seen those? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venn_diagram)
 
Last edited:
  • #12
Yea that is true that it would be a good idea to try a venn diagram, but I wanted to plug and chug with your equation and see if I can get it to match the venn diagram and then perhaps try to deepen my understanding :P :). Thanks a lot btw I appreciate your help.
 
  • #13
Indeed, after the vanishing terms are removed from the Poincaré "expansion", you're left with the same formula that you'd construct by inspection of the Venn diagram.
 
  • #14
I got 0.15.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

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