Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

What about this formulation

  1. Sep 20, 2013 #1
    I'm taking a course in probability and statistics and encountered an exercise with a formulation that doesn't make sense at all to my English-as-second-language ears.

    I will recite the exercise here and maybe you could help my settle wether if the original formulation is bad, or if I've found an opportunity to learn a new way of formulating myself in English.

    The exercise is from "Introduction to Probability and Statistics" by J.Susan Milton and Jesse C. Arnold (McGraw-Hill 2004).

    I'll quote some excerpts that I think will provide enough information.

    Section 3.4, ex. 25:

    The density function is given by

    f(x) = (1-p)x-1*p (geometric)

    where p=.05

    Now (e) doesn't make any sense at all to me. What makes least sense is the use of "that".

    It's solved by

    P(X≥3) = 1-( f(1) + f(2) )

    However, a more appropriate formulation of (e) I then think would be for instance:

    What do you think? Is the original formulation of (e) good, quite inprecise or even incorrect?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 20, 2013 #2

    verty

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    It means, 2 runs produce no unacceptable lots. Therefore you need at least 3 to produce an unacceptable lot. So you want the probability p that the first 2 runs are acceptable.

    It is phrased correctly.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook