[ Solved by @reemii and @thomas5267 ] A cute probability problem
am not good at probability...aawwnn:"(
i'd say 2/3
Probability is always between 0 and 1. 2/3 is less than 1, so I'd say it isn't a bad guess ;)
yes ser
Do you get a numerical answer?
answer is a function of p and n
Is it p(n-1)?
Nope, but it seems you're on right track.. I'll post the options, one sec
Not sure haven't checked, is it: \(n^2p^n\)?
here are the options 1)\(1-[np^{n-1}(1-p)]^{n} \) 2) \((1-p^n)^{n^2} \) 3) \(1-(1-p^n)^{n^2} \) 4) \(1-n^2p^n\)
option number 2, my final answer.
mine looks pretty similar to 4 so that'll be my guess buuuut I won't really be satisfied until I figure it out haha so don't spoil it. I'll think about it mroe.
Okay, I won't say anything :)
are you sure (3) has this \(n^2\) exponent?
Nice question btw
Yes, options 2 and 3 are compliments of each other
I only find \((1-(1-p^n)^n)^n\) . so i'lll wait for the answer.. maybe this is equivalent to one of your options but I don't see it..
Could you please explain how you arrived at
your answer seems very close to the options\[(a^b)^b = a^{b^2}\]
Yep me too. \(\left[1-\left(1-p^n\right)^n\right]^n\).
Okay, lamp glows = every sheet works : \(P(lamps\: glows) = P(all\: sheets\: work) = P(sheet\:1\:works)^n\). ( by independence) Sheet 1: \(P(sheet\: 1\:works) =\) P(at least one line is ok) = 1 - P(no line is ok) = 1 - \(P(line\: 1\: is\: not\: ok)^n\) and line 1: P(line 1 not ok) = 1 - P(line 1 ok) = 1 - \(p^n\).
I fold things up and I arrive at \((1 - (1 - p^n)^n)^n\).
Put it this way, the probability of 1 line working is \(p^n\). The probability of n lines failing is \(\left(1-p^n\right)^n\), so the probability of at least one line working is \(1-\left(1-p^n\right)^n\). Since all n sheet must work, the probability of the circuit working is \(\left[1-\left(1-p^n\right)^n\right]^n\).
Awesome! I completely agree that is the correct answer, textbook options are wrong.
Is there some sort of massive cancellation?
I guess what you have is the best simplified form possible
It seems like the textbook is indeed wrong. Numerical verification shows that none of the answer equals mine and reemii's.
It turns out the chances of the circuit working is really small. Even with p=0.5 and n=3 the probability is only 0.0359625.
I guess the author confused himself. 3 is the closest since if the probability of the circuit working is \(1-\left(1-p^n\right)^{n^2}\) then the probability of the circuit not working would be \(\left(1-p^n\right)^{n^2}\). This can be interpreted as all lines failing. Clearly if all lines fail then the circuit won't work but there exists cases such that despite not all lines fail the circuit still fails. I have no idea what 1 meant and why 4 is here. Suppose the switches all worked perfectly then for n>1 the probability as calculated by 4 is larger than 1?????
I mean the probability is smaller than 0 for option 4 if n>1 and p=1.
Yeah absolutely! we would get #3 option if the sheets were in parallel, instead of series
Yep if the sheets were in parallel #3 is the correct one.
You might want to add an warning to not look past the questionable options you gave.
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!