The probability table returns XD, Gene better not look :P :o

M

Monkeyseat

Full Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2005
Messages
298
A person is drawing names from a hat; Kate, Pam and Wendy.

I had to draw a table to show all possible outcomes.

I did this:

Click: http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/5879/hpim08526fg.jpg

And was told;

There is no reason for the first column in this question. Who draws first has no special significance. In the dice-coin example ( http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/5625/hpim08497ke.jpg ) they were independent events. It needed a column for the coin flip and a row for the die roll and the result in the intersection. Here there is no independent event. The only event is drawing a card.

(I think it should be coin flip row and die roll column.)

The other table I was shown witht that reply had exactly the same first column so why use it if I am being told it has no significance?:

Code: 
K | P W
  | W P
_________
p | K W
  | W K
________
W | K P
  | P K

I'm not very good at math so I want to know why It's not signifcant really, why the first column is not needed and also why the fact that it's not an independant event changes things, I just have a curious mind (I wish I didn't but I do).

WORK DONE :

I thought as the person who is drawn first effects who is drawn 2nd/3rd it is a dependant event, who draws first is significant and thus making the first column important.


Here is what I think they might've meant:

Click: http://www.freemathhelp.com/forum/viewt ... 3301#23301

Any ideas????? Agree?

THANK YOU
 
I think the reply you got only meant to stress that there is nothing special about the first person. You've got three choices for the first person, then two choices for the second, and then whoever is left for the third. So you don't need to be quite as fancy as you were. This probably would have been fine:

__KPW
__KWP
__PKW
__PWP
__WKP
__WPK

What you did wasn't, I don't think (personally), "wrong", so much as over-complicated.

Don't worry: If you're doing much in the area of combinations, permutations, probability, and combinatorics, things will get plenty complicated soon enough. (And, no, you may not ask me how I did in my "Combinatorics" class in college.)

:wink:

Eliz.
 
stapel said:
I think the reply you got only meant to stress that there is nothing special about the first person. You've got three choices for the first person, then two choices for the second, and then whoever is left for the third. So you don't need to be quite as fancy as you were. This probably would have been fine:

__KPW
__KWP
__PKW
__PWP
__WKP
__WPK

What you did wasn't, I don't think (personally), "wrong", so much as over-complicated.

Don't worry: If you're doing much in the area of combinations, permutations, probability, and combinatorics, things will get plenty complicated soon enough. (And, no, you may not ask me how I did in my "Combinatorics" class in college.)

:wink:

Eliz.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I see what you mean, the first person isn't special because there is many chances, the reply I got though suggested that simpler table at the bottom, yet isn't the first column exactly the same as the one I did?
 
The available options are the available options. The formatting of them doesn't affect anything. But your formatting was non-standard, and implied something special was involved in who went first. In this case, I don't think that is necessary.

Eliz.
 
stapel said:
The available options are the available options. The formatting of them doesn't affect anything. But your formatting was non-standard, and implied something special was involved in who went first. In this case, I don't think that is necessary.

Eliz.
Click to expand...

But they said "There is no reason for the first column", when they are the same...

Click: http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/2545/same5er.png

Who draws first, would have a significance on the other names though, how could it not have be significant!?!? :wink: Just because there are 3 names, doesn't mean it isn't sinificant?
 
You entered the first entries into a special column all of their own. That was not necessary. Just list the six options as that: a list of six options.

Eliz.
 
stapel said:
You entered the first entries into a special column all of their own. That was not necessary. Just list the six options as that: a list of six options.

Eliz.
Click to expand...

That's what they did though....

I put mine into a seperate column, they put theirs in a seperate column, yet mine is not needed....

It'd probably help me if it was like this:

Who draws first has no special significance because.....

There is no reason for the first column (even though they are axactly the same :roll: ) in this question beause...
 
It's not that the first column isn't "needed"; it is: it lists who was drawn "first". But splitting the first column off into it's own special section is not needed. And the order of the rows is not needed. People frequently list options in an exercise like this alphabetically, but that's only because it's a bit easier to keep track of things that way. It isn't a rule, and it doesn't change what the six options are.

If it makes you feel better, take the six options I gave you, and mix up the rows so they're listed in a different order.

Eliz.
 
stapel said:
It's not that the first column isn't "needed"; it is: it lists who was drawn "first". But splitting the first column off into it's own special section is not needed. And the order of the rows is not needed. People frequently list options in an exercise like this alphabetically, but that's only because it's a bit easier to keep track of things that way. It isn't a rule, and it doesn't change what the six options are.

If it makes you feel better, take the six options I gave you, and mix up the rows so they're listed in a different order.

Eliz.
Click to expand...

Splitting it off, where do you mean?

Sorry but I don't have a clue what you're on about.

Our first columns are EXACTLY the same, how can mine be wrong, yet the other one be right?

Click: http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/2545/same5er.png

I'm not talking about the order of the rows, I'm talking about the order of being drawn out of the hat.
 
You split off the first column by drawing a line which separated it (split it off) from the other columns. I didn't. It wasn't necessary. And as I mentioned before, I don't think yours was "wrong", so much as "formatted oddly".

Eliz.
 
stapel said:
You split off the first column by drawing a line which separated it (split it off) from the other columns. I didn't. It wasn't necessary.

Eliz.
Click to expand...

Eh...?:(

I'm comparing mine to the basic one in my first post which is what the whole topic is about, I've not been talking about yours.

Click the link!:

Click: http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/2545/same5er.png

I was told compared to the more basic one, the first column was not needed and who was drawn first was not significant.
 
If you're asking me to explain what the other person meant, I can't. You need to ask that other person.

Eliz.
 
stapel said:
If you're asking me to explain what the other person meant, I can't. You need to ask that other person.

Eliz.
Click to expand...

Okay, well, that was all abit pointless.:p

That's why i didn't have a clue what you were on about.

Errr...Thanks anyway. :(

They will never help again so the topic remains open to all lol.:(
 
Re: The probability table returns XD, Gene better not look :

COMPARNING THIS TABLE:

Click: http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/5879/hpim08526fg.jpg

TO THIS TABLE:

Code: 
K | P W
  | W P
_________
p | K W
  | W K
________
W | K P
  | P K

Okay I have been thinking about it today, so err here goes.

The bit with the people drawn first is the same so I am presuming they meant this column here (even though it's 2 columns really):

Click: http://img325.imageshack.us/img325/7681/test0ww.jpg

There is no reason for the first column in this question. In the dice-coin example (Click: http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/5625/hpim08497ke.jpg ) they were independent events. It needed a column for the coin flip and a row for the die roll and the result in the intersection. Here there is no independent event.

The only event is drawing a card. As it is not an independent event, whatever name is drawn will affect what other names could be drawn, so each time a different first name is drawn first, the possible outcomes of the names to be drawn after that would change, so we could not show it simply like we did with the coin.

E.G.

If you drew Kate first, the other possible outcomes would be Pam, Wendy and Wendy Pam. Yet if Pam is drawn first, the outcomes would be Kate, Wendy and Wendy, Kate. So we could not show it like we did with the coin and dice.

I tried to do it like that and the formatting was non-standard so it would've been better to show it like this:

Code: 
K | P W
  | W P
_________
p | K W
  | W K
________
W | K P
  | P K

I assume the comment "Who draws first has no special significance" was talking about the fact that I wrote the name of the person who was drawn first again in the other column, when I had already wrote it on the left hand side, but I am not sure.

Click: http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/8087/test29se.jpg

Does that sound right?

Gene if you're reading, can you just clarify what you meant?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top