5
$\begingroup$

I have a problem, I'm learning probability at the moment (I'm a programmer) and starting I have this:

(Source: Minka.) My neighbor has two children. Assuming that the gender of a child is like a coin flip, it is most likely, a priori, that my neighbor has one boy and one girl, with probability 1/2. The other possibilities—two boys or two girls—have probabilities 1/4 and 1/4.

  • a. Suppose I ask him whether he has any boys, and he says yes. What is the probability that one child is a girl?

  • b. Suppose instead that I happen to see one of his children run by, and it is a boy. What is the probability that the other child is a girl?

Now my reasoning is:

BB = 1/4 = 0.25
BG = 1/4 = 0.25
GB = 1/4 = 0.25
GG = 1/4 = 0.25

So for a., the probability of G I get it just by summing p(B,G) + p(G,B) = 0.5

And for b. p(G|B) = p(G,B)/p(B) = 0.5/0.5 = 1 that is wrong but I'm not getting why.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ "So for a., the probability of G I get it just by summing p(B,G) + p(G,B) = 0.5" This is not correct. Remember, you neighbour has told you he has at least one child who is a boy. What options does that rule out? What then are the odds of 1 girl? $\endgroup$ – Pat Oct 23 '13 at 17:14
  • $\begingroup$ That eliminates the GG option, but the ones I summed are intact, aren't they? $\endgroup$ – Pedro.Alonso Oct 23 '13 at 17:34
8
$\begingroup$

For (a), a simple way to look at is that you've reduced your probability space to only the combinations that have at least one boy:

BB = 1/3
BG = 1/3
GB = 1/3

GG is no longer a possibility based on the fact that your neighbor said he had at least one boy. Of the possibilities remaining, you're left with a 2/3 probability that he has a girl. The information he gave you reduced the probability of him having a girl from 3/4 to 2/3. Formally, this can be shown as follows: $$P(At\ least\ one\ girl|At\ least\ one\ boy) = \frac{P(At\ least\ one\ girl\ \cap At\ least\ one\ boy)}{P(At\ least\ one\ boy)} $$ From your original box, we can see the probability of having at least one boy and at least one girl is BG + GB = 0.25 + 0.25 = 0.5, but we need to divide by the probability of at least one boy, which is BB + BG + GB = 0.25 + 0.25 + 0.25 = 0.75, so we get $\frac{\tfrac{1}{2}}{\tfrac{3}{4}} = \frac{2}{3}$.

For (b), now that we've seen a boy, the only uncertainty remaining is the gender of the other child, and given no other information, the probability of the other child being female is 1/2, which is the answer.

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

Another way to show this (part a ) is to write the Bayes rule as follows:

P(B|G) = P(G)P(B|G) / P(~G)P(B|~G) + P(G)P(B|G) = (0.5 * 0.5) / (0.5*0.25 + 0.5*0.5) = 2/3

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Nick, they way you changed the above formula would be confusing. (the way that Wikipedia explains it) This is a very well-known theory, but could also be confusing. You are welcome to give your own answer or add a comment if you do not agree. $\endgroup$ – Arezou Jul 24 '14 at 19:28
  • $\begingroup$ I thought his edit was a major improvement. You should be using \frac and not using * for multiplication. Most people think of $*$ as convolution. You should also use \mid instead of |. $\endgroup$ – Neil G Apr 13 '15 at 10:04
  • $\begingroup$ I still don't get why both the parts are not same and how are they different.. I compute both of them using P(G|B) $\endgroup$ – Nitin Aug 23 '18 at 9:33

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.