Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    http://static1.squarespace.com/stati...+June+2015.pdf

    Very last question, 8ii)

    I have no idea how to do this, apart from draw a tree diagram with 81 branches.

    MS

    http://static1.squarespace.com/stati...ark+scheme.pdf
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 16characterlimit)
    http://static1.squarespace.com/stati...+June+2015.pdf

    Very last question, 8ii)

    I have no idea how to do this, apart from draw a tree diagram with 81 branches.

    MS

    http://static1.squarespace.com/stati...ark+scheme.pdf
    Do you follow the reasoning in the mark-scheme? They work out

    P(Type II error | p = 0.5) = 0.6047

    and

    P(Type II error | p = 0.7) = 0.0933

    (what happens to the p = 0.3 case?)

    Then they work out P(Type II error) in one test (where p is randomly chosen), then they work out P(Type II error) in at least one of the four tests, assuming that the tests are independent.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gregorius)
    Do you follow the reasoning in the mark-scheme? They work out

    P(Type II error | p = 0.5) = 0.6047

    and

    P(Type II error | p = 0.7) = 0.0933

    (what happens to the p = 0.3 case?)

    Then they work out P(Type II error) in one test (where p is randomly chosen), then they work out P(Type II error) in at least one of the four tests, assuming that the tests are independent.
    Yeah, I got those, its just there's so many outcomes, such as p = 0.3 then p = 0.5 then p = 0.7, and you can't do a binomial distribution or any distribution if there's not a fixed chance of occurrence
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 16characterlimit)
    Yeah, I got those, its just there's so many outcomes, such as p = 0.3 then p = 0.5 then p = 0.7, and you can't do a binomial distribution or any distribution if there's not a fixed chance of occurrence
    Once you've got P(Type II error | p = 0.5) and P(Type II error | p = 0.7), you've eliminated any need to think about distributions from there on in. You use the law of total probability to get P(Type II error), and then work out the probability of (at least) one of four independent events occurring.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gregorius)
    Once you've got P(Type II error | p = 0.5) and P(Type II error | p = 0.7), you've eliminated any need to think about distributions from there on in. You use the law of total probability to get P(Type II error), and then work out the probability of (at least) one of four independent events occurring.
    In that case I would work out 1 - P(NoTypeII) right?

    So P(NoTypeII) could be P(p=0.3)^4 or P(p=0.5)*P(TypeIIp=0.5)^(3 or 2 or 1) or P(p=0.7)*P(TypeIIp=0.7)^(3 or 2 or 1) and so on...

    I don't think I get it, because there is way to many possible things to consider.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 16characterlimit)

    So P(NoTypeII) could be P(p=0.3)^4 or P(p=0.5)*P(TypeIIp=0.5)^(3 or 2 or 1) or P(p=0.7)*P(TypeIIp=0.7)^(3 or 2 or 1) and so on...
    No no. Use the law of total probability to get P(Type II), unconditional on anything.

    P(Type II)= (1/3) P(Type II | P = 0.7) + (1/3) P(Type II | P = 0.5) + (1/3) P(Type II | P = 0.3)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gregorius)
    No no. Use the law of total probability to get P(Type II), unconditional on anything.

    P(Type II)= (1/3) P(Type II | P = 0.7) + (1/3) P(Type II | P = 0.5) + (1/3) P(Type II | P = 0.3)
    That gives the right answer, but isn't that for a single test? The question says 4 tests are carried out, so I thought you need to consider this and all the possible subsequent events.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Here's my working, had to write it up because Latex isn't working nicely at the moment..



    Obviously it would take too much time to work with all combinations of type (II) errors so 1-p(No type (II) error) is the way to go.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Parallex)
    Here's my working, had to write it up because Latex isn't working nicely at the moment..



    Obviously it would take too much time to work with all combinations of type (II) errors so 1-p(No type (II) error) is the way to go.
    Thank's that all makes sense now.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 16characterlimit)
    That gives the right answer, but isn't that for a single test? The question says 4 tests are carried out, so I thought you need to consider this and all the possible subsequent events.
    There are four tests, but they are independent of each other. All the variety of possible combinations are dealt with by using the law of total probability, followed by the independence assumption of the tests.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources

    Make your revision easier

    Maths

    Maths Forum posting guidelines

    Not sure where to post? Read the updated guidelines here

    Equations

    How to use LaTex

    Writing equations the easy way

    Student revising

    Study habits of A* students

    Top tips from students who have already aced their exams

    Study Planner

    Create your own Study Planner

    Never miss a deadline again

    Polling station sign

    Thinking about a maths degree?

    Chat with other maths applicants

    Can you help? Study help unanswered threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.