The Student Room Group

Combinations and probability

A netball team of 7 players is to be chosen from a list of 12.
(i) How many different teams of 7 can be chosen? [1]
(ii) The list of 12 includes Anna and Annette. A team of 7 people is chosen at random. Given that at least one of Anna and Annette is chosen, find the probability that both of them are chosen. [3]

I've done the first part.

But on part 2 I am getting 6/11 when the answer is 3/8.

My reasoning is.. if one of A1 or A2 is chosen then we can just forget about them for now. So.. the question would become..

I have 11 people. I need to choose 6. What's the probability one specific person, A, is chosen?

So I did 10C5/11C6 (total teams of 6 with A/ total teams) and got 6/11.

Where am I going wrong? I have a feeling it is something to do with the fact that the 'given' person could be A1 or A2, but I just can't get my head around it.
Reply 1
Original post by stolenuniverse
A netball team of 7 players is to be chosen from a list of 12.
(i) How many different teams of 7 can be chosen? [1]
(ii) The list of 12 includes Anna and Annette. A team of 7 people is chosen at random. Given that at least one of Anna and Annette is chosen, find the probability that both of them are chosen. [3]

I've done the first part.

But on part 2 I am getting 6/11 when the answer is 3/8.

My reasoning is.. if one of A1 or A2 is chosen then we can just forget about them for now. So.. the question would become..

I have 11 people. I need to choose 6. What's the probability one specific person, A, is chosen?

So I did 10C5/11C6 (total teams of 6 with A/ total teams) and got 6/11.

Where am I going wrong? I have a feeling it is something to do with the fact that the 'given' person could be A1 or A2, but I just can't get my head around it.


You're not accounting for the 'at least one' bit. You're assuming 'exactly one'.
Original post by Zacken
You're not accounting for the 'at least one' bit. You're assuming 'exactly one'.


How could I account for that?
Reply 3
Original post by stolenuniverse
How could I account for that?


Actually now that I've worked through the problem, I get 6/11 as well. So either I've made a mistake (very possible - did it on a piece of scrap quickly) somewhere or the book is incorrect.
Original post by Zacken
Actually now that I've worked through the problem, I get 6/11 as well. So either I've made a mistake (very possible - did it on a piece of scrap quickly) somewhere or the book is incorrect.
I believe the book is correct. I think it's clear the difficulty is in evaluating the number of ways of choosing a group with at least one of Anna and Annette.

I did this as "# of groups with Anna" + "# of groups with Annette" - "#of groups with Anna + Annette".

(Note: I also did a quick check via computer and that also gives 3/8).
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 5
Original post by DFranklin
I believe the book is correct. I think it's clear the difficulty is in evaluating the number of ways of choosing a group with at least one of Anna and Annette.

I did this as "# of groups with Anna" + "# of groups with Annette" - "#of groups with Anna + Annette".

(Note: I also did a quick check via computer and that also gives 3/8).


Ah, I see. Cheers for that. I originally did it as (106)+(105){{10}\choose{6}} + {{10}\choose{5}} as "# of groups with exactly one of them" + "# of groups with both of them".

I see my mistake now: should have multiplied the first term by 2 since there are two possibilities.

Spoiler



(Sorry OP - I made a stupid mistake)
Original post by Zacken
Actually now that I've worked through the problem, I get 6/11 as well. So either I've made a mistake (very possible - did it on a piece of scrap quickly) somewhere or the book is incorrect.


You want

P(A1A2(A1A2)(A1Aˉ2)(Aˉ1A2))=n(A1A2)n(A1A2)(A1Aˉ2)(Aˉ1A2))P(A_1 \cap A_2 | (A_1 \cap A_2) \cup (A_1 \cap \bar{A}_2) \cup (\bar{A}_1 \cap A_2)) \\ = \frac{n(A_1 \cap A_2)}{ n( A_1 \cap A_2) \cup (A_1 \cap \bar{A}_2) \cup (\bar{A}_1 \cap A_2))}

where A1,A2A_1, A_2 are Anna and Annette. This seems to work out to 3/8

[edit: beaten by others, but latex of this quality shouldn't be deleted lightly]
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 7
Original post by atsruser
You want

P(A1A2(A1A2)(A1Aˉ2)(Aˉ1A2))=n(A1A2)n(A1A2)(A1Aˉ2)(Aˉ1A2))P(A_1 \cap A_2 | (A_1 \cap A_2) \cup (A_1 \cap \bar{A}_2) \cup (\bar{A}_1 \cap A_2)) \\ = \frac{n(A_1 \cap A_2)}{ n( A_1 \cap A_2) \cup (A_1 \cap \bar{A}_2) \cup (\bar{A}_1 \cap A_2))}

where A1,A2A_1, A_2 are Anna and Annette. This seems to work out to 3/8


Yep, my mistake was to treat (A1A^2)(A^1A2)(A_1 \cap \hat{A}_2) \cup (\hat{A}_1 \cap A_2) as just one A1A^2A_1 \cap \hat{A}_2 for whatever reason was originally going on through my head at the time...

Ta.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by atsruser
You want

P(A1A2(A1A2)(A1Aˉ2)(Aˉ1A2))=n(A1A2)n(A1A2)(A1Aˉ2)(Aˉ1A2))P(A_1 \cap A_2 | (A_1 \cap A_2) \cup (A_1 \cap \bar{A}_2) \cup (\bar{A}_1 \cap A_2)) \\ = \frac{n(A_1 \cap A_2)}{ n( A_1 \cap A_2) \cup (A_1 \cap \bar{A}_2) \cup (\bar{A}_1 \cap A_2))}

where A1,A2A_1, A_2 are Anna and Annette. This seems to work out to 3/8

[edit: beaten by others, but latex of this quality shouldn't be deleted lightly]
Going to be a git and point out your LaTeX would be improved by using \dfrac instead of \frac:

P(A1A2(A1A2)(A1Aˉ2)(Aˉ1A2))=n(A1A2)n(A1A2)(A1Aˉ2)(Aˉ1A2))P(A_1 \cap A_2 | (A_1 \cap A_2) \cup (A_1 \cap \bar{A}_2) \cup (\bar{A}_1 \cap A_2)) \\ \\ = \dfrac{n(A_1 \cap A_2)}{ n( A_1 \cap A_2) \cup (A_1 \cap \bar{A}_2) \cup (\bar{A}_1 \cap A_2))}
Original post by Zacken
Yep, my mistake was to treat
Unparseable latex formula:

(A_1 \cap \hat{A}_2) \union (\hat{A}_1 \cap A_2)

as just one A1A^2A_1 \cap \hat{A}_2 for whatever reason was originally going on through my head at the time...

Ta.


I wouldn't worry too much since:

1) probability is a silly subject
2) in my first two attempts, I found the probability to be > 1 - got confused as to what I was counting.
You can also get to 672 via 12C7 - 10C7, where 10C7 is the number of teams with neither Anna nor Anette.
Original post by DFranklin
Going to be a git and point out your LaTeX would be improved by using \dfrac instead of \frac:

Cool - didn't know about that. Thanks.
Original post by old_engineer
You can also get to 672 via 12C7 - 10C7, where 10C7 is the number of teams with neither Anna nor Anette.


Yes. Nicer than my denominator.

Quick Reply

Latest