2.7.5 · D4Statistics & Probability — Intermediate

Exercises — Probability — classical, empirical, axiomatic (Kolmogorov axioms)

1,972 words9 min readBack to topic

Before we start, here is a picture of the three tools you will keep reaching for, because most mistakes come from grabbing the wrong one.

Figure — Probability — classical, empirical, axiomatic (Kolmogorov axioms)

L1 — Recognition

Goal: name which tool applies and read off the numbers.

Recall Solution 1.1

(a) A fair die means all six faces are equally likely, so we count — this is classical. (b) Favourable outcomes = multiples of in = , so . Total .

Recall Solution 1.2

A pin has no symmetry — "point-up" and "point-down" are not equally likely, so there is no of equal outcomes to count. We must measure: this is empirical.

Recall Solution 1.3

Axiom 1, Non-negativity: for every event. A probability can never be negative, so is illegal. (This is the "No" in No–Sure–Split.)


L2 — Application

Goal: plug into the addition and complement rules correctly.

Recall Solution 2.1

All cards are equally likely → classical. The overlap = face cards that are spades = J♠, Q♠, K♠, so . Addition rule (subtract the double-counted overlap):

Recall Solution 2.2

"At least one head" has many cases; its complement "no heads" (all tails, TTTT) has exactly one. Use the complement rule. Each of the sequences is equally likely, and TTTT is one of them:

Recall Solution 2.3

Ordered pairs keep outcomes equally likely → . Sums : sum : ; sum : ; sum : . That is .


L3 — Analysis

Goal: choose the right decomposition, handle overlaps and unequal-likelihood.

Recall Solution 3.1

Rearrange the addition rule to solve for the overlap: Now means "neither nor " (De Morgan). Use the complement rule:

Recall Solution 3.2

Why not ? Faces are not equally likely, so counting fails — we use the axioms directly. (a) Normalisation (axiom 2, ) and additivity over the six disjoint singletons: (b) Even faces are disjoint, so add:

Recall Solution 3.3

(a) Empirical: (b) For independent events the parent's Independence of Events gives :


L4 — Synthesis

Goal: combine counting, complement, and conditional/independence ideas.

Recall Solution 4.1

Direct counting of "at least one" is messy; its complement "no six in any roll" is clean, and rolls are independent so probabilities multiply.

Recall Solution 4.2

Split the event "red" by which urn we used (a disjoint split — Law of Total Probability, built on Conditional Probability & Bayes' Theorem): Here , , :

Recall Solution 4.3

All committees equally likely → classical, and we count with Permutations & Combinations. Total committees: Complement "no woman" = all from the men:


L5 — Mastery

Goal: prove a general fact and stress-test degenerate/limiting cases.

Recall Solution 5.1

Start from the exact addition rule (derived in the parent from the axioms): By axiom 1, . Subtracting a non-negative number can only decrease the total, so: Equality holds exactly when — in particular when and are disjoint (then axiom 3 gives plain addition). ∎

Recall Solution 5.2

If , split into two disjoint pieces: the part inside , and the rest. By axiom 3 (disjoint add): Since (axiom 1), we get . ∎ (This is why bigger events never have smaller probability — a picture: is a smaller region sitting entirely inside .)

Figure — Probability — classical, empirical, axiomatic (Kolmogorov axioms)
Recall Solution 5.3

(a) , so (axiom 2). Always , whatever is. (b) From monotonicity, so . Also ... more precisely: disjoint, so . Now and , so by monotonicity . Hence (c) For a single exact point in a continuous space, . Yet the dart can land there — so this is a genuine event of probability that is not impossible. The axioms permit without (see the parent's third "steel-manned" mistake).


Recall Self-check summary (reveal after finishing)

L1: , , axiom 1. — L2: , , . — L3: , ; , even ; , . — L4: , , . — L5: proofs; ; ; but possible.

Connections