Molly needs to roll a 1 in a die and she has 3 tries. What is the probability that she will succeed?
can some body answer this with an explanation.
Regards
Naren
Probability
This topic has expert replies
-
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2015 6:51 pm
- Location: London
-
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2015 6:51 pm
- Location: London
Hi All,
Thanks for passing by, found the answer. If anyone is interested below is how.
Probability to roll a 1 at the first try: 1/6
Probability to roll a 1 at the second try: 5/6 * 1/6 = 5/36
Probability to roll a 1 at the third try: 5/6 * 5/6 * 1/6 = 25/216
Since she can succeed with one OR two OR three tries, we sum it: 91/216
P(2nd roll) is the probability that you DON'T roll a 1 on the 1st roll, because the only way to get to the 2nd roll is to avoid a 1 on the 1st roll. this is why we need to multiply the 1/6 by 5/6.
Regards
Naren
Thanks for passing by, found the answer. If anyone is interested below is how.
Probability to roll a 1 at the first try: 1/6
Probability to roll a 1 at the second try: 5/6 * 1/6 = 5/36
Probability to roll a 1 at the third try: 5/6 * 5/6 * 1/6 = 25/216
Since she can succeed with one OR two OR three tries, we sum it: 91/216
P(2nd roll) is the probability that you DON'T roll a 1 on the 1st roll, because the only way to get to the 2nd roll is to avoid a 1 on the 1st roll. this is why we need to multiply the 1/6 by 5/6.
Regards
Naren
GMAT/MBA Expert
- Brent@GMATPrepNow
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 16207
- Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
- Location: Vancouver, BC
- Thanked: 5254 times
- Followed by:1268 members
- GMAT Score:770
We want P(at least one 1 in three rolls).NarendraSure wrote:Molly needs to roll a 1 in a die and she has 3 tries. What is the probability that she will succeed?
can some body answer this with an explanation.
Regards
Naren
When it comes to probability questions involving "at least," it's best to try using the complement.
That is, P(Event A happening) = 1 - P(Event A not happening)
So, here we get: P(getting at least one 1 in three rolls) = 1 - P(not getting at least one 1 in three rolls)
What does it mean to not get at least one 1? It means getting zero 1's.
So, we can write: P(getting at least one 1) = 1 - P(getting zero 1's in three rolls)
P(get zero 1's in three rolls)
P(get zero 1's in three rolls) = P(no 1 on 1st roll AND no 1 on 2nd roll AND no 1 on 3rd roll )
= P(no 1 on 1st roll) x P(no 1 on 2nd roll) x P(no 1 on 3rd roll)
= 5/6 x 5/6 x 5/6
= 125/216
So, P(getting at least one 1) = 1 - 125/216
= [spoiler]91/216[/spoiler]
Cheers,
Brent
-
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2015 6:51 pm
- Location: London
-
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2630
- Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 3:32 pm
- Location: East Bay all the way
- Thanked: 625 times
- Followed by:119 members
- GMAT Score:780
Just to illustrate why Brent's approach is so good, consider the positive approach, in which we list all the cases.
To get exactly one 1, we would need to roll 1, not-1, not-1 in some order. That gives us
1XX = (1/6) * (5/6) * (5/6) = 25/216
But this could happen in any of THREE orders: 1XX, X1X, XX1. So we have 3 * (25/216) = 75/216.
Now we consider exactly two 1s, which is basically the same idea:
11X = (1/6) * (1/6) * (5/6) = 5/216
This could happen in three orders as well (11X, 1X1, X11), so 3 * (5/216) = 15/216.
We also have exactly three ones, which is 111 = (1/6)*(1/6)*(1/6) = 1/216.
Adding these up, we have 75/216 + 15/216 + 1/216 = 91/216. Yuck!
So doing P(At least one) = 1 - P(No ones) is much more efficient.
To get exactly one 1, we would need to roll 1, not-1, not-1 in some order. That gives us
1XX = (1/6) * (5/6) * (5/6) = 25/216
But this could happen in any of THREE orders: 1XX, X1X, XX1. So we have 3 * (25/216) = 75/216.
Now we consider exactly two 1s, which is basically the same idea:
11X = (1/6) * (1/6) * (5/6) = 5/216
This could happen in three orders as well (11X, 1X1, X11), so 3 * (5/216) = 15/216.
We also have exactly three ones, which is 111 = (1/6)*(1/6)*(1/6) = 1/216.
Adding these up, we have 75/216 + 15/216 + 1/216 = 91/216. Yuck!
So doing P(At least one) = 1 - P(No ones) is much more efficient.
-
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2015 6:51 pm
- Location: London
- talaangoshtari
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 154
- Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 4:29 am
- Thanked: 8 times
- Followed by:1 members
In probability, we have a distribution called Geometric Distribution.
P(X = x) = p.(q)^(x - 1)
p = probability of success
q = probability of failure
Here we have,
P(1《 X 《 3) = P(X = 1) + P(X = 2) + P(X = 3)
= p + pq + pq^2 = (1/6) + (1/6)(5/6) + (1/6)(5/6)^2 = 91/216
P(X = x) = p.(q)^(x - 1)
p = probability of success
q = probability of failure
Here we have,
P(1《 X 《 3) = P(X = 1) + P(X = 2) + P(X = 3)
= p + pq + pq^2 = (1/6) + (1/6)(5/6) + (1/6)(5/6)^2 = 91/216
-
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2015 6:51 pm
- Location: London
Hi talaangoshtari,
how do we need to determine the usage of this neat little formula.
Regards
Naren
how do we need to determine the usage of this neat little formula.
Regards
Naren
- talaangoshtari
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 154
- Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 4:29 am
- Thanked: 8 times
- Followed by:1 members
Hi NarendraSure,
Geometric distribution computes the probabability of the first success after k - 1 failures. In this problem there are 3 scenarios:
1. We roll a 1 in a die in the first try, so we have one success.
2. We roll a 1 in a die in the second try, so we have one failure and one success.
3. We roll a 1 in a die in the third try, so we have two failures and one success.
Geometric distribution computes the probabability of the first success after k - 1 failures. In this problem there are 3 scenarios:
1. We roll a 1 in a die in the first try, so we have one success.
2. We roll a 1 in a die in the second try, so we have one failure and one success.
3. We roll a 1 in a die in the third try, so we have two failures and one success.
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 518
- Joined: Tue May 12, 2015 8:25 pm
- Thanked: 10 times
Brent's way to solve is simple calculation. Great.
But it is difficult to strike. But it is very good to solve such questions
P(A) = 1- P(Not A)
But it is difficult to strike. But it is very good to solve such questions
P(A) = 1- P(Not A)