If the gambler's fallacy is false, how do notions of “expected number” of events work?Probability problem-middle school levelHave I calculated this probability correct?Spinner numbers probabilitySum to infinity of a spinner with 3 coloursIf the spinner is spun 2 times what is the probability that it lands on “A” both timesBest strategy for a game board spinnerOdds of Coming Out Ahead in RouletteProbability and permutationCalculating average win Wheel of fortune, with possible re-spins.
What is this gigantic dish at Ben Gurion airport?
Why is this weapon searching for a new owner?
Is "you will become a subject matter expert" code for "you'll be working on your own 100% of the time"?
Thematic, genred concepts in Ancient Greek?
What was redacted in the Yellowhammer report? (Point 15)
Is a suit against a University Dorm for changing policies on a whim likely to succeed (USA)?
Is low emotional intelligence associated with right-wing and prejudiced attitudes?
What does a Light weapon mean mechanically?
Can you add polynomial terms to multiple linear regression?
Why does the speed of sound decrease at high altitudes although the air density decreases?
What is my breathable atmosphere composed of?
Double it your way
Are space camera sensors usually round, or square?
Bash, import output from command as command
Mutable named tuple with default value and conditional rounding support
Can I toggle Do Not Disturb on/off on my Mac as easily as I can on my iPhone?
Why is the Digital 0 not 0V in computer systems?
Which is the current decimal separator?
How are aircraft depainted?
Why is my fire extinguisher emptied after one use?
How do I say "quirky" in German without sounding derogatory?
getting syntax error in simple bash script
What explanation do proponents of a Scotland-NI bridge give for it breaking Brexit impasse?
Has SHA256 been broken by Treadwell Stanton DuPont?
If the gambler's fallacy is false, how do notions of “expected number” of events work?
Probability problem-middle school levelHave I calculated this probability correct?Spinner numbers probabilitySum to infinity of a spinner with 3 coloursIf the spinner is spun 2 times what is the probability that it lands on “A” both timesBest strategy for a game board spinnerOdds of Coming Out Ahead in RouletteProbability and permutationCalculating average win Wheel of fortune, with possible re-spins.
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
Imagine there is a fair spinner that could land on any number $1$ through $100$. I understand that the chance of any number appearing on the next spin is $frac1100$, and if you spin the spinner $100$ times then the expected number of $5$'s, for example, is $1$.
However, I have the following questions:
- If the spinner does not land on $5$ in the first spin then this does not make the chance of getting a $5$ on the second spin any more or less likely (to assume otherwise would imply the gambler's fallacy). This means that we now must spin the spinner a total of $101$ times in order to expect exactly one $5$. Doesn't this cause some kind of infinite regress? If we never expect a $5$ on any given spin, and no $5$'s have come up thus far in the first $n$ spins, then won't it take $n+100$ spins to expect a 5? I know that at some point if we examine a group of spins then we can expect something with low probability like spinning a $5$ to occur, but it seems strange and counter-intuitive to me that though we expect a $5$ to come up in a sufficiently large group of spins, on each individual spin we do not expect a $5$. Furthermore, we do not expect any number to come up on the first spin (in that the probability of any particular number appearing is low), and yet we know for certain that some number will still come up.
- For there to be a greater than $50%$ chance of spinning a $5$, we must spin the spinner $69$ times according to the following calculation:
$$P(textNot rolling a 5 in n text spins)=left(frac99100right)^n \ left(frac99100right)^n < 0.5 \ log_0.990.5=68.967... $$ Hence, it must be spun $69$ times for there to be a greater than $50%$ chance of there being a $5$. Why is this not $50$ spins, as we expect $0.5$ $5$'s to come up in this period. Also, I have the same question that once a $5$ does not come up, don't we have to spin it $70$ times for there to a greater than $50%$ probability, and can't this cause the same infinite regress as described above?
probability definition
$endgroup$
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Imagine there is a fair spinner that could land on any number $1$ through $100$. I understand that the chance of any number appearing on the next spin is $frac1100$, and if you spin the spinner $100$ times then the expected number of $5$'s, for example, is $1$.
However, I have the following questions:
- If the spinner does not land on $5$ in the first spin then this does not make the chance of getting a $5$ on the second spin any more or less likely (to assume otherwise would imply the gambler's fallacy). This means that we now must spin the spinner a total of $101$ times in order to expect exactly one $5$. Doesn't this cause some kind of infinite regress? If we never expect a $5$ on any given spin, and no $5$'s have come up thus far in the first $n$ spins, then won't it take $n+100$ spins to expect a 5? I know that at some point if we examine a group of spins then we can expect something with low probability like spinning a $5$ to occur, but it seems strange and counter-intuitive to me that though we expect a $5$ to come up in a sufficiently large group of spins, on each individual spin we do not expect a $5$. Furthermore, we do not expect any number to come up on the first spin (in that the probability of any particular number appearing is low), and yet we know for certain that some number will still come up.
- For there to be a greater than $50%$ chance of spinning a $5$, we must spin the spinner $69$ times according to the following calculation:
$$P(textNot rolling a 5 in n text spins)=left(frac99100right)^n \ left(frac99100right)^n < 0.5 \ log_0.990.5=68.967... $$ Hence, it must be spun $69$ times for there to be a greater than $50%$ chance of there being a $5$. Why is this not $50$ spins, as we expect $0.5$ $5$'s to come up in this period. Also, I have the same question that once a $5$ does not come up, don't we have to spin it $70$ times for there to a greater than $50%$ probability, and can't this cause the same infinite regress as described above?
probability definition
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I think this phenomenon gets even weirder on uncountable events. For example, think about a random number generator in the range $[0,1]$. The probability of any particular number being chosen is $0$, but the probability of a number being chosen is $1$. Weird
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is an excellent question, since probability is super counter-intuitive, with the number of "paradoxes" and unintuitive problems it creates. But, learning it is all about recalibrating your intuition to guide you properly.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@DonThousand Does this occur because of the inclusion of irrational numbers and infinite? I have heard that when you move into the realm of the infinite there are events w/ probability 0 that are possible.
$endgroup$
– Joe
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Joe Pretty much. If the numbers had non-zero probability of being chosen, then the total probability of any number being chosen would clearly be infinite, which isn't possible. Hence, the probability must be 0.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
Another fun example is flipping coins. The probability of an infinite sequence of coin flips always being heads is 0, even though it is $textitpossible$.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Imagine there is a fair spinner that could land on any number $1$ through $100$. I understand that the chance of any number appearing on the next spin is $frac1100$, and if you spin the spinner $100$ times then the expected number of $5$'s, for example, is $1$.
However, I have the following questions:
- If the spinner does not land on $5$ in the first spin then this does not make the chance of getting a $5$ on the second spin any more or less likely (to assume otherwise would imply the gambler's fallacy). This means that we now must spin the spinner a total of $101$ times in order to expect exactly one $5$. Doesn't this cause some kind of infinite regress? If we never expect a $5$ on any given spin, and no $5$'s have come up thus far in the first $n$ spins, then won't it take $n+100$ spins to expect a 5? I know that at some point if we examine a group of spins then we can expect something with low probability like spinning a $5$ to occur, but it seems strange and counter-intuitive to me that though we expect a $5$ to come up in a sufficiently large group of spins, on each individual spin we do not expect a $5$. Furthermore, we do not expect any number to come up on the first spin (in that the probability of any particular number appearing is low), and yet we know for certain that some number will still come up.
- For there to be a greater than $50%$ chance of spinning a $5$, we must spin the spinner $69$ times according to the following calculation:
$$P(textNot rolling a 5 in n text spins)=left(frac99100right)^n \ left(frac99100right)^n < 0.5 \ log_0.990.5=68.967... $$ Hence, it must be spun $69$ times for there to be a greater than $50%$ chance of there being a $5$. Why is this not $50$ spins, as we expect $0.5$ $5$'s to come up in this period. Also, I have the same question that once a $5$ does not come up, don't we have to spin it $70$ times for there to a greater than $50%$ probability, and can't this cause the same infinite regress as described above?
probability definition
$endgroup$
Imagine there is a fair spinner that could land on any number $1$ through $100$. I understand that the chance of any number appearing on the next spin is $frac1100$, and if you spin the spinner $100$ times then the expected number of $5$'s, for example, is $1$.
However, I have the following questions:
- If the spinner does not land on $5$ in the first spin then this does not make the chance of getting a $5$ on the second spin any more or less likely (to assume otherwise would imply the gambler's fallacy). This means that we now must spin the spinner a total of $101$ times in order to expect exactly one $5$. Doesn't this cause some kind of infinite regress? If we never expect a $5$ on any given spin, and no $5$'s have come up thus far in the first $n$ spins, then won't it take $n+100$ spins to expect a 5? I know that at some point if we examine a group of spins then we can expect something with low probability like spinning a $5$ to occur, but it seems strange and counter-intuitive to me that though we expect a $5$ to come up in a sufficiently large group of spins, on each individual spin we do not expect a $5$. Furthermore, we do not expect any number to come up on the first spin (in that the probability of any particular number appearing is low), and yet we know for certain that some number will still come up.
- For there to be a greater than $50%$ chance of spinning a $5$, we must spin the spinner $69$ times according to the following calculation:
$$P(textNot rolling a 5 in n text spins)=left(frac99100right)^n \ left(frac99100right)^n < 0.5 \ log_0.990.5=68.967... $$ Hence, it must be spun $69$ times for there to be a greater than $50%$ chance of there being a $5$. Why is this not $50$ spins, as we expect $0.5$ $5$'s to come up in this period. Also, I have the same question that once a $5$ does not come up, don't we have to spin it $70$ times for there to a greater than $50%$ probability, and can't this cause the same infinite regress as described above?
probability definition
probability definition
asked 9 hours ago
JoeJoe
1988 bronze badges
1988 bronze badges
1
$begingroup$
I think this phenomenon gets even weirder on uncountable events. For example, think about a random number generator in the range $[0,1]$. The probability of any particular number being chosen is $0$, but the probability of a number being chosen is $1$. Weird
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is an excellent question, since probability is super counter-intuitive, with the number of "paradoxes" and unintuitive problems it creates. But, learning it is all about recalibrating your intuition to guide you properly.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@DonThousand Does this occur because of the inclusion of irrational numbers and infinite? I have heard that when you move into the realm of the infinite there are events w/ probability 0 that are possible.
$endgroup$
– Joe
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Joe Pretty much. If the numbers had non-zero probability of being chosen, then the total probability of any number being chosen would clearly be infinite, which isn't possible. Hence, the probability must be 0.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
Another fun example is flipping coins. The probability of an infinite sequence of coin flips always being heads is 0, even though it is $textitpossible$.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
1
$begingroup$
I think this phenomenon gets even weirder on uncountable events. For example, think about a random number generator in the range $[0,1]$. The probability of any particular number being chosen is $0$, but the probability of a number being chosen is $1$. Weird
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is an excellent question, since probability is super counter-intuitive, with the number of "paradoxes" and unintuitive problems it creates. But, learning it is all about recalibrating your intuition to guide you properly.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@DonThousand Does this occur because of the inclusion of irrational numbers and infinite? I have heard that when you move into the realm of the infinite there are events w/ probability 0 that are possible.
$endgroup$
– Joe
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Joe Pretty much. If the numbers had non-zero probability of being chosen, then the total probability of any number being chosen would clearly be infinite, which isn't possible. Hence, the probability must be 0.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
Another fun example is flipping coins. The probability of an infinite sequence of coin flips always being heads is 0, even though it is $textitpossible$.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
I think this phenomenon gets even weirder on uncountable events. For example, think about a random number generator in the range $[0,1]$. The probability of any particular number being chosen is $0$, but the probability of a number being chosen is $1$. Weird
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
I think this phenomenon gets even weirder on uncountable events. For example, think about a random number generator in the range $[0,1]$. The probability of any particular number being chosen is $0$, but the probability of a number being chosen is $1$. Weird
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is an excellent question, since probability is super counter-intuitive, with the number of "paradoxes" and unintuitive problems it creates. But, learning it is all about recalibrating your intuition to guide you properly.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is an excellent question, since probability is super counter-intuitive, with the number of "paradoxes" and unintuitive problems it creates. But, learning it is all about recalibrating your intuition to guide you properly.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@DonThousand Does this occur because of the inclusion of irrational numbers and infinite? I have heard that when you move into the realm of the infinite there are events w/ probability 0 that are possible.
$endgroup$
– Joe
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@DonThousand Does this occur because of the inclusion of irrational numbers and infinite? I have heard that when you move into the realm of the infinite there are events w/ probability 0 that are possible.
$endgroup$
– Joe
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Joe Pretty much. If the numbers had non-zero probability of being chosen, then the total probability of any number being chosen would clearly be infinite, which isn't possible. Hence, the probability must be 0.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Joe Pretty much. If the numbers had non-zero probability of being chosen, then the total probability of any number being chosen would clearly be infinite, which isn't possible. Hence, the probability must be 0.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
Another fun example is flipping coins. The probability of an infinite sequence of coin flips always being heads is 0, even though it is $textitpossible$.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
Another fun example is flipping coins. The probability of an infinite sequence of coin flips always being heads is 0, even though it is $textitpossible$.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
But we do expect a 5 on any single spin. Or, at least, we expect $1%$ of a 5 (if that even makes sense).
More seriously, though, on any single spin the probability of getting a 5 is low. However, that is exactly outweighed by how much smaller the wait until the next 5 becomes if you get a 5 next.
In $99%$ of cases, you will get a not-5 on the first spin, and in those cases you are expected to spin a total of 101 times before you see your first 5 (including the first failed spin that just failed). However, in $1%$ of cases, you spin a 5, and in those cases you are expected to spin 1 time before you get your first 5. These cancel out to give a total of 100 expected spins.
As for question 2, that's because you can have two or more 5's appear. The possibility of two or more 5's within the first 50 spins, but still an expected number of 0.5 5's means the probability of any 5 at all must be less than $0.5$:
$$
0.5=textExpected number of 5's=1cdot P(textone 5)+2cdot P(texttwo 5's)+cdots\
implies P(textat least one 5)=P(textone 5)+P(texttwo 5's)+cdots<0.5
$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I don't think this fully addresses OPs issues. Especially since on uncountable domains, the probability of any individual outcome literally is $0$.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@DonThousand The infinite stuff was things you said in the comments. The question that was asked was about roulettes.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
I agree, but I think that the essential confusion that OP has is a bit deeper than that. Agree to disagree I guess.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think phrasing like "you are expected to spin 101 times before you see your first five" is part of what is contributing to the confusion in the first place, and is also not at all an accurate representation of the idea of expectation. It is in fact somewhat unlikely to have to spin 100 times before you see your first five, and also somewhat likely to have to spin more than this to see a five.
$endgroup$
– Morgan Rodgers
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MorganRodgers You're right, expectation does not mean most likely result. The next 5 is actually at any point in the process most likely to be on the next spin, slightly less likely to be on the spin after that, and so on. However, I stand by my statement that the expected number of spins until we see a 5 is 100 (or 101 if we know the first one failed).
$endgroup$
– Arthur
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Question 1 does not really lead to an infinite regress: when we talk about probability, it only makes sense to talk about future events. So when you say
This means that we now must spin the spinner a total of 101 times in
order to expect exactly one 5.
This is not accurate, and moreover is a misrepresentation of what we mean by "expectation". What the expectation is telling you is, if you repeated an experiment of spinning 100 times over and over, the average number of fives that would appear is 1. It does not mean you can expect exactly one 5, in most trials like this there will be more than one 5 and in a decent number of trials there will be 0 5s. But again, we can only speak about the probability of rolling a 5 on future spins.
For question 2, on 50 spins, repeating this experiment a large number of times, the average number of 5s that will come up is 0.50. But some of these trials will have more than one 5 appear; for this average to work out, there must be no 5s appearing in more than half of the trials (and so a less than 50% chance of having at least one 5 appear).
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
If you repeat the experiment over and over, spinning until you get your first 5, the average length of each experiment is most likely going to be 100. That is what "The expected number of spins until you get your first 5 is 100" means.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
It's worth noting that, as you flip the spinner, you have more information than you did before - which changes your expectations. A simpler example, without expectation, would be that if you flip a fair coin twice, there is a $1/4$ chance that both flips are heads. However, we can think about what happens after the first flip:
If our first flip lands heads, then there is now a $1/2$ chance that both flips will be. If not, there is a $0$ chance of that. Prior to the first flip, we know that there is a $1/2$ chance of landing in either of these two cases, so the total probability is $1/2cdot 1/2 + 1/2cdot 0=1/4$.
A similar thing happens with your example: suppose we let $X$ be the number of times $5$ comes up in $100$ spins of the spinner. Most of the time - $99/100$ times to be precise, the first spin is not $5$, and, given this, we now only have $99$ spins left, so expect $X$ to be $99/100$. On the other hand, however, if $5$ does come up, we now expect $X$ to be $1+99/100$ - and averaging these two cases with their probabilities does indeed show that we expect $X$ to be $1$ overall.
Basically, you see that if you fail to get a $5$ on the first round, then your odds of seeing a $5$ have shifted downwards - but this is perfectly balanced by the less likely event that you do see a $5$. This is the same as in your second example with probabilities - yes, as soon as we see that we didn't get a $5$, we still think we need the same number of further spins, but if we get a $5$, we only used $1$ spin which is way below what we thought we'd need - and balances things.
It's worth noting that expectation is a precise mathematical term that may not perfectly align to what you'd like it to mean intuitively. It does not say anything about the most likely event - for instance, if you flipped a fair coin, the expected number of heads is $1/2$, but that's not even a possible outcome. Expectation just says "look at this value over all possible ways things could play out. Average them, weighted according to probability."
This also tells us why the probabilities are not the expectations: if we make $50$ trials, the expected number of $5$'s being $1/2$ could equally well mean "There is a $99/100$ chance that there were no $5$'s, but there's a $1/100$ chance that there were $200$ instances of $5$" or "There is a $1/2$ chance that there were no $5$'s and a $1/2$ chance that there was one five" - with the truth in this case lying in between those two somewhat absurd cases. Basically, cases where there are lots of $5$'s get counted disproportionately, where probability would count them equally to the case where there is just one $5$.
As for the paradox that no number is likely, but some number always exists, this is the same deal for probability: here are two variants of a game you might play:
Guess a number. Spin the wheel. You win if they are equal.
In this game, you will only win with probability $1/100$ because you have no information. The low probability measures this game. A related game is the following:
Spin the wheel. Guess a number. You win if they are equal.
This game you can always win because you just read off what number was spun! The relevant probability here is more like "What's the probability you spun a $5$, given that you spun a $5$" - which is $1$. You just need to be careful about exactly what you already know if you're dealing with probabilities - otherwise seemingly paradoxical results start to appear.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Suppose that the expected duration until getting a $5$ is $x$. In the event that we don't get a $5$ on the first spin, the expected duration of that trial does increase to $x+1$. However, that event only has a $frac99100$ chance of happening. The event that we got a $5$ on the first spin has a $frac1100$ chance of happening. Therefore, the expected duration is
$$
frac1100cdot1+frac99100,(x+1)=x
$$
which has the solution $x=100$.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Before the first spin, the expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the first $100$ spins is $1$.
Suppose the first spin yields a value not equal to $5$.
If we are given that information, then:
- The expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the first $100$ spins (spins $1$ through $100$) is now less than $1$ (more precisely, it's equal to $largefrac99100$).$\[4pt]$
- However the expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the next $100$ spins (spins $2$ through $101$) is equal to $1$.
Extra information can change the probability distribution of a random variable, hence can change its expectation.
Regarding the second question . . .
Assume independent spins, each yielding a random element of $1,...,n$, with all values equally likely.
Let $p=largefrac1n$, and let $X$ be the number of spins until the occurrence of a given value, say $1$.
For each positive integer $k$, let $x_k=P(X=k)$.
Letting $p=largefrac1n$, we get
$$
x_k=(1-p)^k-1p
qquad;;;;;
$$
and the mean of $X$ is given by
beginalign*
E(X)&
=1x_1+2x_2+ 3x_3+cdots\[1pt]
&=sum_k=1^infty kx_k\[1pt]
&=sum_k=1^infty k(1-p)^k-1p\[1pt]
&=psum_k=1^infty k(1-p)^k-1\[1pt]
&=p,cdot,frac1p^2\[1pt]
&=frac1p\[3pt]
&=n\[1pt]
endalign*
If the distribution of $X$ is was symmetrical, the median would be equal to the mean (but not half of the mean).
However the distribution of $X$ is not symmetrical, so we can't infer the median of $X$ just from the knowledge that the mean of $X$ is $n$.
For the case $n=100$, the mean of $X$ is $100$, whereas the median of $X$ is $69$ which is less than the mean.
But in any case, there's no good reason to expect the median of $X$ to be exactly half of the mean.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3354203%2fif-the-gamblers-fallacy-is-false-how-do-notions-of-expected-number-of-events%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
But we do expect a 5 on any single spin. Or, at least, we expect $1%$ of a 5 (if that even makes sense).
More seriously, though, on any single spin the probability of getting a 5 is low. However, that is exactly outweighed by how much smaller the wait until the next 5 becomes if you get a 5 next.
In $99%$ of cases, you will get a not-5 on the first spin, and in those cases you are expected to spin a total of 101 times before you see your first 5 (including the first failed spin that just failed). However, in $1%$ of cases, you spin a 5, and in those cases you are expected to spin 1 time before you get your first 5. These cancel out to give a total of 100 expected spins.
As for question 2, that's because you can have two or more 5's appear. The possibility of two or more 5's within the first 50 spins, but still an expected number of 0.5 5's means the probability of any 5 at all must be less than $0.5$:
$$
0.5=textExpected number of 5's=1cdot P(textone 5)+2cdot P(texttwo 5's)+cdots\
implies P(textat least one 5)=P(textone 5)+P(texttwo 5's)+cdots<0.5
$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I don't think this fully addresses OPs issues. Especially since on uncountable domains, the probability of any individual outcome literally is $0$.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@DonThousand The infinite stuff was things you said in the comments. The question that was asked was about roulettes.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
I agree, but I think that the essential confusion that OP has is a bit deeper than that. Agree to disagree I guess.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think phrasing like "you are expected to spin 101 times before you see your first five" is part of what is contributing to the confusion in the first place, and is also not at all an accurate representation of the idea of expectation. It is in fact somewhat unlikely to have to spin 100 times before you see your first five, and also somewhat likely to have to spin more than this to see a five.
$endgroup$
– Morgan Rodgers
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MorganRodgers You're right, expectation does not mean most likely result. The next 5 is actually at any point in the process most likely to be on the next spin, slightly less likely to be on the spin after that, and so on. However, I stand by my statement that the expected number of spins until we see a 5 is 100 (or 101 if we know the first one failed).
$endgroup$
– Arthur
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
But we do expect a 5 on any single spin. Or, at least, we expect $1%$ of a 5 (if that even makes sense).
More seriously, though, on any single spin the probability of getting a 5 is low. However, that is exactly outweighed by how much smaller the wait until the next 5 becomes if you get a 5 next.
In $99%$ of cases, you will get a not-5 on the first spin, and in those cases you are expected to spin a total of 101 times before you see your first 5 (including the first failed spin that just failed). However, in $1%$ of cases, you spin a 5, and in those cases you are expected to spin 1 time before you get your first 5. These cancel out to give a total of 100 expected spins.
As for question 2, that's because you can have two or more 5's appear. The possibility of two or more 5's within the first 50 spins, but still an expected number of 0.5 5's means the probability of any 5 at all must be less than $0.5$:
$$
0.5=textExpected number of 5's=1cdot P(textone 5)+2cdot P(texttwo 5's)+cdots\
implies P(textat least one 5)=P(textone 5)+P(texttwo 5's)+cdots<0.5
$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I don't think this fully addresses OPs issues. Especially since on uncountable domains, the probability of any individual outcome literally is $0$.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@DonThousand The infinite stuff was things you said in the comments. The question that was asked was about roulettes.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
I agree, but I think that the essential confusion that OP has is a bit deeper than that. Agree to disagree I guess.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think phrasing like "you are expected to spin 101 times before you see your first five" is part of what is contributing to the confusion in the first place, and is also not at all an accurate representation of the idea of expectation. It is in fact somewhat unlikely to have to spin 100 times before you see your first five, and also somewhat likely to have to spin more than this to see a five.
$endgroup$
– Morgan Rodgers
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MorganRodgers You're right, expectation does not mean most likely result. The next 5 is actually at any point in the process most likely to be on the next spin, slightly less likely to be on the spin after that, and so on. However, I stand by my statement that the expected number of spins until we see a 5 is 100 (or 101 if we know the first one failed).
$endgroup$
– Arthur
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
But we do expect a 5 on any single spin. Or, at least, we expect $1%$ of a 5 (if that even makes sense).
More seriously, though, on any single spin the probability of getting a 5 is low. However, that is exactly outweighed by how much smaller the wait until the next 5 becomes if you get a 5 next.
In $99%$ of cases, you will get a not-5 on the first spin, and in those cases you are expected to spin a total of 101 times before you see your first 5 (including the first failed spin that just failed). However, in $1%$ of cases, you spin a 5, and in those cases you are expected to spin 1 time before you get your first 5. These cancel out to give a total of 100 expected spins.
As for question 2, that's because you can have two or more 5's appear. The possibility of two or more 5's within the first 50 spins, but still an expected number of 0.5 5's means the probability of any 5 at all must be less than $0.5$:
$$
0.5=textExpected number of 5's=1cdot P(textone 5)+2cdot P(texttwo 5's)+cdots\
implies P(textat least one 5)=P(textone 5)+P(texttwo 5's)+cdots<0.5
$$
$endgroup$
But we do expect a 5 on any single spin. Or, at least, we expect $1%$ of a 5 (if that even makes sense).
More seriously, though, on any single spin the probability of getting a 5 is low. However, that is exactly outweighed by how much smaller the wait until the next 5 becomes if you get a 5 next.
In $99%$ of cases, you will get a not-5 on the first spin, and in those cases you are expected to spin a total of 101 times before you see your first 5 (including the first failed spin that just failed). However, in $1%$ of cases, you spin a 5, and in those cases you are expected to spin 1 time before you get your first 5. These cancel out to give a total of 100 expected spins.
As for question 2, that's because you can have two or more 5's appear. The possibility of two or more 5's within the first 50 spins, but still an expected number of 0.5 5's means the probability of any 5 at all must be less than $0.5$:
$$
0.5=textExpected number of 5's=1cdot P(textone 5)+2cdot P(texttwo 5's)+cdots\
implies P(textat least one 5)=P(textone 5)+P(texttwo 5's)+cdots<0.5
$$
edited 8 hours ago
answered 9 hours ago
ArthurArthur
139k9 gold badges129 silver badges225 bronze badges
139k9 gold badges129 silver badges225 bronze badges
$begingroup$
I don't think this fully addresses OPs issues. Especially since on uncountable domains, the probability of any individual outcome literally is $0$.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@DonThousand The infinite stuff was things you said in the comments. The question that was asked was about roulettes.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
I agree, but I think that the essential confusion that OP has is a bit deeper than that. Agree to disagree I guess.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think phrasing like "you are expected to spin 101 times before you see your first five" is part of what is contributing to the confusion in the first place, and is also not at all an accurate representation of the idea of expectation. It is in fact somewhat unlikely to have to spin 100 times before you see your first five, and also somewhat likely to have to spin more than this to see a five.
$endgroup$
– Morgan Rodgers
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MorganRodgers You're right, expectation does not mean most likely result. The next 5 is actually at any point in the process most likely to be on the next spin, slightly less likely to be on the spin after that, and so on. However, I stand by my statement that the expected number of spins until we see a 5 is 100 (or 101 if we know the first one failed).
$endgroup$
– Arthur
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
I don't think this fully addresses OPs issues. Especially since on uncountable domains, the probability of any individual outcome literally is $0$.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@DonThousand The infinite stuff was things you said in the comments. The question that was asked was about roulettes.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
I agree, but I think that the essential confusion that OP has is a bit deeper than that. Agree to disagree I guess.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think phrasing like "you are expected to spin 101 times before you see your first five" is part of what is contributing to the confusion in the first place, and is also not at all an accurate representation of the idea of expectation. It is in fact somewhat unlikely to have to spin 100 times before you see your first five, and also somewhat likely to have to spin more than this to see a five.
$endgroup$
– Morgan Rodgers
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MorganRodgers You're right, expectation does not mean most likely result. The next 5 is actually at any point in the process most likely to be on the next spin, slightly less likely to be on the spin after that, and so on. However, I stand by my statement that the expected number of spins until we see a 5 is 100 (or 101 if we know the first one failed).
$endgroup$
– Arthur
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
I don't think this fully addresses OPs issues. Especially since on uncountable domains, the probability of any individual outcome literally is $0$.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
I don't think this fully addresses OPs issues. Especially since on uncountable domains, the probability of any individual outcome literally is $0$.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
@DonThousand The infinite stuff was things you said in the comments. The question that was asked was about roulettes.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@DonThousand The infinite stuff was things you said in the comments. The question that was asked was about roulettes.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
I agree, but I think that the essential confusion that OP has is a bit deeper than that. Agree to disagree I guess.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
I agree, but I think that the essential confusion that OP has is a bit deeper than that. Agree to disagree I guess.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
I think phrasing like "you are expected to spin 101 times before you see your first five" is part of what is contributing to the confusion in the first place, and is also not at all an accurate representation of the idea of expectation. It is in fact somewhat unlikely to have to spin 100 times before you see your first five, and also somewhat likely to have to spin more than this to see a five.
$endgroup$
– Morgan Rodgers
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
I think phrasing like "you are expected to spin 101 times before you see your first five" is part of what is contributing to the confusion in the first place, and is also not at all an accurate representation of the idea of expectation. It is in fact somewhat unlikely to have to spin 100 times before you see your first five, and also somewhat likely to have to spin more than this to see a five.
$endgroup$
– Morgan Rodgers
8 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@MorganRodgers You're right, expectation does not mean most likely result. The next 5 is actually at any point in the process most likely to be on the next spin, slightly less likely to be on the spin after that, and so on. However, I stand by my statement that the expected number of spins until we see a 5 is 100 (or 101 if we know the first one failed).
$endgroup$
– Arthur
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MorganRodgers You're right, expectation does not mean most likely result. The next 5 is actually at any point in the process most likely to be on the next spin, slightly less likely to be on the spin after that, and so on. However, I stand by my statement that the expected number of spins until we see a 5 is 100 (or 101 if we know the first one failed).
$endgroup$
– Arthur
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Question 1 does not really lead to an infinite regress: when we talk about probability, it only makes sense to talk about future events. So when you say
This means that we now must spin the spinner a total of 101 times in
order to expect exactly one 5.
This is not accurate, and moreover is a misrepresentation of what we mean by "expectation". What the expectation is telling you is, if you repeated an experiment of spinning 100 times over and over, the average number of fives that would appear is 1. It does not mean you can expect exactly one 5, in most trials like this there will be more than one 5 and in a decent number of trials there will be 0 5s. But again, we can only speak about the probability of rolling a 5 on future spins.
For question 2, on 50 spins, repeating this experiment a large number of times, the average number of 5s that will come up is 0.50. But some of these trials will have more than one 5 appear; for this average to work out, there must be no 5s appearing in more than half of the trials (and so a less than 50% chance of having at least one 5 appear).
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
If you repeat the experiment over and over, spinning until you get your first 5, the average length of each experiment is most likely going to be 100. That is what "The expected number of spins until you get your first 5 is 100" means.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Question 1 does not really lead to an infinite regress: when we talk about probability, it only makes sense to talk about future events. So when you say
This means that we now must spin the spinner a total of 101 times in
order to expect exactly one 5.
This is not accurate, and moreover is a misrepresentation of what we mean by "expectation". What the expectation is telling you is, if you repeated an experiment of spinning 100 times over and over, the average number of fives that would appear is 1. It does not mean you can expect exactly one 5, in most trials like this there will be more than one 5 and in a decent number of trials there will be 0 5s. But again, we can only speak about the probability of rolling a 5 on future spins.
For question 2, on 50 spins, repeating this experiment a large number of times, the average number of 5s that will come up is 0.50. But some of these trials will have more than one 5 appear; for this average to work out, there must be no 5s appearing in more than half of the trials (and so a less than 50% chance of having at least one 5 appear).
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
If you repeat the experiment over and over, spinning until you get your first 5, the average length of each experiment is most likely going to be 100. That is what "The expected number of spins until you get your first 5 is 100" means.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Question 1 does not really lead to an infinite regress: when we talk about probability, it only makes sense to talk about future events. So when you say
This means that we now must spin the spinner a total of 101 times in
order to expect exactly one 5.
This is not accurate, and moreover is a misrepresentation of what we mean by "expectation". What the expectation is telling you is, if you repeated an experiment of spinning 100 times over and over, the average number of fives that would appear is 1. It does not mean you can expect exactly one 5, in most trials like this there will be more than one 5 and in a decent number of trials there will be 0 5s. But again, we can only speak about the probability of rolling a 5 on future spins.
For question 2, on 50 spins, repeating this experiment a large number of times, the average number of 5s that will come up is 0.50. But some of these trials will have more than one 5 appear; for this average to work out, there must be no 5s appearing in more than half of the trials (and so a less than 50% chance of having at least one 5 appear).
$endgroup$
Question 1 does not really lead to an infinite regress: when we talk about probability, it only makes sense to talk about future events. So when you say
This means that we now must spin the spinner a total of 101 times in
order to expect exactly one 5.
This is not accurate, and moreover is a misrepresentation of what we mean by "expectation". What the expectation is telling you is, if you repeated an experiment of spinning 100 times over and over, the average number of fives that would appear is 1. It does not mean you can expect exactly one 5, in most trials like this there will be more than one 5 and in a decent number of trials there will be 0 5s. But again, we can only speak about the probability of rolling a 5 on future spins.
For question 2, on 50 spins, repeating this experiment a large number of times, the average number of 5s that will come up is 0.50. But some of these trials will have more than one 5 appear; for this average to work out, there must be no 5s appearing in more than half of the trials (and so a less than 50% chance of having at least one 5 appear).
answered 8 hours ago
Morgan RodgersMorgan Rodgers
10.6k3 gold badges17 silver badges42 bronze badges
10.6k3 gold badges17 silver badges42 bronze badges
$begingroup$
If you repeat the experiment over and over, spinning until you get your first 5, the average length of each experiment is most likely going to be 100. That is what "The expected number of spins until you get your first 5 is 100" means.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
If you repeat the experiment over and over, spinning until you get your first 5, the average length of each experiment is most likely going to be 100. That is what "The expected number of spins until you get your first 5 is 100" means.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
If you repeat the experiment over and over, spinning until you get your first 5, the average length of each experiment is most likely going to be 100. That is what "The expected number of spins until you get your first 5 is 100" means.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
If you repeat the experiment over and over, spinning until you get your first 5, the average length of each experiment is most likely going to be 100. That is what "The expected number of spins until you get your first 5 is 100" means.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
It's worth noting that, as you flip the spinner, you have more information than you did before - which changes your expectations. A simpler example, without expectation, would be that if you flip a fair coin twice, there is a $1/4$ chance that both flips are heads. However, we can think about what happens after the first flip:
If our first flip lands heads, then there is now a $1/2$ chance that both flips will be. If not, there is a $0$ chance of that. Prior to the first flip, we know that there is a $1/2$ chance of landing in either of these two cases, so the total probability is $1/2cdot 1/2 + 1/2cdot 0=1/4$.
A similar thing happens with your example: suppose we let $X$ be the number of times $5$ comes up in $100$ spins of the spinner. Most of the time - $99/100$ times to be precise, the first spin is not $5$, and, given this, we now only have $99$ spins left, so expect $X$ to be $99/100$. On the other hand, however, if $5$ does come up, we now expect $X$ to be $1+99/100$ - and averaging these two cases with their probabilities does indeed show that we expect $X$ to be $1$ overall.
Basically, you see that if you fail to get a $5$ on the first round, then your odds of seeing a $5$ have shifted downwards - but this is perfectly balanced by the less likely event that you do see a $5$. This is the same as in your second example with probabilities - yes, as soon as we see that we didn't get a $5$, we still think we need the same number of further spins, but if we get a $5$, we only used $1$ spin which is way below what we thought we'd need - and balances things.
It's worth noting that expectation is a precise mathematical term that may not perfectly align to what you'd like it to mean intuitively. It does not say anything about the most likely event - for instance, if you flipped a fair coin, the expected number of heads is $1/2$, but that's not even a possible outcome. Expectation just says "look at this value over all possible ways things could play out. Average them, weighted according to probability."
This also tells us why the probabilities are not the expectations: if we make $50$ trials, the expected number of $5$'s being $1/2$ could equally well mean "There is a $99/100$ chance that there were no $5$'s, but there's a $1/100$ chance that there were $200$ instances of $5$" or "There is a $1/2$ chance that there were no $5$'s and a $1/2$ chance that there was one five" - with the truth in this case lying in between those two somewhat absurd cases. Basically, cases where there are lots of $5$'s get counted disproportionately, where probability would count them equally to the case where there is just one $5$.
As for the paradox that no number is likely, but some number always exists, this is the same deal for probability: here are two variants of a game you might play:
Guess a number. Spin the wheel. You win if they are equal.
In this game, you will only win with probability $1/100$ because you have no information. The low probability measures this game. A related game is the following:
Spin the wheel. Guess a number. You win if they are equal.
This game you can always win because you just read off what number was spun! The relevant probability here is more like "What's the probability you spun a $5$, given that you spun a $5$" - which is $1$. You just need to be careful about exactly what you already know if you're dealing with probabilities - otherwise seemingly paradoxical results start to appear.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
It's worth noting that, as you flip the spinner, you have more information than you did before - which changes your expectations. A simpler example, without expectation, would be that if you flip a fair coin twice, there is a $1/4$ chance that both flips are heads. However, we can think about what happens after the first flip:
If our first flip lands heads, then there is now a $1/2$ chance that both flips will be. If not, there is a $0$ chance of that. Prior to the first flip, we know that there is a $1/2$ chance of landing in either of these two cases, so the total probability is $1/2cdot 1/2 + 1/2cdot 0=1/4$.
A similar thing happens with your example: suppose we let $X$ be the number of times $5$ comes up in $100$ spins of the spinner. Most of the time - $99/100$ times to be precise, the first spin is not $5$, and, given this, we now only have $99$ spins left, so expect $X$ to be $99/100$. On the other hand, however, if $5$ does come up, we now expect $X$ to be $1+99/100$ - and averaging these two cases with their probabilities does indeed show that we expect $X$ to be $1$ overall.
Basically, you see that if you fail to get a $5$ on the first round, then your odds of seeing a $5$ have shifted downwards - but this is perfectly balanced by the less likely event that you do see a $5$. This is the same as in your second example with probabilities - yes, as soon as we see that we didn't get a $5$, we still think we need the same number of further spins, but if we get a $5$, we only used $1$ spin which is way below what we thought we'd need - and balances things.
It's worth noting that expectation is a precise mathematical term that may not perfectly align to what you'd like it to mean intuitively. It does not say anything about the most likely event - for instance, if you flipped a fair coin, the expected number of heads is $1/2$, but that's not even a possible outcome. Expectation just says "look at this value over all possible ways things could play out. Average them, weighted according to probability."
This also tells us why the probabilities are not the expectations: if we make $50$ trials, the expected number of $5$'s being $1/2$ could equally well mean "There is a $99/100$ chance that there were no $5$'s, but there's a $1/100$ chance that there were $200$ instances of $5$" or "There is a $1/2$ chance that there were no $5$'s and a $1/2$ chance that there was one five" - with the truth in this case lying in between those two somewhat absurd cases. Basically, cases where there are lots of $5$'s get counted disproportionately, where probability would count them equally to the case where there is just one $5$.
As for the paradox that no number is likely, but some number always exists, this is the same deal for probability: here are two variants of a game you might play:
Guess a number. Spin the wheel. You win if they are equal.
In this game, you will only win with probability $1/100$ because you have no information. The low probability measures this game. A related game is the following:
Spin the wheel. Guess a number. You win if they are equal.
This game you can always win because you just read off what number was spun! The relevant probability here is more like "What's the probability you spun a $5$, given that you spun a $5$" - which is $1$. You just need to be careful about exactly what you already know if you're dealing with probabilities - otherwise seemingly paradoxical results start to appear.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
It's worth noting that, as you flip the spinner, you have more information than you did before - which changes your expectations. A simpler example, without expectation, would be that if you flip a fair coin twice, there is a $1/4$ chance that both flips are heads. However, we can think about what happens after the first flip:
If our first flip lands heads, then there is now a $1/2$ chance that both flips will be. If not, there is a $0$ chance of that. Prior to the first flip, we know that there is a $1/2$ chance of landing in either of these two cases, so the total probability is $1/2cdot 1/2 + 1/2cdot 0=1/4$.
A similar thing happens with your example: suppose we let $X$ be the number of times $5$ comes up in $100$ spins of the spinner. Most of the time - $99/100$ times to be precise, the first spin is not $5$, and, given this, we now only have $99$ spins left, so expect $X$ to be $99/100$. On the other hand, however, if $5$ does come up, we now expect $X$ to be $1+99/100$ - and averaging these two cases with their probabilities does indeed show that we expect $X$ to be $1$ overall.
Basically, you see that if you fail to get a $5$ on the first round, then your odds of seeing a $5$ have shifted downwards - but this is perfectly balanced by the less likely event that you do see a $5$. This is the same as in your second example with probabilities - yes, as soon as we see that we didn't get a $5$, we still think we need the same number of further spins, but if we get a $5$, we only used $1$ spin which is way below what we thought we'd need - and balances things.
It's worth noting that expectation is a precise mathematical term that may not perfectly align to what you'd like it to mean intuitively. It does not say anything about the most likely event - for instance, if you flipped a fair coin, the expected number of heads is $1/2$, but that's not even a possible outcome. Expectation just says "look at this value over all possible ways things could play out. Average them, weighted according to probability."
This also tells us why the probabilities are not the expectations: if we make $50$ trials, the expected number of $5$'s being $1/2$ could equally well mean "There is a $99/100$ chance that there were no $5$'s, but there's a $1/100$ chance that there were $200$ instances of $5$" or "There is a $1/2$ chance that there were no $5$'s and a $1/2$ chance that there was one five" - with the truth in this case lying in between those two somewhat absurd cases. Basically, cases where there are lots of $5$'s get counted disproportionately, where probability would count them equally to the case where there is just one $5$.
As for the paradox that no number is likely, but some number always exists, this is the same deal for probability: here are two variants of a game you might play:
Guess a number. Spin the wheel. You win if they are equal.
In this game, you will only win with probability $1/100$ because you have no information. The low probability measures this game. A related game is the following:
Spin the wheel. Guess a number. You win if they are equal.
This game you can always win because you just read off what number was spun! The relevant probability here is more like "What's the probability you spun a $5$, given that you spun a $5$" - which is $1$. You just need to be careful about exactly what you already know if you're dealing with probabilities - otherwise seemingly paradoxical results start to appear.
$endgroup$
It's worth noting that, as you flip the spinner, you have more information than you did before - which changes your expectations. A simpler example, without expectation, would be that if you flip a fair coin twice, there is a $1/4$ chance that both flips are heads. However, we can think about what happens after the first flip:
If our first flip lands heads, then there is now a $1/2$ chance that both flips will be. If not, there is a $0$ chance of that. Prior to the first flip, we know that there is a $1/2$ chance of landing in either of these two cases, so the total probability is $1/2cdot 1/2 + 1/2cdot 0=1/4$.
A similar thing happens with your example: suppose we let $X$ be the number of times $5$ comes up in $100$ spins of the spinner. Most of the time - $99/100$ times to be precise, the first spin is not $5$, and, given this, we now only have $99$ spins left, so expect $X$ to be $99/100$. On the other hand, however, if $5$ does come up, we now expect $X$ to be $1+99/100$ - and averaging these two cases with their probabilities does indeed show that we expect $X$ to be $1$ overall.
Basically, you see that if you fail to get a $5$ on the first round, then your odds of seeing a $5$ have shifted downwards - but this is perfectly balanced by the less likely event that you do see a $5$. This is the same as in your second example with probabilities - yes, as soon as we see that we didn't get a $5$, we still think we need the same number of further spins, but if we get a $5$, we only used $1$ spin which is way below what we thought we'd need - and balances things.
It's worth noting that expectation is a precise mathematical term that may not perfectly align to what you'd like it to mean intuitively. It does not say anything about the most likely event - for instance, if you flipped a fair coin, the expected number of heads is $1/2$, but that's not even a possible outcome. Expectation just says "look at this value over all possible ways things could play out. Average them, weighted according to probability."
This also tells us why the probabilities are not the expectations: if we make $50$ trials, the expected number of $5$'s being $1/2$ could equally well mean "There is a $99/100$ chance that there were no $5$'s, but there's a $1/100$ chance that there were $200$ instances of $5$" or "There is a $1/2$ chance that there were no $5$'s and a $1/2$ chance that there was one five" - with the truth in this case lying in between those two somewhat absurd cases. Basically, cases where there are lots of $5$'s get counted disproportionately, where probability would count them equally to the case where there is just one $5$.
As for the paradox that no number is likely, but some number always exists, this is the same deal for probability: here are two variants of a game you might play:
Guess a number. Spin the wheel. You win if they are equal.
In this game, you will only win with probability $1/100$ because you have no information. The low probability measures this game. A related game is the following:
Spin the wheel. Guess a number. You win if they are equal.
This game you can always win because you just read off what number was spun! The relevant probability here is more like "What's the probability you spun a $5$, given that you spun a $5$" - which is $1$. You just need to be careful about exactly what you already know if you're dealing with probabilities - otherwise seemingly paradoxical results start to appear.
answered 8 hours ago
Milo BrandtMilo Brandt
41.4k5 gold badges81 silver badges144 bronze badges
41.4k5 gold badges81 silver badges144 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Suppose that the expected duration until getting a $5$ is $x$. In the event that we don't get a $5$ on the first spin, the expected duration of that trial does increase to $x+1$. However, that event only has a $frac99100$ chance of happening. The event that we got a $5$ on the first spin has a $frac1100$ chance of happening. Therefore, the expected duration is
$$
frac1100cdot1+frac99100,(x+1)=x
$$
which has the solution $x=100$.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Suppose that the expected duration until getting a $5$ is $x$. In the event that we don't get a $5$ on the first spin, the expected duration of that trial does increase to $x+1$. However, that event only has a $frac99100$ chance of happening. The event that we got a $5$ on the first spin has a $frac1100$ chance of happening. Therefore, the expected duration is
$$
frac1100cdot1+frac99100,(x+1)=x
$$
which has the solution $x=100$.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Suppose that the expected duration until getting a $5$ is $x$. In the event that we don't get a $5$ on the first spin, the expected duration of that trial does increase to $x+1$. However, that event only has a $frac99100$ chance of happening. The event that we got a $5$ on the first spin has a $frac1100$ chance of happening. Therefore, the expected duration is
$$
frac1100cdot1+frac99100,(x+1)=x
$$
which has the solution $x=100$.
$endgroup$
Suppose that the expected duration until getting a $5$ is $x$. In the event that we don't get a $5$ on the first spin, the expected duration of that trial does increase to $x+1$. However, that event only has a $frac99100$ chance of happening. The event that we got a $5$ on the first spin has a $frac1100$ chance of happening. Therefore, the expected duration is
$$
frac1100cdot1+frac99100,(x+1)=x
$$
which has the solution $x=100$.
answered 5 hours ago
robjohn♦robjohn
279k29 gold badges329 silver badges660 bronze badges
279k29 gold badges329 silver badges660 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Before the first spin, the expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the first $100$ spins is $1$.
Suppose the first spin yields a value not equal to $5$.
If we are given that information, then:
- The expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the first $100$ spins (spins $1$ through $100$) is now less than $1$ (more precisely, it's equal to $largefrac99100$).$\[4pt]$
- However the expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the next $100$ spins (spins $2$ through $101$) is equal to $1$.
Extra information can change the probability distribution of a random variable, hence can change its expectation.
Regarding the second question . . .
Assume independent spins, each yielding a random element of $1,...,n$, with all values equally likely.
Let $p=largefrac1n$, and let $X$ be the number of spins until the occurrence of a given value, say $1$.
For each positive integer $k$, let $x_k=P(X=k)$.
Letting $p=largefrac1n$, we get
$$
x_k=(1-p)^k-1p
qquad;;;;;
$$
and the mean of $X$ is given by
beginalign*
E(X)&
=1x_1+2x_2+ 3x_3+cdots\[1pt]
&=sum_k=1^infty kx_k\[1pt]
&=sum_k=1^infty k(1-p)^k-1p\[1pt]
&=psum_k=1^infty k(1-p)^k-1\[1pt]
&=p,cdot,frac1p^2\[1pt]
&=frac1p\[3pt]
&=n\[1pt]
endalign*
If the distribution of $X$ is was symmetrical, the median would be equal to the mean (but not half of the mean).
However the distribution of $X$ is not symmetrical, so we can't infer the median of $X$ just from the knowledge that the mean of $X$ is $n$.
For the case $n=100$, the mean of $X$ is $100$, whereas the median of $X$ is $69$ which is less than the mean.
But in any case, there's no good reason to expect the median of $X$ to be exactly half of the mean.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Before the first spin, the expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the first $100$ spins is $1$.
Suppose the first spin yields a value not equal to $5$.
If we are given that information, then:
- The expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the first $100$ spins (spins $1$ through $100$) is now less than $1$ (more precisely, it's equal to $largefrac99100$).$\[4pt]$
- However the expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the next $100$ spins (spins $2$ through $101$) is equal to $1$.
Extra information can change the probability distribution of a random variable, hence can change its expectation.
Regarding the second question . . .
Assume independent spins, each yielding a random element of $1,...,n$, with all values equally likely.
Let $p=largefrac1n$, and let $X$ be the number of spins until the occurrence of a given value, say $1$.
For each positive integer $k$, let $x_k=P(X=k)$.
Letting $p=largefrac1n$, we get
$$
x_k=(1-p)^k-1p
qquad;;;;;
$$
and the mean of $X$ is given by
beginalign*
E(X)&
=1x_1+2x_2+ 3x_3+cdots\[1pt]
&=sum_k=1^infty kx_k\[1pt]
&=sum_k=1^infty k(1-p)^k-1p\[1pt]
&=psum_k=1^infty k(1-p)^k-1\[1pt]
&=p,cdot,frac1p^2\[1pt]
&=frac1p\[3pt]
&=n\[1pt]
endalign*
If the distribution of $X$ is was symmetrical, the median would be equal to the mean (but not half of the mean).
However the distribution of $X$ is not symmetrical, so we can't infer the median of $X$ just from the knowledge that the mean of $X$ is $n$.
For the case $n=100$, the mean of $X$ is $100$, whereas the median of $X$ is $69$ which is less than the mean.
But in any case, there's no good reason to expect the median of $X$ to be exactly half of the mean.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Before the first spin, the expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the first $100$ spins is $1$.
Suppose the first spin yields a value not equal to $5$.
If we are given that information, then:
- The expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the first $100$ spins (spins $1$ through $100$) is now less than $1$ (more precisely, it's equal to $largefrac99100$).$\[4pt]$
- However the expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the next $100$ spins (spins $2$ through $101$) is equal to $1$.
Extra information can change the probability distribution of a random variable, hence can change its expectation.
Regarding the second question . . .
Assume independent spins, each yielding a random element of $1,...,n$, with all values equally likely.
Let $p=largefrac1n$, and let $X$ be the number of spins until the occurrence of a given value, say $1$.
For each positive integer $k$, let $x_k=P(X=k)$.
Letting $p=largefrac1n$, we get
$$
x_k=(1-p)^k-1p
qquad;;;;;
$$
and the mean of $X$ is given by
beginalign*
E(X)&
=1x_1+2x_2+ 3x_3+cdots\[1pt]
&=sum_k=1^infty kx_k\[1pt]
&=sum_k=1^infty k(1-p)^k-1p\[1pt]
&=psum_k=1^infty k(1-p)^k-1\[1pt]
&=p,cdot,frac1p^2\[1pt]
&=frac1p\[3pt]
&=n\[1pt]
endalign*
If the distribution of $X$ is was symmetrical, the median would be equal to the mean (but not half of the mean).
However the distribution of $X$ is not symmetrical, so we can't infer the median of $X$ just from the knowledge that the mean of $X$ is $n$.
For the case $n=100$, the mean of $X$ is $100$, whereas the median of $X$ is $69$ which is less than the mean.
But in any case, there's no good reason to expect the median of $X$ to be exactly half of the mean.
$endgroup$
Before the first spin, the expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the first $100$ spins is $1$.
Suppose the first spin yields a value not equal to $5$.
If we are given that information, then:
- The expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the first $100$ spins (spins $1$ through $100$) is now less than $1$ (more precisely, it's equal to $largefrac99100$).$\[4pt]$
- However the expected number of occurrences of $5$ in the next $100$ spins (spins $2$ through $101$) is equal to $1$.
Extra information can change the probability distribution of a random variable, hence can change its expectation.
Regarding the second question . . .
Assume independent spins, each yielding a random element of $1,...,n$, with all values equally likely.
Let $p=largefrac1n$, and let $X$ be the number of spins until the occurrence of a given value, say $1$.
For each positive integer $k$, let $x_k=P(X=k)$.
Letting $p=largefrac1n$, we get
$$
x_k=(1-p)^k-1p
qquad;;;;;
$$
and the mean of $X$ is given by
beginalign*
E(X)&
=1x_1+2x_2+ 3x_3+cdots\[1pt]
&=sum_k=1^infty kx_k\[1pt]
&=sum_k=1^infty k(1-p)^k-1p\[1pt]
&=psum_k=1^infty k(1-p)^k-1\[1pt]
&=p,cdot,frac1p^2\[1pt]
&=frac1p\[3pt]
&=n\[1pt]
endalign*
If the distribution of $X$ is was symmetrical, the median would be equal to the mean (but not half of the mean).
However the distribution of $X$ is not symmetrical, so we can't infer the median of $X$ just from the knowledge that the mean of $X$ is $n$.
For the case $n=100$, the mean of $X$ is $100$, whereas the median of $X$ is $69$ which is less than the mean.
But in any case, there's no good reason to expect the median of $X$ to be exactly half of the mean.
edited 5 hours ago
answered 8 hours ago
quasiquasi
41.5k3 gold badges29 silver badges71 bronze badges
41.5k3 gold badges29 silver badges71 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3354203%2fif-the-gamblers-fallacy-is-false-how-do-notions-of-expected-number-of-events%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
I think this phenomenon gets even weirder on uncountable events. For example, think about a random number generator in the range $[0,1]$. The probability of any particular number being chosen is $0$, but the probability of a number being chosen is $1$. Weird
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is an excellent question, since probability is super counter-intuitive, with the number of "paradoxes" and unintuitive problems it creates. But, learning it is all about recalibrating your intuition to guide you properly.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@DonThousand Does this occur because of the inclusion of irrational numbers and infinite? I have heard that when you move into the realm of the infinite there are events w/ probability 0 that are possible.
$endgroup$
– Joe
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Joe Pretty much. If the numbers had non-zero probability of being chosen, then the total probability of any number being chosen would clearly be infinite, which isn't possible. Hence, the probability must be 0.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
Another fun example is flipping coins. The probability of an infinite sequence of coin flips always being heads is 0, even though it is $textitpossible$.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
9 hours ago