Assume three events A.B.C are such that p(A)=0.5, p(B)=0.6, p(C)=0.4,p(AnB)=0.3,
p(AnC)=0.1, p(BnC)=0.2, and p(AnBnC)=0.05. Find
(1) p(AnBnC')
(2) p(AuBuC)
(3) p(A'nBnC')
We draw a Venn diagram with 3 sets ( the 3 circles) and a universal set (the big rectangle).
We let the letters d through k indicate the probabilities of the 8 regions:
Since the probability of something in the Universal set occurring
is 1, referring to the above Venn diagram:
p(U) = 1.0 = d+e+f+g+h+i+j+k
p(A) = 0.5 = d+e+g+h
p(B) = 0.6 = e+f+h+i
p(C) = 0.4 = g+h+i+j
p(AnB) = 0.3 = e+h
p(AnC) = 0.1 = g+h
p(BnC) = 0.2 = f+i
p(AnBnC) = 0.05 = h
So we have this system of equations:
(1) d+e+f+g+h+i+j+k = 1.0
(2) d+e +g+h = 0.5
(3) e+f +h+i = 0.6
(4) g+h+i+j = 0.4
(5) e +h = 0.3
(6) g+h = 0.1
(7) h+i = 0.2
(8) h = 0.05
Use (8) to substitute 0.05 for h in (7) to get i = 0.15,
and in (6) to get g = 0.05, and in (5) to get e = 0.25.
Substitute for g,h and i in (4) to get j = 0.15
Substitute for e,h and i in (3) to get f = 0.15
Substitute for e,g and h in (2) to get d = 0.15
Substitute for d,e,f,g,h,i,j in (1) to get k = 0.05
So we have:
(1) p(AnBnC') = e = 0.25
(2) p(AuBuC) = h = 0.05 <--that was given!!!
(3) p(A'nBnC') = f = 0.15
Edwin
.
It is MUCH easier and simpler solution than that by Edwin.
It requires you to apply only basic formulas of the elementary set theory.
(1) P(A n B n C')
To calculate P(A n B n C'), notice that (A n B n C') are those elements (events) of (A n B) that do not belong to C;
in other words, (A n B n C') = (A n B) \ (A n B n C), (1)
where the sign " \ " denotes subtraction of sets (of subsets).
Then equality (1) implies that
P(A n B n C') = P(A n B) - P(A n B n C) = (substitute the given data) = 0.3 - 0.05 = 0.25. ANSWER
(2) P(A U B U C)
Use the formula
P(A U B U C) = P(A) + P(B) + P(C) - P(AnB) - P(AnC) - P(BnC) + P(A n B n C) (2)
which is valid for any subsets A, B and C of the universal set U.
This formula is very well known in elementary set theory.
If you do not know its proof, here it is in few lines:
Without my explanations, you understand well why I added P(A), P(B) and P(C) in the right side of the formula (2).
But when I added these terms, I counted the intersections P(AnB), P(AnC) and P(BnC) twice - so I need to subtract
these terms in the right side of the formula (2).
But again, when I added the terms P(A), P(B) and P(C) in the right side of the formula (2),
I counted the intersection P(A n B n C) thrice. When I later subtracted the terms P(AnB), P(AnC) and P(BnC), I fully compensate it,
but now this intersection is not covered in the formula at all.
Therefore I must add the term P(A n B n C), and this last step makes everything in equilibrium / (in balance).
The proof is completed.
Now, when the formula (2) is proved, simply substitute the given input data in it. You will get
P(A U B U C) = 0.5 + 0.6 + 0.4 - 0.3 - 0.1 - 0.2 + 0.05 = 0.95 ANSWER
Notice that the Edwin's answer in this point is incorrect.
(3) P(A' n B n C')
To calculate P(A' n B n C'), notice that (A' n B n C') are those elements (events) of B that do belong NEITHER A NOR C;
in other words, (A' n B n C') = (B \ (A n B) \ (C n B)) (3)
Then equality (2) implies that
P(A' n B n C') = P(B \ (A n B) \ (C n B)) = (P(B) - P(AnB)) + (P(B) - P(CnB)) + P(A n B n C) (4)
Notice that in the right side of the formula (4), I subtracted the probability P(AnB) from P(B), then subtracted P(CnB) from P(B),
so I subtracted the probability P(AnC) of the intersection (AnC) twice; therefore, I should add P(A n B n C) to restore the equilibrium.
Substitute the given data into the formula (4), you get the ANSWER
P(A' n B n C') = (0.6 - 0.3 - 0.2) + 0.05 = 0.15. (5)
----------------
When such problems come to the forum, a competition starts between Edwin and me.
Edwin's first move is to solve the problem by the most complicated method. So he sets up the system of linear equations of the order 8
and then solves it.
I, in opposite, think that such approach is IRRELEVANT and that the problem should be solved by the most simple way,
using only basic notions, conceptions, properties and formulas of the elementary set theory.
I am 129% sure that the problem was designed and intended to be solved exactly in this way.
In any case, doing in this way (or, at least reading my solution) you will learn something useful from the elementary set theory.
----------------
Regarding formula (2), see many other similar solved problems in the lessons
- Advanced problems on counting elements in sub-sets of a given finite set
- Challenging problems on counting elements in subsets of a given finite set
in this site.