/*! This file is auto-generated */ .wp-block-button__link{color:#fff;background-color:#32373c;border-radius:9999px;box-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;padding:calc(.667em + 2px) calc(1.333em + 2px);font-size:1.125em}.wp-block-file__button{background:#32373c;color:#fff;text-decoration:none} Problem 30 If 10 married couples are random... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

If 10 married couples are randomly seated at a round table, compute (a) the expected number and (b) the variance of the number of wives who are seated next to their husbands.

Short Answer

Expert verified
The expected number (a) of wives seated next to their husbands is \(\frac{10}{19}\) and the variance (b) is approximately 2.127.

Step by step solution

01

Define Indicator Random Variables

Let's define an indicator random variable \(X_i\) for each wife, where \(i = 1, 2, ..., 10\), such that: \(X_i = \begin{cases}1 & \text{if wife } i \text{ is seated next to her husband} \\ 0 & \text{otherwise}\end{cases}\)
02

Calculate the Expected Value

We can calculate the expected number of wives seated next to their husbands as the sum of the expected value of each indicator random variable \(X_i\). The expected value of the sum of the indicator random variables can be written as: \(E[\sum_{i=1}^{10} X_i] = \sum_{i=1}^{10} E[X_i]\) Now we need to determine \(E[X_i]\) for a single wife. Since each wife has a probability of \(\frac{1}{19}\) of being seated next to her husband (because there are 19 possible choices for her to sit, and only 1 of them is next to her husband), we have: \(E[X_i] = 1 \cdot \frac{1}{19} + 0 \cdot \frac{18}{19} = \frac{1}{19}\) Now, we can calculate the expected value: \(E[\sum_{i=1}^{10} X_i] = 10 \cdot \frac{1}{19} = \frac{10}{19}\)
03

Calculate the Variance

Now let's calculate the variance of the number of wives seated next to their husbands. The variance for the sum of the indicator random variables can be written as: \(Var(\sum_{i=1}^{10} X_i) = \sum_{i=1}^{10} Var(X_i) + \sum_{i \neq j} Cov(X_i, X_j)\) Since the random variables \(X_i\) are not independent (if wife 1 sits next to her husband, it affects the probability for the other wives), we need to find the covariance between \(X_i\) and \(X_j\) where \(i \neq j\): \(Cov(X_i, X_j) = E[X_i X_j] - E[X_i]E[X_j]\) Here, \(E[X_i X_j] = P(X_i = 1 \text{ and } X_j = 1) = \frac{1}{18}\) because, if wife \(i\) sits immediately next to her husband, then there are 18 possible places for wife \(j\) to sit such that she also sits next to her husband. So, we have \(Cov(X_i, X_j) = \frac{1}{18} - \frac{1}{19}\frac{1}{19} = \frac{1}{18} - \frac{1}{361}\). Now back to calculating the variance, we have: \(Var(\sum_{i=1}^{10} X_i) = \sum_{i=1}^{10} Var(X_i) + \sum_{i \neq j} Cov(X_i, X_j)\) \(Var(\sum_{i=1}^{10} X_i) = 10 \cdot Var(X_i) + \binom{10}{2} \cdot Cov(X_i, X_j)\) The variance \(Var(X_i)\) can be calculated by \(Var(X_i) = E[X_i^2] - E[X_i]^2 = \frac{1}{19} - \frac{1}{361}\), so \(Var(\sum_{i=1}^{10} X_i) = 10 \cdot (\frac{1}{19} - \frac{1}{361}) + \binom{10}{2} \cdot (\frac{1}{18} - \frac{1}{361})\) \(Var(\sum_{i=1}^{10} X_i) \approx 2.127\) So, the expected number (a) of wives seated next to their husbands is \(\frac{10}{19}\) and the variance (b) is approximately 2.127.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with 91Ó°ÊÓ!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

The number of accidents that a person has in a given year is a Poisson random variable with mean \(\lambda\). However, suppose that the value of \(\lambda\) changes from person to person, being equal to 2 for 60 percent of the population and 3 for the other 40 percent. If a person is chosen at random, what is the probability that he will have (a) 0 accidents and (b) exactly 3 accidents in a year? What is the conditional probability that he will have 3 accidents in a given year, given that he had no accidents the preceding year?

For Example 2 j show that the variance of the number of coupons needed to amass a full set is equal to $$ \sum_{i=1}^{N-1} \frac{i N}{(N-i)^{2}} $$ When \(N\) is large, this can be shown to be approximately equal (in the sense that their ratio approaches 1 as \(N \rightarrow \infty\) ) to \(N^{2}\left(\pi^{2} / 6\right)\).

Each of \(m+2\) players pays 1 unit to a kitty in order to play the following game. A fair coin is to be flipped successively \(n\) times, where \(n\) is an odd number, and the successive outcomes noted. Each player writes down, before the flips, a prediction of the outcomes. For instance, if \(n=3\), then a player might write down \((H, H, T)\), which means that he or she predicts that the first flip will land heads, the second heads, and the third tails. After the coins are flipped, the players count their total number of correct predictions. Thus, if the actual outcomes are all heads, then the player who wrote \((H, H, T)\) would have 2 correct predictions. The total kitty of \(m+2\) is then evenly - split up among those players having the largest number of correct predictions. Since each of the coin flips is equally likely to land on either heads or tails, \(m\) of the players have decided to make their predictions in a totally random fashion. Specifically, they will each flip one of their own fair coins \(n\) times and then use the result as their prediction. However, the final 2 of the players have formed a syndicate and will use the following strategy. One of them will make predictions in the same random fashion as the other \(m\).

Let \(A_{1}, A_{2}, \ldots, A_{n}\) be events, and let \(N\) denote the number of them that occur. Also, let \(I=1\) if all of these events occur, and let it be 0 otherwise. Prove Bonferroni's inequality, namely that $$ P\left(A_{1} \cdots A_{n}\right) \geq \sum_{i=1}^{n} P\left(A_{i}\right)-(n-1) $$ HINT: Argue first that \(N \leq n-1+I\).

For a standard normal random variable \(Z\), let \(\mu_{n}=E\left[Z^{\prime \prime}\right]\). Show that $$ \mu_{n}= \begin{cases}0 & \text { when } n \text { is odd } \\ \frac{(2 j) !}{2 j} j & \text { when } n=2 j\end{cases} $$ HINT: Start by expanding the moment generating function of \(Z\) into a Taylor series about 0 to obtain $$ \begin{aligned} E\left[e^{t Z}\right] &=e^{t^{2} / 2} \\ &=\sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \frac{\left(t^{2} / 2\right)^{j}}{j !} \end{aligned} $$

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.