(Counting Techniques) Why doesn't this approach work?

In summary, the conversation discusses a question on a final exam in discrete math, where students have provided incorrect answers. The correct solution involves subtracting the number of committees with only men from the total number of committees. Another approach, which many students took, involves choosing one woman for the first spot and then arranging the rest of the committee. However, this approach leads to an incorrect answer due to undercounting the number of permutations. The correct way to use this approach is to calculate the sum of various combinations.
  • #1
Chetlin
36
0
It may just be because I probably got only an hour of sleep last night and my thinking skills are not very good, but I'm grading a question on a final exam in discrete math and a lot of stiudents gave an answer that is incorrect, but I can't see why it is incorrect.

Homework Statement


Given a group of 15 men and 12 women, how many ways can we form a committee of 5 people that includes at least 1 woman?


Homework Equations


not applicable here (?)


The Attempt at a Solution


The correct solution is to subtract the number of committees that contain only men from the total number of possible committees. There are [itex]{15 \choose 5}[/itex] committees that consist of only men and [itex]{15 + 12 \choose 5} = {27 \choose 5}[/itex] total possible committees, so the number of committees that include at least one woman is [itex]{27 \choose 5} - {15 \choose 5} = 77,\!727[/itex].

An approach that a lot of students made and I can't find fault with is to say that if you choose one woman for the first spot, then the rest of the spots in the committee can be anyone. So you have 12 choices for the first spot, 26 choices for the second spot, 25 choices for the third spot, 24 choices for the fourth spot, and 23 choices for the fifth spot. If you multiply these numbers together and then divide the product by 5! (since order does not matter and there are 5! ways that the committee members could be arranged), you get the result [itex]\frac{12 \cdot 26 \cdot 25 \cdot 24 \cdot 23}{5!} = 35,\!880[/itex] which is different from the correct solution. So there is a mistake here.

Another way to get the correct answer is to calculate the sum [itex]{12 \choose 1}{15 \choose 4} + {12 \choose 2}{15 \choose 3} + {12 \choose 3}{15 \choose 2} + {12 \choose 4}{15 \choose 1} + {12 \choose 5}{15 \choose 0}[/itex]. This does give the correct result of 77,727 and it, in a way, seems like the "correct" way to use the approach (as opposed to the incorrect way that I talked about before that gave the incorrect answer).

Thanks a lot!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Use smaller numbers to reality check -
Committee of 2, choosing between three women and three men.
The women are Beth, Cath, and Doris.
The men are Andy, Eddie, and Ian.

Basically - you undercounted the number of permutations by counting only those permutations with a woman in the first slot. i.e. if there was a man in the first slot, you did not count that committee.
 
  • #3
All right, thanks! I thought it was something like that but due to my sleep deprivation I couldn't formulate the complete thoughts required to understand it all the way.
 

FAQ: (Counting Techniques) Why doesn't this approach work?

Why is counting considered an important technique in scientific research?

Counting is an essential tool in scientific research as it allows researchers to accurately measure and quantify data. This is crucial for making meaningful comparisons and drawing conclusions from experimental results.

What are some common challenges with counting techniques in scientific research?

One of the main challenges with counting techniques is maintaining accuracy and consistency. This can be difficult when dealing with large or complex data sets, as well as when human error is a factor.

Why might a particular counting approach not work for a specific research question?

Counting techniques are not a one-size-fits-all solution and may not be suitable for certain research questions. For example, if the data being studied is continuous rather than discrete, counting may not be the most appropriate method for analysis.

How do scientists ensure the reliability of their counting methods?

To ensure the reliability of their counting methods, scientists use various techniques such as double-checking, statistical analysis, and inter-rater reliability tests. These methods help to minimize errors and increase the accuracy of the results.

What are some alternative approaches to counting in scientific research?

Some alternative approaches to counting in scientific research include using technology such as computer programs or machines to automate the counting process. Other methods include qualitative analysis, which focuses on understanding the meaning and context of data rather than just numerical values.

Similar threads

Back
Top