Probability Challenge: Prove $\frac{k}{a}\ge\frac{b-1}{2b}$

In summary, we have shown that for any two judges in a competition with a contestants and b judges (where b is an odd integer), the maximum number of coinciding rankings is at least \frac{k}{a} and this must be at least \frac{b-1}{2b}, proving \frac{k}{a} \ge \frac{b-1}{2b}.
  • #1
anemone
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
3,883
115
In a competition there are \(\displaystyle a\) contestants and \(\displaystyle b\) judges, where \(\displaystyle b \ge 3\) is an odd integer. Each judge rates each contestant as either "pass" or "fail". Suppose \(\displaystyle k\) is a number such that for any two judges their ratings coincide for at most \(\displaystyle k\) contestants. Prove \(\displaystyle \frac{k}{a}\ge\frac{b-1}{2b}\).
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
anemone said:
In a competition there are \(\displaystyle a\) contestants and \(\displaystyle b\) judges, where \(\displaystyle b \ge 3\) is an odd integer. Each judge rates each contestant as either "pass" or "fail". Suppose \(\displaystyle k\) is a number such that for any two judges their ratings coincide for at most \(\displaystyle k\) contestants. Prove \(\displaystyle \frac{k}{a}\ge\frac{b-1}{2b}\).

Suppose we have

Judge1234
Contestant
1failfailpasspass
2failpassfailpass
3failpasspassfail

So $a=3$ and $b=4$.
The maximum coinciding rankings for any two judges is $k=1$.

Substituting we get:
\begin{array}{lcl}
\frac{k}{a}&\ge&\frac{b-1}{2b} \\
\frac{1}{3}&\ge&\frac{4-1}{2\cdot 4} \\
\frac{1}{3}&\ge&\frac{3}{8} \\
0.333... &\ge& 0.375
\end{array}
But... this is a contradiction! :eek:
 
  • #3
Hi I like Serena, thanks for participating and I want to tell you that the number of judges, i.e.\(\displaystyle b\) should be an odd integer.:eek: Sorry...I will show the solution I found online and I hope you and others will enjoy reading it just as much as I do.First, let us count the number \(\displaystyle N\) of the group (judge, judge, contestant) for which the two judges are distinct that rate the contestant the same. There are \(\displaystyle {b \choose 2}=\frac{b(b-1)}{2}\) pairs of judges in total and each pair rates at most \(\displaystyle k\) contestants the same, so we have \(\displaystyle N\le \frac{kb(b-1)}{2}\).Now, consider a fixed contestant \(\displaystyle X\) and count the number of pairs of judges rating \(\displaystyle X\) the same. Suppose \(\displaystyle x\) judges pass \(\displaystyle X\), then there are \(\displaystyle \frac{x(x-1)}{2}\) pairs who pass \(\displaystyle X\) and \(\displaystyle \frac{(b-x)(b-x-1)}{2}\) who fail \(\displaystyle X\), so a total of \(\displaystyle \frac{x(x-1)}{2}+\frac{(b-x)(b-x-1)}{2}\) pairs rate \(\displaystyle X\) the same.

But

\(\displaystyle \frac{x(x-1)}{2}+\frac{(b-x)(b-x-1)}{2}=\frac{2x^2-2bx+b^2-b}{2}\)

\(\displaystyle \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;= \frac {2(x^2-bx)+b^2-b}{2}\)

\(\displaystyle \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;= \frac {2((x-\frac{b}{2})^2-\frac{b^2}{4})+b^2-b}{2}\)

\(\displaystyle \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;= \frac{2(x-\frac{b}{2})^2+\frac{b^2}{2}-b}{2}\)

\(\displaystyle \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;=(x-\frac{b}{2})^2+\frac{b^2}{4}-\frac{b}{2}\)

\(\displaystyle \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\ge \frac{b^2}{4}-\frac{b}{2}\)

\(\displaystyle \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\ge \frac{1}{4}\left(b^2-2b\right)\)

\(\displaystyle \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\ge \frac{1}{4}\left((b-1)^2-1\right)\)

\(\displaystyle \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\ge \frac{1}{4}(b-1)^2-\frac{1}{4}\)

Since \(\displaystyle \frac{(b-1)^2}{4}\) is an integer (\(\displaystyle b\ge 3\) and b is odd integer), so the number of pairs rating \(\displaystyle X\) the same is at least \(\displaystyle \frac{(b-1)^2}{4}\). Hence, \(\displaystyle N\ge \frac{a(b-1)^2}{4}\).

Putting the two inequalities of N together gives \(\displaystyle \frac{k}{a} \ge \frac{(b-1)}{2b}\).
 

FAQ: Probability Challenge: Prove $\frac{k}{a}\ge\frac{b-1}{2b}$

What is the purpose of the "Probability Challenge: Prove $\frac{k}{a}\ge\frac{b-1}{2b}$"?

The purpose of this challenge is to prove the inequality $\frac{k}{a}\ge\frac{b-1}{2b}$, which is a fundamental concept in probability theory. This inequality is often used in various mathematical and statistical calculations, and being able to prove it demonstrates a strong understanding of the underlying principles of probability.

How is this inequality related to probability?

This inequality is directly related to the concept of conditional probability, which is a fundamental concept in probability theory. It represents the probability of an event occurring given that another event has already occurred. The inequality $\frac{k}{a}\ge\frac{b-1}{2b}$ is commonly used in conditional probability calculations.

What is the significance of proving this inequality?

Proving this inequality demonstrates a strong understanding of the fundamental principles of probability theory. It also shows that one is able to apply logical reasoning and mathematical techniques to solve complex problems. This skill is highly valuable in various fields such as statistics, data analysis, and decision making.

What are some common approaches to proving this inequality?

There are several approaches that can be used to prove this inequality. One common approach is to start with the definition of conditional probability and manipulate it using algebraic techniques. Another approach is to use geometric interpretations or visual representations to demonstrate the inequality. Other methods may involve using combinatorics, calculus, or other advanced mathematical concepts.

Are there any real-world applications of this inequality?

Yes, this inequality has many real-world applications. It is commonly used in statistics, data analysis, and decision-making processes. For example, it can be used to calculate the probability of a medical treatment being successful given certain conditions, or to determine the likelihood of a stock market investment being profitable based on past data. It is also used in various fields such as engineering, economics, and psychology.

Similar threads

Back
Top