Probability X1 ≥ X2












2












$begingroup$


Suppose X1 and X2 are independent Geometric p random variables. What is the
probability that X1 ≥ X2?



I am confused about this question because we aren't told anything about X1 and X2 other than they are Geometric. Wouldn't this be 50% because X1 and X2 can be anything in the range?



EDIT: New attempt
$P(X1 ≥ X2) = P(X1 > X2) + P(X1 = X2)$



$P(X1 = X2)$ = $sum_{x}$ $(1-p)^{x-1}p(1-p)^{x-1}p$ = $frac{p}{2-p}$



$P(X1 > X2)$ = $P(X1 < X2)$ and $P(X1 < X2) + P(X1 > X2) + P(X1 = X2) = 1$



Therefore, $P(X1 > X2)$ = $frac{1-P(X1 = X2)}{2}$ = $frac{1-p}{2-p}$
Adding $P(X1 = X2)=frac{p}{2-p}$ to that , I get $P(X1 ≥ X2)$ = $frac{1}{2-p}$



Is this correct?






random-variable geometric-distribution







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Please add the 'self-study' tag.
    $endgroup$
    – StubbornAtom
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Actually because X1 and X2 are discrete variables the equality makes things a bit less obvious.
    $endgroup$
    – usεr11852
    4 hours ago
















2












$begingroup$


Suppose X1 and X2 are independent Geometric p random variables. What is the
probability that X1 ≥ X2?



I am confused about this question because we aren't told anything about X1 and X2 other than they are Geometric. Wouldn't this be 50% because X1 and X2 can be anything in the range?



EDIT: New attempt
$P(X1 ≥ X2) = P(X1 > X2) + P(X1 = X2)$



$P(X1 = X2)$ = $sum_{x}$ $(1-p)^{x-1}p(1-p)^{x-1}p$ = $frac{p}{2-p}$



$P(X1 > X2)$ = $P(X1 < X2)$ and $P(X1 < X2) + P(X1 > X2) + P(X1 = X2) = 1$



Therefore, $P(X1 > X2)$ = $frac{1-P(X1 = X2)}{2}$ = $frac{1-p}{2-p}$
Adding $P(X1 = X2)=frac{p}{2-p}$ to that , I get $P(X1 ≥ X2)$ = $frac{1}{2-p}$



Is this correct?






random-variable geometric-distribution







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Please add the 'self-study' tag.
    $endgroup$
    – StubbornAtom
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Actually because X1 and X2 are discrete variables the equality makes things a bit less obvious.
    $endgroup$
    – usεr11852
    4 hours ago














2












2








2





$begingroup$


Suppose X1 and X2 are independent Geometric p random variables. What is the
probability that X1 ≥ X2?



I am confused about this question because we aren't told anything about X1 and X2 other than they are Geometric. Wouldn't this be 50% because X1 and X2 can be anything in the range?



EDIT: New attempt
$P(X1 ≥ X2) = P(X1 > X2) + P(X1 = X2)$



$P(X1 = X2)$ = $sum_{x}$ $(1-p)^{x-1}p(1-p)^{x-1}p$ = $frac{p}{2-p}$



$P(X1 > X2)$ = $P(X1 < X2)$ and $P(X1 < X2) + P(X1 > X2) + P(X1 = X2) = 1$



Therefore, $P(X1 > X2)$ = $frac{1-P(X1 = X2)}{2}$ = $frac{1-p}{2-p}$
Adding $P(X1 = X2)=frac{p}{2-p}$ to that , I get $P(X1 ≥ X2)$ = $frac{1}{2-p}$



Is this correct?






random-variable geometric-distribution







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Suppose X1 and X2 are independent Geometric p random variables. What is the
probability that X1 ≥ X2?



I am confused about this question because we aren't told anything about X1 and X2 other than they are Geometric. Wouldn't this be 50% because X1 and X2 can be anything in the range?



EDIT: New attempt
$P(X1 ≥ X2) = P(X1 > X2) + P(X1 = X2)$



$P(X1 = X2)$ = $sum_{x}$ $(1-p)^{x-1}p(1-p)^{x-1}p$ = $frac{p}{2-p}$



$P(X1 > X2)$ = $P(X1 < X2)$ and $P(X1 < X2) + P(X1 > X2) + P(X1 = X2) = 1$



Therefore, $P(X1 > X2)$ = $frac{1-P(X1 = X2)}{2}$ = $frac{1-p}{2-p}$
Adding $P(X1 = X2)=frac{p}{2-p}$ to that , I get $P(X1 ≥ X2)$ = $frac{1}{2-p}$



Is this correct?






random-variable geometric-distribution




random-variable geometric-distribution






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 23 mins ago







Sra

















asked 4 hours ago









SraSra

464




464








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Please add the 'self-study' tag.
    $endgroup$
    – StubbornAtom
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Actually because X1 and X2 are discrete variables the equality makes things a bit less obvious.
    $endgroup$
    – usεr11852
    4 hours ago














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Please add the 'self-study' tag.
    $endgroup$
    – StubbornAtom
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Actually because X1 and X2 are discrete variables the equality makes things a bit less obvious.
    $endgroup$
    – usεr11852
    4 hours ago








1




1




$begingroup$
Please add the 'self-study' tag.
$endgroup$
– StubbornAtom
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
Please add the 'self-study' tag.
$endgroup$
– StubbornAtom
4 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
Actually because X1 and X2 are discrete variables the equality makes things a bit less obvious.
$endgroup$
– usεr11852
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
Actually because X1 and X2 are discrete variables the equality makes things a bit less obvious.
$endgroup$
– usεr11852
4 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















4












$begingroup$

It can't be $50%$ because $P(X_1=X_2)>0$



One approach:



Consider the three events $P(X_1>X_2), P(X_2>X_1)$ and $P(X_1=X_2)$, which partition the sample space.



There's an obvious connection between the first two. Write an expression for the third and simplify. Hence solve the question.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I edited, my post with my new answer. Could you take a look and see if it's correct?
    $endgroup$
    – Sra
    22 mins ago











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "65"
};
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: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
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/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstats.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f394042%2fprobability-x1-%25e2%2589%25a5-x2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









4












$begingroup$

It can't be $50%$ because $P(X_1=X_2)>0$



One approach:



Consider the three events $P(X_1>X_2), P(X_2>X_1)$ and $P(X_1=X_2)$, which partition the sample space.



There's an obvious connection between the first two. Write an expression for the third and simplify. Hence solve the question.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I edited, my post with my new answer. Could you take a look and see if it's correct?
    $endgroup$
    – Sra
    22 mins ago
















4












$begingroup$

It can't be $50%$ because $P(X_1=X_2)>0$



One approach:



Consider the three events $P(X_1>X_2), P(X_2>X_1)$ and $P(X_1=X_2)$, which partition the sample space.



There's an obvious connection between the first two. Write an expression for the third and simplify. Hence solve the question.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I edited, my post with my new answer. Could you take a look and see if it's correct?
    $endgroup$
    – Sra
    22 mins ago














4












4








4





$begingroup$

It can't be $50%$ because $P(X_1=X_2)>0$



One approach:



Consider the three events $P(X_1>X_2), P(X_2>X_1)$ and $P(X_1=X_2)$, which partition the sample space.



There's an obvious connection between the first two. Write an expression for the third and simplify. Hence solve the question.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



It can't be $50%$ because $P(X_1=X_2)>0$



One approach:



Consider the three events $P(X_1>X_2), P(X_2>X_1)$ and $P(X_1=X_2)$, which partition the sample space.



There's an obvious connection between the first two. Write an expression for the third and simplify. Hence solve the question.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 3 hours ago

























answered 3 hours ago









Glen_b♦Glen_b

212k22406754




212k22406754












  • $begingroup$
    I edited, my post with my new answer. Could you take a look and see if it's correct?
    $endgroup$
    – Sra
    22 mins ago


















  • $begingroup$
    I edited, my post with my new answer. Could you take a look and see if it's correct?
    $endgroup$
    – Sra
    22 mins ago
















$begingroup$
I edited, my post with my new answer. Could you take a look and see if it's correct?
$endgroup$
– Sra
22 mins ago




$begingroup$
I edited, my post with my new answer. Could you take a look and see if it's correct?
$endgroup$
– Sra
22 mins ago


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Cross Validated!


  • 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.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstats.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f394042%2fprobability-x1-%25e2%2589%25a5-x2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

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







-

Popular posts from this blog

What other Star Trek series did the main TNG cast show up in?

Image
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0; } 4 I'm referring to Picard, Riker, Data, Worf, Geordi, Dr. Crusher, Wesley Crusher, Chief O'Brien and family, Deanna Troi, Guinan. I know Picard and Worf show up on DS9, though I haven't seen it myself. I'm curious what happened to the characters after that last episode of TNG? star-trek star-trek-tng share | improve this question edited 10 hours ago Ham Sandwich 6,051 2 25 75 ...
Read more

Berlina muro

Image
La berlina muro ĉe Bethaniendamm, 1986 La berlina muro aŭ simple la muro [1] , nomita ankaŭ "kontraŭfaŝisma remparo" en propaganda lingvo de la iama Germana Demokratia Respubliko, estis parto de la interngermana limo, kiu dividis de la 13-a de aŭgusto 1961 ĝis la 9-a de novembro 1989 okcidentan Berlinon de la orienta parto de la urbo kaj de la ĉirkaŭa tereno de la GDR. Ĝi estis unu el la plej famaj simboloj de la malvarma milito kaj de la disdivido de Germanio. Pli ol simpla muro, la berlina muro estis fakte tuta defendokonstruaĵo kun du muroj, ena malplena strio, rondirvojo, gardturoj kaj alarmsistemoj. Dum la provo transiri la severe garditan limon al okcidenta Berlino multaj homoj estis mortigitaj. La preciza nombro de viktimoj estas pridisputita kaj ne certa; la nombroj anoncataj varias inter 86 kaj 238 mortintoj. La malplifortiĝo de Sovetunio kaj la politiko de liberigo gvidita de Miĥail Gorbaĉov ebligis al la orientgermanoj faligi la 9-an de novembro 1989 l...
Read more

Berlina aerponto

Image
Flugkoridoroj dum la blokado de Berlino La Berlina aerponto estas la provizigo de okcidenta Berlino per aviadiloj fare de la aliancanoj inter la 23-a de junio 1948 kaj la 12-a de majo 1949 dum la blokado de Berlino fare de la sovetia armeo. Enhavo 1 Historio 1.1 La aerkoridoroj 1.2 Unuaj flugoj 1.3 Plibonigo de la aerponto 1.4 Fino de la aerponto 1.5 Rozinbombiloj 1.6 Bilanco 2 Flughavenoj 2.1 Berlino 2.2 Okcidenta Germanio 3 Aviadiloj de la berlina aerponto 4 15-a datreveno de la aerponto 5 Bibliografio 6 Referencoj 7 Eksteraj ligiloj Historio | General Lucius D. Clay, militguberniestro de la usona okupadzono Jam antaŭ la berlina aerponto estiĝis la malgranda aerponto . La estro de la sovetia militadministracio en Germanio, Vasili Daniloviĉ Sokolovski, ordonis la 1-an de aprilo 1948, kiel reago al la konferenco de Londono inter britoj, francoj kaj reprezentantoj de Benelukso pri aligo de Germa...
Read more