Compute $P(X+Y>Z)$ where $X, Y$ and $Z$ are independent, uniform random variables in the interval $[0,1]$.












1












$begingroup$


I know that if $W=X+Y$ then
$$f_{W}(t) = tmathbf{1}_{[0,1]}(t)+(2-t)mathbf{1}_{(1,2]}(t).$$
Thus, we want to find $P(W>Z)=P(W-Z>0).$ Using Bayes Theorem we get that
$$P(W-Z>0) = P(W-Z>0|Wleq 1)P(Wleq 1)+P(W-Z>0|W> 1)P(W> 1)$$
$$=int_{0}^{1} int_{0}^{w} dz cdot P(Wleq 1)+P(Zleq 1)P(W>1)$$
$$=frac{1}{2}cdot frac{1}{2}+1cdot frac{1}{2}=frac{3}{4}.$$



Is this calculation correct?



Edit



Based on the suggestion made in the comment we consider the following:



$$P(W>Z)=int_{0}^{2}P(Z<w)f_{W}(w)dw$$
$$=int_{0}^{1}w^2cdot dw+int_{1}^{2}(2-w)cdot dw=frac{1}{3}+2-frac{3}{2}=5/6.$$
Does this make sense?






probability-theory







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    No this is not correct. To compute probabilities, you need to condition on convenient things. It is not convenient to condition on the event ${Wleq 1}$ because it is not precise enough (there are too many scenarios to consider, each depending on the specific value of $W$ given that $Wleq 1$). So, why not make life easy and condition on all possible values of $W$? $$P[Z<W] = int_{-infty}^{infty} P[Z<W|W=w]f_W(w)dw=int_{0}^{2} P[Z<W|W=w]f_W(w)dw$$
    $endgroup$
    – Michael
    Dec 3 '18 at 16:43












  • $begingroup$
    @Michael I made an edit. Is this correct now?
    $endgroup$
    – Hello_World
    Dec 3 '18 at 16:50










  • $begingroup$
    Yes that looks good now. If you want, you can write that answer yourself in the answer field below and give it "best answer" (which is good practice when solving a problem based on hints).
    $endgroup$
    – Michael
    Dec 3 '18 at 16:51


















1












$begingroup$


I know that if $W=X+Y$ then
$$f_{W}(t) = tmathbf{1}_{[0,1]}(t)+(2-t)mathbf{1}_{(1,2]}(t).$$
Thus, we want to find $P(W>Z)=P(W-Z>0).$ Using Bayes Theorem we get that
$$P(W-Z>0) = P(W-Z>0|Wleq 1)P(Wleq 1)+P(W-Z>0|W> 1)P(W> 1)$$
$$=int_{0}^{1} int_{0}^{w} dz cdot P(Wleq 1)+P(Zleq 1)P(W>1)$$
$$=frac{1}{2}cdot frac{1}{2}+1cdot frac{1}{2}=frac{3}{4}.$$



Is this calculation correct?



Edit



Based on the suggestion made in the comment we consider the following:



$$P(W>Z)=int_{0}^{2}P(Z<w)f_{W}(w)dw$$
$$=int_{0}^{1}w^2cdot dw+int_{1}^{2}(2-w)cdot dw=frac{1}{3}+2-frac{3}{2}=5/6.$$
Does this make sense?






probability-theory







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    No this is not correct. To compute probabilities, you need to condition on convenient things. It is not convenient to condition on the event ${Wleq 1}$ because it is not precise enough (there are too many scenarios to consider, each depending on the specific value of $W$ given that $Wleq 1$). So, why not make life easy and condition on all possible values of $W$? $$P[Z<W] = int_{-infty}^{infty} P[Z<W|W=w]f_W(w)dw=int_{0}^{2} P[Z<W|W=w]f_W(w)dw$$
    $endgroup$
    – Michael
    Dec 3 '18 at 16:43












  • $begingroup$
    @Michael I made an edit. Is this correct now?
    $endgroup$
    – Hello_World
    Dec 3 '18 at 16:50










  • $begingroup$
    Yes that looks good now. If you want, you can write that answer yourself in the answer field below and give it "best answer" (which is good practice when solving a problem based on hints).
    $endgroup$
    – Michael
    Dec 3 '18 at 16:51
















1












1








1





$begingroup$


I know that if $W=X+Y$ then
$$f_{W}(t) = tmathbf{1}_{[0,1]}(t)+(2-t)mathbf{1}_{(1,2]}(t).$$
Thus, we want to find $P(W>Z)=P(W-Z>0).$ Using Bayes Theorem we get that
$$P(W-Z>0) = P(W-Z>0|Wleq 1)P(Wleq 1)+P(W-Z>0|W> 1)P(W> 1)$$
$$=int_{0}^{1} int_{0}^{w} dz cdot P(Wleq 1)+P(Zleq 1)P(W>1)$$
$$=frac{1}{2}cdot frac{1}{2}+1cdot frac{1}{2}=frac{3}{4}.$$



Is this calculation correct?



Edit



Based on the suggestion made in the comment we consider the following:



$$P(W>Z)=int_{0}^{2}P(Z<w)f_{W}(w)dw$$
$$=int_{0}^{1}w^2cdot dw+int_{1}^{2}(2-w)cdot dw=frac{1}{3}+2-frac{3}{2}=5/6.$$
Does this make sense?






probability-theory







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I know that if $W=X+Y$ then
$$f_{W}(t) = tmathbf{1}_{[0,1]}(t)+(2-t)mathbf{1}_{(1,2]}(t).$$
Thus, we want to find $P(W>Z)=P(W-Z>0).$ Using Bayes Theorem we get that
$$P(W-Z>0) = P(W-Z>0|Wleq 1)P(Wleq 1)+P(W-Z>0|W> 1)P(W> 1)$$
$$=int_{0}^{1} int_{0}^{w} dz cdot P(Wleq 1)+P(Zleq 1)P(W>1)$$
$$=frac{1}{2}cdot frac{1}{2}+1cdot frac{1}{2}=frac{3}{4}.$$



Is this calculation correct?



Edit



Based on the suggestion made in the comment we consider the following:



$$P(W>Z)=int_{0}^{2}P(Z<w)f_{W}(w)dw$$
$$=int_{0}^{1}w^2cdot dw+int_{1}^{2}(2-w)cdot dw=frac{1}{3}+2-frac{3}{2}=5/6.$$
Does this make sense?






probability-theory




probability-theory






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 3 '18 at 16:49







Hello_World

















asked Dec 3 '18 at 16:36









Hello_WorldHello_World

4,11621731




4,11621731












  • $begingroup$
    No this is not correct. To compute probabilities, you need to condition on convenient things. It is not convenient to condition on the event ${Wleq 1}$ because it is not precise enough (there are too many scenarios to consider, each depending on the specific value of $W$ given that $Wleq 1$). So, why not make life easy and condition on all possible values of $W$? $$P[Z<W] = int_{-infty}^{infty} P[Z<W|W=w]f_W(w)dw=int_{0}^{2} P[Z<W|W=w]f_W(w)dw$$
    $endgroup$
    – Michael
    Dec 3 '18 at 16:43












  • $begingroup$
    @Michael I made an edit. Is this correct now?
    $endgroup$
    – Hello_World
    Dec 3 '18 at 16:50










  • $begingroup$
    Yes that looks good now. If you want, you can write that answer yourself in the answer field below and give it "best answer" (which is good practice when solving a problem based on hints).
    $endgroup$
    – Michael
    Dec 3 '18 at 16:51




















  • $begingroup$
    No this is not correct. To compute probabilities, you need to condition on convenient things. It is not convenient to condition on the event ${Wleq 1}$ because it is not precise enough (there are too many scenarios to consider, each depending on the specific value of $W$ given that $Wleq 1$). So, why not make life easy and condition on all possible values of $W$? $$P[Z<W] = int_{-infty}^{infty} P[Z<W|W=w]f_W(w)dw=int_{0}^{2} P[Z<W|W=w]f_W(w)dw$$
    $endgroup$
    – Michael
    Dec 3 '18 at 16:43












  • $begingroup$
    @Michael I made an edit. Is this correct now?
    $endgroup$
    – Hello_World
    Dec 3 '18 at 16:50










  • $begingroup$
    Yes that looks good now. If you want, you can write that answer yourself in the answer field below and give it "best answer" (which is good practice when solving a problem based on hints).
    $endgroup$
    – Michael
    Dec 3 '18 at 16:51


















$begingroup$
No this is not correct. To compute probabilities, you need to condition on convenient things. It is not convenient to condition on the event ${Wleq 1}$ because it is not precise enough (there are too many scenarios to consider, each depending on the specific value of $W$ given that $Wleq 1$). So, why not make life easy and condition on all possible values of $W$? $$P[Z<W] = int_{-infty}^{infty} P[Z<W|W=w]f_W(w)dw=int_{0}^{2} P[Z<W|W=w]f_W(w)dw$$
$endgroup$
– Michael
Dec 3 '18 at 16:43






$begingroup$
No this is not correct. To compute probabilities, you need to condition on convenient things. It is not convenient to condition on the event ${Wleq 1}$ because it is not precise enough (there are too many scenarios to consider, each depending on the specific value of $W$ given that $Wleq 1$). So, why not make life easy and condition on all possible values of $W$? $$P[Z<W] = int_{-infty}^{infty} P[Z<W|W=w]f_W(w)dw=int_{0}^{2} P[Z<W|W=w]f_W(w)dw$$
$endgroup$
– Michael
Dec 3 '18 at 16:43














$begingroup$
@Michael I made an edit. Is this correct now?
$endgroup$
– Hello_World
Dec 3 '18 at 16:50




$begingroup$
@Michael I made an edit. Is this correct now?
$endgroup$
– Hello_World
Dec 3 '18 at 16:50












$begingroup$
Yes that looks good now. If you want, you can write that answer yourself in the answer field below and give it "best answer" (which is good practice when solving a problem based on hints).
$endgroup$
– Michael
Dec 3 '18 at 16:51






$begingroup$
Yes that looks good now. If you want, you can write that answer yourself in the answer field below and give it "best answer" (which is good practice when solving a problem based on hints).
$endgroup$
– Michael
Dec 3 '18 at 16:51












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

$x+y > z\
0le z le 1$



Either $x +y > 1$ and we can ignore $z$ or $x+yle 1$ and $z < x+y$



$int_0^1int_0^{1-x}int_0^{x+y} dz dy dx + int_0^1int_{1-x}^{1} dy dx\
frac 13 + frac 12$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    0












    $begingroup$

    Using the Irwin–Hall distribution



    $$W = X + Y,qquad f_W(w)= w 1_{(0,1]}(w) + (2 - w)1_{(1,2)}(w)$$



    then you get



    $$
    begin{align}
    P(W > Z)
    &= P(W > Zmid W > 1)P(W > 1)+ P(W > Z, W leq 1) \
    &= 1 cdot int_1^2(2-w)dw +
    int_0^1int_0^wwdzdw \
    &= frac{1}{2} + frac{1}{3}
    end{align}$$



    as Doug M points out. You forgot a $w$ and $dw$ in $int_{0}^{1} int_{0}^{w} dz$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













      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: "69"
      };
      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: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      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
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3024303%2fcompute-pxyz-where-x-y-and-z-are-independent-uniform-random-variable%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      0












      $begingroup$

      $x+y > z\
      0le z le 1$



      Either $x +y > 1$ and we can ignore $z$ or $x+yle 1$ and $z < x+y$



      $int_0^1int_0^{1-x}int_0^{x+y} dz dy dx + int_0^1int_{1-x}^{1} dy dx\
      frac 13 + frac 12$






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        0












        $begingroup$

        $x+y > z\
        0le z le 1$



        Either $x +y > 1$ and we can ignore $z$ or $x+yle 1$ and $z < x+y$



        $int_0^1int_0^{1-x}int_0^{x+y} dz dy dx + int_0^1int_{1-x}^{1} dy dx\
        frac 13 + frac 12$






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$
















          0












          0








          0





          $begingroup$

          $x+y > z\
          0le z le 1$



          Either $x +y > 1$ and we can ignore $z$ or $x+yle 1$ and $z < x+y$



          $int_0^1int_0^{1-x}int_0^{x+y} dz dy dx + int_0^1int_{1-x}^{1} dy dx\
          frac 13 + frac 12$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          $x+y > z\
          0le z le 1$



          Either $x +y > 1$ and we can ignore $z$ or $x+yle 1$ and $z < x+y$



          $int_0^1int_0^{1-x}int_0^{x+y} dz dy dx + int_0^1int_{1-x}^{1} dy dx\
          frac 13 + frac 12$







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Dec 3 '18 at 17:00









          Doug MDoug M

          44.4k31854




          44.4k31854























              0












              $begingroup$

              Using the Irwin–Hall distribution



              $$W = X + Y,qquad f_W(w)= w 1_{(0,1]}(w) + (2 - w)1_{(1,2)}(w)$$



              then you get



              $$
              begin{align}
              P(W > Z)
              &= P(W > Zmid W > 1)P(W > 1)+ P(W > Z, W leq 1) \
              &= 1 cdot int_1^2(2-w)dw +
              int_0^1int_0^wwdzdw \
              &= frac{1}{2} + frac{1}{3}
              end{align}$$



              as Doug M points out. You forgot a $w$ and $dw$ in $int_{0}^{1} int_{0}^{w} dz$.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                0












                $begingroup$

                Using the Irwin–Hall distribution



                $$W = X + Y,qquad f_W(w)= w 1_{(0,1]}(w) + (2 - w)1_{(1,2)}(w)$$



                then you get



                $$
                begin{align}
                P(W > Z)
                &= P(W > Zmid W > 1)P(W > 1)+ P(W > Z, W leq 1) \
                &= 1 cdot int_1^2(2-w)dw +
                int_0^1int_0^wwdzdw \
                &= frac{1}{2} + frac{1}{3}
                end{align}$$



                as Doug M points out. You forgot a $w$ and $dw$ in $int_{0}^{1} int_{0}^{w} dz$.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  0












                  0








                  0





                  $begingroup$

                  Using the Irwin–Hall distribution



                  $$W = X + Y,qquad f_W(w)= w 1_{(0,1]}(w) + (2 - w)1_{(1,2)}(w)$$



                  then you get



                  $$
                  begin{align}
                  P(W > Z)
                  &= P(W > Zmid W > 1)P(W > 1)+ P(W > Z, W leq 1) \
                  &= 1 cdot int_1^2(2-w)dw +
                  int_0^1int_0^wwdzdw \
                  &= frac{1}{2} + frac{1}{3}
                  end{align}$$



                  as Doug M points out. You forgot a $w$ and $dw$ in $int_{0}^{1} int_{0}^{w} dz$.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  Using the Irwin–Hall distribution



                  $$W = X + Y,qquad f_W(w)= w 1_{(0,1]}(w) + (2 - w)1_{(1,2)}(w)$$



                  then you get



                  $$
                  begin{align}
                  P(W > Z)
                  &= P(W > Zmid W > 1)P(W > 1)+ P(W > Z, W leq 1) \
                  &= 1 cdot int_1^2(2-w)dw +
                  int_0^1int_0^wwdzdw \
                  &= frac{1}{2} + frac{1}{3}
                  end{align}$$



                  as Doug M points out. You forgot a $w$ and $dw$ in $int_{0}^{1} int_{0}^{w} dz$.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Dec 3 '18 at 22:31









                  Benjamin ChristoffersenBenjamin Christoffersen

                  2009




                  2009






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                      • 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%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3024303%2fcompute-pxyz-where-x-y-and-z-are-independent-uniform-random-variable%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

                      How do I know what Microsoft account the skydrive app is syncing to?

                      Image
                      up vote 4 down vote favorite 1 Some time ago, I set up skydrive for my wife on her mac. But now she wants to access the files online, I cannot remember what Microsoft account I setup and linked her skydive app to and nor can I see anything in the skydrive app settings to tell me either? How can I see the name of the Microsoft account the skydive app is currently linked to? I would like to know this for skydrive app for Mac and PC onedrive share | improve this question asked Feb 25 '13 at 4:52 Gary Barrett 260 2 5 12
                      Read more

                      Grease: Live!

                      Image
                      A tradução deste artigo está abaixo da qualidade média aceitável. É possível que tenha sido feita por um tradutor automático ou por alguém que não conhece bem o português ou a língua original do texto. Caso queira colaborar com a Wikipédia, tente encontrar a página original e melhore este verbete conforme o guia de tradução. Grease: Live! Grease: Live!  (PRT/BRA)  Estados Unidos 2016 •   cor •   130 min. min   Direção Thomas Kail Alex Rudzinski Produção Marc Platt Adam Siegel Roteiro Allan Carr Robert Cary Warren Casey Jim Jacobs Jonathan Tolins Bronte Woodard Baseado em Grease (musical) Grease (filme) Elenco Julianne Hough Aaron Tveit Vanessa Hudgens Carlos Pena Jr. Keke Palmer Carly Rae Jepsen Kether Donohue Jordan Fisher David Del Rio Andrew Call Gênero Musical Música Tom Kitt Figurino William Ivey Long Companhia(s) produtora(s) Warner Bros. Studios Distribuição Fox Lançamento 31 de Janei
                      Read more

                      When does type information flow backwards in C++?

                      Image
                      up vote 62 down vote favorite 19 I just watched Stephan T. Lavavej talk at CppCon 2018 on "Class Template Argument Deduction", where at some point he incidentally says: In C++ type information almost never flows backwards ... I had to say "almost" because there's one or two cases, possibly more but very few . Despite trying to figure out which cases he might be referring to, I couldn't come up with anything. Hence the question: In which cases the C++17 standard mandates that type information propagate backwards? c++ language-lawyer c++17 share | improve this question edited 7 hours ago scohe0
                      Read more