Intuition vs Result on this probability question.











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












Question is mentioned so many times on the internet and actually is an example in Sheldon Ross' textbook 'A First Course in Probability' (p 39, 8th ed.).




A football team consists of 20 offensive and 20 defensive players. The players are to be paired in groups of 2 for the purpose of determining roommates. If the pairing is done at random, what is the probability that there are no offensive-defensive roommate pairs? What is the probability that there are 2i offensive-defensive roommate pairs when i = 1,2,3...,10?




I came to an answer which is:



$$
P_{2i} = cfrac{ {{20}choose{2i}}(2i)!Big[cfrac{(20-2i)!}{{{2}^{10-i}}(10-i)!}Big]^2 }{ cfrac{(40)!}{{2^{20}}{(20)!}} }
$$

where $P_n$ denote the probability that there are n pair(s) of offensive-defensive players as roommate.



With the Stirling's approximation, the answer for several situations goes like this:



$$P_0 approx 1.3403 times 10^{-6}$$
$$P_{10} approx .345861$$
$$P_{20} approx 7.6068 times 10^{-6}$$



And there goes my thoughts:



The numerical results are against my intuition. If there are 20 - 20 offense defense players and they are to be grouped, I would surmise there should be 50% chance of having $P_{10}$ situation, which is the probability that only 10 pairs of offense/defense players being assigned as teammates and rest of them being assigned with players with the same position (defense-defense, offense-offense). But the likeliness of this happening is less than 50%.



Furthermore, the asymmetry between $P_0$ and $P_{10}$ bothers me as well. Why is the probability of having none of players being matched with different position 5 times less than the probability of having all of the players being matched with different position? My intuition says those probabilities should be the same and I feel it's equally hard to assign them completely segregated or integrated.



I am not questioning the math here, but still can't wrap my head around with how to explain the seemingly-counter-intuitive numeric result. Is there anyone who could shed me light on how to explain this logically?



Thanks.










share|cite|improve this question




























    up vote
    1
    down vote

    favorite












    Question is mentioned so many times on the internet and actually is an example in Sheldon Ross' textbook 'A First Course in Probability' (p 39, 8th ed.).




    A football team consists of 20 offensive and 20 defensive players. The players are to be paired in groups of 2 for the purpose of determining roommates. If the pairing is done at random, what is the probability that there are no offensive-defensive roommate pairs? What is the probability that there are 2i offensive-defensive roommate pairs when i = 1,2,3...,10?




    I came to an answer which is:



    $$
    P_{2i} = cfrac{ {{20}choose{2i}}(2i)!Big[cfrac{(20-2i)!}{{{2}^{10-i}}(10-i)!}Big]^2 }{ cfrac{(40)!}{{2^{20}}{(20)!}} }
    $$

    where $P_n$ denote the probability that there are n pair(s) of offensive-defensive players as roommate.



    With the Stirling's approximation, the answer for several situations goes like this:



    $$P_0 approx 1.3403 times 10^{-6}$$
    $$P_{10} approx .345861$$
    $$P_{20} approx 7.6068 times 10^{-6}$$



    And there goes my thoughts:



    The numerical results are against my intuition. If there are 20 - 20 offense defense players and they are to be grouped, I would surmise there should be 50% chance of having $P_{10}$ situation, which is the probability that only 10 pairs of offense/defense players being assigned as teammates and rest of them being assigned with players with the same position (defense-defense, offense-offense). But the likeliness of this happening is less than 50%.



    Furthermore, the asymmetry between $P_0$ and $P_{10}$ bothers me as well. Why is the probability of having none of players being matched with different position 5 times less than the probability of having all of the players being matched with different position? My intuition says those probabilities should be the same and I feel it's equally hard to assign them completely segregated or integrated.



    I am not questioning the math here, but still can't wrap my head around with how to explain the seemingly-counter-intuitive numeric result. Is there anyone who could shed me light on how to explain this logically?



    Thanks.










    share|cite|improve this question


























      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite











      Question is mentioned so many times on the internet and actually is an example in Sheldon Ross' textbook 'A First Course in Probability' (p 39, 8th ed.).




      A football team consists of 20 offensive and 20 defensive players. The players are to be paired in groups of 2 for the purpose of determining roommates. If the pairing is done at random, what is the probability that there are no offensive-defensive roommate pairs? What is the probability that there are 2i offensive-defensive roommate pairs when i = 1,2,3...,10?




      I came to an answer which is:



      $$
      P_{2i} = cfrac{ {{20}choose{2i}}(2i)!Big[cfrac{(20-2i)!}{{{2}^{10-i}}(10-i)!}Big]^2 }{ cfrac{(40)!}{{2^{20}}{(20)!}} }
      $$

      where $P_n$ denote the probability that there are n pair(s) of offensive-defensive players as roommate.



      With the Stirling's approximation, the answer for several situations goes like this:



      $$P_0 approx 1.3403 times 10^{-6}$$
      $$P_{10} approx .345861$$
      $$P_{20} approx 7.6068 times 10^{-6}$$



      And there goes my thoughts:



      The numerical results are against my intuition. If there are 20 - 20 offense defense players and they are to be grouped, I would surmise there should be 50% chance of having $P_{10}$ situation, which is the probability that only 10 pairs of offense/defense players being assigned as teammates and rest of them being assigned with players with the same position (defense-defense, offense-offense). But the likeliness of this happening is less than 50%.



      Furthermore, the asymmetry between $P_0$ and $P_{10}$ bothers me as well. Why is the probability of having none of players being matched with different position 5 times less than the probability of having all of the players being matched with different position? My intuition says those probabilities should be the same and I feel it's equally hard to assign them completely segregated or integrated.



      I am not questioning the math here, but still can't wrap my head around with how to explain the seemingly-counter-intuitive numeric result. Is there anyone who could shed me light on how to explain this logically?



      Thanks.










      share|cite|improve this question















      Question is mentioned so many times on the internet and actually is an example in Sheldon Ross' textbook 'A First Course in Probability' (p 39, 8th ed.).




      A football team consists of 20 offensive and 20 defensive players. The players are to be paired in groups of 2 for the purpose of determining roommates. If the pairing is done at random, what is the probability that there are no offensive-defensive roommate pairs? What is the probability that there are 2i offensive-defensive roommate pairs when i = 1,2,3...,10?




      I came to an answer which is:



      $$
      P_{2i} = cfrac{ {{20}choose{2i}}(2i)!Big[cfrac{(20-2i)!}{{{2}^{10-i}}(10-i)!}Big]^2 }{ cfrac{(40)!}{{2^{20}}{(20)!}} }
      $$

      where $P_n$ denote the probability that there are n pair(s) of offensive-defensive players as roommate.



      With the Stirling's approximation, the answer for several situations goes like this:



      $$P_0 approx 1.3403 times 10^{-6}$$
      $$P_{10} approx .345861$$
      $$P_{20} approx 7.6068 times 10^{-6}$$



      And there goes my thoughts:



      The numerical results are against my intuition. If there are 20 - 20 offense defense players and they are to be grouped, I would surmise there should be 50% chance of having $P_{10}$ situation, which is the probability that only 10 pairs of offense/defense players being assigned as teammates and rest of them being assigned with players with the same position (defense-defense, offense-offense). But the likeliness of this happening is less than 50%.



      Furthermore, the asymmetry between $P_0$ and $P_{10}$ bothers me as well. Why is the probability of having none of players being matched with different position 5 times less than the probability of having all of the players being matched with different position? My intuition says those probabilities should be the same and I feel it's equally hard to assign them completely segregated or integrated.



      I am not questioning the math here, but still can't wrap my head around with how to explain the seemingly-counter-intuitive numeric result. Is there anyone who could shed me light on how to explain this logically?



      Thanks.







      probability






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Nov 21 at 22:42

























      asked Nov 21 at 20:47









      Kevin Woo

      113




      113






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          2
          down vote













          If you're pairing $n$ offensive players with $n$ defensive players, you might start with your first offensive player, and choose one of $n$ possible defensive players to pair him with. Then for the second offensive player you have $n-1$ possible defensive players to choose from, and so on.
          The total number of choices is $n (n-1) ... (1) = n!$.



          On the other hand, suppose you are pairing the $n$ offensive players with offensive players and the $n$ defensive players with the defensive players (of course, $n$ had better be even). You have only $n-1$ choices to match with the first offensive player (since you can't pair him with himself).
          Then take the first defensive player and match him with one of $n-1$ choices. That leaves you with $n-2$ offensive and $n-2$ defensive players still unmatched. Continue in this way, alternating offensive and defensive. Your total number of choices is
          $$(n-1)(n-1)(n-3)(n-3) ldots (1)(1)$$
          Note that when matching an offensive player you have one fewer choice than
          you had at the same stage when you matched offensive to defensive players
          ($n-1$ versus $n$, $n-3$ versus $n-2$, etc), while when matching a defensive player you have the same number of choices. Thus the second way
          gives you fewer total choices than the first way.






          share|cite|improve this answer




























            up vote
            0
            down vote













            @RobertIsrael already gave a great answer why $P_{20} > P_0$. This answer addresses why $P_{10} < 0.5$.



            While your intuition might have told you that having $10$ pairs is "typical" or "average" or "most likely" etc, that does not mean it will happen with $0.5$ probability! The "typical/average/most likely" event does not happen with $0.5$ probability at all. (BTW I put "typical/average/most likely" in quotes because it is not clear to me that $10$ pairs is actually the expected number or the most probable case. In fact based on Robert's reasoning I expect the average & most probable case both to skew slightly higher than $10$.)



            The following two similar examples might help clarify...?



            First, flip a fair coin $20$ times. $10$ heads is indeed the average, and also the most probable. But $P(10 heads) = {20 choose 10} / 2^{20} approx 0.18 neq 0.5$.



            Second, back to the football team. Imagine it has $20000$ offensive players and $20000$ defensive players, and you do the pairing. What is $P_{10000}$? To hit $10000$ pairs exactly has got to be a very, very improbable event, right? I don't know the value but I would be surprised if it is even $1$%.






            share|cite|improve this answer























              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',
              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%2f3008333%2fintuition-vs-result-on-this-probability-question%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








              up vote
              2
              down vote













              If you're pairing $n$ offensive players with $n$ defensive players, you might start with your first offensive player, and choose one of $n$ possible defensive players to pair him with. Then for the second offensive player you have $n-1$ possible defensive players to choose from, and so on.
              The total number of choices is $n (n-1) ... (1) = n!$.



              On the other hand, suppose you are pairing the $n$ offensive players with offensive players and the $n$ defensive players with the defensive players (of course, $n$ had better be even). You have only $n-1$ choices to match with the first offensive player (since you can't pair him with himself).
              Then take the first defensive player and match him with one of $n-1$ choices. That leaves you with $n-2$ offensive and $n-2$ defensive players still unmatched. Continue in this way, alternating offensive and defensive. Your total number of choices is
              $$(n-1)(n-1)(n-3)(n-3) ldots (1)(1)$$
              Note that when matching an offensive player you have one fewer choice than
              you had at the same stage when you matched offensive to defensive players
              ($n-1$ versus $n$, $n-3$ versus $n-2$, etc), while when matching a defensive player you have the same number of choices. Thus the second way
              gives you fewer total choices than the first way.






              share|cite|improve this answer

























                up vote
                2
                down vote













                If you're pairing $n$ offensive players with $n$ defensive players, you might start with your first offensive player, and choose one of $n$ possible defensive players to pair him with. Then for the second offensive player you have $n-1$ possible defensive players to choose from, and so on.
                The total number of choices is $n (n-1) ... (1) = n!$.



                On the other hand, suppose you are pairing the $n$ offensive players with offensive players and the $n$ defensive players with the defensive players (of course, $n$ had better be even). You have only $n-1$ choices to match with the first offensive player (since you can't pair him with himself).
                Then take the first defensive player and match him with one of $n-1$ choices. That leaves you with $n-2$ offensive and $n-2$ defensive players still unmatched. Continue in this way, alternating offensive and defensive. Your total number of choices is
                $$(n-1)(n-1)(n-3)(n-3) ldots (1)(1)$$
                Note that when matching an offensive player you have one fewer choice than
                you had at the same stage when you matched offensive to defensive players
                ($n-1$ versus $n$, $n-3$ versus $n-2$, etc), while when matching a defensive player you have the same number of choices. Thus the second way
                gives you fewer total choices than the first way.






                share|cite|improve this answer























                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote









                  If you're pairing $n$ offensive players with $n$ defensive players, you might start with your first offensive player, and choose one of $n$ possible defensive players to pair him with. Then for the second offensive player you have $n-1$ possible defensive players to choose from, and so on.
                  The total number of choices is $n (n-1) ... (1) = n!$.



                  On the other hand, suppose you are pairing the $n$ offensive players with offensive players and the $n$ defensive players with the defensive players (of course, $n$ had better be even). You have only $n-1$ choices to match with the first offensive player (since you can't pair him with himself).
                  Then take the first defensive player and match him with one of $n-1$ choices. That leaves you with $n-2$ offensive and $n-2$ defensive players still unmatched. Continue in this way, alternating offensive and defensive. Your total number of choices is
                  $$(n-1)(n-1)(n-3)(n-3) ldots (1)(1)$$
                  Note that when matching an offensive player you have one fewer choice than
                  you had at the same stage when you matched offensive to defensive players
                  ($n-1$ versus $n$, $n-3$ versus $n-2$, etc), while when matching a defensive player you have the same number of choices. Thus the second way
                  gives you fewer total choices than the first way.






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  If you're pairing $n$ offensive players with $n$ defensive players, you might start with your first offensive player, and choose one of $n$ possible defensive players to pair him with. Then for the second offensive player you have $n-1$ possible defensive players to choose from, and so on.
                  The total number of choices is $n (n-1) ... (1) = n!$.



                  On the other hand, suppose you are pairing the $n$ offensive players with offensive players and the $n$ defensive players with the defensive players (of course, $n$ had better be even). You have only $n-1$ choices to match with the first offensive player (since you can't pair him with himself).
                  Then take the first defensive player and match him with one of $n-1$ choices. That leaves you with $n-2$ offensive and $n-2$ defensive players still unmatched. Continue in this way, alternating offensive and defensive. Your total number of choices is
                  $$(n-1)(n-1)(n-3)(n-3) ldots (1)(1)$$
                  Note that when matching an offensive player you have one fewer choice than
                  you had at the same stage when you matched offensive to defensive players
                  ($n-1$ versus $n$, $n-3$ versus $n-2$, etc), while when matching a defensive player you have the same number of choices. Thus the second way
                  gives you fewer total choices than the first way.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Nov 21 at 21:05









                  Robert Israel

                  315k23206456




                  315k23206456






















                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote













                      @RobertIsrael already gave a great answer why $P_{20} > P_0$. This answer addresses why $P_{10} < 0.5$.



                      While your intuition might have told you that having $10$ pairs is "typical" or "average" or "most likely" etc, that does not mean it will happen with $0.5$ probability! The "typical/average/most likely" event does not happen with $0.5$ probability at all. (BTW I put "typical/average/most likely" in quotes because it is not clear to me that $10$ pairs is actually the expected number or the most probable case. In fact based on Robert's reasoning I expect the average & most probable case both to skew slightly higher than $10$.)



                      The following two similar examples might help clarify...?



                      First, flip a fair coin $20$ times. $10$ heads is indeed the average, and also the most probable. But $P(10 heads) = {20 choose 10} / 2^{20} approx 0.18 neq 0.5$.



                      Second, back to the football team. Imagine it has $20000$ offensive players and $20000$ defensive players, and you do the pairing. What is $P_{10000}$? To hit $10000$ pairs exactly has got to be a very, very improbable event, right? I don't know the value but I would be surprised if it is even $1$%.






                      share|cite|improve this answer



























                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote













                        @RobertIsrael already gave a great answer why $P_{20} > P_0$. This answer addresses why $P_{10} < 0.5$.



                        While your intuition might have told you that having $10$ pairs is "typical" or "average" or "most likely" etc, that does not mean it will happen with $0.5$ probability! The "typical/average/most likely" event does not happen with $0.5$ probability at all. (BTW I put "typical/average/most likely" in quotes because it is not clear to me that $10$ pairs is actually the expected number or the most probable case. In fact based on Robert's reasoning I expect the average & most probable case both to skew slightly higher than $10$.)



                        The following two similar examples might help clarify...?



                        First, flip a fair coin $20$ times. $10$ heads is indeed the average, and also the most probable. But $P(10 heads) = {20 choose 10} / 2^{20} approx 0.18 neq 0.5$.



                        Second, back to the football team. Imagine it has $20000$ offensive players and $20000$ defensive players, and you do the pairing. What is $P_{10000}$? To hit $10000$ pairs exactly has got to be a very, very improbable event, right? I don't know the value but I would be surprised if it is even $1$%.






                        share|cite|improve this answer

























                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote










                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote









                          @RobertIsrael already gave a great answer why $P_{20} > P_0$. This answer addresses why $P_{10} < 0.5$.



                          While your intuition might have told you that having $10$ pairs is "typical" or "average" or "most likely" etc, that does not mean it will happen with $0.5$ probability! The "typical/average/most likely" event does not happen with $0.5$ probability at all. (BTW I put "typical/average/most likely" in quotes because it is not clear to me that $10$ pairs is actually the expected number or the most probable case. In fact based on Robert's reasoning I expect the average & most probable case both to skew slightly higher than $10$.)



                          The following two similar examples might help clarify...?



                          First, flip a fair coin $20$ times. $10$ heads is indeed the average, and also the most probable. But $P(10 heads) = {20 choose 10} / 2^{20} approx 0.18 neq 0.5$.



                          Second, back to the football team. Imagine it has $20000$ offensive players and $20000$ defensive players, and you do the pairing. What is $P_{10000}$? To hit $10000$ pairs exactly has got to be a very, very improbable event, right? I don't know the value but I would be surprised if it is even $1$%.






                          share|cite|improve this answer














                          @RobertIsrael already gave a great answer why $P_{20} > P_0$. This answer addresses why $P_{10} < 0.5$.



                          While your intuition might have told you that having $10$ pairs is "typical" or "average" or "most likely" etc, that does not mean it will happen with $0.5$ probability! The "typical/average/most likely" event does not happen with $0.5$ probability at all. (BTW I put "typical/average/most likely" in quotes because it is not clear to me that $10$ pairs is actually the expected number or the most probable case. In fact based on Robert's reasoning I expect the average & most probable case both to skew slightly higher than $10$.)



                          The following two similar examples might help clarify...?



                          First, flip a fair coin $20$ times. $10$ heads is indeed the average, and also the most probable. But $P(10 heads) = {20 choose 10} / 2^{20} approx 0.18 neq 0.5$.



                          Second, back to the football team. Imagine it has $20000$ offensive players and $20000$ defensive players, and you do the pairing. What is $P_{10000}$? To hit $10000$ pairs exactly has got to be a very, very improbable event, right? I don't know the value but I would be surprised if it is even $1$%.







                          share|cite|improve this answer














                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer








                          edited Nov 22 at 6:04

























                          answered Nov 22 at 5:51









                          antkam

                          1,383112




                          1,383112






























                              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.





                              Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                              Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                              • 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.


                              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%2f3008333%2fintuition-vs-result-on-this-probability-question%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

                              Le Mesnil-Réaume

                              Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten

                              web3.py web3.isConnected() returns false always