amilapsn
  • amilapsn
An explosion at a construction site could have occurred as the result of static electricity, malfunctioning of equipment, carelessness or sabotage. Inter-views with construction engineers analysing the risks involved led to the estimates that such an explosion would occur with probability 0.25 as a result of static electricity, 0.20 as a result of malfunctioning of equipment, 0.40 as a result of carelessness and 0.75 as a result of sabotage. It is also felt the prior probabilities of the four causes of the explosion are 0.20, 0.40, 0.25 and 0.15. Based on all the information....
Mathematics
schrodinger
  • schrodinger
See more answers at brainly.com
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.

Get this expert

answer on brainly

SEE EXPERT ANSWER

Get your free account and access expert answers to this
and thousands of other questions

amilapsn
  • amilapsn
(a) What is the most likely cause of the explosion? (b) What is the least likely cause for the explosion?
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
Am I correct?: "Such an explosion would occur with probability 0.25 as a result of static electricity " \(\equiv\) P(explosion/static electricity)=0.25
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
Or is it the other way round?

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.

More answers

kropot72
  • kropot72
Surely "0.75 as a result of sabotage" should have been written as "0.15 as a result of sabotage". Please confirm.
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
I don't get it @kropot72
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
Are you telling the given probabilities are the same?
kropot72
  • kropot72
The sum of the given prior probabilities is 1. The sum of the posterior probabilities must also be 1 (by the basic rule of probabilities). The most likely error in the posterior probabilities is "...0.75 as a result of sabotage". If this is written as "...0.15 as a result of sabotage", the sum of the posterior probabilities would be 1.
kropot72
  • kropot72
It is quite possible for the prior and the posterior probabilities of sabotage to both be 0.15.
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
But in the question it's 0.75
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
Am I correct?: "Such an explosion would occur with probability 0.25 as a result of static electricity " \(\equiv\) P(explosion/static electricity)=0.25 Or is it the other way round?
kropot72
  • kropot72
The solution is found from Bates Theorem: \[\large P(A|B)=\frac{P(A) P(B|A)}{P(B)}\] for proposition A, and evidence B where P(A) is the prior, the initial degree of belief in A P(A|B) is the posterior, the degree of belief having accounted for B and the quotient P(B | A)/P(B) represents the support B provides for A. So if we consider static electricity as a possible cause, the support the evidence provides for the prior is given by 0.25/0.2 = 1.25. The support for each of the other three possible causes is found in a similar way.
kropot72
  • kropot72
"But in the question it's 0.75" Based on the reasons in my previous posting, you need to query this part of the question with your lecturer.
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
ok....
kropot72
  • kropot72
"The solution is found from Bates Theorem:" should obviously read "The solution is found from Bayes Theorem:"
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
Is this the answer: A: Static Electricity B: Malfunctioning of equipment C: Carelessness D: Sabotage E: Explosion P(E|A)=0.25
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
P(E|B)=0.20 P(E|C)=0.40 P(E|D)=0.15 (As you suggested)
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
P(A)=0.20 P(B)=0.40 P(C)=0.25 P(D)=0.15
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
We have to find P(A|E), P(B|E), P(C|E) and P(D|E) right?
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
P(A|E)=P(A and E)/P(E), ok?
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
But to find that we need to find P(E)...
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
Hey I think P(E|D) can be equal to 0.75...
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
Because, P(E|A)+P(E|B)+P(E|C)+P(E|D) should not be 1
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
*should not necessarily be
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
The given probabilities are not posterior probabilities...
kropot72
  • kropot72
The first part of the question is: (a) What is the most likely cause of the explosion? So you need to find what support the evidence has on each of the prior probabilities. For static electricity the support is 1.25. For malfunction the support is 0.5. For carelessness the support is 1.6. For sabotage the support is 1 (assuming the posterior is 0.15 and not 0.75). Before taking the evidence, the leading possibilities were malfunction and carelessness, in that order. However in the light of the evidence carelessness is now the most likely cause. (b) In the light of the evidence sabotage is the least likely cause.
kropot72
  • kropot72
"The given probabilities are not posterior probabilities..." The last set of probabilities are given as prior probabilities. How was it concluded that the evidence -based probabilities are not posterior probabilities?
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
Because the phrase, "...an explosion would occur with probability 0.25 as a result of static electricity..." suggests P(Explosion|Static Electricity)=0.25 \(\sf \underline{not}\) P(Static Electricity|Explosion)
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
i. e. it suggest the probability of an explosion if there is static electricity.
kropot72
  • kropot72
Sorry to say I need to log out now. You need to study the application of Bayes' Theorem to this kind of question. The first set of probabilities in the question are definitely posterior probabilities, based on evidence. You could find the information here helpful: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes'_theorem
amilapsn
  • amilapsn
np.

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.