Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Problem Set 12: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Prof. Albert R Meyer Prof. Adam Chlipala

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 4

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

6.042J/18.062J, Spring ’15: Mathematics for Computer Science April 29


Prof. Albert R Meyer & Prof. Adam Chlipala revised Tuesday 28th April, 2015, 19:03

Problem Set 12
Due: May 8

Reading:

 Independence: Chapter 17.7, 17.8;

 Random variables: Chapter 18 through 18.3;

 Expectation: Chapter 18.4, 18.5 in the course textbook.

Problem 1.
Let R, S, and T be random variables with the same codomain, V .
(a) Suppose R is uniform—that is,

1
PrŒR D b] D ;
jV j
for all b 2 V —and R is independent of S . Originally this text had the following argument:

The probability that R D S is the same as the probability that R takes whatever value S happens
to have, therefore
1
PrŒR D S] D : (1)
jV j

Are you convinced by this argument? We decided to replace it by a reference to this problem. We’d like
your advice on whether it should be put back in the text. Before advising us, write out a careful proof of (1).
Hint: The event ŒR D S ] is a disjoint union of events
[
ŒR D S] D ŒR D b AND S D b]:
b2V

(b) Let S  T be the random variable giving the values of S and T .1 Now suppose R has a uniform
distribution, and R is independent of S  T . How about this argument?

The probability that R D S is the same as the probability that R equals the first coordinate of
whatever value S  T happens to have, and this probability remains equal to 1=jV j by indepen­
dence. Therefore the event ŒR D S ] is independent of ŒS D T ].

Write out a careful proof that ŒR D S ] is independent of ŒS D T ].


2015, Eric Lehman, F Tom Leighton, Albert R Meyer. This work is available under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 license.
1 Thatis, S  T W S ! V  V where

.S  T /.!/ WWD .S.!/; T .!//


for every outcome ! 2 S.
2 Problem Set 12

(c) Let V D f1; 2; 3g and .R; S; T / take the following triples of values with equal probability,

.1; 1; 1/; .2; 1; 1/; .1; 2; 3/; .2; 2; 3/; .1; 3; 2/; .2; 3; 2/:

Verify that

1. R is independent of S  T ,
2. The event ŒR D S ] is not independent of ŒS D T ].
3. S and T have a uniform distribution.

Problem 2.
(A true story from World War Two.)
The army needs to test n soldiers for a disease. There is a blood test that accurately determines when
a blood sample contains blood from a diseased soldier. The army presumes, based on experience, that the
fraction of soldiers with the disease is approximately equal to some small number p.
Approach (1) is to test blood from each soldier individually; this requires n tests. Approach (2) is to
randomly group the soldiers into g groups of k soldiers, where n D gk. For each group, blend the k blood
samples of the people in the group, and test the blended sample. If the group-blend is free of the disease, we
are done with that group after one test. If the group-blend tests positive for the disease, then someone in the
group has the disease, and we to test all the people in the group for a total of k C 1 tests on that group.
Since the groups are chosen randomly, each soldier in the group has the disease with probability p, and it
is safe to assume that whether one soldier has the disease is independent of whether the others do.
(a) What is the expected number of tests in Approach (2) as a function of the number of soldiers n, the
disease fraction p, and the group size k?
p
(b) Show how to choose k so that the expected number of tests using Approach (2) is approximately n p.
Hint: Since p is small, you may assume that .1 - p/k  1 and ln.1 - p/  -p.

(c) What fraction of the work does Approach (2) expect to save over Approach (1) in a million-strong army
of whom approximately 1% are diseased?

(d) Can you come up with a better scheme by using multiple levels of grouping, that is, groups of groups?

Problem 3.
A literal is a propositional variable or its negation. A k-clause is an OR of k literals, with no variable
occurring more than once in the clause. For example,

P OR Q OR R OR V;

is a 4-clause, but
V OR Q OR X OR V;
is not, since V appears twice.
Let S be a sequence of n distinct k-clauses involving v variables. The variables in different k-clauses
may overlap or be completely different, so k  v  nk.
A random assignment of true/false values will be made independently to each of the v variables, with true
and false assignments equally likely. Write formulas in n, k, and v in answer to the first two parts below.
(a) What is the probability that the last k-clause in S is true under the random assignment?

(b) What is the expected number of true k-clauses in S?


Problem Set 12 3

(c) A set of propositions is satisfiable iff there is an assignment to the variables that makes all of the
propositions true. Use your answer to part (b) to prove that if n < 2k , then S is satisfiable.
MIT OpenCourseWare
https://ocw.mit.edu

6.042J / 18.062J Mathematics for Computer Science


Spring 2015

For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: https://ocw.mit.edu/terms.

You might also like