Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

"A waste disposal company averages $6.5$ spills of toxic waste per month. Assume spills occur randomly at a uniform rate, and independently of each other, with a negligible chance of $2$ or more occurring at the same time. Find the probability there are $4$ or more spills in a $2$ month period."

The way I did it was to first say "the probability of a spill on a random selected day is $\frac{65}{300}$ (assuming $30$-day months)". Then I calculated the probability that there will be $3$ or $2$ or $1$ or no spills over $600$ days, then I subtracted it from 1. I got a tiny answer (a few percent), but the correct solution was $0.9989$. What did I do wrong, and why is the correct answer $0.9989$?

share|improve this question
    
Why $\mathbf{600}$ days? Besides, if there are $6.5$ spills on average in one month, and so $13$ on average in two months, most people would guess that it is very likely that $4$ or more spills occurred in the two month period, not a few percent. –  Dilip Sarwate Jan 26 '13 at 19:10
    
Yes, but I still don't know why I'm wrong. Changing it to 60 days would only make the probability tinier. –  user54609 Jan 26 '13 at 19:17
    
Maybe if you typed in the formula you used to calculate the probability of $3$ or fewer spills in $60$ days, it would help people to point out what you did wrong. –  Dilip Sarwate Jan 26 '13 at 21:38

1 Answer 1

This sends up all sorts of red flags:

I calculated the probability that there will be 3 or 2 or 1 or no spills over 600 days, then I subtracted 1 from it.

Since probabilities can't be greater than one, if you subtracted one from "the probability that there will be 3 or 2 or 1 or no spills" then you should have gotten a negative number.

Intuitively, you should have realized that if there are an average of 6.5 spills per month, the probability that there will be at least 4 over 2 months should be pretty high, so your low answer should have set off some mental alarms.

Have you learned about the Poisson distribution? That's the easy way to solve this problem.

share|improve this answer
    
I actually subtracted it from 1, not the other way around lol –  user54609 Jan 26 '13 at 18:55
    
@EricDong That's better, then. Still, the way the problem is written screams "Poisson distribution!" –  Jonathan Christensen Jan 26 '13 at 19:01

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.