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.

An insurance policy covers $2$ employees of Company Z. The policy will reimburse company Z for a maximum of $1$ loss per employee per year. It reimburses the full amount of the loss up to an annual company-wide maximum of $8000$. The probability of an employee incurring a loss in a year is $40$%. The probability that an employee incurs a loss is independent of the other employee's losses. The amount of each loss is uniformly distributed on $[1000, 5000]$. Given that one of the employees has incurred a loss in excess of $2000$, determine the probability that losses will exceed reimbursements.

So I'm not seeking a solution to this problem. I was able to solve it, but not for the reason stated in the solution. I don't understand what is meant by the following:

$[...]$ The probability that total losses exceed reimbursement $[...]$ is $\frac{1}{6}$ (this pat is not confusing). However, this is conditional on the occurrence of the loss of the employee whose loss is Y (but no longer conditional on the occurrence of the loss for the employee whose loss is $X$, because the event considered is already conditional on $X > 2000$, so the loss has occurred.) $[...]$

The full solution is rather wordy, so I restricted it to the portion that was confusing. (If more of it is needed in order to answer the post, then please let me know.)

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 1 down vote accepted

$[...]$ The probability that total losses exceed reimbursement $[...]$ is $\frac{1}{6}$.

This part shouldn't be confusing.

However, this is conditional on the occurrence of the loss of the employee whose loss is Y

This means that the total losses can exceed reimbursement only if the other employee (the one other than the one mentioned to have lost over $2000$) incurs a loss as well. This occurs with probability $.4$ (and is of course not a sufficient condition).

(but no longer conditional on the occurrence of the loss for the employee whose loss is $X$, because the event considered is already conditional on $X > 2000$, so the loss has occurred.) $[...]$

This means that while it is necessary that the employee mentioned incurs a loss, this is guaranteed as it is already mentioned that he has lost more than $2000$.

Basically, the point of the excerpt is to point out that in your working for the solution, the figure $.4$ should only appear once.

share|improve this answer
    
In other words, the solution is $\frac{1}{6}\cdot0.4$. –  Sarastro Feb 19 '13 at 2:38

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.