3
$\begingroup$

Below I feel that I am not understanding something subtle about independence in probability relating to the influence of new information/evidence....

To give context:

Question:
A crime is committed by one of two suspects, $A$ and $B$. Initially, there is equal evidence against both of them. In further investigation at the crime scene, it is found that the guilty party had a blood type found in $10\%$ of the population. Suspect $A$ does match this blood type, whereas the blood type of Suspect $B$ is unknown.
(a) Given this new information, what is the probability that $A$ is the guilty party?
Solution:
Let $M$ be the event that $A$’s blood type matches the guilty party’s and for brevity, write $A$ for “$A$ is guilty” and $B$ for “$B$ is guilty”.
By Bayes’ Rule,
$$P(A|M)= \frac{P(M|A)P(A)}{P(M|A)P(A)+P(M|B)P(B)} = \frac{1/2}{1/2 + (1/10)(1/2)} = \frac{10}{11}.$$
(We have $P(M|B)=1/10$ since, given that $B$ is guilty, the probability that $A$’s blood type matches the guilty party’s is the same probability as for the general population.)

I don't understand the $P(M|B)=1/10$ part exactly. When I attempted the question with writing $P(M|A^\mathsf{c})=1/10$, as $A^\mathsf{c}=B$ (if $A$ is not guilty that would that mean $B$ as they impy each other).

In writing so, how could one say that $M$ is independent of $A^\mathsf{c}$ entirely? Wouldn't knowing that person $A$ is not guilty give us information about how likely it is for person $A$ to have a matching type with the guilty party? Ie. it would be more in general to have a matching blood type given that person $A$ is innocent as $A$ was a suspect in the ordeal

(potentially important: I also thought about how person $A$ was a suspect in the ordeal, is that important too? As wouldnt being a suspect alter the chances of matching blood types entirely compared to the general population?)

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

It is found that the guilty party had a blood type found in $10\%$ of the population. Suspect A does match this blood type, whereas the blood type of Suspect B is unknown.

In other words, there is some blood type that is found in $10\%$ of the population, call it blood type X. So, the chance that some particular person has blood type X is $10\%$.

Now consider $P(M|B)$. $B$ means that suspect B is in fact guilty. Because B is guilty, we know that B's blood type is X ("it is found that the guilty party had a blood type found in $10\%$ of the population"). Recall, $M$ is the event that suspect A's blood type matches the guilty party. Well, it is given that B is the guilty party and B's blood type is X. In other words,

Given that B was guilty with blood type X, what is the chance that A matches B?

Given that B is guilty and has blood type X, then asking for the chance that A matches B is the same as asking for the chance that A has blood type X. This is $10\%$.

Further

\begin{align*} P(M) &= P(\text{A is guilty, and A matches A})+P(\text{B is guilty, and A matches B})\\ &= \frac{1}{2}\cdot 1+\frac{1}{2}\cdot\frac{1}{10}\\ &= \frac{11}{20}\\ &\neq P(M|B) \end{align*}

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I see that your answer does not address independence much, is it wise to agree that $P(M|B)=P(M)$ or is that a different ball game? $\endgroup$ – Brofessor Aug 20 '16 at 7:03
  • $\begingroup$ Did you try calculating $P(M)$? Is it equal to $P(M|B)$? $\endgroup$ – Em. Aug 20 '16 at 7:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, the $P(M)=\frac{11}{20}$. Which is interesting because i thought the chances of A matching the murderer's blood was $\frac{1}{10}$ or 10%? Or have i got my condition wrong :/ $\endgroup$ – Brofessor Aug 20 '16 at 7:33
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Brofessor You were on the right track the whole time. I'm not sure where you got that they were independent, since it seems your intuition was right. Anyway, yes, $P(M) = 11/20$. $\endgroup$ – Em. Aug 20 '16 at 7:36
  • $\begingroup$ Great edit! I guess a way to see that the "intuition" was wrong was because the $P(M)$ doesn't condition on the "specific type of 10% blood of the murder" Ie. type $X$. Hence the event $M$, person A is not restricted to only having type $X$ but rather only to match the blood type of the guilty party. (which could mean having other forms of matching blood) Furthermore, event $M$ doesnt suggest the event itself should contain information that the guilty party has a blood matching to type $X$, only that A matches what ever blood the murderer has. $\endgroup$ – Brofessor Aug 20 '16 at 9:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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