IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags math puzzles , probability , probability puzzles

Reply
Old 22nd September 2008, 12:22 PM   #1
rwp
Thinker
 
rwp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 207
Deal or No Deal: Two Cases

I have been thinking about this one for a while now:

On Deal or No Deal, if a contestant gets down to two cases and the top prize is still on the board, what is the probability that the case he or she holds contains the top prize?

My first thought was to relate this to the Monty Hall puzzle and claim that there is a 1/26 probability (there are 26 cases to start); however, I have since changed my mind and now agree with 1/2.

Here is why:


I tried a "brute force" method on this and produced all the possible outcomes for a Deal or No Deal game with only four cases to start. With four cases there are less outcomes to observe (4! = 24). Here they are in order of the following:

Chosen case, next pick, next pick, last case remaining.

The letter "A" represents the top prize.

ABCD
ABDC
ACBD
ACDB
ADBC
ADCB

BACD
BADC
BCAD
BCDA
BDAC
BDCA

CABD
CADB
CBAD
CBDA
CDAB
CDBA

DABC
DACB
DBAC
DBCA
DCAB
DCBA

Of course you will only choose the "A" case 1/4 of the time and will not choose it 3/4 of the time. [P(Pick A on first try) = 6/24 = 1/4]

There are 12/24 times when you are down to two cases and A is left in play. 6/12 or 1/2 are winners, and 6/12 or 1/2 are losers. That seems to definitively answer the question for me.

Is there anything wrong with that analysis?
rwp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 12:33 PM   #2
Vorticity
Fluid Mechanic
 
Vorticity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,677
You're going to have to explain the game in more detail. I have no idea what you're talking about.
__________________
Free lunch. Final wisdom. Total coverage.
http://stopsylvia.com
Vorticity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 12:40 PM   #3
rwp
Thinker
 
rwp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 207
Originally Posted by Vorticity View Post
You're going to have to explain the game in more detail. I have no idea what you're talking about.
Really?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deal_or_No_Deal
rwp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 12:42 PM   #4
drkitten
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 21,629
Originally Posted by Vorticity View Post
You're going to have to explain the game in more detail. I have no idea what you're talking about.
Basically, the contestant picks one of N urns, each of which have prizes of varying amounts in them.

The contestant then opens successive unchosen urns, and the prizes inside them are revealed.

At various points, the MC will offer the player the chance to swap the prize inside his (chosen) urn for a sum of money related to the average of the prizes that have not yet been seen.

Since the player is choosing urns without any information about their contents, the Monty Hall information "paradox" does not arise; if the last two prizes unaccounted for are A and B, then the chosen urn has a 50/50 chance of having A or B in it, irrespective of the values of A and B or the starting number N.
drkitten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 12:44 PM   #5
Viper Daimao
Critical Thinker
 
Viper Daimao's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 496
Originally Posted by rwp View Post
yes. I also have little idea about how the game is played other than picking random briefcases with some listed amounts of money in them.
Viper Daimao is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 12:49 PM   #6
rwp
Thinker
 
rwp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 207
Originally Posted by drkitten View Post
Since the player is choosing urns without any information about their contents, the Monty Hall information "paradox" does not arise; if the last two prizes unaccounted for are A and B, then the chosen urn has a 50/50 chance of having A or B in it, irrespective of the values of A and B or the starting number N.
It is making sense to me now. The difference between the two scenarios is the fact that the host doesn't just get rid of all of the losing cases and leave one behind in Deal or No Deal as he would in the Monty Hall game.
rwp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 12:54 PM   #7
andyandy
anthropomorphic ape
 
andyandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 8,377
It will just be 50%. The Monty Hall problem introduces an extra variable in that the quizmaster gives you additional information after you have chosen your box. When you have just two boxes on the table you have no additional information to change the probabilities from 50:50.
andyandy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 12:54 PM   #8
balrog666
Eigenmode: Cynic
 
balrog666's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,974
Originally Posted by drkitten View Post
Basically, the contestant picks one of N urns, each of which have prizes of varying amounts in them.

The contestant then opens successive unchosen urns, and the prizes inside them are revealed.

At various points, the MC will offer the player the chance to swap the prize inside his (chosen) urn for a sum of money related to the average of the prizes that have not yet been seen.

Since the player is choosing urns without any information about their contents, the Monty Hall information "paradox" does not arise; if the last two prizes unaccounted for are A and B, then the chosen urn has a 50/50 chance of having A or B in it, irrespective of the values of A and B or the starting number N.

Since the revealed urns have been chosen at random, yes, exactly.
__________________
A person who won't think has no advantage over one who can't think. - (paraphrased) Mark Twain

Political language… is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. – George Orwell
balrog666 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 12:55 PM   #9
rwp
Thinker
 
rwp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 207
Originally Posted by Viper Daimao View Post
yes. I also have little idea about how the game is played other than picking random briefcases with some listed amounts of money in them.
Originally Posted by Vorticity
You're going to have to explain the game in more detail. I have no idea what you're talking about.
1. A player chooses 1 case from 26. Each case has a different monetary value, with the lowest being $0.01 and the highest being $1,000,000. The player is not allowed to look in his or her case.

2. The player then eliminates case by case, which are opened to reveal their values.

3. The question is, if the player luckily manages to keep the top prize on the board until there are two cases left (the one on the board plus the one he or she holds), what are the odds he or she holds the winning case?

I say it is 50/50 but was tricked earlier by recent analysis of Monty Hall puzzles and similar situations.
rwp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 01:25 PM   #10
cwalner
Philosopher
 
cwalner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 6,104
Originally Posted by rwp View Post
1. A player chooses 1 case from 26. Each case has a different monetary value, with the lowest being $0.01 and the highest being $1,000,000. The player is not allowed to look in his or her case.

2. The player then eliminates case by case, which are opened to reveal their values.

3. The question is, if the player luckily manages to keep the top prize on the board until there are two cases left (the one on the board plus the one he or she holds), what are the odds he or she holds the winning case?

I say it is 50/50 but was tricked earlier by recent analysis of Monty Hall puzzles and similar situations.
Yeah, once down to two cases the probability is 50/50. as others have stated this is not analagous to the Monty Hall problem because the contestant is choosing cases to eliminate without knowledge of what is in the chosen case at the time of choosing and can eliminate the top value (as you know happens quite often if you watch the show.

The real probabilistic tool for analyzing this show is expected value, not just raw probability. in this case a simplified formula for that at any given point in the show is
E = S/n
E = expected value if play continues.
S = sum of all values still on board
n= number of cases (including the one you chose) left in play.

Once this is calculated just compare it to the banker's offer. If E is higher continue to play. If banker's offer is higher take the offer.

In my experience of watching the show the banker's offer is typically between 60% and 70% of E so it is almost never the best course of action to accept the banker's offer.

using this formula if you are left with two cases and have the $1,000,000.00 and the $0.01 left then E = $500,000.00. If the banker offers you less you have a better chance for opening your case. If the banker offers more, you should take the offer.

What makes the show so interesting is that it is real money on the line and it is psychologically difficult for most people to pass up a sure $350,000.00 for a 50-50 shot at $1,000,000.00
__________________
Vecini - Inconceivable!
Inigo - You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
cwalner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 01:54 PM   #11
drkitten
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 21,629
Originally Posted by cwalner View Post
The real probabilistic tool for analyzing this show is expected value, not just raw probability. in this case a simplified formula for that at any given point in the show is
E = S/n
E = expected value if play continues.
S = sum of all values still on board
n= number of cases (including the one you chose) left in play.

What makes the show so interesting is that it is real money on the line and it is psychologically difficult for most people to pass up a sure $350,000.00 for a 50-50 shot at $1,000,000.00

Well, one could argue that that's because expected value is NOT the most appropriate probabilistic tool for analyzing this show, precisely because the psychological "payoff" is not linear with the dollar value. One of the fundamental assumptions underlying game theory is that players are "risk-neutral," but most studies show that real people are somewhat risk averse.

And if you think about it -- how would $1,000,000 change your life that $350,000 would not? I could pay off all my debts, including my house, with either and still have a comfortable chunk of change in the bank afterwards. There comes a point where money is no longer useful as money; it's just a way of keeping abstract score. Bill Gates is worth more than three times as much as Larry Page -- but they're both deca-billionaires.

What can you imagine that extra $30+ billion buying? A nice car? An evening on the town? A professional sports team? What does Larry want that he can't afford?

Last edited by drkitten; 22nd September 2008 at 01:55 PM.
drkitten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 02:01 PM   #12
rwp
Thinker
 
rwp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 207
Originally Posted by cwalner View Post
In my experience of watching the show the banker's offer is typically between 60% and 70% of E so it is almost never the best course of action to accept the banker's offer.

using this formula if you are left with two cases and have the $1,000,000.00 and the $0.01 left then E = $500,000.00. If the banker offers you less you have a better chance for opening your case. If the banker offers more, you should take the offer.

What makes the show so interesting is that it is real money on the line and it is psychologically difficult for most people to pass up a sure $350,000.00 for a 50-50 shot at $1,000,000.00
I'd take the 100% guaranteed $350,000 rather than toss a coin for a million and have an equal chance of getting nothing but a penny. $350,000 is a lot of money. If someone offered me a choice on the street of 350K or that I could flip a coin and heads was a million, I'd take the cash (unless I could flip the coin in which case I would use trickery to guarantee a head).
rwp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 02:20 PM   #13
rwp
Thinker
 
rwp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 207
Analyzing this further, it appears that in my simple version of the game, where there are 4! outcomes, your odds of picking the "A" prize increase as follows:

You pick a case: 1/4 chance of being "A"
You eliminate a case: 1/4 chance of it being "A"
You eliminate another case: 1/3 chance of it being "A"
You eliminate the final case: 1/2 chance of it being "A"


Since I just used "brute force" to see these probabilities, I'm not sure how to say it in the language of math. Is it safe to assume that in the real version of Deal or No Deal (26! outcomes) that the next case you choose has a increased probabilities of being the top prize in the following manner?

1/t-n where n is the cases that have been opened and t is the total number of cases?

So the probability that you will open the million on the next case is 1/(remaining cases)?
rwp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 02:31 PM   #14
DavidS
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 623
Originally Posted by drkitten View Post
Well, one could argue that that's because expected value is NOT the most appropriate probabilistic tool for analyzing this show, precisely because the psychological "payoff" is not linear with the dollar value. One of the fundamental assumptions underlying game theory is that players are "risk-neutral," but most studies show that real people are somewhat risk averse.

And if you think about it -- how would $1,000,000 change your life that $350,000 would not? I could pay off all my debts, including my house, with either and still have a comfortable chunk of change in the bank afterwards. There comes a point where money is no longer useful as money; it's just a way of keeping abstract score. Bill Gates is worth more than three times as much as Larry Page -- but they're both deca-billionaires.

What can you imagine that extra $30+ billion buying? A nice car? An evening on the town? A professional sports team? What does Larry want that he can't afford?
That's really the only reason I've watched the show a few times -- I try to estimate what the banker's offer will be. It pretty quickly became apparent that the offers were somewhat lower than the expected value of the outstanding prizes, but I haven't been able to formulate an algorithm to determine how much lower. It doesn't help that I haven't calculated the expected values more precisely than I can do in my head by eyeballing the board, which isn't very precise at all until very late in the game.

Does anybody know whether the value is calculated formally and the same way for all participants (i.e. always offering the same buyout price for a given suite of unopened cases)? Or is the "risk aversion deduction" somehow adapted to individual players' demeanors? Or randomized?
DavidS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 04:30 PM   #15
cwalner
Philosopher
 
cwalner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 6,104
Originally Posted by rwp View Post
I'd take the 100% guaranteed $350,000 rather than toss a coin for a million and have an equal chance of getting nothing but a penny. $350,000 is a lot of money. If someone offered me a choice on the street of 350K or that I could flip a coin and heads was a million, I'd take the cash (unless I could flip the coin in which case I would use trickery to guarantee a head).
You and drkitten both make a very valid point of the psychology and why to take the money. I was pointing out that mathematically, the offer is almost never the better choice.

The other problem that I know of using expected value is that it describes the pattern of results over a large set of trials. A contestant on the game only gets one trial.

looking at it from a 1 trial perspective, you have about a 1/5 chance of getting one of the big money cases (100k+) so if you can get an offer over 100k it may be best to take the sure thing than risk it to get more since, as drkitten asked, will the extra money change your life that much more than 'just' the 100k?
__________________
Vecini - Inconceivable!
Inigo - You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
cwalner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 09:06 PM   #16
Mobyseven
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,671
In other news, my friend's boyfriend won $40k on the Aussie Deal or No Deal.

She was pretty happy with that.
Mobyseven is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 11:41 PM   #17
wafonso
Critical Thinker
 
wafonso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 332
Originally Posted by DavidS View Post
That's really the only reason I've watched the show a few times -- I try to estimate what the banker's offer will be. It pretty quickly became apparent that the offers were somewhat lower than the expected value of the outstanding prizes, but I haven't been able to formulate an algorithm to determine how much lower. It doesn't help that I haven't calculated the expected values more precisely than I can do in my head by eyeballing the board, which isn't very precise at all until very late in the game.

Does anybody know whether the value is calculated formally and the same way for all participants (i.e. always offering the same buyout price for a given suite of unopened cases)? Or is the "risk aversion deduction" somehow adapted to individual players' demeanors? Or randomized?
I can only talk about the Australian version of the show, where the top prize is A$200,000. I've watched it a few times (I usually get home after work in time to watch the final half of the show), and they don't seem to be using a definite algorithm to pick the value of the offers; at least not a very simple one.

In most cases the offer is lower than what would be expected from the average of the prizes still on the board, but some times it is higher - and some times it is significantly lower. It looks to me like they do take into account the flow of the game to define the offer, and not simply what prizes are still possible. A participant who just had a very good round (taking out only low values) seems to get a higher offer than would be warranted, while one who had a bad round will get a lower offer than expected.

Also, no formal analysis... but the Freakonomics blog has some suggestions (in the comments, not the main post) at http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.co...al-or-no-deal/
wafonso is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2008, 12:02 AM   #18
Badly Shaved Monkey
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Badly Shaved Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,363
I've watched the UK version a few times (top prize £250k) and it is clear that the Banker offers about 2/3 of the expected value of the box, with a significant amount of specific fiddling with the offered amount to take into account particular circumstances of the current contestant- sometimes, for instance, the Banker offers sums where the digits are 'neat' in some way.

The expected return at the outset is about £15,000.

The interesting behaviour I have noted is that contestants' tactics alter through the course of the game. I've never seen anyone 'deal' early, but if the offer significantly exceeds £15,000 they probably should, because with a lot of boxes left, the expected value of what remains is likely to show regression to the mean and fall back somewhere near £15,000. But dealing early would make for a shorter and (even) duller show on those occasions.

The other behaviour seems to be 'going for broke'. If the really high-value boxes have gone then people seem to care less whether they get £5,000 or 1p and seem to play the game out just for the heck of it.

It would be interesting to turn those casual observations into some testable hypotheses, but I would guess that if an early offer rises significantly above £15,000, say £20-30,000, then this should be accepted because the long-run outcome of not accepting at that stage is too often worse even than £15,000. I wonder, even, whether the show's producers rely on contestant's desire to keep playing the game and therefore be on stage for a good length of time not to exploit this early bail out strategy.

In the background, of course, is that the success of the game depends on the boxes containing a range of prizes ranging from amounts that most people would find 'life-changing' down to trivial sums, but that the transition point from 'life-changing' to 'worth having' varies among contestants. As has been pointed out, the possibility of winning £250k seems to lead to behaviour that flies in the face of the probability of winning £250k.
__________________
"i'm frankly surprised homeopathy does as well as placebo" Anonymous homeopath.
"Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo it is not enough that you be persecuted by an unkind establishment; you must also be right." (Robert Park)
Is the pen is mightier than the sword? Its effectiveness as a weapon is certainly enhanced if it is sharpened properly and poked in the eye of your opponent.
Badly Shaved Monkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2008, 01:59 AM   #19
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 54,892
Originally Posted by Mobyseven View Post
In other news, my friend's boyfriend won $40k on the Aussie Deal or No Deal.

She was pretty happy with that.
Moby, please tell me that you were only watching the show because of your friend's boyfriend. Please????
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2008, 03:04 AM   #20
nathan
Zygoticly Phased
 
nathan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,477
Originally Posted by drkitten View Post
Well, one could argue that that's because expected value is NOT the most appropriate probabilistic tool for analyzing this show, precisely because the psychological "payoff" is not linear with the dollar value. One of the fundamental assumptions underlying game theory is that players are "risk-neutral," but most studies show that real people are somewhat risk averse.
Quite. The expected value calculation makes sense when you're playing an unbounded number of games where the randomness evens out. But you're not. You get to play exactly one game.
nathan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2008, 05:40 AM   #21
GreyICE
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,149
Originally Posted by cwalner View Post
In my experience of watching the show the banker's offer is typically between 60% and 70% of E so it is almost never the best course of action to accept the banker's offer.

using this formula if you are left with two cases and have the $1,000,000.00 and the $0.01 left then E = $500,000.00. If the banker offers you less you have a better chance for opening your case. If the banker offers more, you should take the offer.

What makes the show so interesting is that it is real money on the line and it is psychologically difficult for most people to pass up a sure $350,000.00 for a 50-50 shot at $1,000,000.00
Wow, didn't I do a thread about this a while back?

Risk of Ruin.

Or even if your expected value is INFINITY, it's sometimes better to take the safe choice.
GreyICE is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2008, 06:02 AM   #22
Blackadder
Muse
 
Blackadder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 728
Originally Posted by cwalner View Post
What makes the show so interesting is that it is real money on the line and it is psychologically difficult for most people to pass up a sure $350,000.00 for a 50-50 shot at $1,000,000.00
for good reasons!

This is not a hand of poker, where you make choices to maximize EV, knowing you will play many hands, so when this current hand gives you a big 0 , your strategy in the long run will pay off.

This is a unique opportunity to get a very significant amount of money. Unless the contestant is very rich already, it's wiser to chose the lower 100% certain prize.
Blackadder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2008, 06:19 AM   #23
ZirconBlue
Sole Survivor of L-Town
 
ZirconBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lexington, KY, USA, Earth
Posts: 15,149
Originally Posted by Badly Shaved Monkey View Post
I've watched the UK version a few times (top prize £250k) and it is clear that the Banker offers about 2/3 of the expected value of the box, with a significant amount of specific fiddling with the offered amount to take into account particular circumstances of the current contestant- sometimes, for instance, the Banker offers sums where the digits are 'neat' in some way.

It seems to me, although I haven't done the formal calculations, that the early offers are significantly lower than the Expected Value, while later offers are closer to the EV. Which, if true, would tend to keep contestants playing longer.

This is my impression, based on watching a handful of episodes of the US version.

ETA: I just realized that I've probably spent more time reading discussions like these about Deal or No Deal, than actually watching the show.
__________________
Religion and sex are powerplays.
Manipulate the people for the money they pay.
Selling skin, selling God
The numbers look the same on their credit cards.

Last edited by ZirconBlue; 23rd September 2008 at 06:35 AM.
ZirconBlue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2008, 07:53 AM   #24
69dodge
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,607
Originally Posted by Badly Shaved Monkey View Post
I've never seen anyone 'deal' early, but if the offer significantly exceeds £15,000 they probably should, because with a lot of boxes left, the expected value of what remains is likely to show regression to the mean and fall back somewhere near £15,000.
That doesn't sound right. Can you give a specific example? That is, which boxes have been opened already and which are still closed?
69dodge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2008, 09:31 AM   #25
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
Originally Posted by rwp View Post
1. A player chooses 1 case from 26. Each case has a different monetary value, with the lowest being $0.01 and the highest being $1,000,000. The player is not allowed to look in his or her case.

2. The player then eliminates case by case, which are opened to reveal their values.

3. The question is, if the player luckily manages to keep the top prize on the board until there are two cases left (the one on the board plus the one he or she holds), what are the odds he or she holds the winning case?

I say it is 50/50 but was tricked earlier by recent analysis of Monty Hall puzzles and similar situations.
Think of them this way. He now has the choice of the two. It is an equal probability either way because he has a fresh choice.

The illusion is that choosing not to change is not just as much of a choice as choosing to change.

He is still making a choice between A or B, so it will always be 50/50.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2008, 09:56 AM   #26
rwp
Thinker
 
rwp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 207
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Think of them this way. He now has the choice of the two. It is an equal probability either way because he has a fresh choice.

The illusion is that choosing not to change is not just as much of a choice as choosing to change.

He is still making a choice between A or B, so it will always be 50/50.
Knowing how he got there matters. If an all-knowing host would have eliminated all of the other cases except one (purposefully not revealing the top prize), the probability would be 25/26 that the last case remaining would be the top prize, and 1/26 that you chose it originally.

The main reason the real situation is a 1/2 probability is that the contestant randomly eliminates cases to get to that point, and all of the information gathered along the way eliminates all other possibilities except for 1/2 in favor of winning and 1/2 in favor of losing.
rwp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2008, 04:13 PM   #27
Badly Shaved Monkey
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Badly Shaved Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,363
Originally Posted by 69dodge View Post
That doesn't sound right. Can you give a specific example? That is, which boxes have been opened already and which are still closed?
If a lot of low value boxes go early on, then the offer often exceeds the initial EV.

However, the high value boxes, whose continued presence lifted that offer, have a low probability of being among the last few boxes. If the player stubbornly persists in carrying on to the later rounds having been made a high offer, the greater likelihood is that the high value box will get opened and the offer will get busted down to a much lower level.

I've just looked at Series 1 in the UK.

(By the way, I'd misremembered the actual EV, it's £25,712.12. I think I had the £15,000 figure in mind because the Banker always seems to play to about 2/3 of the actual EV)

Out of 66 games, there were 94 offers or final boxes over £15,000 (77 offers, 17 final boxes). On 36 occasions was a subsequent offer better than that.

If the criterion is set at £25,000 then the respective figures were, 52 (38, 14) and 19.

That means that it's roughly 50:50 (36/77, 19/38) whether an offer over £15k or £25k amount will be bettered by a later offer.

Now my head hurts and I want to go to bed.

Is there evidence of 'regression to the mean' in that? I think I've lost myself in the arithmetic!
__________________
"i'm frankly surprised homeopathy does as well as placebo" Anonymous homeopath.
"Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo it is not enough that you be persecuted by an unkind establishment; you must also be right." (Robert Park)
Is the pen is mightier than the sword? Its effectiveness as a weapon is certainly enhanced if it is sharpened properly and poked in the eye of your opponent.

Last edited by Badly Shaved Monkey; 23rd September 2008 at 04:16 PM.
Badly Shaved Monkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2008, 04:52 PM   #28
ShowerComic
Critical Thinker
 
ShowerComic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 384
Originally Posted by ZirconBlue View Post
It seems to me, although I haven't done the formal calculations, that the early offers are significantly lower than the Expected Value, while later offers are closer to the EV. Which, if true, would tend to keep contestants playing longer.
What's interesting to me, is at the end of the game, when the contestant selects 'Deal' and takes the money offered by the Banker. Usually there are only a few other cases left unopened, and the host has the player go through the remaining cases. For each case, the banker quickly gives a value.

To me this means that whatever value the banker is giving, it is automatically calculated based on the hidden cases, the ones on stage, and at the player's side. Suspense, human nature, and commercial interruptions are a large part of the show. -- As with all game shows.
__________________

ShowerComic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2008, 12:02 AM   #29
Badly Shaved Monkey
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Badly Shaved Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,363
Here's another piece of information.

For those 66 games, mean maximum offer = £33,774, Mean box content £21,548.

I've not done any stats on it, but note that the mean box content is lower than the EV, probably because the EV is so heavily weighted by the £250,000 and it only turned up once in 66 games. Clearly the error bars on these numbers would probably be quite big.

Nonetheless, it does suggest that if you could take the Banker's maximum offer you are likely to beat the box. Of course, you only know what the maximum offer was in retrospect and as I have already found, a 'high' offer is followed by at least one higher offer about half of the time.

In the end, and has already been alluded to, the mainspring of the game is the willingness of a contestant to blow an almost guaranteed payout of several £000's for a small chance of a really high payout.

Max offer; count
>100,000;7
>=50,000; 13
>=25,000; 23
>=15,000; 41
>=10,000; 50
>=5,000; 62
__________________
"i'm frankly surprised homeopathy does as well as placebo" Anonymous homeopath.
"Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo it is not enough that you be persecuted by an unkind establishment; you must also be right." (Robert Park)
Is the pen is mightier than the sword? Its effectiveness as a weapon is certainly enhanced if it is sharpened properly and poked in the eye of your opponent.
Badly Shaved Monkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2008, 06:32 AM   #30
69dodge
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,607
The whole thing is still not totally clear to me, but I'll try to explain what I had in mind when I said it didn't sound right.

1) I don't think regression to the mean applies here. The population is not infinite, nor even very large. And the sampling is kind of backwards: items are removed from a shrinking sample, not added to a growing one.

2) Sometimes, the average of the unopened boxes will go up after opening another box; sometimes it will go down. On average, it will stay the same. ("On average" means that the amount by which it might go up or down is considered along with the probability of it changing by that amount.)

3) The box amounts are more spread out, the larger they are: the next higher amount after $1 is only $1 more, but the next higher amount after $1000 is $1000 more. (Or something like that.) So, in any group of unopened boxes (or maybe, in most such groups?), more boxes are below the group average than are above it. So if you pick a box at random, it's more likely than not to be below average, and therefore to raise the average of the rest when it's opened and removed from the group. (But, consistently with (2), the less-likely decreases of the average tend to be larger than the more-likely increases.)
69dodge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:05 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.