ADDITIONAL MATHEMATICS PROJECT WORK 2 2010

PART 1
a) History of probability
The scientific study of probability is a modern development. Gambling shows that
there has been an interest in quantifying the ideas of probability for millenni
a, but exact mathematical descriptions of use in those problems only arose much
later. According to Richard Jeffrey, "Before the middle of the seventeenth centu
ry, the term 'probable' (Latin probabilis) meant approvable, and was applied in
that sense, univocally, to opinion and to action. A probable action or opinion w
as one such as sensible people would undertake or hold, in the circumstances. Ho
wever, in legal contexts especially, 'probable' could also apply to propositions
for which there was good evidence. Aside from some elementary considerations ma
de by Girolamo Cardano in the 16th century, the doctrine of probabilities dates
to the correspondence of Pierre de Fermat and Blaise Pascal (1654). Christiaan H
uygens (1657) gave the earliest known scientific treatment of the subject. Jakob
Bernoulli's Ars Conjectandi (posthumous, 1713) and Abraham de Moivre's Doctrine
of Chances (1718) treated the subject as a branch of mathematics. See Ian Hacki
ng's The Emergence of Probability and James Franklin's The Science of Conjecture
for histories of the early development of the very concept of mathematical prob
ability. The theory of errors may be traced back to Roger Cotes's Opera Miscella
nea (posthumous, 1722), but a memoir prepared by Thomas Simpson in 1755 (printed
1756) first applied the theory to the discussion of errors of observation. The
reprint (1757) of this memoir lays down the axioms that positive and negative er
rors are equally probable, and that there are certain assignable limits within w
hich all errors may be supposed to fall; continuous errors are discussed and a p
robability curve is given. Pierre-Simon Laplace (1774) made the first attempt to
deduce a rule for the combination of observations from the principles of the th
eory of probabilities. He represented the law of probability of errors by a curv
e y = (x), x being any error and y its probability, and laid down three properti
es of this curve: 1. it is symmetric as to the y-axis; 2. the x-axis is an asymp
tote, the probability of the error being 0; 3. the area enclosed is 1, it being
certain that an error exists. He also gave (1781) a formula for the law of facil
ity of error (a term due to Lagrange, 1774), but one which led to unmanageable e
quations. Daniel Bernoulli (1778) introduced the principle of the maximum produc
t of the probabilities of a system of concurrent errors.
ADDITIONAL MATHEMATICS PROJECT WORK 2 2010
PART 1
The method of least squares is due to Adrien-Marie Legendre (1805), who introduc
ed it in his Nouvelles méthodes pour la détermination des orbites des comètes
(New Methods for Determining the Orbits of Comets). In ignorance of Legendre's
contribution, an Irish-American writer, Robert Adrain, editor of "The Analyst" (
1808), first deduced the law of facility of error,
h being a constant depending on precision of observation, and c a scale factor e
nsuring that the area under the curve equals 1. He gave two proofs, the second b
eing essentially the same as John Herschel's (1850). Gauss gave the first proof
which seems to have been known in Europe (the third after Adrain's) in 1809. Fur
ther proofs were given by Laplace (1810, 1812), Gauss (1823), James Ivory (1825,
1826), Hagen (1837), Friedrich Bessel (1838), W. F. Donkin (1844, 1856), and Mo
rgan Crofton (1870). Other contributors were Ellis (1844), De Morgan (1864), Gla
isher (1872), and Giovanni Schiaparelli (1875). Peters's (1856) formula for r, t
he probable error of a single observation, is well known. In the nineteenth cent
ury authors on the general theory included Laplace, Sylvestre Lacroix (1816), Li
ttrow (1833), Adolphe Quetelet (1853), Richard Dedekind (1860), Helmert (1872),
Hermann Laurent (1873), Liagre, Didion, and Karl Pearson. Augustus De Morgan and
George Boole improved the exposition of the theory. Andrey Markov introduced th
e notion of Markov chains (1906) playing an important role in theory of stochast
ic processes and its applications. The modern theory of probability based on the
meausure theory was developed by Andrey Kolmogorov (1931). On the geometric sid
e (see integral geometry) contributors to The Educational Times were influential
(Miller, Crofton, McColl, Wolstenholme, Watson, and Artemas Martin).
ADDITIONAL MATHEMATICS PROJECT WORK 2 2010
PART 1
a) Probability in our lives i) Weather forecasting Suppose you want to go on a p
icnic this afternoon, and the weather report says that the chance of rain is 70%
? Do you ever wonder where that 70% came from? Forecasts like these can be calcu
lated by the people who work for the National Weather Service when they look at
all other days in their historical database that have the same weather character
istics (temperature, pressure, humidity, etc.) and determine that on 70% of simi
lar days in the past, it rained. As we've seen, to find basic probability we div
ide the number of favorable outcomes by the total number of possible outcomes in
our sample space. If we're looking for the chance it will rain, this will be th
e number of days in our database that it rained divided by the total number of s
imilar days in our database. If our meteorologist has data for 100 days with sim
ilar weather conditions (the sample space and therefore the denominator of our f
raction), and on 70 of these days it rained (a favorable outcome), the probabili
ty of rain on the next similar day is 70/100 or 70%. Since a 50% probability mea
ns that an event is as likely to occur as not, 70%, which is greater than 50%, m
eans that it is more likely to rain than not. But what is the probability that i
t won't rain? Remember that because the favorable outcomes represent all the pos
sible ways that an event can occur, the sum of the various probabilities must eq
ual 1 or 100%, so 100% - 70% = 30%, and the probability that it won't rain is 30
%. ii) Batting averages Let's say your favorite baseball player is batting 300.
What does this mean? A batting average involves calculating the probability of a
player's getting a hit. The sample space is the total number of at-bats a playe
r has had, not including walks. A hit is a favorable outcome. Thus if in 10 at-b
ats a player gets 3 hits, his or her batting average is 3/10 or 30%. For basebal
l stats we multiply all the percentages by 10, so a 30% probability translates t
o a 300 batting average. This means that when a Major Leaguer with a batting ave
rage of 300 steps up to the plate, he has only a 30% chance of getting a hit - a
nd since most batters hit below 300, you can see how hard it is to get a hit in
the Major Leagues!
ADDITIONAL MATHEMATICS PROJECT WORK 2 2010
PART 1
a) Introduction
ADDITIONAL MATHEMATICS PROJECT WORK 2 2010
PART 1
b) Difference between the Theoretical and Empirical Probabilities The term empir
ical means "based on observation or experiment." An empirical probability is gen
erally, but not always, given with a number indicating the possible percent erro
r (e.g. 80+/-3%). A theoretical probability, however, is one that is calculated
based on theory, i.e., without running any experiments. Empirical Probability of
an event is an "estimate" that the event will happen based on how often the eve
nt occurs after collecting data or running an experiment (in a large number of t
rials). It is based specifically on direct observations or experiences. Theoreti
cal Probability of an event is the number of ways that the event can occur, divi
ded by the total number of outcomes. It is finding the probability of events tha
t come from a sample space of known equally likely outcomes. Comparing Empirical
and Theoretical Probabilities: Sum of the rolls of two dice Karen and Jason rol
l two dice 50 times and record their results in the accompanying chart. 1.) What
is their empirical probability of rolling a 7? 2.) What is the theoretical prob
ability of rolling a 7? 3.) How do the empirical and theoretical probabilities c
ompare? 3, 5, 5, 4, 6, 7, 7, 5, 9, 10, 12, 9, 6, 5, 7, 8, 7, 4, 11, 6, 8, 8, 10,
6, 7, 4, 4, 5, 7, 9, 9, 7, 8, 11, 6, 5, 4, 7, 7, 4, 3, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 6, 7, 8,
9
Solution: 1.) Empirical probability (experimental probability or observed probab
ility) is 13/50 = 26%. 2.) Theoretical probability (based upon what is possible
when working with two dice) = 6/36 = 1/6 = 16.7% (check out the table at the rig
ht of possible sums when rolling two dice). 3.) Karen and Jason rolled more 7's
than would be expected theoretically.
ADDITIONAL MATHEMATICS PROJECT WORK 2 2010
PART 2
a) {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6} b)
1
(2,1) (2,2) (2,3) (2,4) (2,5) (2,6)
1 2 1 3 4 5 6
1 2 3 3 4 5 6
(1,1) (1,2) (1,3) (1,4) (1,5) (1,6)
(3,1) (3,2) (3,3) (3,4) (3,5) (3,6) 4 2
2 3 4 5 6
1 2 3 4 5 6
(4,1) (4,2) (4,3) (4,4) (4,5) (4,6)
1 2 5 3 4 5 6
(5,1) (5,2) (5,3) (5,4) (5,5) (5,6)
1 2 6 3 4 5 6
(6,1) (6,2) (6,3) (6,4) (6,5) (6,6)
ADDITIONAL MATHEMATICS PROJECT WORK 2 2010
PART 3
a) Table 1 show the sum of all dots on both turned-up faces when two dice are to
ssed simultaneously. Sum of the dots on both turned-up faces (x) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 Possible outcomes Probability, P(x)
(1,1) (1,2),(2,1) (1,3),(2,2),(3,1) (1,4),(2,3),(3,2),(4,1) (1,5),(2,4),(3,3),(4
,2),(5,1) (1,6),(2,5),(3,4),(4,3),(5,2),(6,1) (2,6),(3,5),(4,4),(5,3),(6,2) (3,6
),(4,5),(5,4),(6,3) (4,6),(5,5),(6,4) (5,6),(6,5) (6,6) Table 1
1/36 2/36 3/36 4/36 5/36 6/36 5/36 4/36 3/36 2/36 1/36
ADDITIONAL MATHEMATICS PROJECT WORK 2 2010
PART 3
b) Table of possible outcomes of the following events and their corresponding pr
obabilities. Events Possible outcomes Probability, P(x)
A
{(1,2),(1,3),(1,4),(1,5),(1,6),(2,1),(2,3),(2,4),(2,5),(2,6),(3,1) ,(3,2),(3,4),
(3,5),(3,6),(4,1),(4,2),(4,3),(4,5),(4,6),(5,1),(5,2), (5,3),(5,4),(5,6),(6,1),(
6,2),(6,3),(6,4),(6,5) } 
B
ø
ø
C
P = Both number are prime P = {(2,2), (2,3), (2,5), (3,3), (3,5), (5,3), (5,5)}
Q = Difference of 2 number is odd Q = { (1,2), (1,4), (1,6), (2,1), (2,3), (2,5)
, (3,2), (3,4),(3,6), (4,1), (4,3), (4,5), (5,2), (5,4), (5,6), (6,1), (6,3), (6
,5) } C=PUQ C = {1,2), (1,4), (1,6), (2,1), (2,2), (2,3), (2,5), (3,2), (3,3), (
3,4), (3,6), (4,1), (4,3), (4,5), (5,2), (5,3), (5,4), (5,5), (5,6), (6,1), (6,3
), (6,5) }

D
P = Both number are prime P = {(2,2), (2,3), (2,5), (3,3), (3,5), (5,3), (5,5)}
R = The sum of 2 numbers are even R = {(1,1), (1,3), (1,5), (2,2), (2,4), (2,6),
(3,1), (3,3), (3,5), (4,2), (4,4), (4,6), (5,1), (5,3), (5,5), (6,2(, (6,4), (6
,6)} D=P R D = {(2,2), (3,3), (3,5), (5,3), (5,5)}

ADDITIONAL MATHEMATICS PROJECT WORK 2 2010
PART 4
a) Sum of the two numbers ( ) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Frequency ( ) 2 4 4 9 4 1
1 4 6 3 1 2 = 50 Table 2 i) Mean =  4 12 16 45 24 77 32 54 30 11 24 = 329
2
8 36 64 225 144 539 256 486 300 121 288  
= = 6.58 ii) Variance = = = -  ± (6.58)2
= 6.044 iii) Standard deviation = = = 2.458     
ADDITIONAL MATHEMATICS PROJECT WORK 2 2010
PART 4
b) Sum of the two numbers ( ) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Frequency ( ) 4 5 6 16 12
21 10 8 9 5 4 = 100 8 15 24 80 72 147 80 72 90 55 48 = 691
2
16 45 96 400 432 1029 640 648 900 605 576  
Prediction of mean = 6.91 i. Mean = 6.91 ii. Variance = = = 6.122 iii. Standard d
eviation = = 2.474 Prediction is proven. 
2
- 
ADDITIONAL MATHEMATICS PROJECT WORK 2 2010
PART 5
a)
Mean = =  =7
§
x P(x)
Variance =
= 
§
x 2 P(x) ± (mean) 2
- (7)2
= 54.83 ± 49 = 5.83 Standard deviation = = 2.415
ADDITIONAL MATHEMATICS PROJECT WORK 2 2010
PART 5
b) Part 4 n = 50 Mean Variance Standard deviation 6.58 6.044 2.458 n = 100 6.91
6.122 2.474 7.00 5.83 2.415 Part 5
We can see that, the mean, variance and standard deviation that we obtained thro
ugh experiment in part 4 are different but close to the theoretical value in par
t 5. For mean, when the number of trial increased from n=50 to n=100, its value
get closer (from 6.58 to 6.91) to the theoretical value. This is in accordance t
o the Law of Large Number. We will discuss Law of Large Number in next section.
Nevertheless, the empirical variance and empirical standard deviation that we ob
tained i part 4 get further from the theoretical value in part 5. This violates
the Law of Large Number. This is probably due to a. The sample (n=100) is not la
rge enough to see the change of value of mean, variance and standard deviation.
b. Law of Large Number is not an absolute law. Violation of this law is still po
ssible though the probability is relative low.
In conclusion, the empirical mean, variance and standard deviation can be differ
ent from the theoretical value. When the number of trial (number of sample) gett
ing bigger, the empirical value should get closer to the theoretical value. Howe
ver, violation of this rule is still possible, especially when the number of tri
al (or sample) is not large enough.
ADDITIONAL MATHEMATICS PROJECT WORK 2 2010
PART 5
c) The range of the mean
Conjecture: As the number of toss, n, increases, the mean will get closer to 7.
7 is the theoretical mean. Image below support this conjecture where we can see
that, after 500 toss, the theoretical mean become very close to the theoretical
mean, which is 3.5. (Take note that this is experiment of tossing 1 die, but not
2 dice as what we do in our experiment)