スレタイ箱入り無数目を語る部屋3

[過去ﾛｸﾞ] スレタイ箱入り無数目を語る部屋3 (1002ﾚｽ)
上下前次1-新
通常表示 512ﾊﾞｲﾄ分割ﾚｽ栞
抽出解除必死ﾁｪｯｶｰ(本家) (べ) 自ID ﾚｽ栞あぼーん

このｽﾚｯﾄﾞは過去ﾛｸﾞ倉庫に格納されています｡
次ｽﾚ検索歴削→次ｽﾚ栞削→次ｽﾚ過去ﾛｸﾞﾒﾆｭｰ

ﾘﾛｰﾄﾞ規制です｡10分ほどで解除するので､他のﾌﾞﾗｳｻﾞへ避難してください｡

142: １３２人目の素数さん [] 2022/09/02(金) 23:43:39.49 ID:K8gWPGVv

>>132 補足

ここ、下記のDR Tony Huynh のAnswer 2が参考になるな（私訳をつけた）

https://mathoverflow.net/questions/151286/probabilities-in-a-riddle-involving-axiom-of-choice
Probabilities in a riddle involving axiom of choice
asked Dec 9 '13 at 16:16 Denis

Answer 2 （answered Dec 9, 2013 Tony Huynh PhD in the Department of Combinatorics & Optimization at the University of Waterloo.）
I also like this version of the riddle.
To answer the actual question though,
I would say that it is not possible to guess incorrectly with probability only 1/N, even for N=2.
In order for such a question to make sense,
it is necessary to put a probability measure on the space of functions f:N→R.
Note that to execute your proposed strategy, we only need a uniform measure on {1,…,N},
but to make sense of the phrase it fails with probability at most 1/N,
we need a measure on the space of all outcomes.
The answer will be different depending on what probability space is chosen of course.

Here's a concrete choice for a probability space that shows that your proposal will fail.
Suppose that for each index i we sample a real number Xi from the normal distribution so that the Xis are independent random variables.
If there is only person, no matter which boxes they view, they gain no information about the un-opened boxes due to independence.
Thus, their probability of guessing correctly is actually 0, not (N-1)/N, say.

If it were somehow possible to put a 'uniform' measure on the space of all outcomes,
then indeed one could guess correctly with arbitrarily high precision,
but such a measure doesn't exist.

つづく

http://rio2016.5ch.net/test/read.cgi/math/1660377072/142

上下前次1-新書関写板覧索設栞歴

ｽﾚ情報赤ﾚｽ抽出画像ﾚｽ抽出歴の未読ｽﾚ AAｻﾑﾈｲﾙ

ぬこの手ぬこTOP 0.037s