Give a deck of 54 cards, what's the probability that even one card will match two dealt hands… Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Probability that two out of five cards are seven?Change in probability complexity when adding 2 “wildcards” (jokers) to a standard 52 card deckThe probability of being dealt at least 5 wanted cardsA deck of cards is dealt out. What is the probability that the first ace occurs on the 14th card?Probability of Poker Hands in a 54 card deck?Suppose we are dealt five cards from an ordinary 52-card deck. What is the probability thatProbability of each player withdrawing 4 aces given 3 cards each on a 40 card deck?Card probability (15 cards, 9 unique suits, odds of specific possibilities acros three 5 card hands)What is the probability that a player does not have at least 1 card of each suit with a 52-card deck?Dual 52 card deck, pair of exact card match (position and rank) probability

Jazz greats knew nothing of modes. Why are they used to improvise on standards?

How can I make names more distinctive without making them longer?

How does modal jazz use chord progressions?

Cauchy Sequence Characterized only By Directly Neighbouring Sequence Members

What did Darwin mean by 'squib' here?

Training a classifier when some of the features are unknown

How to set letter above or below the symbol?

Is above average number of years spent on PhD considered a red flag in future academia or industry positions?

If A makes B more likely then B makes A more likely"

Unexpected result with right shift after bitwise negation

Unable to start mainnet node docker container

Determine whether f is a function, an injection, a surjection

What's the point in a preamp?

Typsetting diagram chases (with TikZ?)

Active filter with series inductor and resistor - do these exist?

Is there a service that would inform me whenever a new direct route is scheduled from a given airport?

What computer would be fastest for Mathematica Home Edition?

Complexity of many constant time steps with occasional logarithmic steps

How can you insert a "times/divide" symbol similar to the "plus/minus" (±) one?

Who can trigger ship-wide alerts in Star Trek?

Is 1 ppb equal to 1 μg/kg?

What is the electric potential inside a point charge?

Using "nakedly" instead of "with nothing on"

What loss function to use when labels are probabilities?



Give a deck of 54 cards, what's the probability that even one card will match two dealt hands…



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Probability that two out of five cards are seven?Change in probability complexity when adding 2 “wildcards” (jokers) to a standard 52 card deckThe probability of being dealt at least 5 wanted cardsA deck of cards is dealt out. What is the probability that the first ace occurs on the 14th card?Probability of Poker Hands in a 54 card deck?Suppose we are dealt five cards from an ordinary 52-card deck. What is the probability thatProbability of each player withdrawing 4 aces given 3 cards each on a 40 card deck?Card probability (15 cards, 9 unique suits, odds of specific possibilities acros three 5 card hands)What is the probability that a player does not have at least 1 card of each suit with a 52-card deck?Dual 52 card deck, pair of exact card match (position and rank) probability










2












$begingroup$


if we shuffle a deck (with 54 cards including Joker) thoroughly and deal out a four card hand, there are over 300,000 different hands. What's the probability that no cards match between two dealt hands? even one card matches? two cards match? all cards match?



Edit: The two jokers are different. Not identical



Here is what I have so far. For no card to match the probability should be $frac5054 cdotfrac4953cdotfrac4852cdotfrac4751 approx 72%$ chance that no cards match.



If any one is to match it would be $frac454 + frac453 + frac452 + frac451approx 30.4%$



If exactly two are to match it would be $frac454cdotfrac353cdotfrac4852cdotfrac4751approx 0.35%$



for all cards to match it would be $frac454cdotfrac353cdotfrac252cdotfrac151$



Is this the right way to think about it? Am I missing anything?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The jokers may mess with things. Also relies on a set number of cards per hand.
    $endgroup$
    – Roddy MacPhee
    Mar 31 at 19:49







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Are the two jokers identical? In some decks they are, in some they aren't (for instance, one is red and one is black).
    $endgroup$
    – Moko19
    Mar 31 at 20:49






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    There are a number of mistakes in your attempts. For example, for exactly two to match your attempt actually calculates the probability that very specifically the first card matches and the second card matches and the last two don't. You neglected to account for other orders of matching and not matching making that answer off by a factor of 6. For exactly one to match, you added when you weren't supposed to. Approach the same way as for two matches. It should be clear when a mistake is made since the totals don't add up to 1 like they should.
    $endgroup$
    – JMoravitz
    Mar 31 at 21:14






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    no. A probability of 1 means absolutely certain. in your example it's $frac2^100-1012^100$
    $endgroup$
    – Roddy MacPhee
    Mar 31 at 23:13







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I'm tempted just give you combinatoric and probabilistic links as an answer...
    $endgroup$
    – Roddy MacPhee
    Mar 31 at 23:22















2












$begingroup$


if we shuffle a deck (with 54 cards including Joker) thoroughly and deal out a four card hand, there are over 300,000 different hands. What's the probability that no cards match between two dealt hands? even one card matches? two cards match? all cards match?



Edit: The two jokers are different. Not identical



Here is what I have so far. For no card to match the probability should be $frac5054 cdotfrac4953cdotfrac4852cdotfrac4751 approx 72%$ chance that no cards match.



If any one is to match it would be $frac454 + frac453 + frac452 + frac451approx 30.4%$



If exactly two are to match it would be $frac454cdotfrac353cdotfrac4852cdotfrac4751approx 0.35%$



for all cards to match it would be $frac454cdotfrac353cdotfrac252cdotfrac151$



Is this the right way to think about it? Am I missing anything?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The jokers may mess with things. Also relies on a set number of cards per hand.
    $endgroup$
    – Roddy MacPhee
    Mar 31 at 19:49







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Are the two jokers identical? In some decks they are, in some they aren't (for instance, one is red and one is black).
    $endgroup$
    – Moko19
    Mar 31 at 20:49






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    There are a number of mistakes in your attempts. For example, for exactly two to match your attempt actually calculates the probability that very specifically the first card matches and the second card matches and the last two don't. You neglected to account for other orders of matching and not matching making that answer off by a factor of 6. For exactly one to match, you added when you weren't supposed to. Approach the same way as for two matches. It should be clear when a mistake is made since the totals don't add up to 1 like they should.
    $endgroup$
    – JMoravitz
    Mar 31 at 21:14






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    no. A probability of 1 means absolutely certain. in your example it's $frac2^100-1012^100$
    $endgroup$
    – Roddy MacPhee
    Mar 31 at 23:13







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I'm tempted just give you combinatoric and probabilistic links as an answer...
    $endgroup$
    – Roddy MacPhee
    Mar 31 at 23:22













2












2








2


0



$begingroup$


if we shuffle a deck (with 54 cards including Joker) thoroughly and deal out a four card hand, there are over 300,000 different hands. What's the probability that no cards match between two dealt hands? even one card matches? two cards match? all cards match?



Edit: The two jokers are different. Not identical



Here is what I have so far. For no card to match the probability should be $frac5054 cdotfrac4953cdotfrac4852cdotfrac4751 approx 72%$ chance that no cards match.



If any one is to match it would be $frac454 + frac453 + frac452 + frac451approx 30.4%$



If exactly two are to match it would be $frac454cdotfrac353cdotfrac4852cdotfrac4751approx 0.35%$



for all cards to match it would be $frac454cdotfrac353cdotfrac252cdotfrac151$



Is this the right way to think about it? Am I missing anything?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




if we shuffle a deck (with 54 cards including Joker) thoroughly and deal out a four card hand, there are over 300,000 different hands. What's the probability that no cards match between two dealt hands? even one card matches? two cards match? all cards match?



Edit: The two jokers are different. Not identical



Here is what I have so far. For no card to match the probability should be $frac5054 cdotfrac4953cdotfrac4852cdotfrac4751 approx 72%$ chance that no cards match.



If any one is to match it would be $frac454 + frac453 + frac452 + frac451approx 30.4%$



If exactly two are to match it would be $frac454cdotfrac353cdotfrac4852cdotfrac4751approx 0.35%$



for all cards to match it would be $frac454cdotfrac353cdotfrac252cdotfrac151$



Is this the right way to think about it? Am I missing anything?







probability combinatorics






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Mar 31 at 21:14







Salman Paracha

















asked Mar 31 at 19:46









Salman ParachaSalman Paracha

581159




581159







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The jokers may mess with things. Also relies on a set number of cards per hand.
    $endgroup$
    – Roddy MacPhee
    Mar 31 at 19:49







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Are the two jokers identical? In some decks they are, in some they aren't (for instance, one is red and one is black).
    $endgroup$
    – Moko19
    Mar 31 at 20:49






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    There are a number of mistakes in your attempts. For example, for exactly two to match your attempt actually calculates the probability that very specifically the first card matches and the second card matches and the last two don't. You neglected to account for other orders of matching and not matching making that answer off by a factor of 6. For exactly one to match, you added when you weren't supposed to. Approach the same way as for two matches. It should be clear when a mistake is made since the totals don't add up to 1 like they should.
    $endgroup$
    – JMoravitz
    Mar 31 at 21:14






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    no. A probability of 1 means absolutely certain. in your example it's $frac2^100-1012^100$
    $endgroup$
    – Roddy MacPhee
    Mar 31 at 23:13







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I'm tempted just give you combinatoric and probabilistic links as an answer...
    $endgroup$
    – Roddy MacPhee
    Mar 31 at 23:22












  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The jokers may mess with things. Also relies on a set number of cards per hand.
    $endgroup$
    – Roddy MacPhee
    Mar 31 at 19:49







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Are the two jokers identical? In some decks they are, in some they aren't (for instance, one is red and one is black).
    $endgroup$
    – Moko19
    Mar 31 at 20:49






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    There are a number of mistakes in your attempts. For example, for exactly two to match your attempt actually calculates the probability that very specifically the first card matches and the second card matches and the last two don't. You neglected to account for other orders of matching and not matching making that answer off by a factor of 6. For exactly one to match, you added when you weren't supposed to. Approach the same way as for two matches. It should be clear when a mistake is made since the totals don't add up to 1 like they should.
    $endgroup$
    – JMoravitz
    Mar 31 at 21:14






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    no. A probability of 1 means absolutely certain. in your example it's $frac2^100-1012^100$
    $endgroup$
    – Roddy MacPhee
    Mar 31 at 23:13







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I'm tempted just give you combinatoric and probabilistic links as an answer...
    $endgroup$
    – Roddy MacPhee
    Mar 31 at 23:22







1




1




$begingroup$
The jokers may mess with things. Also relies on a set number of cards per hand.
$endgroup$
– Roddy MacPhee
Mar 31 at 19:49





$begingroup$
The jokers may mess with things. Also relies on a set number of cards per hand.
$endgroup$
– Roddy MacPhee
Mar 31 at 19:49





1




1




$begingroup$
Are the two jokers identical? In some decks they are, in some they aren't (for instance, one is red and one is black).
$endgroup$
– Moko19
Mar 31 at 20:49




$begingroup$
Are the two jokers identical? In some decks they are, in some they aren't (for instance, one is red and one is black).
$endgroup$
– Moko19
Mar 31 at 20:49




4




4




$begingroup$
There are a number of mistakes in your attempts. For example, for exactly two to match your attempt actually calculates the probability that very specifically the first card matches and the second card matches and the last two don't. You neglected to account for other orders of matching and not matching making that answer off by a factor of 6. For exactly one to match, you added when you weren't supposed to. Approach the same way as for two matches. It should be clear when a mistake is made since the totals don't add up to 1 like they should.
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
Mar 31 at 21:14




$begingroup$
There are a number of mistakes in your attempts. For example, for exactly two to match your attempt actually calculates the probability that very specifically the first card matches and the second card matches and the last two don't. You neglected to account for other orders of matching and not matching making that answer off by a factor of 6. For exactly one to match, you added when you weren't supposed to. Approach the same way as for two matches. It should be clear when a mistake is made since the totals don't add up to 1 like they should.
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
Mar 31 at 21:14




1




1




$begingroup$
no. A probability of 1 means absolutely certain. in your example it's $frac2^100-1012^100$
$endgroup$
– Roddy MacPhee
Mar 31 at 23:13





$begingroup$
no. A probability of 1 means absolutely certain. in your example it's $frac2^100-1012^100$
$endgroup$
– Roddy MacPhee
Mar 31 at 23:13





1




1




$begingroup$
I'm tempted just give you combinatoric and probabilistic links as an answer...
$endgroup$
– Roddy MacPhee
Mar 31 at 23:22




$begingroup$
I'm tempted just give you combinatoric and probabilistic links as an answer...
$endgroup$
– Roddy MacPhee
Mar 31 at 23:22










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

Supposing you have $54$ distinct cards and you draw a four-card hand, take note of the cards and shuffle them back in and draw another four cards, the probability of having exactly $k$ cards in the new hand exactly matching a card from the initial hand (where exactly matching requires both the suit and the number to be identical and the jokers only match the exact same joker, e.g. if there is a black joker and a red joker) is:



$$fracbinom4kcdot 4frack~cdot 50frac4-k~54frac4~ = fracbinom4kbinom504-kbinom544$$



where here $nfrack~$ represents the falling factorial $underbracencdot (n-1)cdot (n-2)cdots (n-k+1)_k~textterms$



The expression on the left can be explained by treating each card as being pulled in sequence, picking which positions in the sequence are occupied by matching cards, picking which matching cards those are, and picking which non-matching cards occupied the remaining spaces out of the possible ways in which four cards could be drawn.



The expression on the right can be explained by treating it as though the cards are picked simultaneously where order doesn't matter and picking which matching cards they are and which non-matching cards they are and dividing by the number of ways of selecting four cards. You should recognize the expression on the right as simply being the well-known hypergeometric distribution.



The results are:



$beginarrayhline k&textexact&textapproximate\
hline 0&frac230300316251&0.728219041dots\1&frac78400316251&0.247904354dots\
2&frac2450105417&0.023241033dots\
3&frac200316251&0.000632409dots\
4&frac1316251&0.000003162dots\hlineendarray$



Notice how the probabilities add up exactly to $1$, as should always be the case when partitioning the sample space of a probability experiment.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Question: in equation above shouldn't the denominator be (54 4)? if I use (50 4) the denominator = 230300. If you address this, i'll accept this answer. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Salman Paracha
    Apr 5 at 4:45










  • $begingroup$
    @Salman it should indeed be 54 choose 4, not 50 choose 4. That was a typo. Good catch
    $endgroup$
    – JMoravitz
    Apr 5 at 9:54


















1












$begingroup$

Comment: If I understand correctly, we can suppose the first hand
is dealt, and then try to match it. In my simulation (in R) below I suppose that
the first hand has cards numbered from 1 through 4 (in some order). In a million randomly dealt second
hands, my probabilities of various counts of matching cards are shown
below.



set.seed(401) # for reproducibility
x = replicate(10^6, sum(sample(1:54, 4)<=4))
table(x)/10^6
x
0 1 2 3 4
0.728386 0.247738 0.023251 0.000624 0.000001


Only the first few places of these probabilities are likely to be accurate,
but this may give you something to check against as you finish your
combinatorial analysis. Notice that the simulated proportion $0.728$ of no matches
is the same (to three places) as the correct probability in your first answer.



A second simulation, with seed 2019, gave the following slightly
different answers:



x
0 1 2 3 4
0.727877 0.247891 0.023563 0.000667 0.000002


More precisely, hypergeometric probabilities [also just now posted by @JMoravitz (+1)] are:



dhyper(0:3, 4, 50, 4)
[1] 0.7282190412 0.2479043545 0.0232410332 0.0006324091


enter image description here






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3169817%2fgive-a-deck-of-54-cards-whats-the-probability-that-even-one-card-will-match-tw%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    2












    $begingroup$

    Supposing you have $54$ distinct cards and you draw a four-card hand, take note of the cards and shuffle them back in and draw another four cards, the probability of having exactly $k$ cards in the new hand exactly matching a card from the initial hand (where exactly matching requires both the suit and the number to be identical and the jokers only match the exact same joker, e.g. if there is a black joker and a red joker) is:



    $$fracbinom4kcdot 4frack~cdot 50frac4-k~54frac4~ = fracbinom4kbinom504-kbinom544$$



    where here $nfrack~$ represents the falling factorial $underbracencdot (n-1)cdot (n-2)cdots (n-k+1)_k~textterms$



    The expression on the left can be explained by treating each card as being pulled in sequence, picking which positions in the sequence are occupied by matching cards, picking which matching cards those are, and picking which non-matching cards occupied the remaining spaces out of the possible ways in which four cards could be drawn.



    The expression on the right can be explained by treating it as though the cards are picked simultaneously where order doesn't matter and picking which matching cards they are and which non-matching cards they are and dividing by the number of ways of selecting four cards. You should recognize the expression on the right as simply being the well-known hypergeometric distribution.



    The results are:



    $beginarrayhline k&textexact&textapproximate\
    hline 0&frac230300316251&0.728219041dots\1&frac78400316251&0.247904354dots\
    2&frac2450105417&0.023241033dots\
    3&frac200316251&0.000632409dots\
    4&frac1316251&0.000003162dots\hlineendarray$



    Notice how the probabilities add up exactly to $1$, as should always be the case when partitioning the sample space of a probability experiment.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      Question: in equation above shouldn't the denominator be (54 4)? if I use (50 4) the denominator = 230300. If you address this, i'll accept this answer. Thanks!
      $endgroup$
      – Salman Paracha
      Apr 5 at 4:45










    • $begingroup$
      @Salman it should indeed be 54 choose 4, not 50 choose 4. That was a typo. Good catch
      $endgroup$
      – JMoravitz
      Apr 5 at 9:54















    2












    $begingroup$

    Supposing you have $54$ distinct cards and you draw a four-card hand, take note of the cards and shuffle them back in and draw another four cards, the probability of having exactly $k$ cards in the new hand exactly matching a card from the initial hand (where exactly matching requires both the suit and the number to be identical and the jokers only match the exact same joker, e.g. if there is a black joker and a red joker) is:



    $$fracbinom4kcdot 4frack~cdot 50frac4-k~54frac4~ = fracbinom4kbinom504-kbinom544$$



    where here $nfrack~$ represents the falling factorial $underbracencdot (n-1)cdot (n-2)cdots (n-k+1)_k~textterms$



    The expression on the left can be explained by treating each card as being pulled in sequence, picking which positions in the sequence are occupied by matching cards, picking which matching cards those are, and picking which non-matching cards occupied the remaining spaces out of the possible ways in which four cards could be drawn.



    The expression on the right can be explained by treating it as though the cards are picked simultaneously where order doesn't matter and picking which matching cards they are and which non-matching cards they are and dividing by the number of ways of selecting four cards. You should recognize the expression on the right as simply being the well-known hypergeometric distribution.



    The results are:



    $beginarrayhline k&textexact&textapproximate\
    hline 0&frac230300316251&0.728219041dots\1&frac78400316251&0.247904354dots\
    2&frac2450105417&0.023241033dots\
    3&frac200316251&0.000632409dots\
    4&frac1316251&0.000003162dots\hlineendarray$



    Notice how the probabilities add up exactly to $1$, as should always be the case when partitioning the sample space of a probability experiment.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      Question: in equation above shouldn't the denominator be (54 4)? if I use (50 4) the denominator = 230300. If you address this, i'll accept this answer. Thanks!
      $endgroup$
      – Salman Paracha
      Apr 5 at 4:45










    • $begingroup$
      @Salman it should indeed be 54 choose 4, not 50 choose 4. That was a typo. Good catch
      $endgroup$
      – JMoravitz
      Apr 5 at 9:54













    2












    2








    2





    $begingroup$

    Supposing you have $54$ distinct cards and you draw a four-card hand, take note of the cards and shuffle them back in and draw another four cards, the probability of having exactly $k$ cards in the new hand exactly matching a card from the initial hand (where exactly matching requires both the suit and the number to be identical and the jokers only match the exact same joker, e.g. if there is a black joker and a red joker) is:



    $$fracbinom4kcdot 4frack~cdot 50frac4-k~54frac4~ = fracbinom4kbinom504-kbinom544$$



    where here $nfrack~$ represents the falling factorial $underbracencdot (n-1)cdot (n-2)cdots (n-k+1)_k~textterms$



    The expression on the left can be explained by treating each card as being pulled in sequence, picking which positions in the sequence are occupied by matching cards, picking which matching cards those are, and picking which non-matching cards occupied the remaining spaces out of the possible ways in which four cards could be drawn.



    The expression on the right can be explained by treating it as though the cards are picked simultaneously where order doesn't matter and picking which matching cards they are and which non-matching cards they are and dividing by the number of ways of selecting four cards. You should recognize the expression on the right as simply being the well-known hypergeometric distribution.



    The results are:



    $beginarrayhline k&textexact&textapproximate\
    hline 0&frac230300316251&0.728219041dots\1&frac78400316251&0.247904354dots\
    2&frac2450105417&0.023241033dots\
    3&frac200316251&0.000632409dots\
    4&frac1316251&0.000003162dots\hlineendarray$



    Notice how the probabilities add up exactly to $1$, as should always be the case when partitioning the sample space of a probability experiment.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    Supposing you have $54$ distinct cards and you draw a four-card hand, take note of the cards and shuffle them back in and draw another four cards, the probability of having exactly $k$ cards in the new hand exactly matching a card from the initial hand (where exactly matching requires both the suit and the number to be identical and the jokers only match the exact same joker, e.g. if there is a black joker and a red joker) is:



    $$fracbinom4kcdot 4frack~cdot 50frac4-k~54frac4~ = fracbinom4kbinom504-kbinom544$$



    where here $nfrack~$ represents the falling factorial $underbracencdot (n-1)cdot (n-2)cdots (n-k+1)_k~textterms$



    The expression on the left can be explained by treating each card as being pulled in sequence, picking which positions in the sequence are occupied by matching cards, picking which matching cards those are, and picking which non-matching cards occupied the remaining spaces out of the possible ways in which four cards could be drawn.



    The expression on the right can be explained by treating it as though the cards are picked simultaneously where order doesn't matter and picking which matching cards they are and which non-matching cards they are and dividing by the number of ways of selecting four cards. You should recognize the expression on the right as simply being the well-known hypergeometric distribution.



    The results are:



    $beginarrayhline k&textexact&textapproximate\
    hline 0&frac230300316251&0.728219041dots\1&frac78400316251&0.247904354dots\
    2&frac2450105417&0.023241033dots\
    3&frac200316251&0.000632409dots\
    4&frac1316251&0.000003162dots\hlineendarray$



    Notice how the probabilities add up exactly to $1$, as should always be the case when partitioning the sample space of a probability experiment.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Apr 5 at 9:55

























    answered Apr 1 at 22:44









    JMoravitzJMoravitz

    49.1k44091




    49.1k44091











    • $begingroup$
      Question: in equation above shouldn't the denominator be (54 4)? if I use (50 4) the denominator = 230300. If you address this, i'll accept this answer. Thanks!
      $endgroup$
      – Salman Paracha
      Apr 5 at 4:45










    • $begingroup$
      @Salman it should indeed be 54 choose 4, not 50 choose 4. That was a typo. Good catch
      $endgroup$
      – JMoravitz
      Apr 5 at 9:54
















    • $begingroup$
      Question: in equation above shouldn't the denominator be (54 4)? if I use (50 4) the denominator = 230300. If you address this, i'll accept this answer. Thanks!
      $endgroup$
      – Salman Paracha
      Apr 5 at 4:45










    • $begingroup$
      @Salman it should indeed be 54 choose 4, not 50 choose 4. That was a typo. Good catch
      $endgroup$
      – JMoravitz
      Apr 5 at 9:54















    $begingroup$
    Question: in equation above shouldn't the denominator be (54 4)? if I use (50 4) the denominator = 230300. If you address this, i'll accept this answer. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Salman Paracha
    Apr 5 at 4:45




    $begingroup$
    Question: in equation above shouldn't the denominator be (54 4)? if I use (50 4) the denominator = 230300. If you address this, i'll accept this answer. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Salman Paracha
    Apr 5 at 4:45












    $begingroup$
    @Salman it should indeed be 54 choose 4, not 50 choose 4. That was a typo. Good catch
    $endgroup$
    – JMoravitz
    Apr 5 at 9:54




    $begingroup$
    @Salman it should indeed be 54 choose 4, not 50 choose 4. That was a typo. Good catch
    $endgroup$
    – JMoravitz
    Apr 5 at 9:54











    1












    $begingroup$

    Comment: If I understand correctly, we can suppose the first hand
    is dealt, and then try to match it. In my simulation (in R) below I suppose that
    the first hand has cards numbered from 1 through 4 (in some order). In a million randomly dealt second
    hands, my probabilities of various counts of matching cards are shown
    below.



    set.seed(401) # for reproducibility
    x = replicate(10^6, sum(sample(1:54, 4)<=4))
    table(x)/10^6
    x
    0 1 2 3 4
    0.728386 0.247738 0.023251 0.000624 0.000001


    Only the first few places of these probabilities are likely to be accurate,
    but this may give you something to check against as you finish your
    combinatorial analysis. Notice that the simulated proportion $0.728$ of no matches
    is the same (to three places) as the correct probability in your first answer.



    A second simulation, with seed 2019, gave the following slightly
    different answers:



    x
    0 1 2 3 4
    0.727877 0.247891 0.023563 0.000667 0.000002


    More precisely, hypergeometric probabilities [also just now posted by @JMoravitz (+1)] are:



    dhyper(0:3, 4, 50, 4)
    [1] 0.7282190412 0.2479043545 0.0232410332 0.0006324091


    enter image description here






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$

















      1












      $begingroup$

      Comment: If I understand correctly, we can suppose the first hand
      is dealt, and then try to match it. In my simulation (in R) below I suppose that
      the first hand has cards numbered from 1 through 4 (in some order). In a million randomly dealt second
      hands, my probabilities of various counts of matching cards are shown
      below.



      set.seed(401) # for reproducibility
      x = replicate(10^6, sum(sample(1:54, 4)<=4))
      table(x)/10^6
      x
      0 1 2 3 4
      0.728386 0.247738 0.023251 0.000624 0.000001


      Only the first few places of these probabilities are likely to be accurate,
      but this may give you something to check against as you finish your
      combinatorial analysis. Notice that the simulated proportion $0.728$ of no matches
      is the same (to three places) as the correct probability in your first answer.



      A second simulation, with seed 2019, gave the following slightly
      different answers:



      x
      0 1 2 3 4
      0.727877 0.247891 0.023563 0.000667 0.000002


      More precisely, hypergeometric probabilities [also just now posted by @JMoravitz (+1)] are:



      dhyper(0:3, 4, 50, 4)
      [1] 0.7282190412 0.2479043545 0.0232410332 0.0006324091


      enter image description here






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$















        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$

        Comment: If I understand correctly, we can suppose the first hand
        is dealt, and then try to match it. In my simulation (in R) below I suppose that
        the first hand has cards numbered from 1 through 4 (in some order). In a million randomly dealt second
        hands, my probabilities of various counts of matching cards are shown
        below.



        set.seed(401) # for reproducibility
        x = replicate(10^6, sum(sample(1:54, 4)<=4))
        table(x)/10^6
        x
        0 1 2 3 4
        0.728386 0.247738 0.023251 0.000624 0.000001


        Only the first few places of these probabilities are likely to be accurate,
        but this may give you something to check against as you finish your
        combinatorial analysis. Notice that the simulated proportion $0.728$ of no matches
        is the same (to three places) as the correct probability in your first answer.



        A second simulation, with seed 2019, gave the following slightly
        different answers:



        x
        0 1 2 3 4
        0.727877 0.247891 0.023563 0.000667 0.000002


        More precisely, hypergeometric probabilities [also just now posted by @JMoravitz (+1)] are:



        dhyper(0:3, 4, 50, 4)
        [1] 0.7282190412 0.2479043545 0.0232410332 0.0006324091


        enter image description here






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        Comment: If I understand correctly, we can suppose the first hand
        is dealt, and then try to match it. In my simulation (in R) below I suppose that
        the first hand has cards numbered from 1 through 4 (in some order). In a million randomly dealt second
        hands, my probabilities of various counts of matching cards are shown
        below.



        set.seed(401) # for reproducibility
        x = replicate(10^6, sum(sample(1:54, 4)<=4))
        table(x)/10^6
        x
        0 1 2 3 4
        0.728386 0.247738 0.023251 0.000624 0.000001


        Only the first few places of these probabilities are likely to be accurate,
        but this may give you something to check against as you finish your
        combinatorial analysis. Notice that the simulated proportion $0.728$ of no matches
        is the same (to three places) as the correct probability in your first answer.



        A second simulation, with seed 2019, gave the following slightly
        different answers:



        x
        0 1 2 3 4
        0.727877 0.247891 0.023563 0.000667 0.000002


        More precisely, hypergeometric probabilities [also just now posted by @JMoravitz (+1)] are:



        dhyper(0:3, 4, 50, 4)
        [1] 0.7282190412 0.2479043545 0.0232410332 0.0006324091


        enter image description here







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Apr 1 at 23:15

























        answered Apr 1 at 22:29









        BruceETBruceET

        36.4k71540




        36.4k71540



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3169817%2fgive-a-deck-of-54-cards-whats-the-probability-that-even-one-card-will-match-tw%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Triangular numbers and gcdProving sum of a set is $0 pmod n$ if $n$ is odd, or $fracn2 pmod n$ if $n$ is even?Is greatest common divisor of two numbers really their smallest linear combination?GCD, LCM RelationshipProve a set of nonnegative integers with greatest common divisor 1 and closed under addition has all but finite many nonnegative integers.all pairs of a and b in an equation containing gcdTriangular Numbers Modulo $k$ - Hit All Values?Understanding the Existence and Uniqueness of the GCDGCD and LCM with logical symbolsThe greatest common divisor of two positive integers less than 100 is equal to 3. Their least common multiple is twelve times one of the integers.Suppose that for all integers $x$, $x|a$ and $x|b$ if and only if $x|c$. Then $c = gcd(a,b)$Which is the gcd of 2 numbers which are multiplied and the result is 600000?

            Ingelân Ynhâld Etymology | Geografy | Skiednis | Polityk en bestjoer | Ekonomy | Demografy | Kultuer | Klimaat | Sjoch ek | Keppelings om utens | Boarnen, noaten en referinsjes Navigaasjemenuwww.gov.ukOffisjele webside fan it regear fan it Feriene KeninkrykOffisjele webside fan it Britske FerkearsburoNederlânsktalige ynformaasje fan it Britske FerkearsburoOffisjele webside fan English Heritage, de organisaasje dy't him ynset foar it behâld fan it Ingelske kultuergoedYnwennertallen fan alle Britske stêden út 'e folkstelling fan 2011Notes en References, op dizze sideEngland

            Հադիս Բովանդակություն Անվանում և նշանակություն | Դասակարգում | Աղբյուրներ | Նավարկման ցանկ