Confidence Interval of number of red marbles among 100 marbles where proportion of red marbles is uniformly...











up vote
0
down vote

favorite












A bag contains 100 marbles of colors red and black. The proportion of red color marbles is uniformly distributed between 0 and 1. How do I compute the confidence interval of the number of red marbles?



The expected number of red marbles will be $E(100p) = 100*0.5 = 50$.



To compute the variance, I thought of using the variance of p.
$Var(p) = frac{1}{12}$



Hence, $Var(100p) = frac{100^2}{12}$ and $SD = 28.867$



Using this value the confidence interval can be computed as $50 pm 1.96*28.867 = 50 pm 56.58$.



I doubt if this is correct solution; it gives a negative value for the lower interval.










share|cite|improve this question


























    up vote
    0
    down vote

    favorite












    A bag contains 100 marbles of colors red and black. The proportion of red color marbles is uniformly distributed between 0 and 1. How do I compute the confidence interval of the number of red marbles?



    The expected number of red marbles will be $E(100p) = 100*0.5 = 50$.



    To compute the variance, I thought of using the variance of p.
    $Var(p) = frac{1}{12}$



    Hence, $Var(100p) = frac{100^2}{12}$ and $SD = 28.867$



    Using this value the confidence interval can be computed as $50 pm 1.96*28.867 = 50 pm 56.58$.



    I doubt if this is correct solution; it gives a negative value for the lower interval.










    share|cite|improve this question
























      up vote
      0
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      0
      down vote

      favorite











      A bag contains 100 marbles of colors red and black. The proportion of red color marbles is uniformly distributed between 0 and 1. How do I compute the confidence interval of the number of red marbles?



      The expected number of red marbles will be $E(100p) = 100*0.5 = 50$.



      To compute the variance, I thought of using the variance of p.
      $Var(p) = frac{1}{12}$



      Hence, $Var(100p) = frac{100^2}{12}$ and $SD = 28.867$



      Using this value the confidence interval can be computed as $50 pm 1.96*28.867 = 50 pm 56.58$.



      I doubt if this is correct solution; it gives a negative value for the lower interval.










      share|cite|improve this question













      A bag contains 100 marbles of colors red and black. The proportion of red color marbles is uniformly distributed between 0 and 1. How do I compute the confidence interval of the number of red marbles?



      The expected number of red marbles will be $E(100p) = 100*0.5 = 50$.



      To compute the variance, I thought of using the variance of p.
      $Var(p) = frac{1}{12}$



      Hence, $Var(100p) = frac{100^2}{12}$ and $SD = 28.867$



      Using this value the confidence interval can be computed as $50 pm 1.96*28.867 = 50 pm 56.58$.



      I doubt if this is correct solution; it gives a negative value for the lower interval.







      conditional-expectation central-limit-theorem confidence-interval






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Nov 22 at 19:43









      Ajit Sharma

      213




      213






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          0
          down vote













          You cannot compute a confidence interval until a sample is drawn, and the method by which you sample the marbles will affect the resulting calculation.



          All that we have so far is that there is some finite population $N = 100$ of marbles, of which the proportion of red marbles is some random variable $p in operatorname{Uniform}[0,1]$. More precisely, the number of such marbles is a discrete uniform random variable between $0$ and $100$ inclusive, but for our purposes, we can let $p$ be continuous uniform on $[0,1]$. Then the expected number of red marbles is $$operatorname{E}[Np] = N operatorname{E}[p] = 100(0.5) = 50,$$ as you previously calculated. The variance of the number of red marbles is $$operatorname{Var}[Np] = N^2 operatorname{Var}[p] = 100^2 cdot frac{1}{12} = frac{2500}{3}.$$



          But as I stated at the very beginning, these do not comprise a confidence interval, because no sampling scheme has been specified. To illustrate, suppose we sample $n$ marbles from the bag with replacement--so that after one marble is pulled out, its color is observed, and then it is put back in the bag. The number of red marbles observed this way is some random variable $X$ that follows a binomial distribution where $p$ is some fixed but unknown number in $[0,1]$. A point estimate of $p$ can be obtained by computing the sample mean, e.g., $$hat p = frac{X}{n}.$$ A $100(1-alpha)%$ Wald-type confidence interval can be constructed using a normal approximation, and would have the form $$hat p pm z^*_{alpha/2} sqrt{frac{hat p(1-hat p)}{n}},$$ where $z^*_{alpha/2}$ is the upper $alpha/2$ quantile of the standard normal (so $z^*_{.025} approx 1.96$ for a $95%$ confidence interval). This is not the only interval estimate possible; e.g., a Wilson score interval or Clopper-Pearson (exact binomial) interval can also be constructed.



          However, if your sampling scheme is different--e.g., you sample without replacement--then although your point estimate may still be the same, your interval estimate should be different because the act of sampling without replacement means you effectively have more information about the true value of $p$ for the same number of draws. One way to understand this is by noting that if $n = 100$ samples are drawn without replacement, then you know exactly how many marbles are red, because you have drawn them all; whereas if you sample marbles with replacement, you can draw as many times as you please and still not be absolutely certain of the true number of red marbles. A discussion of how such a confidence interval is constructed is beyond the present scope of this answer, but it involves something called "finite sample correction."



          Finally, if the prior distribution of $p$ were not uniform, the methods applied here would not suffice. A Bayesian approach would be more appropriate to establish an interval estimate.






          share|cite|improve this answer





















            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            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',
            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%2f3009562%2fconfidence-interval-of-number-of-red-marbles-among-100-marbles-where-proportion%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            0
            down vote













            You cannot compute a confidence interval until a sample is drawn, and the method by which you sample the marbles will affect the resulting calculation.



            All that we have so far is that there is some finite population $N = 100$ of marbles, of which the proportion of red marbles is some random variable $p in operatorname{Uniform}[0,1]$. More precisely, the number of such marbles is a discrete uniform random variable between $0$ and $100$ inclusive, but for our purposes, we can let $p$ be continuous uniform on $[0,1]$. Then the expected number of red marbles is $$operatorname{E}[Np] = N operatorname{E}[p] = 100(0.5) = 50,$$ as you previously calculated. The variance of the number of red marbles is $$operatorname{Var}[Np] = N^2 operatorname{Var}[p] = 100^2 cdot frac{1}{12} = frac{2500}{3}.$$



            But as I stated at the very beginning, these do not comprise a confidence interval, because no sampling scheme has been specified. To illustrate, suppose we sample $n$ marbles from the bag with replacement--so that after one marble is pulled out, its color is observed, and then it is put back in the bag. The number of red marbles observed this way is some random variable $X$ that follows a binomial distribution where $p$ is some fixed but unknown number in $[0,1]$. A point estimate of $p$ can be obtained by computing the sample mean, e.g., $$hat p = frac{X}{n}.$$ A $100(1-alpha)%$ Wald-type confidence interval can be constructed using a normal approximation, and would have the form $$hat p pm z^*_{alpha/2} sqrt{frac{hat p(1-hat p)}{n}},$$ where $z^*_{alpha/2}$ is the upper $alpha/2$ quantile of the standard normal (so $z^*_{.025} approx 1.96$ for a $95%$ confidence interval). This is not the only interval estimate possible; e.g., a Wilson score interval or Clopper-Pearson (exact binomial) interval can also be constructed.



            However, if your sampling scheme is different--e.g., you sample without replacement--then although your point estimate may still be the same, your interval estimate should be different because the act of sampling without replacement means you effectively have more information about the true value of $p$ for the same number of draws. One way to understand this is by noting that if $n = 100$ samples are drawn without replacement, then you know exactly how many marbles are red, because you have drawn them all; whereas if you sample marbles with replacement, you can draw as many times as you please and still not be absolutely certain of the true number of red marbles. A discussion of how such a confidence interval is constructed is beyond the present scope of this answer, but it involves something called "finite sample correction."



            Finally, if the prior distribution of $p$ were not uniform, the methods applied here would not suffice. A Bayesian approach would be more appropriate to establish an interval estimate.






            share|cite|improve this answer

























              up vote
              0
              down vote













              You cannot compute a confidence interval until a sample is drawn, and the method by which you sample the marbles will affect the resulting calculation.



              All that we have so far is that there is some finite population $N = 100$ of marbles, of which the proportion of red marbles is some random variable $p in operatorname{Uniform}[0,1]$. More precisely, the number of such marbles is a discrete uniform random variable between $0$ and $100$ inclusive, but for our purposes, we can let $p$ be continuous uniform on $[0,1]$. Then the expected number of red marbles is $$operatorname{E}[Np] = N operatorname{E}[p] = 100(0.5) = 50,$$ as you previously calculated. The variance of the number of red marbles is $$operatorname{Var}[Np] = N^2 operatorname{Var}[p] = 100^2 cdot frac{1}{12} = frac{2500}{3}.$$



              But as I stated at the very beginning, these do not comprise a confidence interval, because no sampling scheme has been specified. To illustrate, suppose we sample $n$ marbles from the bag with replacement--so that after one marble is pulled out, its color is observed, and then it is put back in the bag. The number of red marbles observed this way is some random variable $X$ that follows a binomial distribution where $p$ is some fixed but unknown number in $[0,1]$. A point estimate of $p$ can be obtained by computing the sample mean, e.g., $$hat p = frac{X}{n}.$$ A $100(1-alpha)%$ Wald-type confidence interval can be constructed using a normal approximation, and would have the form $$hat p pm z^*_{alpha/2} sqrt{frac{hat p(1-hat p)}{n}},$$ where $z^*_{alpha/2}$ is the upper $alpha/2$ quantile of the standard normal (so $z^*_{.025} approx 1.96$ for a $95%$ confidence interval). This is not the only interval estimate possible; e.g., a Wilson score interval or Clopper-Pearson (exact binomial) interval can also be constructed.



              However, if your sampling scheme is different--e.g., you sample without replacement--then although your point estimate may still be the same, your interval estimate should be different because the act of sampling without replacement means you effectively have more information about the true value of $p$ for the same number of draws. One way to understand this is by noting that if $n = 100$ samples are drawn without replacement, then you know exactly how many marbles are red, because you have drawn them all; whereas if you sample marbles with replacement, you can draw as many times as you please and still not be absolutely certain of the true number of red marbles. A discussion of how such a confidence interval is constructed is beyond the present scope of this answer, but it involves something called "finite sample correction."



              Finally, if the prior distribution of $p$ were not uniform, the methods applied here would not suffice. A Bayesian approach would be more appropriate to establish an interval estimate.






              share|cite|improve this answer























                up vote
                0
                down vote










                up vote
                0
                down vote









                You cannot compute a confidence interval until a sample is drawn, and the method by which you sample the marbles will affect the resulting calculation.



                All that we have so far is that there is some finite population $N = 100$ of marbles, of which the proportion of red marbles is some random variable $p in operatorname{Uniform}[0,1]$. More precisely, the number of such marbles is a discrete uniform random variable between $0$ and $100$ inclusive, but for our purposes, we can let $p$ be continuous uniform on $[0,1]$. Then the expected number of red marbles is $$operatorname{E}[Np] = N operatorname{E}[p] = 100(0.5) = 50,$$ as you previously calculated. The variance of the number of red marbles is $$operatorname{Var}[Np] = N^2 operatorname{Var}[p] = 100^2 cdot frac{1}{12} = frac{2500}{3}.$$



                But as I stated at the very beginning, these do not comprise a confidence interval, because no sampling scheme has been specified. To illustrate, suppose we sample $n$ marbles from the bag with replacement--so that after one marble is pulled out, its color is observed, and then it is put back in the bag. The number of red marbles observed this way is some random variable $X$ that follows a binomial distribution where $p$ is some fixed but unknown number in $[0,1]$. A point estimate of $p$ can be obtained by computing the sample mean, e.g., $$hat p = frac{X}{n}.$$ A $100(1-alpha)%$ Wald-type confidence interval can be constructed using a normal approximation, and would have the form $$hat p pm z^*_{alpha/2} sqrt{frac{hat p(1-hat p)}{n}},$$ where $z^*_{alpha/2}$ is the upper $alpha/2$ quantile of the standard normal (so $z^*_{.025} approx 1.96$ for a $95%$ confidence interval). This is not the only interval estimate possible; e.g., a Wilson score interval or Clopper-Pearson (exact binomial) interval can also be constructed.



                However, if your sampling scheme is different--e.g., you sample without replacement--then although your point estimate may still be the same, your interval estimate should be different because the act of sampling without replacement means you effectively have more information about the true value of $p$ for the same number of draws. One way to understand this is by noting that if $n = 100$ samples are drawn without replacement, then you know exactly how many marbles are red, because you have drawn them all; whereas if you sample marbles with replacement, you can draw as many times as you please and still not be absolutely certain of the true number of red marbles. A discussion of how such a confidence interval is constructed is beyond the present scope of this answer, but it involves something called "finite sample correction."



                Finally, if the prior distribution of $p$ were not uniform, the methods applied here would not suffice. A Bayesian approach would be more appropriate to establish an interval estimate.






                share|cite|improve this answer












                You cannot compute a confidence interval until a sample is drawn, and the method by which you sample the marbles will affect the resulting calculation.



                All that we have so far is that there is some finite population $N = 100$ of marbles, of which the proportion of red marbles is some random variable $p in operatorname{Uniform}[0,1]$. More precisely, the number of such marbles is a discrete uniform random variable between $0$ and $100$ inclusive, but for our purposes, we can let $p$ be continuous uniform on $[0,1]$. Then the expected number of red marbles is $$operatorname{E}[Np] = N operatorname{E}[p] = 100(0.5) = 50,$$ as you previously calculated. The variance of the number of red marbles is $$operatorname{Var}[Np] = N^2 operatorname{Var}[p] = 100^2 cdot frac{1}{12} = frac{2500}{3}.$$



                But as I stated at the very beginning, these do not comprise a confidence interval, because no sampling scheme has been specified. To illustrate, suppose we sample $n$ marbles from the bag with replacement--so that after one marble is pulled out, its color is observed, and then it is put back in the bag. The number of red marbles observed this way is some random variable $X$ that follows a binomial distribution where $p$ is some fixed but unknown number in $[0,1]$. A point estimate of $p$ can be obtained by computing the sample mean, e.g., $$hat p = frac{X}{n}.$$ A $100(1-alpha)%$ Wald-type confidence interval can be constructed using a normal approximation, and would have the form $$hat p pm z^*_{alpha/2} sqrt{frac{hat p(1-hat p)}{n}},$$ where $z^*_{alpha/2}$ is the upper $alpha/2$ quantile of the standard normal (so $z^*_{.025} approx 1.96$ for a $95%$ confidence interval). This is not the only interval estimate possible; e.g., a Wilson score interval or Clopper-Pearson (exact binomial) interval can also be constructed.



                However, if your sampling scheme is different--e.g., you sample without replacement--then although your point estimate may still be the same, your interval estimate should be different because the act of sampling without replacement means you effectively have more information about the true value of $p$ for the same number of draws. One way to understand this is by noting that if $n = 100$ samples are drawn without replacement, then you know exactly how many marbles are red, because you have drawn them all; whereas if you sample marbles with replacement, you can draw as many times as you please and still not be absolutely certain of the true number of red marbles. A discussion of how such a confidence interval is constructed is beyond the present scope of this answer, but it involves something called "finite sample correction."



                Finally, if the prior distribution of $p$ were not uniform, the methods applied here would not suffice. A Bayesian approach would be more appropriate to establish an interval estimate.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Nov 22 at 20:16









                heropup

                62k65998




                62k65998






























                    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.





                    Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                    Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                    • 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.


                    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%2f3009562%2fconfidence-interval-of-number-of-red-marbles-among-100-marbles-where-proportion%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

                    Wiesbaden

                    Marschland

                    Dieringhausen