Explore related knowledge and questions →

Question 12951: Use Conditional Equivalence Only with Positive Denominator

On this page
  1. Original question and givens
  2. Definition and scope
  3. Step-by-step derivation
  4. Reverse checks
  5. Result
  6. This question review and source binding

Return to catalogue page 65

← Question derivation index · Original question batch

R0024-12951 · q-20261014-advance-20261027-r06-event-independence-0026

Original question and givens

Use one complete finite probability model with aligned exact masses=[36/49, 6/49, 6/49, 1/49] on Fin(4)={0,…,3}. Masses must be nonnegative and sum exactly to 1; do not assume uniformity. Events A=[2, 3], B=[1, 3] are carrier-label sets, normalized by removing duplicates and sorting numerically. The primary definition is P(A∩B)=P(A)P(B); conditional formulas require positive conditioning probability. Only two-event independence is checked, not mutual independence of a larger family. Use exact reduced rational outputs with positive denominators; omit /1 for integers. Require P(B)>0. Give (P_A,P_B,P_intersection,P_A_given_B,conditional_equal?,independent?).

  • G001 — Use one complete finite probability model with aligned exact masses=[36/49, 6/49, 6/49, 1/49] on Fin(4)={0,…,3}. Masses must be nonnegative and sum exactly to 1; do not assume uniformity. Events A=[2, 3], B=[1, 3] are carrier-label sets, normalized by removing duplicates and sorting numerically. The primary definition is P(A∩B)=P(A)P(B); conditional formulas require positive conditioning probability. Only two-event independence is checked, not mutual independence of a larger family. Use exact reduced rational outputs with positive denominators; omit /1 for integers. Require P(B)>0. Give (P_A,P_B,P_intersection,P_A_given_B,conditional_equal?,independent?).

Definition and scope

Use the original question domain, assumptions and cited MKO definitions. This item has second-context mathematical and bilingual review, with the model, answer and every arithmetic step independently recomputed from the original parameters; the source question remains a candidate.

Step-by-step derivation

S001 · calculation

Before

event model whole mass total := sum(36/49, 6/49, 6/49, 1/49)

After

event model whole mass total = 1

Conditions: none

Compute exactly from the original roles and complete established operands,without changing pairings,order or replacing guards by approximation.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: exact_rational_arithmetic · Uses: G001

S002 · implies

Before

complete carrier Fin(4);raw aligned masses=[[36, 49], [6, 49], [6, 49], [1, 49]]

After

normalized masses=[36/49, 6/49, 6/49, 1/49];nonnegative=Yes;total=1

Conditions: none

Qualify one complete finite PMF with nonnegative atoms and exact total1.Zero-mass atoms remain in the carrier;complements are not taken only within positive-mass support.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: event_common_complete_probability_space · Uses: G001, S001

S003 · implies

Before

raw carrier events A=[2, 3];B=[1, 3];carrier size=4

After

normalized A=[2, 3];B=[1, 3];intersection=[3]

Conditions: none

Events are carrier-index sets,normalized without dropping zero-mass labels.Intersection requires the same label in A and B.This differs from coordinate-value events in a joint table.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: event_carrier_label_sets_and_intersection · Uses: G001, S002

S004 · calculation

Before

A mass := sum(6/49, 1/49)

After

A mass = 1/7

Conditions: none

Compute exactly from the original roles and complete established operands,without changing pairings,order or replacing guards by approximation.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: exact_rational_arithmetic · Uses: G001, S003

S005 · calculation

Before

B mass := sum(6/49, 1/49)

After

B mass = 1/7

Conditions: none

Compute exactly from the original roles and complete established operands,without changing pairings,order or replacing guards by approximation.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: exact_rational_arithmetic · Uses: G001, S004

S006 · calculation

Before

A intersection B mass := sum(1/49)

After

A intersection B mass = 1/49

Conditions: none

Compute exactly from the original roles and complete established operands,without changing pairings,order or replacing guards by approximation.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: exact_rational_arithmetic · Uses: G001, S005

S007 · calculation

Before

event product P_A times P_B := mul(1/7, 1/7)

After

event product P_A times P_B = 1/49

Conditions: none

Compute exactly from the original roles and complete established operands,without changing pairings,order or replacing guards by approximation.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: exact_rational_arithmetic · Uses: G001, S006

S008 · implies

Before

P_A=1/7;P_B=1/7;P_intersection=1/49;product=1/49

After

two-event independent=Yes

Conditions: none

The primary definition is intersection probability equal to the marginal product,not disjointness.Do not assume independence before multiplying.This checks two events,not mutual independence of a larger family.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: independence_primary_product_definition · Uses: G001, S007

S009 · implies

Before

conditioning event=[1, 3];P_B=1/7>0

After

positive denominator qualified before conditional ratio

Conditions: none

Establish P(B)>0 before division.A nonempty event alone does not guarantee positive probability.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: positive_conditioning_guard_before_division · Uses: G001, S008

S010 · calculation

Before

conditional P_A_given_B := div(1/49, 1/7)

After

conditional P_A_given_B = 1/7

Conditions: none

Compute exactly from the original roles and complete established operands,without changing pairings,order or replacing guards by approximation.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: exact_rational_arithmetic · Uses: G001, S009

S011 · implies

Before

P_B=1/7>0;P_A_given_B=1/7;P_A=1/7

After

conditional equals marginal=Yes;equivalent product independence=Yes

Conditions: none

With a positive nonzero denominator,P_AB/P_B=P_A iff P_AB=P_A*P_B.Multiplying back by the same P_B is reversible,so the flags agree.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: positive_denominator_conditional_equivalence · Uses: G001, S010

Reverse checks

  • S011 · premise_and_result_audit — Check against the original data and this step's premises; a one-way implication is not an equivalence.
  • S010 · premise_and_result_audit — Recompute conditional P_A_given_B with exact rational arithmetic, not rounded decimals.
  • S009 · premise_and_result_audit — Check against the original data and this step's premises; a one-way implication is not an equivalence.
  • S008 · premise_and_result_audit — Check against the original data and this step's premises; a one-way implication is not an equivalence.
  • S007 · premise_and_result_audit — Recompute event product P_A times P_B with exact rational arithmetic, not rounded decimals.
  • S006 · premise_and_result_audit — Recompute A intersection B mass with exact rational arithmetic, not rounded decimals.
  • S005 · premise_and_result_audit — Recompute B mass with exact rational arithmetic, not rounded decimals.
  • S004 · premise_and_result_audit — Recompute A mass with exact rational arithmetic, not rounded decimals.
  • S003 · premise_and_result_audit — Check against the original data and this step's premises; a one-way implication is not an equivalence.
  • S002 · premise_and_result_audit — Check against the original data and this step's premises; a one-way implication is not an equivalence.
  • S001 · premise_and_result_audit — Recompute event model whole mass total with exact rational arithmetic, not rounded decimals.

Result

(1/7, 1/7, 1/49, 1/7, Yes, Yes)

The full substitutions and premise checks give the original answer; source identity,format and status are unchanged.

This question review and source binding

Review date: 2026-10-26

Original questions, answers, step expressions, numeric ASTs and historical records are retained. Source candidate labels remain historical and are not overwritten as formal proof.

Source hashes and review receipts
  • input commit: 0f7be61e2c22317a4075561dc822c87d881a50db
  • original question SHA-256: 91cc96628640efa8467ed32d9490ae2ff41fd164952387bbe6c51aee9a367226
  • candidate record SHA-256: 8e1c755e6dd1a7711d0be403df9ae478f4e2661abd19e29d98d5df9846f06f06
  • semantic review receipt SHA-256: 1c8f6c2c6c75852cb93c08235684ce9f32ebe86065c58c693a04257e772c2d35
  • question-first witness SHA-256: 05fd764b5f9f7fff6185003efe576d87632f6daf40606ac3839a7feafe4f80d8
  • Lean: NOT_RUN · human review: NOT_PERFORMED
Same-source full JSON