NEW HERE? LEARN MORE
closeclose
Last visit was: 24 Apr 2024, 13:11 It is currently 24 Apr 2024, 13:11
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
New posts
New comers' posts

Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel

Set Theory!

User avatar
bellcurve
Manager
Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 63
Own Kudos [?]: 256 [0]
Given Kudos: 9
Send PM
Set Theory! [#permalink] New post   07 Jun 2011, 07:48
I have a clearifying question about set theory formulas, if you all don't mind.

1. For 3 sets A, B, and C: P(AuBuC) = P(A) + P(B) + P(C) – P(AnB) – P(AnC) – P(BnC) + P(AnBnC)

2. No of persons in atleast one set = P(A) + P(B) + P(C) - P(AnB) - P(AnC) - P(BnC) + 2 P(AnBnC)

Why these two formulas are different? Isn't "at least in one set" equal to union of all (AuBuC)?

Thanks,
BC



Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Quantitative Questions Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
User avatar
fluke
Retired Moderator
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 1114
Own Kudos [?]: 4702 [0]
Given Kudos: 376
Send PM
Re: Set Theory! [#permalink] New post   07 Jun 2011, 08:06
bellcurve wrote:
I have a clearifying question about set theory formulas, if you all don't mind.

1. For 3 sets A, B, and C: P(AuBuC) = P(A) + P(B) + P(C) – P(AnB) – P(AnC) – P(BnC) + P(AnBnC)

2. No of persons in atleast one set = P(A) + P(B) + P(C) - P(AnB) - P(AnC) - P(BnC) + 2 P(AnBnC)

Why these two formulas are different? Isn't "at least in one set" equal to union of all (AuBuC)?

Thanks,
BC


I think first one is good for at least one person as well.

No idea where can we use the second formula.
User avatar
bellcurve
Manager
Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 63
Own Kudos [?]: 256 [0]
Given Kudos: 9
Send PM
Re: Set Theory! [#permalink] New post   07 Jun 2011, 09:29
Does anybody think differently?
User avatar
sudhir18n
Current Student
Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 356
Own Kudos [?]: 566 [0]
Given Kudos: 13
Send PM
Re: Set Theory! [#permalink] New post   07 Jun 2011, 09:47
P(A u B u C)= P(A) + P(B) + P(C) – P(A n B) – P(A n C) – P(B n C) + 2 P(A n B n C) - atleast one
User avatar
bellcurve
Manager
Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 63
Own Kudos [?]: 256 [0]
Given Kudos: 9
Send PM
Re: Set Theory! [#permalink] New post   07 Jun 2011, 11:32
sudhir18n, can you please clarify?

If I solve your equation using the equations above, I would get

P(A u B u C)= P(A n B n C)

Which is definatley not true. What am I missing here?
User avatar
sudhir18n
Current Student
Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 356
Own Kudos [?]: 566 [0]
Given Kudos: 13
Send PM
Re: Set Theory! [#permalink] New post   07 Jun 2011, 11:46
bellcurve wrote:
sudhir18n, can you please clarify?

If I solve your equation using the equations above, I would get

P(A u B u C)= P(A n B n C)

Which is definatley not true. What am I missing here?


use this
https://grockit.com/blog/gmat/2011/01/28 ... et-theory/
User avatar
bellcurve
Manager
Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 63
Own Kudos [?]: 256 [0]
Given Kudos: 9
Send PM
Re: Set Theory! [#permalink] New post   07 Jun 2011, 12:38
The link says the same thing. I have the formulas, its just that I am not sure why formula for P(AuBuC) is different than "at least one." Aren't those refering to the same things? It seems like, "at least one" is obtained by adding P(AnBnC) to P(AuBuC). What can be included in the "at least one" that can not be included in P(AuBuC)?
User avatar
bellcurve
Manager
Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 63
Own Kudos [?]: 256 [0]
Given Kudos: 9
Send PM
Re: Set Theory! [#permalink] New post   10 Jun 2011, 09:01
Can anybody shed some light?
User avatar
L
KarishmaB
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 14817
Own Kudos [?]: 64899 [0]
Given Kudos: 426
Location: Pune, India
Send PM
Re: Set Theory! [#permalink] New post   13 Jun 2011, 19:55
Expert Reply
bellcurve wrote:
Anybody?


I think that 'at least one' should be the same as union. But they seem to have something else in mind (I don't have the faintest clue what that is). In terms of the diagram, the area that corresponds to 'at least one set' according to them, doesn't represent anything.
You may want to ask them for clarification on their blog post.



Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Quantitative Questions Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
Re: Set Theory! [#permalink]
13 Jun 2011, 19:55
Moderator:
yashikaaggarwal
Senior Moderator - Masters Forum
3137 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne
Main navigation
GMAT Resources
Partners
MBA Resources
www.gmac.com|www.mba.com | | GMAT Club Rules | Terms and Conditions