The Monty Hall Problem

Ken AshfordRandom Musings2 Comments

I’ve heard of this before, and I think I’ve finally figured it out.

Here, in a nutshell, is what logicians have called The Monty Hall Problem:

Suppose you are a contestant on a "Let’s Make A Deal" game show.  The host points to three doors.  Behind one door is a brand new car, he tells you.  There is a goat behind the other two doors.  He instructs you to pick a door.  You tell the host that you pick Door #1.

Then the host, who knows what is behind each door, opens one of the doors that you did NOT pick, say, Door #3.  Behind it is a goat.  He then asks you, "Do you want to switch your choice to Door #2?"

Are you better off switching your choice?

That is the Monty Hall problem, and if you are like most educated people, including collegate math professors, you would answer, "No."  You would reason, "The odds that I initially picked the correct door are one in 3.  Those odds don’t improve, even after one of the doors has revealed a goat behind it.  So I wouldn’t improve my chances by switching."

You would think that, but you would be wrong.

The Monty Hall Problem (also known as the "Monty Hall paradox") suggests that you would actually be better off switching your choice to Door #2.

It seems counterintuitive, but here’s why you are better off switching.

You are quite correct in that the odds of initially picking the correct door is one in three, and opening a losing door does not change those odds.  But here’s the thing.  Once the third door is revealed to be a goat, the odds of the other door — the one you didn’t pick — jump from 1/3 to 2/3 (because all the probabilities of each door must total one).  You are, therefore, better of switching.  Here’s how it looks in Venn diagram form:

Door #1 is picked.  The odds of it being correct is 1/3.  The odds of either Door #2 or Door #3 being correct is, collectively, 2/3:

200pxmonty_closed_doors

After Door #3 is revealed as a losing door, the odds of Door #2 being correct is now 2/3 (and the odds of Door #3 being correct is, of course, zero):

225pxmonty_open_door_chances

Therefore, you would be better off switching.

If that doesn’t help, perhaps this will.

Here’s a graphical representation of all the possible selections and outcomes.  You might find this helpful:

Monty_hall

Note that Scenario 1, 2, and 3 have an equal chance of happening: one-third.  But look closely: If the player chooses to switch, the player wins the car in the last two cases. A player choosing to stay with the initial choice wins in only the first case. Since in two out of three equally likely cases switching wins, the probability of winning by switching is 2/3. In other words, players who switch will win the car on average two times out of three.

Got it?

Now there are a lot of caveats and assumptions to this paradox.  One of them is the assumption that Monty Hall knows what is behind each door, and that he will always offer the player to switch doors, regardless of whether the player initially picked a winning door or not.  For a more detailed discussion, read here.

Just A Little Too Much Time On My Hands….

Ken AshfordPersonal1 Comment

Me as James Bond….

Me as Muhammad Ali….

Me as Sweeney Todd…

Me as Austin Powers….

Me as Brad Pitt escorting Angelina Jolie to the Golden Globes

And the MOST DISTURBING OF ALL…..

Me as Kate Moss in a Dior ad…

Bad Economic Times

Ken AshfordEconomy & Jobs & DeficitLeave a Comment

Payroll employment plummeted by 63,000 jobs last month, with the losses spread throughout a wide swath of the economy, not just construction and financial services.

From the Washington Post:

And in a particularly worrisome sign, temporary help services cut 27,600 jobs. Often, companies cut temporary workers before shedding permanent jobs, making that category a leading indicator for what is to come.

The online WSJ says it all:

Wsj_2

And gas prices?  Well, if you drive, you already know….

[By the way, the last story in the WSJ?  Ironic isn’t it?]

More On Delegate Counts: Some Myths

Ken AshfordElection 2008Leave a Comment

Some caveats worth remembering:

The Caucus Myth

For starters, forget about hard counting delegates from just about any caucus state. In many cases, including Iowa, delegates are not directly elected to the national convention. Instead, only delegates to in-state conventions are picked. And final choices on national delegates are not made until late spring, usually at statewide conventions.

Pledged But Not Bound

There is also a dirty secret about pledged delegates, those who are directly elected in primaries. They are “pledged,” but not all are “bound.” Under Democratic Party rules they do not have to vote for the candidate chosen by primary voters (although some states bind them by statute for at least the first convention ballot). Sure, they are bound by conscience — but don’t forget, many delegates are politicians whose conscience might not be their guiding light if circumstances fundamentally change by convention time.

Super Wild Cards

And then there are the near-800 super delegates — unelected, unbound and unlikely to present profiles in courage when the going gets tough. Around 75 of them have not even been picked yet, perhaps the ultimate wild card in this unpredictable campaign.

Of course, these caveats (and many others) are too numerous to mention when the news media reports “hard counts” of Democratic delegates. But at a minimum we should be calling these counts “estimates” only.

At least when we report economic numbers we usually call them “indicators.” It is time for such modesty in Democratic delegate counting — just a slight nod at least to the fact that in uncharted waters like this we really don’t know anything for sure.

The Weirdest Cover Evah

Ken AshfordPopular CultureLeave a Comment

You have to be a certain age to appreciate the bizarreness of this cover. 

The singers are Gary Numan ("Cars") and Leo Sayer ("Dream Weaver").  The song is "On Broadway".

My head explodes.

Meanwhile Back East…

Ken AshfordDisastersLeave a Comment

BildesnowRoofs are collapsing in New England.  It’s so bad that the New York Times has taken notice:

LACONIA, N.H. — It has been a great winter for skiers in central and northern New England, but the heavy snowfall has become a nightmare for municipal budgets and the owners of dozens of buildings whose roofs have collapsed.

A mill complex under renovation in Laconia, a building at a summer camp in Concord, N.H., and a Wal-Mart distribution center in Lewiston, Me., are among the buildings whose roofs have collapsed in the last three days under the weight of snow made denser by rain and ice from a storm that swept through this week. Schools across the region have closed because of weakened roofs.

“I’ve lived here for years, and I’ve never seen damage like this,” said the Rev. Shirley Marcroft, who with her husband, Dave, is pastor of New Life Church in Campton, N.H. The church’s roof caved in and part of the building collapsed Wednesday night because of the snow.

Ms. Marcroft said the food pantry lost $4,000 worth of provisions she bought last week.

And from today’s Concord Monitor:

Two more buildings have added to the rash of roof collapses in Concord in the past month. Most of a multi-purpose building at Camp Spaulding was flattened to the ground under the weight of snow and ice, and a garage on South Main Street partially collapsed.

Two families were evacuated for the night from abutting apartments while engineers assessed the damage

Paul Smith Elementary School in Franklin also was closed yesterday after custodians noticed part of the roof sagging, the Associated Press reported.

Concord Fire Marshal Sean Toomey warned that snow becomes denser as it melts. While it may look as if there is less on a roof, the amount there may be heavier, he said.

The roof on a large garage attached to the back of 59 S. Main St. partially collapsed yesterday evening under more than 2 feet of snow. The storefront of the building is home to Main Street Payday Advance. There are two apartments in back. Electricity was cut off, and the building closed for the night.

I remember some pretty sever winters when I was a kid in Concord, but as I got older, the winters got milder.  But even when the snows were bad and heavy, I don’t think I recall hearing things being this bad.

The Experience Of Getting Arrested

Ken AshfordCrimeLeave a Comment

A blogger at Gawker, who has never been in trouble with the law, took a swig from a beer (in a paper bag) while in the subway Tuesday night.  A crime, but not (so she thought) one that the NYPD would care too much about.  She was wrong.  After 24 hours being held in two jails, and after night court in which all charges were dropped, she penned her adventures in this interesting read: What I Learned In Jail Last Night

Where I Come Down On The Obama/Clinton “Fighting”

Ken AshfordElection 2008Leave a Comment

There’s a lot of debate about whether the fight between Clinton and Obama is good for the Democratic Party and/or whether or not it will hurt the Democratic nominee (whoever it is) in the general election.  Many on the left have expressed concern that the infighting between Clinton and Obama will result in a "damaged" candidate for the general election, once one is chosen.  Republicans, of course, are hoping this will be the case.

I’m in a different camp.  While I prefer Obama, I think Hillary Clinton would make an excellent and capable President.  So, come November, I would happily pull the lever for her.

And as for the infighting, I don’t think it is a bad thing.  First of all, it’s not that ugly.  While they are obviously doing what they can to attack each other, and will probably step up the "attacks" in the weeks to come, so far it hasn’t struck me as overtly negative or unfair.  Of course, it’s all politics, so the bar for what counts as "unfairness" is pretty high.  But candidates and their campaigns can — and should — get away with a lot.  This isn’t nerfball.

But except at the extreme margins (which tend to get emphasized by the media), both Obama and Clinton seem to be waging their battles with a healthy modicum of respect and dignity, and even wit and humor.   Their most difficult tasks will be to keep their surrogates in line.

Essentially, what is happening now is test of a test of each candidate’s composure, character, and determination to attain the position to which they are applying.  They both are qualified; they both are "deserving"; and either one would excel in that position.

So the supposed "infighting" between the two is not bad for the party; if anything, it is good.  It tests them.  And come November, the supporters of the loser will rally around the nominee.

It’s all good.

AS AN ASIDE:  I don’t think a lot of things that Hillary is saying is helpful.  Lately, she’s been touting McCain’s experience on a number of different issues, presumably as a way to distinguish McCain and Obama.  The problem is: it looks like she’s praising McCain.  It makes me want to slap her and say, "He’s on the other side!"

Case in point:

In a Cabinet-style setting, surrounded by retired military leaders, Sen. Hillary Clinton said the public should ask whether Democratic presidential rival Barack Obama has met the criteria needed to become the nation’s commander in chief.

“I think that since we now know Sen. (John) McCain will be the nominee for the Republican Party, national security will be front and center in this election. We all know that. And I think it’s imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold,” the New York senator told reporters crowded into an infant’s bedroom-sized hotel conference room in Washington.

“I believe that I’ve done that. Certainly, Sen. McCain has done that and you’ll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy,” she said.

Is that a good tactic?  Yes, Hillary.  Both you and John McCain, the people you claim have "experience", voted for the Iraq War, something which two-thirds of all Americans (and 80% of Democrats) oppose!  How does placing you side-by-side with McCain make you look good, Hillary?

Joe Sudbay of AmericaBlog wonders exactly what "threshhold" did Clinton cross to become cammander-in-chief (does sleeping with Bill count?) and comments:

This is getting ridiculous. It’s one thing for Clinton to build herself up. But constantly comparing herself to McCain, constantly praising McCain over the man who may be our candidate in the fall, is beyond annoying. Is that supposed to make her appear stronger? If she wants that comparison, we’ll make it. On the most important foreign policy decision of this decade, on the biggest foreign policy disaster in recent American history, Hillary Clinton and John McCain made the wrong call – both sided with George Bush and voted for the Iraq war. If this is the judgment they would bring to the threshold of the Oval Office, if these are the decisions Hillary and McCain are going to be making when the phone rings at 3AM, who needs either one of them.

Yup.

J Alter: Clinton’s “Big Win” On Tuesday Not So Big

Ken AshfordElection 2008Leave a Comment

Lot of good stuff here:

Hillary Clinton won big victories Tuesday night in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island. But she’s now even further behind in the race for the Democratic nomination. How could that be? Math. It’s relentless.

To beat Barack Obama among pledged delegates, Clinton now needs even bigger margins in the 12 remaining primaries than she needed when I ran the numbers on Monday—an average of 23 points, which is more than double what she received in Ohio.

Superdelegates won’t help Clinton if she cannot erase Obama’s lead among pledged delegates, which now stands at roughly 134. Caucus results from Texas aren’t complete, but Clinton will probably net about 10 delegates out of March 4. That’s 10 down, 134 to go. Good luck.

I’ve asked several prominent uncommitted superdelegates if there’s any chance they would reverse the will of Democratic voters. They all say no. It would shatter young people and destroy the party.

Clinton’s only hope lies in the popular vote—a yardstick on which she now trails Obama by about 600,000 votes. Should she end the primary season in June with a lead in popular votes, she could get a hearing from uncommitted superdelegates for all the other arguments that she would make a stronger nominee (wins the big states, etc.). If she loses both the pledged delegate count and the popular vote, no argument will cause the superdelegates to disenfranchise millions of Democratic voters. It will be over.

Emphasis mine.

Student Body President Of UNC-Chapel Hill Shot Dead

Ken AshfordBreaking NewsLeave a Comment

Breaking news:

25347311204826709220x165Chapel Hill police have identified a woman found dead near the University of North Carolina campus Wednesday morning as the university’s student body president.

Eve Carson, 22, a UNC senior and biology major, was found shot multiple times in the head about a half-mile from campus.

Police have also issued a bulletin for Carson’s blue 2005 Toyota Highlander with Georgia license plate AIV-6690.

Officers spent most of Wednesday and Thursday morning following up and searching for leads in the case. At a news conference Thursday, they called it a "fairly random crime."

Anyone with information about case is asked to call the Chapel Hill Police Department at 919-968-27600.

University Chancellor James Moeser has scheduled a memorial at 3 p.m. at Polk Place on campus, and police will hold another news conference at 5:30 p.m.

RELATED:  Story from yesterday, before she had been identified…

Also, her student government profile and candidate page

Clinton Or Obama: They Both Beat McCain

Ken AshfordElection 2008Leave a Comment

ABC/Washington Post Poll:

McCain is losing three in 10 conservatives to either Obama or Clinton, far more than he likely could stand to see slip away. Democratic presidential candidates since 1988 have won 15 to 20 percent of conservatives, not 30 percent.

That poses a potentially difficult straddle for McCain – reassuring conservatives on his right without alienating moderates and independents in the center. Currently many more Americans call Obama "about right" ideologically, 56 percent, than McCain, 41 percent….

At the same time, Obama’s race still rates as a slight net positive for him, as does Clinton’s sex for her, compared with the net negative of McCain’s age. Americans by a 23-point margin are less enthusiastic about McCain given the fact that he’d be the oldest first-term president; by an 8-point margin, they’re more enthusiastic about Obama given that he’d be the first African-American president. Clinton’s net positive on being the first woman president is about the same, 9 points.

Obama’s race is a net positive for Democrats by 20 points and independents by a slight 5 points, negative for Republicans by 5. Clinton’s sex is a net positive for Democrats and independents, negative for Republicans. McCain’s age, by contrast, is a net negative across party lines, although to varying degrees….

Despite reduced violence in Iraq, 63 percent of Americans continue to say that given its costs vs. benefits the war was not worth fighting. And fewer than half, 43 percent, are persuaded the United States is making significant progress restoring civil order there…. among independents only a third say it was worth fighting, and just 40 percent see significant progress on civil order….

Only 47 percent of conservatives, and 52 percent of Republicans, pick McCain as better suited in terms of his personality and temperament.

The fact that Obama beats McCain by a greater margin than Hillary beating McCain?  That’s gotta be good news for the Obama team, who has to convince superdelegates why he is the better nominee than Clinton.