Best Response

I got 1/7. For those of you interested in the detailed calculation: Let P(A) = Probability of getting 3 heads Let P(B) = Probability of getting at least 1 head or conversely 1 - probability of getting no heads. (1-(1/2)^3)

P(A) = (1/2)^3 = 1/8 P(B) = (3c1)(1/2)^3 + (3c2)(1/2)^3 + (3c3)(1/2)^3 = 7/8 by binomial theorem

Bayes: P(A|B) = P(B|A)*P(A)/P(B) P(B|A) = 1 (given you have 3 heads, you have a 100% chance of getting at least 1 head P(A) = 1/8 P(B) = 7/8

P(A|B) = P(B|A)*P(A)/P(B) = 1 * (1/8) / (7/8) = 1/7 Boom.

"Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity"
 

We did 3 flips, let's call them flip 1, filp 2, and flip 3.

There are two possible interpretations of 'you got at least one heads' I think of:

  • The interrogator decided to tell me the result of one of the flips. It hapened to be flip x which hapens to be heads. -> Two remaining flips need to be heads in order to have 3 heads, both of them are independent of x, which mean we have a probability of 1/4 of having 3 heads: 1/2 for the first remaining flip multiplied by 1/2 for the second one.

  • The interrogator tells me 'you got at least one heads' as a genuine description of what he is seeing, so that I know which are the possible states. -> For each flip there are 2 outcomes, meaning there is a total of 8 (2 x 2 x 2) outcomes. The assertion of the interogator only means that one of outcomes is not possible (flip 1 is not head, flip 2 is not head, flip 3 is not head), there are 7 remaining possible outcomes and only one the 7 is (flip 1 is head, flip 2 is head, flip 3 is head). The probability of having 3 heads is thus 1/7.

If you want the interrogator to be clear you can have the following discussion with him: - Which flip are you telling me about? - The second one. (for example, it doesn't really matter). - Would you had told me about the outcome of the second flip even if it was not heads?

Yes -> 1/4 No -> 1/7

 
leolum:
We did 3 flips, let's call them flip 1, filp 2, and flip 3.

There are two possible interpretations of 'you got at least one heads' I think of: - The interrogator decided to tell me the result of one of the flips. It hapened to be flip x which hapens to be heads. -> Two remaining flips need to be heads in order to have 3 heads, both of them are independent of x, which mean we have a probability of 1/4 of having 3 heads: 1/2 for the first remaining flip multiplied by 1/2 for the second one. - The interrogator tells me 'you got at least one heads' as a genuine description of what he is seeing, so that I know which are the possible states. -> For each flip there are 2 outcomes, meaning there is a total of 8 (2 x 2 x 2) outcomes. The assertion of the interogator only means that one of outcomes is not possible (flip 1 is not head, flip 2 is not head, flip 3 is not head), there are 7 remaining possible outcomes and only one the 7 is (flip 1 is head, flip 2 is head, flip 3 is head). The probability of having 3 heads is thus 1/7.

If you want the interrogator to be clear you can have the following discussion with him: - Which flip are you telling me about? - The second one. (for example, it doesn't really matter). - Would you had told me about the outcome of the second flip even if it was not heads?

Yes -> 1/4 No -> 1/7

.

 

OK, we are given that one coin was heads. If we knew that the given head was the first toss, then the odds of all three being heads are 1/4, as explained above. If we knew that the given head was the second toss, then the odds of all three being heads are 1/4. If we knew that the given head was the third toss, then the odds of all three being heads are 1/4. Sure, we do not know which toss is the given head, but it does not matter. Therefore, if we know that one coin is heads, then the odds that the other two are heads are still 1/4 (1/2 x 1/2).

 

This is simply incorrect. You are over thinking it. There are 8 equiprobable sets of 3 coin flips, 7 of which have at least 1 H, and only 1 of the 7 is HHH. See ActuarialQuant's post for math details. It is essentially the same trick as the famous boy/girl problem.

 

I stand corrected, though am still trying to correct my original thought process, which still makes sense, though apparently wrong. Thanks.

 

Ut in qui eos ea consequuntur. Ut vero rerum omnis omnis ut quidem. Sit reprehenderit quo molestiae dicta temporibus et cupiditate. Enim necessitatibus incidunt voluptas ea laboriosam eos esse. Voluptatem enim dolores quaerat nihil veritatis repellat non. Aut odio libero vero. Sint ratione quia porro.

Mollitia ea delectus rem nostrum. Accusamus odio esse pariatur adipisci. Est qui dolorem tempora voluptas deleniti sint.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne

Career Advancement Opportunities

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. New 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (14) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (205) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (145) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”