Let H1,H2,H3,...,Hn be mutually exclusive and exhaustive events with P(Hi)>0;i=1,2,3,...,n. Let E be any other event with 0<P(E)<1.
STATEMENT-1: P(Hi∣E)>P(E∣Hi)⋅P(Hi) for i=1,2,3,...,n.
STATEMENT-2 n∑i=1P(Hi)=1.
A
Statement -1 is True, Statement-2 is True; Statement -2 is a correct explanation for Statement -1
No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!
B
Statement -1 is True, Statement -2 is True; Statement -2 is Not a correct explanation for Statement -1
Right on! Give the BNAT exam to get a 100% scholarship for BYJUS courses
C
Statement -1 is True, Statement -2 is False
No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!
D
Statement -1 is False, Statement -2 is True
No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!
Open in App
Solution
The correct option is A Statement -1 is True, Statement -2 is True; Statement -2 is Not a correct explanation for Statement -1 Statement1: If P(Hi∩E)=0 for some i, then P(HiE)=P(EHi)=0 If P(Hi∩E)≠0 for ∀i=1,2,...,n, then P(HiE)=P(Hi∩E)P(Hi)×P(Hi)P(E) =P(EHi)×P(Hi)P(E)>P(EHi).P(Hi)[∵0<P(E)<1] Hence, statement 1 may not always be true. Statement2: Clearly H1∪H2∪...∪Hn=S (Sample Space) ⇒P(H1)+P(H2)+...+P(Hn)=1