6 ms·
My hopes for this explanation were too high. I just tested it on my cooworkers. No luck. I reverted to suggesting to write a short simulation script to convince
by rho4 5y ago
My hopes for this explanation were too high. I just tested it on my cooworkers. No luck. I reverted to suggesting to write a short simulation script to convince themselves by experimental data.
- v-erne 5y agoI personally find the Generalized Monty Hall problem as unintuitive as the original one. But I belive that I found a batter way to make it intuitive (at least for people that have heard about classic and conditional probability). And it event worked on one of my friends :) If Your first choice was lucky and two goats remained in other gates than Monty does not change anything by showing You the goat in one of them (it't the same as if Monty selected random gate). Things becomes intresting if You was unlucky and selected Goat. Monty MUST show You the other goat (because there is only one available for him to select). And thus he introduces information to otherwise random selection (it stops beeing random). And by doing this he eliminates for You conditional possiblity of selecting second goat when You selected one in first round (and in this conditional scenariu swiching is sure bet which changes the overall odds to 2/3)