An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications, Volume 1¶
Feller, W. (1968). An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications, Volume 1. Wiley.
Cited by¶
12 citations across 12 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Birthday Problem
- The birthday problem names a structural fact about finite namespaces under random filling: when N items are drawn uniformly at random (with replacement) from a set of K equally likely outcomes, the probability that some two of them coincide reaches one-half not at N ≈ K/2 — the answer naive intuition supplies — but at N of order √K (precisely, N ≈ √(2K ln 2)).
This sourceStandard derivation of the birthday problem: the probability that some pair among N uniform draws from K outcomes coincides reaches one-half at N of order √K (the 23-person / 365-day case), driven by the quadratic N(N−1)/2 pair count rather than the linear element count.
- The birthday problem names a structural fact about finite namespaces under random filling: when N items are drawn uniformly at random (with replacement) from a set of K equally likely outcomes, the probability that some two of them coincide reaches one-half not at N ≈ K/2 — the answer naive intuition supplies — but at N of order √K (precisely, N ≈ √(2K ln 2)).
- Central Limit Theorem
- Convolution
- The slide-flip-weight-sum operation computes $p_S(s) = \sum_k p_X(k)\, p_Y(s-k)$ — for each total $s$, slide $p_Y$ across $p_X$ and sum the products — which is exactly the discrete convolution $(p_X * p_Y)(s)$, yielding the familiar triangular distribution peaking at $7$.
This sourceDiscrete convolution of probability mass functions, including the triangular distribution of the sum of two fair dice.
- The slide-flip-weight-sum operation computes $p_S(s) = \sum_k p_X(k)\, p_Y(s-k)$ — for each total $s$, slide $p_Y$ across $p_X$ and sum the products — which is exactly the discrete convolution $(p_X * p_Y)(s)$, yielding the familiar triangular distribution peaking at $7$.
- Disjointness
- Contrast a near-miss that shows the identity-relativity and the danger of assuming separateness from mere difference: let \(C\) = {hearts} and \(D\) = {face cards}. \(C\) and \(D\) are clearly different collections, but they are not disjoint — the J, Q, K of hearts belong to both — so \(P(C \cup D) = P(C) + P(D) - P(C \cap D)\) requires subtracting the three shared cards, and naively adding would over-count.
This sourceStandard reference deriving additivity over disjoint events and the inclusion–exclusion correction P(A ∪ B) = P(A) + P(B) − P(A ∩ B) required when collections merely differ but in fact overlap. ISBN 9780471257080.
- Contrast a near-miss that shows the identity-relativity and the danger of assuming separateness from mere difference: let \(C\) = {hearts} and \(D\) = {face cards}. \(C\) and \(D\) are clearly different collections, but they are not disjoint — the J, Q, K of hearts belong to both — so \(P(C \cup D) = P(C) + P(D) - P(C \cap D)\) requires subtracting the three shared cards, and naively adding would over-count.
- Law of Large Numbers
- Where the defining integral diverges there is no limit object, and the averages are not approaching something slowly; they are approaching nothing. A dependence budget. Independence is the cheapest way to buy convergence, but the real requirement is that no fixed set of common factors move an unbounded number of terms together. A declared mode of convergence. In probability, almost surely, or in mean square; the choice decides whether the guarantee attaches to a sample size or to a trajectory. Asymptotic form with no built-in rate. The statement quantifies over n → ∞, so every error bar and sample-size calculation comes from a second assumption layered on top. No term-level constraint. Nothing is imposed on any observation, any run of observations, or their order of arrival; deviations already accumulated are never reversed, only divided by a growing number.
This sourceShows that the law constrains no individual trial and compensates no past deviation, that the absolute deviation of the count from expectation grows on the order of the square root of the trial count, and that the variance of the mean is the variance over n.
- Where the defining integral diverges there is no limit object, and the averages are not approaching something slowly; they are approaching nothing. A dependence budget. Independence is the cheapest way to buy convergence, but the real requirement is that no fixed set of common factors move an unbounded number of terms together. A declared mode of convergence. In probability, almost surely, or in mean square; the choice decides whether the guarantee attaches to a sample size or to a trajectory. Asymptotic form with no built-in rate. The statement quantifies over n → ∞, so every error bar and sample-size calculation comes from a second assumption layered on top. No term-level constraint. Nothing is imposed on any observation, any run of observations, or their order of arrival; deviations already accumulated are never reversed, only divided by a growing number.
- Partition
- The same machinery underlies stratified estimation and Bayesian updating.
This sourceStandard reference for the law of total probability, where a partition of the sample space into mutually exclusive, exhaustive events licenses the additive decomposition.
- The same machinery underlies stratified estimation and Bayesian updating.
- Probability
- Now consider event "sum is 8": the five pairs
(2,6), (3,5), (4,4), (5,3), (6,2), probability5/36 ≈ 0.139.P(sum = 8 | first = 4) = 1/6 ≈ 0.167(the pair(4, 4)), which differs from the marginal — these two events are dependent, and knowing the first die shifts the conditional probability, the canonical dice-space worked example Feller (1968) develops in detail in the foundational discrete-probability chapters.This sourceCanonical textbook of discrete probability; develops the dice-space, urn-model, and combinatorial worked examples that exhibit all six structural components (sample space, event structure, measure, conditioning, dependence, interpretation) of a probabilistic claim.
- Now consider event "sum is 8": the five pairs
- Random Walk
- The single most consequential fact the prime names is the scaling law of dispersion: because the increments are independent, their variances add while their means partly cancel, so the typical distance from the origin after \(n\) steps grows like \(\sqrt{n}\), not like \(n\).
This sourceStandard reference for the simple random walk: additive variances giving √n dispersion, the running-sum construction, and exact first-passage and recurrence results.
- The single most consequential fact the prime names is the scaling law of dispersion: because the increments are independent, their variances add while their means partly cancel, so the typical distance from the origin after \(n\) steps grows like \(\sqrt{n}\), not like \(n\).
- Risk Pooling
- Perfectly correlated risks cannot pool; they merely accumulate.
This sourceCanonical textbook of discrete probability; develops the dice-space, urn-model, and combinatorial worked examples that exhibit all six structural components (sample space, event structure, measure, conditioning, dependence, interpretation) of a probabilistic claim.
- Perfectly correlated risks cannot pool; they merely accumulate.
- Statistical Independence
- Not zero
correlation. Correlation captures only linear co-movement; a deterministic nonlinear relation (\(Y = X^2\)) can have exactly zero correlation while violating independence grossly.This sourceStandard reference for independence, the factorization of joint distributions, and worked examples (dice, the distinction from uncorrelatedness).
- Not zero
Domain-specific¶
Verification¶
This reference passed the adversarial substantiation pipeline: it was checked to exist and to support the claim it is attached to. See how references were verified.
Links previously used in the corpus¶
Before the registry existed this work was also linked 1 other way.
Registry ID ref:299df181154a · see in the full table