Unit 04 — How to Solve Anything

The heaviest-scoring unit in the portion. Six topics, each opening with how to recognise that a question belongs to it — which matters more here than anywhere else, because the whole unit is four distributions that look alike until you know the tells — then the master method, then questions worked in full, then every exercise Levin sets, solved, with the page number against each one.

TOPICS: 6 TEXTBOOK: LEVIN CH. 5, §5.1–§5.7, pp. 210–257 EXAM WEIGHT: Q1 (b) POISSON — 4 MARKS  ·  Q2 (b) NORMAL — 5 MARKS PAIRS WITH: Unit 04 notes
◆ Why this unit first

Of the 31 in-scope marks, 9 sit in this unit — more than any other. Both papers put a Poisson question in Q1 (b) and a normal distribution question in Q2 (b), and both times the shape was identical: "the average is λ per interval, find P(X = 0) or P(X ≥ 1)" and "find an interval probability, then a one-tail probability".

Both Poisson versions solved →  ·  Both normal versions solved →

THE ONE DECISION THAT DECIDES THE WHOLE UNIT

Every question in Unit 4 is answered by picking the right distribution and then substituting. Picking wrong costs the entire question, so the choice is worth more than the arithmetic:

Binomial vs Poisson vs Normal
Binomial: Fixed \(n\) trials, 2 outcomes \(\to P(r) = \binom{n}{r} p^r q^{n-r}\)
Poisson: Rate \(\lambda\) per interval (no fixed \(n\)) \(\to P(x) = \frac{\lambda^x e^{-\lambda}}{x!}\)
Normal: Continuous measurement with \(\mu, \sigma \to z = \frac{x - \mu}{\sigma}\)
Bridges / Approximations
Poisson approx: \(n \ge 20, p \le 0.05 \implies \lambda = np\)
Normal approx: \(np \ge 5, nq \ge 5 \implies \mu = np, \sigma = \sqrt{npq}\) (requires \(\pm 0.5\) continuity correction)

Topic 6 is nothing but this diagram, drilled. If you can run it in ten seconds you have already earned the method marks on Q1 (b) and Q2 (b).

Topic 1 of 6 · Levin §5.1–§5.3 · pp. 210–222 · 15 textbook questions

Random Variables, Probability Distributions and Expected Value

The foundation the other five topics stand on. A probability distribution is a frequency distribution whose frequencies have been divided by the total, and the expected value is a grouped mean where the weights are probabilities instead of counts — so if you can do Unit 1's \(\Sigma fx/\Sigma f\), you can already do \(\Sigma x\,P(x)\).

How to know a question belongs to this topic
It asks you to
Build a table of outcomes against probabilities, or take a table you were given and collapse it to one number — the long-run average.
Give-away words
expected value expected number of… construct a probability distribution on average, should he… is it worth… which should he choose E(X)
What it hands you
A short list of outcomes with probabilities (or frequencies you must convert to probabilities first). Crucially, no \(n\), no \(p\), no \(\lambda\), no \(\mu\) and \(\sigma\) — if those appear, you are in Topics 2–5, not here.
The give-away structure
The probabilities are listed one by one and must sum to 1.00. A binomial or Poisson question never lists probabilities — it gives you a rule for generating them.
What a full answer contains
The table (outcome · probability · outcome × probability), the total, and then the decision sentence — "the expected cost is $77, which is less than the $100 warranty, so he should not buy it". The decision is usually the last mark.
Don't confuse it with
If the question gives you…then it is…
a fixed number of trials \(n\) and a success probability \(p\)Topic 2 — binomial
an average rate "per hour / per page / per 1,000"Topic 3 — Poisson
a mean and a standard deviation of a measured quantityTopic 4 — normal
an explicit list of outcomes and their probabilitiesHere
Master Method — Topic 1
Formula bank
Expected value
(discrete)
\[ E(X) = \mu = \sum x_i\,P(x_i) \]
Frequency →
probability
\[ P(x_i) = \frac{f_i}{\Sigma f} \qquad\text{and always } \sum P(x_i) = 1.00 \]
Variance of a
random variable
\[ \sigma^2 = \sum (x_i-\mu)^2 P(x_i) = \sum x_i^2 P(x_i) - \mu^2 \]
Expected value
from raw counts
\[ E(X) = \frac{\text{total of all observations}}{\text{number of periods}} \]

The last one is not a separate formula — it is what \(\Sigma x P(x)\) collapses to when every period is equally likely. Two of Levin's exercises (5-9, 5-10) are exactly that.

The routine
  1. List the outcomes in a column. If you were given frequencies, divide by the total to get probabilities and check they sum to 1.00.
  2. Build the \(x\cdot P(x)\) column. Row by row.
  3. Total it. That total is \(E(X)\). Write the unit: rupees, accidents per month, cars.
  4. Answer the business question. Compare \(E(X)\) against the threshold in the question — the price, the policy limit, the rival option — and state the decision.
  5. Say what "expected" means if there is a spare line: it is a long-run average, not a prediction of any single outcome. An expected 7.75 accidents a month never actually happens in a month.
Traps
  • Averaging the outcomes instead of weighting them. \(E(X)\) is not the mean of the \(x\) column; each \(x\) is weighted by its own probability.
  • Forgetting the decision. Levin's expected-value exercises almost all end in "should he?" — a bare number scores half.
  • Probabilities that do not sum to 1. Always check. If they do not, you have misread a row.
  • Treating \(E(X)\) as achievable. "Expected 5.28" when the outcomes are 2, 4, 6, 8… is fine — an expected value need not be a possible outcome.
Textbook bank — every Levin exercise on this topic §5.1 probability distributions · §5.2 random variables & expected value · §5.3 expected value in decision making
15 exercises Levin §5.1 p. 210 · §5.2 p. 213 · §5.3 p. 218
5-2Build a distributionLevin Ex. 5-2 · p. 211

Q. Construct a table and a graph of the probability distribution of the total number of dots showing when two dice are tossed.

Why: every one of the 36 ordered pairs is equally likely, so \(P(\text{sum}) = \dfrac{\text{number of pairs giving that sum}}{36}\) — a classical-probability count, then a table.
Sum x23456789101112
Ways12345654321
P(x)1/362/363/364/365/366/365/364/363/362/361/36
AnswerThe probabilities sum to \(36/36 = 1.00\) ✓. The graph is a symmetric triangle peaking at 7. \(E(X) = \Sigma xP(x) = \mathbf{7}\) — which you can also see from the symmetry without computing.
5-3TheoryLevin Ex. 5-3 · p. 211

Q. Which of these statements about probability distributions are correct? (a) It provides information about the long-run or expected frequency of each outcome. (b) Its graph has the possible outcomes marked on the horizontal axis. (c) It lists the probabilities that each outcome is random. (d) It is always constructed from a set of observed frequencies like a frequency distribution. (e) It may be based on subjective estimates of the likelihood of certain outcomes.

Why: test each statement against the definition — a probability distribution is a listing of all outcomes of an experiment with the probability of each, however those probabilities were arrived at.
Answer (a) Correct — that is precisely what it describes.
(b) Correct — outcomes on the horizontal axis, probability on the vertical.
(c) Incorrect — meaningless wording. It lists the probability that each outcome occurs, not that an outcome "is random".
(d) Incorrect — the word always kills it. A distribution can be built a priori from theory (the two dice in 5-2 needed no observation at all).
(e) Correct — subjective probabilities are one of the three legitimate ways of assigning probability (Unit 3, Concept 1).
5-4Build a distributionLevin Ex. 5-4 · p. 211

Q. Southport Autos offers four luxury option combinations. 1. V-8 · sun roof · halogen headlights   2. Leather · power locks · cassette deck   3. Halogen · V-8 · leather   4. Cassette deck · V-8 · power locks. Combinations 2, 3 and 4 are equally likely; combination 1 is twice as likely as any of these. (a) What is the probability a customer orders a car with a V-8 engine? (b) Two customers order — construct the probability distribution of the number of V-8 engines ordered.

Why: "twice as likely" is a ratio, so set the smallest probability to \(k\), write the others as multiples, and force the total to 1. Part (b) is then two independent trials with the same success probability — a binomial with \(n=2\).
Why we do itWhat to write
Turn the ratio into algebra: three combinations at \(k\), one at \(2k\), summing to 1.
\[ 2k+k+k+k = 5k = 1 \;\Rightarrow\; k = 0.2 \] \(P_1=0.4,\; P_2=P_3=P_4=0.2\)
(a) V-8 appears in combinations 1, 3 and 4. These are mutually exclusive, so add.
\[ P(\text{V-8}) = 0.4+0.2+0.2 = \mathbf{0.8} \]
(b) Two customers choose independently, each with \(p=0.8\) — that is a binomial with \(n=2\).
\[ P(X=0)=(0.2)^2=0.04 \] \[ P(X=1)=2(0.8)(0.2)=0.32 \] \[ P(X=2)=(0.8)^2=0.64 \]
Check and interpret.
\(0.04+0.32+0.64 = 1.00\) ✓   \(E(X)=np=1.6\) V-8s per two customers — which is why Padmanabha is worried about the V-8 shortage.
5-5Build a distributionLevin Ex. 5-5 · p. 212

Q. Ritwik believes the Auto King has a 70% chance of completely replacing the Secretariat's pool of 500 cars; one chance in five that only half the 500 are replaced; and one chance in 10 that all are replaced and the pool is expanded by 20%. Construct a table and graph of the probability distribution of sales.

Why: the question gives probabilities in three different formats — a percentage, "one chance in five", "one chance in 10". Convert all three to decimals first, then translate each scenario into a number of cars.
Why we do itWhat to write
Standardise the probabilities and check they close.
\(0.70,\;\; \tfrac{1}{5}=0.20,\;\; \tfrac{1}{10}=0.10\)  →  sum \(=1.00\) ✓
Translate each scenario into units sold.
Replace all: 500. Replace half: \(0.5(500)=\)250. All plus 20% expansion: \(500(1.20)=\)600.
Pair them up, in ascending order of sales.
\[ P(250)=0.20,\quad P(500)=0.70,\quad P(600)=0.10 \] \[ E(X)=250(0.2)+500(0.7)+600(0.1)=\mathbf{460 \text{ cars}} \]
Note: the graph is three vertical spikes at 250, 500 and 600 — not a curve. A discrete distribution is drawn as spikes or bars, never joined up.
5-6Frequency → probability → E(X)Levin Ex. 5-6 · p. 216

Q. Construct a probability distribution from the frequency distribution below, then (a) draw its graph and (b) compute the expected value of the outcome.

Outcome2468101215
Frequency24221612731
Why: this is the bridge from Unit 1 to Unit 4. Dividing every frequency by the total turns a frequency distribution into a probability distribution, and \(\Sigma fx/\Sigma f\) becomes \(\Sigma xP(x)\) — the same arithmetic under a new name.
Why we do itWhat to write
Total the frequencies — every probability is divided by this.
\[ \Sigma f = 24+22+16+12+7+3+1 = 85 \]
Divide each frequency by 85.
\[ P(x) = 0.2824,\;0.2588,\;0.1882,\;0.1412,\;0.0824,\;0.0353,\;0.0118 \] sum \(= 1.0000\) ✓
Rather than multiplying seven decimals, use \(\Sigma fx/\Sigma f\) — identical result, far less arithmetic.
\[ \Sigma fx = 48+88+96+96+70+36+15 = 449 \]
Divide.
\[ E(X) = \frac{449}{85} = \mathbf{5.28} \]
(a) The graph is seven spikes at 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15 with heights equal to the probabilities — a right-skewed shape, which is why \(E(X)=5.28\) sits above the middle outcome. Note 5.28 is not one of the possible outcomes, and that is perfectly normal for an expected value.
5-7Read a graphLevin Ex. 5-7 · p. 216

Q. From the graph of a probability distribution with spikes at 8,000 → 0.05; 9,000 → 0.15; 10,000 → 0.25; 11,000 → 0.30; 12,000 → 0.20; 13,000 → 0.05: (a) construct the table, (b) find the expected value.

Why: reading a distribution off a graph is the reverse of drawing one — read each spike height as a probability, and the first check is always whether they total 1.00.
Why we do itWhat to write
Check the heights close to 1 — if they do not, you have misread a spike.
\(0.05+0.15+0.25+0.30+0.20+0.05 = 1.00\) ✓
Build \(x\,P(x)\) row by row.
\[ 400+1350+2500+3300+2400+650 \]
Total.
\[ E(X) = \mathbf{10{,}600} \]
5-8Expected value → decisionLevin Ex. 5-8 · p. 216

Q. Bill Johnson bought a $300 VCR and can buy a 5-year extended warranty for $100. He believes maintenance expenses over the next five years will be:

Expense ($)050100150200250300
Probability0.350.250.150.100.080.050.02

Find the expected value of the anticipated maintenance costs. Should Bill pay $100 for the warranty?

Why: the classic "is the insurance worth it?" question. Compute what the risk costs on average, then compare with the price of removing it. The comparison is the answer.
Why we do itWhat to write
Check the probabilities close.
\(0.35+0.25+0.15+0.10+0.08+0.05+0.02 = 1.00\) ✓
Build the \(x\,P(x)\) column. The 0 row contributes nothing but must still be listed.
\[ 0 + 12.5 + 15 + 15 + 16 + 12.5 + 6 \]
Total.
\[ E(\text{cost}) = \mathbf{\$77.00} \]
Compare with the price and state the decision — this is the mark.
No, he should not buy it. The warranty costs $100 to avoid an expected cost of only $77, so on average it loses him $23.
The nuance worth one extra line: expected value is a long-run average. A risk-averse buyer might still pay $100 to cap a possible $300 loss — insurance is normally priced above its expected payout, and people buy it anyway. Saying this shows you understand what \(E(X)\) does and does not decide.
5-9E(X) from raw countsLevin Ex. 5-9 · p. 216

Q. Raj Gandhi must decide whether to install a traffic light. Accidents at the intersection:

YearJFMAMJJASOND
1995108106912210100710
199612978437148884

SHA policy is to install a light where the monthly expected number of accidents exceeds 7. Should Raj recommend installation?

Why: every month is equally likely, so building a probability column would put \(1/24\) against all 24 values — the weighted sum collapses to the plain average. Total and divide.
Why we do itWhat to write
Total each year separately — it halves the chance of an addition slip and gives a cross-check.
1995: \(10{+}8{+}10{+}6{+}9{+}12{+}2{+}10{+}10{+}0{+}7{+}10 = 94\)
1996: \(12{+}9{+}7{+}8{+}4{+}3{+}7{+}14{+}8{+}8{+}8{+}4 = 92\)
Combine over all 24 months.
\[ E(X) = \frac{94+92}{24} = \frac{186}{24} = \mathbf{7.75 \text{ accidents per month}} \]
Compare with the policy threshold and answer the question asked.
\(7.75 > 7\), so yes — Raj should recommend the traffic light.
5-10Compare two E(X)Levin Ex. 5-10 · p. 217

Q. Ankit Desai will investigate whichever division loses more first-class couriers per month on average — trucking or air, but not both.

Lost fromJFMAMJJASOND
Truck452321354701
Airplane560213424740
Why: same denominator (12 months) for both, so you can compare the totals directly and only divide at the end.
Why we do itWhat to write
Total each row.
Truck: \(4{+}5{+}2{+}3{+}2{+}1{+}3{+}5{+}4{+}7{+}0{+}1 = 37\)
Airplane: \(5{+}6{+}0{+}2{+}1{+}3{+}4{+}2{+}4{+}7{+}4{+}0 = 38\)
Divide by 12 to get the monthly expectation.
\[ E(\text{truck}) = \tfrac{37}{12} = 3.08 \qquad E(\text{air}) = \tfrac{38}{12} = 3.17 \]
Answer the question — and be honest about how small the gap is.
He should investigate the air division (3.17 vs 3.08). But the difference is one courier over a whole year — a decision this close should not really be made on expected value alone.
That last sentence is the discriminator. Anyone can total two rows; noticing that the criterion barely separates the two divisions is the managerial judgement the question is fishing for.
5-11E(X) → decisionLevin Ex. 5-11 · p. 221

Q. Each hockey ticket costs ₹5 to print and sells for ₹25; unsold tickets are discarded. Estimated sales: 25,000 (p = 0.10), 40,000 (0.30), 55,000 (0.45), 70,000 (0.15). How many tickets should management print?

Why: you cannot just print the expected number sold, because the payoff is asymmetric — an unsold ticket loses ₹5 but an unmet buyer loses ₹20 of margin. So evaluate the expected profit of each candidate print run and pick the largest.
Why we do itWhat to write
Note the expected demand first — it is the number most students print, and it is wrong.
\[ E(\text{demand}) = 25000(0.1)+40000(0.3)+55000(0.45)+70000(0.15) = 49{,}750 \]
Set up the profit rule. You only ever sell \(\min(\text{printed},\text{demand})\), but you pay to print all of them.
\[ \text{Profit} = 25\min(Q,D) - 5Q \]
Evaluate the expected profit at each of the four candidate quantities.
\(Q=25{,}000:\) ₹5,00,000
\(Q=40{,}000:\) ₹7,62,500
\(Q=55{,}000:\) ₹9,12,500
\(Q=70{,}000:\) ₹8,93,750
Pick the maximum and justify it in business terms.
Print 55,000 tickets — expected profit ₹9,12,500. Printing to expected demand (49,750) or to the maximum (70,000) both earn less: the margin lost on an unsold ticket (₹5) is far smaller than the margin lost on a customer turned away (₹20), so it pays to print above expected demand — but not to the maximum.
5-12Expected loss / marginal analysisLevin Ex. 5-12 · p. 222

Q. Airport Rent-a-Car rents an economy car for ₹35/day, buys cars at ₹6,300, operates 312 days a year, has variable cost ₹2.50 per car per day, and recovers 50% of cost on resale after a year. Daily demand: 13 (0.08), 14 (0.15), 15 (0.22), 16 (0.25), 17 (0.21), 18 (0.09). Use the expected-loss method to find the optimal number of cars to buy.

Why: the same asymmetry as 5-11 but over a year. Marginal analysis asks one question per extra car: is the chance it gets used big enough to justify the loss if it does not?
Why we do itWhat to write
Marginal profit — what one more car earns if demand does reach it, over the full year.
\[ MP = (35 - 2.50)\times 312 = ₹10{,}140 \]
Marginal loss — what one more car costs if it is never rented: the unrecovered half of its price.
\[ ML = 6{,}300 - 0.5(6{,}300) = ₹3{,}150 \]
The break-even probability: stock another car while the chance of needing it exceeds this.
\[ p^* = \frac{ML}{MP+ML} = \frac{3{,}150}{13{,}290} = \mathbf{0.237} \]
Build the "demand at least this many" column and compare each with \(p^*\).
\(P(D\ge13)=1.00\) ✓ · \(P(D\ge14)=0.92\) ✓ · \(P(D\ge15)=0.77\) ✓ · \(P(D\ge16)=0.55\) ✓ · \(P(D\ge17)=0.30\) ✓ · \(P(D\ge18)=0.09\) ✗
Stop at the last car whose probability still clears \(p^*\).
Buy 17 cars. The 18th fails the test (0.09 < 0.237), the 17th passes (0.30 ≥ 0.237). Note this is above expected demand of 15.63 — again because being short is far more expensive than being idle.
Scope note: marginal analysis is Levin §5.3 and sits at the edge of the mid-term syllabus, which names only "random variables and expected value" for this unit. Worth understanding the logic — stock while P(needed) > ML/(MP+ML) — but it has never been examined in the two papers on file.
SC 5-1Frequency → probabilityLevin SC 5-1 · p. 217

Q. Outcomes 102, 105, 108, 111, 114, 117 occurred with frequencies 10, 20, 45, 15, 20, 15. Draw the probability distribution and find the expected outcome.

Why: identical to 5-6 — divide by the total, then weight.
Total, then probabilities.
\(\Sigma f = 125\) → \(P = 0.08,\,0.16,\,0.36,\,0.12,\,0.16,\,0.12\) (sum 1.00 ✓)
Weight and total.
\[ 8.16+16.80+38.88+13.32+18.24+14.04 = \mathbf{109.44} \]
Matches Levin's printed answer of 109.44 exactly.
SC 5-2E(X) → decisionLevin SC 5-2 · p. 216

Q. Dharmendra buys a stock whenever the expected rate of return exceeds 10%. A ₹150 stock has returns 0 (p = 0.20), 10 (0.25), 15 (0.30), 25 (0.15), 50 (0.10). Will he buy?

Why: the threshold is a percentage but the returns are in rupees — so convert the threshold to rupees before comparing, or you will compare 15.75 against 10 and get the right answer for the wrong reason.
Expected return in rupees.
\[ E(R)=0+2.50+4.50+3.75+5.00 = ₹15.75 \]
Convert the 10% rule into rupees on a ₹150 purchase, then compare.
\(10\%\) of ₹150 \(= ₹15.00\). Since \(₹15.75 > ₹15.00\), yes — he will purchase the stock (expected return 10.5%).
SC 5-3Expected lossLevin SC 5-3 · p. 221

Q. Mario sells 1–4 "everything but" pizzas a night. Each costs $7 to prepare and sells for $12; unsold pizzas are thrown out, and each pizza ordered but undeliverable costs $5 in lost future business. Demand: 1 (0.40), 2 (0.30), 3 (0.20), 4 (0.10). How many should he stock to minimise expected loss?

Why: build a loss table — every combination of "stocked" against "demanded" — then weight each row by the demand probabilities. Two kinds of loss: overstock costs the $7 preparation, understock costs the $5 goodwill.
Why we do itWhat to write
Name the two unit losses. Overstocking wastes the whole $7 cost; understocking forfeits $5 of future business per pizza.
Overstock loss = $7 per unsold pizza. Understock loss = $5 per unmet order.
Build the loss table: rows = stocked, columns = demanded.
Stock 1: 0, 5, 10, 15  ·  Stock 2: 7, 0, 5, 10
Stock 3: 14, 7, 0, 5  ·  Stock 4: 21, 14, 7, 0
Weight each row by P(demand) = 0.4, 0.3, 0.2, 0.1 and total.
Stock 1: \(0+1.5+2.0+1.5 = 5.0\)
Stock 2: \(2.8+0+1.0+1.0 = \mathbf{4.8}\)
Stock 3: \(5.6+2.1+0+0.5 = 8.2\)
Stock 4: \(8.4+4.2+1.4+0 = 14.0\)
Pick the smallest expected loss.
Mario should stock two "everything but" pizzas a night — expected loss $4.80, the minimum.
Note on Levin's printed table: the book's loss figures use $10/$20/$30 in the first row, which follow from treating the overstock loss as the full $7 cost and the understock loss as the $5 lost margin in a slightly different accounting. The method — build a loss table, weight by demand probability, take the minimum — is identical, and the book's answer is also stock 2.
5-1Read a graphLevin Ex. 5-1 · p. 210

Q. From a graph of a probability distribution over the outcomes 1–10, construct the corresponding table.

Why: the reverse of drawing one. Read each spike height off the vertical axis, pair it with its outcome, and verify the total.
MethodRead the height of the spike above each outcome on the vertical (probability) axis; tabulate as two rows, Outcome and P(outcome); then check \(\Sigma P = 1.00\). If your readings do not total 1.00 you have misread a spike — that check is the only self-verification available on a graph-reading question, so always write it down.
Topic 2 of 6 · Levin §5.4 · pp. 228–230 · 11 textbook questions + 4 exam-shaped

The Binomial Distribution

The distribution of "how many successes in a fixed number of tries". Everything about it follows from four conditions, and almost every mistake made on it is a failure to translate the English phrase — more than two, at least one, no more than four — into the right set of \(r\) values before any arithmetic starts.

How to know a question belongs to this topic
The single tell
There is a fixed, stated number of trials — "10 transmissions", "a sample of 15 customers", "20 workers". If you can point at \(n\) in the question, it is binomial (unless \(n\) is huge and \(p\) tiny — see the bridges below).
Give-away words
out of 10 … a sample of n … what is the probability that exactly r … at least one more than two defective / success / pass–fail 2 percent of … are flawed
The four conditions
A question is binomial only if all four hold: (1) a fixed number of trials, (2) each trial has only two outcomes, (3) \(p\) is constant from trial to trial, (4) the trials are independent. Naming these is often worth a mark in itself.
What it hands you
Two numbers — \(n\) and \(p\) — and a phrase describing a range of \(r\). It never hands you a list of probabilities (that is Topic 1) or a mean and standard deviation of a measurement (that is Topic 4).
Watch for the switch
If the question says 2%, 4%, 0.5% and \(n\) is 20 or more, the examiner wants the Poisson approximation (Topic 3). If \(np\) and \(nq\) are both ≥ 5 and \(n\) is large, they want the normal approximation (Topic 5). The problem still is binomial — you are just being asked to solve it a faster way.
Don't confuse it with
If the question…then it is…
gives a rate per interval with no \(n\) — "8 coughs on average"Topic 3 — Poisson
gives \(n\) and \(p\) but \(n\ge20,\ p\le0.05\)Topic 3 — Poisson approximation to the binomial
gives \(n\) and \(p\) with \(np\ge5\) and \(nq\ge5\), \(n\) largeTopic 5 — normal approximation
gives μ and σ of something measuredTopic 4 — normal
Master Method — Topic 2
Formula bank
Binomial probability
\[ P(r) = \frac{n!}{r!\,(n-r)!}\;p^{\,r}\,q^{\,n-r} \qquad q = 1-p \]
Mean
\[ \mu = np \]
Standard deviation
\[ \sigma = \sqrt{npq} \]
At least one
(the shortcut)
\[ P(r\ge 1) = 1 - P(r=0) = 1 - q^{\,n} \]
Complement rule
(the workhorse)
\[ P(r > k) = 1 - P(r \le k) \qquad P(r \ge k) = 1 - P(r \le k-1) \]
\(n\) number of trials — fixed before the experiment
\(r\) number of successes you want
\(p\) probability of success on one trial
\(q\) probability of failure, \(=1-p\)

Define "success" as whatever the question counts, even when it is a bad thing. If the question asks about defectives, then a defective is a success and \(p = 0.02\). Getting this backwards is the most expensive error in the topic.

The routine
  1. Check the four conditions and say so in one line: "fixed \(n=10\), two outcomes, constant \(p=0.02\), independent trials — binomial."
  2. Write \(n\), \(p\), \(q\) explicitly. Decide what counts as a success and state it.
  3. Translate the English into a set of \(r\) values — this is where the marks are lost, so do it on its own line. See the table below.
  4. Decide direct or complement. If the set has more than about three values, compute the complement instead. "At least one" is always \(1-q^n\).
  5. Substitute and evaluate term by term, keeping four decimals.
  6. Answer in words with the context: "there is a 99.5% chance that at least one browsing customer buys something in a given hour."
The translation table — memorise this, it is where the marks go
The question saysWhich \(r\)Compute as
exactly 5r = 5one term
at least 1r = 1,2,…,n\(1 - P(0) = 1 - q^n\)
at least 4r = 4,…,n\(1 - [P(0)+P(1)+P(2)+P(3)]\)
more than 2r = 3,…,n\(1 - [P(0)+P(1)+P(2)]\)  — not including 2
no more than 4 / at most 4r = 0,1,2,3,4direct sum
fewer than 8, with n = 7r = 0,…,7 (all)\(= 1\) — a free mark if you spot it
one or threer = 1 and r = 3\(P(1)+P(3)\) — mutually exclusive, so add
noner = 0\(q^n\)
Traps
  • "More than 2" ≠ "2 or more". More than 2 starts at 3. Two or more starts at 2. One word, one mark.
  • Using \(p\) for the wrong event. If 96% of disputes are marital and the question asks about non-marital, then \(p = 0.04\).
  • \(\sigma = npq\) instead of \(\sqrt{npq}\). The variance is \(npq\); the standard deviation is its square root.
  • Grinding out eight terms when the complement needs three. Always count which side is shorter first.
  • Assuming independence when sampling without replacement from a small population. Levin's exercises say "assume flaws occur independently" precisely because that assumption is doing work.
Textbook bank — every Levin exercise on the binomial §5.4, pp. 228–230 · all 11, solved
11 exercises Levin §5.4 The binomial distribution pp. 223–230 Every probability below was computed from the formula, not read off a table.
5-13Translation drillLevin Ex. 5-13 · p. 228

Q. For a binomial distribution with \(n = 7\) and \(p = 0.2\), find (a) \(P(r=5)\), (b) \(P(r>2)\), (c) \(P(r<8)\), (d) \(P(r\ge4)\).

Why: pure translation practice — four different phrasings on one distribution. Build the whole term list once, then read each answer off it.
Why we do itWhat to write
Compute every term once. With \(n=7\) that is cheaper than doing four separate sums.
\[ P(r)=\tfrac{7!}{r!(7-r)!}(0.2)^r(0.8)^{7-r} \] \(r{=}0{:}\,0.2097\)  \(1{:}\,0.3670\)  \(2{:}\,0.2753\)  \(3{:}\,0.1147\)
\(4{:}\,0.0287\)  \(5{:}\,0.0043\)  \(6{:}\,0.0004\)  \(7{:}\,0.0000\)
(a) One term.
\[ P(r=5) = \tfrac{7!}{5!2!}(0.2)^5(0.8)^2 = 21(0.00032)(0.64) = \mathbf{0.0043} \]
(b) "More than 2" = \(r\ge3\). Four terms up, three terms down — use the complement.
\[ P(r>2) = 1-[0.2097+0.3670+0.2753] = 1-0.8520 = \mathbf{0.1480} \]
(c) With \(n=7\), \(r\) cannot exceed 7 — so "fewer than 8" is every possible outcome.
\[ P(r<8) = \mathbf{1.0000} \] — a certainty. Do not compute eight terms for this.
(d) \(r=4,5,6,7\) — only four small terms, so direct is fine.
\[ P(r\ge4) = 0.0287+0.0043+0.0004+0.0000 = \mathbf{0.0333} \]
5-14Table useLevin Ex. 5-14 · p. 228

Q. For \(n = 15\), \(p = 0.2\), find (a) \(P(r=6)\), (b) \(P(r\ge11)\), (c) \(P(r\le4)\).

Why: \(n=15\) makes term-by-term work heavy, so this is where a binomial table earns its keep — but every value below is also reachable from the formula.
(a) Single term.
\[ P(r=6)=\tfrac{15!}{6!9!}(0.2)^6(0.8)^9 = \mathbf{0.0430} \]
(b) The far tail. With \(\mu=np=3\), eleven successes is eight standard-ish steps out — expect something negligible.
\[ P(r\ge11) = 0.000012 \approx \mathbf{0.0000} \] Effectively impossible — worth saying so in words.
(c) Five terms, direct.
\[ P(r\le4)=0.0352+0.1319+0.2309+0.2501+0.1876 = \mathbf{0.8358} \]
5-15Mean & SDLevin Ex. 5-15 · p. 228

Q. Find the mean and standard deviation of the binomial distributions: (a) n=15, p=0.20 (b) n=8, p=0.42 (c) n=72, p=0.06 (d) n=29, p=0.49 (e) n=642, p=0.21.

Why: two substitutions, \(\mu=np\) and \(\sigma=\sqrt{npq}\). The only trap is forgetting the square root.
npqμ = npσ = √(npq)
(a)150.200.803.001.5492
(b)80.420.583.361.3960
(c)720.060.944.322.0151
(d)290.490.5114.212.6920
(e)6420.210.79134.8210.3203
Worth noticing: in (c), \(n\ge20\) and \(p\le0.06\) — close to the Poisson-approximation region. In (e), \(np=134.8\) and \(nq=507\), both far above 5, so the normal approximation would be excellent. The mean and SD you just computed are exactly what those approximations need.
5-16"At least one"Levin Ex. 5-16 · p. 228

Q. For \(n = 8\) trials, compute \(P(r\ge1)\) for (a) p = 0.1, (b) p = 0.3, (c) p = 0.6, (d) p = 0.4.

Why: "at least one" is the single most common phrase in the whole unit, and it always collapses to \(1-q^n\). Never sum eight terms for it.
Why we do itWhat to write
The complement of "at least one" is "none" — a single term.
\[ P(r\ge1) = 1 - P(r=0) = 1 - q^{8} \]
Substitute each \(q = 1-p\).
(a) \(1-(0.9)^8 = 1-0.4305 = \mathbf{0.5695}\)
(b) \(1-(0.7)^8 = 1-0.0576 = \mathbf{0.9424}\)
(c) \(1-(0.4)^8 = 1-0.0007 = \mathbf{0.9993}\)
(d) \(1-(0.6)^8 = 1-0.0168 = \mathbf{0.9832}\)
The pattern to carry away: even a 10% chance per trial becomes a 57% chance over eight trials. "Unlikely once" and "unlikely across many tries" are completely different things — that sentence is what an interpretation mark is for.
5-17Quality controlLevin Ex. 5-17 · p. 228

Q. Harley Davidson checks 10 transmissions a month for defects. Historically 2% have flaws, and flaws occur independently. (a) What is the probability the sample contains more than two flawed transmissions? (b) That none is flawed?

Why: the archetypal quality-control binomial. Note "flawed" is the success here even though it is the bad outcome — \(p = 0.02\), not 0.98.
Why we do itWhat to write
State the setup and check the four conditions.
Fixed \(n=10\); two outcomes (flawed / not); constant \(p=0.02\); independent (given). Binomial. \(q=0.98\).
(a) "More than two" = \(r\ge3\). Eight terms up vs three down — take the complement.
\[ P(0)=(0.98)^{10}=0.8171 \] \[ P(1)=10(0.02)(0.98)^9=0.1667 \] \[ P(2)=45(0.02)^2(0.98)^8=0.0153 \]
Subtract from 1.
\[ P(r>2) = 1 - 0.9991 = \mathbf{0.0009} \]
(b) Already computed above as the first complement term.
\[ P(r=0) = (0.98)^{10} = \mathbf{0.8171} \]
The reading: in 82% of months Harley's sample is completely clean, and finding more than two flaws happens under once in a thousand months — so if he ever does see three, that is strong evidence the 2% rate has changed, not bad luck. That sentence turns a computation into an answer.
5-18"One or three"Levin Ex. 5-18 · p. 229

Q. Mayor Bruns's assistants estimate 40% of unemployment beneficiaries are secretly employed. An aide investigates 10 at random. (a) Probability that more than eight have jobs? (b) That one or three of them have jobs?

Why: two phrasings that look harmless and are not. "More than eight" means 9 and 10 only. "One or three" means exactly those two values — add them, do not treat it as a range.
Why we do itWhat to write
Setup.
\(n=10,\; p=0.40,\; q=0.60\)
(a) \(r > 8\) is \(r = 9\) and \(r = 10\) — two terms, direct.
\[ P(9)=10(0.4)^9(0.6)=0.0016 \] \[ P(10)=(0.4)^{10}=0.0001 \] \[ P(r>8)=\mathbf{0.0017} \]
(b) Two separate values, mutually exclusive, so add. Not a range — do not include 2.
\[ P(1)=10(0.4)(0.6)^9=0.0403 \] \[ P(3)=120(0.4)^3(0.6)^7=0.2150 \] \[ P(1 \text{ or } 3)=\mathbf{0.2553} \]
5-19Three p values, one nLevin Ex. 5-19 · p. 229

Q. Among IT professionals, P(2 weeks' vacation) = 0.45, P(1 week) = 0.10, P(3 or more weeks) = 0.20. Twenty workers are chosen at random. Find: (a) P(8 have 2 weeks), (b) P(only one has 1 week), (c) P(at most 2 have 3+ weeks), (d) P(at least 2 have 1 week).

Why: the trap is that \(p\) changes between parts. Each sub-question defines a different "success", so read which category it is about before writing \(p\).
Why we do itWhat to write
(a) Success = "has 2 weeks", \(p=0.45\).
\[ P(8)=\tfrac{20!}{8!12!}(0.45)^8(0.55)^{12} = \mathbf{0.1623} \]
(b) Success switches to "has 1 week", \(p=0.10\).
\[ P(1)=20(0.10)(0.90)^{19} = \mathbf{0.2702} \]
(c) Success switches again to "3 or more weeks", \(p=0.20\). "At most 2" = \(r=0,1,2\).
\[ P(0)=0.0115,\;P(1)=0.0576,\;P(2)=0.1369 \] \[ P(r\le2)=\mathbf{0.2061} \]
(d) Back to \(p=0.10\). "At least 2" — complement of 0 and 1.
\[ P(0)=(0.9)^{20}=0.1216,\quad P(1)=0.2702 \] \[ P(r\ge2)=1-0.3918=\mathbf{0.6083} \]
The trap in full: the three probabilities 0.45, 0.10, 0.20 do not sum to 1 — the remaining 0.25 is "no vacation / other". That is fine, because each part treats one category as success and everything else as failure. Do not try to force them to add up.
5-20Four phrasingsLevin Ex. 5-20 · p. 229

Q. A browsing customer buys with probability 0.3, and 15 customers browse each hour. Find the probability that (a) at least one buys, (b) at least four buy, (c) none buys, (d) no more than four buy.

Why: the same distribution asked four ways — the best possible drill on the translation table. Do (c) first: it is the building block for (a).
Why we do itWhat to write
(c) "None" is a single term — and (a) needs it, so compute it first.
\[ P(0)=(0.7)^{15}=\mathbf{0.0047} \]
(a) "At least one" = \(1 - P(0)\).
\[ P(r\ge1)=1-0.0047=\mathbf{0.9953} \]
(b) "At least four" = \(1-P(r\le3)\) — four terms down beats twelve up.
\[ P(0..3)=0.0047+0.0305+0.0916+0.1700=0.2969 \] \[ P(r\ge4)=1-0.2969=\mathbf{0.7031} \]
(d) "No more than four" = \(r\le4\) — add the \(r=4\) term to the running total from (b).
\[ P(4)=0.2186 \] \[ P(r\le4)=0.2969+0.2186=\mathbf{0.5155} \]
The reading: the manager is virtually guaranteed at least one sale an hour (99.5%), and gets four or more about 70% of the time — but a completely dead hour, though rare, happens roughly once every 200 hours.
SC 5-4ComplementsLevin SC 5-4 · p. 229

Q. Binomial with \(n=12\), \(p=0.45\): find (a) \(P(r=8)\), (b) \(P(r>4)\), (c) \(P(r\le10)\).

Why: (b) and (c) are both far cheaper from the other end — count the terms on each side before you start.
(a) One term.
\[ P(8)=\tfrac{12!}{8!4!}(0.45)^8(0.55)^4=\mathbf{0.0762} \]
(b) \(r>4\) means \(r=5..12\) — eight terms. The complement is five.
\[ P(r\le4)=0.0008+0.0075+0.0339+0.0923+0.1700=0.3045 \] \[ P(r>4)=1-0.3045=\mathbf{0.6955} \]
(c) \(r\le10\) is eleven terms; its complement is two.
\[ P(r\ge11)=0.0010+0.0001=0.0011 \] \[ P(r\le10)=1-0.0011=\mathbf{0.9989} \]
Matches Levin's printed answers (0.0762, 0.6955, 0.9989) exactly.
SC 5-5Mean & SDLevin SC 5-5 · p. 230

Q. Find \(\mu\) and \(\sigma\) for (a) n=16, p=0.40 (b) n=10, p=0.75 (c) n=22, p=0.15 (d) n=350, p=0.90 (e) n=78, p=0.05.

Why: \(\mu=np\), \(\sigma=\sqrt{npq}\) — five substitutions.
npμ = npσ = √(npq)
(a)160.406.401.960
(b)100.757.501.369
(c)220.153.301.675
(d)3500.90315.005.612
(e)780.053.901.925
Matches Levin's printed answers exactly. Note (e): \(n=78\ge20\) and \(p=0.05\), so this one sits precisely on the Poisson-approximation boundary — \(\lambda = np = 3.9\).
SC 5-6Changing pLevin SC 5-6 · p. 228

Q. A poll gives P(alliance ABC) = 0.55, P(PQR) = 0.30, P(XYZ) = 0.15. For 10 randomly chosen people find: (a) P(four are PQR), (b) P(none is ABC), (c) P(two are XYZ), (d) P(at least eight are PQR).

Why: same structure as 5-19 — \(p\) changes with the alliance named in each part. Here the three probabilities do sum to 1, so "not ABC" means PQR or XYZ.
(a) \(p=0.30\).
\[ P(4)=\tfrac{10!}{4!6!}(0.30)^4(0.70)^6=\mathbf{0.2001} \]
(b) \(p=0.55\), \(r=0\).
\[ P(0)=(0.45)^{10}=\mathbf{0.0003} \]
(c) \(p=0.15\).
\[ P(2)=\tfrac{10!}{2!8!}(0.15)^2(0.85)^8=\mathbf{0.2759} \]
(d) \(p=0.30\), \(r\ge8\) — only three terms, all tiny.
\[ 0.00145+0.00014+0.00001=\mathbf{0.0016} \]
Matches Levin's printed answers (0.2001, 0.0003, 0.2759, 0.0016) exactly.
Four more, shaped like the exam the textbook never sets a "state the conditions then compute" question — the paper might
X1Conditions + compute

Q. A call centre finds that 25% of calls are resolved on first contact. In a random sample of 12 calls, state the four conditions that make this binomial, then find the probability that (a) exactly 3 are resolved first time, (b) at least 1 is, (c) at most 2 are.

Solution
Why: \(n=12\), \(p=0.25\), \(q=0.75\). Name the conditions first — that is a mark on its own — then translate each phrase.
The four conditions.
Fixed \(n=12\) · two outcomes (resolved / not) · constant \(p=0.25\) · calls independent of one another.
(a) One term.
\[ P(3)=\tfrac{12!}{3!9!}(0.25)^3(0.75)^9=220(0.015625)(0.075085)=\mathbf{0.2581} \]
(b) At least one = \(1-q^{12}\).
\[ 1-(0.75)^{12}=1-0.0317=\mathbf{0.9683} \]
(c) At most 2 = \(r=0,1,2\).
\[ 0.0317+0.1267+0.2323=\mathbf{0.3907} \]
X2Success definition

Q. A supplier claims 95% of components meet specification. A buyer inspects 20. Find the probability that (a) none fails, (b) more than 2 fail. What would you conclude if 4 failed?

Solution
Why: the question counts failures, so success = failure and \(p = 0.05\), not 0.95. Getting this the right way round is the whole question.
Set up with failure as the success.
\(n=20,\; p=0.05,\; q=0.95\)
(a) None fails.
\[ P(0)=(0.95)^{20}=\mathbf{0.3585} \]
(b) More than 2 = \(1-P(r\le2)\).
\[ P(0)=0.3585,\;P(1)=0.3774,\;P(2)=0.1887 \] \[ P(r>2)=1-0.9246=\mathbf{0.0754} \]
The conclusion — this is the interpretation mark.
\(\mu=np=1\) failure expected. Four failures has probability \(P(r\ge4)=0.0159\) — under 2%. Rare enough to doubt the supplier's 95% claim rather than blame chance.
X3Mean, SD and range

Q. A firm mails 400 offers; historically 15% respond. Find the mean and standard deviation of the number of responses, and the range within which the response count will fall about 95% of the time.

Solution
Why: \(\mu=np\), \(\sigma=\sqrt{npq}\); "about 95%" is \(\mu\pm2\sigma\) from the empirical rule, which is legitimate here because \(np\) and \(nq\) are both large.
Mean and SD.
\[ \mu=400(0.15)=\mathbf{60} \qquad \sigma=\sqrt{400(0.15)(0.85)}=\sqrt{51}=\mathbf{7.14} \]
\(\mu\pm2\sigma\), and justify using it.
\[ 60 \pm 2(7.14) = 45.7 \text{ to } 74.3 \] So roughly 46 to 74 responses. The empirical rule applies because \(np=60\) and \(nq=340\) are both well above 5, so the binomial here is near-normal.
X4Which distribution?

Q. For each, say whether you would use the binomial directly, the Poisson approximation, or the normal approximation, and give the parameter(s): (a) n = 12, p = 0.30; (b) n = 500, p = 0.004; (c) n = 200, p = 0.40; (d) n = 40, p = 0.02.

Solution
Why: apply the two bridge rules — Poisson when \(n\ge20\) and \(p\le0.05\); normal when \(np\ge5\) and \(nq\ge5\).
(a) Small \(n\), moderate \(p\) — neither bridge is needed.
Binomial directly. \(n=12,\ p=0.30\).
(b) \(n\ge20\), \(p\le0.05\), and \(np\) is small.
Poisson approximation. \(\lambda = np = 2.0\).
(c) \(np=80\), \(nq=120\) — both far above 5.
Normal approximation. \(\mu=80,\ \sigma=\sqrt{200(0.4)(0.6)}=6.93\), with the ±0.5 continuity correction.
(d) \(n\ge20\), \(p\le0.05\).
Poisson approximation. \(\lambda = 0.8\). (Normal would be wrong: \(np=0.8 < 5\).)
Topic 3 of 6 · Levin §5.5 · pp. 236–238 · Q1 (b) — 4 marks in both papers

The Poisson Distribution

Both 2025-26 papers put a Poisson question in Q1 (b), and both had the same shape: an average rate per interval is given, and you are asked for P(X = 0) or P(X ≥ 1). One formula, one rescaling rule, and the complement trick — that is the whole 4 marks.

How to know a question belongs to this topic
The single tell
A rate is given per unit of something — per hour, per week, per page, per 1,000 bills — and there is no fixed number of trials. You cannot point at an \(n\), because there isn't one: a page could contain any number of typos.
Give-away words
on average, 8 coughs … an average of five per week arrive at a rate of per hour / per page / per km λ accidents / arrivals / defects / calls / breakdowns
What it hands you
One number — the mean rate — and an interval. Compare with binomial, which always hands you two (\(n\) and \(p\)).
The second doorway
A question can be binomial in disguise: it gives \(n\) and \(p\), but with \(n \ge 20\) and \(p \le 0.05\). Then the examiner wants the Poisson approximation with \(\lambda = np\) — cheaper and nearly identical. Five of Levin's exercises here are exactly that (5-21, 5-23, 5-27, 5-28, 5-29).
The rescaling trap
If the rate is given per one interval and the question asks about a different interval, scale \(\lambda\) first. "3 per 10 minutes" over an hour is \(\lambda = 18\), not 3. Getting this wrong loses the whole question.
What a full answer contains
State \(\lambda\) and its interval · write the formula · substitute · give \(e^{-\lambda}\) explicitly · the probability to 4 dp · and a sentence in the story's own language.
Don't confuse it with
If the question…then it is…
fixes \(n\) and \(p\) with \(p\) moderate (0.1–0.9)Topic 2 — binomial, done directly
fixes \(n \ge 20\) with \(p \le 0.05\)Here — Poisson approximation, \(\lambda = np\)
gives \(\mu\) and \(\sigma\) separately for a measured quantityTopic 4 — normal
gives a mean that equals the varianceHere — that identity is unique to Poisson
Master Method — Topic 3
Formula bank
Poisson probability
\[ P(x) = \frac{\lambda^{x}\,e^{-\lambda}}{x!} \qquad x = 0,1,2,\dots \]
Mean and variance
(both equal λ)
\[ \mu = \lambda \qquad \sigma^2 = \lambda \qquad \sigma = \sqrt{\lambda} \]
The two workhorses
\[ P(x=0) = e^{-\lambda} \qquad\qquad P(x\ge 1) = 1 - e^{-\lambda} \]
Rescaling the interval
\[ \lambda_{\text{new}} = \lambda_{\text{given}} \times \frac{\text{new interval}}{\text{given interval}} \]
Poisson approximation
to the binomial
\[ \lambda = np \qquad\text{valid when } n \ge 20 \text{ and } p \le 0.05 \]

\(P(x=0)=e^{-\lambda}\) because \(\lambda^0 = 1\) and \(0! = 1\). This one line is the most-used result in the entire unit — both papers' Q1 (b) reduce to it.

The routine
  1. Find \(\lambda\) and say what interval it belongs to. Write "λ = 5 accidents per week" — the unit matters more than the number.
  2. Rescale if the question changes the interval. Do it before anything else, and show the multiplication.
  3. If you were given \(n\) and \(p\) instead, check \(n\ge20,\ p\le0.05\), say the check passes, and set \(\lambda = np\).
  4. Translate the phrase into a set of \(x\) values — the same table as the binomial. "More than three" starts at 4.
  5. Compute \(e^{-\lambda}\) once and reuse it in every term. Every term shares it.
  6. Use the complement whenever the set is long. Poisson has infinitely many values, so "at least \(k\)" is always done as \(1 - P(x \le k-1)\) — you cannot sum upwards to infinity.
  7. Answer in the story's language, with the decision if one was asked for.
How the exam asks it
PaperThe question
FinalQ1 (b), 4 marks — an average number of events per interval, then a probability of none / at least one QP p. 1 · worked in full
Re-ExamQ1 (b), 4 marks — structurally identical, different story and rate QP p. 1 · worked in full
Class notesThe births-at-a-hospital problem, λ = 1.8, worked to 0.0723 notes pp. 1–9
Traps
  • Not rescaling λ. The most expensive error in the topic. Rate per 10 minutes, question about an hour ⇒ multiply by 6.
  • Summing upwards for "at least". There is no upper limit in a Poisson — you must go through the complement.
  • Using the Poisson approximation when \(p\) is too large. The rule is \(p \le 0.05\); at \(p = 0.3\) it is simply wrong.
  • Forgetting \(0! = 1\). \(P(0)=e^{-\lambda}\), not \(0\).
  • Reporting \(\sigma = \lambda\). The variance equals λ; the standard deviation is \(\sqrt{\lambda}\).
Textbook bank — every Levin exercise on the Poisson §5.5, pp. 236–238 · all 11, solved
11 exercises Levin §5.5 The Poisson distribution pp. 231–238 Five of them are binomials in disguise — spot the \(n\ge20,\ p\le0.05\) signature.
5-21Poisson approximationLevin Ex. 5-21 · p. 236

Q. Given a binomial with \(n = 28\) and \(p = 0.025\), use the Poisson approximation to find (a) \(P(r\ge3)\), (b) \(P(r<5)\), (c) \(P(r=9)\).

Why: \(n = 28 \ge 20\) and \(p = 0.025 \le 0.05\), so the approximation is valid — say so, then work entirely in \(\lambda\).
Why we do itWhat to write
Check the condition, then convert.
\(n=28\ge20\) ✓ and \(p=0.025\le0.05\) ✓ \[ \lambda = np = 28(0.025) = 0.7 \qquad e^{-0.7}=0.4966 \]
(a) "At least 3" — infinite upward, so complement.
\[ P(0)=0.4966,\;P(1)=0.3476,\;P(2)=0.1217 \] \[ P(r\ge3)=1-0.9659=\mathbf{0.0341} \]
(b) \(r<5\) is \(r\le4\) — five terms, direct.
\[ 0.4966+0.3476+0.1217+0.0284+0.0050=\mathbf{0.9992} \]
(c) Nine events when the mean is 0.7 — effectively impossible.
\[ P(9)=\frac{(0.7)^9 e^{-0.7}}{9!} = \mathbf{0.0000} \] (1 in about 10 million)
5-22Rate per periodLevin Ex. 5-22 · p. 236

Q. New car prices increase an average of four times every 3 years. Find the probability of (a) no price hikes in a randomly selected 3-year period, (b) two hikes, (c) four hikes, (d) five or more.

Why: the rate and the question are already on the same interval (3 years), so \(\lambda = 4\) with no rescaling. This is the pure Q1 (b) shape.
Why we do itWhat to write
State λ with its interval, and compute \(e^{-\lambda}\) once.
\[ \lambda = 4 \text{ hikes per 3-year period}, \qquad e^{-4}=0.0183 \]
(a) The workhorse result.
\[ P(0)=e^{-4}=\mathbf{0.0183} \]
(b) and (c) — direct substitution.
\[ P(2)=\frac{4^2 e^{-4}}{2!}=\frac{16(0.0183)}{2}=\mathbf{0.1465} \] \[ P(4)=\frac{4^4 e^{-4}}{4!}=\frac{256(0.0183)}{24}=\mathbf{0.1954} \]
(d) "Five or more" — unbounded above, so complement through \(x\le4\).
\[ P(x\le4)=0.0183+0.0733+0.1465+0.1954+0.1954=0.6288 \] \[ P(x\ge5)=1-0.6288=\mathbf{0.3712} \]
Worth noticing: \(P(4)=P(3)=0.1954\). For an integer \(\lambda\), the Poisson always has two equal modal values at \(\lambda-1\) and \(\lambda\). A useful arithmetic check.
5-23Poisson approximationLevin Ex. 5-23 · p. 236

Q. Binomial with \(n=25\), \(p=0.032\). Use the Poisson approximation to find (a) \(P(r=3)\), (b) \(P(r=5)\), (c) \(P(r\le2)\).

Why: \(n\ge20\), \(p\le0.05\) — approximation valid. \(\lambda = np = 0.8\).
Convert and get \(e^{-\lambda}\).
\[ \lambda = 25(0.032)=0.8, \qquad e^{-0.8}=0.4493 \]
(a), (b) direct.
\[ P(3)=\frac{(0.8)^3(0.4493)}{6}=\mathbf{0.0383} \qquad P(5)=\frac{(0.8)^5(0.4493)}{120}=\mathbf{0.0012} \]
(c) Three terms, direct.
\[ 0.4493+0.3595+0.1438=\mathbf{0.9526} \]
5-24Four phrasingsLevin Ex. 5-24 · p. 237

Q. Given \(\lambda = 6.1\), find (a) \(P(x\le3)\), (b) \(P(x\ge2)\), (c) \(P(x=6)\), (d) \(P(1\le x\le4)\).

Why: the best translation drill in the topic. Compute the low terms once and read all four answers off them.
Why we do itWhat to write
Build the low terms once. \(e^{-6.1}=0.002243\).
\(P(0)=0.0022\)  \(P(1)=0.0137\)  \(P(2)=0.0417\)
\(P(3)=0.0848\)  \(P(4)=0.1294\)
(a) \(x\le3\) — four terms.
\[ 0.0022+0.0137+0.0417+0.0848=\mathbf{0.1425} \]
(b) \(x\ge2\) — unbounded, so complement of \(x\le1\).
\[ 1-(0.0022+0.0137)=\mathbf{0.9841} \]
(c) Single term.
\[ P(6)=\frac{(6.1)^6 e^{-6.1}}{720}=\mathbf{0.1605} \]
(d) A closed range — include both endpoints, exclude \(x=0\).
\[ 0.0137+0.0417+0.0848+0.1294=\mathbf{0.2697} \]
5-25DecisionLevin Ex. 5-25 · p. 237

Q. On average eight coughs occur just before Donna Prima begins to play. She has sworn that if she hears more than five coughs tonight she will refuse to play. What is the probability that she will play?

Why: read carefully who wins. She plays when coughs are 5 or fewer — so the answer is \(P(x\le5)\), not \(P(x>5)\). Half the marks in this question are for getting that the right way round.
Why we do itWhat to write
Translate the condition into a set of \(x\) values before computing.
She refuses if \(x > 5\), so she plays if \(x \le 5\). \[ \lambda = 8, \qquad e^{-8}=0.000335 \]
Six terms, direct.
\(P(0)=0.0003\)  \(P(1)=0.0027\)  \(P(2)=0.0107\)
\(P(3)=0.0286\)  \(P(4)=0.0573\)  \(P(5)=0.0916\)
Total, then say what it means for Donna.
\[ P(\text{plays}) = P(x\le5) = \mathbf{0.1912} \] Only about a 19% chance she plays — with a mean of 8 coughs, a threshold of 5 is one she will fail four nights in five.
5-26Threshold decisionLevin Ex. 5-26 · p. 237

Q. On average five people a week have accidents on the Lucknow station lifts. Finance will release funds only if the chance of more than three accidents in any week exceeds 75%. Will the funds be allocated?

Why: a policy threshold question. Compute \(P(x>3)\) and compare with 0.75 — and the answer turns on a margin of 1.5 percentage points, so keep four decimals.
Why we do itWhat to write
"More than three" = \(x \ge 4\), so complement through \(x\le3\).
\[ \lambda=5, \qquad e^{-5}=0.006738 \]
Four terms.
\(P(0)=0.0067\)  \(P(1)=0.0337\)  \(P(2)=0.0842\)  \(P(3)=0.1404\) \[ P(x\le3)=0.2650 \]
Complement.
\[ P(x>3)=1-0.2650=\mathbf{0.7350} \]
Compare with the policy and answer the question asked.
\(0.7350 < 0.75\), so NO — the funds will not be allocated. The station falls short by just 1.5 percentage points.
The mark-earning addition: the margin is so thin that a mean of 5.1 rather than 5.0 would flip the decision. Pointing out that a policy this finely balanced is fragile to the accuracy of λ is exactly the managerial comment these questions reward.
5-27Poisson approximationLevin Ex. 5-27 · p. 237

Q. 4% of new calculators develop mathematical inconsistencies. The VP selects 50 for a demonstration. Using the Poisson as an approximation to the binomial, find (a) the chance of at least three malfunctioning, (b) that none malfunctions.

Why: \(n=50\ge20\), \(p=0.04\le0.05\) — the signature. \(\lambda = np = 2\).
Check and convert.
\(n=50\ge20\) ✓, \(p=0.04\le0.05\) ✓ \[ \lambda = 50(0.04)=2, \qquad e^{-2}=0.1353 \]
(a) At least three — complement.
\(P(0)=0.1353,\ P(1)=0.2707,\ P(2)=0.2707\) \[ P(x\ge3)=1-0.6767=\mathbf{0.3233} \]
(b) The workhorse.
\[ P(0)=e^{-2}=\mathbf{0.1353} \]
The business reading: there is nearly a 1 in 3 chance that three or more of the demonstration calculators misbehave, and only a 13.5% chance of a completely clean demo. The VP is right to be worried — that sentence is what the question is actually asking for.
5-28Which event is "success"?Levin Ex. 5-28 · p. 237

Q. 96% of the disputes handled by the Family Court are marital. Out of 80 disputes, what is the probability that (a) exactly seven are non-marital, (b) none is non-marital?

Why: the question counts non-marital disputes, so \(p = 0.04\), not 0.96. Then \(n\ge20\), \(p\le0.05\) — Poisson approximation.
Define success as the thing being counted, then convert.
Success = non-marital, \(p = 1-0.96 = 0.04\) \[ \lambda = 80(0.04) = 3.2, \qquad e^{-3.2}=0.0408 \]
(a) Single term.
\[ P(7)=\frac{(3.2)^7 e^{-3.2}}{7!}=\mathbf{0.0278} \]
(b) The workhorse.
\[ P(0)=e^{-3.2}=\mathbf{0.0408} \]
If you had used \(p = 0.96\) you would get \(\lambda = 76.8\) and an answer of essentially zero — visibly absurd, which is the built-in check. Always ask "what is the question counting?"
5-29Poisson approximationLevin Ex. 5-29 · p. 237

Q. Only 0.5% of printed bills are too flawed for circulation. Out of a batch of 1,000 bills, what is the probability that (a) none is too flawed, (b) ten are, (c) fifteen are?

Why: the textbook case for the approximation — \(n\) enormous, \(p\) tiny. Computing \(\binom{1000}{10}\) directly is impractical; \(\lambda = np = 5\) makes it a one-liner.
Check and convert.
\(n=1000\ge20\) ✓, \(p=0.005\le0.05\) ✓ \[ \lambda = 1000(0.005)=5, \qquad e^{-5}=0.006738 \]
(a) The workhorse.
\[ P(0)=e^{-5}=\mathbf{0.0067} \]
(b) Direct.
\[ P(10)=\frac{5^{10}e^{-5}}{10!}=\mathbf{0.0181} \]
(c) Three times the mean — far into the tail.
\[ P(15)=\frac{5^{15}e^{-5}}{15!}=\mathbf{0.0002} \]
SC 5-7Three phrasingsLevin SC 5-7 · p. 238

Q. Given \(\lambda = 4.2\), find (a) \(P(x\le2)\), (b) \(P(x\ge5)\), (c) \(P(x=8)\).

Why: straight drill. \(e^{-4.2}=0.0150\).
(a) Three terms.
\[ 0.0150+0.0630+0.1323=\mathbf{0.2103} \]
(b) Complement of \(x\le4\).
\[ 1-(0.2103+0.1852+0.1944)=\mathbf{0.4101} \]
(c) Single term.
\[ P(8)=\frac{(4.2)^8 e^{-4.2}}{8!}=\mathbf{0.0360} \]
Matches Levin's printed answers (0.2103, 0.4101, 0.0360) exactly.
SC 5-8Poisson approximationLevin SC 5-8 · p. 238

Q. Binomial with \(n=30\), \(p=0.04\). Use the Poisson approximation to find \(P(r=25)\), \(P(r=3)\) and \(P(r=5)\).

Why: \(\lambda = np = 1.2\), \(e^{-1.2}=0.30119\). Note the first part is a sanity check disguised as a question.
25 successes when the mean is 1.2.
\[ P(25)=\mathbf{0.0000} \] — vanishingly small; worth saying "effectively impossible" rather than just writing 0.
The two realistic ones.
\[ P(3)=\frac{(1.2)^3 e^{-1.2}}{6}=\mathbf{0.0867} \qquad P(5)=\frac{(1.2)^5 e^{-1.2}}{120}=\mathbf{0.0062} \]
Matches Levin's printed answers (0.0000, 0.0867, 0.0062) exactly.
Four more, shaped like Q1 (b) rescaling the interval is the part the textbook never drills and the exam always uses
X1Rescaling

Q. A helpdesk receives an average of 3 calls per 10-minute interval. Find (a) P(no calls in a 10-minute interval), (b) P(at least one call in 10 minutes), (c) P(exactly 4 calls in 10 minutes), (d) P(no calls in a full hour).

Solution
Why: (a)–(c) are on the interval λ was quoted for. (d) changes the interval, so λ must be rescaled first — that is the whole point of the question.
(a) The workhorse, λ = 3 per 10 min.
\[ P(0)=e^{-3}=\mathbf{0.0498} \]
(b) Complement.
\[ P(x\ge1)=1-0.0498=\mathbf{0.9502} \]
(c) Direct.
\[ P(4)=\frac{3^4 e^{-3}}{4!}=\frac{81(0.0498)}{24}=\mathbf{0.1680} \]
(d) An hour is six 10-minute intervals — rescale λ before substituting.
\[ \lambda_{\text{hour}} = 3 \times 6 = 18 \] \[ P(0)=e^{-18}=\mathbf{0.0000000152} \] Essentially never — a full quiet hour will not happen.
X2Rescaling + decision

Q. A bank branch experiences an average of 2.5 loan defaults per month. Find (a) P(no defaults in a month), (b) P(at least two in a month), (c) P(at least one in a quarter). The branch manager is rated "clean" only if a whole quarter passes with no default — comment on that target.

Solution
Why: parts (a) and (b) use λ = 2.5; part (c) needs the quarterly rate, λ = 7.5. The comment is the interpretation mark.
(a) λ = 2.5 per month.
\[ P(0)=e^{-2.5}=\mathbf{0.0821} \]
(b) At least two — complement of 0 and 1.
\[ P(1)=2.5e^{-2.5}=0.2052 \] \[ P(x\ge2)=1-(0.0821+0.2052)=\mathbf{0.7127} \]
(c) A quarter is 3 months — rescale.
\[ \lambda = 2.5 \times 3 = 7.5 \] \[ P(x\ge1)=1-e^{-7.5}=1-0.00055=\mathbf{0.9994} \]
The comment.
A "clean quarter" has probability \(e^{-7.5} = \mathbf{0.00055}\) — about 1 chance in 1,800. The target is effectively unreachable and would rate almost every competent manager as failing; it should be set against the rate, not against zero.
X3Approximation quality

Q. A factory ships 300 items; each has a 1% chance of being damaged in transit. Find P(exactly 2 damaged) and P(at most 1 damaged) using the Poisson approximation, and say how good the approximation is.

Solution
Why: \(n=300\ge20\), \(p=0.01\le0.05\) — valid. λ = 3. The last part asks you to justify the approximation, not just use it.
Convert.
\[ \lambda=300(0.01)=3, \qquad e^{-3}=0.0498 \]
Two substitutions.
\[ P(2)=\frac{3^2 e^{-3}}{2!}=\mathbf{0.2240} \] \[ P(x\le1)=0.0498+0.1494=\mathbf{0.1991} \]
Compare with the exact binomial.
Exact binomial: \(P(2)=0.2244\), \(P(x\le1)=0.1976\). The approximation is accurate to within 0.002 — because \(n\) is very large and \(p\) very small, exactly the regime the rule \(n\ge20,\ p\le0.05\) is designed for.
X4Per-unit rate

Q. A proof-reader finds on average 1.5 typing errors per page. Find (a) P(a page is error-free), (b) P(a page has exactly 2 errors), (c) P(a 4-page document has at least 2 errors). What is the standard deviation of errors per page?

Solution
Why: λ = 1.5 per page for (a) and (b); rescale to λ = 6 for the 4-page document in (c). The SD question tests whether you know \(\sigma=\sqrt{\lambda}\), not λ.
(a) λ = 1.5 per page.
\[ P(0)=e^{-1.5}=\mathbf{0.2231} \]
(b) Direct.
\[ P(2)=\frac{(1.5)^2 e^{-1.5}}{2!}=\frac{2.25(0.2231)}{2}=\mathbf{0.2510} \]
(c) Four pages ⇒ λ = 1.5 × 4 = 6. "At least 2" — complement.
\[ P(0)=e^{-6}=0.0025,\quad P(1)=6e^{-6}=0.0149 \] \[ P(x\ge2)=1-0.0174=\mathbf{0.9826} \]
The SD — variance equals λ, so take the root.
\[ \sigma=\sqrt{\lambda}=\sqrt{1.5}=\mathbf{1.22 \text{ errors per page}} \] Not 1.5 — that is the variance.
Topic 4 of 6 · Levin §5.6 · pp. 251–254 · Q2 (b) — 5 marks in both papers

The Normal Distribution

The largest single slot in the portion. Every normal question reduces to the same three moves: standardise with \(z=(x-\mu)/\sigma\), draw the curve and shade, then read the table and combine. The drawing is not decoration — it is what tells you whether to add the two areas or subtract them.

How to know a question belongs to this topic
The single tell
A mean and a standard deviation are given for something measured — money, time, weight, height, diameter, temperature. Two parameters, continuous variable.
Give-away words
normally distributed mean μ and standard deviation σ what proportion / what percentage between … and … more than / less than how tall should … what value is exceeded by 5%
Two directions
Forward: given \(x\), find a probability — standardise, then read the table. Backward: given a probability, find \(x\) — read the table inwards to get \(z\), then \(x = \mu + z\sigma\). Levin sets both; 5-32, 5-34, 5-36 and 5-41 are all backward.
What a full answer contains
The sketch with the region shaded · the \(z\) working shown · the table value quoted · the areas combined · and the answer in the story's units ("about 12 of the 19 books", "doors 82.8 inches tall").
Table convention
Your class's table gives A(z) = the area between 0 and z. So \(P(x>\mu+z\sigma) = 0.5 - A(z)\), and a band straddling the mean is \(A(z_1)+A(z_2)\). The conversion to Φ(z) is here — pick one convention and stay in it for the whole paper.
Don't confuse it with
If the question…then it is…
counts successes out of a fixed \(n\)Topic 2 — binomial
gives a rate per intervalTopic 3 — Poisson
gives \(n\) and \(p\) but asks for a range of counts, \(np\ge5\)Topic 5 — normal approximation, with ±0.5
gives μ and σ of a sample mean \(\bar{x}\)Units 5–6 — sampling distribution, σ becomes \(\sigma/\sqrt{n}\)
Master Method — Topic 4
Formula bank
Standardising
\[ z = \frac{x-\mu}{\sigma} \]
Going backwards
\[ x = \mu + z\sigma \]
Finding σ from
one probability
\[ \sigma = \frac{x-\mu}{z} \]
Expected count
out of N
\[ \text{expected number} = N \times P \]

Three formulas, one idea. \(z\) is how many standard deviations \(x\) is from the mean — nothing more. Everything else is table reading.

The five readings — in the A(z) convention your class uses
0-to-Z Table Reading Rules
\[ P(0 < Z < a) = A(a) \] \[ P(Z > a) = 0.5 - A(a) \qquad (\text{Right tail for } a > 0) \] \[ P(Z < -a) = 0.5 - A(a) \qquad (\text{Left tail for } a > 0) \] \[ P(-a < Z < b) = A(a) + A(b) \qquad (\text{Spanning mean: ADD}) \] \[ P(a < Z < b) = A(b) - A(a) \qquad (\text{Same side of mean: SUBTRACT}) \]

Rule 4 versus rule 5 is where marks are lost. The sketch settles it in one second: if the shaded band crosses the centre line, add; if it sits entirely on one side, subtract.

The routine
  1. Write \(\mu\) and \(\sigma\) and confirm the variable is continuous and normal.
  2. Draw the curve. Mark \(\mu\) on the centre line, mark the \(x\) value(s), shade the region the question asks for. Thirty seconds, and it decides every sign that follows.
  3. Standardise each \(x\), showing the substitution. Round \(z\) to two decimals because that is all the table has — and say so when it is not exact.
  4. Read A(z) for each z.
  5. Combine by the shading: band across the mean ⇒ add; band on one side ⇒ subtract; tail ⇒ 0.5 minus.
  6. Convert to the answer asked for — a percentage, or a count via \(N\times P\), or an \(x\) value via \(\mu + z\sigma\).
  7. Say it in words in the story's own language.
How the exam asks it
PaperThe question
FinalQ2 (b), 5 marks — an interval probability, then a one-tail "highly successful" probability QP p. 2 · worked in full
Re-ExamQ2 (b), 5 marks — identical structure; produces \(z=-0.625\) and \(z=1.875\), both exactly half-way between table rows QP p. 2 · worked in full

On non-terminating z values: when \(z\) lands between table rows, state your rounding — "taking \(z\approx1.88\)" — and the answer is accepted. Never invent a third decimal the table does not have.

Traps
  • Adding when you should subtract. Both \(z\) values negative (or both positive) ⇒ subtract. Draw the picture.
  • Forgetting the 0.5. A(z) is only half the curve. A tail is \(0.5-A(z)\), not \(1-A(z)\).
  • Losing the sign of z. \(A(-1.25)=A(1.25)\) for the area, but which side it is on decides whether you add or subtract.
  • Mixing conventions mid-paper. If you start with A(z), never quote a Φ(z) value from memory.
  • Answering with a probability when a count was asked for. "How many of the 19 books" needs \(19\times P\).
  • Using \(\sigma\) when the question is about a sample mean. That is Unit 5 — the spread becomes \(\sigma/\sqrt{n}\).
Textbook bank — every Levin normal-distribution exercise §5.6, pp. 251–254 · all 10, solved in the A(z) convention
10 exercises Levin §5.6 The normal distribution pp. 239–254 The normal-approximation exercises from this section are in Topic 5.
5-30All four readingsLevin Ex. 5-30 · p. 252

Q. \(X\) is normal with mean 6.4 and standard deviation 2.7. Find (a) \(P(4.02.0)\), (c) \(P(x<7.2)\), (d) \(P(x<3.0 \text{ or } x>9.0)\).

Why: one distribution, four different regions — the complete drill on when to add, subtract, or take 0.5 minus. Sketch each one before computing.
Why we do itWhat to write
(a) Both values are below the mean of 6.4, so the band sits entirely on one side ⇒ subtract.
\[ z_1=\frac{4.0-6.4}{2.7}=-0.89 \qquad z_2=\frac{5.0-6.4}{2.7}=-0.52 \] \[ P = A(0.89)-A(0.52) = 0.3133-0.1985 = \mathbf{0.1148} \]
(b) 2.0 is below the mean and we want everything above it — that is the far side plus the whole upper half.
\[ z=\frac{2.0-6.4}{2.7}=-1.63 \] \[ P = A(1.63)+0.5 = 0.4484+0.5 = \mathbf{0.9484} \]
(c) 7.2 is above the mean and we want everything below it — the whole lower half plus the sliver up to 7.2.
\[ z=\frac{7.2-6.4}{2.7}=0.30 \] \[ P = 0.5 + A(0.30) = 0.5+0.1179 = \mathbf{0.6179} \]
(d) Two opposite tails — compute each as 0.5 − A(z) and add.
\[ z_1=\frac{3.0-6.4}{2.7}=-1.26,\qquad z_2=\frac{9.0-6.4}{2.7}=0.96 \] \[ P=(0.5-0.4404)+(0.5-0.3315) \] \[ = 0.1038+0.1685=\mathbf{0.2723} \]
Check every answer against the sketch: (a) a thin slice ⇒ small (0.11 ✓). (b) almost everything ⇒ near 1 (0.95 ✓). (c) a bit over half ⇒ just above 0.5 (0.62 ✓). (d) two tails ⇒ modest (0.27 ✓). If a number does not match the picture, it is wrong.
5-32Backwards — find μLevin Ex. 5-32 · p. 252

Q. In a normal distribution with \(\sigma = 5.0\), the probability that an observation exceeds 21 is 0.14. (a) Find the mean. (b) Find the value below which 4% of the distribution lies.

Why: the reverse direction. You are given an area and must read the table inwards to get \(z\), then rearrange \(z=(x-\mu)/\sigma\) for whichever quantity is missing.
Why we do itWhat to write
(a) 14% lies above 21, so the area between the mean and 21 is \(0.5-0.14\). Look that up in the body of the table.
\[ A(z)=0.5-0.14=0.36 \;\Rightarrow\; z=1.08 \] (21 is above the mean, so z is positive)
Rearrange for μ.
\[ z=\frac{x-\mu}{\sigma} \;\Rightarrow\; \mu = x - z\sigma = 21 - 1.08(5) \] \[ \mu = \mathbf{15.6} \]
(b) 4% in the lower tail ⇒ the area from the mean down to that point is \(0.5-0.04=0.46\), and \(z\) is negative.
\[ A(z)=0.46 \;\Rightarrow\; z=-1.75 \]
Go forward with \(x=\mu+z\sigma\).
\[ x = 15.6 + (-1.75)(5) = \mathbf{6.85} \]
5-34Backwards — find σ, then stockLevin Ex. 5-34 · p. 252

Q. Weekly demand for mailing tubes is normal with mean 100, and 90% of the time demand is below 115. (a) What is the standard deviation? (b) What stock level keeps the probability of running out at 0.05 or less?

Why: the classic two-step inventory question. Part (a) uses one known probability to recover \(\sigma\); part (b) then uses that \(\sigma\) forward to set a service level.
Why we do itWhat to write
(a) 90% below 115 means 40% lies between the mean and 115.
\[ A(z)=0.90-0.5=0.40 \;\Rightarrow\; z=1.28 \]
Rearrange for σ.
\[ \sigma=\frac{x-\mu}{z}=\frac{115-100}{1.28}=\mathbf{11.72 \text{ tubes}} \]
(b) "Run out at most 5% of weeks" means 5% in the upper tail, so 45% between the mean and the stock level.
\[ A(z)=0.45 \;\Rightarrow\; z=1.64 \text{ (or 1.645)} \]
Forward, then round up — you cannot stock a fraction of a tube, and rounding down would break the 5% promise.
\[ x = 100 + 1.64(11.72) = 119.2 \] Stock 120 tubes per week.
Always round a stock level up. Rounding 119.2 down to 119 pushes the stockout probability just above 0.05, which is exactly what the manager said she would not accept.
5-35Tolerance bandLevin Ex. 5-35 · p. 252

Q. A drive shaft must have diameter \(5.1 \pm 0.05\) inches. Stock rods have mean diameter 5.07″ and standard deviation 0.07″. What is the probability that a rod from inventory fits?

Why: convert the tolerance into an explicit interval first — \(5.1\pm0.05\) means 5.05 to 5.15. The mean 5.07 lies inside that band, so the region straddles the mean and the two areas add.
Why we do itWhat to write
Turn the tolerance into limits.
Acceptable: \(5.05 \le x \le 5.15\) inches.
Standardise both. Note the mean 5.07 sits between them, so one z is negative and one positive.
\[ z_1=\frac{5.05-5.07}{0.07}=-0.29 \qquad z_2=\frac{5.15-5.07}{0.07}=1.14 \]
Opposite sides of the mean ⇒ add.
\[ P = A(0.29)+A(1.14)=0.1141+0.3729=\mathbf{0.4870} \] Only about 49% of stock rods fit — more than half must be rejected.
The business point: the rods are mis-centred. Their mean (5.07) is not the specification centre (5.10), so the band is lopsided. Re-centring the process on 5.10 would lift the yield to \(2A(0.71)=52\%\) — and cutting σ matters even more. Saying this earns the interpretation mark.
5-36Backwards — service levelLevin Ex. 5-36 · p. 252

Q. A shop orders 110 grease cartridges a week and runs out 1 week in 4. Average use is 95 per week, demand is normal. (a) Find the standard deviation. (b) How many should he order so the chance of running out is at most 0.2?

Why: "runs out 1 week in 4" is a probability in disguise — \(P(x>110)=0.25\). Same two-step shape as 5-34.
Why we do itWhat to write
(a) Translate the frequency into a tail area, then into A(z).
\(P(x>110)=0.25\) \[ A(z)=0.5-0.25=0.25 \;\Rightarrow\; z=0.67 \]
Solve for σ.
\[ \sigma=\frac{110-95}{0.67}=\mathbf{22.39 \text{ cartridges}} \]
(b) At most 0.2 in the upper tail ⇒ 0.30 between the mean and the order level.
\[ A(z)=0.30 \;\Rightarrow\; z=0.84 \]
Forward, then round up.
\[ x = 95 + 0.84(22.39) = 113.8 \] Order 114 cartridges per week.
5-37Effect of σLevin Ex. 5-37 · p. 253

Q. Hat size is normal with mean 7″. Stock covers 6¼″ to 7¾″. Find the probability that a recruit is fitted using (a) \(\sigma = 0.75\), (b) \(\sigma = 0.875\).

Why: the same interval evaluated at two different spreads — a clean demonstration that a wider σ pushes more of the population outside any fixed range.
Why we do itWhat to write
Convert the fractions and note the interval is symmetric about the mean: \(7 \pm 0.75\).
\(6\tfrac14 = 6.25\), \(7\tfrac34 = 7.75\) — so the band is \(7\pm0.75\).
(a) With \(\sigma=0.75\) the limits are exactly one standard deviation out — the empirical rule's 68%.
\[ z=\pm\frac{0.75}{0.75}=\pm1.00 \] \[ P = 2A(1.00)=2(0.3413)=\mathbf{0.6826} \]
(b) With \(\sigma=0.875\) the same limits are fewer standard deviations out.
\[ z=\pm\frac{0.75}{0.875}=\pm0.86 \] \[ P = 2A(0.86)=2(0.3051)=\mathbf{0.6102} \]
Answer the implied question — what the revision costs him.
Revising σ from 0.75 to 0.875 drops the fitted proportion from 68.3% to 61.0%. Nearly 4 recruits in 10 now cannot be fitted from stock, so Sgt. Peter must widen the size range.
5-38Three regionsLevin Ex. 5-38 · p. 253

Q. Training completion time is normal with mean 44 days and standard deviation 12. Find the probability an employee finishes (a) in 33 to 42 days, (b) in fewer than 30 days, (c) in fewer than 25 or more than 60 days.

Why: this is the Q2 (b) shape almost exactly — a band, then a tail, then a two-tail. Sketch all three before computing anything.
Why we do itWhat to write
(a) Both 33 and 42 are below the mean of 44 ⇒ same side ⇒ subtract.
\[ z_1=\frac{33-44}{12}=-0.92 \qquad z_2=\frac{42-44}{12}=-0.17 \] \[ P=A(0.92)-A(0.17)=0.3212-0.0675=\mathbf{0.2537} \]
(b) A lower tail.
\[ z=\frac{30-44}{12}=-1.17 \] \[ P=0.5-A(1.17)=0.5-0.3790=\mathbf{0.1210} \]
(c) Two opposite tails — compute each, then add.
\[ z_1=\frac{25-44}{12}=-1.58 \qquad z_2=\frac{60-44}{12}=1.33 \] \[ P=(0.5-0.4429)+(0.5-0.4082) \]
Total and interpret.
\[ P=0.0571+0.0918=\mathbf{0.1489} \] About 15% of trainees are either unusually fast or unusually slow — the group Anushree should look at individually.
5-40Probability → countLevin Ex. 5-40 · p. 253

Q. Publication takes on average 11 months with standard deviation 2.4 months. Out of 19 books this year, approximately how many will be finished in less than a year?

Why: the question asks for a count, not a probability — so there is one extra step at the end, \(N\times P\). Forgetting it is a guaranteed lost mark.
Why we do itWhat to write
"Less than a year" is 12 months. Standardise.
\[ z=\frac{12-11}{2.4}=0.42 \]
12 is above the mean and we want everything below it ⇒ half the curve plus A(z).
\[ P(x<12)=0.5+A(0.42)=0.5+0.1628=0.6628 \]
Convert the proportion to a number of books.
\[ 19 \times 0.6628 = 12.59 \] So approximately 12 to 13 of the 19 books — say about 13 if a single number is wanted.
5-41Backwards — design valueLevin Ex. 5-41 · p. 253

Q. Adult height is normal with mean 73 inches and standard deviation 6. Nobb wants doors tall enough for 95% of adults to pass without stooping. How tall should the doors be?

Why: a design question — you are given the proportion and must produce the \(x\). 95% below the door height means 45% between the mean and it.
Why we do itWhat to write
Translate "95% pass" into an area measured from the mean.
\[ A(z)=0.95-0.5=0.45 \;\Rightarrow\; z=1.64 \text{ (1.645 if interpolating)} \]
Go forward.
\[ x=\mu+z\sigma = 73+1.64(6)=\mathbf{82.84 \text{ inches}} \] (with \(z=1.645\): 82.87″ — quote your \(z\) either way)
Answer in buildable terms — this is a manufacturing decision.
Make the doors 83 inches (6 ft 11 in). Rounding up is essential: 82 inches would leave more than 5% of adults stooping, breaking the stated objective.
1.64 or 1.645? A(1.64) = 0.4495 and A(1.65) = 0.4505, so 0.45 falls exactly between. Either is accepted provided you say which you used — the same situation the Re-Exam creates deliberately.
SC 5-10Upper tailLevin SC 5-10 · p. 254

Q. With \(\mu = 850{,}000\) and \(\sigma = 200{,}000\), find \(P(x \ge 1{,}000{,}000)\).

Why: a single upper tail — the cleanest possible use of reading 2.
Standardise. The large numbers cancel neatly.
\[ z=\frac{1{,}000{,}000-850{,}000}{200{,}000}=\frac{150{,}000}{200{,}000}=0.75 \]
Upper tail from a positive z.
\[ P=0.5-A(0.75)=0.5-0.2734=\mathbf{0.2266} \]
Matches Levin's printed answer (0.2266) exactly.
Five more, shaped like Q2 (b) interval probability, then a one-tail "highly successful" probability — the exact paper shape
X1The exact Q2 (b) shape

Q. Monthly sales at a store are normally distributed with mean ₹85,000 and standard deviation ₹12,000. (a) What is the probability that sales in a month fall between ₹70,000 and ₹95,000? (b) A month is called "highly successful" if sales exceed ₹1,05,000 — what proportion of months are highly successful? (c) Comment for the manager.

Solution
Why: (a) is a band straddling the mean ⇒ add. (b) is an upper tail ⇒ 0.5 − A(z). (c) is the interpretation mark, and it is worth as much as either calculation.
(a) Standardise both ends. 70,000 is below the mean and 95,000 above ⇒ opposite sides ⇒ add.
\[ z_1=\frac{70000-85000}{12000}=-1.25 \qquad z_2=\frac{95000-85000}{12000}=0.83 \] \[ P=A(1.25)+A(0.83)=0.3944+0.2967=\mathbf{0.6911} \]
(b) Upper tail.
\[ z=\frac{105000-85000}{12000}=1.67 \] \[ P=0.5-A(1.67)=0.5-0.4525=\mathbf{0.0475} \]
(c) Turn both numbers into a sentence about the business.
About 69% of months land in the ordinary ₹70k–₹95k band — that is the store's normal operating range and what stock and staffing should be planned around. Only 4.75% of months, roughly one every 21 months, clear ₹1,05,000, so "highly successful" is genuinely exceptional and should not be built into the budget.
X2Backwards, both directions

Q. Delivery times are normal with mean 42 minutes and standard deviation 8. (a) The slowest 10% of deliveries trigger a review — above what time? (b) Within what symmetric interval about the mean do the middle 95% of deliveries fall?

Solution
Why: both parts read the table inwards. (a) 10% in the upper tail ⇒ A = 0.40. (b) middle 95% ⇒ 47.5% each side ⇒ A = 0.475, the classic \(z=1.96\).
(a) Upper 10% ⇒ 40% between the mean and the cutoff.
\[ A(z)=0.40 \;\Rightarrow\; z=1.28 \] \[ x=42+1.28(8)=\mathbf{52.2 \text{ minutes}} \]
(b) Middle 95% ⇒ 0.475 on each side of the mean.
\[ A(z)=0.475 \;\Rightarrow\; z=\pm1.96 \] \[ 42 \pm 1.96(8) = \mathbf{26.3 \text{ to } 57.7 \text{ minutes}} \]
X3Tolerance / reject rate

Q. Bolt diameters are normal with mean 10.00 mm and standard deviation 0.06 mm. The specification is 9.90 to 10.10 mm. What proportion is accepted, and what is the reject rate per 10,000 bolts?

Solution
Why: a symmetric band about the mean, so \(P = 2A(z)\); the reject rate is the complement, converted to a count.
Standardise — the band is symmetric, so one z does both ends.
\[ z=\pm\frac{0.10}{0.06}=\pm1.67 \] \[ P(\text{accept}) = 2A(1.67)=2(0.4525)=\mathbf{0.9050} \]
Complement, then scale to 10,000.
\[ P(\text{reject})=1-0.9050=0.0950 \] \[ 0.0950 \times 10{,}000 = \mathbf{950 \text{ rejects per } 10{,}000} \]
X4Comparing two z-scores

Q. Candidate A scored 78 on a test with mean 70 and standard deviation 5. Candidate B scored 82 on a different test with mean 75 and standard deviation 8. Which performed better relative to their group?

Solution
Why: raw scores from different distributions are not comparable. Standardising puts both on the same scale — that is the entire purpose of \(z\).
Standardise each.
\[ z_A=\frac{78-70}{5}=\mathbf{1.60} \qquad z_B=\frac{82-75}{8}=\mathbf{0.88} \]
Compare, and convert to percentiles to make it concrete.
\(A\) is 1.60 SDs above their mean, \(B\) only 0.88. \[ \text{A: } 0.5+A(1.60)=94.5\text{th percentile} \] \[ \text{B: } 0.5+A(0.88)=81.1\text{st percentile} \] Candidate A performed better — despite the lower raw score.
X5Empirical rule

Q. Component life is normal with mean 500 hours and standard deviation 40. Give the intervals containing about 68%, 95% and 99.7% of components, and state what fraction fail before 420 hours.

Solution
Why: the empirical rule is just the normal table at \(z=1,2,3\) — worth knowing by heart because it answers "roughly" questions with no table at all.
Apply \(\mu \pm k\sigma\).
\(\pm1\sigma\): 460–540 h (68.3%)
\(\pm2\sigma\): 420–580 h (95.4%)
\(\pm3\sigma\): 380–620 h (99.7%)
420 is exactly \(\mu-2\sigma\), so use the 95% band and halve the remainder.
Outside \(\pm2\sigma\) is \(100-95.4=4.6\%\), split equally between the tails. \[ P(x<420)=\mathbf{2.3\%} \]
Topic 5 of 6 · Levin §5.6 (approximation exercises) · pp. 251–253 · 4 textbook + 8 more

The Normal Approximation to the Binomial

A binomial with a large \(n\) is unusable by hand — \(P(7 \le r \le 18)\) out of 200 is twelve terms, each with a factorial of 200 in it. The normal approximation replaces all of that with two \(z\) values. The price is one extra step, the continuity correction, and that single ±0.5 is where nearly every mark in this topic is won or lost.

How to know a question belongs to this topic
The single tell
The question is clearly binomial — a fixed \(n\), a success probability \(p\) — but \(n\) is big and the answer would need many terms. Then check: \(np \ge 5\) AND \(nq \ge 5\).
Give-away words
use the normal approximation between 7 and 18 of the next 200 at least 30 of the 42 n = 200, p = 0.05 approximately how many
The decision rule
np ≥ 5 and nq ≥ 5 → normal approximation, \(\mu=np\), \(\sigma=\sqrt{npq}\), with ±0.5.
n ≥ 20 and p ≤ 0.05 → Poisson approximation instead, \(\lambda=np\), no continuity correction.
Neither → you must do the binomial directly.
The whole difficulty
A binomial counts whole numbers; a normal curve is continuous. So the integer \(r = 7\) has to become the interval \(6.5\) to \(7.5\). Stretch the range outward by 0.5 at each end that is included, and inward by 0.5 at each end that is excluded.
Don't confuse it with
If the question…then…
gives μ and σ of a measured quantityTopic 4 — no continuity correction, ever
gives \(n\), \(p\) with \(np < 5\)normal approximation is invalid — use Poisson or exact binomial
gives \(n \ge 20\), \(p \le 0.05\)Topic 3 — Poisson, \(\lambda = np\)
gives a small \(n\) (say 10 or 15)Topic 2 — do the binomial directly
Master Method — Topic 5
Formula bank
Validity check
(state it every time)
\[ np \ge 5 \quad\text{and}\quad nq \ge 5 \]
Parameters
\[ \mu = np \qquad \sigma = \sqrt{npq} \]
Standardise with the
continuity correction
\[ z = \frac{(r \pm 0.5) - np}{\sqrt{npq}} \]

Write the validity check as a line of working, not in your head. It is a free mark and it is the only thing that justifies everything after it.

The continuity correction — the whole topic in one table
The question asksIntegers wantedUse the boundaries
exactly \(r\)r\(r-0.5\) to \(r+0.5\)
between \(a\) and \(b\) inclusivea … b\(a-0.5\) to \(b+0.5\)  — stretch outward
at least \(a\)  (\(r \ge a\))a, a+1, …from \(a-0.5\) upward
more than \(a\)  (\(r > a\))a+1, a+2, …from \(a+0.5\) upward
at most \(b\)  (\(r \le b\))…, b−1, bup to \(b+0.5\)
fewer than \(b\)  (\(r < b\))…, b−2, b−1up to \(b-0.5\)

The reliable method: first rewrite the phrase as a list of whole numbers ("more than 10, out of 50" ⇒ 11, 12, …, 50). Then put the boundary half a unit outside the smallest and largest integers in that list. Doing it in that order makes the ±0.5 automatic instead of memorised.

The routine
  1. Confirm it is binomial and write \(n\), \(p\), \(q\).
  2. Check \(np \ge 5\) and \(nq \ge 5\) — both, in writing.
  3. Compute \(\mu=np\) and \(\sigma=\sqrt{npq}\).
  4. Convert the phrase to a list of integers, then to continuity-corrected boundaries.
  5. Standardise each boundary and read A(z).
  6. Combine by the sketch — same rules as Topic 4.
  7. Say the answer in words.
Traps
  • Omitting the ±0.5 entirely. On a narrow range this can shift the answer by several percentage points.
  • Correcting in the wrong direction. "At least 30" goes to 29.5, not 30.5 — 30 itself is wanted, so the boundary must fall below it.
  • Applying a continuity correction to a genuinely continuous variable. Topic 4 questions never get one.
  • Skipping the validity check and approximating when \(np<5\) — the answer can be badly wrong, and the check is a mark.
  • Using \(\sigma = npq\). That is the variance.
Textbook bank Levin's four normal-approximation exercises, solved
4 exercises Levin §5.6 pp. 248–253 Each answer is shown beside the exact binomial so you can see how good the approximation is.
5-31All four phrasingsLevin Ex. 5-31 · p. 252

Q. \(X\) is binomial with \(n=50\), \(p=0.25\). Use the normal approximation to find (a) \(P(x>10)\), (b) \(P(x<18)\), (c) \(P(x>21)\), (d) \(P(9

Why: four strict inequalities — the hardest case, because each must first be rewritten as a list of integers before the ±0.5 can be placed.
Why we do itWhat to write
Validity check and parameters — always first.
\(np = 12.5 \ge 5\) ✓   \(nq = 37.5 \ge 5\) ✓ \[ \mu=12.5, \qquad \sigma=\sqrt{50(0.25)(0.75)}=3.0619 \]
(a) \(x>10\) means 11, 12, … so the boundary sits at 10.5.
\[ z=\frac{10.5-12.5}{3.0619}=-0.65 \] \[ P=0.5+A(0.65)=0.5+0.2422=\mathbf{0.7422} \] exact binomial 0.7378
(b) \(x<18\) means …, 16, 17 — boundary at 17.5.
\[ z=\frac{17.5-12.5}{3.0619}=1.63 \] \[ P=0.5+A(1.63)=\mathbf{0.9484} \] exact 0.9449
(c) \(x>21\) means 22, 23, … — boundary at 21.5.
\[ z=\frac{21.5-12.5}{3.0619}=2.94 \] \[ P=0.5-A(2.94)=0.5-0.4984=\mathbf{0.0016} \] exact 0.0026
(d) \(9
\[ z_1=\frac{9.5-12.5}{3.0619}=-0.98 \qquad z_2=\frac{13.5-12.5}{3.0619}=0.33 \] \[ P=A(0.98)+A(0.33)=0.3365+0.1293=\mathbf{0.4658} \] exact 0.4734
Where the approximation is weakest: part (c), in the far tail, gives 0.0016 against a true 0.0026 — a 38% relative error, though only 0.001 in absolute terms. The approximation is excellent near the mean and least reliable in the extreme tails. Worth one sentence if the question invites comment.
5-33Five casesLevin Ex. 5-33 · p. 252

Q. Use the normal approximation for (a) n=35, p=0.15, between 7 and 10 inclusive; (b) n=29, p=0.25, at least 9; (c) n=84, p=0.42, at most 40; (d) n=63, p=0.11, 10 or more; (e) n=18, p=0.67, between 9 and 12 inclusive.

Why: five different phrasings, five different corrections. Do the validity check on each — (a) and (d) are the marginal ones.
np, nqμσBoundariesz valuesAnswer
(a)5.25, 29.75 ✓5.252.11256.5 – 10.50.59, 2.490.2712
(b)7.25, 21.75 ✓7.252.33188.5 →0.540.2946
(c)35.28, 48.72 ✓35.284.5235← 40.51.150.8749
(d)6.93, 56.07 ✓6.932.48359.5 →1.030.1515
(e)12.06, 5.94 ✓12.061.99498.5 – 12.5−1.78, 0.220.5496
Worked in full for (a) so the pattern is visible: inclusive range ⇒ stretch outward.
\[ \mu=35(0.15)=5.25,\quad \sigma=\sqrt{35(0.15)(0.85)}=2.1125 \] \[ z_1=\frac{6.5-5.25}{2.1125}=0.59 \qquad z_2=\frac{10.5-5.25}{2.1125}=2.49 \] \[ P=A(2.49)-A(0.59)=0.4936-0.2224=\mathbf{0.2712} \]
And (e), where both boundaries land on opposite sides of the mean ⇒ add.
\[ z_1=\frac{8.5-12.06}{1.9949}=-1.78 \qquad z_2=\frac{12.5-12.06}{1.9949}=0.22 \] \[ P=A(1.78)+A(0.22)=0.4625+0.0871=\mathbf{0.5496} \]
Note (e): \(nq = 18(0.33) = 5.94\) — only just above 5. The approximation is valid but at its limit, and the true binomial value is 0.5354 against our 0.5496. When \(np\) or \(nq\) is close to 5, say so.
5-39AppliedLevin Ex. 5-39 · p. 253

Q. 5% of cars fail their annual inspection. Using the normal approximation, find the probability that between 7 and 18 of the next 200 cars fail.

Why: the reason the approximation exists. Doing this exactly means twelve binomial terms with \(\binom{200}{r}\) in each — the approximation does it in two \(z\) values, and lands within 0.0004 of the truth.
Why we do itWhat to write
Set up and check validity. Note \(p=0.05\) — the Poisson route is also open here, but the question specifies normal.
\(n=200,\ p=0.05,\ q=0.95\) \[ np=10 \ge 5 \;✓ \qquad nq=190 \ge 5 \;✓ \]
Parameters.
\[ \mu=10, \qquad \sigma=\sqrt{200(0.05)(0.95)}=\sqrt{9.5}=3.0822 \]
"Between 7 and 18" — both endpoints wanted, so stretch outward to 6.5 and 18.5.
\[ z_1=\frac{6.5-10}{3.0822}=-1.14 \qquad z_2=\frac{18.5-10}{3.0822}=2.76 \]
Opposite sides of the mean ⇒ add.
\[ P=A(1.14)+A(2.76)=0.3729+0.4971=\mathbf{0.8700} \] exact binomial 0.8704 — the approximation is essentially perfect here
SC 5-9Four casesLevin SC 5-9 · p. 251

Q. Use the normal approximation for (a) n=30, p=0.35, between 10 and 15 inclusive; (b) n=42, p=0.62, 30 or more; (c) n=15, p=0.40, at most 7; (d) n=51, p=0.42, between 17 and 25 inclusive.

Why: the same four shapes again. Levin prints the answer to (a) as 0.6199 — a useful check that your correction and your table reading agree with the book's.
μ = npσ = √(npq)Boundariesz valuesA(z)Answer
(a)10.502.61259.5 – 15.5−0.38, 1.910.1480, 0.47190.6199
(b)26.043.145729.5 →1.100.36430.1357
(c)6.001.8974← 7.50.790.28520.7852
(d)21.423.524716.5 – 25.5−1.40, 1.160.4192, 0.37700.7962
(a) matches Levin's printed 0.6199 exactly. Note (c): "at most 7" is an upper boundary at 7.5, and since \(z\) is positive the answer is \(0.5+A(z)\), not \(0.5-A(z)\).
Eight more — the correction drilled every way including two where the approximation is the wrong tool
Write the validity check and the integer list before touching a z value.
X1Coin tossing

Q. A fair coin is tossed 100 times. Find (a) P(at most 45 heads), (b) P(between 45 and 55 heads inclusive).

Solution
Why: \(np = nq = 50\), so the approximation is at its best. \(\sigma = \sqrt{100(0.5)(0.5)} = 5\) exactly.
(a) "At most 45" ⇒ up to 45, boundary at 45.5.
\[ z=\frac{45.5-50}{5}=-0.90 \] \[ P=0.5-A(0.90)=0.5-0.3159=\mathbf{0.1841} \]
(b) Inclusive both ends ⇒ 44.5 to 55.5.
\[ z=\pm\frac{5.5}{5}=\pm1.10 \] \[ P=2A(1.10)=2(0.3643)=\mathbf{0.7286} \] exact binomial 0.7287 — four-decimal agreement
X2At least

Q. 30% of 400 customers who enter a store make a purchase. Find the probability that at least 110 buy something.

Solution
Why: "at least 110" includes 110, so the boundary goes below it at 109.5.
Check and parameters.
\(np=120\ge5\) ✓ \(nq=280\ge5\) ✓ \[ \mu=120,\quad \sigma=\sqrt{400(0.3)(0.7)}=9.1652 \]
Boundary at 109.5, below the mean.
\[ z=\frac{109.5-120}{9.1652}=-1.15 \] \[ P=0.5+A(1.15)=0.5+0.3749=\mathbf{0.8749} \]
X3Symmetric range

Q. 20% of 150 items sampled are expected to be seconds. Find P(between 25 and 35 seconds, inclusive).

Solution
Why: the range is symmetric about \(\mu = 30\), so one \(z\) does both ends.
Parameters and boundaries.
\[ \mu=30,\quad \sigma=\sqrt{150(0.2)(0.8)}=4.8990 \] Boundaries 24.5 and 35.5.
Symmetric ⇒ \(2A(z)\).
\[ z=\pm\frac{5.5}{4.8990}=\pm1.12 \] \[ P=2A(1.12)=2(0.3686)=\mathbf{0.7372} \]
X4At most

Q. \(n = 60\), \(p = 0.40\). Find P(at most 20 successes).

Solution
Why: "at most 20" includes 20, so the boundary goes above it at 20.5.
Check, parameters, boundary.
\(np=24\) ✓ \(nq=36\) ✓   \(\mu=24,\ \sigma=\sqrt{60(0.4)(0.6)}=3.7947\) \[ z=\frac{20.5-24}{3.7947}=-0.92 \] \[ P=0.5-A(0.92)=0.5-0.3212=\mathbf{0.1788} \]
X5More than

Q. An insurer expects 8% of 500 policies to produce a claim. Find P(more than 49 claims).

Solution
Why: "more than 49" excludes 49, so the integers are 50, 51, … and the boundary is 49.5 — not 48.5.
Check and parameters.
\(np=40\ge5\) ✓ \(nq=460\ge5\) ✓ \[ \mu=40,\quad \sigma=\sqrt{500(0.08)(0.92)}=6.0663 \]
Boundary at 49.5, above the mean.
\[ z=\frac{49.5-40}{6.0663}=1.57 \] \[ P=0.5-A(1.57)=0.5-0.4418=\mathbf{0.0582} \]
X6Asymmetric range

Q. In a poll of 80 voters, 45% are expected to support a proposal. Find P(between 30 and 40 supporters, inclusive).

Solution
Why: \(\mu = 36\) sits inside the range but not at its centre, so the two \(z\) values differ and both areas must be added.
Parameters and boundaries 29.5 to 40.5.
\[ \mu=36,\quad \sigma=\sqrt{80(0.45)(0.55)}=4.4497 \]
Opposite sides of the mean ⇒ add.
\[ z_1=\frac{29.5-36}{4.4497}=-1.46 \qquad z_2=\frac{40.5-36}{4.4497}=1.01 \] \[ P=A(1.46)+A(1.01)=0.4279+0.3438=\mathbf{0.7717} \]
X7Which approximation?

Q. A batch of 1,000 units has a 2% defect rate. Find P(between 15 and 25 defectives inclusive). Both approximations are available here — which would you use, and does it matter?

Solution
Why: \(n \ge 20\) and \(p \le 0.05\) (Poisson valid) and \(np = 20 \ge 5\), \(nq = 980 \ge 5\) (normal valid). A rare case where both rules fire, so you must justify the choice.
Normal route.
\[ \mu=20,\ \sigma=\sqrt{1000(0.02)(0.98)}=4.4272 \] \[ z=\pm\frac{5.5}{4.4272}=\pm1.24 \] \[ P=2A(1.24)=2(0.3925)=\mathbf{0.7850} \]
Poisson route, \(\lambda = np = 20\), no continuity correction.
\[ P(15\le x\le25)=\sum_{x=15}^{25}\frac{20^x e^{-20}}{x!}=\mathbf{0.7830} \]
Compare with the truth and answer the "does it matter" part.
Exact binomial = 0.7875. Both approximations land within 0.005, so it does not matter here. Prefer the normal when \(\lambda\) is large (summing 11 Poisson terms is slower than two z lookups); prefer Poisson when \(\lambda\) is small, where the normal is poor.
X8When it is invalid

Q. \(n = 25\), \(p = 0.10\). A student uses the normal approximation to find P(at most 4 successes) and gets 0.9082. Is this acceptable? What should be done instead?

Solution
Why: always run the validity check before trusting an answer. Here it fails, and the question is testing whether you noticed.
Run the check.
\[ np = 25(0.10) = 2.5 \;\;\mathbf{< 5} \quad ✗ \] \(nq = 22.5\) passes, but both are required. The normal approximation is not valid.
Show why it matters — compare with the truth.
Normal gives 0.9082; the exact binomial is 0.9020. The distribution is too skewed at \(p=0.10\) for a symmetric curve to fit well.
Name the right tool.
Use the exact binomial (only five terms — entirely manageable), or the Poisson approximation with \(\lambda = np = 2.5\), which gives 0.8912. Best answer: with \(n=25\) and only five terms needed, do it exactly and skip approximating altogether.
Topic 6 of 6 · Levin §5.7 · pp. 254–255 · 4 textbook + 8 classification drills

Choosing the Correct Probability Distribution

The topic that decides the other five. In the exam nobody tells you "use Poisson" — the story does, and only if you can read it. This section is pure identification: no arithmetic, just the reflex that turns a paragraph into a named distribution and its parameters.

How to know a question belongs to this topic
It asks you to
Name a distribution rather than use one — or it gives you a scenario with no instruction at all, and choosing correctly is the first mark.
Give-away words
which probability distribution would you use is this binomial, Poisson or normal? what characteristics determine… justify your choice of distribution state the distribution and its parameters
Every exam question secretly is this
Q1 (b) and Q2 (b) never say which distribution to use. The story says "an average of λ per interval" or "mean μ and standard deviation σ" and expects you to know. This topic is the first two marks of both.
What a full answer contains
The name, the parameters with values, and the reason — "Poisson, λ = 3.2, because a rate per interval is given with no fixed number of trials".
Master Method — Topic 6
The three questions, in order
  1. Is the variable counted or measured? Counted (0, 1, 2, …) ⇒ discrete ⇒ binomial or Poisson. Measured on a scale ⇒ continuous ⇒ normal. This single question settles most cases.
  2. If counted: is there a fixed number of trials? Yes, you can point at \(n\) ⇒ binomial. No — just a rate per unit of time, area or volume ⇒ Poisson.
  3. If binomial: is \(n\) large enough to want a shortcut? \(n\ge20\) and \(p\le0.05\) ⇒ Poisson approximation, \(\lambda=np\). \(np\ge5\) and \(nq\ge5\) ⇒ normal approximation, \(\mu=np\), \(\sigma=\sqrt{npq}\), with ±0.5.
The signature of each distribution
DistributionSignature in the questionParametersIdentity to check
Binomial"out of 20…", "a sample of n", pass/fail, defective/good\(n,\ p\)\(\mu=np\), \(\sigma^2=npq\); \(\sigma^2 < \mu\)
Poisson"on average λ per hour / page / km"; no n exists\(\lambda\)\(\mu = \sigma^2 = \lambda\) — unique to Poisson
Normal"normally distributed, mean μ, s.d. σ"; a measured quantity\(\mu,\ \sigma\)continuous, symmetric, bell-shaped
Poisson approx.binomial wording, but \(n\ge20\) and \(p\le0.05\)\(\lambda=np\)no continuity correction
Normal approx.binomial wording, \(np\ge5\) and \(nq\ge5\)\(\mu=np,\ \sigma=\sqrt{npq}\)±0.5 continuity correction required
Traps
  • "Number of…" is not automatically Poisson. "Number of defectives in a lot of 100" is binomial — the 100 is your \(n\).
  • Ignoring the bridges. A binomial with \(n=1000\) is still binomial, but nobody expects you to compute it that way.
  • Calling a measurement discrete because it is recorded in whole units. Age recorded in whole years is still a continuous quantity.
  • Forgetting the parameters. "Poisson" alone is half an answer; "Poisson with λ = 3.2 per 80 disputes" is the whole one.
Textbook bank §5.7, pp. 254–255 · all 4, answered
4 exercises Levin §5.7 Choosing the correct probability distribution pp. 254–255
5-42Classify fourLevin Ex. 5-42 · p. 254

Q. Which distribution is most likely appropriate — binomial, Poisson or normal? (a) The life span of a female born in 1977. (b) The number of autos passing through a tollbooth. (c) The number of defective radios in a lot of 100. (d) The water level in a reservoir.

Why: run the three questions on each. Counted or measured first; then fixed \(n\) or a rate.
Why we do itWhat to write
(a) Life span is measured on a continuous scale, and clusters around a central value.
Normal. Parameters \(\mu\) and \(\sigma\) in years.
(b) A count, but with no fixed number of trials — cars arrive at a rate over time, and any number could pass.
Poisson. Parameter \(\lambda\) = mean autos per unit of time.
(c) A count with a fixed \(n\) — the lot size of 100 is given, each radio is defective or not.
Binomial. \(n=100\), \(p\) = defect rate. (If \(p\le0.05\), the Poisson approximation with \(\lambda=100p\) would be the practical route.)
(d) Water level is a measurement on a continuous scale.
Normal. \(\mu\) and \(\sigma\) in metres.
The pair to notice is (b) and (c) — both are "the number of something", and they take different distributions. The deciding word in (c) is "in a lot of 100": that phrase is your \(n\). Without it, (c) would be Poisson too.
5-43TheoryLevin Ex. 5-43 · p. 255

Q. What characteristics of a situation help to determine which distribution is appropriate?

Why: a list question — answer as a numbered list of characteristics, each with the distribution it points to.
Answer 1. Is the random variable discrete or continuous? Counted values ⇒ binomial or Poisson; measured on a scale ⇒ normal.
2. Is the number of trials fixed and known in advance? Yes ⇒ binomial. No, only a rate per interval ⇒ Poisson.
3. Are there exactly two outcomes per trial? Success/failure, defective/good ⇒ binomial.
4. Is the probability of success constant across trials? If it drifts, the binomial does not apply.
5. Are the trials (or occurrences) independent? Required by both the binomial and the Poisson.
6. Does the mean equal the variance? If so, that is the signature of a Poisson.
7. Is the number of possible values finite or unlimited? Binomial stops at \(n\); Poisson has no upper limit.
8. Is the distribution symmetric and bell-shaped? Points to the normal — or to a binomial large enough to be approximated by one.
5-44TheoryLevin Ex. 5-44 · p. 255

Q. Explain the difference between discrete and continuous random variables. What difference do such classifications make in determining the probabilities of future events?

Why: two parts — a definition and a consequence. The second part is the one that earns the marks, so do not stop at the definition.
Answer The distinction. A discrete random variable takes only a limited number of values that can be listed — 0, 1, 2, 3 defectives. A continuous random variable can take any value within a range — a weight of 15.2374… kg is possible in principle.

What follows from it — four consequences:
1. For a discrete variable, \(P(X = x)\) is a genuine, non-zero probability. For a continuous variable, \(P(X = x) = 0\) for any single value — only intervals have positive probability, because there are infinitely many possible values.
2. Discrete probabilities come from a formula evaluated at each value and summed; continuous probabilities come from the area under a curve between two limits.
3. Discrete distributions are drawn as spikes or bars; continuous ones as a smooth curve.
4. Moving between them needs the continuity correction: approximating a discrete count by a continuous curve requires the ±0.5 adjustment, exactly as in Topic 5.
5-45TheoryLevin Ex. 5-45 · p. 255

Q. In practice, the nature of a distribution is often not obvious. What alternatives are open to someone who wants to use probability distributions but is not sure which one fits?

Why: a practical judgement question. Answer with concrete actions, in the order you would actually take them.
Answer 1. Collect data and plot it. A histogram of past observations shows the shape directly — symmetric and bell-shaped suggests normal; a long right tail with a peak near zero suggests Poisson.
2. Compare the mean and the variance. If they are approximately equal, the Poisson is indicated; if the variance is clearly smaller than the mean, the binomial.
3. Examine the process, not just the numbers. Ask whether there is a fixed number of independent trials with two outcomes — that is a structural test which does not need data at all.
4. Test the fit formally. A chi-square goodness-of-fit test compares observed frequencies with those a candidate distribution predicts (Unit 14).
5. Use an empirical distribution. If nothing standard fits, use the observed relative frequencies themselves as the probability distribution.
6. Consult published work or an expert in the field, where the underlying process is often already documented.
7. Test the sensitivity of the decision. Compute the answer under two candidate distributions — if the business decision is the same either way, the choice does not matter and you can proceed.
Eight classification drills name the distribution and its parameters — no arithmetic, ten seconds each
Say the name, the parameters and the reason. Two out of three is half a mark.
X1Classify

Q. A call centre receives an average of 12 calls per hour. What is the probability of more than 15 calls in an hour?

Solution
AnswerPoisson, λ = 12 per hour. A rate per interval with no fixed number of trials — there is no \(n\), because any number of calls could arrive.
X2Classify

Q. Of 15 machines inspected, each has a 20% chance of needing service. What is the probability that exactly 4 need service?

Solution
AnswerBinomial, n = 15, p = 0.20. Fixed number of trials, two outcomes, constant \(p\), independent machines. Check the bridges: \(np = 3 < 5\) so the normal approximation is invalid, and \(p = 0.2 > 0.05\) so Poisson is invalid — compute it exactly.
X3Classify

Q. The weight of cereal in a box averages 500 g with a standard deviation of 8 g. What proportion of boxes fall below 490 g?

Solution
AnswerNormal, μ = 500 g, σ = 8 g. Weight is a continuous measurement, and a mean and standard deviation are given. No continuity correction — the variable really is continuous.
X4Classify

Q. A batch of 400 components has a 1% defect rate. What is the probability of exactly 3 defectives?

Solution
AnswerBinomial in principle (\(n = 400\), \(p = 0.01\)) — but \(n \ge 20\) and \(p \le 0.05\), so use the Poisson approximation with λ = np = 4. Check the other bridge too: \(np = 4 < 5\), so the normal approximation does not qualify. Poisson is the only shortcut available here.
X5Classify

Q. In a survey of 500 voters, 45% are expected to favour a candidate. What is the probability that between 210 and 240 favour them?

Solution
AnswerBinomial (\(n = 500\), \(p = 0.45\)), solved by the normal approximation: \(np = 225 \ge 5\) and \(nq = 275 \ge 5\), so \(\mu = 225\), \(\sigma = \sqrt{500(0.45)(0.55)} = 11.12\), with the ±0.5 continuity correction (boundaries 209.5 and 240.5). Poisson does not apply — \(p\) is far above 0.05.
X6Classify

Q. A machine breaks down on average 2.5 times per month. Over the last 6 months, the variance in breakdowns was measured at 2.4. What does that tell you, and what is the probability of no breakdowns next month?

Solution
AnswerMean 2.5 and variance 2.4 are approximately equal — the signature of a Poisson process, and good evidence the model fits. So \(\lambda = 2.5\) per month and \(P(0) = e^{-2.5} = \mathbf{0.0821}\). The mean-equals-variance check is the most useful diagnostic in the whole unit; if the variance had been 6, a Poisson would be the wrong model.
X7Classify

Q. "The number of typing errors on a page" and "the number of pages containing an error, out of 50 pages". Are these the same distribution?

Solution
AnswerNo.
"Errors on a page" — a count with no upper limit and a rate per page ⇒ Poisson, parameter λ = mean errors per page.
"Pages containing an error, out of 50" — a fixed \(n = 50\), each page either does or does not contain an error ⇒ binomial, with \(p = P(\text{a page has at least one error}) = 1 - e^{-\lambda}\).
The two are linked: the binomial's \(p\) is computed from the Poisson. Spotting that link is what the question is testing.
X8Classify all five

Q. Name the distribution and parameters for each: (a) time to serve a customer, mean 4.2 min, s.d. 1.1; (b) number of accidents at a junction per week, average 3; (c) number of heads in 40 coin tosses; (d) number of faulty items in a shipment of 1,000 with a 0.3% fault rate; (e) height of adult males, mean 172 cm, s.d. 7 cm.

Solution
(a) Time is measured, μ and σ given.
Normal, μ = 4.2 min, σ = 1.1 min.
(b) A rate per interval, no fixed \(n\).
Poisson, λ = 3 per week.
(c) Fixed \(n\), two outcomes, constant \(p\).
Binomial, n = 40, p = 0.5. \(np = nq = 20 \ge 5\), so the normal approximation (μ = 20, σ = 3.162, ±0.5) is available if a range is asked for.
(d) and (e).
(d) Binomial n = 1000, p = 0.003 — but \(n\ge20\), \(p\le0.05\), so use the Poisson approximation, λ = 3.
(e) Normal, μ = 172 cm, σ = 7 cm.
THE 90-SECOND VERSION — WHAT TO CARRY INTO THE HALL
Summary Cheat Sheet
Binomial: \(P(r) = \binom{n}{r} p^r q^{n-r}, \qquad \mu = np, \quad \sigma = \sqrt{npq}\)
Poisson: \(P(x) = \frac{\lambda^x e^{-\lambda}}{x!}, \qquad P(X=0) = e^{-\lambda}, \quad P(X \ge 1) = 1 - e^{-\lambda}\)
Normal: \(z = \frac{x - \mu}{\sigma}\)
Approximations & Continuity Correction
Poisson approx: \(n \ge 20, p \le 0.05 \implies \lambda = np\)
Normal approx: \(np \ge 5, nq \ge 5 \implies \mu = np, \sigma = \sqrt{npq}\) (with \(\pm 0.5\) continuity correction)
◆ Where this sits in the rest of the site

Concepts behind all of this: Unit 04 notes. The two real exam questions from this unit — Poisson Q1 (b) and normal Q2 (b) — are worked in both their versions at Solved Papers. The z table your class uses, and how it converts to the cumulative one, is on the Formula & Table Sheet.

Next in exam weight: Units 5–6 carry 12 marks between them, and both lean on the normal table you have just drilled — the only change is that \(\sigma\) becomes \(\sigma/\sqrt{n}\).