Q.Suppose that the reliability of a HIV test is specified as follows: Of people having HIV, 90% of the test detect the disease but 10% go undetected. Of people free of HIV, 99% of the test are judged HIV−ive but 1% are diagnosed as showing HIV+ive. From a large population of which only 0.1% have HIV, one person is selected at random, given the HIV test, and the pathologist reports him/her as HIV+ive. What is the probability that the person actually has HIV?
🔒You're viewing a preview — the full solution, concept, methods & PYQ mapping are locked.
🔒 Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →Concept understanding — Conditional Probability
Conditional Probability
Roll a die and ask "what is the chance of an even number?" — that is 3/6. But suppose someone tells you the result is greater than 3. Now you are no longer looking at all six faces, only at {4,5,6}, and two of those (4 and 6) are even, so the probability becomes 2/3. That change — from the probability of A to the probability of A given that B has already occurred — is conditional probability.
The Idea: Shrink the Sample Space
Conditioning on B throws away every outcome where B is false and treats B as the new "whole world." You measure A only against what is still possible.
Think of filtering a table of data: unconditional probability uses every row; conditional probability keeps only the rows where the condition is true.
The Definition
For events A and B with P(B)>0,
P(A∣B)=P(B)P(A∩B).
We divide by P(B) to rescale so that B itself has probability 1; the surviving part of A is the overlap A∩B. Checking the die: P(A∩B)=P({4,6})=62 and P(B)=63, so P(A∣B)=3/62/6=32, matching the intuition.
Rearranging gives the multiplication rule P(A∩B)=P(A∣B)P(B), which is usually the easier way to compute a joint probability when a problem says "given that."
Two Cautions
- P(A∣B) and P(B∣A) are generally not equal; swapping them is the classic mistake. They are linked by Bayes' theorem, P(A∣B)=P(B)P(B∣A)P(A). …
The key idea is Conditional Probability — specifically, Bayes’ theorem, which reverses the conditional probability using the base rate of the disease.
Let H = event that the person has HIV, and + = event that the test is positive.
We are given:
- P(H)=0.001 (0.1% prevalence)
- P(+∣H)=0.90 (sensitivity)
- P(+∣Hc)=0.01 (false positive rate, since 1% of healthy people test positive)
We want P(H∣+).
Step 1: Find P(+) using the law of total probability:
P(+)=P(+∣H)P(H)+P(+∣Hc)P(Hc)=(0.90)(0.001)+(0.01)(0.999)=0.0009+0.00999=0.01089
Step 2: Apply Bayes’ theorem: …
This is a classic Bayes' theorem problem. We are given the test's sensitivity (90% true positive rate) and specificity (99% true negative rate), and a very low disease prevalence (0.1%). Even with a positive test result, the probability that the person actually has HIV is only about 8.3% — because the false positives from the huge healthy population swamp the true positives.
Why Bayes' theorem is the natural tool
We want P(HIV∣positive). That's a conditional probability where the condition (the test result) is observed, but we need to reverse the direction of the given conditional probabilities. The test tells us P(positive∣HIV) and P(negative∣no HIV), but we need the inverse.
Bayes' theorem is exactly the formula for this reversal. It combines:
- The prior probability of having HIV (the population prevalence: 0.1%)
- The likelihood of a positive test given HIV (90%)
- The total probability of a positive test (which includes both true positives and false positives)
The result is the posterior probability — our updated belief after seeing the positive test.
Step-by-step solution
1. Define the events clearly
Let H = person has HIV, and T+ = test reports positive.
From the problem:
- P(H)=0.1%=0.001 (prevalence)
- P(T+∣H)=90%=0.9 (sensitivity — true positive rate)
- P(T−∣H)=99%=0.99 (specificity — true negative rate)
Therefore:
- P(H)=1−0.001=0.999
- P(T+∣H)=1−0.99=0.01 (false positive rate)
2. Find the total probability of a positive test
A positive test can happen in two ways:
- The person has HIV and the test correctly detects it: P(H)×P(T+∣H)
- The person does not have HIV and the test falsely says positive: P(H)×P(T+∣H)
By the law of total probability:
P(T+)=P(H)⋅P(T+∣H)+P(H)⋅P(T+∣H)
Substitute the numbers:
P(T+)=(0.001)(0.9)+(0.999)(0.01)
Compute each term:
- True positives: 0.001×0.9=0.0009
- False positives: 0.999×0.01=0.00999
So:
P(T+)=0.0009+0.00999=0.01089
Notice that false positives (0.00999) are more than 11 times the true positives (0.0009). This is the key reason the posterior probability is so low — the healthy population is huge, so even a tiny false positive rate produces many false positives.
3. Apply Bayes' theorem
We want P(H∣T+):
P(H∣T+)=P(T+)P(H)⋅P(T+∣H) …
Method: Bayes' Theorem (finding the cause from the observed outcome)
Use this for diagnostic-test problems: you observe a test result and want the probability that the person truly has the condition. The test gives you P(positive∣disease) and P(negative∣healthy), but you need the reverse, P(disease∣positive).
Steps
Step 1: Set up the partition of possible causes.
List the mutually exclusive, exhaustive hypotheses (here: the person has the disease, or is free of it) and write their prior probabilities P(Ei) (these must sum to 1).
Step 2: Write each likelihood.
For each cause, state P(A∣Ei) — the probability of the observed outcome (here: the test reports positive) under that cause.
Step 3: Get the total probability of the outcome (the denominator).
By the law of total probability,
P(A)=∑iP(Ei)P(A∣Ei).
Step 4: Apply Bayes' theorem for the cause you want.
P(Ek∣A)=∑iP(Ei)P(A∣Ei)P(Ek)P(A∣Ek). …
Common Mistakes
Mistake 1: Thinking a positive result on a "90% / 99%" test means about a 90% chance of disease.
Why it's wrong: this ignores the base rate — only 0.1% of people have HIV, so the false positives from the 99.9% healthy population swamp the true positives. Correct approach: use Bayes' theorem; the answer is only about 8.3%.
Mistake 2: Omitting the false-positive term in the denominator.
Why it's wrong: a positive test comes from true positives and false positives. Correct approach: P(+)=P(H)P(+∣H)+P(H′)P(+∣H′). …
Showing the 12 most recent of 69 on this concept.
- AP EAPCET 2025Set eng-2025-05-24-FN1 markMCQQ.An item is tested on a device for its defectiveness. The probability that such an item is defective is 0.3. The device gives accurate result in 8 out of 10 such tests. If the device reports that an item tested is not defective, then the probability that it is actually defective is (A) 152 (B) 293 (C) 313 (D) 514
›Reveal solutionSolution
A direct Bayes'-theorem inversion problem; the item is actually defective with probability 313 given a "not defective" report — option (C).
Concept and Intuition
The device's report can be wrong. To find the true state given an observed (possibly wrong) report, we must weigh both ways the report could have arisen: a genuinely non-defective item correctly reported as such, or a genuinely defective item incorrectly reported as non-defective. Bayes' theorem combines these.
Step-by-Step Solution
- Let D: item defective, P(D)=0.3; D′: item not defective, P(D′)=0.7.
- Device accuracy =0.8, so it errs with probability 0.2.
- "Reports not defective" while the item is defective means the device made an error: P(report ND∣D)=0.2.
- "Reports not defective" while the item is not defective means the device was accurate: P(report ND∣D′)=0.8. …
- AP EAPCET 2026Set eng-2026-05-12-FN1 markMCQQ.In a college, the heights of 4% of male and 1% of female students are more than 1.8 meters. If 60% of the total students are female and a student selected at random has height more than 1.8 meters, then the probability that this student is a female, is (A) 118 (B) 116 (C) 115 (D) 113
›Reveal solutionSolution
A direct application of Bayes' theorem: given the height is above 1.8m, find the probability the student is female.
Concept and Intuition
This is the classic "reverse conditional probability" setup — we know P(tall∣gender) for each gender and the gender proportions, and want P(gender∣tall). Bayes' theorem converts one direction of conditioning into the other by weighting each gender's tall-probability by its population share and normalizing.
Step-by-Step Solution
- Let M = male, F = female, H = height >1.8m. Given: P(F)=0.6, P(M)=0.4, P(H∣M)=0.04, P(H∣F)=0.01.
- Total probability of height >1.8m: P(H)=P(M)P(H∣M)+P(F)P(H∣F)=0.4(0.04)+0.6(0.01)=0.016+0.006=0.022. …
- AP EAPCET 2024Set eng-2024-05-20-AN1 markMCQQ.A person is known to speak false once out of 4 times. If that person picks a card at random from a pack of 52 cards and reports that it is a king, then the probability that it is actually a king is (A) 371 (B) 51 (C) 3712 (D) 3725
›Reveal solutionSolution
Classic Bayes'-theorem problem: weigh the prior probability of drawing a king against the person's truth-telling reliability. Answer: 1/5.
Concept and Intuition
The report 'it is a king' can arise two ways: the card really is a king and the person tells the truth, or the card is NOT a king and the person lies (falsely claims king). Bayes' theorem combines these into the posterior probability that it's actually a king.
Step-by-Step Solution
- Prior: P(K)=4/52=1/13 (king drawn), P(Kˉ)=12/13 (not a king).
- Truth-telling: P(truth)=3/4, P(lie)=1/4.
- P(reports king∣K)=P(truth)=3/4 (truthfully reports the actual king).
- P(reports king∣Kˉ)=P(lie)=1/4 (lies about a non-king, falsely calling it a king). …
- AP EAPCET 2024Set eng-2024-05-20-FN1 markMCQQ.A, B, C are mutually exclusive and exhaustive events of a random experiment and E is an event that occurs in conjunction with one of the events A, B, C. The conditional Probabilities of E given the happening of A, B, C are respectively 0.6, 0.3 and 0.1. If P(A)=0.30 and P(B)=0.50, then P(C∣E)= (A) 352 (B) 3515 (C) 3518 (D) 3517
›Reveal solutionSolution
This is a direct Bayes' theorem application over three mutually exclusive, exhaustive causes; P(C∣E)=2/35.
Concept and Intuition
When an event E can occur alongside any of several mutually exclusive, exhaustive causes A,B,C, Bayes' theorem lets us find the probability of a particular cause given that E has occurred, by weighing each cause's prior probability by how likely E is under it, then normalizing.
Step-by-Step Solution
- Since A,B,C are mutually exclusive and exhaustive, P(C)=1−P(A)−P(B)=1−0.30−0.50=0.20.
- Total probability of E: P(E)=P(E∣A)P(A)+P(E∣B)P(B)+P(E∣C)P(C) =0.6(0.30)+0.3(0.50)+0.1(0.20)=0.18+0.15+0.02=0.35 …
- AP EAPCET 2022Set eng-2022-07-07-FN1 markMCQQ.In a toy factory, the machines A, B and C are used to manufacture 30%, 40% and 30% of the output, respectively. The probabilities of toys made by machines A, B, and C to be defective are respectively 2%, 3% and 1%. A toy is taken from the factory and is found to be defective. The probability that it was manufactured by the machine B is (A) 4/5 (B) 2/9 (C) 3/4 (D) 4/7
›Reveal solutionSolution
This tests Bayes' theorem for finding the probability of a specific cause given an observed
effect (a defective toy); the answer is 4/7.
Concept and Intuition
When an outcome (a defective toy) could have come from several sources, each with its own prior
probability and its own conditional probability of producing that outcome, Bayes' theorem lets us
"invert" the conditioning: given that the outcome occurred, what's the probability it came from a
particular source? The key is to first find the total probability of the outcome by summing over
all sources (the law of total probability), then take the one source's contribution as a fraction of
that total.
Step-by-Step Solution
- Prior probabilities: P(A)=0.3, P(B)=0.4, P(C)=0.3.
- Conditional defect rates: P(D∣A)=0.02, P(D∣B)=0.03, P(D∣C)=0.01.
- Total probability of a defective toy (law of total probability):
P(D)=P(A)P(D∣A)+P(B)P(D∣B)+P(C)P(D∣C)=0.3(0.02)+0.4(0.03)+0.3(0.01)
=0.006+0.012+0.003=0.021.
- By Bayes' theorem: …
- AP EAPCET 2025Set eng-2025-05-21-FN1 markMCQQ.A person is known to speak the truth in 3 out of 4 occasions. If he throws a die and reports that it is six, then the probability that it is actually six is (A) 83 (B) 72 (C) 91 (D) 54
›Reveal solutionSolution
A classic Bayes'-theorem problem: combine the prior P(six)=1/6 with the witness's reliability 3/4 to get the posterior probability it's actually six, given he reports six. The answer is 3/8.
Concept and Intuition
Before he speaks, the die has P(six)=1/6. His report is evidence, but he isn't perfectly reliable (truthful 3/4 of the time). Bayes' theorem updates the prior probability using how likely the report "six" is under each of the two possibilities (six actually occurred vs. it didn't).
Step-by-Step Solution
- Let E1 = the die actually shows six, E2 = it doesn't. P(E1)=61, P(E2)=65.
- Let A = he reports "six". If E1 occurred, he reports six truthfully with probability 43: P(A∣E1)=43.
- If E2 occurred, he reports "six" only if he lies, with probability 41: P(A∣E2)=41.
- By Bayes' theorem:
P(E1∣A)=P(A∣E1)P(E1)+P(A∣E2)P(E2)P(A∣E1)P(E1).
- Numerator: 43⋅61=243=81.
- Denominator's second term: 41⋅65=245.
- Sum =243+245=248=31. …
- AP EAPCET 2025Set eng-2025-05-21-FN1 markMCQQ.70% of the total employees of a factory are men. Among the employees of that factory, 30% of men and 15% of women are technical assistants. If an employee chosen at random is found to be a technical assistant, then the probability that this employee is a man is (A) 239 (B) 173 (C) 1714 (D) 2314
›Reveal solutionSolution
A direct Bayes'/total-probability computation using a convenient total of 100 employees. The answer is 1714.
Concept and Intuition
We want P(man∣technical assistant). Since we're given the proportion of men and women, and what fraction of each group are technical assistants, the cleanest approach is to work with actual counts (out of a convenient total like 100) rather than abstract probabilities — it avoids fraction juggling.
Step-by-Step Solution
- Assume 100 employees: Men =70, Women =30.
- Technical assistants among men: 30% of 70=21.
- Technical assistants among women: 15% of 30=4.5.
- Total technical assistants =21+4.5=25.5.
- P(man∣TA)=25.521=255210=5142=1714. …
- AP EAPCET 2023Set eng-2023-05-19-FN1 markMCQQ.A shopkeeper buys a particular type of electric bulbs from three manufacturers M1,M2 and M3. He buys 25% of his requirement from M1, 45% from M2 and 30% from M3. Based on past experience he found that 2% of type M3 bulbs are defective, where as only 1% of type M1 and type M2 are defective. If a bulb chosen by him at random is defective, then the probability that it was of type M3 is (A) 135 (B) 136 (C) 137 (D) 138
›Reveal solutionSolution
A direct application of Bayes' theorem with the law of total probability for the defective-bulb probability. Answer: (B).
Concept and Intuition
This is a classic "reverse conditional probability" problem: we know how likely a defect is given the source, and want the reverse — the probability the source was M3 given a defect was observed. Bayes' theorem converts one into the other via the law of total probability.
Step-by-Step Solution
- Given: P(M1)=0.25, P(M2)=0.45, P(M3)=0.30; P(D∣M1)=0.01, P(D∣M2)=0.01, P(D∣M3)=0.02.
- Total probability of a defective bulb: P(D)=P(M1)P(D∣M1)+P(M2)P(D∣M2)+P(M3)P(D∣M3) =0.25(0.01)+0.45(0.01)+0.30(0.02)=0.0025+0.0045+0.006=0.013. …
- AP EAPCET 2021Set eng-2021-08-24-AN1 markMCQQ.A man is known to speak truth 7 out of 10 times. After throwing a die with 100 faces marked 1,2,3,…,100 on its faces, the man reports that he got a prime number on the die. What is the probability that it is actually a prime? (A) 165 (B) 167 (C) 1611 (D) 1610
›Reveal solutionSolution
A classic Bayes'-theorem "truth-telling" problem: combining the base rate of primes among 1–100 with the man's truthfulness gives P(actually prime∣reports prime)=167.
Concept and Intuition
Even though the man is more likely to tell the truth than lie, the base rate of the event matters. Since primes are a minority (25 out of 100), a "prime" report is diluted by false reports from the much larger non-prime set.
Step-by-Step Solution
- Number of primes from 1 to 100 is 25 (2, 3, 5, ..., 97), so P(prime)=10025=41, and P(not prime)=43.
- He speaks truth with probability 107: P(reports prime∣prime)=107, and (lying) P(reports prime∣not prime)=103. …
- AP EAPCET 2025Set eng-2025-05-24-FN1 markMCQQ.In a school there are 3 sections A, B and C. Section A contains 20 girls and 30 boys, section B contains 40 girls and 20 boys and section C contains 10 girls and 30 boys. The probabilities of selecting the section A, B and C are 0.2, 0.3 and 0.5 respectively. If a student selected at random from the school is a girl, then the probability that she belongs to section A is (A) 200121 (B) 12116 (C) 8114 (D) 8116
›Reveal solutionSolution
A three-section Bayes'-theorem problem; the answer is 8116, option (D).
Concept and Intuition
Given a randomly selected student is a girl, we want to reverse-condition on which section she came from. This requires the total probability of "selecting a girl" (summed over all three sections weighted by section-selection probability), then applying Bayes' theorem to isolate section A's contribution.
Step-by-Step Solution
- Conditional probabilities of picking a girl within each section: P(girl∣A)=5020=52; P(girl∣B)=6040=32; P(girl∣C)=4010=41.
- Section-selection probabilities: P(A)=51, P(B)=103, P(C)=21.
- Joint terms: P(A)P(girl∣A)=51⋅52=252; P(B)P(girl∣B)=103⋅32=51; P(C)P(girl∣C)=21⋅41=81. …
- AP EAPCET 2025Set eng-2025-05-21-AN1 markMCQQ.A manufacturing company of bulbs has 3 units A, B and C which produce 25%, 35% and 40% of the bulbs respectively. Out of the bulbs produced by A, B, C units, 5%, 4% and 2% are defective respectively. If a bulb is chosen at random and found to be defective, then the probability that it is produced by unit B is (A) 6928 (B) 7128 (C) 6729 (D) 6925
›Reveal solutionSolution
This tests Bayes' theorem: given the bulb is defective, find the (reversed) probability it came from unit B. Answer: 6928.
Concept and Intuition
We know the forward probabilities (which unit makes what fraction, and each unit's defect rate), but we're asked a reverse question: given the bulb turned out defective, which unit is it likely from? Bayes' theorem reweights the prior production shares by how likely each unit was to have produced this particular (defective) outcome.
Step-by-Step Solution
- Let A,B,C be the events "bulb from unit A/B/C", with P(A)=0.25, P(B)=0.35, P(C)=0.40.
- Conditional defect rates: P(D∣A)=0.05, P(D∣B)=0.04, P(D∣C)=0.02.
- Total probability of a defective bulb: P(D)=0.25(0.05)+0.35(0.04)+0.40(0.02)=0.0125+0.014+0.008=0.0345 …
- AP EAPCET 2024Set eng-2024-05-23-FN1 markMCQQ.Bag A contains 2 white and 3 red balls and bag B contains 4 white and 5 red balls. If one ball is drawn at random from one of the bags and is found to be red, then the probability that it was drawn from the bag B is (A) 5423 (B) 5125 (C) 5225 (D) 5527
›Reveal solutionSolution
A classic Bayes'-theorem problem: given the ball drawn is red, the probability it came from bag B is 5225.
Concept and Intuition
This is Bayes' theorem: we're given the outcome (red ball drawn) and want to find the probability of which "cause" (bag A or B) produced it, using the prior probability of choosing each bag (each 21) and each bag's own probability of yielding red.
Step-by-Step Solution
- Bag A: 2 white, 3 red (5 total) ⇒P(red∣A)=53.
- Bag B: 4 white, 5 red (9 total) ⇒P(red∣B)=95.
- P(A)=P(B)=21 (bag chosen at random).
- Total probability of red: P(red)=P(A)P(red∣A)+P(B)P(red∣B)=21⋅53+21⋅95=103+185.
- Common denominator 90: 103=9027, 185=9025, sum =9052=4526.
- Bayes: P(B∣red)=P(red)P(B)P(red∣B)=26/45(1/2)(5/9)=26/455/18. …
🎓Unlock everything free for 14 days
- ✓Full step-by-step solutions
- ✓Concept-first explanations
- ✓Methods, shortcuts & mistakes
- ✓PYQ mapping + timed mock tests
Full access for 14 days. No credit card required.