Paper detail

Revisiting the name variant of the two-children problem

Initially proposed by Martin Gardner in the 1950s, the famous two-children problem is often presented as a paradox in probability theory. A relatively recent variant of this paradox states that, while in a two-children family for which at least one child is a girl, the probability that the other child is a boy is $2/3$, this probability becomes $1/2$ if the first name of the girl is disclosed (provided that two sisters may not be given the same first name). We revisit this variant of the problem and show that, if one adopts a natural model for the way first names are given to girls, then the probability that the other child is a boy may take any value in $(0,2/3)$. By exploiting the concept of Schur-concavity, we study how this probability depends on model parameters.

preprint2023arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.