Mathematics • Year 9 • Unit 4 • Lesson 16

Experimental and Theoretical Probability

Build fluency with the two probability formulas: theoretical P(E) = favourable ÷ total, and experimental P(E) ≈ occurrences ÷ trials. One worked example, one guided example with blanks, then eight graduated practice problems.

Build · I Do / We Do / You Do

1. I do — fully worked example

Read every line. Each step shows what is being calculated and why.

Problem. A coin is tossed 200 times. (a) How many heads would you expect? (b) If 95 heads actually occur, find the experimental P(head). (c) Comment on whether this suggests bias.

Step 1 — Theoretical first: what does fair predict?

Theoretical P(head) = 1 ÷ 2 = 0.5 (two equally likely outcomes, one is "head").

Reason: theoretical probability = favourable ÷ total possible outcomes, assuming fairness.

Step 2 — Expected number of heads in 200 tosses.

Expected = 200 × 0.5 = 100 heads.

Reason: expected count = (number of trials) × (theoretical probability).

Step 3 — Experimental P(head) from the actual 95 heads.

Experimental P(head) = 95 ÷ 200 = 0.475.

Reason: experimental P = (occurrences of event) ÷ (total trials). This is also called relative frequency.

Step 4 — Comment on bias.

0.475 is close to 0.5. Difference of 5 heads out of 200 is small and easily caused by random variation. No clear evidence of bias.

Answer: (a) 100 heads expected; (b) experimental P(head) = 0.475; (c) likely just random variation — not biased.

Stuck? Revisit lesson § "Worked Example" Step 1 — same 200-toss / 95-heads scenario.

2. We do — fill in the missing steps

Same structure as Section 1. Fill the blanks as you go. 4 marks

Problem. A spinner has 4 equal sections (red, blue, green, yellow). In 80 spins, red appears 25 times. (a) Find theoretical P(red). (b) Find experimental P(red). (c) Compare.

Step 1 — Theoretical P(red). Four equally likely sections, one is red.

Theoretical P(red) = ____ ÷ ____ = ______

Step 2 — Expected reds in 80 spins.

Expected = 80 × ______ = ______ reds.

Step 3 — Experimental P(red).

Experimental P(red) = ____ ÷ ____ = ______

Step 4 — Compare and explain.

Experimental is ______ than theoretical. With only ____ spins, this difference is most likely due to ____________________.

Stuck? Revisit lesson § "Worked Example" Step 2 — the same 80-spin spinner problem.

3. You do — independent practice

Show working under each problem. Foundation = single rule; standard = combine two ideas; extension = compare or evaluate.

Foundation — single calculation

3.1 A fair die is rolled. Find the theoretical probability of rolling a 5.    1 mark

3.2 A coin is tossed 50 times. Heads come up 22 times. Find the experimental P(head) as a decimal.    1 mark

3.3 A die is rolled 60 times. How many 6s do you expect?    1 mark

3.4 A spinner has 5 equal sections. What is the theoretical probability of landing on any one section? Express as a fraction and a decimal.    1 mark

Standard — combine two ideas

3.5 A die is rolled 90 times. (a) How many of each number are expected? (b) If the number 4 actually appears 20 times, find the experimental P(4).    2 marks

3.6 A bag has unknown marbles. After 100 draws (with replacement), 40 are red. (a) Estimate P(red). (b) If the bag holds 250 marbles, roughly how many are red?    2 marks

Extension — compare and reason

3.7 A coin is tossed three times: 10, 100, 1000 tosses. The heads counts are 7, 54 and 503 respectively. Calculate experimental P(head) for each, then explain in one sentence which result is most trustworthy and why.    3 marks

3.8 A die is rolled 600 times. Theoretical P(6) = 1/6. The number 6 actually appears 145 times. (a) What was expected? (b) By how much does experimental P differ from theoretical? (c) Is this difference small enough to ignore? Explain.    3 marks

Stuck on 3.7? With more trials, random variation gets washed out — that's the law of large numbers from the lesson.

How did this worksheet feel?

What I'll revisit before next class:

Answers — Do not peek before attempting

Section 2 — We do (faded spinner)

Step 1: theoretical P(red) = 1 ÷ 4 = 0.25.
Step 2: expected = 80 × 0.25 = 20 reds.
Step 3: experimental P(red) = 25 ÷ 80 = 0.3125.
Step 4: experimental is higher than theoretical. With only 80 spins, this difference is most likely due to random variation (not enough trials).

3.1 — Theoretical P(5) on a die

One favourable outcome (the 5), six possible outcomes. P(5) = 1/6 ≈ 0.167.

3.2 — Experimental P(head)

P(head) = 22 ÷ 50 = 0.44.

3.3 — Expected 6s in 60 rolls

Expected = 60 × (1/6) = 10 sixes.

3.4 — 5-section spinner

P(any section) = 1/5 = 0.2.

3.5 — Die rolled 90 times

(a) Expected of each number = 90 ÷ 6 = 15.
(b) Experimental P(4) = 20 ÷ 90 = 2/9 ≈ 0.222.

3.6 — Marble bag

(a) Experimental P(red) ≈ 40 ÷ 100 = 0.4.
(b) About 0.4 × 250 = 100 red marbles.

3.7 — Coin tosses 10 / 100 / 1000

P(head) = 7/10 = 0.7; 54/100 = 0.54; 503/1000 = 0.503.
The 1000-toss result is most trustworthy because more trials reduce random variation — by the law of large numbers, experimental probability approaches the theoretical 0.5 as trials grow.

3.8 — Die rolled 600 times

(a) Expected = 600 ÷ 6 = 100 sixes.
(b) Experimental P(6) = 145 ÷ 600 ≈ 0.2417. Theoretical = 1/6 ≈ 0.1667. Difference ≈ 0.075.
(c) Probably not negligible — getting 145 sixes when 100 were expected is 45 more than expected. With this many trials, random variation alone is unlikely to cause that big a gap, so the die may be biased and should be tested further.