21

A family has a child. They adopt a girl as well. If some years later one of the children become the champion of women's swimming championship, what is the probability that this girl is the adopted child?

  1. $\frac{1}{2}$
  2. $\frac{2}{3}$
  3. $\frac{3}{4}$
  4. $\frac{1}{3}$

I first separated it into two possibilities: either the biological child is a boy or a girl. (I'm gonna call the biological child B and the adopted child A from now on)

There is a $\frac{1}{2}$ chance for B to be a boy, if that's the case, then the probability that the champion is A would be $\frac{1}{2} × 1$ as the champion is definitely girl and the only girl among these children is A.

And there is a $\frac{1}{2}$ chance for B to be a girl, if that's the case, then the probability that the champion is A would be $\frac{1}{2}×\frac{1}{2}$.

Adding these up gives the result : $\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{4}=\frac{3}{4}$ meaning option 3. However the answer is somehow option 2 meaning $\frac{2}{3}$ and I don't know why.

Arya369
  • 577
  • 3
    You're assuming that given the winner is a girl, the chance the biological child is a boy/girl is equal, which is not necessarily true. I think it it's easier to think of if you rephrase it is "given you pick a girl from the family at random, what is the probability she is adopted?". – Sai Mehta Mar 24 '25 at 20:39
  • 29
    Boy or girl paradox puzzles have almost always been plagued by ambiguity in the statement of the puzzle. This variant is no exception. – PM 2Ring Mar 25 '25 at 06:13
  • 3
    It is twice as likely someone from the family wins the championship when they have 2 people competing. – Nic Mar 25 '25 at 16:36
  • 6
    It should be pointed out that there are a lot of unstated and unjustified assumptions here. For example, there's no reason to think that the first child is equally likely to be a boy or girl, given that they adopted a girl: After all, they get to choose who to adopt. Maybe most families who already have one child and adopt another would choose to adopt a child of the opposite sex to the one they already have. – Robert Israel Mar 25 '25 at 16:37
  • Oh, okay. Here's a question for you: A president of the United States was from a family with nine children; what is the probability that he was the 4th youngest child in his family? – fleablood Mar 26 '25 at 18:04
  • @DavidK All of the asnwers are appreciated and helpful to some extent, I chose that answer as I understood its analyze of both perspectives more clearly. – Arya369 Mar 27 '25 at 07:30
  • @DavidK's I just saw your comments on my answer under the question. You may see my answer where I added required mathematical details. I explained different equivalent conditions under which one obtains $\frac 23$ (see Case 3). I showed that $\frac 23$ is obtained if and only if one considers a lottery-like situation, in which doubling the number of girls doubles the chance of winning. Indeed, winning a championship race is not like winning a lottery, and in my opinion $\frac 23$ is not the best because by replacing girls with tickets, and race by lottery we get the same result. – Amir Mar 29 '25 at 06:34
  • @Amir You have improved your answer considerably since I made my earlier comments. Assumption 1 is still a strawman argument, since no other answer makes that assumption and there is no reason to think the author of the test did. It is essentially a coincidence that Assumption 2 with $\alpha=2$ leads to the same result. You make some good points about home environment and so forth, all of which tell us that the test posed a bad question. People ignore these points because we have no good way to estimate their effects, not because we can't imagine them. – David K Mar 29 '25 at 13:16
  • @DavidK The equivalence of $p=\frac23$, $α=2$, and Assumption 1 may be not a coincidence, as it intuitively follows from the full symmetry of the lottery-like situation. A key observation is that the wining probability depends on an interpretable parameter $α$. I think this factor should not be ignored, otherwise we have a lottery. Using the presented analysis, we are now able to see that under Assumption 2, $\frac13$ is impossible and $\frac12$ is an extreme case. Two remaining choices $\frac 34$ and $\frac 23$ correspond to $α=1$ and $α=2$, which have their own interpretations. – Amir Mar 29 '25 at 15:11
  • @Amir The parameter $\alpha$ is a function of the correlation between the swimming abilities of two girls in one family. The standard assumption is zero correlation. I suspect the correlation is not zero, but I am not aware that anyone has been able to measure it, let alone find a correlation large enough to change the answer to this question. The fact that I don’t know this is just one more reason the question is flawed. It assumes knowledge that the test-taker cannot be expected to have. – David K Mar 29 '25 at 15:39
  • In fact the wording of the question doesn’t rule out the possibility that the family has two daughters and both later win championships (in different places or at different times). I’m reminded of the time two brothers swept the men’s pistol events at the Olympics. IIRC one of them sat out an event so that his brother could win a gold medal. – David K Mar 29 '25 at 15:50
  • @DavidK Nice example! I think the parameter $α $ depends on not only swimming abilities of two girls living together in a family, but also intera-familial and extra-familial factors. Anyway, I agree with you on that the question assumes knowledge that the test-taker cannot be expected to have. – Amir Mar 29 '25 at 15:57
  • @Amir If the correlation were so high that one sister being a champion practically guaranteed the other would be one too, the answer would be $1/2.$ – David K Mar 29 '25 at 16:03
  • @DavidK Exactly! From (4) one can see that the probability tends to $\frac 12$ as $\alpha \to \infty$. – Amir Mar 29 '25 at 16:06

9 Answers9

19

Notation: Let

  • $C$ be the event $\{$adopted girl wins championship$\}$,
  • $F$ be the event $\{$someone from family of adopted girl wins $\}$,
  • $B$ be the event $\{$girl is adopted into a family with a boy$\}$, and
  • $G$ be the event $\{$girl is adopted into a family with a girl$\}$.

The answer $\frac{3}{4}$ that you had gotten originally, actually answers the following question:

Question 1: A fairy godmother says to the girl as in the OP: I will make someone in your adoptive family a swimming champion:

  • If you are adopted to a family with a boy already, then you will definitely be the champion.

  • If you are adopted to a family with another girl, then it will be either you or your sister, each of you with probability $\frac{1}{2}$.

Given that the adopted girl has a 50-50 chance of being adopted by a family already with a boy vs already with a girl, what is the probability she gets crowned champion?

Then to answer Question 1, , the probability $P(C)$ that you get crowned champion indeed satisfies what you got:

$$P(C) = \frac{P(C|G)P(G) \ + \ P(C|B)P(B)}{P(G)+P(B)} = \frac{3}{4}.$$ Question 1 is actually equivalent to question 1$'$ stated next:

Question 1$'$: A girl from your town is named swimming champion every year, where every family with a daughter nominates exactly one of their daughters to compete, uniformly at random from their daughters, and then the champion is chosen uniformly at random from the girls who were nominated to competed. You find out that this year the girl who won the swimming championship happens to be a girl from the family that adopted that girl as in the OP. What is the probability that that adopted girl won, given this information, and the chances are 50-50 that the adopted girl was adopted into a family with another girl already vs a family with another boy instead?

In particular, to answer Question 1$'$, the probability $P(C|F)$ that the adopted girl is crowned champion here, satisfies:

$$P(C|F) \ = \ \frac{P(C|(F \cap G))P(F|G)P(G) + P(C|(F \cap B))P(F|B)P(B)}{P(F|B)P(B) + P(F|G)P(G)}.$$

Now $P(C|F \cap G)$ is the probability that the adopted girl won, given that both (a) someone in her family won and (b) the girl was adopted in a family with another girl. This satisfies $P(C|F \cap G) =$ $\frac{1}{2}$. Likewise, $P(C|F \cap B)$ is the probability that the adopted girl won, given that both (a) someone in her family won and (b) the girl was adopted in a family with a boy instead. This satisfies $P(C|F \cap B) =$ $1$. Then plugging in $P(G)=P(B)=\frac{1}{2}$ and $P(F|G) = P(F|B)$ [indeed, a family with $2$ girls has the same the chances of someone in there winning the championship as a family with only $1$ girl, as they both get exactly one nominee each], and to answer Question 1$'$, you get the probability $P(C|F)$ that the adopted girl won, given that someone in her family won, satisfies $P(C|F)=$ $\frac{3}{4}$. For Question 1$'$ that is.

However, I think what is really happening instead is this following question:

Question 2: A girl from your town is named swimming champion each year [with each girl in the town equally likely of being named champion]. You find out that this year the girl who won the swimming championship happens to be a girl from the family that adopted that girl as in the OP. What is the probability that that adopted girl won, given this information, and the chances are 50-50 that the adopted girl was adopted into a family with another girl already vs a family with another boy instead?

Intuitively, for Question 2, that someone from this girl's family won, now gives information as to whether she has a sister or a brother. See, if that girl happens to be adopted into a family that has another girl, then it is twice as likely that her family would capture the swimming championship, than it would be if that girl were adopted into a family with a boy. [You assumed instead that it is equally likely that someone in the adopted girl's family wins, whether the adopted girl ends up with a sister or a brother.] So here, to answer Question 2, the probability $P(C|F)$ that the adopted girl is crowned champion here, also satisfies the equation:

$$P(C|F) \ = \ \frac{P(C|(F \cap G))P(F|G)P(G) + P(C|(F \cap B))P(F|B)P(B)}{P(F|B)P(B) + P(F|G)P(G)}.$$

Now here as well, $P(C|F \cap G)$ is the probability that the adopted girl won, given that both (a) someone in her family won and (b) the girl was adopted in a family with another girl. This satisfies $P(C|F \cap G) =$ $\frac{1}{2}$, as before. Likewise, $P(C|F \cap B)$ is the probability that the adopted girl won, given that both (a) someone in her family won and (b) the girl was adopted in a family with a boy instead. This also satisfies $P(C|F \cap B) =$ $1$ as before. As before as well, the equaion $P(G)=P(B)=\frac{1}{2}$ is true. Here however, the following equation is true: $P(F|G) = 2P(F|B)$ [indeed, a family with $2$ girls has twice the chances of someone in the family winning the championship, as a family with only $1$ girl has]. Thus, plugging in $P(G)=P(B)=\frac{1}{2}$ and $P(F|G) = 2P(F|B)$, and you get $P(C|F)=$ $\frac{2}{3}$.

Mike
  • 23,620
  • 1
    I edited and put $P(C|F)$, which is what you want to calculate and what I should have had, instead of $P(C)$ as I had before. – Mike Mar 25 '25 at 16:27
15

A frequentist perspective:

It is often easier to think about problems like these by imagining a larger sample space. Instead of thinking about one family who has one daughter who won a championship, imagine a large number of similar families who each send their daughters to participate in a race, and ask "What is the probability that the winner of that race is an adopted child?"

For example, imagine that there are 1,000 families. In 500 families, there are two girls; and in 500 families there, is only one girl. That means that there are 1,500 girls altogether. Now imagine that all of these girls race, and that they are all equally likely to win. This means that the probability of an adoptee winning the race is $$ \frac{1000\text{ adoptees}}{1500\text{ total girls}} = \frac{2}{3}. $$

Xander Henderson
  • 33,139
  • 25
  • 74
  • 123
  • 2
    +1 Although I do think this could be worded a bit differently that would help with the clarity of the exposition. Every family has a biological child [boy or girl 50-50] AND an adopted daughter. What is the probability that an adopted daughter wins? And to relate to my answer below and to OP's original line of reasoning, OP assumed that each family has an equally likely chance of having a winner [whether it be boy-girl or girl-girl], versus each individual girl having an equally likely chance. – Mike Mar 24 '25 at 23:59
  • 1
    How do we know that this is a solution to the original problem? In other words, how do we know that the probability for 1000 of this type of family is the same as for 1000 various types of families? – Alex Jones Mar 25 '25 at 04:02
  • 3
    @AlexJones: Good question! Let’s see what happens when we add the rest of the population in. Suppose a city has 1000 of these families, among a total population of say 30,000 eligible girls. Then the probability of a girl from one of these chosen families winning is 1500/30000, and the probability of one of the adoptees winning is 1000/30000. So given that a girl from one of our families won, the chances she was an adoptee are (1000/30000)/(1500/30000) = 1000/1500 again. Restricting to conditional probability makes the total population cancel out. – Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine Mar 25 '25 at 09:14
  • 2
    However, if we do a frequentist approach carefully, we again get that $2/3$ is not exactly right. If we have $1000$ families, each adopting a girl and having another child, then the total number of girls is $X\sim Bin(1000,1/2)+1000$ and so the actual probability of an adopted girl winning is $\mathbb E(1000/X)\neq 1000/\mathbb E(X)$. – Especially Lime Mar 27 '25 at 08:56
11

Another approach is to decompose the probability space. A possible visualization of this is

enter image description here

In this image:

  • BG is the event that the family has a biological girl; this happens with probability $1/2$.
  • BB is the event that the family has a biological boy; this happens with probability $1/2$.
  • AG is the event that the family adopts a girl; this happens with probability $1$.
  • BGW is the event that the biological girl wins; under the assumption that every racer who competes is equally likely to win, then the probability of any particular racer winning is $1/N$, where $N$ is the number of racers.
  • AGW is the event that the adopted girl wins; as above, this is $1/N$.
  • SEW is the event that some other racer wins. If a family has both a biological girl and an adopted girl, then this probability is $1-2/N$; otherwise, it is $1-1/N$.

The goal is to compute $P(\text{AGW} \mid \text{AGW} \cup \text{BGW})$. That is, the goal is to compute the probability that an adopted girl won given that one of the "special" girls won. By definition of conditional probability,

\begin{align} P(\text{AGW} \mid \text{AGW} \cup \text{BGW}) &= \frac{P(\text{AGW} \cap [\text{AGW}\cup \text{BGW})]}{P(\text{AGW} \cup \text{BGW})} \\ &= \frac{P(\text{AGW})}{P(\text{AGW}\cup \text{BGW})} \\ &= \frac{\frac{1}{2}\cdot \frac{1}{N} + \frac{1}{2}\cdot\frac{1}{N}}{\frac{1}{2}\cdot \frac{1}{N} + \frac{1}{2}\cdot\frac{1}{N} + \frac{1}{2}\cdot\frac{1}{N}} \tag{$\ast$}\label{eq1} \\ &= \frac{2}{3}. \end{align}

In (\ref{eq1}), the numerator comes from adding the probabilities of the outcomes in which the adopted girl wins, while the denominator comes from adding the probabilities of the outcomes in which either the biological or adopted girl wins. In each case, these probabilities are computed by multiplying the probabilities along a branch which leads to the outcome of interest.

The tree is helpful in shortcutting the computation above: add up the probabilities from leaves which represent "good" outcomes (i.e. those in which the adopted girl wins), add up the probabilities from leaves which represent outcomes we care about (i.e. those in which one of the girls wins), and divide.

Xander Henderson
  • 33,139
  • 25
  • 74
  • 123
  • 4
    This is a good way to think of it, because it also highlights why the probability is not $2/3$. The (incorrect) assumption the question writer wants you to make is that $N$ is the same in both branches. But in the top branch there is one more girl eligible to compete - this family having a biological girl doesn't change the number of girls born to other families in the district. – Especially Lime Mar 25 '25 at 09:28
  • 1
    @EspeciallyLime It is actually even more complicated than that, as it isn't even really reasonable to assume that every competitor has the same chance of winning. There is also the issue that you don't know that both girls in a family with two girls competed at all, so there is another little event to keep track of. There are actually a lot of little hidden assumptions, and it isn't really possible to keep track of them all. In any event, if we do as you suggest and keep track of that one missing swimmer in the last case, the probability ends up being $$\frac{2N-1}{3N-1},$$ ... – Xander Henderson Mar 25 '25 at 13:54
  • 1
    ...where $N$ is the number of competitors. This is $\frac{2}{3} + \varepsilon(N)$, where $\varepsilon(N)$ is a small error term that tends to $0$ as the number of competitors increases. Given that this was presented as a multiple choice problem, it seems reasonable to assume that $N$ is "large enough" that this error term is not relevant. Alternatively, one can make the assumption that, irrespective of how many other competitors there are, the chance of a girl from this family winning is $p$ (i.e. the adopted girls wins with probability $p$ whether or not she has a sister,... – Xander Henderson Mar 25 '25 at 13:57
  • 1
    ...and the biological daughter wins with probability $p$, as well. Set up that way, the probability is again $2/3$. – Xander Henderson Mar 25 '25 at 13:58
  • 3
    Well, $N$ can't be large enough to give exactly $2/3$. But it can be small enough to give exactly $3/4$. So it's a poor question. (But yours is a good answer.) – Especially Lime Mar 25 '25 at 14:13
  • @EspeciallyLime $N$ as small as $-1$ doesn't sound reasonable:) – STerliakov Mar 25 '25 at 19:21
  • You don't actually need to assume both girls competed. You just need to assume that given no other information, each girl in a certain population -- a pool of potential competitors -- has some equal chance to enter, and of all the ones who do enter the given information does not favor any one of them to win. – David K Mar 26 '25 at 17:50
  • @DavidK Sure. Like I said, there are a lot of hidden assumptions in this problem. These kinds of problems are, in general, rife with problems and incredibly hard to actually pose for a student in a reasonable manner. But I also think that it is worthwhile to think about the psychology of the person who wrote the problem, and selected the multiple choice options. – Xander Henderson Mar 26 '25 at 17:52
  • Yes, I forgot this was multiple choice. And forgetting that, I went and wrote a whole answer in which I ended up making reference to this answer, and posted my answer before reading any of the comments on this answer. Perhaps a waste of effort. But I have developed a distaste for this particular flavor of word problem, the kind of distaste that leads me to respond with snark. – David K Mar 26 '25 at 17:56
  • @DavidK No, I actually agree with you. These kinds of problems exist to make the point that seemingly irrelevant factors can change the probability model. It is an important point, but the questions themselves are really, really hard to write precisely. I don't hate them, but I find them very frustrating. – Xander Henderson Mar 26 '25 at 17:58
5

This answer is a little bit tongue-in-cheek, although the mathematical part of it is completely sincere. I just find problems like this beg to be at least lightly roasted.


Under a reasonable model, the answer is a little more than $\frac23.$ How much more is not possible to determine from the given information.

The answer $\frac23$ relies on the assumption that a family with two girls is twice as likely to produce a winner as a family with only one girl. But we could also say that the girls of this family are members of a larger pool of girls who are eligible to enter and win the competition, and that there are $N$ other girls in that pool. So in the case where the biological child is a boy, each girl in the pool has $\frac{1}{N+1}$ chance to win, whereas if the biological child is a girl, each girl in the pool has a $\frac{1}{N+2}$ chance to win.

Then adopting (pun intended) the analysis of a previous answer with an adjustment for the number of girls in the pool, we get the desired probability:

\begin{align} P(\text{AGW} \mid \text{AGW} \cup \text{BGW}) &= \frac{\frac12\cdot \frac{1}{N+1} + \frac12\cdot\frac{1}{N+2}}{\frac12\cdot \frac{1}{N+1} + \frac12\cdot\frac{1}{N+2} + \frac12\cdot\frac{1}{N+2}} \\ &= \frac{2N+3}{3N+4}. \end{align}

So in the limit as $N\to\infty$ (where the number of girls in this particular family loses its effect on the probability of any given girl winning) we get the probability $\frac23,$ whereas in the other extreme, $N=0,$ we get the probability $\frac34,$ which is in fact the probability that the winner is the adopted girl if the competition was originally limited only to children from this family.

But the "exact" probability depends on $N,$ which is an unknown.


In a more sophisticated model we might say that $N$ also is a random variable. The effect of the sex of the biological child of the adoptive family is still present, however.

I also did not account for the possibility that no girl in the entire pool decides to enter the competition. I think this particular event washes out if you include it in the analysis.


As practical advice for problems such as this, especially in a context like this where you have a limited number of answers to choose from and no opportunity to explain your answer, it is best to make all the usual assumptions such as exactly equal likelihoods of a pregnancy resulting in a girl or a boy (rather than approximately equal likelihoods). Other objections, such as the question of whether the choice to adopt a daughter is really independent of whether a couple's other child is a girl or a boy, should similarly be waved off; if there is no way to establish dependence mathematically given only the information in the question, assume independence.

Moreover, make any other additional assumptions as necessary in agreement with a "typical" interpretation of the story in the question. A women's swim championship would almost certainly draw from a large pool of potential competitors, and the chance that a daughter of some previously mentioned couple would be the champion should be very small. This is the case for large $N$ in the analysis above, and the value is then much closer to $\frac23$ than to $\frac34.$ Therefore $\frac23$ is unambiguously the correct response to a test question such as this.

David K
  • 111,757
2

Winning a race can be any event, e.g being spotted at a flea market, getting a law degree, etc.

There are four events to consider.

Let $G$ be the event that a girl did something.
Let $A$ be the event that the adopted girl did somethigng.
Let $S$ be the event that the family has a non-adopted son.
Let $D$ be the event that the family has a non-adopted daugher.

Then we are interested in $$P(A|G)=\frac{P(G|A)P(A)}{P(G)}=\frac{P(A)}{P(G)}$$ because $P(G|A)=1$

$$P(G)=P(G|S)P(S)+P(G|D)P(D)=\frac{1}{2}\cdot\frac{1}{2} + 1\cdot\frac{1}{2}=\frac{3}{4}$$

$P(A)=P(A|X)P(X)$ where $X$ is one of $G\cap S$, $G\cap D$, $\lnot G\cap S$ or $\lnot G\cap S$

Since the probability of $A$ given $\lnot G$ is zero we get that $$P(A)=P(A|G,S)P(G,S)+P(A|G,D)P(G,D)$$ and this gives us $$P(A|G,S)P(G|S)P(S)+P(A|G,D)P(G|D)P(D)=1\cdot\frac{1}{2}\cdot\frac{1}{2}+1\cdot\frac{1}{2}\cdot\frac{1}{2}=\frac{1}{4}+\frac{1}{4}=\frac{1}{2}$$

Therefore, $P(A)=\frac{1}{2}$ and $$P(A|G)=\frac{1}{2}\div\frac{3}{4}=\frac{2}{3}$$

John Douma
  • 12,679
  • 2
  • 26
  • 27
2

Summary

The probability can meaningfully differ from $\frac 23$. When the biological child is a boy or girl with equal chances, it can be $\frac 34$, $\frac 23$, or even tends to $\frac 12$ or $1$. In fact, $\frac 23$ is only obtained for a lottery-like situation.

The probability is a decreasing function of the odds of a specific event, which enables us to easily analysis different assumptions.

A key modeling point is that wining in a championship race is not similar to wining in a lottery where buying two tickets double the wining chance.

Events

$W $: The adopted girl of the family is the winner

$F$: The family of the adopted girl holds the championship

$G_1$: The family of the adopted girl has a biological boy (has only one girl)

$G_2$: The family of the adopted girl has a biological girl (has two girls).

Analysis

Given the problem statement:

A family has a child and adopts a girl as well. If some years later one of the children become the champion of women's swimming championship, what is the probability that this girl is the adopted child?

we want to compute the probability $\color{blue}{p}$ of that the adopted girl of the family wins the race ($W$) given her family holds the championship ($F$). This can be written as the following conditional probability:

$$\color{blue}{p}= P(W|F).$$

This probability can be computed using each of the following formulas:

$$ P(W|F)=\frac{P(W \cap F)}{P(F)}=\frac{P(A)+P(B)}{ P(A)+P(B)+P(C)} \tag{1}$$

$$ P(W|F)=P(W|F \cap G_1)P(G_1|F)+P(W|F \cap G_2)P(G_2|F) \tag{2}$$

where the new auxiliary events $A$, $B$, and $C$ are nothing but the three disjoints possible situations in front of us:

$\; \; \;A=W \cap F\cap G_1 $: The biological child is a boy, and the adopted girl is the winner

$\; \; \; B=W \cap F\cap G_2$: The biological child is a girl, and the adopted girl is the winner

$\; \; \; C=W' \cap F\cap G_2$: The biological child is a girl, and the biological girl is the winner.

To use ($1$) or ($2$), the probability terms in the right side should be determined under a suitable assumption. Some possible assumptions are considered in the following.


Assumption 1: The three events $A$, $B$, and $C$ occur with equal probabilities.

In this case, $P(A)=P(B)=P(C)$, and from ($1$) one can easily get $$p=\color{blue}{\frac23}.$$

The above is a common assumption used in elementary probability courses and text books to simplify problems, especially when students are not familiar with conditional probabilities and only able to compute the probabilities by counting methods.

Maybe the above method was intended by the examiner because to answer a 4-choice question like the one in the OP, around a minute to 90 seconds is typically given.


Assumption 2: It is equally likely for the family to have a biological boy or girl. When the family holds the championship and has two girls, the winner can be the biological girl or the adopted girl equally likely.

In this case, by defining $\alpha >0 $ (which is the odds of the event $G_2$ given $F$)

$$\alpha=\frac{P(G_2|F)}{P(G_1|F)}=\frac{P(F|G_2)}{P(F|G_1)}, \tag{3}$$

one can use the formula $(2)$ as follows:

$$\color{blue}{p}= 1 \times \frac {1}{1+\alpha} +\frac12 \times \frac {\alpha}{1+\alpha},$$

to get the general formula:

$$\fbox{$\color{blue}{p}=\frac {2+\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}.$} \tag{4}$$

This gives $\color{blue}{\frac34}$ for $\alpha=1$, $\color{blue}{\frac23}$ for $\alpha=2$, tends to $\color{blue}{\frac 12}$ as $\alpha \to +\infty$, and tends to $\color{blue}{1}$ as $\alpha \to 0$.

Let us briefly discuses some cases on $\alpha$. Other reasonings may be given by readers.

  • Case 1: $0< \alpha <1$. For this case, we have $P(F|G_2)<P(F|G_1)$, which may seem unacceptable at first, but it is possible for a toxic family environment where the performances of the girls decrease because of jealousy, recognition of unfairness, or other factors.
  • Case 2: $\alpha \ge 1$. For this case, we have $P(F|G_2) \ge P(F|G_1)$, which seems more sensible if birds in their little nests agree. In fact, a positive environment may help both girls perform better. In addition to intra-familial factors, the value of $\alpha$ may also depend on extra-familial factors, such as the number of other competitors.
  • Case 3: $\alpha = 2$. In this case, we have a lottery-like situation, as wining in the championship race is assumed to be similar to wining in a lottery with unique bills where buying two tickets double the wining chance [1]. It may be worth noting that $\alpha=2$ implies that $P(A)=P(B)=P(C)$, which follows from $$\small{P(A)=P(W |F\cap G_1)P(F|G_1)P(G_1)=\frac 12 P(F|G_1)\\=P(B)=P(W |F\cap G_1)P(F|G_2)P(G_2)= \frac 14 P(F|G_2).}$$ This means that Assumption 1 and the lottery-like situation are equivalent under Assumption 2. Indeed, $$\alpha=2 \iff p=\color{blue}{\frac23} \iff P(A)=P(B)=P(C)$$ as the function in ($4$) is strictly decreasing in $\alpha$.

Remark 1: Almost all the given answers to the OP's question consider the lottery-like situation ($\alpha=2$), see e.g., Mike's answer [2] and Xander's second answer [3] (Xander's first answer [4] estimates the probability of that an adopted girl wins the race). David's answer [5] is an exception. With the assumption he made, for $N\ge 0$, we have $$1 \le \alpha=\frac{\frac{2}{N+2}}{\frac{1}{N+1}}=\frac{2(N+1)}{N+2}<2,$$ which from $(4)$ gives $\frac{2N+3)}{3N+4} > \frac 23$ (but it rapidly tends to the lottery-like situation as $N$ increases). The above is an instance for which $\alpha$ depends on the number of the other competitors (an extra-familial factor).

Remark 2: Indeed, one can consider more realistic assumptions to get a better estimate based on some available data. For example, in reality, the probability of the baby being a boy or a girl is not the same. Moreover, the adopted girl or the biological girl may have a more favorable genetic profile or better mental or psychological well-being, which implies that the wining chances of the girls are not the same. A similar analysis can be used to handle these extensions to get:

$$\color{blue}{p}= \frac {1+\theta}{1+\alpha} \tag{5}$$

where $\kappa=P(G_2)$, $\theta=P(U|F \cap G_2)$, and $\alpha=\frac{P(G_2|F)}{P(G_1|F)}=\frac{\kappa}{1-\kappa}\frac{P(F|G_2)}{P(F|G_2)}$. $\kappa$ can be estimated by the probability that a baby is a girl [6]. $\theta$ can be estimated by $\frac{p_A}{p_A+p_B}$, where $p_A$ and $p_B$ are the success probabilities of the adopted and biological girls, respectively.

Amir
  • 11,213
  • Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on [meta], or in [chat]. Comments continuing discussion may be removed. – Shaun Mar 27 '25 at 13:45
2

Let $A$ denote an adopted girl, let $G$ denote a biological girl and $B$ denote a biological boy. Once it is revealed that a family of two children, only one of which is adopted and also a girl, has a winner daughter (denote this even as $F$) in a only-girls competition, there are only three options for the family kid structure for this to happen:

  1. $(A,B)$: the kids in a family are an adopted girl and a biological boy and $A$ is the winner of the competition.
  2. $(A,G)$: the kids in a family are an adopted girl and a biological girl, and $A$ is the winner of the competition.
  3. $(G,A)$: the kids in a family are an adopted girl and a biological girl, and $G$ is the winner of the competition.

Making the intrinsic assumptions that

  • a. In a family of type $F$ with two girls, each girl is equally likely to win the competition, and
  • b. In a family of type $F$, the gender (boy or girl) of a biological kid is equally likely.

Then, we have tat that the even of interest - $A$ is the winner given $F$, which we denote by $\mathcal{A}$- contains only $(A,B)$ and $(A,G)$. Thus $$P[\mathcal{A}|F]=\frac23$$


Another take on the problem is as follows:

  • As above, let $F$ denote the event in which a family of two children, only one of which is adopted and a girl and the other cild being biological, has a girl who wins a only-girls competition.
  • Let $\mathcal{A}$ be the event that an adopted girl in a family of type $F$ is the winner of the completion.
  • Let $B$ be the event that the biological child in a family of type $F$ is a boy.
  • Let $G$ be the event that the biological child in a family of type $F$ is a girl.

The probability of interest is $$P[\mathcal{A}|F]=\frac{P[\mathcal{A}\cap F]}{P[F]}\tag{0}\label{zero}$$

\begin{align} P[F]&=P[\mathcal{A}\cap F]+P[\mathcal{A}^c\cap F]\\ &=P[\mathcal{A}\cap F\cap B] + P[\mathcal{A}\cap F\cap G]+P[\mathcal{A}^c\cap F\cap B]+P[\mathcal{A}^c\cap F\cap G]\\ &=P[\mathcal{A}\cap F\cap B] + P[\mathcal{A}\cap F\cap G]+P[\mathcal{A}^c\cap F\cap G]\tag{1}\label{one} \end{align}

At this point, we make some intrinsic assumptions (similar to (a) and (b) above):

  • a'. In a family of type $F$ with two girls, each girls is equally likely to win the competition.
  • b'. The gender of the biological child is independent from $\mathcal{A}\cap F$.

These assumptions imply that \begin{align} P[\mathcal{A}\cap F\cap B]&=P[\mathcal{A}\cap F]P[B|\mathcal{A}\cap F]=\frac12P[\mathcal{A}\cap F]\tag{2}\label{two}\\ P[\mathcal{A}^c\cap F\cap G]&=P[\mathcal{A}\cap F\cap G]=P[\mathcal{A}\cap F]P[G|\mathcal{A}\cap F]=\frac12 P[\mathcal{A}\cap F]\tag{3}\label{three} \end{align} Using \eqref{two} and \eqref{three} in \eqref{zero} yields $$ P[\mathcal{A}|F]=\frac{P[\mathcal{A}\cap F]}{\frac12P[\mathcal{A}\cap F]+P[\mathcal{A}\cap F]}=\frac1{\tfrac12+1}=\frac23$$

Mittens
  • 46,836
1

If we take all the possible things that can happen, we can find the probability easily by using probability of E happening = number of events where E occurs / total number of events., in mathematical terms P(E) = Number of favorable events / Total number of events

First we write down all the events:

  1. The family has a biological boy (so the adopted girl wins, favorable situation)
  2. The family has a biological girl and the adopted girl wins (the adopted girl wins, favorable situation)
  3. The family has a biological girl and the biological girl wins

Here, the total number of events is 3, and 2 of them are favorable (i.e. the adopted girl wins)

So the probability of the adopted girl winning is [4.] 2 / 3

1

There are two different answers, so what is the difference?

  1. A family has a child plus an adopted girl. A girl from that family wins.

  2. 1000 families have each one child plus one adopted girl. A girl from one of the 1000 families wins.

So what is the difference? The difference is that in the second case, it is more likely that the winner comes from a family with one girl and one adopted girl, and not from a family with one boy and one adopted girl. This changes all the calculations of probabilities.

gnasher729
  • 10,722