Can You Solve the Frog Riddle?

Here's the dangerous scenario that you've gotten yourself into:

You’re stranded in a rainforest, and you’ve eaten a poisonous mushroom. To save your life, you need an antidote excreted by a certain species of frog. Unfortunately, only the female frog produces the antidote. The male and female look identical, but the male frog has a distinctive croak.

As you begin to lose consciousness, you find yourself standing equidistant between two points. At one of them is a single frog. At the other are two frogs. You just heard the sound of the male croaking from the second point. You have time to get to one of those points and begin frantic frog licking. Which direction do you choose?

The answer isn't quite so obvious. Derek Abbott explains in this demonstration of conditional probability.

-via The Kids Should See This

This concept is the same type of probability that governs the "Monty Hall" problem of which door to choose on Let's Make a Deal:
Monty Hall Problem

If you are shown a "wrong" door and are given the chance to switch before the final reveal, it is in your interest to do so as the probability of winning is higher. Seems counter-intuitive, but the math proves it.

Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)

The part I don't get about the 2 in 3 probability is that the 3 possibilities shown were 2 males, or, female on the left and male on the right, or, male on the left with female on the right. I don't get how female on the left or right would be considered 2 different possibilities as the net result is the same, 1 male and 1 female. Givem that logic, why couldn't we add 2 more possibilities and say female on bottom male on top, and male on bottom female on top, as if they were standing on each other. This would increase the odds to 4 out of 5, or 80%.

Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)

4 replies

Login to comment.

Click here to access all of this post's 6 comments