Talk:Boole's inequality

Statistics High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Mathematics Low‑priority

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

Untitled[edit]

Should there be a mention/discussion of the Bonferroni correction/adjustment/method, as described at e.g. WebStat, School of Psychiatry, University of New England? 128.250.204.118 02:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The proof given here is not complete as it only proves the inequality for finite unions, but not for countable ones.85.179.68.57 (talk) 05:22, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed TheKing44 (talk) 21:00, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Needs makeover[edit]

I think that the "proof without using induction" does use induction and is in fact the same as the "proof using induction". Also the last few lines of the "proof without using induction" don't make sense. McKay (talk) 05:56, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The "proof without using induction" doesn't make sense from the line "Now we have to modify the sets {\displaystyle A_{i}}A_{i}, so they become disjoint." It isn't clear why we have to make the Ai sets disjoint, and I don't think the next line actually does makes Ai disjoint ":

B_{i}=A_{i}-\bigcup _{j=1}^{i-1}A_{j}.

". Therefore the rest of the proof does not derive from that. TryingToUnderstand11 (talk) 06:19, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is the reference to Boole's work correct?[edit]

I think the inequality appears in page 307 of "An investigation of the laws of thought" by George Boole (1854) https://archive.org/details/investigationofl01bool/page/306/mode/2up Dimitris131 (talk) 11:34, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]