A magazine where the digital world meets the real world.
On the web
- Home
- Browse by date
- Browse by topic
- Enter the maze
- Follow our blog
- Follow us on Twitter
- Resources for teachers
- Subscribe
In print
What is cs4fn?
- About us
- Contact us
- Partners
- Privacy and cookies
- Copyright and contributions
- Links to other fun sites
- Complete our questionnaire, give us feedback
Search:
Bayesian baffler
by Norman Fenton and Paul Curzon, Queen Mary University of London

Here is a counter-intuitive result that most people get wrong. It is the kind of thing that programs we write to do decision-making or to help people (here lawyers and juries) make wise decisions, need to get right. What do you estimate the probabilities are?
A criminal has left their DNA at a crime scene. Only one in every 10 million people have the DNA profile found. A suspect, Fred Smith, whose DNA matches, is put on trial. There is no other evidence. The population is 10 million people. The prosecutor claims that the probability that an innocent person has the matching DNA is one in 10 million: so Fred is guilty. The defence say the correct probability is closer to one in two. Who is correct? Is Fred’s guilt “beyond reasonable doubt”?