datarekha

Sample Space, Events & Axioms

You already trust two obvious things about a die's chances — none is negative, and together they make one whole. Write those obvious things down carefully and you have the three axioms, from which every other rule of probability quietly follows.

7 min read Beginner GATE DA Lesson 4 of 122

What you'll learn

  • Sample space, outcome, and event (a subset of the sample space)
  • The three axioms: non-negativity, P(S) = 1, additivity for disjoint events
  • What the axioms force for free: complement, P(empty) = 0, monotonicity
  • Inclusion-exclusion when events overlap: P(A∪B) = P(A) + P(B) − P(A∩B)

Before you start

Roll an ordinary die. Even before it lands, you know the chances: each of the six faces, one in six. And without anyone ever teaching you, you already trust two things about those chances — that no face has a negative chance, and that the six of them together make one whole. Those feel too obvious to say out loud. Yet it is exactly the obvious things, once written down carefully, that the rest of probability is built on.

Naming the pieces

Let us name the parts on this familiar die. The full list of what can happen — 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 — is the sample space, written S. A single result, say a 4, is an outcome. And a question like “was it even?” picks out a part of that list, {2, 4, 6} — that part is an event. So an event is just a subset of the sample space, and probability is simply a rule that hands each event a number.

Three obvious demands

What must that rule obey to be sensible? Just three short demands — the axioms — and each is only one of the die-facts you already trusted, made general.

  1. Non-negativity. Every event’s chance is at least zero: P(E) ≥ 0. No event happens a negative amount.
  2. Normalisation. The whole sample space has chance one: P(S) = 1. Something on the list is certain to happen.
  3. Additivity. If two events A and B cannot happen together — they share no outcome, A ∩ B = ∅ — then their chances simply add: P(A ∪ B) = P(A) + P(B).
Axiom 1P(E) ≥ 0never negativeAxiom 2P(S) = 1something happensAxiom 3disjoint A, B:P(A∪B)=P(A)+P(B)add when no overlap
Three rules, each an obvious die-fact made general. Every other identity is derived from these.

What the three demands give you for free

Here is the quiet power of writing the obvious down. From these three rules alone, several everyday facts follow without any new assumption.

The empty event has chance zero, P(∅) = 0: since S and share nothing and together are just S, additivity gives P(S) = P(S) + P(∅), so P(∅) must be zero. The complement rule, P(Aᶜ) = 1 − P(A), follows the same way — an event and its opposite share nothing and together fill S, so their chances add to one. And monotonicity: a bigger event cannot have a smaller chance, so if A ⊆ B then P(A) ≤ P(B). Put together, every chance is boxed into 0 ≤ P(A) ≤ 1. None of these were assumed; all three demands forced them.

When events overlap

Additivity had a catch — it only adds chances for events that cannot happen together. So what do we do when they can?

Draw a single card from a deck. Let A be “it is a King” and B be “it is a Heart”. These events overlap, because one card — the King of Hearts — is both. If you simply add P(A) + P(B), that one card gets counted twice, once as a King and once as a Heart. To repair it, subtract the overlap exactly once:

SABA∩Bcounted twiceP(A∪B) = P(A) + P(B) − P(A∩B)
Add both circles, then remove the double-counted overlap once.

This repair is inclusion-exclusion: P(A ∪ B) = P(A) + P(B) − P(A ∩ B). And notice it contains additivity as a special case — when the events do not overlap, P(A ∩ B) = 0 and the subtraction does nothing, leaving Axiom 3 exactly. For three events the same correction continues — add the singles, take out each pairwise overlap, add the triple back: P(A∪B∪C) = ΣP(single) − ΣP(pair) + P(A∩B∩C).

You can feel the overlap directly. Drag the two circles below: slide them apart and the shared region vanishes, so the chances simply add; push them together and the overlap grows, and that is precisely the amount inclusion-exclusion subtracts.

Tryconditional probability

Drag the events — conditioning shrinks the universe

A ⫫ B (independent)
AB
Drag a circle to move it, or the small dot on its edge to resize. Dots are a fixed Monte Carlo sample of the universe.
P(A)0.166
P(B)0.136
P(A ∩ B)0.027
P(A | B)P(A∩B) / P(B)0.200
P(B | A)0.164
P(A)·P(B)0.023
P(A ∩ B)0.027
These match — A and B are independent.
Toggle Condition on B to dim everything outside B — conditioning throws away the rest of the universe.

A worked example

In a class, P(Maths) = 0.7, P(Physics) = 0.6, and P(both) = 0.5. Find the probability a student passes at least one of the two.

“At least one” is the union, so reach for inclusion-exclusion — and the missing piece the prediction hinted at is exactly P(both), the overlap:

P(Maths ∪ Physics) = P(Maths) + P(Physics) − P(both)
                   = 0.7 + 0.6 − 0.5
                   = 0.8

So 0.8. Without subtracting the 0.5 overlap you would have got 1.3 — a chance above one, which Axiom 2 forbids, and a clear signal you double-counted the students who passed both.

A question to carry forward

Inclusion-exclusion fixed the double-counting between two events by subtracting their overlap. Here is the thread for the next lesson: that overlap P(A ∩ B) is itself a probability worth understanding on its own — what does it really mean to ask for the chance of A given that B has already happened?

In one breath

  • Sample space S = every outcome; an event is a subset of S; probability scores each event.
  • Three axioms: (1) P(E) ≥ 0, (2) P(S) = 1, (3) disjoint A,BP(A∪B) = P(A)+P(B).
  • For free: P(∅)=0, complement P(Aᶜ)=1−P(A), monotonicity A⊆B ⇒ P(A)≤P(B), and 0 ≤ P(A) ≤ 1.
  • Inclusion-exclusion (overlap): P(A∪B) = P(A)+P(B)−P(A∩B); additivity is the no-overlap case. Three events: add singles − pairs + triple.
  • The marks are lost by forgetting to subtract the overlap, or assuming equally-likely outcomes when explicit probabilities are given.

Practice

Quick check

0/6
Q1Recall: rolling a die, the event 'an even number' is which of these?
Q2Trace: for events with P(A) = 0.6, P(B) = 0.3, and P(A ∩ B) = 0.1, compute P(A ∪ B).numerical answer — type a number
Q3Trace: two mutually exclusive (disjoint) events have P(A) = 0.45 and P(B) = 0.25. What is P(A ∪ B)?numerical answer — type a number
Q4Apply: which statements follow directly from the three axioms? (select all that apply)select all that apply
Q5Apply: a probability is claimed to be P(E) = 1.2 for some event E. Which axiom does this break?
Q6Create: 70% of a town reads the Hindi paper, 40% reads the English paper, and 20% reads both. Set up and solve for the percentage that reads at least one paper — then say what percentage reads NEITHER.

Sign in to track your progress

Completed lessons, your XP, level, and streak save to your account — it's free and takes a few seconds.

Practice this in an interview

All questions
State the law of total probability and give a concrete example of when you'd apply it.

The law of total probability decomposes P(A) over a mutually exclusive, exhaustive partition of the sample space: P(A) = Σ P(A|Bᵢ)·P(Bᵢ). It is the engine behind the Bayes denominator and any calculation where you want an overall rate built from segment-level rates.

When does each common distribution arise — Bernoulli, Binomial, Poisson, Normal, Exponential, Uniform?

Each distribution has a natural generative story: Bernoulli is a single coin flip; Binomial sums Bernoullis; Poisson counts rare arrivals; Normal emerges from sums of many small effects; Exponential models waiting times between Poisson events; Uniform assigns equal probability across a range. Choosing correctly comes from matching that story to the data-generating process.

What is the birthday problem and what does it reveal about probability intuition?

In a room of just 23 people, the probability that at least two share a birthday exceeds 50 %. The counterintuitive result comes from counting the large number of pairs rather than comparing each person to a fixed date — an example of how our intuition systematically underestimates collision probabilities.

What is conditional probability, and how does it differ from joint probability?

Conditional probability P(A|B) is the probability of A given that B has already occurred, computed as P(A and B) / P(B). It narrows the sample space to B, whereas joint probability P(A and B) lives in the full, unrestricted space.

Related lessons

Explore further

Skip to content