# A Heuristic Argument for the Effectiveness of the Union Bound

The union bound is ubiquitous in theoretical computer science, and perhaps in justification of this Andy Drucker mentioned in a lecture once a heuristic argument for its “tightness”. Just to write it out, the union bound takes

$P(A \cup B) = P(A) + P(B) - P(A \cap B) \qquad\qquad P\left(\bigcup_i A_i\right)$

and approximates it as

$P(A \cup B) \leq P(A) +P(B)\qquad \qquad P\left(\bigcup_i A_i\right) \leq \displaystyle\sum_i P(A_i)$

Imagine if $\{A_i \mid 1 \leq i \leq n\}$ are “bad events” that occur with some tiny probability $\delta$. The union bound says

$P(\text{a bad event happens}) \leq n \delta$

If the events were fully independent, we would have the equality

$P(\text{a bad event happens}) = 1 - (1 - \delta)^n$

Now $(1 - \delta)^n \approx 1 - n\delta$ when $\delta = o(n)$. So we have

$P(\text{a bad event happens}) \approx 1 - (1 - n\delta) = n\delta$

This is equal to the bound spit out by the application of the union bound! In the case of fully independent events with small probabilities, we see the union bound is essentially tight. Full independence is rare, but in applications where low-probability events are slightly correlated, the union bound is also a good approximation.