Answer:
15, 8, 66%, 40
Step-by-step explanation:
Hi! ok so in ogive charts its really about finding the corresponding data points and sometimes it's a lot of estimation so these answers may not be exact but they'll be close.
In the image, you'll see a bunch of lines, basically what youre doing is finding the corresponding frequency of the dollars or vice versa.
<em>question a)</em>
50 dollars or less, so the area of 50 dollars and below that.
from the chart we can see that this lines up to around 15 people.
<em>question b)</em>
now this one is a little bit more challenging, but you can use the same process as you did for the first question. so we can see who spent 100 dollars or less. this value is around 42 (just from looking at the graph)
<em>we know if you didn't spend 100 dollars or less, you must have spent more than that. </em>
so take 50-42=8
around 8<u> people</u> spent 100 dollars or more.
<em>question c)</em>
basically the same question as the first but more calculations are involved. from the graph we can see around 33 people spent 80 dollars or less. but the question is asking the percentage. so what percent of 50 (people) is 33.
33/50 = 0.66
around 66%
<em>question d)</em>
80th percentile means less than or equal to 80% of the frequencies/the data. so we first need to find what value that is in terms of frequency.
50 times 0.8 = 40
40 people
now just plot that on the graph (sorry i did it wrong in the image)
Answer:
1. 500
2. 126
3. 615
Step-by-step explanation:
Area of a parallelogram formula: A = bh
20 x 25 = 500
7 x 18 = 126
20.5 x 30 = 615
Hmm it would be k(x)=2(5x) or it could be k(x)=10x
Hope this helps!
Answer:
The proof contains a simple direct proof, wrapped inside the unnecessary logical packaging of a proof by contradiction framework.
Step-by-step explanation:
The proof is rigourous and well written, so we discard the second answer.
This is not a fake proof by contradiction: it does not have any logical fallacies (circular arguments) or additional assumptions, like, for example, the "proof" of "All the horses are the same color". It is factually correct, but it can be rewritten as a direct proof.
A meaningful proof by contradiction depends strongly on the assumption that the statement to prove is false. In this argument, we only this assumption once, thus it is innecessary. Other proofs by contradiction, like the proof of "The square root of 2 is irrational" or Euclid's proof of the infinitude of primes, develop a longer argument based on the new assumption, but this proof doesn't.
To rewrite this without the superfluous framework, erase the parts "Suppose that the statement is false" and "The fact that the statement is true contradicts the assumption that the statement is false. Thus, the assumption that the statement was false must have been false. Thus, the statement is true."
<h2>
Explanation:</h2>
Hello! Remember you have to write complete questions in order to get good and exact answers. Here I'll assume the graphed function comes from:
So this is the equation of a parabola that opens upward and whose vertex lies on the point:
The graph of this function is shown below. Which is true regarding the graphed function f(x)?
- It is true that the domain is the set of all real numbers because this is a polynomial function.
- It is true that the range is the set of all real numbers such that y ≥ 5
- It is true that this parabola opens upward
- It is true that it doesn't cut the x-axis
