15,628+10, 15,000+638, 15,540+98.
Answer: sigma is used for measuring Population Standard Deviation.
Step-by-step explanation:
The lower case Greek letter 'sigma' is denoted by the symbol (
).
This symbol indicates the Population Standard Deviation of the data. Standard deviation means how much variation or dispersion is there in our data. Squaring of standard deviation gives us Variance which is denoted by the symbol
.
Formula for Population Standard deviation (
) is =
,
where
= each value from our list of data
= Population mean of data
N = Number of observations in our data
Standard deviation can never be negative and it is very much sensitive to outliers in our data.
Answer:
-2y
Step-by-step explanation:
Let's simplify step-by-step.
x−y−(x+y)
Distribute the Negative Sign:
=x−y+−1(x+y)
=x+−y+−1x+−1y
=x+−y+−x+−y
Combine Like Terms:
=x+−y+−x+−y
=(x+−x)+(−y+−y)
=−2y
Arrange data set in ascending order:
State A: 21, 22, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24, 24, 25
State B: 20, 20, 21, 22, 23, 23, 24, 46, 50
State A State B
minimum 21 20
1st Quartile 22 20.5
median 23 23
3rd Quartile 24 46
maximum 25 50
IQR 2 25.5
Answer:
B. There is not sufficient evidence at the 0.02 level of significance that the new technique reduces training time.
Step-by-step explanation:
We are given that using traditional methods it takes 107 hours to receive an advanced flying license.
A researcher believes the new technique may reduce training time and decides to perform a hypothesis test.
Let
= <u><em>average training time to receive an advanced flying license</em></u>
So, Null hypothesis,
:
107 hours {means that the new technique doesn't reduce training time}
Alternate Hypothesis,
:
< 107 hours {means that the new technique may reduce training time}
Now, it is stated that after performing the test on 50 students, the researcher decides to reject the null hypothesis at a 0.10 level of significance.
As we know that if the test statistics value is rejected at a 10% level of significance, then it must not be rejected at the 0.02 level of significance.
This means that there is not sufficient evidence at the 0.02 level of significance that the new technique reduces training time because our null hypothesis has not been rejected.