Answer:
The correct option is;
Simpson Paradox
Step-by-step explanation:
The phenomenon whereby particular trends are prevalent in small data portions but are not evident or an inverse trend is observe when the portions are joined together is known as Simpson's paradox.
Whereby the data for calculating the bating averages as found online are given as follows;
Season, Derek Jeter David Justice
1995, 12/48 = 0.250 104/411 ≈ 0.253
1996, 183/582 ≈ 0.314 45/140 ≈ 0.321
The overall hits to the overall bats ratio are;
, (183 + 12)/(582 + 48) ≈0.310 (104+45)/(411+140) = 0.27
Which shows that Derek Jeter's overall average was better than Justice's average
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
(3x + 2) + (x - 4) = 90
4x - 2 = 90
4x = 92
x = 23
m∠A = (3(23) + 2) = 71°
Answer:
<em>99.93%</em>
Step-by-step explanation:
<u>Probability of Independent Events</u>
Given the probability of success of each detector is 0.84 independently of the others, their combined success/failure probability can be computed with the product rule.
We can calculate the required probability by using the binomial distribution, but it's easier to calculate the probability of the negated event an subtract from 1.
We want to know the probability that a least one of the 4 systems detects the occurrence of theft. That probability is the sum of the probabilities that one of them, two of them, three of them or all of them succeed. The negated event is that NONE of them actually detects the theft. Being p the individual probability of success, p=0.84. Being q the probability of failure, q=0.16.
The probability that none of the systems detect the theft is

Thus, the probability that at least one of the systems detect the theft is

That means a 99.93%
Answer:
a) has the same probability of being selected
Step-by-step explanation:
A simple random sampling means that each possible sample of size n has the same probability of being selected.
Then your answer is:
a) has the same probability of being selected
Answer:
(3, 0).
Step-by-step explanation:
dentifying the vertices of the feasible region. Graphing is often a good way to do it, or you can solve the equations pairwise to identify the x- and y-values that are at the limits of the region.
In the attached graph, the solution spaces of the last two constraints are shown in red and blue, and their overlap is shown in purple. Hence the vertices of the feasible region are the vertices of the purple area: (0, 0), (0, 1), (1.5, 1.5), and (3, 0).
The signs of the variables in the contraint function (+ for x, - for y) tell you that to maximize C, you want to make y as small as possible, while making x as large as possible at the same time.
Hence, The Answer is ( 3, 0)