Answer:
i think 3 and 5 should be the answer
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
# of granola bars and it's cost.
Step-by-step explanation:
It is asking for the meaning of 2B. Note that inside the question, it states that:
"<em>The price of a granola bar is B dollars</em>".
It also states that:
"<em>Donovan eats </em>2<em> granola bars</em>".
This means that to solve for the total spent on granola bars, you multiply the price (B) with the amount gotten (2 in this case).
~
Using the t-distribution, as we have the standard deviation for the sample, it is found that the 95% confidence interval estimate for the mean number of calories for servings of breakfast cereals is (195.3, 215.7).
<h3>What is a t-distribution confidence interval?</h3>
The confidence interval is:
In which:
- is the sample mean.
- t is the critical value.
- n is the sample size.
- s is the standard deviation for the sample.
From the sample and the significance level of 0.05, we have that the parameters are given by:
Hence:
The 95% confidence interval estimate for the mean number of calories for servings of breakfast cereals is (195.3, 215.7).
More can be learned about the t-distribution at brainly.com/question/16162795
It is usually noted that correlation does not imply causation, but there are some correlations which are causation as well.
A correlation is when there is a relationship between two variables while causation is when the outcome of one variable affects the outcome of the other variable.
From the first option, though there may be a positive relationship between sales of jeans and sales of slacks, but the purchase of jeans does not mean that you have to purchase a slack, thus, there is no causation.
For the second option, though there may be positive relationship between <span>the number of aisles and the number of products in a supermarket, but a supermarket can have many aisles with few products, i.e. many aisles does not automatically imply many products, thus, there is no causation.
For the third option, though there may be a positive relationship between </span><span>the number of swimmers and the number of sunbathers at a beach, but all swimmers in a beach are not sunbathers and all sunbathers are not swimmers. Thus, a swimmer does not imply a sunbather and a sunbather does not imply a swimmer. Thus, there is no causation.
For the last option, it is generally known that the more you practice an activity, the better you get in that activity. Thus, there exist a relationship between </span><span>the number of hours spent practicing archery and the number of bull's-eyes an archer can hit and there also exist causation because the number of bull's-eye an archer can hit is directly dependent on the number of hours the archer spent practicing.
Therefore, the </span><span>correlation that is most likely a causation is </span><span>the positive correlation between the number of hours spent practicing archery and the number of bull's-eyes the archer can hit.</span>
I can't see the photo!????????