On day one she starts of with 1 hour so it will be 1+30x. X being the number of days so by the seventh day Anna would practice for 240 minutes.
Answer:
<h2><u><em>The function basically returns the same objects (= does nothing). This could also be written explicitly as a named function. new Function <- function(x) { x } which would then be. cross val <- function(data, lambda=0, y trans = new Function) This is the default value, like in lambda=0, except the default value is a function itself.</em></u></h2><h2><u>
brainlist plz </u></h2>
Step-by-step explanation:
You read 2/5 of the remainder on Sunday. That means 3/5 of the remainder are unread (1- 2/5). It is given that 36 pages are unread. Therefore 3/5 of the remainder is equal to 36. Set up equation and solve for x which will be the remainder
3/5x=36
x=36(5/3)
x=60
Answer:Step-by-step explanation:
x+46=90
x=90-46
x=44°
Answer:
Yes, there is evidence to support that claim that instructor 1 is more effective than instructor 2
Step-by-step explanation:
We can conduct a hypothesis test for the difference of 2 proportions. If there is no difference in instructor quality, then the difference in proportions will be zero. That makes the null hypothesis
H0: p1 - p2 = 0
The question is asking whether instructor 1 is more effective, so if he is, his proportion will be larger than instructor 2, so the difference would result in a positive number. This makes the alternate hypothesis
Ha: p1 - p2 > 0
This is a right tailed test (the > or < sign always point to the critical region like an arrowhead)
We will use a significance level of 95% to conduct our test. This makes the critical values for our test statistic: z > 1.645.
If our test statistic falls in this region, we will reject the null hypothesis.
<u>See the attached photo for the hypothesis test and conclusion</u>