Question

A certain process for manufacturing integrated circuits has been in use for a period of time, and it is known that 12% of the circuits it produces are defective. A new process that is supposed to reduce the proportion of defectives is being tested. In a simple random sample of 100 circuits produced by the new process, 12 were defective. a. One of the engineers suggests that the test proves that the new process is no better than the old process, since the proportion of defectives in the sample is the same. Is this conclusion justified? Explain. b. Assume that there had been only 11 defective circuits in the sample of 100. Would this have proven that the new process is better? Explain. c. Which outcome represents stronger evidence that the new process is better: finding 11 defective circuits in the sample, or finding 2 defective circuits in the sample?

Answer 1

Answer:

(a) No the conclusion is not justified.

b. No

c. Two defective circuits in the sample

Step-by-step explanation:

Ans: (a) No the conclusion is not justified. What is important is the percentage population of defectives;

the sample proportion is only an approximation. The population proportion

for the new process may be more than or less than that of the old process.  We can  decide to pick two hundred samples and discover that the number of defects is greater than the previous process

(b)

.For the defectives, the population proportion for the new process may be 0.12 or more,

although the sample of defectives is just 11 out of 100

(c) Two defective circuits in the sample. This is because the probability of having two defects from the 100n samples is less than having 11 defects