.

Select all the options that have the same value as 3 1/2 % of 20.

elena55 [62]

There are only three answers to this question. Answer-A, D,E

8 0

3 years ago

Simplify the equation 4x+3y=2x

nikdorinn [45]

Answer:

2x=3y or x= -3y/2 and y =2/-3y

Step-by-step explanation:

4x-2x=-3y

2x=-3y

4 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

This problem uses the teengamb data set in the faraway package. Fit a model with gamble as the response and the other variables

hichkok12 [17]

Answer:

A. 95% confidence interval of gamble amount is (18.78277, 37.70227)

B. The 95% confidence interval of gamble amount is (42.23237, 100.3835)

C. 95% confidence interval of sqrt(gamble) is (3.180676, 4.918371)

D. The predicted bet value for a woman with status = 20, income = 1, verbal = 10, which shows a negative result and does not fit with the data, so it is inferred that model (c) does not fit with this information

Step-by-step explanation:

to)

We will see a code with which it can be predicted that an average man with income and verbal score maintains an appropriate 95% CI.

attach (teengamb)

model = lm (bet ~ sex + status + income + verbal)

newdata = data.frame (sex = 0, state = mean (state), income = mean (income), verbal = mean (verbal))

predict (model, new data, interval = "predict")

lwr upr setting

28.24252 -18.51536 75.00039

we can deduce that an average man, with income and verbal score can play 28.24252 times

using the following formula you can obtain the confidence interval for the bet amount of 95%

predict (model, new data, range = "confidence")

lwr upr setting

28.24252 18.78277 37.70227

as a result, the confidence interval of 95% of the bet amount is (18.78277, 37.70227)

b)

Run the following command to predict a man with maximum values for status, income, and verbal score.

newdata1 = data.frame (sex = 0, state = max (state), income = max (income), verbal = max (verbal))

predict (model, new data1, interval = "confidence")

lwr upr setting

71.30794 42.23237 100.3835

we can deduce that a man with the maximum state, income and verbal punctuation is going to bet 71.30794

The 95% confidence interval of the bet amount is (42.23237, 100.3835)

it is observed that the confidence interval is wider for a man in maximum state than for an average man, it is an expected data because the bet value will be higher than the person with maximum state that the average what you carried s that simultaneously The, the standard error and the width of the confidence interval is wider for maximum data values.

(C)

Run the following code for the new model and predict the answer.

model1 = lm (sqrt (bet) ~ sex + status + income + verbal)

we replace:

predict (model1, new data, range = "confidence")

lwr upr setting

4,049523 3,180676 4.918371

The predicted sqrt (bet) is 4.049523. which is equal to the bet amount is 16.39864.

The 95% confidence interval of sqrt (wager) is (3.180676, 4.918371)

(d)

We will see the code to predict women with status = 20, income = 1, verbal = 10.

newdata2 = data.frame (sex = 1, state = 20, income = 1, verbal = 10)

predict (model1, new data2, interval = "confidence")

lwr upr setting

-2.08648 -4.445937 0.272978

The predicted bet value for a woman with status = 20, income = 1, verbal = 10, which shows a negative result and does not fit with the data, so it is inferred that model (c) does not fit with this information

4 0

3 years ago

16. Two golfers completed one round of golf. The first golfer had a score

bearhunter [10]

9514 1404 393

Answer:

9

Step-by-step explanation:

The extra shots can be computed from the difference in their scores:

6 -(-3) = 6 +3 = 9

The first golfer took 9 more shots.

6 0

3 years ago

According to a Washington Post-ABC News poll, 331 of 502 randomly selected U.S. adults interviewed said they would not be bother

k0ka [10]

Answer:

$z=\frac{0.659 -0.5}{\sqrt{\frac{0.5(1-0.5)}{502}}}=7.124$

$p_v =P(z>7.124)=5.24x10^{-13}$

So the p value obtained was a very low value and using the significance level given $\alpha=0.05$ we have $p_v$ so we can conclude that we have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis, and we can said that at 5% of significance the proportion of interest is significantly higher than 0.5.

Step-by-step explanation:

Data given and notation

n=502 represent the random sample taken

X=331 represent the adults that said they would not be bothered if the NAtional security agency

$\hat p=\frac{331}{502}=0.659$ estimated proportion of people who would not be bothered if the NAtional security agency

$p_o=0.5$ is the value that we want to test

$\alpha=0.01$ represent the significance level

Confidence=99% or 0.99

z would represent the statistic (variable of interest)

$p_v$ represent the p value (variable of interest)

Concepts and formulas to use

We need to conduct a hypothesis in order to test the claim that the true proportion is higher than the majority of 0.5:

Null hypothesis: $p\leq 0.5$

Alternative hypothesis: $p > 0.5$

When we conduct a proportion test we need to use the z statistic, and the is given by:

$z=\frac{\hat p -p_o}{\sqrt{\frac{p_o (1-p_o)}{n}}}$ (1)

The One-Sample Proportion Test is used to assess whether a population proportion $\hat p$ is significantly different from a hypothesized value $p_o$ .

Calculate the statistic

Since we have all the info requires we can replace in formula (1) like this:

$z=\frac{0.659 -0.5}{\sqrt{\frac{0.5(1-0.5)}{502}}}=7.124$

Statistical decision

It's important to refresh the p value method or p value approach . "This method is about determining "likely" or "unlikely" by determining the probability assuming the null hypothesis were true of observing a more extreme test statistic in the direction of the alternative hypothesis than the one observed". Or in other words is just a method to have an statistical decision to fail to reject or reject the null hypothesis.

The significance level provided $\alpha=0.01$ . The next step would be calculate the p value for this test.

Since is a right tailed test the p value would be:

$p_v =P(z>7.124)=5.24x10^{-13}$

So the p value obtained was a very low value and using the significance level given $\alpha=0.05$ we have $p_v$ so we can conclude that we have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis, and we can said that at 5% of significance the proportion of interest is significantly higher than 0.5.

4 0

3 years ago