<span>The probability that a house in an urban area will develop a leak is 55%. if 20 houses are randomly selected, what is the probability that none of the houses will develop a leak? round to the nearest thousandth.
Use binomial distribution, since probability of developing a leak, p=0.55 is assumed constant, and
n=20, x=0
and assuming leaks are developed independently between houses,
P(X=x)
=C(n,0)p^x* (1-p)^(n-x)
=C(20,0)0.55^0 * (0.45^20)
=1*1*0.45^20
=1.159*10^(-7)
=0.000
</span>
<h3>
Answer: Choice B</h3>
No, this is not a plausible value for the population mean, because 5 is not within the 95% confidence interval.
====================================================
Explanation:
The greek letter mu is the population mean. It has the symbol
which looks like the letter 'u' but with a tail at the front or left side.
The question is asking if mu = 5 is plausible if the researcher found the 95% confidence interval to be 5.2 < mu < 7.8
We see that 5 is <u>not</u> in that interval. It's a bit to the left of 5.2
Since mu = 5 is not in the interval, it's not a plausible value for the population mean.
Have we ruled it out with 100% confidence? No. Such a thing is not possible. There's always room for (slight) error. The researcher would need to do a census to be fully confident; however, such practices are very time consuming and expensive. This is the main reason why statistics is important to try to estimate the population with a sample.
<span>5/ 8 x 4/ 5
=20/40
=1/2
answer is </span>A. 1/2
Answer:
I would say about 5 or 6 hours.
Step-by-step explanation: