The formula is width times length
Answer: First of all, we will add the options.
A. Yes, because 3 inches falls above the maximum value of lengths in the sample.
B. Yes, because the regression equation is based on a random sample.
C. Yes, because the association between length and weight is positive.
D. No, because 3 inches falls above the maximum value of lengths in the sample.
E. No, because there may not be any 3-inch fish of this species in the pond.
The correct option is D.
Step-by-step explanation: It would not be appropriate to use the model to predict the weight of species that is 3 inches long because 3 inches falls above the maximum value of lengths in the sample.
As we can see from the question, the model only accounts for species that are within the range of 0.75 to 1.35 inches in length, and species smaller or larger than that length have not been taken into consideration. Therefore the model can not be used to predict the weights of fishes not with the range accounted for.
Answer:
7/44
Step-by-step explanation:
you can't simply subtract 1/11 from 1/4 because the denominators are not the same . Meaning you have to convert the denominators into a similar number. Transformers in even number and a consecutive number while 11 is an odd number and a prime number they don't really agree on anything 11 can only be divided by itself and 1 wall for can be divided by a multitude of things. Because of them not exactly agreeing on any specific category , you have to multiply them by each other . So your new fractions should look like 11 / 44 and 4 / 44 . from there you can easily subtract 4 from 11 and get 7 / 44 now normally you can reduce these types of fractions but because seven can only be divided by itself and 44 is not a factor of 7 you cannot reduce this fraction .
Answer:
B
Step-by-step explanation:
it this answer
Answer:
3z-44
Step-by-step explanation:
All you have to do is to simplify the numbers. 2 + 6 - 52 = -44.
