Step-by-step explanation:
using normal distribution aproximation
Check attachment
Consider a function f(x), the linear approximation L(x) of f(x) is given by
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/28920/28920634744c12dbe5253ddd7aff04137189268d" alt="L(x)=f(a)+(x-a)f'(a)"
Given the quantity:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8bccc/8bccc2ef5bd75452486d7e043a720efde830f01b" alt="\frac{1}{203}"
We approximate the quantity using the function
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/48a71/48a71b87bba376caab84dc701c40c95dc27d0881" alt="f(x)= \frac{1}{x}"
, where x = 203.
We choose a = 200, thus the linear approximation is given as follows:
Answer:
b) B and D and c) A and C
Step-by-step explanation:
The hypotheses would be:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4da24/4da24a2e1ca132bc17a3f0158747f89a9fe374ea" alt="H_0: p =0.75\\H_a: p >0.75"
(Right tailed test at 5% level)
Sample proportions are
Sample A B C D
Success 31 34 27 38
Proportion p 0.775 0.85 0.675 0.95
Std error
(sqrtpq/n) 0.066 0.056 0.074 0.034
p diff
p-0.75 0.025 0.10 - 0.075 0.20
Z stat
p diff/SE 0.0757 1.77 1.01 5.80
p value 0.469 0.038 0.156 0.000001
we find that p value is more smaller than alpha, the more accurate the alternate hypothesis.
b) Only B and D provide against the null. Because p <0.05
c) A and C provide no evidence for the alternative because p >0.05
A.) alternate exterior angles
The input is the y
y = x^2 - 5
plug in what we're given
-1 = x^2 -5
add 5 to both sides
4 = x^2
take the square root of both sides
2 = x
Hope this helps :)