Answer:
5%100 ×R200
Step-by-step explanation:
Address and u the one for me please
Answer:
There is not enough evidence to support the claim that Alaska had a lower proportion of identity theft than 23%.
Step-by-step explanation:
We are given the following in the question:
Sample size, n = 1432
p = 23% = 0.23
Alpha, α = 0.05
Number of theft complaints , x = 321
First, we design the null and the alternate hypothesis
This is a one-tailed test.
Formula:
Putting the values, we get,
Now, we calculate the p-value from the table.
P-value = 0.298
Since the p-value is greater than the significance level, we fail to reject the null hypothesis and accept the null hypothesis.
Conclusion:
Thus, there is not enough evidence to support the claim that Alaska had a lower proportion of identity theft than 23%.
Answer:
(22) = 7
Step-by-step explanation:
The inverse function maps the output of the function back to its input
f(7) = 22 means when input is 7 the output is 22
The inverse maps the output 22 back to the input 7 , that is
(22) = 7
Answer:
Graph the parabola using the direction, vertex, focus, and axis of symmetry.
Direction: Opens Down
Vertex:
(
2
,
4
)
Focus:
(
2
,
15
/4
)
Axis of Symmetry:
x
=
2
Directrix:
y
=
17
/4
x y
0 0
1 3
2 4
3 3
4 0
To find the x-intercept, substitute in
0 for y and solve for x
. To find the y-intercept, substitute in 0 for x and solve for y
.
x-intercept(s): (
0
,
0
)
,
(
−
4
,
0
)
y-intercept(s): (
0
,
0
)
Step-by-step explanation: