Ask question

Ask question

All categories

2 years ago

13

The track and field coach records Ian's 400-meter race times during three practices. How much greater was the percent of change

from Practice 1 to Practice 2 than from Practice 2 to Practice 3? Round to the nearest tenth.

1 answer:

BigorU [14]2 years ago

4 0

Answer:

d. 1.5%

Step-by-step explanation:

Given - The track and field coach records Ian's 400-meter race times during three practices.

Practice 1 2 3

Time (s) 63 60 58

To find - How much greater was the percent of change from Practice 1 to Practice 2 than from Practice 2 to Practice 3? Round to the nearest tenth.

a. 7.9%

b. 4.8%

c. 3.3%

d. 1.5%

Proof -

% change from Practice 1 to Practice 2 change = $\frac{60 - 63}{63}. 100$ %

= $-\frac{3}{63}.100$ % = - 4.761904762 %

⇒% change from Practice 1 to Practice 2 change = - 4.762 %

Now,

% change from Practice 2 to Practice 3 change = $\frac{58 - 60}{60}. 100$ %

= $-\frac{2}{60}.100$ % = - 3.334 %

⇒% change from Practice 2 to Practice 3 change = - 3.3334 %

So,

- 4.461904762% - (- 3.3334%) = -4.461904762 + 3.3334 % = -1.4285 % ≈ 1.5%

∴ we get

Value = 1.5%

The correct option is - d. 1.5%

You might be interested in

A triangle has two sides of length 13 and 10. What is the largest possible whole-number length for the third side?

NeTakaya

In order for a triangle to exist, the two smaller sides must add to a number greater than the largest side.

So, 13+10 = 23

So, the number has to be smaller than 23, and the largest whole number less than 23 is 22.

22 Is the largest possible whole number.

8 0

2 years ago

Let X1 and X2 be independent random variables with mean μand variance σ².

My name is Ann [436]

Answer:

a) $E(\hat \theta_1) =\frac{1}{2} [E(X_1) +E(X_2)]= \frac{1}{2} [\mu + \mu] = \mu$

So then we conclude that $\hat \theta_1$ is an unbiased estimator of $\mu$

$E(\hat \theta_2) =\frac{1}{4} [E(X_1) +3E(X_2)]= \frac{1}{4} [\mu + 3\mu] = \mu$

So then we conclude that $\hat \theta_2$ is an unbiased estimator of $\mu$

b) $Var(\hat \theta_1) =\frac{1}{4} [\sigma^2 + \sigma^2 ] =\frac{\sigma^2}{2}$

$Var(\hat \theta_2) =\frac{1}{16} [\sigma^2 + 9\sigma^2 ] =\frac{5\sigma^2}{8}$

Step-by-step explanation:

For this case we know that we have two random variables:

$X_1 , X_2$ both with mean $\mu = \mu$ and variance $\sigma^2$

And we define the following estimators:

$\hat \theta_1 = \frac{X_1 + X_2}{2}$

$\hat \theta_2 = \frac{X_1 + 3X_2}{4}$

Part a

In order to see if both estimators are unbiased we need to proof if the expected value of the estimators are equal to the real value of the parameter:

$E(\hat \theta_i) = \mu , i = 1,2$

So let's find the expected values for each estimator:

$E(\hat \theta_1) = E(\frac{X_1 +X_2}{2})$

Using properties of expected value we have this:

$E(\hat \theta_1) =\frac{1}{2} [E(X_1) +E(X_2)]= \frac{1}{2} [\mu + \mu] = \mu$

So then we conclude that $\hat \theta_1$ is an unbiased estimator of $\mu$

For the second estimator we have:

$E(\hat \theta_2) = E(\frac{X_1 + 3X_2}{4})$

Using properties of expected value we have this:

$E(\hat \theta_2) =\frac{1}{4} [E(X_1) +3E(X_2)]= \frac{1}{4} [\mu + 3\mu] = \mu$

So then we conclude that $\hat \theta_2$ is an unbiased estimator of $\mu$

Part b

For the variance we need to remember this property: If a is a constant and X a random variable then:

$Var(aX) = a^2 Var(X)$

For the first estimator we have:

$Var(\hat \theta_1) = Var(\frac{X_1 +X_2}{2})$

$Var(\hat \theta_1) =\frac{1}{4} Var(X_1 +X_2)=\frac{1}{4} [Var(X_1) + Var(X_2) + 2 Cov (X_1 , X_2)]$

Since both random variables are independent we know that $Cov(X_1, X_2 ) = 0$ so then we have:

$Var(\hat \theta_1) =\frac{1}{4} [\sigma^2 + \sigma^2 ] =\frac{\sigma^2}{2}$

For the second estimator we have:

$Var(\hat \theta_2) = Var(\frac{X_1 +3X_2}{4})$

$Var(\hat \theta_2) =\frac{1}{16} Var(X_1 +3X_2)=\frac{1}{4} [Var(X_1) + Var(3X_2) + 2 Cov (X_1 , 3X_2)]$

Since both random variables are independent we know that $Cov(X_1, X_2 ) = 0$ so then we have:

$Var(\hat \theta_2) =\frac{1}{16} [\sigma^2 + 9\sigma^2 ] =\frac{5\sigma^2}{8}$

7 0

2 years ago

What is the answer for 76.4 x 3.6?

hammer [34]

Answer:

275.04

Step-by-step explanation:

76.4 x 3.6 = 275.04

6 0

1 year ago

Find the value of k. Then find the angle measures of the polygon

pochemuha

Answer:

45° + 2k + k = 180°

=> 45 + 3k = 180

=> 3k = 180 – 45

=> k = 135/3

=> k = 45

other two angles :-

2k = 2×45 = 90°

k = 45°

7 0

2 years ago

Proof that x^y + y^x > 1 for all x,y > 0 ...?

bekas [8.4K]

To prove this inequality we need to consider three cases. We need to see that the equation is symmetric and that switching the variables x and y does not change the equation.

Case 1: x >= 1, y >= 1

It is obvious that

x^y >= 1, y^x >= 1
x^y + y^x >= 2 > 1
x^y + y^x > 1

Case 2: x >= 1, 0 < y < 1

Considering the following sub-cases:

- x = 1, x^y = 1
- x > 1,

Let x = 1 + n, where n > 0

x^y = (1 + n)^y = f_n(y)

By Taylor Expansion of f_e(y) around y = 0,

x^y = f_n(0) + f_n'(0)/1!*y + f_n''(0)/2!*y^2 + ...
= 1 + ln(1 + n)/1!*y + ln(1 + n)^2/2!*y^2 + ...

Since ln(1 + n) > 0,

x^y > 1

Thus, we can say that x^y >= 1, and since y^x > 0.

x^y + y^x > 1

By symmetry, 0 < x < 1, y >= 1, also yields the same.

Case 3: 0 < x, y < 1

We can prove this case by fixing one variable at a time and by invoking symmetry to prove the relation.

Fixing the variable y, we can set the expression as a function,

f(x) = x^y + y^x
f'(x) = y*x^(y-1) + y^x*ln y
For all x > 0 and y > 0, it is obvious that
f'(x) > 0.

Hence, the function f(x) is increasing and hence the function f(x) would be at its minimum when x -> 0+ (this means close to zero but always greater than zero).

lim x->0+ f(x) = 0^y + y^0 = 0 + 1 = 1

Thus, this tells us that

f(x) > 1.

Fixing variable y, by symmetry also yields the same result: f(x) > 1.

Hence, when x and y are varying, f(x) > 1 must also hold true.
Thus, x^y + y^x > 1.

We have exhausted all the possible cases and shown that the relation holds true for all cases. Therefore,

<span> x^y + y^x > 1

----------------------------------------------------

I have to give credit to my colleague, Mikhael Glen Lataza for the wonderful solution.

I hope it has come to your help.

</span>

6 0

3 years ago