Answer:
The test was not statistically significant because if the null hypothesis is true, one could expect to get a test statistic at least as extreme as that observed 21% of the time.
Step-by-step explanation:
This is the right answer,since this result is only observed 21% of the time, so in general it's not significant, so the first 2 are eliminated. The 2 x 0.21 doesn't matter since, the percent is 21% not 42%, so it doesn't even matter. The last question we eliminate is:"The test was not statistically significant because if the null hypothesis is true, one could expect to get a test statistic at least as extreme as that observed 79% of the time" 79% of the time is a pretty good amount to say it's significant, but it only says 21% of the time.So, it leaves us with:The test was not statistically significant because if the null hypothesis is true, one could expect to get a test statistic at least as extreme as that observed 21% of the time.
Hope this helps lol (: is this a psat or somethin?
Hope this helps, pls mark me brainliest
Robot 1- W = 20(3m) W= 60Nm
Robot 2- W= 30N (3m), W = 90Nm
Robot 3- W= 10N(2m), W= 20Nm
Robot 4- W= 30N(2m), W= 60Nm
Robot 2 did the most work, Robot 3 did the least amount of work and Robots, 1 and 4 did an equal amount of work
Step-by-step answer:
The steps are much easier to follow when we know how many product it sells. The number does not really matter, because we need the profit per item.
Say, the company made and sold 100 items of the product.
The revenue = 100*5 = $500.
On the average, 2 out of 100 are defective and need to be replaced at a cost of $100 each, so
replacement cost = 2* 100 = 200
So net profit for 100 items = $500 -$200 = $300
Net profit for each item = $300/100 = $3.00
Remark: since the product is replaced, no refund is necessary, so revenue stays at $300.
I am pertty sure its 0.6 but if i am wrong sorry
