Step-by-step explanation:
There should be an option that says, “From the origin, move 0.5 unit to the right along the x-axis and 1 unit down, and place the point.”
(5x-2) + (2x+6) = 67, so we simplify and solve for x:
7x + 4 = 67 --> 7x = 63 --> x = 9
Now we substitute 9 for x in (5x-2):
5(9) - 2 --> 45 - 2 = 43
The distance between A and B is 43 miles.
Hope this Helps!
Brainliest Please!
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
So you can use the special formula for 30-60-90 triangle or you can use the whole Soh Cah Toa thing.
I honestly prefer trig. so a is the opposite side of the 30 deg and 12 is the hyp. This should scream sine to you since sine goes with opposite/hypotenuse.
sin(30 deg)=a/12
Multiply both sides by 12
giving a=12 sin(30)
Type into calculator unless you know your unit circle well.
a=6
Answer:
896
Step-by-step explanation:
Let's talk first about how many 3 digit numbers there are. The first 3 digit number is 100 and the last is 999. So there are 999-100+1 numbers that are 3 digits long. That simplifies to 900.
Now let's find how many of those have a sum for the digits being 1, then 2 ? Then take that sum away from the 900 to see how many 3 digit numbers have the sum of their digits being more than 2.
3 digit numbers with sum of 1:
The first and only number is 100 since 1+0+0=1.
We can't include 010 or 001 because these aren't really three digits long.
3 digit numbers with sum of 2:
The first number is 101 since 1+0+1=2.
The second number is 110 since 1+1+0=2.
The third number is 200 since 2+0+0=2.
That's the last of those. We could only use 0,1, and 2 here.... Anything with a 3 in it would give us something larger than or equal to 3.
So there are 900-1-3 numbers who are 3 digits long and whose sum of digits is greater than 2.
This answer simplifies to 896.
Reliable causal inference based on observational studies is seriously threatened by unmeasured confounding.
What is unmeasured cofounding?
- By definition, an unmeasured confounder is a variable that is connected to both the exposed and the result and could explain the apparent observed link.
- The validity of interpretation in observational studies is threatened by unmeasured confounding. The use of negative control group to reduce unmeasured confounding has grown in acceptance and popularity in recent years.
Although they've been utilised mostly for bias detection, negative controls have a long history in laboratory sciences and epidemiology of ruling out non-causal causes. A pair of negative control exposure and outcome variables can be utilised to non-parametrically determine the average treatment effect (ATE) from observational data that is vulnerable to uncontrolled confounding, according to a recent study by Miao and colleagues.
Reliable causal inference based on observational studies is seriously threatened by unmeasured confounding.
Learn more about unmeasured confounding here:
brainly.com/question/10863424
#SPJ4
