All categories

2 years ago

At 6:00 pm, the temperature in Paris was 3°C higher than at 6:00 am.

Mathematics

2 answers:

sleet_krkn [62]2 years ago

5 0

Answer:

x+3

Step-by-step explanation:

Suppose temprature at 6:00am = x

At 6:00pm temprature was 3°C Higher than at 6:00am.

Then,

x+3= temprature at 6:00 pm

kvasek [131]2 years ago

3 0

Answer:

-5 + 3 = -2

Step-by-step explanation:

You might be interested in

How many times greater was the temperature in Miami (45) than the lowest in San Diego (25)

Greeley [361]

Answer:

<em>The temperature in Miami is 9/5 times the temperature in San Diego.</em>

Step-by-step explanation:

<u>Ratios</u>

To compare the temperature in Miami (45) with the temperature in San Diego (25), we use the division or ratio between both numbers:

$\displaystyle \frac{45}{25}$

Simplify the fraction dividing by 5:

$\displaystyle \frac{9}{5}$

Since the relation between them is 9/5, it means the temperature in Miami is 9/5 times the temperature in San Diego.

3 0

3 years ago

Use lagrange multiplier techniques to find the local extreme values of f(x, y) = x2 − y2 − 2 subject to the constraint x2 + y2 =

dexar [7]

Given $f(x,\ y)=x^2-y^2-2$ subject to the constraint $x^2+y^2=16$

Let $g(x,\ y)=x^2+y^2$ .

The gradient vectors of $f$ and $g$ are:

$\nabla f(x,\ y)=\langle2x,-2y\rangle$ and $\nabla g(x,\ y)=\langle2x,2y\rangle$

By Lagrange's theorem, there is a number $\lambda$ , such that

$\langle2x,-2y\rangle=\lambda\langle2x,2y\rangle=\langle2\lambda x,2\lambda y\rangle$

$\lambda=\pm1$

It can be seen that $f(x,\ y)=x^2-y^2-2$ has local extreme values at the given region.

6 0

3 years ago

A collection of coins consists of dimes and nickels .The number of dimes is two more than the twice the number of nickels.The va

CaHeK987 [17]

27 dimes for my answer

hope it works

7 0

3 years ago

A truck can be rented from Company A for $70.00 a day plus $0.00 per mile. Company B charges $40.00 a day plus $0.70 per mile to

inessss [21]

Sent a picture of the solution to the problem (s).

7 0

3 years ago

A data mining routine has been applied to a transaction dataset and has classified 88 records as fraudulent (30 correctly so) an

chubhunter [2.5K]

Answer:

The classification matrix is attached below

Part a

The classification error rate for the records those are truly fraudulent is 65.91%.

Part b

The classification error rate for records that are truly non-fraudulent is 96.64%

Step-by-step explanation:

The classification matrix is obtained as shown below:

The transaction dataset has 30 fraudulent correctly classified records out of 88 records, that is, 30 records are correctly predicted given that an instance is negative.

Also, there would be 88 - 30 = 58 non-fraudulent incorrectly classified records, that is, 58 records are incorrectly predicted given that an instance is positive.

The transaction dataset has 920 non-fraudulent correctly classified records out of 952 records, that is, 920 records are correctly predicted given that an instance is positive.

Also, there would be 952 - 920 = 32 fraudulent incorrectly classified records, that is, 32 records incorrectly predicted given that an instance is negative.

That is,

Predicted value

Active value Fraudulent Non-fraudulent

Fraudlent 30 58

non-fraudulent 32 920

The classification matrix is obtained by using the information related to the transaction data, which is classified into fraudulent records and non-fraudulent records.

The error rate is obtained as shown below:

The error rate is obtained by taking the ratio of $\left( {b + c} \right)(b+c)$ and the total number of records.

The classification matrix is, shown above

The total number of records is, $30 + 58 + 32 + 920 = 1,040$

The error rate is,

$\begin{array}{c}\\{\rm{Error}}\,{\rm{rate}} = \frac{{b + c}}{{{\rm{Total}}}}\\\\ = \frac{{58 + 32}}{{1,040}}\\\\ = \frac{{90}}{{1,040}}\\\\ = 0.0865\\\end{array}$

The percentage is $0.0865 \times 100 = 8.65$

(a)

The classification error rate for the records those are truly fraudulent is obtained by taking the rate ratio of b and $\left( {a + b} \right)(a+b)$ .

The classification error rate for the records those are truly fraudulent is obtained as shown below:

The classification matrix is, shown above and in the attachment

The error rate for truly fraudulent is,

$\begin{array}{c}\\FP = \frac{b}{{a + b}}\\\\ = \frac{{58}}{{30 + 58}}\\\\ = \frac{{58}}{{88}}\\\\ = 0.6591\\\end{array}$

The percentage is, $0.6591 \times 100 = 65.91$

(b)

The classification error rate for records that are truly non-fraudulent is obtained by taking the ratio of d and $\left( {c + d} \right)(c+d)$ .

The classification error rate for records that are truly non-fraudulent is obtained as shown below:

The classification matrix is, shown in the attachment

The error rate for truly non-fraudulent is,

$\begin{array}{c}\\TP = \frac{d}{{c + d}}\\\\ = \frac{{920}}{{32 + 920}}\\\\ = \frac{{920}}{{952}}\\\\ = 0.9664\\\end{array}$

The percentage is, $0.9664 \times 100 = 96.64$

8 0

3 years ago