= What is the perimeter of the thangle ?
2m
2m
2m

In this question, you are being asked to perform a Factor Analysis with Varimax rotation to identify the underlying structure between variables Q1 through Q26. The goal is to determine how many factors should be retained and the total variance explained by the model.

Factor analysis is a statistical method that helps to identify underlying factors or dimensions that explain the patterns of correlations among a set of observed variables. Varimax rotation is a popular method of rotating the factors to simplify and clarify the structure of the factor solution.

To determine how many factors to retain, we use the eigenvalue criterion of greater than one. The eigenvalue is a measure of how much variance in the original data is accounted for by each factor. A factor with an eigenvalue of greater than one indicates that it explains more variance than a single variable and should be retained.

After performing the Factor Analysis with Varimax rotation and using the eigenvalue criterion, let's say we were able to retain 4 factors. The total variance explained by this model would be the sum of the variances accounted for by each factor.

It's important to note that the interpretation of the factors will depend on the specific variables and context of the study. Factors are often labeled based on the variables that load most heavily onto them. The scores can be saved using the regression method, which calculates the factor scores for each observation based on the observed values of the variables.

Learn more about Analysis  here:

https://brainly.com/question/29926939

#SPJ11

An expression is equivalent to m + m + m + m which is a sum of two terms that can be written as 2(m) + 2(m).

To write an expression equivalent to m + m + m + m that is a sum of two terms, we can use the distributive property of multiplication over addition.

Combine like terms on the left-hand side to get 4m.

Factor out 4 from 4m to get 4(m).

Since we want to write this expression as a sum of two terms, we can split the 4 into 2 + 2.

Substitute the 2 + 2 for 4 in our factored expression from step 2 to get:

4(m) = 2(m) + 2(m)

Thus, an expression equivalent to m + m + m + m that is a sum of two terms is 2(m) + 2(m).

Learn more about the algebraic expression here :

brainly.com/question/21751419

#SPJ1

The null hypothesis (H0) in this case would be that the lightbulbs last exactly 2,000 hours before needing to be replaced. The alternate hypothesis (HA) would be that the lightbulbs last less than 2,000 hours, which aligns with your suspicion. Therefore, the correct answer would be c.) H0 = 2,000 hours; HA < 2,000 hours.

In your question, you are suspicious that GELighting'ss claim of their lightbulbs lasting exactly 2,000 hours might not be accurate, and you believe they last less than 2,000 hours. To address your concern, we can set up null and alternate hypotheses:

Null hypothesis (H0): The lightbulbs last exactly 2,000 hours. This is the claim you're trying to test.The alternatee hypothesis (HA): The lightbulbs last less than 2,000 hours. This is what you suspect might be true.

Based on the options provided, the correct answer is:
c.) H0 = 2,000 hours; HA < 2,000 hours

Learn more about null hypothesis:

brainly.com/question/28920252

#SPJ11

The origin is an unstable node. In these cases, the basin of attraction is not well-defined.

The theorem for finding portions of the basin of attraction for a critical point at the origin is as follows:

Suppose we have a system of differential equations given by:

dx/dt = f(x,y)

dy/dt = g(x,y)

And a critical point at the origin, (0,0). Suppose further that the Jacobian matrix evaluated at the origin has distinct eigenvalues λ1 and λ2, with corresponding eigenvectors v1 and v2.

Then the basin of attraction for the critical point at the origin can be divided into three parts as follows:

The origin is a stable node if both eigenvalues are negative. In this case, the basin of attraction includes all initial conditions in the quadrant containing the origin that are not on the eigenvectors.

The origin is a stable spiral if both eigenvalues are complex with negative real part. In this case, the basin of attraction includes all initial conditions that spiral towards the origin, excluding those on the eigenvectors.

The origin is a saddle point if the eigenvalues have opposite signs. In this case, the basin of attraction is divided by the eigenvectors into two regions, one containing initial conditions that approach the origin and the other containing initial conditions that move away from the origin.

Note that if the eigenvalues are complex with positive real part, the origin is an unstable spiral, and if both eigenvalues are positive, the origin is an unstable node. In these cases, the basin of attraction is not well-defined.

Learn more about origin

brainly.com/question/31317185

#SPJ11

The test statistic (42.19) falls between the lower and upper critical values (13.839 and 42.982) and the p-value (0.057) is greater than the significance level (0.05), we do not reject the null hypothesis.

To test whether or not the manager's claim was achieved, we need to set up a hypothesis test.

Null hypothesis (H0): The population standard deviation of wait times at the drive-through is equal to 3 minutes.
Alternative hypothesis (Ha): The population standard deviation of wait times at the drive-through is not equal to 3 minutes.

We will use a chi-square test with (n-1) degrees of freedom, where n is the sample size. At a 5% level of significance, the critical values are 12.242 (lower) and 41.337 (upper).

To calculate the test statistic, we use the formula:
χ^2 = (n-1) * s^2 / σ^2

where n is the sample size, s is the sample standard deviation, and σ is the hypothesized population standard deviation.

Plugging in the values, we get:
χ^2 = (28-1) * 3.75^2 / 3^2 = 30.1875

The corresponding p-value for this test statistic is 0.168, which is greater than 0.05. Therefore, we fail to reject the null hypothesis.

Our conclusion is: Do not reject the null hypothesis. There is insufficient evidence to support the Manager's claim.
To test the manager's claim, we will perform a chi-square test for the standard deviation. The null hypothesis (H0) is that the standard deviation of wait times is equal to 3 minutes.

First, we calculate the test statistic (rounded to 2 decimal places):

Chi-square = (n - 1) * (s^2) / σ^2
Chi-square = (28 - 1) * (3.75^2) / (3^2)
Chi-square = 27 * (14.0625) / 9
Chi-square = 42.19

Next, we determine the critical values for a 5% level of significance (with df = n - 1 = 27, rounded to 3 decimal places):

Lower critical value: 13.839
Upper critical value: 42.982

Now, we find the p-value (rounded to 3 decimal places):

p-value = P(Chi-square > 42.19) = 0.057

Since the test statistic (42.19) falls between the lower and upper critical values (13.839 and 42.982) and the p-value (0.057) is greater than the significance level (0.05), we do not reject the null hypothesis. There is insufficient evidence to support the manager's claim.

Learn more about null hypothesis at: brainly.com/question/28920252

#SPJ11

The present ages of Korir, his daughter and his son is 48, 12 and 8 years respectively.

Let us represent the present ages as:

K = Korir

d = daughter of Korir

s = son of Korir

From the first statement in the problem, we can deduce the following:

Korir's age is 4 times his daughter's age: K = 4d

Korir's age is 6 times his son's age: K = 6s

We can use these two equations to solve for K in terms of both d and s:

K = 4d = 6s

4d = 6s

d = 3/2s

Next, we use the second statement in the problem to form another equation:

In 12 years, the sum of the ages of his daughter and son will differ from his age by 9 years.

(d + 12) + (s + 12) = K + 9

Substitute the equation K = 4d into this equation to get:

(d + 12) + (s + 12) = 4d + 9

d + s + 33 = 4d + 9

3d - s = 24

Substitute the equation d = 3/2s into this equation to get:

3(3/2s) - s = 24

9/2s - s = 24

s = 8

Finally, we can use the equation d = 3/2s to solve for d:

d = 3/2s = 3/2(8) = 12

For Korir,

K = 4d = 4(12) = 48

Therefore, Korir is 48 years old, daughter is 12 years old and his son is 8 years old.

Learn more about word problem here:

https://brainly.com/question/21405634

#SPJ1

It would take approximately 30 cuts to cut a 10 cm piece of paper into a 10-nanometer strip.

A grouping of numbers, variables, operators, and/or functions that has mathematical significance is referred to as an expression. Expressions can depict a number, a set of rules, or a calculation.

If you can only cut the piece of paper in half each time, then the number of cuts required to reduce the width of the paper from 10 cm to 10 nm can be calculated by dividing the initial width of the paper by the final width after each cut.

To convert 10 cm to 10 nm, we need to divide 10 cm by 10⁻⁷ cm/nm, which gives 10⁹ nm. Therefore, the number of cuts required would be:

log2(10⁹) ≈ 29.9

So it would take approximately 30 cuts to cut a 10 cm piece of paper into a 10-nanometer strip.

To know more about an expression follow

https://brainly.com/question/767706

#SPJ1

The triangle that is similar to triangle PQR has the following features:

Similar triangles are triangles that share these two features listed as follows:

More can be learned about similar triangles at brainly.com/question/14285697

#SPJ1

Answer:f(x)=2x3^x

Step-by-step explanation:

The margin of error for this estimate is 0.8853 MB/s. Your answer is option 1) 0.8853.

To calculate the margin of error for this estimate, we'll use the formula:
Margin of Error = (Critical Value) × (Standard Deviation / √Sample Size)
For a 95% confidence interval, the critical value (z-score) is approximately 1.96. The standard deviation is 1.62 MB/s, and the sample size is 11.
Margin of Error = 1.96 × (1.62 / √11) ≈ 0.8853

Learn more about margin of error here:

https://brainly.com/question/30633768

#SPJ11

We may build up a proportion and solve for the scale model radius of Neptune using the ratio between the radii of the two planets and the known scale model radius of the Earth. The scale model of Neptune that is produced has a radius of around 9.7 cm.

We may take advantage of the fact that the ratio between the two planets' radii and the ratio between their respective scale model radii is the same. Let's name the Neptune scale model radius "r" Then, we may set up the ratio shown below:

Neptune's radius is equal to the product of Earth's radius and its scale model.

With the provided values, we may simplify and obtain:

24620 km / 6370 km equals 2.5 cm / r

We obtain the following when solving for "r":

r = (24620 km * 2.5 cm) / (6370 km)

r ≈ 9.7 cm

Therefore, a scale model of Neptune would have to be drawn with a radius of approximately 9.7 cm.

Learn more about scale models here:

https://brainly.com/question/17581605

#SPJ4

Answer:

19

Step-by-step explanation:

Total number of ways of choosing a student from the gym class = 29 (since there are 29 students in total).

Number of ways of choosing a seventh grader = 10 (since there are 10 seventh graders).

Number of ways of not choosing a seventh grader = Total number of ways of choosing a student - Number of ways of choosing a seventh grader = 29 - 10 = 19

The tabled value for a x^2 variable based on 50 degrees of freedom with an area of 0.025 to its right is x² = 69.34 (rounded to two decimal places).

To find the tabled value for a x^2 variable based on n-1 degrees of freedom with an area of a to its right, we need to use a chi-square distribution table.

For this problem, n = 51 and a = 0.025. First, we need to find the degrees of freedom. Since we are using a x^2 variable, the degrees of freedom is n - 1 = 51 - 1 = 50.

Next, we need to find the critical value from the chi-square distribution table with 50 degrees of freedom and an area of 0.025 to its right.

From the table, we find that the critical value is 69.338.

Learn more about chi-square distribution table here:

https://brainly.com/question/30764634

#SPJ11

Therefore, the probability of a bulb lasting between 632 and 640 hours is 0.0455 (or 4.55%).

To solve this problem, we need to standardize the values of 632 and 640 using the given mean and standard deviation, and then find the probability of the bulb lasting between these two standardized values.

Let X be the lifetime of a light bulb. We know that X ~ N(μ = 600, σ = 25).

Let Z be the standardized normal variable, given by:

Z = (X - μ) / σ

Substituting the values, we get:

Z632 = (632 - 600) / 25 = 1.28

Z640 = (640 - 600) / 25 = 1.60

To find the probability of a bulb lasting between 632 and 640 hours, we need to find the area under the standard normal curve between Z632 and Z640. We can use a standard normal table or a calculator to find this area.

Using a standard normal table or calculator, we find that the probability of a bulb lasting between 632 and 640 hours is:

P(1.28 < Z < 1.60) = P(Z < 1.60) - P(Z < 1.28)

From the standard normal table, we find that P(Z < 1.60) = 0.9452 and P(Z < 1.28) = 0.8997. Therefore,

P(1.28 < Z < 1.60) = 0.9452 - 0.8997 = 0.0455 (rounded to four decimal places)

To know more about probability,

https://brainly.com/question/30034780

#SPJ11

The probability of getting a z-score of -356.5625 or lower is essentially 0. Therefore, the likelihood of the diameter being within 1-0.03 inches is extremely low (close to 0%).

To answer your question, we can use the normal distribution since we have a sample mean and sample standard deviation. We can assume that the diameter measurements follow a normal distribution with a mean of 24 inches and a standard deviation of 0.064 inches.

To find the likelihood of the diameter being within 1-0.03 inches, we need to standardize the values using the formula:

z = (x - μ) / σ

where x is the value we want to find the likelihood for (in this case, 1-0.03 = 0.97 inches), μ is the mean (24 inches), and σ is the standard deviation (0.064 inches).

So, plugging in the values:

z = (0.97 - 24) / 0.064 = -356.5625

This gives us a z-score of -356.5625. We can use a standard normal distribution table or calculator to find the probability of getting a z-score of -356.5625 or lower.

Know more about probability here:

https://brainly.com/question/30034780

#SPJ11

The expression  3 / 4 a + 8 - 1 / 4 a - 2  is equivalent to  1 / 2(a + 12)..

'

Two expressions are said to be equivalent if they have the same value irrespective of the value of the variable(s) in them.

The equivalent expression can be found by simplifying the expression as follows:

Therefore,

3 / 4 a + 8 - 1 / 4 a - 2

collect like terms

3 / 4 a  - 1 / 4 a + 8 - 2

3a - 1a / 4 + 6

2a/ 4 + 6

1 / 2 a + 6

Therefore, the second expression is 1 / 2(a + 12).

Let's open the brackets

1 / 2(a + 12) = 1 / 2a + 6

Therefore, the expression are equivalent.

learn more on equivalent expression here: brainly.com/question/16609931

#SPJ1

The value of the coordinates of the points R’, S’ and T’ are,

R' = (1, - 2)

S' = (- 8, 2)

T' = (- 4, 7)

We have to given that;

ΔRST is reflected across the line y=x to form ΔR'S'T'.

Here, All the coordinates are,

R = (- 2, 1)

S = (2, - 8)

T = (7, - 4)

Hence, After reflection across y = x, the coordinates of the points R’, S’ and T’ are,

R' = (1, - 2)

S' = (- 8, 2)

T' = (- 4, 7)

Thus, The value of the coordinates of the points R’, S’ and T’ are,

R' = (1, - 2)

S' = (- 8, 2)

T' = (- 4, 7)

Learn more about the transformation visit:

https://brainly.com/question/30097107

#SPJ1

An interesting relationship in the population may fail to achieve statistical significance if there are too few observations or sample size is too small.

Statistical significance is a measure of the probability that the observed relationship between variables in a sample could have occurred by chance alone. When a relationship is statistically significant, it means that the probability of observing the relationship by chance is very low, typically less than 5% (p < 0.05).

However, if the sample size is too small, there may not be enough data to detect a real relationship between variables, even if it exists in the population. In such cases, the observed relationship may not be statistically significant, even though it is important and meaningful.

Increasing the sample size can help to increase the power of the analysis, making it more likely to detect a true relationship between variables. Thus, having a sufficiently large sample size is important for achieving statistical significance and for making reliable conclusions about the relationship between variables.

learn about Statistical significance,

https://brainly.com/question/15848236

#SPJ11

The set of points { (x, y, z) | x² + y² = 1} actually represents a cylinder, not a circle.

To understand why, let's analyze the equation and the terms provided: The equation x² + y² = 1 represents a circle in the xy-plane because it satisfies the standard equation for a circle with a radius of 1 centered at the origin (0,0). However, since there is a third coordinate 'z' present without any restrictions or dependence on 'x' and 'y', it allows the circle to extend along the z-axis infinitely in both positive and negative directions.

Therefore, when combining the circle in the xy-plane with the unrestricted z-axis, we get a cylinder with a radius of 1 centered along the z-axis.

More on sets of points: https://brainly.com/question/31315095

#SPJ11

The "Player 1 is more likely to hit the ball than Player 2 because P(Player 1) > P(Player 2)" is true.

We need to convert them to a common denominator. The least common multiple of 11, 9, and 7 is 693.

Player 1: 7/11 = 504/693

Player 2: 6/9 = 462/693

Player 3: 5/7 = 495/693

Comparing the probabilities, we can see that:

Player 1 has a probability of 504/693 of hitting the ball.

Player 2 has a probability of 462/693 of hitting the ball.

Player 3 has a probability of 495/693 of hitting the ball.

Since the denominator is the same for all three players, we can directly compare the numerators.

Comparing the numerators, we can see that:

504 > 462 > 495

Therefore, Player 1 is more likely to hit the ball than Player 2 and Player 3.

Therefore, "Player 1 is more likely to hit the ball than Player 2 because P(Player 1) > P(Player 2)" is true.

Learn more about common denominator here : brainly.com/question/29005561

#SPJ1

Answer:

took me a minute the answer is D. (3a^2b)/(5).

I got some things like when I simpley the equation

(15a^2)(4b)

The correct expression for the estimated model is: In (odds ratio) = -7.8562 +0.0304 Income + 1.2804 Lawnsize. This model was created using binary logistic regression analysis to study the characteristics that differentiate home owners who have a lawn service (code 1) and those who do not (code 0).

The additional information available for these 30 home owners includes family income (Income, in thousands of dollars) and lawn size (Lawn Size, in thousands of square feet). The estimated model shows that for every one unit increase in income,

the odds of having a lawn service increase by 0.0304, and for every one unit increase in lawn size, the odds of having a lawn service increase by 1.2804. This information can be useful for the marketing manager to target potential customers based on their family income and lawn size.
The correct expression for the estimated model in this case is:

ln(odds ratio) = -7.8562 + 0.0304 Income + 1.2804 Lawn Size

Learn more about ratio here:- brainly.com/question/13419413.

#SPJ11

A multiple linear regression model can be used to predict the relationship between wear of a bearing and its predictors, oil viscosity and load.

We can fit a multiple linear regression model to determine the relationship between wear of a bearing (y) and its predictors, oil viscosity (x1) and load (x2). This model can be expressed as:

y = b0 + b1*x1 + b2*x2 + ε
where b0, b1, and b2 are the regression coefficients for the intercept, oil viscosity, and load, respectively, and ε is the error term.

To estimate the variance and standard errors of the regression coefficients, we can use statistical software such as R or Excel. The variance of the model is typically estimated using the residual standard error (RSE), which represents the average amount by which the actual responses differ from the predicted values. The standard errors of the coefficients can then be calculated using the RSE and the covariance matrix of the coefficients.

To use the multiple linear regression model to predict wear when x1=25 and x2=1000, we simply substitute these values into the equation and solve for y. The predicted value of y would represent the expected amount of wear given the specified values of oil viscosity and load.

If we want to account for an interaction between oil viscosity and load, we can fit a multiple linear regression model with an interaction term, which can be expressed as:
y = b0 + b1*x1 + b2*x2 + b3*x1*x2 + ε

where b3 is the coefficient for the interaction term between oil viscosity and load. This model allows us to test whether the effect of oil viscosity on wear depends on the level of load, or vice versa.

To use this model to predict wear when x1=25 and x2=1000, we again substitute these values into the equation and solve for y. We can then compare this prediction with the one from the previous model to see if there is any significant difference in the predicted values.

In summary, a multiple linear regression model can be used to predict the relationship between wear of a bearing and its predictors, oil viscosity and load. The model can also be extended to include an interaction term to test for any conditional effects between the predictors. Predictions can be made based on the estimated coefficients and specified values of the predictors.

To fit a multiple linear regression model to the data, you would need to use software like R, Python, or Excel to analyze the data from Table Q4. The model will help you understand the relationship between the wear of a bearing (y) and its predictors, oil viscosity (x1) and load (x2).

After fitting the model, you can estimate the variance and standard errors of the regression coefficients to assess the precision of your estimates.

Using the fitted multiple linear regression model, you can predict the wear (y) when x1=25 and x2=1000 by plugging these values into the model's equation.

Next, fit a multiple linear regression model with an interaction term (x1 * x2) to these data. This allows you to analyze how the combination of oil viscosity and load affects the wear of the bearing.

Use the model with the interaction term to predict wear when x1=25 and x2=1000. Compare this prediction with the predicted value from part iii (without the interaction term) to see if the interaction term improves the prediction accuracy.

Learn more about linear regression:

brainly.com/question/29665935

#SPJ11

a. The scatter diagram for these data with the speed of execution as the independent variable would plot each brokerage firm's speed of execution score on the x-axis and their overall satisfaction rating score on the y-axis.

b. The scatter diagram developed in part (a) shows a positive correlation between the speed of execution and overall satisfaction rating. As the speed of execution score increases, the overall satisfaction rating score also tends to increase.

c. The least squares estimated regression equation is:

y = 2.108 + 0.473x

where y represents the overall satisfaction rating score and x represents the speed of execution score.

d. The slope of the estimated regression equation (0.473) represents the change in the overall satisfaction rating score for a one-unit increase in the speed of execution score. In other words, on average, for every increase of 1 in the speed of execution score, the overall satisfaction rating score is predicted to increase by 0.473.

e. If Zecco.com's speed of execution rating increased from 2.7 to the average speed of execution rating (3.3), we can use the estimated regression equation to predict their new overall satisfaction rating score:

y = 2.108 + 0.473(3.3) = 3.616

Therefore, we would predict a new overall satisfaction rating score of approximately 3.616 for Zecco.com if they increased their speed of execution rating to the average of the other 10 brokerage firms surveyed.

Learn more about scatter diagram here:

https://brainly.com/question/31102167

#SPJ11

The area to the right of z = -2.71 and the area to the right of z = 2.71 under the standard normal curve are both approximately 0.0034.

To find the area under the standard normal curve to the right of z = -2.71, we need to calculate the area between z = -2.71 and z = infinity. This can be done using a standard normal distribution table or calculator, which will give us an area of approximately 0.0034.

To find the area under the standard normal curve to the right of z = 2.71, we can use the same approach but this time we need to calculate the area between z = 2.71 and z = infinity. Again, using a standard normal distribution table or calculator, we can find this area to be approximately 0.0034.

Know more about standard normal curve here:

https://brainly.com/question/28971164

#SPJ11

In this situation, a randomized block experiment with 5 houses was used instead of a one-way ANOVA experiment with 15 different houses because it allows for better control of variability between houses, and a more accurate comparison of the assessors' performance.

In a one-way ANOVA experiment with 15 different houses, each assessor would evaluate a different group of 5 houses, which introduces variability between the groups of houses. This variability could mask the true differences between the assessors, making it difficult to determine if they differ systematically in their assessments.

In contrast, using a randomized block experiment with only 5 houses, each assessor evaluates the same set of houses, which effectively eliminates the variability between groups of houses. This design allows for a more accurate comparison of the assessors, as any observed differences in assessments can be more confidently attributed to differences between the assessors rather than differences between the houses.

To summarize, a randomized block experiment with 5 houses was used because it controls for variability between houses and provides a more accurate comparison of the assessors' performance, which is the main focus of this study.

Learn more about ANOVA here:

https://brainly.com/question/23638404

#SPJ11

the tradeoff between x and y is such that the weighted sum of their square roots is constant.

To derive the equation for the indifference curve, we need to find the combinations of x and y that yield the same level of utility U. Mathematically, we can express this as:

U(x, y) = constant

Substituting the given utility function, we get:

(.6x.5 + .4y.5)1/.5 = constant

Simplifying, we get:

(.36x + .16y) = constant^2

Dividing by the constant squared, we get:

(.36x + .16y)/constant^2 = 1

This is the equation for the indifference curve, which represents all the combinations of x and y that yield the same level of utility U. The constant represents the level of utility, and the equation shows that the tradeoff between x and y is such that the weighted sum of their square roots is constant.

learn about utility function,

https://brainly.com/question/31498128,

#SPJ11

a. Number who are salespersons and have some college education = 145

b. Number who are factory workers or graduates high school = 345

c. Number who are technical workers or some college = 435

d. Number who are high school graduates or attended some college = 610

e. Number who are technical workers or salespersons and have graduated high school or attended some college: 625

f. Number who are high school graduates or have attended some college: 610

g. Number who are salespersons or technical workers:  585

The given table provides the data of job placement and education level of 1030 workers. We need to calculate the number of workers who meet the listed criteria.

a. The number of workers who are salespersons and have some college education can be found from the intersection of the second row (some college) and second column (salesperson), which is 145.

b. The number of workers who are high school graduates or have attended some college can be found by adding the first row (high school graduates) and the second row (some college), which is 650.

c. The number of workers who are technical workers or salespersons and have graduated high school or attended some college can be found by adding the intersection of the first row and third column (technical workers) and the intersection of the second row and second column (salespersons), which is 315.

d. The number of workers who have attended some college can be found by adding the second row and the third row, which is 555.

e. The number of workers who are technical workers or salespersons and have graduated high school or attended some college can be found by adding the intersection of the first row and third column (technical workers) and the intersection of the second row and second column (salespersons) and the intersection of the first row and second column (high school graduates), which is 465.

f. The number of workers who are high school graduates or have attended some college can be found by adding the first row (high school graduates) and the second row (some college), which is 650.

g. The number of workers who are salespersons or technical workers can be found by adding the intersection of the second row and second column (salespersons) and the intersection of the first row and third column (technical workers), which is 275.

To learn more about Number  visit: https://brainly.com/question/17429689

#SPJ11

Answer:

16.642

Step-by-step explanation: