Welcome to Westonci.ca, your ultimate destination for finding answers to a wide range of questions from experts. Get detailed and accurate answers to your questions from a dedicated community of experts on our Q&A platform. Connect with a community of professionals ready to provide precise solutions to your questions quickly and accurately.
Sagot :
Let's analyze the given table and the possible values for [tex]\( R \)[/tex].
Here is the provided table rewritten for clarity:
[tex]\[ \begin{array}{|c|c|c|c|c|} \cline { 2 - 4 } \multicolumn{1}{c|}{} & A & B & C & \text{Total} \\ \hline D & 0.12 & 0.78 & 0.10 & 1.0 \\ \hline E & R & S & T & 1.0 \\ \hline \text{Total} & U & X & Y & 1.0 \\ \hline \end{array} \][/tex]
First, let's find the missing column totals [tex]\( U \)[/tex], [tex]\( X \)[/tex], and [tex]\( Y \)[/tex]:
- The total for column [tex]\( A \)[/tex] (denoted as [tex]\( U \)[/tex]):
[tex]\[ U = 0.12 + R \][/tex]
- The total for column [tex]\( B \)[/tex] (denoted as [tex]\( X \)[/tex]):
[tex]\[ X = 0.78 + S \][/tex]
- The total for column [tex]\( C \)[/tex] (denoted as [tex]\( Y \)[/tex]):
[tex]\[ Y = 0.10 + T \][/tex]
Given that the overall totals of each column should sum to 1, we have:
- For column [tex]\( A \)[/tex]:
[tex]\[ 0.12 + R = 1.0 \implies R = 1.0 - 0.12 = 0.88 \][/tex]
- For column [tex]\( B \)[/tex]:
[tex]\[ 0.78 + S = 1.0 \implies S = 1.0 - 0.78 = 0.22 \][/tex]
- For column [tex]\( C \)[/tex]:
[tex]\[ 0.10 + T = 1.0 \implies T = 1.0 - 0.10 = 0.90 \][/tex]
From this analysis, let's examine the proposed values for [tex]\( R \)[/tex]:
- [tex]\( 0.09 \)[/tex]
- [tex]\( 0.10 \)[/tex]
- [tex]\( 0.13 \)[/tex]
- [tex]\( 0.79 \)[/tex]
We need to identify which value for [tex]\( R \)[/tex] would indicate an association. Note that in conditional probability and association analysis, large discrepancies between expected and observed frequencies can indicate such associations.
Given that [tex]\( D \)[/tex] represents 78% in column [tex]\( B \)[/tex], we need a value for [tex]\( R \)[/tex] which can practically differentiate column [tex]\( A \)[/tex]. Here, a value like [tex]\( 0.79 \)[/tex] for [tex]\( R \)[/tex] would show that most values of [tex]\( E \)[/tex] are conversing significantly to column [tex]\( A \)[/tex]. It highlights a much higher discrepancy compared to the other proposed values (0.09, 0.10, and 0.13).
The value [tex]\( 0.79 \)[/tex] is much larger, indicating a much stronger association between the variables compared to other provided values which are significantly smaller.
Therefore, the value for [tex]\( R \)[/tex] that most likely indicates an association between the conditional variables is:
[tex]\[ \boxed{0.79} \][/tex]
Here is the provided table rewritten for clarity:
[tex]\[ \begin{array}{|c|c|c|c|c|} \cline { 2 - 4 } \multicolumn{1}{c|}{} & A & B & C & \text{Total} \\ \hline D & 0.12 & 0.78 & 0.10 & 1.0 \\ \hline E & R & S & T & 1.0 \\ \hline \text{Total} & U & X & Y & 1.0 \\ \hline \end{array} \][/tex]
First, let's find the missing column totals [tex]\( U \)[/tex], [tex]\( X \)[/tex], and [tex]\( Y \)[/tex]:
- The total for column [tex]\( A \)[/tex] (denoted as [tex]\( U \)[/tex]):
[tex]\[ U = 0.12 + R \][/tex]
- The total for column [tex]\( B \)[/tex] (denoted as [tex]\( X \)[/tex]):
[tex]\[ X = 0.78 + S \][/tex]
- The total for column [tex]\( C \)[/tex] (denoted as [tex]\( Y \)[/tex]):
[tex]\[ Y = 0.10 + T \][/tex]
Given that the overall totals of each column should sum to 1, we have:
- For column [tex]\( A \)[/tex]:
[tex]\[ 0.12 + R = 1.0 \implies R = 1.0 - 0.12 = 0.88 \][/tex]
- For column [tex]\( B \)[/tex]:
[tex]\[ 0.78 + S = 1.0 \implies S = 1.0 - 0.78 = 0.22 \][/tex]
- For column [tex]\( C \)[/tex]:
[tex]\[ 0.10 + T = 1.0 \implies T = 1.0 - 0.10 = 0.90 \][/tex]
From this analysis, let's examine the proposed values for [tex]\( R \)[/tex]:
- [tex]\( 0.09 \)[/tex]
- [tex]\( 0.10 \)[/tex]
- [tex]\( 0.13 \)[/tex]
- [tex]\( 0.79 \)[/tex]
We need to identify which value for [tex]\( R \)[/tex] would indicate an association. Note that in conditional probability and association analysis, large discrepancies between expected and observed frequencies can indicate such associations.
Given that [tex]\( D \)[/tex] represents 78% in column [tex]\( B \)[/tex], we need a value for [tex]\( R \)[/tex] which can practically differentiate column [tex]\( A \)[/tex]. Here, a value like [tex]\( 0.79 \)[/tex] for [tex]\( R \)[/tex] would show that most values of [tex]\( E \)[/tex] are conversing significantly to column [tex]\( A \)[/tex]. It highlights a much higher discrepancy compared to the other proposed values (0.09, 0.10, and 0.13).
The value [tex]\( 0.79 \)[/tex] is much larger, indicating a much stronger association between the variables compared to other provided values which are significantly smaller.
Therefore, the value for [tex]\( R \)[/tex] that most likely indicates an association between the conditional variables is:
[tex]\[ \boxed{0.79} \][/tex]
Thanks for stopping by. We strive to provide the best answers for all your questions. See you again soon. Thanks for stopping by. We strive to provide the best answers for all your questions. See you again soon. Thank you for visiting Westonci.ca, your go-to source for reliable answers. Come back soon for more expert insights.