Discover the best answers at Westonci.ca, where experts share their insights and knowledge with you. Discover comprehensive solutions to your questions from a wide network of experts on our user-friendly platform. Get quick and reliable solutions to your questions from a community of experienced experts on our platform.
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]
We appreciate your time. Please revisit us for more reliable answers to any questions you may have. We hope our answers were useful. Return anytime for more information and answers to any other questions you have. Keep exploring Westonci.ca for more insightful answers to your questions. We're here to help.
