A synthetic fiber used in manufacturing carpet has a tensile strength that is normally distributed with a mean 75.5 psi and standard deviation 3.5 psi. Find the probability that a random sample of n = 6 fiber specimens will have a sample tensile strength that exceeds 75.75 psi.

43.25% probability that a random sample of n = 6 fiber specimens will have a sample tensile strength that exceeds 75.75 psi.

Step-by-step explanation:

To solve this problem, we need to understand the normal probability distribution and the central limit theorem.

Normal probability distribution:

Problems of normally distributed samples are solved using the z-score formula.

In a set with mean and standard deviation , the zscore of a measure X is given by:

The Z-score measures how many standard deviations the measure is from the mean. After finding the Z-score, we look at the z-score table and find the p-value associated with this z-score. This p-value is the probability that the value of the measure is smaller than X, that is, the percentile of X. Subtracting 1 by the pvalue, we get the probability that the value of the measure is greater than X.

Central Limit Theorem:

The Central Limit Theorem estabilishes that, for a random variable X, with mean and standard deviation , a large sample size can be approximated to a normal distribution with mean and standard deviation

In this problem, we have that:

Find the probability that a random sample of n = 6 fiber specimens will have a sample tensile strength that exceeds 75.75 psi.

This is 1 subtracted by the pvalue of Z when X = 75.75. So

has a pvalue of 0.5675.

1 - 0.5675 = 0.4325

43.25% probability that a random sample of n = 6 fiber specimens will have a sample tensile strength that exceeds 75.75 psi.

the results from a pre-test for students for the year 2000 and the year 2010 are illustrated in the box plot. what do these results tell us about how students performed on the 29 question pre-test for the two years?

if we compare only the lowest and highest scores between the two years, we might conclude that the students in 2010 did better than the students in 2010. this conclusion seems to follow since the lowest score of 8 in 2010 is greater in value than the lowest score of 6 in 2000. also, the highest score of 28 in 2010 is greater in value than the highest score of 27 in 2000.

but the box portion of the illustration gives us more detailed information. the middle bar in each box shows us that the median score of 20 in 2000 is greater in value than the median score of 17 in 2010. further, we note that the box and whiskers divide the illustration into four pieces. each of these four pieces represents the same portion of students. so, the upper half of the students in 2000 scored in the same score range as the upper one-fourth of the students in 2010, see the illustration at a score of 20.

by considering the upper one-fourth, upper half, and upper three-fourths instead of just the lowest and highest scores, we would conclude that the students as a whole did much better in 2000 than in 2010. we would conclude that as a whole the students in 2010 are less prepared than the students in 2000.

in this section, we discuss box-and-whisker plots and the five key values used in constructing a box-and-whisker plot. the key values are called a five-number summary, which consists of the minimum, first quartile, median, third quartile, and maximum.

step-by-step explanation: