Using the methods provided in the text for computing confidence intervals for population proportions, a marketing analyst takes a survey of 1000 randomly selected consumers. She asks if they prefer low-sodium soup products. Using the results, she provides a 95% confidence interval for the population proportion of consumers who prefer low-sodium soup products. The interval has a margin of error of 03. Which of the following is an appropriate interpretation of these results? (a) The sample proportion from the survey differs from the population proportion by at most 03.
(b) 95% of all possible values of the population proportion are contained in the interval provided.
(c) The analyst is 95% confident that all possible values for the sample proportion from a sample of 1000 consumers are in the interval provided.
(d) Using these methods, 95% of all possible confidence intervals from a sample of 1000 consumers will contain the population proportion.
(e) The reported confidence interval will contain the population proportion 95% of the time.
Suppose the analyst tells you that of the 1000 consumers surveyed, 630 indicated a preference for low-sodium soups. Use these results to determine a 99% confidence interval for the population proportion of consumers who prefer low-sodium soups.
(a) [.591, 669]
(b) [.600, 660]
(c) [.601, 659]
(d) (.629, 631]
(e) [.615, 645]

d

gimmee one of those gold crowns!

~coco

step-by-step explanation:

and 90% of people marry there 7th grade love. since u have read this, u will be told good news 2night. if u don't pass this on nine comments ur worst week starts now this isn't fake. apparently if u copy and paste this on ten comments in the next ten minutes you will have the best day of ur life tomorrow. you will either get kissed or asked out in the next 53 minutes someone will say i love u

read more on -

i think it's eleven too, don't woosh me here, but according to the "experts" it's 2.

the proof starts from the peano postulates, which define the natural

numbers n. n is the smallest set satisfying these postulates:

  p1.   1 is in n.

  p2.   if x is in n, then its "successor" x' is in n.

  p3.   there is no x such that x' = 1.

  p4.   if x isn't 1, then there is a y in n such that y' = x.

  p5.   if s is a subset of n, 1 is in s, and the implication

      (x in s => x' in s) holds, then s = n.

then you have to define addition recursively:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 1, then define a + b = a'

      (using p1 and p2). if b isn't 1, then let c' = b, with c in n

      (using p4), and define a + b = (a + c)'.

then you have to define 2:

  def:   2 = 1'

2 is in n by p1, p2, and the definition of 2.

theorem:   1 + 1 = 2

proof: use the first part of the definition of + with a = b = 1.

      then 1 + 1 = 1' = 2   q.e.d.

note: there is an alternate formulation of the peano postulates which

replaces 1 with 0 in p1, p3, p4, and p5. then you have to change the

definition of addition to this:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 0, then define a + b = a.

      if b isn't 0, then let c' = b, with c in n, and define

      a + b = (a + c)'.

you also have to define 1 = 0', and 2 = 1'. then the proof of the

theorem above is a little different:

proof: use the second part of the definition of + first:

      1 + 1 = (1 + 0)'

      now use the first part of the definition of + on the sum in

      parentheses:   1 + 1 = (1)' = 1' = 2   q.e.d.