Giving first person all my points and

1. Yes they are congruent. You translate AB to move it over to CD. Specifically, shift 2 units to the right.

2. No, they are not congruent. QR is longer than MN. Congruent segments must be the same length.

3. No, they are not congruent. At first glance, they seem to be congruent after translation and reflection. However, XY is longer than UV, and those legs should be the same length for a pair of congruent triangles to be possible.

4. Yes they are congruent. You translate triangle ABC to move it over to triangle DEF (shift 1 to the left, 3 down).

the smallest possible measurement of the width is 14 feet

step-by-step explanation:

let's assume length of parallelogram is 'l'

width of parallelogram is 'w'

the perimeter of a parallelogram must be no less than 40 feet

so, we get

we are given

length of parallelogram is 6 feet

so,

l=6

we can plug it

now, we can solve for w

subtract both sides by 12

divide both sides by 2

and we get

so,

the smallest possible measurement of the width is 14 feet

24

step-by-step explanation:

the graph shows 30% of students walk. 80 students were questioned, so the number that said they walk is

30% × 80 = 0.30 × 80 = 24