Arandom sample of 300 circuits generated 13 defectives .use the data to test the hypothesish0: p = 0.05 against h1: p ≠ 0.05. use α = 0.08. find the p-value for thetest.

So the p value obtained was a very high value and using the significance level given we have so we can conclude that we have enough evidence to FAIL to reject the null hypothesis, and we can said that at 5% of significance the proportion of defectives is not significantly different from 0.05 .  

Step-by-step explanation:

1) Data given and notation  

n=300 represent the random sample taken

X=13 represent the number of defectives

estimated proportion of defectives

is the value that we want to test

represent the significance level

Confidence=92% or 0.92

z would represent the statistic (variable of interest)

represent the p value (variable of interest)  

2) Concepts and formulas to use  

We need to conduct a hypothesis in order to test the claim that the true porportion is 0.05.:  

Null hypothesis:  

Alternative hypothesis:  

When we conduct a proportion test we need to use the z statisitc, and the is given by:  

(1)  

The One-Sample Proportion Test is used to assess whether a population proportion is significantly different from a hypothesized value .

3) Calculate the statistic  

Since we have all the info requires we can replace in formula (1) like this:  

4) Statistical decision  

It's important to refresh the p value method or p value approach . "This method is about determining "likely" or "unlikely" by determining the probability assuming the null hypothesis were true of observing a more extreme test statistic in the direction of the alternative hypothesis than the one observed". Or in other words is just a method to have an statistical decision to fail to reject or reject the null hypothesis.  

The significance level provided . The next step would be calculate the p value for this test.  

Since is a bilateral test the p value would be:  

So the p value obtained was a very high value and using the significance level given we have so we can conclude that we have enough evidence to FAIL to reject the null hypothesis, and we can said that at 5% of significance the proportion of defectives is not significantly different from 0.05 .  

the inequality is:

250c+180g≥950

step-by-step explanation:

let c denotes the number of days in a week   miyoko worked as a cryptographer.

and g denotes the number of days in a week she works as a geologist.

now we are given that she earns $250 for every day she works as a cryptographer,and earns $180 for every day she works as a geologist.

now miyoko's goal is to earn more than $950 this week.

hence, the inequality could be represented as:

250c+180g≥950

sure i'm up for it

step-by-step explanation: