1. Given: proportion (p) = 1688/3940 = 0.

4295 and sample proportion

p^=8441688=0.50\hat{p}=\frac{844}{1688}=0.50p^=1688844=0.50

CI for population for significance level of α=1%\alpha =1\%α=1%, its critical

value zα2=±2.576z_\frac{\alpha }{2}=\pm 2.576z2α=±2.576 (refer to z-table)

(p^±z(p^−pon))=(0.50±2.5760.4295(1−0.4295)3940)=[0.480,0.520]=[48%,52%]\left ( \hat{p}
\pm z\left ( \sqrt{\frac{\hat{p}-p_o}{n}}\right )\right )=\left ( 0.50\pm
2.576\sqrt{\frac{0.4295(1-0.4295)}{3940}} \right )=[0.480,0.520]=[48\%, 52\%](p^±z(np^
−po))=(0.50±2.57639400.4295(1−0.4295))=[0.480,0.520]=[48%,52%]

2) a)  Null Hypothesis (H0) : p^≥6%\hat{p}\geq 6\%p^≥6%

    Alternative Hypothesis (Ha) : p^<6%\hat{p}< 6\%p^<6%

   b) np=200(14200)=14≥10np= 200(\frac{14}{200})=14\geq 10np=200(20014)=14≥10

(satisfied) 

       n(1−p)=200(1−14200)=186≥30n(1-p)=200(1-\frac{14}{200})=186\geq
30n(1−p)=200(1−20014)=186≥30 (satisfied for normal distribution)

  c) SE=p(1−p)n=14200(1−14200)200=0.018SE=\sqrt{\frac{p(1-p)}{n}}={\sqrt\frac{\frac{14}
{200}(1-\frac{14}{200})}{200}}=0.018SE=np(1−p)=20020014(1−20014)=0.018

  d) z=p^−pop(1−p)n=0.06−1420014200(1−14200)200=−0.554z=\frac{\hat{p}-p_o}
{\sqrt{\frac{p(1-p)}{n}}}=\frac{0.06-\frac{14}{200}}{{\sqrt\frac{\frac{14}{200}(1-\frac{14}
{200})}{200}}}=-0.554z=np(1−p)p^−po=20020014(1−20014)0.06−20014=−0.554

  e) P(z<−0.554)=0.29P(z<-0.554) = 0.29P(z<−0.554)=0.29

  f) Since, p-value of our test statistics is greater than the significance level of say 0.05 . We have
insufficient evidence to reject null. So, we accept null that the sample proportions of Brazilian
adults with diabetes is greater than 6%. 
 

  g) n=(zα2ME)2(p^)(1−p^)=(1.961%)2(0.07)(1−0.07)≈2501n=\left ( \frac{z_\frac{\alpha }{2}}

{ME} \right )^2(\hat{p})(1-\hat{p})=\left ( \frac{1.96}{1\%} \right )^2(0.07)(1-0.07)\approx
2501n=(MEz2α)2(p^)(1−p^)=(1%1.96)2(0.07)(1−0.07)≈2501

3) a)  CI for population for significance level of α=10%\alpha =10\%α=10%, its critical
value tα2=±1.663t_\frac{\alpha }{2}=\pm 1.663t2α=±1.663 (refer to t-table, two-tailed with df=
n-1 = 90-1 = 89)

(xˉ±t(xˉ−μsn))=(−10.4±1.663(−10.4690))=[16.946,−37.746]\left ( \bar{x}\pm t\left (

\frac{\bar{x}-\mu }{\frac{s}{\sqrt{n}}}\right ) \right )=\left ( -10.4\pm 1.663\left ( \frac{-10.4 }
{\frac{6}{\sqrt{90}}}\right ) \right )=[16.946,-37.746](xˉ±t(nsxˉ−μ))=(−10.4±1.663(906
−10.4))=[16.946,−37.746]

   b) n=(tα2(s)ME)2=(1.663(6)0.1)2≈9956n=\left ( \frac{t_\frac{\alpha }{2} (s)}{ME}\right )

^2=\left (\frac{1.663(6)}{0.1} \right )^2\approx 9956n=(MEt2α(s))2=(0.11.663(6))2≈9956

  

4) a)  Null Hypothesis (H0) : μ≥16\mu \geq 16μ≥16

    Alternative Hypothesis (Ha) : μ<16\mu < 16μ<16

   b) n = 54  ; it is greater than 30 so satisfied for normal distribution

   

   c) SE=sn=5.154=0.694SE=\frac{s}{\sqrt{n}}=\frac{5.1}{\sqrt{54}}=0.694SE=ns=545.1
=0.694

  d) Test statistic, 

   t=xˉ−μsn=17.9−16654=2.327t=\frac{\bar{x}-\mu }{\frac{s}{\sqrt{n}}}=\frac{17.9-16}
{\frac{6}{\sqrt{54}}}=2.327t=nsxˉ−μ=54617.9−16=2.327

  e) P-value of t(2.327) at df = n-1 = 54-1 = 53 is, P(T<t2.327)=0.988

To the right

  

Since p-value of F-statistic 12.3, at the last column is less than significance level of say 0.05.
Therefore, over all significance of the model is significant. 

Here are the result of 105 observations for monthly rent of a property(response or dependent
variable) together with its predictor or independent variables, Size, Time and Pool . Regression
output table above shows the coefficients of each , we can now conclude regression line as,
let y^=rent\hat{y}=renty^=rent

   y^=βo+β1(x1)+β2(x2)+β3(x3)\hat{y}=\beta _o+\beta _1(x_1)+\beta _2(x_2)+\beta _3(x_3)y^

=βo+β1(x1)+β2(x2)+β3(x3)

   y^=βo+β1(size)+β2(time)+β3(pool)\hat{y}=\beta _o+\beta _1(size)+\beta _2(time)+\beta

_3(pool)y^=βo+β1(size)+β2(time)+β3(pool)

   y^=7415.7603+1.6941(size)−165.2999(time)
+1139.6987(pool)\hat{y}=7415.7603+1.6941(size)-165.2999(time)+1139.6987(pool)y^
=7415.7603+1.6941(size)−165.2999(time)+1139.6987(pool)

Conclusion: We can use this linear regression in which all dependent variables are included or
significant in the model since in the above table, (column of P-value), all of them has p-value of
less than 0.05 significance level. Thus, time, size and pool provide good linear fit for our
prediction model for rent. 

As you can see, this three independent variables or factor affect the value of rent of a property. 

Say,  If Build-up area (sq ft) of a property is 1 unit (size=1), and time is zero minute (time=0)  or
the house is just near MRT station and no pool at all.(pool=0) , the Value of rent will be
y^=7415.7603+1.6941(1)−165.2999(9)+1139.6987(0)=7417.74\hat{y}=7415.7603+1.6941(1)-
165.2999(9)+1139.6987(0)=7417.74y^
=7415.7603+1.6941(1)−165.2999(9)+1139.6987(0)=7417.74. 

Imagine if we the property is away from the MRT station, say t= 10 minutes and still no pool ,
the value of rent will change to cheaper one : 

y^=7415.7603+1.6941(1)−165.2999(10)+1139.6987(0)=5764.46\hat{y}=7415.7603+1.6941(1)-
165.2999(10)+1139.6987(0)=5764.46y^
=7415.7603+1.6941(1)−165.2999(10)+1139.6987(0)=5764.46 

As you can see, these factors like time, size and availability of pool changes the value of rent. 

 __________________

  

Using excel, (DATA ANALYSIS) you can get the above summary for t-test, two sample
assuming unequal variance. 

Or simply execute this in excel, to solve for mean in each column, No sibling and With Sibling.
Average(data)

Therefor, mean for No Sibling is 544.05

                 mean for With Sibling is 543.9

a)Mean difference = 544.05-543.9 = 0.15

From the above summary of data using Excel, we have

        t-statistic : t= 0.00549

   with df = 38,      P(T<t)= P(T<0.00549)=0.9956 (it falls in the rejection region of null )

b. Provide a 90% confidence interval estimate of the mean difference between the critical
reading SAT scores for the twins raised with no siblings and the twins raised with siblings.
(, ) (to 2 decimals)

Confidence interval : (\bar{x}_1-\bar{x}_2)\pm t\sqrt{s_1}{}}