A father and his three children decide on all matters with a vote. Each member of the family gets as many votes as their age. Right now, the family members are 36,13,6, and 4 year old, so the father always wins. How many years will it take for the three children to win a vote if they all agree?

Answer:

9

Step-by-step explanation:

i can not really tell what letters are on the picture but i think it is 9

The number of different subsets of $\{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12\}$  is 13.

We are given that;

Subset = $\{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12\}$

Now,

To apply the principle of inclusion-exclusion, we need to find the number of elements in each set and each intersection of sets. We have:

∣A∣=∣B∣=∣C∣=6

∣A∩B∣=∣A∩C∣=∣B∩C∣=2

∣A∩B∩C∣=1

Using the principle of inclusion-exclusion, we get:

∣A∪B∪C∣=∣A∣+∣B∣+∣C∣−∣A∩B∣−∣A∩C∣−∣B∩C∣+∣A∩B∩C∣

Plugging in the values we have found above, we get:

∣A∪B∪C∣=6+6+6−2−2−2+1=13

Therefore, by the subset the answer will be 13.

Learn more about addition rule for two subsets here:

https://brainly.com/question/27496136

#SPJ1

Answer:  We will see that the function is f(x) = 0.559*ln(x)

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

To show that trapezoid B is similar to trapezoid A, we need to perform three basic transformations in the following order:

1. Translation: Move trapezoid A to the left by 2 units and up by 2 units. This will bring point A to (-5, 3), point B to (-3, 5), point C to (3, 5), and point D to (5, 3).

2. Rotation: Rotate trapezoid A 90 degrees clockwise around the origin. This will bring point A to (3, 5), point B to (5, -3), point C to (-5, -3), and point D to (-3, 5).

3. Dilation: Enlarge the rotated trapezoid A by a scale factor of 2, using the origin as the center of dilation. This will bring point A to (6, 10), point B to (10, -6), point C to (-10, -6), and point D to (-6, 10).

After these three transformations, trapezoid A will be similar to trapezoid B.Step-by-step explanation:

At one time, the British advanced corporation tax system taxed British companies' foreign earnings at a higher rate than their domestic earnings.

This was put in place to discourage multinational corporations from artificially shifting profits earned in the UK to low-tax jurisdictions. The policy was aimed at preventing companies from avoiding tax by moving profits out of the UK and into tax havens. By imposing a higher tax rate on foreign earnings, the UK government hoped to make it less attractive for companies to engage in profit-shifting practices.

The policy was controversial and faced criticism from some business groups, who argued that it placed an unfair burden on companies operating overseas. However, the government defended the policy as necessary to ensure that companies paid their fair share of tax in the countries where they operated. Eventually, the policy was replaced by a territorial tax system, which only taxes companies on their profits earned in the UK. This change was made to simplify the tax system and make it more attractive for companies to invest in the UK.

Learn more about British here:

https://brainly.com/question/2280126

#SPJ11

The annual interest savings is the amount Toni would save each year in interest charges due to the lower APR. It would be around  0.375%

Let x be the original APR. Then the first purchase of a point reduced the APR to x - 0.125%, the second point reduced it further to x - 0.25%, and the third point reduced it to x - 0.375%. Since Toni's new APR is 3.2%, we have:

x - 0.375% = 3.2%

Solving for x, we get:

x = 3.2% + 0.375% = 3.575%

Therefore, Toni's original APR was 3.575%.

To check our answer, we can use the fact that Toni purchased 3 points at a cost of 1% each. Since her loan value is the total cost of the points ($8,100) divided by the cost per percent (1%), we have:

loan value = $8,100 / 1% = $810,000

The reduction in APR due to the 3 points is 0.375%, which is equivalent to a reduction in the annual interest rate of:

0.375% / 100% = 0.00375

The annual interest savings due to the reduction in APR is then:

$810,000 x 0.00375 = $3,037.50

The annual interest savings is the amount Toni would save each year in interest charges due to the lower APR. Dividing this by the loan value gives us the actual reduction in APR:

$3,037.50 / $810,000 = 0.00375 = 0.375%

This confirms that our answer for the original APR is correct.

To know more about interest here

https://brainly.com/question/25720319

#SPJ4

The solution of the fractions 1 / 4 × 20 / 21  is 5 / 21.

A fraction is number with numerator and denominator. Therefore, let's multiply the fractions.

1 / 4 × 20 / 21 = 20 / 84

Hence, let's reduce the fraction by dividing the numerator and denominator by 4.

20 / 84 ÷ 4 / 4

20 / 84 ÷ 4 / 4 = 5 / 21

Therefore, the fraction is 5 / 21.

learn more on fractions here: https://brainly.com/question/27740408

#SPJ1

Answer:

6 is the middle point of AD

Given a linear operator T on a vector space V and an ordered basis {3}, we need to compute the matrix representation [T] with respect to this basis. Once we have the matrix [T], we can find its eigenvectors and eigenvalues

To address your question, we first need to understand the concepts involved:

1. A linear operator (T) is a function that maps a vector space V to itself, while preserving the structure of the space.
2. An ordered basis is a linearly independent set of vectors that spans the vector space V.
3. [T] is the matrix representation of the linear operator T with respect to the ordered basis.
4. Eigenvectors are non-zero vectors that satisfy the equation T(v) = λv, where λ is a scalar called an eigenvalue.

. If the eigenvectors of T form a basis for the vector space V (i.e., they are linearly independent and span the space), then we can say that F3 is a basis consisting of eigenvectors of T.

Know more about vector here:

https://brainly.com/question/29740341

#SPJ11

There is enough evidence to support the strategist's claim

To test the claim, we can use a one-sample proportion test.

Let p be the true proportion of residents in the town who favor construction. The null hypothesis is that p = 0.80 and the alternative hypothesis is that p > 0.80.

The test statistic is:

z = (p' - p) / sqrt(p * (1 - p) / n)

where p' is the sample proportion, n is the sample size.

Using the given data, we have:

p' = 0.83

p = 0.80

n = 1600

Plugging in these values, we get:

z = (0.83 - 0.80) / sqrt(0.80 * 0.20 / 1600) = 2.236

The corresponding p-value for this test statistic is 0.0126 (using a standard normal distribution table or calculator).

Since the p-value (0.0126) is less than the significance level (0.01), we reject the null hypothesis. There is sufficient evidence to support the claim that the percentage of residents who favor construction is more than 80%.

Learn more about hypothesis at https://brainly.com/question/15173534

#SPJ11

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

The area of the circle is approximately 55.39 square inches.

The circumference of the circle is approximately 26.38 inches.

The area of a circle = πr²

The circumference of the circle = 2πr

Where, r is the radius of the circle, which is half of the diameter of the circle.

Therefore, we have:

radius (r) = 8.4/2 = 4.2 inches

π = 3.14

Thus:

The area of the circle = πr² = 3.14 * 4.2²

Area ≈ 55.39 square inches [nearest hundredth]

The circumference of the circle = 2πr = 2 * 3.14 * 4.2

Circumference ≈ 26.38 inches.

Learn more about the circumference on:

https://brainly.com/question/30381834

#SPJ1

The equation is equivalent to (x²+3)² + 7x² + 21 = -10 is m² + 7m + 10= 0.

We have,

m = x² + 3

and, (x²+3)² + 7x² + 21 = -10

Now, simplifying the above expression and substitute m = x² + 3

(x²+3)² + 7x² + 21 = -10

(x²+3)² + 7(x² + 3) = -10

m² + 7m = -10

m² + 7m + 10= 0

Learn more about Equation here:

https://brainly.com/question/15466492

#DPJ1

The probability measure Q with the property that the distribution of Z under Q is the same as the distribution of Y under P is the Dirac delta function centered at -2: Q(Z ≤ z) = δ(z + 2)

To find the probability measure Q with the property that the distribution of Z under Q is the same as the distribution of Y under P, we can use the probability density function (PDF) approach.

First, we need to find the PDF of Y under P. Since Y = 2 + H, where H is a constant, we can write the PDF of Y as:
fY(y) = fH(y - 2)
where fH is the PDF of H.

Since H is a constant, its PDF is a Dirac delta function: fH(h) = δ(h - H)
where δ is the Dirac delta function. Substituting this into the expression for fY, we get:
fY(y) = δ(y - 2 - H)

Now, we need to find the PDF of Z under Q. Let FZ be the CDF of Z under Q. Then, we have:
FZ(z) = Q(Z ≤ z)

Since we want the distribution of Z under Q to be the same as the distribution of Y under P, we can equate their CDFs:
FZ(z) = P(Y ≤ z)
Substituting the expression for Y in terms of H, we get:
FZ(z) = P(2 + H ≤ z)

Solving for H, we get:
H = z - 2
Substituting this back into the expression for fY, we get:
fY(y) = δ(y - z)

Therefore, the PDF of Z under Q is: fZ(z) = fY(z - 2) = δ(z - 2 - z) = δ(-2).
This means that Z has a constant value of -2 under Q.

To know more about the probability density function visit:

https://brainly.com/question/30403935

#SPJ11

The graph of the given inequality y ≥ x² + 1 is a shaded region above the downward-facing parabola -x² + 1.

Hence, graph A represents the given inequality.

The inequality  y ≥ x² + 1 represents a region in the coordinate plane where y is greater than or equal to the value of the function -x² + 1 for any given x. The graph of this inequality is a shaded region above the downward-facing parabola -x² + 1. The vertex of this parabola is located at the point (0,1), and as x moves away from 0, the value of the function becomes more negative.

Therefore, the shaded region includes all points (x, y) where y is greater than or equal to the y-value of the parabola at that x-value. The resulting graph is a curve that opens downward and flattens out at y=1 as x moves further away from 0.

Hence, the correct option is A.

To know more about inequality here

https://brainly.com/question/31434121

#SPJ1

Sam lives in either a small house or a yellow house.

Mutually exclusive:

Maya chooses either red or yellow when taking one crayon from a set of 16.

Raymond draws a 2 or a 3 when taking a single card from a deck.

Hannah gets either heads or tails when she flips a coin.

Not mutually exclusive:

Sally wears a blue shirt or blue pants.

Jack either goes to his friend's house or does his homework.

Sam lives in either a small house or a yellow house.

To learn more about mutually visit:

https://brainly.com/question/13800737

#SPJ11

Answer:

1) 4 pounds / $5.48 = .73 pounds / dollar

2) 5 pounds / $4.85 = 1.03 pounds / dollar

3) $3.51 / 3 pounds = $1.17 / pound

4) $9.12 / 6 pounds = $1.52 / pound

Let help you with that.

To find the distance between two points, we can use the distance formula:

```

d = √(x2 - x1)2 + (y2 - y1)2

```

Where:

* `d` is the distance between the two points

* `x1` and `y1` are the coordinates of the first point

* `x2` and `y2` are the coordinates of the second point

In this case, the points are (8, -4) and (-1, -2):

```

d = √((8 - (-1))^2 + ((-4) - (-2))^2)

```

```

d = √(9^2 + (-2)^2)

```

```

d = √(81 + 4)

```

```

d = √85

```

```

d = 9.2 (rounded to the nearest tenth)

```

Therefore, the distance between the two points is 9.2 units.

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

Approximately 670 wrestlers weigh between 210 and 230 lbs.

a) To find the proportion/percentage of wrestlers that weigh less than 220 lbs, we need to standardize the weight value using the formula:

z = (x - μ) / σ

where x is the weight value, μ is the mean weight, and σ is the standard deviation.

So, for x = 220 lbs:

z = (220 - 225) / 20 = -0.25

Looking up the standard normal table or using a calculator, we find that the area/proportion to the left of z = -0.25 is 0.4013. Therefore, the proportion/percentage of wrestlers that weigh less than 220 lbs is:

0.4013 or 40.13%

b) To find the probability that a random wrestler weighs more than 250 lbs, we again need to standardize the weight value:

z = (250 - 225) / 20 = 1.25

Using the standard normal table or a calculator, we find that the area/proportion to the right of z = 1.25 is 0.1056. Therefore, the probability that a random wrestler weighs more than 250 lbs is:

0.1056 or 10.56%

c) To find the number of wrestlers that weigh between 210 and 230 lbs, we first need to standardize these weight values:

z1 = (210 - 225) / 20 = -0.75

z2 = (230 - 225) / 20 = 0.25

Next, we need to find the area/proportion between these two standardized values:

P(-0.75 < z < 0.25) = P(z < 0.25) - P(z < -0.75)

Using the standard normal table or a calculator, we find that P(z < 0.25) is 0.5987 and P(z < -0.75) is 0.2266. Therefore:

P(-0.75 < z < 0.25) = 0.5987 - 0.2266 = 0.3721

Finally, we can find the number of wrestlers by multiplying this proportion by the total population size:

0.3721 * 1800 = 669.78 or approximately 670 wrestlers

Therefore, approximately 670 wrestlers weigh between 210 and 230 lbs.

To learn more about probability visit:

https://brainly.com/question/15124899

#SPJ11

Answer:

[tex]60\pi[/tex]

Step-by-step explanation:

Surface area of a cylinder is

[tex]2\pi rh + 2\pi r^2[/tex]

r=3,h=7.

Plug in the values.

[tex]42\pi +18\pi =60\pi[/tex]

S is not continuous at c, and since this is true for any irrational number in (0,1), S is not continuous at any point in (0,1).

To show that S is continuous at 0 and at 1, we need to show that the limit of S(x) as x approaches 0 and 1 exists and is equal to S(0) and S(1), respectively.

First, let's consider the limit as x approaches 0. We have:

lim x→0 S(x) = lim x→0 x² = 0² = 0

Since S(0) = 0, we have lim x→0 S(x) = S(0), and thus S is continuous at 0.

Now let's consider the limit as x approaches 1. We have:

lim x→1 S(x) = lim x→1 x² = 1² = 1

Since S(1) = 1, we have lim x→1 S(x) = S(1), and thus S is continuous at 1.

To show that S is not continuous at any point in (0,1), we need to find a point c in (0,1) such that S is not continuous at c. One way to do this is to show that the limit of S(x) as x approaches c does not exist.

Let c be any irrational number in (0,1), and let {r_n} be a sequence of rational numbers in (0,1) that converges to c. Then we have:

lim n→∞ S(r_n) = lim n→∞ r_n = c

On the other hand, since c is irrational, S(c) = c². Therefore, we have:

lim x→c S(x) = c²

Since lim n→∞ S(r_n) ≠ lim x→c S(x), the limit of S(x) as x approaches c does not exist. Therefore, S is not continuous at c, and since this is true for any irrational number in (0,1), S is not continuous at any point in (0,1).

To learn more about continuous visit:

https://brainly.com/question/31694381

#SPJ11

The  (q/p)^Sn, n>=1 is a martingale.

To show that (q/p)^Sn, n>=1 is a martingale, we need to show that it satisfies the three conditions of a martingale:

The expected value of (q/p)^Sn is finite for all n.

For all n, E[(q/p)^Sn+1 | Fn] = (q/p)^Sn, where Fn is the sigma-algebra generated by the first n transitions.

(q/p)^Sn is adapted to the filtration Fn.

First, we note that the expected value of (q/p)^Sn is finite for all n since q/p < 1, and thus (q/p)^n approaches zero as n approaches infinity.

Next, we consider the second condition. Let F_n be the sigma-algebra generated by the first n transitions, and let X_n = (q/p)^Sn. We need to show that E[X_n+1 | F_n] = X_n.

We can write (q/p)^(n+1) = (q/p)^n * (q/p), so we have:

E[X_n+1 | F_n] = E[(q/p)^(n+1) | F_n]

= E[(q/p)^n * (q/p) | F_n]

= (q/p)^n * E[(q/p) | F_n]

= (q/p)^n * [(q/p) * P(up) + (p/q) * P(down)]

= (q/p)^n * [(q/p) * p + (p/q) * q]

= (q/p)^n * (p + q)

= (q/p)^n * 1

= X_n

Thus, the second condition is satisfied.

Finally, we need to show that X_n is adapted to the filtration F_n. This is true since X_n only depends on the first n transitions, which are included in F_n.

Therefore, we have shown that (q/p)^Sn, n>=1 is a martingale.

Learn more about markov chain at https://brainly.com/question/30544880

#SPJ11

The table is:

                                    Has Disease    Does Not Have Disease     Total
Positive Test Result:         16,740                4,620                           21,360
Negative Test Result:        1,260                37,380                          38,640
Total:                                  18,000              42,000                          60,000

1. Total population: 60,000
2. Disease prevalence: 30% of the population has the disease, so 0.30 * 60,000 = 18,000 people have the disease, and 60,000 - 18,000 = 42,000 people do not have the disease.
3. Sensitivity (True Positive Rate): 93% means that out of those with the disease, 93% will test positive. So, 0.93 * 18,000 = 16,740 positive tests among those with the disease.
4. Specificity (True Negative Rate): 89% means that out of those without the disease, 89% will test negative. So, 0.89 * 42,000 = 37,380 negative tests among those without the disease.
5. False Negative Rate: Since the test has a sensitivity of 93%, the false negative rate is 100% - 93% = 7%. Thus, 0.07 * 18,000 = 1,260 false negatives.
6. False Positive Rate: Since the test has a specificity of 89%, the false positive rate is 100% - 89% = 11%. Thus, 0.11 * 42,000 = 4,620 false positives.

Now we can fill in the table:

                                    Has Disease    Does Not Have Disease     Total
Positive Test Result:         16,740                4,620                           21,360
Negative Test Result:        1,260                37,380                          38,640
Total:                                  18,000              42,000                          60,000

Learn more about "test": https://brainly.com/question/3787717

#SPJ11

If Crunchy-Critters produces chips bags with mean weight as 16 oz, the the probability that weight of the bag is less than 15.4 oz is 0.0228.

We use the standard normal distribution to find the required probability. First, we need to standardize the value of 15.4 oz using the formula : z = (x - μ) / σ,

where x is = value we are interested in, μ is = mean weight, σ is = standard deviation, and z is the standardized score.

The mean-weight of the chips is (μ) = 16 oz,

The standard-deviation of weight (σ) is 0.3 oz,

Substituting the values we have, we get:

⇒ z = (15.4 - 16)/0.3,

⇒ z = -2, and

We know that, P(X < 15.4) = P(Z < -2) = 0.0228

Therefore, the required probability is 0.0228 or 2.28%.

Learn more about Probability here

https://brainly.com/question/13799179

#SPJ1

The critical F-value (3.098), we can reject the null hypothesis and conclude that there is a significant difference between the mean amount of snowfall for the four regions.

To learn

To test whether there is a significant difference between the mean amount of snowfall for the four regions, we can use a one-way ANOVA test. The null hypothesis for this test is that the mean amount of snowfall is the same for all four regions, while the alternative hypothesis is that at least one region has a significantly different mean amount of snowfall than the others.

To begin, we can calculate the sample means and sample standard deviations for each region:

Region 1: Mean = 3.10, SD = 0.283

Region 2: Mean = 3.00, SD = 0.418

Region 3: Mean = 2.57, SD = 0.182

Region 4: Mean = 3.09, SD = 0.499

Next, we can calculate the overall mean and overall variance of the sample data:

Overall mean = (3.10 + 3.00 + 2.57 + 3.09) / 4 = 2.94

Overall variance = (([tex]0.283^2[/tex] + 0.418^2 + [tex]0.182^2[/tex] + [tex]0.499^2[/tex]) / 3) / 4 = 0.00937

Using these values, we can calculate the F-statistic for the one-way ANOVA test:

F = (Between-group variability) / (Within-group variability)

Between-group variability = Sum of squares between groups / degrees of freedom between groups

Within-group variability = Sum of squares within groups / degrees of freedom within groups

Degrees of freedom between groups = k - 1 = 4 - 1 = 3

Degrees of freedom within groups = N - k = 20 - 4 = 16

Sum of squares between groups = (n1 * (x1bar - overall_mean)[tex]^2[/tex] + n2 * (x2bar - overall_mean)[tex]^2[/tex] + n3 * (x3bar - overall_mean)[tex]^2[/tex] + n4 * (x4bar - overall_mean)[tex]^2[/tex]) / (k - 1)

= ((9 * (3.10 - 2.94)[tex]^2[/tex] + 9 * (3.00 - 2.94)[tex]^2[/tex] + 7 * (2.57 - 2.94)[tex]^2[/tex] + 3 * (3.09 - 2.94)[tex]^2[/tex]) / 3

= 3.602

Sum of squares within groups = (n1 - 1) * s[tex]1^2[/tex] + (n2 - 1) * s[tex]2^2[/tex] + (n3 - 1) * s[tex]3^2[/tex] + (n4 - 1) * s[tex]4^2[/tex]

= (8 *[tex]0.283^2[/tex] + 8 * 0.[tex]418^2[/tex] + 6 * [tex]0.182^2[/tex] + 2 * [tex]0.499^2[/tex])

= 1.055

F = (Between-group variability) / (Within-group variability) = 3.602 / 1.055 = 3.415

We can then use an F-distribution table or calculator to find the critical F-value for a significance level of 0.05, with degrees of freedom between groups = 3 and degrees of freedom within groups = 16. The critical F-value is 3.098.

Since our calculated F-value (3.415) is greater than the critical F-value (3.098), we can reject the null hypothesis and conclude that there is a significant difference between the mean amount of snowfall for the four regions.

To learn more about significant visit:

https://brainly.com/question/2284168

#SPJ11

The rise of the line that has a slope of 5/8 and a run of 16 is calculated as: 10.

The slope of a line is defined as the ratio of the rise of the line to the run of the line. This can also be defined as change in y over the change in x of a line.

Given the following:

Slope of a line (m) = 5/8

Run of the triangle = 16

Rise = x

Using the slope formula, we have:

Slope of a line (m) = rise/run

5/8 = x/16

Solve for x:

x = (5 * 16) / 8

x = 80/8

x = 10

Therefore, we can conclude that the rise is 10.

Learn more about the slope of a line on:

https://brainly.com/question/29044610

#SPJ1

Answer:

48 cm

Step-by-step explanation:

The volume of an oblique(slanted) cylinder is still

[tex]\pi r^{2} \cdot h[/tex], like a "normal" cylinder. (r is radius, h or x is height)

The diameter of the cylinder is 8, so the radius would be [tex]\frac{8}{2} = 4[/tex].

The volume is therefore [tex]4^2 \pi \cdot h[/tex] , which is [tex]16 \pi h[/tex].

We know [tex]16 \pi h = 768\pi[/tex], so we divide both sides by [tex]16\pi[/tex] to isolate the variable.

[tex]\frac{768\pi}{16\pi}= 48[/tex].

So, we know that the height is 48.

Therefore, x=48. (and remember the unit!)

If the radius is supposed to be 8, then do the same thing but with r=8.

Also, I don't know if there's a typo in the title, so this is assuming the volume is [tex]786\pi[/tex]cm^3, and not [tex]768\pi[/tex]in^3.

The equation that can be used to find the value of x is 120 = (x + 5) × (120/x - 1/3).

Carmen's first trip was 120 miles, and she traveled at an average of x miles per hour. We can use the formula:

distance = rate × time, which can be written as:
120 miles = x miles/hour × time

where, time is the time for outgoing.

For the return trip, Carmen traveled at a rate that was 5 miles per hour faster, so her speed was (x + 5) miles/hour. The time for the return trip was one-third of an hour less than the time for the outgoing trip, so we can represent the return trip time as (time - 1/3) hours. Using the distance formula again for the return trip:
120 miles = (x + 5) miles/hour × (time - 1/3) hours

Now, let's express both times in terms of x. From the first equation, we can find the time for the outgoing trip as:
time = 120 miles / x miles/hour

Substitute this expression for time in the return trip equation:
120 miles = (x + 5) miles/hour × (120/x - 1/3) hours

Now you have an equation that can be used to find the value of x:
120 = (x + 5) × (120/x - 1/3)

Know more about equation here:

https://brainly.com/question/29174899

#SPJ11

The optimal value for x in the stochastic model is a range of values from x=6 to x=8. The stochastic model causes problems due to the uncertainty in the optimal solution and the assumptions.

With a=5, the optimal solution is x=8. However, with the addition of stochasticity and possible values for a of 3, 4, and 6, the optimal value for x becomes a range of values.

The expected value of a is 4.5, which means that there is a higher probability of a lower value for a, resulting in a lower optimal value for x. Therefore, the optimal value for x becomes x=6 when a=3 or a=4, x=7 when a=5, and x=8 when a=6.

The stochastic model causes problems because the optimal solution is no longer a fixed value but rather a range of values that are dependent on the probability distribution of a.

Additionally, this model assumes that the production time is the only constraint on production, which may not always be the case in real-world production scenarios. Therefore, the stochastic model may not accurately reflect the actual production process and could lead to suboptimal production decisions.

To know more about  stochastic model, refer here:
https://brainly.com/question/28138551#
#SPJ11