In a survey of 100 people who play chess against a computer player, it was found that the computer won 90 percent of the matches. is there statistical significance to say that the computer is a better chess player than the people who played against it?

these are the choices

no, because the results are likely to occur by chance.

yes, because a computer will always win in a competition against a human.

yes, because the results are unlikely to occur by chance.

no, because the sample is a voluntary sample of those people willing to play against a computer.

Option b is right

Step-by-step explanation:

Sample size =100

p = sample proportion of computer winning = 0.9

q = sample proportion of computer not winning = 0.1

P = the population proportion

If equally likely then P = 0.5

H0: p =0.5

Ha: p>0.5

(One tailed test)

Test statistic =

Since this lies outside 1.96 we reject null hypothesis

i.e. computer will always win in a competition against humna

Option b is right

answer: 457.14

step-by-step explanation:

205 - 45 = 160

160 / .35 = 457.142857

step-by-step explanation:

we are given

since, we have to isolate x on anyone side

so, we can move all x terms on one side

subtract both sides by 2x

add both sides by 9

divide both sides by 4

we get