Develop a multiple regression model to predict the price of a home based on square footage and location. (Price is in thousands of dollars.) Include a dummy variable to represent the location (1 = on cul-de-sac, 0 = not on cul-de-sac). The first few lines of data are below: Home Price SqFt Cul-de-sac
1 615.6 3055 yes
2 557.4 2731 yes
3 472.6 2515 yes
4 595.3 3011 yes
5 696.9 3267 no
6 409.2 2061 no
7 814.2 3842 no
8 592.4 2777 no
9 695.5 3514 yes
10 495.3 2145 no
11 488.4 2277 no
12 605.4 3200 yes
13 635.7 3065 yes
14 654.8 2998 yes
15 565.6 2875 yes
16 642.2 3000 yes
17 568.9 2374 no
18 686.5 3393 no
19 724.5 3457 yes
20 749.7 3754 yes
What is the interpretation of Ra²?
a. 91.32% of the variation in Price is being explained by the X’s.
b. 91.32% of the variation in Price is being explained by the X’s once we have taken a penalty for the # X’s using.
c. 92.23% of the variation in Price is being explained by the X’s.
d. 92.23% of the variation in Price is being explained by the X’s once we have taken a penalty for the # X’s using.

2.56 is the width of the garden

step-by-step explanation:

i think it's eleven too, don't woosh me here, but according to the "experts" it's 2.

the proof starts from the peano postulates, which define the natural

numbers n. n is the smallest set satisfying these postulates:

  p1.   1 is in n.

  p2.   if x is in n, then its "successor" x' is in n.

  p3.   there is no x such that x' = 1.

  p4.   if x isn't 1, then there is a y in n such that y' = x.

  p5.   if s is a subset of n, 1 is in s, and the implication

      (x in s => x' in s) holds, then s = n.

then you have to define addition recursively:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 1, then define a + b = a'

      (using p1 and p2). if b isn't 1, then let c' = b, with c in n

      (using p4), and define a + b = (a + c)'.

then you have to define 2:

  def:   2 = 1'

2 is in n by p1, p2, and the definition of 2.

theorem:   1 + 1 = 2

proof: use the first part of the definition of + with a = b = 1.

      then 1 + 1 = 1' = 2   q.e.d.

note: there is an alternate formulation of the peano postulates which

replaces 1 with 0 in p1, p3, p4, and p5. then you have to change the

definition of addition to this:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 0, then define a + b = a.

      if b isn't 0, then let c' = b, with c in n, and define

      a + b = (a + c)'.

you also have to define 1 = 0', and 2 = 1'. then the proof of the

theorem above is a little different:

proof: use the second part of the definition of + first:

      1 + 1 = (1 + 0)'

      now use the first part of the definition of + on the sum in

      parentheses:   1 + 1 = (1)' = 1' = 2   q.e.d.

answer: it is 8

step-by-step explanation:

you know why its 8