VCE General & Further Maths Question Thread!

[BasicAcid]

B as it says the first year it's $100,000 so we know the second is $108,000 third is $116,640 etc fourth is $125,971.2 etc... 13th is over $250,000

[Yacoubb]

B as it says the first year it's $100,000 so we know the second is $108,000 third is $116,640 etc fourth is $125,971.2 etc... 13th is over $250,000

The question asks after how many years. The twelfth year is actually 13 years later. Hence, The answer is A.

After one year = t2.
Hence, after twelve years = t13

[Zealous]

I say A. Similar reasoning to Yaccoub.

Spoiler

t1 (first year): $100000
t2 (second year): $108000 [note: this is after one year (one year after the first)]
t3 (third year): $116640 [this is after two years]
...
t11 (eleventh year): $215892 [after 10 years]
t12 (twelth year): $233164 [after 11 years]
t13 (thirteenth year): $251817

Yes t13 is the first term above $250000, but even though it's the 13th year, it is only 12 years after the first year, and thus the answer is A.

These are the sort of questions that I get really annoyed at, they don't follow the common "n-1" formula's. I often find them a little trickier.

[BLACKCATT]

yeah the answers says B (heffernan 2003 btw) so i wasn't too sure, thanks for the help:)

[sam.utute]

In Core,
If you are asked to describe the shape, would you say for example: positively skewed with a possible outlier    -   if you know it isn't an outlier, do you still say 'possible', and likewise if you know it is an outlier?

thanks

Use outlier where appropriate. If you're not sure/cannot calculate if it's an outlier, than try using "extreme values" instead.

[abcdqdxD]

doesn't "possible outlier" suggest that it may not be an outlier?

[Yacoubb]

In Core,
If you are asked to describe the shape, would you say for example: positively skewed with a possible outlier    -   if you know it isn't an outlier, do you still say 'possible', and likewise if you know it is an outlier?

thanks

If you can actually load your data onto the calculator and get a boxplot, it'll actually show whether an upper our lower outlier exists.

So, you'd say (if outliers present)
The distribution is positively skewed with an apparent outlier.

OR

if no outliers are present:
The distribution is positively skewed with no apparent oulier.

[Yacoubb]

doesn't "possible outlier" suggest that it may not be an outlier?

I'd use this for stem-and-leaf plots.

[sam.utute]

If you can actually load your data onto the calculator and get a boxplot, it'll actually show whether an upper our lower outlier exists.

So, you'd say (if outliers present)
The distribution is positively skewed with an apparent outlier.

OR

if no outliers are present:
The distribution is positively skewed with no apparent oulier.

That would take up too much time in my opinion. Obviously, depends on how fast your are, but my guess is the average student won't have time to input data onto their calculator.

[Yacoubb]

That would take up too much time in my opinion. Obviously, depends on how fast your are, but my guess is the average student won't have time to input data onto their calculator.

Depends really on how you're given the data. If it's a stem and leaf plot, then mentioning that there are 'possible outliers' would probably do. But if you were given a histogram or box plot, the outlier is usually visible.

[tcstudent]

Guys just doing Networks, and this question is one that i always hate, Constructing a network



those are the questions
but i never understand how to set out the vertices and where and how long to draw the edges,

[Damoz.G]

Guys just doing Networks, and this question is one that i always hate, Constructing a network

(Image removed from quote.)

those are the questions
but i never understand how to set out the vertices and where and how long to draw the edges,

I'm guessing your talking about Q14?

If so, this was how I did it last year in Further:
1. Space out all of your Vertices (The Numbered Dots).
2. Go row-by-row and then match the number from the row with the corresponding number in the column. If it has a number "2" then you need to have to lines connecting the two Vertices.
You just have to be careful not to double up or add unnecessary ones, unless it has a number more than 1.

The setting out of where you put your Vertices is not an issue, and neither is the length of your Edges. What the examiners look for is that you can read the Matrix and match the lines with the two numbers. e.g. In Q14b, For Row 5 Column 3, there is a number two. That means that you have to have one line connecting the Vertices of 3 and 5, and then make another line again to show that you recognised there was 2 lines required.

I had to draw it out, but I'm not sure how to upload a Picture onto here. =/

[tcstudent]

haha damn you couldnt post the pic, what ya needa do is to go on tinypic through google and upload the photo and then just use the IMG link after you upload it and copy and paste it here, i have a few more pics to upload as i am struggling them with aswell lol.

thanks bro

[Damoz.G]

haha damn you couldnt post the pic, what ya needa do is to go on tinypic through google and upload the photo and then just use the IMG link after you upload it and copy and paste it here, i have a few more pics to upload as i am struggling them with aswell lol.

thanks bro

Alright, I made a really rough drawing out of it, but I'll re draw it and make it neater and easier to understand. I'll have it posted within the next 45 Minutes. I'll do it now.

Feel free to post the other Questions as well, and I'll try and help as much I can.

[tcstudent]

hehe, ive got another question when drawing a network, from a Matrix representation, are you allowed to have edges crossing each other when drawing it out,

 I have B->M thats one edges then it goes P->K which looks like a big X, is this allowed, i thought edges were not allowed to cross when drawing out networks?, because if they are allowed to cross i am gonna be pissed thinking all this time you were not allowed too