++++++ Ask your question for the QM2 course here and an experienced Success Formula tutor will answer it as soon as possible ++++++ Any problems or questions while studying/preparing for QM2? Don’t worry, we got you covered! Just post any of your questions on the QM2 discussion board on Studydrive and our professional tutors will help you!!! PLEASE ask your questions as a SEPARATE POST and NOT as a COMMENT here! We wish you lots of success! Your Success Formula Team
How do you get to the value 0.85 as the necessary decrease to be profitable?
what about g?
No area was marked for this question
great work! I've been looking for something like this for a while now :) thanks!
No area was marked for this question
thanks Gigi
Can you explain this more specifically. I don't get how you find the 183, 185, 180
same calculations like in 7.1 d) just different numbers Price = 168.565 +0.053 x 336.238 - (0.15 x 21.174) = 183.210 183.210 - 3.017 = 180.193 183.210 + 2.079 = 185.289
In the 'Brief Solutions' file, the right solution is this but instead 4P1-P2-P3. Why did they left out the 4's for P2 and P3?
I Think ist a mistake in the Brief Solutions
Do you guys know, how we get the df nominator 2? Like I don't know how to get the number
Hi guys :) If anybody is looking for a QM2 tutor, I know somebody who has a lot of experience and does really good tutoring. She's also offering it online and has done so for a while now so it works really well. She's gonna start a weekly group revising all the topics that have come up so far in QM2 before the exam in June as well. If you'd like the contact just message me on WhatsApp at 00491789149648! :)
Hi guys, I just found a great website where you can buy & sell your used university books! It's called Study-Books. Actually pretty cool and the books look like new :) just wanted to let you know. very nice if you wanna save some money for the next period. check it out: www.study-books.com
No area was marked for this question
Are these the corrected answers?
So if we increase it by 1 million, it still doesn't affect the optimal solution? That wouldn't make sense. Since the coefficient is -5 (MINUS), you have to look at the Allowable DECREASE of the coefficient. Since this is 1.167, the optimal solution is indeed not affected.
Hi guys! As we all know now we don’t have meetings anymore because of Covid-19. This situation is not beneficial for us since we won’t be prepare enough for the final exam. My friends and I were thinking about a fair solution. We come up with an idea; to cancel the 2 final weeks that we won’t have (week 6&7) in the exam. We are many people that agreed with this solution, but I need more people to convince them to accept this solution. Indeed, how do you want us to pass an exam on something that we’re not able to do? What about our meetings? Quizzes? Lectures? (Even if they want to upload lectures of last year, it’s not enough) If you agree with this solution or have another alternative, please feel free to comment on this post. Together, we will go through this annoying situation!
good idea, we can try
Can you explain the variables please? C1 and C2 are the types of crude oils right? The first constraint means that what is produced of type A oil is at least 120000 but don't we get 0.6 from c1 and 0.4 from c2 which would imply 0.6c1 +0.4c2>= 120000 ?(same logic for the second constraint)
No area was marked for this question
a lot of mistakes! you suck
No area was marked for this question
very nice work!
No area was marked for this question
thank you ! very nice work
No area was marked for this question
why 40 and 15 as variables?
that's the solution provided by excel
No area was marked for this question
How did you do that???
No area was marked for this question
and what was the RHS again? please help!
No area was marked for this question
why did you put in 40 and 15 for the variables?
No area was marked for this question
Hi! Just downloaded 5 of your documents, would appreciate if you could do the same for me :)
No area was marked for this question
why so many dislikes?
The whole exercise is messed up I would say: the first shaded region for the feasible area without the additional 4 constraint is wrong in the first place, from there the optimal solution is also wrong. One thing to take into account is that this time the function we are dealing with should be minimized in contrast with all the examples in the book, which have to be maximized. Therefore, graphically we are aiming to find the lowest possible level curve and not the highest as the person does. Because the above mistakes are made adding the additional constraint also messes things further, meaning that instead of changing the solution, adding the 4th constraint does not affect it in any way: Constraint 2: 2x1+4x2>=40 or simplified: x1+2x2>=20 Constraint 4: x1+2x2=>12
8 must be 1.75. Use the formula for an infinite series with the growth factor 1/3 and 1/2 for the "first term", which results in 0.75. Adding the 1 from the beginning results in 1.75. Apart from that good job! :)
thank you :)
can you please explain why? I'm struggling a bit. thx!
View 1 more comment
That's right but I think they are looking for the influence of unusual observations here (aka the three big teams). Could there be another explanation?
As the average Team is closer to the mean than the typical Team (median) it is the average Team who has a narrower interval
this is way to complicated: Just memorize the general rule:
View 2 more comments
Okii thanks :)
No area was marked for this question
Why are people disliking this?
ah okay makes sense.
sorry wrong document. Forget what I said.
No area was marked for this question
1 is d because they ask about the Most valid
it is d! a is also valid but the questions is about "the most adequate" answer.
No area was marked for this question
Hi Nomad! Just had a look and downloaded a couple of your documents, would appreciate if you could also have a look at mine and download them too :)
how did you get there?
This become [478.13;549.98} Which makes it answer C
I made an error calculating the terms. The answer is 21.66 of course.
Shouldn't t be 9 in this case because it's the years in succesion.
Divide by zero?
Apologies to say this, but that is not how maths work. The right expression would be that the term (1+r)^t with a limit for t approaching infinity, gives a value of infinity. Therefore the denominator becomes infinitely big (verify this with an r of 0,00001 (very small thus) and use a larger number for t (i'd recommend 10000 otherwise it will be a math error due to a lacking shitty calculator). This value is getting bigger and bigger, thus the denominator gets bigger and as the denominator approaches infinity, the whole fraction approaches 0. That would be the better answer than 'cancels out'. Never seen some math equation randomly disappear before.
it approaches zero so it’s basically equal to zero and therefore cancels out
No area was marked for this question
how did you find this value
It’s the determinant of one of the sub-matrixes
No area was marked for this question
High quality work
Konstanz izz da
how did you get to those numbers?
isn't it: L3 - (5*L1) ?
A sign error occured in task 7 when you used the pq formula, which in this case causes the signs of the outcomes to be twisted. Accordingly, the result should be 28.99%. btw, thanks for uploading
Shouldn't quarterly mean that you do 1/4? In which case it would be 0.0553 which still means option 2 is correct, but your calculations are incorrect. I think that if it was 4 years it would have said 4 times a year like in Question 9
quarterly means every 3 months
where did you get this formula?
how did you find the values 120,240 etc
I think it's wrong, it should be b because it's about the standardised values - the slope is r
View 1 more comment
Slide 15 of the lecture slides would imply b)
yes its on the lecture slide
Who can provide me a formula I can is for any question in mathematics
No area was marked for this question
where's the vid?
Load more