BRAINLIEST TO CORRECT ANSWER!!!

a hypothesis is an expected answer to a question, usually based on some theory or prior research. hypothesis testing is a method of determining the viability of a hypothesis. let’s use the us presidential election as an example. there are many hypotheses (questions) about how people feel or whom they will vote for. the only way to know the 100% “truth” about the answers to these questions is to ask every single possible voter – something that is impossible, expensive, time consuming etc. instead, we take samples and use statistics to make “best guesses” about the answer to a particular hypothesis. we never know for sure if our conclusion is right at the time we accept/reject it, but these techniques, when used appropriately can get us close to the truth most of the time (which is a lot better than guessing, flipping coins or throwing darts to get answers).

the tricky part about hypothesis testing is that we have to think somewhat backwards about it – we have to test what is known as the “null hypothesis”. as an example, the hypothesis might be “obama is more popular than romney” while the null hypothesis is “there is no difference in popularity between obama and romney”. we focus on the null hypothesis because it tells us exactly what the expected value of our tests should be (obama popularity = romney popularity) and we can collect data and see if it comes out that way (see next section on “significance”). if it does, then we “accept the null hypothesis” and reject our original hypothesis. if the null hypothesis is disproven, we look at the data to see if our original hypothesis holds (obama> romney).

the great compromise was the deal of how representation for each state in congress as written in the constitution worked. small states such as new jersey wanted each state to have an equal amount of representatives regardless of their population. bigger states such as virginia wanted each state to have representation based solely on their population. the compromise itself states there would be a senate (equal representation for each state) and a house of representatives (representation based on population).

due to this explanation, i don't really think you could say small states and large states gave up something specifically. you could say the small states gave up their want for each state to have an equal amount of representatives regardless of their population, and you could say the large states gave up their want for each state to have representation based solely on their population, but technically the great compromise worked it out really well!

or in shorter terms how they would be represented in congress.