You are a regulator for the Securities and Exchange Commission who is in charge of investigating whether a company has violated laws against insider trading. Your initial investigation has revealed no evidence of wrongdoing. However, you know that it is difficult to uncover secret activity, and that only 1 3 of investigations will correctly identify guilt. Of course, if the company is innocent, there is no chance of finding anything. You also estimate that 1 in 5 instances of trading similar to this one are actually illegal. What is the probability that the company is guilty, given that your initial investigation found no evidence of wrongdoing?

i really dont know

step-by-step explanation:

if you are saying purchasing 3 social media ads and one newspaper ad counts as one purchase then there are:

6 purchases

if you are asking how many of each then:

18 social media ads

6 newspaper ads

(1, –1), (16, –4), (36, –6)

step-by-step explanation:

given that the function is

this can also be written as

we have to graph this function and check which list of points lie on the graph

see attachment for graph:

we find that the points lying are (1,-1) (16,-4) and (36,-6)

since square root is there we find that x can only be posiitve but y can be since square root both positive and negative.

yes   because as the functions are graphed they eventually will intersect unless otherwise

step-by-step explanation: