Serena says that if a regression line is drawn correctly in a scatterplot, there will always be the same number of points above the line as there are below the line. Which of these must be a counterexample to her claim? a scatterplot with an odd number of points in which the correct regression line passes directly through 0 of the points a scatterplot with an even number of points in which the correct regression line passes directly through 0 of the points a scatterplot with an odd number of points in which the correct regression line passes directly through 1 of the points a scatterplot with an even number of points in which the correct regression line passes directly through 2 of the points

.there can be infinite values of m and n that can satisfy the above equation. for each value of m of m or n. there maybe infinite sets of solution for the above

step-by-step explanation:

not only in mathematics, scientific proof also are required in the other field of science. also maths proofs are of particular structure, containing steps and logics. so proving is like doing science, it is science. that's why it is important to prove. 

an inaccurate proof leads to errors, or stating results that are not accurate.  which wil mess the probelm up you dont want this

hence, the required result is

step-by-step explanation:

suppose we have two matrices a and b

we will assume the two matrices

we have to compute b-a which means subtracting corresponding elements of a from b.

-