Given any two numbers, which is greater, the LCM of the numbers or the GCF of the numbers? Why?

Tazmin Horton 2020-10-28 Answered
Given any two numbers, which is greater, the LCM of the numbers or the GCF of the numbers? Why?
You can still ask an expert for help

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Solve your problem for the price of one coffee

  • Available 24/7
  • Math expert for every subject
  • Pay only if we can solve it
Ask Question

Expert Answer

dieseisB
Answered 2020-10-29 Author has 85 answers
LCM will always be greater than the GCF of any 2 numbers,because LCM is a multiple while GCF is a factor also if the 2 numbers are relatively prime, their GCF will be 1 but their LCM will be the product of the given 2 numbers
Not exactly what you’re looking for?
Ask My Question

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Relevant Questions

asked 2021-02-23
Interpreting z-scores: Complete the following statements using your knowledge about z-scores.
a. If the data is weight, the z-score for someone who is overweight would be
-positive
-negative
-zero
b. If the data is IQ test scores, an individual with a negative z-score would have a
-high IQ
-low IQ
-average IQ
c. If the data is time spent watching TV, an individual with a z-score of zero would
-watch very little TV
-watch a lot of TV
-watch the average amount of TV
d. If the data is annual salary in the U.S and the population is all legally employed people in the U.S., the z-scores of people who make minimum wage would be
-positive
-negative
-zero
asked 2021-01-17
A new thermostat has been engineered for the frozen food cases in large supermarkets. Both the old and new thermostats hold temperatures at an average of 25F. However, it is hoped that the new thermostat might be more dependable in the sense that it will hold temperatures closer to 25F. One frozen food case was equipped with the new thermostat, and a random sample of 21 temperature readings gave a sample variance of 5.1. Another similar frozen food case was equipped with the old thermostat, and a random sample of 19 temperature readings gave a sample variance of 12.8. Test the claim that the population variance of the old thermostat temperature readings is larger than that for the new thermostat. Use a 5% level of significance. How could your test conclusion relate to the question regarding the dependability of the temperature readings? (Let population 1 refer to data from the old thermostat.)
(a) What is the level of significance?
State the null and alternate hypotheses.
H0:?12=?22,H1:?12>?22H0:?12=?22,H1:?12?22H0:?12=?22,H1:?12<?22H0:?12>?22,H1:?12=?22
(b) Find the value of the sample F statistic. (Round your answer to two decimal places.)
What are the degrees of freedom?
dfN=?
dfD=?
What assumptions are you making about the original distribution?
The populations follow independent normal distributions. We have random samples from each population.The populations follow dependent normal distributions. We have random samples from each population.The populations follow independent normal distributions.The populations follow independent chi-square distributions. We have random samples from each population.
(c) Find or estimate the P-value of the sample test statistic. (Round your answer to four decimal places.)
(d) Based on your answers in parts (a) to (c), will you reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis?
At the ? = 0.05 level, we fail to reject the null hypothesis and conclude the data are not statistically significant.At the ? = 0.05 level, we fail to reject the null hypothesis and conclude the data are statistically significant. At the ? = 0.05 level, we reject the null hypothesis and conclude the data are not statistically significant.At the ? = 0.05 level, we reject the null hypothesis and conclude the data are statistically significant.
(e) Interpret your conclusion in the context of the application.
Reject the null hypothesis, there is sufficient evidence that the population variance is larger in the old thermostat temperature readings.Fail to reject the null hypothesis, there is sufficient evidence that the population variance is larger in the old thermostat temperature readings. Fail to reject the null hypothesis, there is insufficient evidence that the population variance is larger in the old thermostat temperature readings.Reject the null hypothesis, there is insufficient evidence that the population variance is larger in the old thermostat temperature readings.
asked 2021-12-16
Maria's Pizza sells one 16-inch cheese pizza or two 10-inch cheese pizzas for $9.99. Determine which size given more pizza.
asked 2021-09-10
Given two integers. What can you claim about them, when their quotient is:
1. Positive?
2. Negative?
3. =0?
asked 2021-01-30
Simplification Basic Concepts with Examples Simplification is very easy and important topic according to banking, SSC and other govt. exam perspective. Simplification is based on basic math calculations and some other algebraic topics. Simplification is less time consuming and having higher accuracy.
asked 2022-06-13
Log predictive density asmptotically in predictive information criteria for Bayesian models
I am reading this paper, Andrew Gelman's Understanding predictive information criteria for Bayesian models, and I will give a screenshot as below:
Under standard conditions, the posterior distribution, p ( θ y ), approaches a normal distribution in the limit of increasing sample size (see, e.g., DeGroot, 1970). In this asymptotic limit, the posterior is dominated by the likelihood-the prior contributes only one factor, while the likelihood contributes n factors, one for each data point-and so the likelihood function also approaches the same normal distribution.
As sample size n →∝, we can label the limiting posterior distribution as θ | y N ( θ 0 , V 0 / n ). In this limit the log predictive density is
l o g p ( y θ ) = c ( y ) 1 2 ( k l o g ( 2 π ) + l o g | V o / n l + ( θ θ 0 ) T ( V o / n ) 1 ( θ θ 0 ) )
where c(y) is a constant that only depends on the data y and the model class but not on the parameters θ.
The limiting multivariate normal distribution for 0 induces a posterior distribution for the log predictive density that ends up being a constant (equal to  c ( y ) 1 2 ( k l o g ( 2 π ) + l o g | V o / n | ) ) minus 1 2 times a χ k 2 random variable, where k is the dimension of θ, that is, the number of parameters in the model. The maximum of this distribution of the log predictive density is attained when equals the maximum likelihood estimate (of course), and its posterior mean is at a vaue lower.
For actual posterior distributions, this asymptotic result is only an approximation, but it will be useful as a benchmark for interpreting the log predictive density as a measure of fit.
With singular models (e.g. mixture models and overparameterized complex models more gener- ally) a set of different parameters can map to a single data model, the Fisher information matrix i not positive definite, plug-in estimates are not representative of the posterior, and the distribution of the deviance does not converge to a χ 2 distribution. The asymptotic behavior of such models can be analyzed using singular learning theory (Watanabe, 2009, 2010).
Sorry for the long paragraph. The things that confuse me are:
1. Why here seems like we know the posterior distribution f ( θ | y ) first, then we use it to find the log p ( y | θ )? Shouldn't we get the model, log p ( y | θ ) first?
2. What does the green line "its posterior mean is at a value k 2 lower" mean? My understanding is since there is a term 1 2 χ k 2 in the expression and the expectation of χ k 2 is k, which lead to a k 2 lower. But k 2 lower than what?
3. How does the log p ( y | θ ) interpreting the measure of fit? I can see that there is a mean square error(MSE) term in this expression but it is an MSE of the parameter θ, not the data y.
Thanks for any help!
asked 2022-05-15
Sorry if this questions is overly simplistic. It's just something I haven't been able to figure out.
I've been reading through quite a few linear algebra books and have gone through the various methods of solving linear systems of equations, in particular, n systems in n unknowns. While I understand the techniques used to solve these for the most part, I don't understand how these situations present themselves. I was wondering if anyone could provide a simple real-world example or two from data analysis, finance, economics, etc. in which the problem they were working on led to a system of n equations in n unknowns. I don't need the solution worked out. I just need to know the problem that resulted in the system.