Problem

Evaluate the reasonableness and usefulness of a \(20\text{-}\text{inch}\) intercept for a height model fitted only to children \(\text{ages}~5\text{--}12\). Address the meaning and plausibility of \(\text{age}~0\) and its location outside the fitted range.

Source parameter display: A linear height model was fitted only to children ages 5–12 and has intercept 20 inches. Which evaluation of the intercept is correct? No requested evaluation or match verdict is annotated.

Big Picture

What this problem is really about

Reasonableness has more than one layer: zero input may be meaningful, the predicted output may be physically plausible, and yet the fitted data may still provide no support there. Check the fitted domain separately from real-world plausibility so an extrapolated intercept is neither dismissed automatically nor treated as observed evidence.

Answer choices

Choose your path.

Preview only

The intercept is outside the fitted ages, so the model cannot make any useful prediction for children ages 5–12.

Age 0 is meaningful and 20 inches is plausible for an infant, so the fitted model is supported as an accurate infant prediction.

Age 0 is not meaningful for a child, so the intercept cannot be considered even though it is part of the fitted equation.

Age 0 is meaningful and 20 inches is plausible for an infant, but age 0 is outside the fitted ages, so this extrapolated intercept is not useful for describing ages 5–12.

The choices are visible. Checking your work and seeing which answer is correct happen inside Gozunta.

Evaluate the reasonableness and usefulness of a \(20\text{-}\text{inch}\) intercept for a height model fitted only to children \(\text{ages}~5\text{--}12\). Address the meaning and plausibility of \(\text{age}~0\) and its location outside the fitted range.

What this problem is really about

Turn the preview into practice.

Gozunta lets you study this problem—and more than 10,000 others.