DescriptionIn this final information and data literacy assignment, you will persuade a non-technical audience, a jury, that the statistical analysis that you have done provides adequate evidence on the case they must determine. You must explain to a jury (from the general population) the case, how probability and statistics can inform it, and what you found by doing your analysis. You must use present this in a way and using language they will understand. Part of this will be explaining why this approach can be used with confidence for addressing this question. You will also demonstrate your ability to edit a professional document to assure it is clear, complete, and concise, following the direction provided in the Legal Memorandum Guide. Proofread and edit your pre-writing document for grammar and spelling PRIOR TO TURNING IT IN (you may use an external grammar tool to help with this. The Legal Memorandum Template downloadis provided to make formatting the document easier. Assignment Preparation You will be expected to discuss the elements of this assignment accurately. There are several areas in which students have had difficultly in the past that you may want to make sure you are familiar with by doing some additional research Be sure you clearly understand the specific car part you are discussing. If this is not a familiar product take the time to look up some information or videos on it before writing about it so, you can speak precisely.Evaluate the information you have been given carefully, using the method we practiced in assignment IDL 3.Be sure you are clear on the difference between the data and your evaluation of it. Be sure you understand the difference between negligence and liability. Be sure you understand what a class-action lawsuit (Links to an external site.) (Links to an external site.) is. Problem DescriptionA series of seemingly related recent automobile failures have resulted in a class-action lawsuit (Links to an external site.), Saraki v. Real Car Parts Corporation being filed. The ‘class’ in this case is claiming that Real Car Parts manufactured a part that does not comply with mandated performance standards in place to assure the safe operation of vehicles. The class was established as this part has been used by many manufactures in many models of vehicles for a decade, and therefore, involves hundreds of thousands of vehicles. They are claiming the failure of this part has led to serious engine failures resulting in needed vehicle repair or replacement, for which Real Car Parts should be financially responsible.The part in question is a shaft with a copper-lead bearing surface that is manufactured for use in fuel pumps. The use of copper lead as a bearing surface was considered a revolution in the performance capability of this part when it was introduced. However, after a decade in operation, the ability of this design to meet performance standards established for the safe operation of vehicles is being questioned. The established standards require these parts may not wear more than 3.5 microns over a useful life of 250,000 miles of vehicle operation with the fuel pump using this shaft. This standard has been established, as wear of the shaft bearing surface exceeding this amount can result in catastrophic fuel pump failure in extreme weather conditions. Due to the significance of this litigation, the Judge involved with the case, The Honorable Fairuza Habibi, has brought you in as an expert witness, independent of either side of the litigation, to provide the jury with the clarity that can be brought to the question by an engineering review. At your request, she is providing you with data from a random sampling of 45 shafts of this design from a recent manufacturing run, which have been put through a test simulating 250,000 miles of wear. The result of this test was and She is requiring that you complete your work with a high level of confidence, therefore you have suggested using a confidence interval of .01. You are to provide the jury with which side of the litigation you would support and why in a written document that makes the determination clear and believable to them. The document you are to provide is to follow the court's template and their Legal memorandum guide. You will also copy the document to Milton Jackson, Clerk of the Courts, Julius Gubenko, Plaintiffs’ Counsel, and Calvin Tjader Defendant’s Counsel.Data from Sample TestingAssignment Completion This assignment will be completed as a (modified version) of a legal memorandum as documented by CUNY School of Law. (You should not reference their document, as the information you need to address is covered here.) Each element of the document has an attached section that describes the purpose of the section, how to think or structure it for this assignment, and what I will be looking for when grading it. You may also reference or download this information as one document in theLegal Memorandum Guide. download The appearance of the document must match that of the attached xemplar for which you may use the attached template. downloadThis document will emulate a professional document and as such will be completed in full sentences and paragraphs. Memorandum Header Question PresentedBrief Answer Facts Discussion Conclusion Appendix Assignment Grading (This information is an overview see the specific sections for more detail )Clarity, conciseness, and accuracy - While clarity and conciseness are a concern for the entire document, the memorandum subject line (RE), the question presented, and the brief answer will be closely evaluated on the accuracy of your statements, and the clarity and conciseness of your document elements. Address your audience - Your document must be worded in a way where your audience will understand, believe, and be persuaded by what you say. Each of the elements must be worded in a way that is complete and coherent to an outside reader who is likely not an engineer or statistician. While the appendix is for reading by an audience that is statistics literate, it must also be complete, showing how you set up and solved the problem along with what you found and what it means to the case. (Finding someone like that to review your document and tell you where they are not following your writing can help you with editing. An outside reader may review your document for problem areas but MAY NOT do your writing for you.)Completeness - All the elements shown in the Legal Memorandum guide must be included in the correct sequence and format. Assignments determined to be significantly incomplete by the instructor will receive a zeroProfessional appearance - As is expected with professional documents, this document will be typewritten in its entirety. Any elements not typewritten, including the appendix will receive a zero. (if you do not know how to insert your formulas, do a search for written or video instructions. Proofread, revise, and edit - Be sure that your work is coherent and grammatically correct before turning it in. Tools to assist you with this, such a Grammarly, are available online, use them. A resource that can complement this is to read your work out loud to yourself. You may also read it to someone who is not familiar with statistics to see if they understand it. If your work has multiple errors you will be penalized. If the work is extremely difficult to follow, you may receive no credit. RubricIDL 4 P&S 2021SIDL 4 P&S 2021SCriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMemorandum Header contentThe first four elements of the memorandum - "To", "CC", "From", and "Date" - are completed correctly2 ptsAll four identified elements of the header are completed correctly1.5 ptsThree of the four identified elements of the header are completed correctly1 ptsTwo of the four identified elements of the header are completed correctly0.5 ptsOne of the four identified elements of the header is completed correctly0 ptsTThe memorandum header elements are not completed correctly or are left blank2 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe memorandum subject line (RE) descriptionThe memorandum subject line includes the case and a brief description of what you are doing for it.2 ptsThe memorandum subject line is complete and well written1.3 ptsOne element of the subject line is unclear0.5 ptsThe memorandum subject line is missing an element0 ptsThe memorandum subject line is missing2 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe "Question Presented" sectionThe "Question Presented" accurately states the full case. The statement is concise, grammatically correct and stated as a question. The statement does not extend to information beyond the question.5 ptsThe "Question Presented" is very well done in that is it correct, complete, clear concise, and stated as a question.4.25 ptsThe "Question presented" is weak in one of the following ways: it is not correct, complete, clear, concise, or stated as a question.3.75 ptsThe "Question Presented" is weak in several of the following ways: it is not correct, complete, clear, concise, or stated as a question.3 ptsThe "Question Presented" is significantly weak in many of the following ways: it is not correct, complete, clear, concise, or stated as a question.0 ptsThe "Question Presented" is missing5 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe "Brief Answer" sectionThe "Brief Answer" is very well done in that is it is a correct statement of the answer, it completely describes what is being answered without describing how the answer was arrived at, it is clear, it is grammatically correct, and it concise5 ptsThe "Brief Answer" is very well done in that is it correct, complete, clear and concise4.25 ptsThe "Brief Answer" is weak in one of the following ways: it is not correct, complete, clear, or concise,3.75 ptsThe "Brief" is weak in several of the following ways: it is not correct, complete, clear, or concise.3 ptsThe "Brief Answer" is significantly weak in many of the following ways: it is not correct, complete, clear, and/or concise,0 ptsThe "Brief Answer" is missing5 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe "Facts" sectionThe "Facts" section completely and clearly presents the data that was provided in the project description. (This is the information you were provided before you engaged in solving the problem.) This information is presented in a way that a reader new to the topic and without and engineering or statistics background can follow and understand what you are presenting. (Present the information in a way that it flows logically for the reader. Include words that describe what the numbers represent when numbers are used.)15 ptsThe "Facts" section is very well done in that is it correct, complete, clear and concise13 ptsThe "Facts" section is weak in one of the following ways: it is not correct, complete, clear, or concise,11 ptsThe "Facts" section is weak in several of the following ways: it is not correct, complete, clear, and/or concise,9 ptsThe "Brief Answer" is significantly weak in many of the following ways: it is not correct, complete, clear, and/or concise,0 ptsThe "Facts" section is missing15 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe "Discussion" sectionThe "Discussion" section provides a description of how the student used the data provided to address the problem, why the approach used allows you to know what you need to in order to provide substaintial input into how the case should be determined, what you found doing the calculations, and what the outcome is. This must be accomplished in language that the audience for this memorandum can understand. Statistical terms must be limited, and with a definition or description of their purpose in plain language. This section must include an a plain language description of what this type of calculation accomplishes.15 ptsThe "Discussion" section is very well done in that is it correct, complete, and clear (written to be understandable for an audience who are not engineers or statisticians).13 ptsThe "Discussion" section is weak in one of the following ways: it not correct, complete, clear, or in plain language (written to be understandable for an audience who are not engineers or statisticians).11 ptsThe "Discussion" section is weak in several of the following ways: it not correct, complete, clear, and/or in plain language (written to be understandable for an audience who are not engineers or statisticians).9 ptsThe "Discussion" section is weak in many of the following ways: it not correct, complete, clear, and/or in plain language (written to be understandable for an audience who are not engineers or statisticians).0 ptsThe "Discussion" section is missing15 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe "Conclusion" sectionThe "Conclusion" section is included. This section synthesizes the entire memorandum and is clear, complete, concise, and uses language the audience will understand.8 ptsThe "Conclusion" section is very well done in that is it correct, complete, concise, and clear (written to be understandable for an audience not comprised of engineers or statisticians).6.8 ptsThe "Conclusion" section is weak in one of the following ways: it not correct, complete, concise, or clear, (written to be understandable for an audience not comprised of engineers or statisticians).6 ptsThe "Conclusion" section is weak in several of the following ways: it not correct, complete, concise, or clear, (written to be understandable for an audience not comprised of engineers or statisticians).5.2 ptsThe "Conclusion" section is weak in many of the following ways: it not correct, complete, clear, concise and/or in plain language (written to be understandable for an audience not comprised of engineers or statisticians).0 ptsThe "Conclusion" section is missing8 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAppendix is includedAn appendix is included that presents your calculations (typewritten). This presentation demonstrates you understand the method completely by approaching the problem correctly and obtaining the correct answer. The calculations are presented with all details included.8 ptsThe Appendix is included, correctly, and complete (with full calculations shown)6.5 ptsThe Appendix is included, but is weak in one minor way or it is incomplete5 ptsThe Appendix is included, but is weak in several ways and/or incomplete0 ptsThe Appendix is missing8 ptsTotal Points: 60

APA FORMAT ACTIVE VOICE TIMES ROMAN 12 FREE OF GRAMMATICAL SPELLING SENTENCE STRUCTURE ERRORS FIRM GRASP OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE ZERO USE OF CONVERSATIONAL ENGLISH IN TEXT CITATIONS REFERENCE PAGE Grading Rubric A=4=Mastery For credit for these assignments, you must submit an Excel Workbook showing your calculations (must also include cell references) in addition to a Word Document in which you answer the questions and enter the values from your Excel Workbook. A 4 Mastery All problems are solved correctly. Complete and detailed steps are provided to explain how to solve the problem. Explanations demonstrate a mastery of understanding of the statistical concepts and terminology. All variables, equations, and expressions are properly formatted. CompetencyFormulate and evaluate hypothesis tests for population parameters based on sample statistics using both Critical Regions and P-Values, and be able to state results in a non-technical way that can be understood by consumers of the data instead of statisticians.Student ProfileYou are a statistician working for a drug company. A few new scientists have been hired by your company. They are experts in pharmacology, but are not experts in doing statistical studies, so you will explain to them how statistical studies are done when testing two samples for the effectiveness of a new drug. The two samples can be dependent or independent, and you will explain the difference.Concept being StudiedYour focus is on hypothesis tests and confidence intervals for two populations using two samples, some of which are independent and some of which are dependent. These concepts are an extension of hypothesis testing and confidence intervals which use statistics from one sample to make conclusions about population parameters.What to SubmitYour research and analysis should be presented on the Word document provided. All calculations should be provided on a separate Excel workbook that should be submitted to your boss as well.

Traveling Salesman ProblemFor this Critical Thinking assignment, you will solve a real-world optimization problem using graph theory.Part I: Complete the following steps: Select a real-world optimization problem that is an example of the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP). Create a graph modeling the real-world scenario corresponding to the problem. Use weights to represent the variable that you are optimizing. Find an optimal solution for the problem using the concepts studied in this module. Part II: Based on your work in Part I, discuss the following: Discuss your rationale for your choice of the real-world optimization problem. How were you able to identify that it was an example of the TSP? Why is this example relevant? Describe how you created the graph modeling the real-world scenario corresponding to the problem. Determine if the graph is complete. If so, use your graph to describe the formula for computing the number of Hamilton circuits. Explain in detail how you solved the problem. Describe a method for finding a non-optimal solution to the problem. Consider another variable that could be optimized in the problem. How would your answers to Part I be affected by this change? Discuss the advantages of using graph theory to solve this problem. Requirements:You must submit TWO files for this assignment. The first file should contain the computations, graphs, diagrams, etc., associated with the questions in Part I. This file may be formatted as a numbered list of answers. Unless stated in the problem, a narrative discussion is not required, but you must provide enough information to show how you arrived at the answer.The second file should be a 2-3-page narrative paper, written in APA format, associated with the situation described in Part II. Specific requirements for the paper are provided below: