<p>I forget the shifts/stretches that they gave you. That looks right though</p>
<p>I think I remember what #38 was, to whoever asked. It was something along the lines of f(x) and g(x) are defined for all reals. f(x)=g(x)(x-2) +r, find r. Choices were f(-2) to f(2). Sorry if my memory of the problem sucks D=. I had no idea what that question was and I just blindly guessed E.</p>
<p>I’m also looking for the answer to the disproving of the prime thing. I looked at 2 is a prime number and was about to pick it, since my availability heuristic was screaming at me but I looked a few of the other answers too and it appears that there were two other answers along the same line as that. Ultimately, I chose the choice that was something like “Not all prime numbers are odd” or something like that. Anyone positive on their choice for that?</p>
<p>Also looking for a confirmation to #50. I blindly guessed E for no reason. So it’s looking like the regression problem was not 5.2? Suck for me, seeing that the beginning few pages of this thread had people posting 5.2 as their guess. Got me all hyped up and happy that I guessed 5.2 but oh wells. </p>
<p>May we all get an 800 =D</p>
<p>laladidum its actually 1/2 all of that
2 would actually make the function shrink because it makes the exponential function rise at a much faster rate
1/2 would expand the function, which is what the question asked for, because the function would not rise at as fast of a rate</p>
<p>well the problem said stretch vertically so it should be getting taller not wider. if it was 1/2, it would be stretching horizontally i think.</p>
<p>tsuirakuame
im positive the answer was two only because it disproved the equation given to you.</p>
<p>the equation was</p>
<p>any prime number = 2x + 1 where x (or k i cant remember) is an integer
if you plug in 2 as the prime number, x becomes one half, which is not an integer, thereby disproving the statement</p>
<p>To your second question laladidum, that was #38… the one question I had to skip. I had no idea what to do with it.</p>
<p>Tsuirakuame, I think a few people agreed that it was E before, 2 is a prime number. I don’t think “Not all prime numbers are odd” was a choice. </p>
<h1>50 was E. I and III. nice guessing</h1>
<p>And yeah, I was disappointed as well to hear that the regression one was 4.9</p>
<p>it didn’t specifically say stretch vertically. lol
i think i would have noticed it if it said stretch vertically. the phrase just doesnt sound right either</p>
<p>it only said stretch the function according to my memory</p>
<p>i believe laladidum is right…it was asking for a vertical stretch</p>
<p>yeah i remember 38 now. i had no idea what to do with it so i just skipped it.
dude im in calc BC and i dont even know what the hell was going on with some of these questions</p>
<p>well i remember it specifically saying “stretch vertically” cause i thought it sounded weird too, so i reread it and sure enough thats what it said. it was weird wording though! haha</p>
<p>I agree with laladidum. I think it actually said stretch vertically. Multiplying the function by 1/2 would cause it to ‘flatten out’</p>
<p>does anyone have a rough idea of what the curve is gonna be like? i skipped quite a few and now im thinking i should cancel my score T_T</p>
<p>god damnit. talk about carelessness. i apologize laladidum</p>
<p>i dont think all too well on this test lol</p>
<p>Yeah, BlizzardPenguin, I’m in ap calc ab and I was surprised by the regression problem and #38 because I had never seen them before on any practice tests or in math in general</p>
<p>yeah some of the questions they asked on this test were pretty obscure.</p>
<p>better look next time i suppose. from what i understand this test was one of the “harder” ones.</p>
<p>No problem blizzardpenguin 
Just wanted to make sure there wasn’t an error. I skipped the linear regression problem and for #38 I guess f(2), since f(2) = g(2)*(2-2) + r, meaning it would become f(2) = 0 + r. There were no circle/eliipisis or probability questions. Weird</p>
<p>yeah… I actually just opened my Barron’s and Regression was in the table of contents towards the end of the learning material… I thought I had literally studied everything… ■■■ ahah
And Miao, it’s hard to predict the curve. If everyone gets like certain questions wrong, they might make the curve more generous</p>
<p>Yeah laladidum last night I made a note to study conics, vectors, probability and all the obscure stuff/formulas and none of it turn up… ha</p>
<p>but the curve can’t be THAT generous
i mean if someone were to miss 8 or 9, im pretty sure collegeboard wouldn’t let him/her get an 800</p>
<p>i just went through the scoring tables in the official study guide book. those were really generous. it’d be awesome if those tables were repeated :P</p>
<p>I heard you can always get an 800 with a 42.5 and higher. But the curve may be more generous than that since this test seems to be harder. Did anyone here take December? How are they in comparison?</p>