Is the proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south different from the proportion of wildfirescaused by humans in the west? 372 of the 563 randomly selected wildfires looked at in the south werecaused by humans while 372 of the 521 randomly selected wildfires looked at the west were caused byhumans. What can be concluded at the a 0.05 level of significance?a. For this study, we should use Select an answerb. The null and alternative hypotheses would be:Ho: Select an answerv Select an answerv Select an answerv (please enter a decimal)H: Select an answerv Select an answerv Select an answerv (Please enter a decimal)C. The test statistic ?v =(please show your answer to 3 decimal places.)d. The p-value =(Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.)e. The p-value is ? af. Based on this, we should Select an answerv the null hypothesis.g. Thus, the final conclusion is that ...O The results are statistically insignificantconclude that the population proportionfrom the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west.a = 0.05, so there is insufficient evidence towildfires caused by humans in the south is differentO The results are statistically significant at a = 0.05, so there is sufficient evidence to concludethat the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is different from thepopulation proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west.O The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.05, so there is statistically significantevidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the southis equal to the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west.O The results are statistically significant at a = 0.05, so there is sufficient evidence to concludethat the proportion of the 563 wildfires that were caused by humans in the south is differentfrom the proportion of the 521 wildfires that were caused by humans in the west.

Note: Since you have posted a question with multiple subparts, we will solve the first three…

arires Is the proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south different from the proportion or caused by humans in the west? 372 of the 563 randomly selected wildfires looked at in the south were caused by humans while 372 of the 521 randomly selected wildfires looked at the west were caused by humans. What can be concluded at the a 0.05 level of signtflicance? %3D a. For this study, we should use Select an answer b. The null and alternative hypotheses would be: Ho: Select an answer Select an answerv Select an answerv (please enter a decimal) H1: Select an answerv Select an answerv Select an answerv (Please enter a decimal) c. The test statistic ?v = (please show your answer to 3 decimal places.) d. The p-value |(Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.) %3D e. The p-value is ? a f. Based on this, we should Select an answerv the null hypothesis. g. Thus, the final conclusion is that... O The results are statistically insignificant at a 0.05, so there is insufficient evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is different from the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. %3D O The results are statistically significant at a = 0.05, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is different from the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. O The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.05, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is equal to the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. O The results are statistically significant at a = 0.05, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of the 563 wildfires that were caused by humans in the south is different from the proportion of the 521 wildfires that were caused by humans in the west. %3!