NO
Since there is no feasible region defined, there is no answer possible.
Yes. There need not be a feasible region.
Yes. Although possible in real life, it is unlikely in school examples!
The feasible region is one possible anwer to this incomplete question.
From the information provided in the question it is not possible to tell.
It is usually the answer in linear programming. The objective of linear programming is to find the optimum solution (maximum or minimum) of an objective function under a number of linear constraints. The constraints should generate a feasible region: a region in which all the constraints are satisfied. The optimal feasible solution is a solution that lies in this region and also optimises the obective function.
To find the maximum value of 3x + 3y in the feasible region, you will need to determine the constraints on the variables x and y and then use those constraints to define the feasible region. You can then use linear programming techniques to find the maximum value of 3x + 3y within that feasible region. One common way to solve this problem is to use the simplex algorithm, which involves constructing a tableau and iteratively improving a feasible solution until an optimal solution is found. Alternatively, you can use graphical methods to find the maximum value of 3x + 3y by graphing the feasible region and the objective function 3x + 3y and finding the point where the objective function is maximized. It is also possible to use other optimization techniques, such as the gradient descent algorithm, to find the maximum value of 3x + 3y within the feasible region. Without more information about the constraints on x and y and the specific optimization technique you wish to use, it is not possible to provide a more specific solution to this problem.
Feasible means possible viable means possible plus practical.
Neither. We say "compliance is not feasible", meaning it may be technically possible but is not practical.
Since there is no feasible region defined, there is no answer possible.
No. The "inline" specifier is a hint to the compiler that the function so marked should be replaced, at each invocation, with its body. The compiler does not have to do so, and will refuse in certain cases. If it does honor the specifier, then you save the overhead of function call setup, entry, return, and cleanup, at the possible cost of larger object code size.However, an inlined function body is subject to possible optimization, in the larger context of where it was placed, so inlining functions "can" optimize them, but that is not primarily what inlining means. Non-inlined functions are only optimized within the context of the function body.
optimal solution is the possible solution that we able to do something and feasible solution is the solution in which we can achieve best way of the solution
The objective of Bowling is to knock down and many pins as possible.
In business, we could say feasible, possible -- e.g. That's not a viable/feasible/possible solution. A modern but very informal alternative is doable -- meaning something which we can do.
Yes. There need not be a feasible region.
Yes. Although possible in real life, it is unlikely in school examples!
Antonyms of "Paradox" include "Plausible", "Possible", "Feasible", and "Thesis".