You are given the following C++ program that performs naïve…

You are given the following C++ program that performs naïve matrix multiplication for increasing matrix sizes: // Naive square matrix multiplication: C = A * B (all n x n)void matmul(const std::vector &A,            const std::vector &B,            std::vector &C) {     int n = A.size();     for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)        for (int j = 0; j < n; ++j)            for (int k = 0; k < n; ++k)                C[i][j] += A[i][k] * B[k][j];}   Assume the main() function measures the runtime for matrix sizes n = 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600.  The computational complexity (i.e. the number of floating-point operations) performed by matmul() is proportional to n3 (written as O(n3)).  Answer the following:   (a) If the time for  n = 200  is measured to be 0.25 seconds, estimate the expected runtime for: n = 400 n = 800 Assume ideal cubic scaling (O(n3)) (b) In reality, the measured execution times for large matrices (e.g., n = 1600 ) are often much worse than the ideal cubic prediction. Explain two reasons related to memory hierarchy or cache behavior that cause this slowdown. (c) Explain why matrix multiplication is embarrassingly parallel at the level of output elements, and briefly describe how OpenMP could parallelize the outer loops. Suppose a student parallelizes the i loop with OpenMP and obtains the following runtimes: threads time (s) 1 8.0 4 2.8 8 1.9 Compute for 8 threads: speedup efficiency Then state one likely bottleneck limiting scalability.

Using the tax table below, if a person had taxable income of…

Using the tax table below, if a person had taxable income of $15,000 how much would they pay in the 10%Bracket[AnswerA], 12%Bracket[AnswerB], 22%Bracket[AnswerC], MarginalTaxRate[AnswerD]? 10% Up to $9,875 12% $9,876–$40,125 22% $40,126–$85,525 24% $85,526–$163,300 32% $163,301–$207,350 35% $207,351–$518,400 37% Over $518,401