An Engineering claims to have invented a hand-held sensor that can detect the presence of explosives inside a closed container. Law enforcement and security agencies are very interested in purchasing several of the devices if they are shown to perform effectively. An independent laboratory arranged a preliminary test. If the device can detect explosives at a rate greater than the chance would predict, a more rigorous test will be performed. They placed four empty boxes in the corners of an otherwise empty room. For each trial, they put a small quantity of an explosive in one of the boxes selected at random. The company's technician then entered the room and used the senser to try to determine which of the four boxes contained the explosive. The experiment consisted of 50 trials, and the technician was successful in finding explosives 16 times. Does this indicate that should undergo further testing, assuming an alpha of 0.05? Note: this is an experiment, so you do not need to put the check for the 10% condition. In fact, doing so would be wrong. Consequently, there are only two (2) conditions you need to check.

BONUS# 1: Imagine that instead of running only 50 trials, the laboratory ran 500 trials and discovered explosives correctly at the same rate as above. In this situation (n= 500) , would the probability of rejecting the null be higher, lower, or the same as it was with the 50 trials? Explain using words.

BONUS # 2: Why do you not need the 10% condition here (i. e. , why do you not need the 10% condition when doing an experiment?