My dog, Otas, is normally well-behaved. When I take Otas on walks, he is always well-behaved. When other people walk him, they claim there are always misbehaviors 'misbehaving'. In general, they don't believe that Otas is a good dog. Data has been collected on each walk including the number of 'incidents', the length of the walk, the number of other dogs encountered, whether we encountered a mailman, the number of squirrels, and the number of fire-hydrants passed, and the general time of day. Using the data provided, prove whether Otas is a good behaving dog. Using R studio to answer the following questions. Data source: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kS3KkLMAMWl82r6mF_HeX9boeU5AjZYA/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=104360782992555327503&rtpof=true&sd=true

1. Prepare the data for modelling. What steps did you have to take and how did you do them? 2 marks
2. I believe that Otas may be better behaved specifically when I walk him vs. when anyone else walks him. Conduct a test to see if this is the case. Briefly explain the test and your results (i.e., state the null, alternative, the p-value of the result and what it means.)3 marks
3. Now conduct a Chow^(chow)test to determine if there is any difference at all when someone else walks Otas. Briefly explain your results, specifically in light of the test above.4 marks
4. Suppose the last 30 observations I'm actually walking Otas with another person (i.e., two of us are walking Otas together). Extend the Chow test logic to test for any difference between the three scenarios (i.e., me alone, someone else alone, me & someone else together). Explain your results.4 marks