answer：To determine all perfect cubes of prime numbers under 100, I'll start by listing the prime numbers less than 100. These are 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53, 59, 61, 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, and 97.Next, I'll calculate the cube of each prime number. For example, the cube of 2 is (2^3 = 8), the cube of 3 is (3^3 = 27), and so on.After computing all the cubes, I'll check which of these results are less than 100. The cubes that meet this condition are 8, 27, 125, 343, 1331, 2197, 4913, and 6859.Finally, I'll compile these results into a list of perfect cubes of prime numbers under 100.

answer：Okay, so I need to write a Python script to calculate the volume of a pyramid. The user has given that the base area is 15 and the height is 10. They also mentioned that the computation should have an intermediary step where the product of the base area and height is calculated before finding the final volume. Hmm, I remember that the formula for the volume of a pyramid is (base area multiplied by height) divided by 3. So, first, I should calculate the product of the base area and height, which is 15 * 10. That gives me 150. Then, I divide that by 3 to get the volume, which should be 50.I should structure the script to reflect these steps clearly. Maybe assign the base area and height to variables first. That way, if the values change later, it's easy to update. Then compute the product, store it in another variable, and finally calculate the volume by dividing that product by 3.I also need to make sure to print out the result so the user can see it. Maybe include a print statement that says something like "The volume of the pyramid is..." followed by the calculated value.Wait, should I consider any user input here? The problem states that the base area and height are predetermined constants, so I don't need to prompt the user for input. That simplifies things.Let me outline the steps in code:1. Assign base_area = 152. Assign height = 103. Calculate product = base_area * height4. Calculate volume = product / 35. Print the volume with a descriptive message.I think that's all. I should write the code accordingly, making sure each step is clear and follows good programming practices, like using meaningful variable names and comments if necessary.Oh, and since the numbers are integers, the result will be a float (50.0), but the user might prefer it as an integer. However, the formula inherently results in a division, so it's fine to leave it as is.I don't think I need any error handling here because the inputs are fixed. So the script should run smoothly without any issues.Let me put it all together now.

answer：Okay, so I need to figure out how to convert a prefix notation expression into a postfix notation. The example given is "*+ABC", and I need to turn that into postfix. Hmm, let me start by recalling what prefix and postfix notations are.Prefix notation, also known as Polish notation, is where the operator comes before the operands. So in "*+ABC", the operators are * and +, and the operands are A, B, and C. Postfix notation, or Reverse Polish notation, is the opposite: the operator comes after the operands. So I need to rearrange the expression so that the operators come after their respective operands.Let me break down the prefix expression step by step. The expression is "*+ABC". I think this can be parsed as * (+ A B) C. Wait, is that right? Let me make sure. In prefix notation, each operator applies to the next two operands. So the first operator is *, and then the next part is +ABC. But +ABC would be parsed as + A B, and then the result of that is an operand for the * operator along with C. So the structure is * ( + A B ) C.To convert this into postfix, I need to make sure that each operator comes after its operands. So for the + operator, which operates on A and B, the postfix would be A B +. Then, the * operator operates on the result of + and C, so it would be (A B +) C *. Putting it together, the postfix expression should be A B + C *.Wait, let me verify that. If I have A B +, that's adding A and B, then multiplying the result by C. So the postfix expression is A B + C *. That makes sense.But just to be thorough, let me consider another approach. Maybe using a stack to convert prefix to postfix. I remember that one method to convert prefix to postfix is to reverse the prefix expression and then treat it as postfix, but I might be mixing things up. Alternatively, I can parse the prefix expression from right to left, using a stack to hold operators and operands.Let me try that. Starting from the right, the expression is "*+ABC". Reversing it gives "CBA+*". Now, treating this as a postfix expression, I can evaluate it or convert it accordingly. Wait, no, that might not be the right approach because reversing prefix doesn't directly give postfix.Alternatively, I can use a recursive approach. The prefix expression is a tree where the root is the operator, and the left and right children are the operands. So for "*+ABC", the root is *, with left child + and right child C. The + node has left child A and right child B. To convert this tree to postfix, I need to traverse the tree in post-order, which means visiting the left subtree, then the right subtree, then the root.So starting from the root *, I go to the left child +. Then from +, I go to its left child A, which is a leaf, so I output A. Then back to +, go to its right child B, output B, then output +. Now, back to the root *, go to its right child C, output C, then output *. So the postfix expression is A B + C *.Yes, that seems consistent with my earlier conclusion. So the postfix expression is A B + C *.I think I've got it. The key steps are understanding the structure of the prefix expression as a tree, then performing a post-order traversal to get the postfix notation. Alternatively, breaking it down step by step by identifying the operators and their operands and rearranging them accordingly.Another way to look at it is to recognize that in prefix notation, each operator applies to the immediately following operands, but in postfix, the operator comes after. So for binary operators, you need to make sure that each operator is placed after its two operands. In the case of "*+ABC", the + operator applies to A and B, so A B +, then the * applies to that result and C, so A B + C *.I think I'm confident now that the postfix expression is A B + C *.

answer：Okay, I need to create a Python script that determines if a given integer is prime or composite. Let me think about how to approach this.First, the script should take an integer input from the user. I'll use the input() function and convert it to an integer. But I should also handle cases where the input might not be a valid integer. Wait, the problem says the user input is an integer, so maybe I don't need to handle that, but it's good to consider.Next, I need to check if the number is prime. Remember, a prime number is greater than 1 and has no divisors other than 1 and itself. So, if the number is less than 2, it's definitely composite.For numbers 2 and above, I'll check divisibility. The most straightforward way is to test divisibility from 2 up to the square root of the number. If any number in that range divides the input evenly, it's composite. Otherwise, it's prime.Wait, why the square root? Oh right, because if a number n has a factor larger than its square root, the corresponding factor would be smaller than the square root, so we would have already found it.So the steps are:1. Get the input number.2. Check if it's less than 2. If yes, output 'composite'.3. For numbers 2 and above, check divisibility from 2 up to sqrt(n).4. If any divisor is found, it's composite. Else, it's prime.I should also consider edge cases. For example, 2 is the smallest prime. What about 1? It's not prime, so the script should correctly identify it as composite.Let me outline the code structure:- Read input as integer.- Handle cases where n < 2.- For n >=2, loop from 2 to sqrt(n) +1 (to include the integer part).- For each i in this range, check if n % i ==0. If yes, composite.- If loop completes without finding a divisor, it's prime.Wait, in Python, the square root can be calculated using math.sqrt(), but since we're dealing with integers, maybe using int(math.sqrt(n)) +1 is better to cover all possible factors.Alternatively, I could loop up to n//2, but that's less efficient. Using sqrt is more efficient, especially for larger numbers.So, I'll import math and calculate the square root.Putting it all together:Import math.n = int(input())if n < 2: print("composite")else: is_prime = True for i in range(2, int(math.sqrt(n)) +1): if n % i ==0: is_prime = False break print("prime" if is_prime else "composite")Wait, but what about even numbers? Maybe I can optimize by first checking if n is even, then only check odd divisors. But for simplicity, maybe it's better to keep it as is, especially since the problem doesn't specify handling very large numbers.Testing this script with some examples:n=2: should print prime. The loop runs from 2 to sqrt(2)+1 which is about 2, so i=2. 2%2==0, so is_prime becomes False. Wait, but 2 is prime. Oh no, that's a problem.Wait, because for n=2, the loop runs from 2 to 2 (since sqrt(2) is ~1.414, int is 1, +1 is 2). So i=2. 2%2 is 0, so is_prime becomes False, and the script would output composite, which is wrong.Ah, I see the issue. The loop starts at 2, but for n=2, the only divisor is 2, which is n itself. So the code incorrectly marks it as composite.How to fix this? Maybe adjust the loop to not include n itself, but that's not the case here. Alternatively, handle n=2 as a special case.So, perhaps before the loop, check if n is 2. If yes, it's prime. Else, proceed.So modifying the code:if n < 2: print("composite")elif n == 2: print("prime")else: if n % 2 ==0: print("composite") else: is_prime = True for i in range(3, int(math.sqrt(n)) +1, 2): if n % i ==0: is_prime = False break print("prime" if is_prime else "composite")Wait, that's a more optimized approach. First, check if n is even (after handling 2), then only check odd divisors.Let me test this logic.n=2: correctly identified as prime.n=3: loop doesn't run (since sqrt(3) is ~1.7, int is 1, so range is 3 to 2, which doesn't run. So is_prime remains True, output prime.n=4: even, so output composite.n=9: sqrt is 3. So i runs from 3 to 3. 9%3==0, so composite.n=15: sqrt is ~3.87, so i runs 3. 15%3==0, composite.n=7: sqrt is ~2.64, so int is 2. range starts at 3, which is higher than 2, so loop doesn't run. is_prime remains True, output prime.That seems correct.So the code now handles n=2 correctly and optimizes by checking even numbers first and then only odd divisors.I think this should work. Let me write the code accordingly.

answer：Alright, let's tackle this problem step by step. So, I have this table with various teams and their statistics across different seasons. The question is asking for the average of the team that has 39 points in the 1991-92 season.First, I need to understand the structure of the table. There's a column for the team name, average, points, played, and then three columns for the seasons 1991-92, 1992-93, and 1993-94. Each row represents a different team with their respective stats.Okay, so I need to find the team that has 39 points in the 1991-92 season. Once I identify that team, I can then find their average from the "Average" column.Looking at the table, I'll go through each row and check the value under the 1991-92 column. Let's see:- River Plate: 55- Boca Juniors: 50- Vélez Sársfield: 48- Independiente: 36- Huracán: 38- San Lorenzo: 34- Banfield: N/A- Deportivo Español: 45- Lanús: N/A- Racing Club: 39- Gimnasia de La Plata: 41- Rosario Central: 34- Ferro Carril Oeste: 37- Belgrano de Córdoba: 35- Platense: 42- Newell's Old Boys: 44- Argentinos Juniors: 35- Textil Mandiyú: 33- Estudiantes de La Plata: 29Ah, here we go. Racing Club has 39 points in the 1991-92 season. Now, I need to find their average. Looking at the "Average" column for Racing Club, it's 1.026.So, the average for Racing Club, which has 39 points in the 1991-92 season, is 1.026.To get this information programmatically, I can write a SQL query that selects the average from the table where the 1991-92 points are 39. Here's how that query would look:```sqlSELECT `Average` FROM table_14368332_1 WHERE `1991-92` = 39;```This query tells the database to look into the table named `table_14368332_1`, find the row where the value in the `1991-92` column is 39, and then return the corresponding value from the `Average` column. Running this query should give me the average of 1.026 for Racing Club.

answer：Okay, so I need to figure out how to decipher and retrieve data from the URL https://www.example.com/. Hmm, I'm not entirely sure what "decipher and retrieve data" means in this context. Maybe it's about extracting information from the URL itself or accessing the website's content. Let me think through this step by step.First, the URL is https://www.example.com/. I know that URLs can contain various parts like the protocol (https), domain name (www.example.com), path, query parameters, and fragments. In this case, the URL is pretty simple, just the domain with no path or parameters. So, maybe the data embedded within the URL is just the domain name itself, but that seems too straightforward.Alternatively, perhaps the task is to access the website and extract data from it. But since I can't actually visit the website, I need to think of another way. Maybe it's about parsing the URL structure. Let me break it down:- Protocol: https- Subdomain: www- Domain: example- Top-level domain: comSo, the URL doesn't have any query parameters or paths, which are usually where data is embedded. For example, if the URL was https://www.example.com/?data=123, then the data would be in the query parameter 'data'. But here, there's nothing after the domain.Wait, maybe the data is in the URL's structure, like the domain name itself. But 'example.com' is a placeholder domain used for examples, so it doesn't have any real data. Perhaps the task is to recognize that there's no embedded data because the URL is too basic.Another angle: sometimes URLs can have encoded data, like base64 or URL encoding. But in this case, the URL is plain, so I don't think there's any encoding involved.Alternatively, maybe the data is about the website's metadata, like the title, description, or keywords. But without accessing the website, I can't retrieve that information.Wait, maybe the task is to explain how one would retrieve data from a URL in general. So, if someone gives a URL, you can parse it to get the domain, path, parameters, etc. For example, using a programming language like Python, you could use libraries such as urllib to parse the URL components.Let me think about how that would work. In Python, you can import urlparse from urllib.parse and then parse the URL. For example:from urllib.parse import urlparseurl = "https://www.example.com/"parsed_url = urlparse(url)Then, you can extract components like parsed_url.scheme (which would be 'https'), parsed_url.netloc (which would be 'www.example.com'), and so on. But in this case, there's no path or query, so those would be empty.Alternatively, if the URL had query parameters, you could extract them using parsed_url.query, which would give you a string like 'key1=value1&key2=value2', and then split that into key-value pairs.But since the given URL is so simple, maybe the answer is that there's no embedded data beyond the domain name. Or perhaps the task is to recognize that without additional components, there's nothing to retrieve.Wait, another thought: sometimes URLs can have fragments, which are the part after the '#'. But in this URL, there's no fragment either.So, putting it all together, the URL provided doesn't contain any embedded data beyond the domain. If there were query parameters or a path, we could extract data from those, but as it stands, the URL is too basic.I think I've covered the possible angles. The key points are:1. Break down the URL into its components.2. Check for query parameters, paths, or fragments where data might be embedded.3. Since there's none, conclude that there's no data to retrieve from this URL beyond the domain.