Average Rate of Change?
145892
Definition of Rate of change(R):=limit  {[f(x+Δ]-f(x)]/Δ}\n                                  Δ->0\n\nhere x+Δ=1+h and x = 1, therefore, Δ=h;\n\nR = {f(1+h)-f(1)}/h =  {1-(1+h)^6}/h
160498
In the stock market.\n\nVolume rate of change.\nPrice rate of change.\n\nBoth very good indicators of coming change to a stock.
196770
the amount of time it takes
620893
The best way to work this out would be to plot a speed time graph for the information.\n\nOr you could express it as a simultaneous equation.
1129152
The answer is 10\nYou find the average rate of change of the function f(x) over a given interval, by computing the total change in the function f(x) over the interval, and then dividing this value by the size of the interval.\nYour interval size is 2- (-1) = 3. So you want:\n\n(f(2) - f(-1)) / 3  = (22-(-8))/3 = 30/3 =10\n\nf(2) = 2(2^3) - 2^2 +5*2 = 16-4+10 = 22\nf(-1) = 2(-1^3) - (-1^2) -5 = -2-1-5 = -8
124212
Percent Change (PC)\n\nThe percent change (PC) in rates over a particular time period is calculated by taking the difference between the average rate of the first two years and the average rate of the last two years. The difference is then divided by the average rate of the first two years and multiplied by 100 to convert it to a percent.\n\n formula for percent change\nAnnual Percent Change (APC)\n\nThe Annual Percent Change (APC) is calculated by fitting a least squares regression line to the natural logarithm of the rates, using the calendar year as a regressor variable.\n\nn = number of years\n\nr = rates\n\ny = Ln(r)\n\nx = calendar year\n\ny = mx + b\n\nAPC = 100 * (em – 1)\n\nBecause the methods used in the calculation of PC and APC are not directly related, it is possible that the signs of the PC and the APC may disagree.\n\nSee Calculating APC with Weighting for the formulas used in calculating Weighted APCs.\nSignificance Test: APC to 0\n\nTesting the hypothesis that the APC is equal to zero is equivalent to testing the hypothesis that the regression parameter m is equal to zero. The hypothesis is rejected at a significance level p if ProbT(abs(m/SEm), n-2)>= 1-p/2, where ProbT(x,n) is the t distribution function evaluated at x and with n degrees of freedom, and where SEm is the standard error of m from the regression.\nStandard Error for APC\n\nThe standard error, i.e., SEm, is obtained from the fit of the regression. This calculation assumes that the rates increased or decreased at a constant rate over the entire calendar year interval. The validity of this assumption is not assessed. In those few instances where at least one of the rates is equal to zero, the linear regression is not calculated.\n\nSee:\n\nKleinbaum, Kupper, and Muller. Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariable Methods. PWS-Kent, Boston, Mass., 2nd edition, 1988.\nConfidence Intervals for APC\n\nThe endpoints of a p x 100% confidence interval are calculated as:\n\nformula for confidence intervals for EAPC\n\nWhere Tval = Tinv(1-p/2,n-2) is the inverse of the t distribution function evaluated at 1-p/2 and with n-2 degrees of freedom.\n\nNote:  In SEER*Stat, you specify the p-value as opposed to the confidence interval.  The confidence interval = (1-p) x 100.  Therefore, a 95% confidence interval is specified by p=.05.\nSignificance Test: APC to APC\n\nThe differences between trends for two time periods are tested for statistical significance by comparing the difference in regression coefficients divided by the standard error of that difference with a T distribution with degrees of freedom defined as the sum of the years in both time periods minus 4 (Kleinbaum, 1988).
839113
rate of change of demand or supply
410214
Yes, the typical COLA increase is 3.5%. Some organizations link it to inflation, so it could vary (1-4%). It does put into perspective the "typical" raises the most employers give, where the range is usually (0-5%). If you recieve a 3-4% increase in the past few years, chances are that your purchase power is actually declning. The average housing and transportation (and healthcare) costs have increased 5-15% per year, so a 3% raise would mean that you would be farther away from your dream of being able to buy that house, or afford a car. Now I must go and cry myself to sleep...
1033792
The calculation is always flawed as transfer rate is used to determine and guess the amount of time needed. Transfer rate can vary as well so that makes it flawed. The average transfer rate is measured every few seconds. The amount of info left to transfer is divided by the average transfer rate and that gives the number of seconds remaining. That is a simple explaination in practice it will will be alittle more complicated.\n\nXP does a much better job at guessing than the previous version but it will never be 100% accurate.
1075045
The rate does not change frequently, so bookmarking this page is good enough, one would suppose:\nhttp://www.wsjprimerate.us/wall_street_journal_prime_rate_history.htm#current
165316
So what if the rate in the 9th year is 5% and then the rate in the 15th year is 15% and all other 10%?\n\nUh oh......\n\nUse a spreadsheet program and you can investigate differences much more easily.
830722
I think it's a 38.9% increase ... The difference between £125000 and £90000 is £35,000.\nSo you need to find what percentage £35,000 is of £90,000, so that's 35,000 divided by 90,000, then multiply this by 100 to find the percentage.
48053
Generally you get rates by dividing change in position by the change in time.  Since differentiation like this tends to amplify noise, observation errors, etc., often some sort of filtering or averaging is used to smooth out the noise.
191015
Since the first 3 answerers didn't really comment on where they got their answers from, I thought a more detailed answer was called for.\n\nThere's a general formula for these types of growth, which also applies to things like radioactive decay rates and interest rates:\n\nP(t) = P(0)*e^(r*t)\n\nP(t) is the population at time t\nP(0) is the population you're starting out with (the population at time 0)\ne is the "natural base" number\nr is the rate of change\nt is the time\n\nIn this case, r is .005 (.5 percent), t is 3 years (878-875), P(0) is 360, and P(t) is our only unknown.  So plug them in:\n\nP(3) = 360*e^(.005*3) = 365.440703...\nWhich rounds to 365.\n\nThe first answerer's method becomes inaccurate after a while; for example, 50 years should be 462, not 450.  The second answerer is better.  The third is just plain wrong, with no explanation of his methods.
956724
Increase = 11877 - 3752 / 3752\n\n216%\n\nThink of a simpler example.  Say something happened 2 times today and 3 times tomorrow.  That would be 50% more tomorrow or (3-2)/2 = 1/2\n\nSome people will tell you it is 3/2, that is wrong.  The increase is not 150% in this simple case.
437292
The price has increased by 101.34%\n\nI used to rate of change formula:\n\n[(3 - 1.49) / 1.49] * 100
625377
% increase=difference/original value\n\ntherefore % inc. =(21.0-20.7)/20.7\n                 =0.3/20.7\n                 =0.014492\n                 =0.01% to nearest hundredth