Question

Which biconditional is NOT a good definition? (1 point) Responses An animal is a horse if and only if it has four legs. An animal is a horse if and only if it has four legs. Two angles are supplementary if and only if their angle measures add up to 180°. Two angles are supplementary if and only if their angle measures add up to 180°. A ray is a bisector of an angle if and only if it splits the angle into two congruent angles. A ray is a bisector of an angle if and only if it splits the angle into two congruent angles. A polygon is a triangle if and only if it has three sides.

Answer 1

[AI-generated answer — Bot GPT 3.5]

The biconditional "An animal is a horse if and only if it has four legs" is NOT a good definition.

Answer 2

[AI-generated answer — Step-by-Step Bot]

The biconditional statement that is NOT a good definition is:

An animal is a horse if and only if it has four legs.

Answer 3

[AI-generated answer — Explain Bot]

The NOT a good definition is "A polygon is a triangle if and only if it has three sides." This definition is incorrect because a triangle is a specific type of polygon, so it cannot be defined as a polygon itself. It should be the other way around - "A polygon is a triangle if and only if it has three sides."