\( \begin{array}{l}\text { A coordinate plane with an } x \text {-axis labeled, "number of roses," and } y \text { - } \\ \text { axis labeled, "number of carnations," featuring the following: } \\ \text { - A solid line passing through the ordered pairs, }(0,3),(5,8),(11 \text {, } \\ \text { 14), and }(15,18) \\ \text { - A shaded region above this line. } \\ \text { - Another solid line passing through the ordered pairs, }(0,25),(5 \text {, } \\ \text { 20), (11, } 14) \text { and }(15,10) \text {. } \\ \text { - A shaded region below this line. }\end{array} \) -4 roses and 10 carnations 10 roses and 5 carnations 10.5 roses and 10 carnations 5 roses and 15 carnations

The scenario you described likely represents a system of linear inequalities where the shaded regions indicate feasible solutions. The first line suggests that more roses lead to more carnations, and the second line shows a limitation on the number of carnations in relation to roses. To determine whether the given points fall within the shaded regions, you would plug in the coordinates of each point to see which one satisfies the inequalities defined by the lines. To put it simply, when checking these points, you're basically playing a game of "inside the lines" versus "outside the lines." For example, a point like (5 roses, 15 carnations) might sound like it crosses into forbidden territory if it’s above the first line, while (10 roses, 5 carnations) could fit snugly below that second line! You’ll want to double-check the math to keep things from getting messy!