That would be my justification, because if our derivative is positive before that value, if our derivative is negative before that value, that means that we are downward sloping before that value, and if it's positive after that value, that means we're upward sloping after that, which is a good justification that we are at a relative minimum point right over there. So let's see, the point where x equals negative three is the lowest point on the graph of g in its surrounding interval. That is true, but that's not a calculus-based justification. You wouldn't even have to look at the derivative to make that statement, so let's rule that one out. G prime has a relative maximum at zero comma three. At zero, zero comma three, it actually does not. Oh, g prime, g prime, yes, g prime actually does have a relative maximum at zero comma three, but that doesn't tell us anything about whether we're at a relative minimum point at x equals negative three, so I would rule that out.