To understand the given question, the user needs to know the meaning of ARITH(EXTEND), ARITH(COMPAT), AWO, and NOAWO.

ARITH(EXTEND) and ARITH(COMPAT) are compiler options that control the generation of instructions for arithmetic operations. ARITH(EXTEND) generates extended-precision arithmetic instructions, whereas ARITH(COMPAT) generates instructions for compatibility with earlier IBM processors.

AWO and NOAWO are compiler options that control the use of automatic binary optimization. AWO enables automatic optimization, whereas NOAWO disables it.

Now let's evaluate each statement:

(a) ARITH(EXTEND) is slower than ARITH(COMPAT) This statement is generally true. ARITH(EXTEND) generates extended-precision arithmetic instructions, which are more complex and require more processing time than ARITH(COMPAT) instructions. Therefore, the statement is correct.

(b) AWO is slower than NOAWO This statement is generally false. AWO enables automatic optimization, which can improve program performance. NOAWO disables optimization, which can result in slower program execution. Therefore, the statement is incorrect.

Therefore, the correct answer is:

The Answer is: A. (1) only a is correct

To answer this question, the user needs to be familiar with computer programming terminology, specifically related to mainframe computing.

ELPA stands for "Extended Link Pack Area".

A) Extensive Line Processing Area is incorrect because it is not a commonly used term in computer programming and does not relate to the concept of ELPA.

B) Extensive Link Pack Area is incorrect because it is very similar to the correct answer, but is missing the "Extended" modifier.

C) Extended Link Pack Area is the correct answer because it accurately describes the purpose and function of ELPA.

D) Elusive Line Processing Area is incorrect because it does not accurately describe the purpose or function of ELPA and is not a commonly used term in computer programming.

The answer is: C) Extended Link Pack Area.

To solve this question, the user needs to know about the SYNCHRONIZED clause in COBOL and how it affects binary data items.

The SYNCHRONIZED clause in COBOL is used to specify the alignment of data items in memory. When used with binary data items, it ensures that the data is stored in a way that is compatible with the hardware on which the program is running.

Now, let's go through each option and explain why it is right or wrong:

A. (1) The binary data items will be properly aligned only on halfword boundaries. This option is incorrect because the SYNCHRONIZED clause does not restrict the alignment to halfword boundaries only.

B. (2) The binary data items will be properly aligned only on fullword boundaries. This option is incorrect because the SYNCHRONIZED clause does not restrict the alignment to fullword boundaries only.

C. (3) The binary data items will be properly aligned only on doubleword boundaries. This option is incorrect because the SYNCHRONIZED clause does not restrict the alignment to doubleword boundaries only.

D. (4) The binary data items will be properly aligned on halfword, fullword, or doubleword boundaries. This option is correct. When the SYNCHRONIZED clause is used with binary data items, it can specify that the data should be aligned on halfword, fullword, or doubleword boundaries, depending on the value specified.

Therefore, the answer is: D.

To answer this question, the user needs to have some basic understanding of Packed-Decimal and its performance considerations.

Packed-Decimal is a data format used in computer systems to store decimal numbers efficiently. It stores two digits in a single byte, allowing for more efficient storage of decimal values. In terms of performance, the number of digits used in Packed-Decimal can affect the speed of operations involving these values.

Now, let's go through each option and determine which statement is true:

A. (1) Using an odd number of digits is 10% to 30% slower than using an even number of digits - This statement is false. According to performance benchmarks, using an odd number of digits in Packed-Decimal is actually faster than using an even number of digits.

B. (2) Using an even number of digits is 10% to 30% faster than using an odd number of digits - This statement is false. As mentioned, using an odd number of digits is actually faster than using an even number of digits.

C. (3) Using an odd number of digits is 5% to 20% slower than using an even number of digits - This statement is also false. Using an odd number of digits is faster, not slower, than using an even number of digits.

D. (4) Using an odd number of digits is 5% to 20% faster than using an even number of digits - This statement is true. According to performance benchmarks, using an odd number of digits in Packed-Decimal is 5% to 20% faster than using an even number of digits.

Therefore, the correct answer to this question is:

The Answer is: D. (4) Using an odd number of digits is 5% to 20% faster than using an even number of digits.