Integer Properties.

Expert replies

kamalakarthi: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 80; Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 10:08 pmFollowed by: 2 members

by kamalakarthi » Wed Aug 02, 2017 3:16 am

GMAT Gurus,

In this DS question, I came to conclusion that Statement 1 is not sufficient. But, it turns out to be wrong. Can you please help on what am I missing in the big picture.

My work: Since ab = 2, either both a and b are + ve or -ve

in case of +ve, It could be 2 and 1 or 4 and 1/2 if it is 2 and 1 then [a] + = 1 as a would be 1 and b would be 0 but this is not true if a was 4 and b was 1/2. Same for -ve as well. So, I thought statement A is not sufficient.

Statement 2, I was able to conclude 2 is not sufficient.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Source: Beat The GMAT — Quantitative Reasoning | Wed Aug 02, 2017 3:16 am

GMAT/MBA Expert

ceilidh.erickson: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 2095; Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:22 pmFollowed by: 247 members; Thanked: 1443 times

by ceilidh.erickson » Wed Aug 02, 2017 10:11 am

Be careful - you are slightly misinterpreting the prompt: [x] denotes the greatest integer less than or equal to x. For any non-integer, we round down to the nearest integer. But whenever x is an integer, then [x] = x.

Use the same testing cases approach you were using before:

(1) ab = 2

Case 1:
a = 2 --> [a] = 2
b = 1 --> = 1
[a] + = 2 + 1 = 3

We get a "no" answer to the question. So can we get a "yes" answer to the question?

Your initial analysis was sound: a product of 2 tells us that we have (positive*positive) or (negative*negative). If both a and b are negative, then [a] and must also be negative, so their sum can never equal 1.

If both positive, then either both a and b equal the square root of 2, or one is greater and the other is smaller than the square root of 2.

Case 2:
a = sqrt(2) = approx. 1.4 --> [a] = 1
b = sqrt(2) --> = 1
[a] + = 2

Again, a "no" answer to the question. Since this is the closest together that we can get the two values, it is the minimum possible value of [a] + . Therefore, there is no possible way that [a] + = 1. We have sufficient information to know that the answer is definitively "no."

Does that help?

Ceilidh Erickson
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education

GMAT/MBA Expert

ceilidh.erickson: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 2095; Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:22 pmFollowed by: 247 members; Thanked: 1443 times

by ceilidh.erickson » Wed Aug 02, 2017 10:12 am

Please also post the source of this question. It's a copyright violation not to do so!

Ceilidh Erickson
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education

GMAT/MBA Expert

ceilidh.erickson: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 2095; Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:22 pmFollowed by: 247 members; Thanked: 1443 times

by ceilidh.erickson » Wed Aug 02, 2017 10:14 am

This formula structure of "greatest integer less than or equal to" or "least integer greater than or equal to" is very common on the GMAT. Here are some other examples to practice with:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/ds-t276593.html#719492
https://www.beatthegmat.com/ds-t281646.html#738122
https://www.beatthegmat.com/if-denotes-t ... tml#787526

Ceilidh Erickson
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education

GMAT/MBA Expert

Brent@GMATPrepNow: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 16206; Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pmFollowed by: 1268 members; Location: Vancouver, BC; Thanked: 5254 times; GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Wed Aug 02, 2017 10:26 am

One more to practice with: https://www.beatthegmat.com/number-prope ... 71768.html

Cheers,
Brent

Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com

kamalakarthi: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 80; Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 10:08 pmFollowed by: 2 members

by kamalakarthi » Wed Aug 02, 2017 10:43 am

Experts, Thanks for the reply. The source of this question is from gmatclub.com quant tests.

GMAT/MBA Expert

Brent@GMATPrepNow: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 16206; Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pmFollowed by: 1268 members; Location: Vancouver, BC; Thanked: 5254 times; GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Wed Aug 02, 2017 11:19 am

kamalakarthi wrote:The source of this question is from gmatclub.com quant tests.

Too late. The police are already on their way

Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com

GMAT/MBA Expert

ceilidh.erickson: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 2095; Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:22 pmFollowed by: 247 members; Thanked: 1443 times

by ceilidh.erickson » Wed Aug 02, 2017 11:34 am

Brent@GMATPrepNow wrote:
kamalakarthi wrote:The source of this question is from gmatclub.com quant tests.
Too late. The police are already on their way

Ceilidh Erickson
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education

Matt@VeritasPrep: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 2629; Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 3:32 pmFollowed by: 119 members; Location: East Bay all the way; Thanked: 625 times; GMAT Score:780

by Matt@VeritasPrep » Sun Aug 06, 2017 9:52 pm

Brent@GMATPrepNow wrote:
kamalakarthi wrote:The source of this question is from gmatclub.com quant tests.
Too late. The police are already on their way

But they didn't read him his copyrights, so he's off the hook

Save $100 on any VP online course!

Matt@VeritasPrep: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 2629; Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 3:32 pmFollowed by: 119 members; Location: East Bay all the way; Thanked: 625 times; GMAT Score:780

by Matt@VeritasPrep » Sun Aug 06, 2017 9:57 pm

kamalakarthi wrote: in case of +ve, It could be 2 and 1 or 4 and 1/2 if it is 2 and 1 then [a] + = 1 as a would be 1 and b would be 0 but this is not true if a was 4 and b was 1/2. Same for -ve as well. So, I thought statement A is not sufficient.

Let's assume that both a and b are positive. (If they're both negative, then obviously their floors can't sum to 1.)

If a > 0, b > 0, and ab = 2, then AT LEAST ONE of a and b must be ≥ √2. (If they're both < √2, then their product is less than √2 * √2.) If one of them is > √2, then the other must be < √2, or else their product will be > 2.

But whichever one is ≥ √2 must be at least [√2], or at least 1! Let's say that one is a. Then we've got 1 + , where b = 2/a. The only way that = 0 is if [2/a] = 0, or if 0 < 2/a < 1. But multiplying that inequality by a, we get 0 < 2 < a, or 2 < a, which can't be, since we can't have both terms be greater than √2.

So we can't get a sum of 1, no matter what.

Save $100 on any VP online course!

Matt@VeritasPrep: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 2629; Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 3:32 pmFollowed by: 119 members; Location: East Bay all the way; Thanked: 625 times; GMAT Score:780

by Matt@VeritasPrep » Sun Aug 06, 2017 10:04 pm

Another way we could get there:

ab = 2

a = 2/b

With that, we have [a] + => [2/b] + .

We also know that a and b must be nonnegative integers. (If one of them is negative, then the other must be negative, since a = 2/b, and if they're both negative, then [a] and are both < 0.)

Now let's suppose that [2/b] + = 1. Since both [2/b] and are nonnegative integers, the only way we can get a sum of 1 is if one of these = 1 and the other = 0.

Let's take the first case, = 1 and [2/b] = 0. If that's the case, then 1 ≤ b < 2 and 0 < 2/b < 1. That second inequality simplifies as 2 < b. With that in mind, we must have b > 2 ... but if b > 2, then ≥ 2, and we saw above that = 1. That's a contradiction, so = 1 and [2/b] = 0 is impossible.

The second case ( = 0 and [2/b] = 1) works much the same way.

Save $100 on any VP online course!

Matt@VeritasPrep: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 2629; Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 3:32 pmFollowed by: 119 members; Location: East Bay all the way; Thanked: 625 times; GMAT Score:780

by Matt@VeritasPrep » Sun Aug 06, 2017 10:09 pm

One last way to get there (and to get a feel for what's happening) is trying numbers.

A simple case if a = √2 and b = √2. That gives us [a] = 1 and = 1 and [a] + = 2. OK, too big, but let's try monkeying around with the numbers. For simplicity's sake, we'll make a > b.

If a ≥ 1.5, then [a] = 2, and [a] + > 1, so we can't have that either. With that in mind, we MUST have 1.5 > a ≥ √2, so a is in a pretty tight band between about 1.415 and 1.5. But if a's in that range, then b is somewhere between √2 and 2/1.5, or somewhere between 1.333... and about 1.415. With that in mind, our ranges are

1.5 > a ≥ √2, or [a] = 1

√2 ≥ b > 1.333..., or = 1

So by trying to keep a in the right range, we can't get any smaller than [a] + = 1 + 1.

Save $100 on any VP online course!

GMAT/MBA Expert

Brent@GMATPrepNow: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 16206; Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pmFollowed by: 1268 members; Location: Vancouver, BC; Thanked: 5254 times; GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Mon Aug 07, 2017 6:19 am

Matt@VeritasPrep wrote:
Brent@GMATPrepNow wrote:
kamalakarthi wrote:The source of this question is from gmatclub.com quant tests.
Too late. The police are already on their way
But they didn't read him his copyrights, so he's off the hook

Perhaps, but you're not off the hook for that pun!!!

Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com

Matt@VeritasPrep: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 2629; Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 3:32 pmFollowed by: 119 members; Location: East Bay all the way; Thanked: 625 times; GMAT Score:780

by Matt@VeritasPrep » Fri Aug 18, 2017 1:20 pm

Brent@GMATPrepNow wrote:
Matt@VeritasPrep wrote:
Brent@GMATPrepNow wrote:
kamalakarthi wrote:The source of this question is from gmatclub.com quant tests.
Too late. The police are already on their way
But they didn't read him his copyrights, so he's off the hook
Perhaps, but you're not off the hook for that pun!!!

Brent, you are no pun at all :p

Save $100 on any VP online course!

GMAT/MBA Expert

Brent@GMATPrepNow: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 16206; Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pmFollowed by: 1268 members; Location: Vancouver, BC; Thanked: 5254 times; GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Sat Aug 19, 2017 5:18 am

Matt@VeritasPrep wrote:
Brent@GMATPrepNow wrote:
Matt@VeritasPrep wrote:
Brent@GMATPrepNow wrote:
kamalakarthi wrote:The source of this question is from gmatclub.com quant tests.
Too late. The police are already on their way
But they didn't read him his copyrights, so he's off the hook
Perhaps, but you're not off the hook for that pun!!!
Brent, you are no pun at all :p

I happun to believe I'm very pun

Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com

Featured schoolRound 2 closes Jan 7, 2027 54 days left

Chicago Booth

Since 1982, 10 Booth faculty members have received the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences, more than any other business school.

#3
U.S. News rank: $175,000
Median base salary: 670
Average GMAT Focus: 635
Students in the class

Apply to Booth Visit chicagobooth.edu See the full profile

Photo: Warren LeMay, CC BY-SA 2.0

GMAT Course Reviews

563 reviews

1168 reviews

431 reviews

359 reviews

147 reviews

5/5

5 Star (563 Reviews)

"Target Test Prep is the closest to the official version of the GMAT exam, about 99% accuracy in terms of the quality and quantity of information. The course has excellently created singular sets of focused lessons and tests for every possible topic that one could come across in the official GMAT exam."

"The TTP course maximizes the efficiency of the time you spend studying. It will take time and effort but I could almost guarantee that if you complete the course exactly as it is laid out you will get an amazing score. They also have a very responsive team willing to help with any questions you might have."

"TTP has two things that I think no other test prep company offers: A teaching approach that reinforces understanding and an attitude that will give you the mental preparedness needed to succeed on the test. TTP gives you a deep understanding of the concept you need to know while teaching you how to think."

Write a Review