BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
GMATLiveTeach Starts Oct 17
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Chris Peckover, 100th-Percentile GMAT Scorer

Oct 17 · Chris Peckover
Sat · 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM ET
Oct 20 · Chris Peckover
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Oct 25 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 1:00 to 4:00 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemand 5 seats left Start anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Set Theory Question!

Expert replies
by bellcurve » Mon Jun 13, 2011 5:52 am
I have a clearifying question about set theory formulas, if you all don't mind.

1. For 3 sets A, B, and C: P(AuBuC) = P(A) + P(B) + P(C) - P(AnB) - P(AnC) - P(BnC) + P(AnBnC)

2. No of persons in atleast one set = P(A) + P(B) + P(C) - P(AnB) - P(AnC) - P(BnC) + 2P(AnBnC)

Why these two formulas are different (+ P(AnBnC)in the first one vs 2P(AnBnC)in the second one)?

Isn't "at least in one set" equal to union of all (AuBuC)?

Thanks,
BC
Join the discussion
Source: — Problem Solving |

by Frankenstein » Mon Jun 13, 2011 6:07 am
Hi,
Can you post the source of this. The second formula is definitely wrong. Both the forumlas should be same.
"at least in one set" is equal to union of all (AuBuC)
Cheers!

Things are not what they appear to be... nor are they otherwise
Join the discussion

by bellcurve » Mon Jun 13, 2011 6:29 am
I saw it some other places as well. But here is one of those.

https://grockit.com/blog/gmat/2011/01/2 ... et-theory/

Thanks,
BC
Join the discussion

by Frankenstein » Mon Jun 13, 2011 6:35 am
Hi,
That could be a silly typo, started at one place and the same has been copied in various sites. I still believe that the formula is wrong.
Cheers!

Things are not what they appear to be... nor are they otherwise
Join the discussion

by Tani » Mon Jun 13, 2011 8:01 am
To get the Total you have to take the number in each set [P(A) + P(B) + P(C)], minus the items counted twice [- P(AnB) - P(AnC) - P(BnC)], minus twice the number of items counted three times [-2 P(ABC)] plus those not in any set.
Tani Wolff
Join the discussion

by bellcurve » Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:35 am
I am still not sure about the equations above. Is one of them wrong? Conceptwise, what is the difference between union of all sets (AuBuc) vs "at least one set"?
Join the discussion

by Ian Stewart » Mon Jun 13, 2011 11:13 pm
I just looked at that blog - the number in the union of the three sets should be identical to the number who are in 'at least one set', so there's some kind of error there.

In any case, I've always found 3-overlapping set formulas both difficult to remember and awkward to apply. I would never even consider using them on a GMAT problem, and I certainly don't think you need to know them, provided you're comfortable working your way through a Venn diagram. The GMAT really is not a test of whether you are a human spreadsheet program - that is, it's not testing whether you can memorize formulas and plug numbers into them. Most GMAT questions include some kind of conceptual 'twist' so that the question is testing your ability to actually *think* through a math problem. Because of those twists, you often won't be able to simply plug numbers into some formula you've memorized to get your answer. That's one reason I much prefer a Venn diagram approach to overlapping set problems - then you aren't relying on seeing questions which ask the precise question these formulas answer.
For online GMAT math tutoring, or to buy my higher-level Quant books and problem sets, contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

ianstewartgmat.com
Join the discussion

by Tani » Tue Jun 14, 2011 7:10 am
It's a question of what you are comfortable with. I find the formulas much more obvious and workable than Venn diagrams. By all means work with the one that makes the most sense (and produces the most right answers) for you.
Tani Wolff
Join the discussion