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

Redeem

Prime Factors

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 11:55 pm
Thanked: 4 times

Prime Factors

by surajgarg » Wed Jul 28, 2010 12:33 am
For any integer k>1, the term "length of an integer" refers to the number of positive prime factors, not necessarily distinct, whose product is equal to k. For example, if k=24, the length of k is equal to 4, since 24=2x2x2x3. If x and y are positive integers such that x>1, y>1, and x+3y<1000, what is the maximum possible sum of the length of x and the length of y?

A. 5
B. 6
C. 15
D. 16
E. 18

OA D
Top
Source: — Problem Solving |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 748
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:54 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:3 members

by outreach » Wed Jul 28, 2010 1:12 am
first tried to find the maximum number possible with 2 as prime=512=2^9
now y has to be less than (1000-512)/3=166

y=160=2^5*5^1

max length possible 9+6=15
-------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
General blog
https://amarnaik.wordpress.com
MBA blog
https://amarrnaik.blocked/
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 6:44 am
Location: London
Thanked: 70 times
Followed by:3 members

by kmittal82 » Wed Jul 28, 2010 1:15 am
Hmm, I got (C) as the answer, but Ill share my method anyways.

x + 3y < 1000

The maximum length will be when all the factors are 2, so essentially we need to find perfect squares of 2.

Now, give the above, the maximum value of y we can have is 256 (any number higher than 256 will violate the inequality)

y = 256 = 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 -> Length = 8

This gives the maximum value of x as 231. The closes perfect square to that with maximum length (i.e. all factors 2) is 128 = 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 -> Length = 7

Total maximum length = 15

Not the same answer as the OA, but I would like to know where I have gone wrong.

Thanks
Top
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 11:55 pm
Thanked: 4 times

by surajgarg » Wed Jul 28, 2010 1:23 am
Hey thanks for the approach. I was unable to understand how to approach this.

The answer is indeed D. 16

x+3y<1000

In such a case x has to be maximum possible power of 2 which turns out to be 512, which implies no. of prime factors is 9
So y will be 128, no. of prime factors is 7

So sum is 16!!!
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 6:44 am
Location: London
Thanked: 70 times
Followed by:3 members

by kmittal82 » Wed Jul 28, 2010 1:30 am
surajgarg wrote:Hey thanks for the approach. I was unable to understand how to approach this.

The answer is indeed D. 16

x+3y<1000

In such a case x has to be maximum possible power of 2 which turns out to be 512, which implies no. of prime factors is 9
So y will be 128, no. of prime factors is 7

So sum is 16!!!
Ah, I got the wrong end of the stick here, shouldv'e maximized x instead of y :)

Thanks for the solution, good question
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 748
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:54 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:3 members

by outreach » Wed Jul 28, 2010 1:34 am
mmm..
maximizing factors of 2 for both x and y then gives the solution
-------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
General blog
https://amarnaik.wordpress.com
MBA blog
https://amarrnaik.blocked/
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 758
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:32 pm
Location: Bangalore,India
Thanked: 67 times
Followed by:2 members

by sumanr84 » Wed Jul 28, 2010 2:04 am
outreach wrote:first tried to find the maximum number possible with 2 as prime=512=2^9
now y has to be less than (1000-512)/3=166

y=160=2^5*5^1

max length possible 9+6=15
Nice approach by outreach..thanks

This signifies how even after knowing the root of the problem mistakes can happen.
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3650
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:27 am
Location: India
Thanked: 267 times
Followed by:80 members
GMAT Score:760

by sanju09 » Wed Jul 28, 2010 4:07 am
good question surajgarg, liked the trap very much
The mind is everything. What you think you become. -Lord Buddha



Sanjeev K Saxena
Quantitative Instructor
The Princeton Review - Manya Abroad
Lucknow-226001

www.manyagroup.com
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 11:48 pm
Thanked: 215 times
Followed by:7 members

by kvcpk » Wed Jul 28, 2010 5:27 am
I rememeber doing this problem earlier and was searching for this link from past 15 mins..

Here you go..

https://www.beatthegmat.com/tough-prime- ... tml#270083
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1460
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:28 am
Thanked: 135 times
Followed by:7 members

by selango » Wed Jul 28, 2010 5:34 am
This is one of the MGMAT CAT problem.
--Anand--
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 131
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 10:19 am
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 10 times

by aleph777 » Wed Jul 28, 2010 7:41 am
I just want to confirm the strategy here.

When it came to solving for x, I immediately went looking for the max exponent of 2.

x = 512 = 2^9

I messed up with solving for y, though, because I just looked for the prime factors of 162 rather than an exponential series of 2s.

PRIME FACTORS of 162: 2 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 3
EXPONENTS OF 2: 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2

So my problem was not continuing to search for an exponential value as I did when solving for x.

When it comes to this sort of question (max. length of integers), it seems that you should ALWAYS work with the smallest possible integer, correct?

Thanks!
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1