Kaplan DS

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 10:26 am
Thanked: 16 times

Kaplan DS

by student22 » Mon Apr 19, 2010 5:08 pm
Here's a screenshot of the question. The OA is B

I have issue with why statement 1 is false.

Basically the question is asking whether the commutative property is valid for a and b.

Well, statement 1 states that m @ m = 1/2. The only way that two equal numbers equal 1/2 is by addition.

1/4 + 1/4 = 1/2

So by default, a @ b = b @ a or a + b = b + a.

Can anyone explain where I made a mistake?

Image
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 214
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 1:46 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Thanked: 37 times
GMAT Score:700

by sk818020 » Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:00 pm
(1) tells you that its either multiplication or additional.

(1/4)+(1/4) = 1/2

or

(1/sqrt(2)) x (1/sqrt(2)) = 1/2

Hope that helps!

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 10:26 am
Thanked: 16 times

by student22 » Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:14 pm
Wow, would've never considered 1/sqrt(2) * 1/sqrt(2). Good call.

Thanks.

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 214
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 1:46 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Thanked: 37 times
GMAT Score:700

by sk818020 » Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:19 pm
No problem. The only reason I got to sqrt(2) is because I tried to prove that multiplication could not be a possibility by seeing if the following had no solution:

(1/x)(1/x)=1/2

1/x^2=1/2
x^2=2
x=sqrt(2)

Figured I would let you know how I got to that in case it helps you in the future.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 10:26 am
Thanked: 16 times

by student22 » Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:24 pm
Thanks, that does make sense and it will definitely be very helpful for these types of problems!

User avatar
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 2:49 pm
Thanked: 2 times

by iamtensai » Mon Apr 19, 2010 7:37 pm
(1) tells you that its either multiplication or additional.
well following from that logic wouldn't you conclude that statement 1 is sufficient? since a+b=b+a and ab=ba


Instead of trying to figure out which operator @ represents (either + or *), I would just accept @ as an operator of its own.
Consider the case where a@b = 1/2 + a - b
also the case where a@b = 1/2+a-a+b-b
both will lead to m@m=1/2 but lead to different conclusions when we compare a@b and b@a

Statement 1 is about m@m, so it cannot sufficiently imply the result about a@b, instead we only know about a@a and b@b. For that reason (1) is insufficient.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 10:26 am
Thanked: 16 times

by student22 » Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:30 pm
Yep, also true, I guess if they don't tell you specifically that it has to be one of the four operators, you can assume that it's a completely independent one.

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:33 am

by nisha.menon294 » Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:34 pm
If both Multiplication and addition prove that a@b=b@a , then statement 1 will be sufficient

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 578
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 6:00 pm
Thanked: 136 times
Followed by:62 members

by KapTeacherEli » Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:02 pm
student22 has this one.

'operation' in this question doesn't (necessarily) mean one of the four basic operations. The GMAT loves the symbolism problems, and will test your ability to follow complex 'operations' represented by unusual notation. In fact, statement (2) should make it quite clear that @ is NOT simply multiplication or division.

With that in mind, @ could be anything; we could write (1) off as obviously insufficient and be done with it. But when in doubt on a DS question, Kaplan recommends Picking Numbers to test it out. As sk8 demonstrated, we can generate a 'yes' answer if @ is simple addition; it's possible that a@b = b@a. But given (1)'s info, can we generate a 'no' answer?

Well, a@b could equal a - b + 1/4. In this case, we're following rule (1); as long as a and b are equal, we're guaranteed a result of 1/4. But it's also clear that if a =/= b, then a@b =/= b@a. We've produced a 'no' answer. And since we have a 'yes' answer and a 'no' answer, we know statement 1 is not sufficient.
Eli Meyer
Kaplan GMAT Teacher
Cambridge, MA
www.kaptest.com/gmat

ImageImageImage

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:33 pm
Thanked: 3 times

by dxgamez » Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:13 am
Could someone explain why st. 2 is sufficient?

I still can't get it. Thanks.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1275
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 11:13 pm
Location: Arabian Sea
Thanked: 125 times
Followed by:2 members

by ajith » Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:24 am
dxgamez wrote:Could someone explain why st. 2 is sufficient?

I still can't get it. Thanks.
a@b = ab/(a^2+b^2)

b@a will mean you have to replace a's with b's and b's with a's


b@a = b*a/(b^2+a^2) = ab/(a^2+b^2) = a@b hence sufficient
Always borrow money from a pessimist, he doesn't expect to be paid back.

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:33 pm
Thanked: 3 times

by dxgamez » Tue Apr 20, 2010 8:04 am
Thanks ajith. Much clearer now.

But I'm stucked at #1 now. I thought I got it but all wrong.

Any explanation on how Eli got a@b = a - b + 1/4 ? I'm missing something here. Trying to relate with st 1 of m@m = 1/2 but can't find any relation.

Appreciate any help!

User avatar
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 2:49 pm
Thanked: 2 times

by iamtensai » Tue Apr 20, 2010 12:56 pm
dxgamez wrote:Thanks ajith. Much clearer now.

But I'm stucked at #1 now. I thought I got it but all wrong.

Any explanation on how Eli got a@b = a - b + 1/4 ? I'm missing something here. Trying to relate with st 1 of m@m = 1/2 but can't find any relation.

Appreciate any help!
I think Eli meant to use the example a@b = a - b + 1/2, the same one from my post above.

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:33 pm
Thanked: 3 times

by dxgamez » Tue Apr 20, 2010 3:49 pm
@tensai

Could you explain a lil further the cases you mentioned?

Thanks.

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 578
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 6:00 pm
Thanked: 136 times
Followed by:62 members

by KapTeacherEli » Tue Apr 20, 2010 8:13 pm
Yup, made a typo; meant 1/2, not 1/4. Thanks, iamtensai!

And dxgamez, I didn't 'get' my typo'd solution. In fact, with statement one alone, the answer is impossible to 'get'!

Rather, when Picking Numbers (a helpful strategy that Kaplan recommends), I try to get a Yes and a No. As soon as I can produce two solutions--ANY two solutions--that follow the statement rules but give contradictory answers, I know that contradictory answers are possible and therefore that the statement is insufficient.

So per the Kaplan method, we begin by analyzing the question stem. Again, it's helpful to understand GMAT terminology; this question is asking a specific Yes/No question, so Always Yes and Always No are BOTH sufficient, and 'Maybe' is the insufficient answer. There's not much simplification to do here, but we make sure we understand the terminology in the question: operation does not mean '+ - * /', but rather refers to any and all functions.

Next, we evaluate the statements one at a time. Here it makes the most sense to start with (2); it's a concrete definition of @. Sure enough, as ajith said, we have an operation with addition and multiplication which are both reversible. ab = ba, and a^2 + b^2 = b^2 + a^2. The value for this operation will always be the same for two numbers, regardless of what order the terms are listed in. Our answer is Always Yes. We eliminate choices (B), (C), and (E), leaving (A) and (D) as our only options.

Now we move on to statement (1). This tell us that when a and b are equal and are run through operation @, the solution is always 1/2. We have no other information; we suspect this is insufficient, but we will test it by Picking Numbers--or in this case, Picking Operations.

The first operation we pick should be the one in statement (2). Remember, we don't consider the information in (2) true when considering statement (1) alone. But statement (2) is possible, because the statements on the GMAT never contradict. So, we can choose it as one of our examples. If a@b = ab/(a^2+b^2), then M@M = 1/2, so that operation follows rule (1). We're allowed to pick it. When we pick it, we get an answer of Yes (as we already know from evaluating statement (2))

So now, we've picked a value for statement (1) that gives us a Yes--can we get a No? That's where the previous equation comes in. As I showed, a - b + 1/2 will always produce a value of 1/2 when a = b. However, you cannot flip around a and b in that equation; subtraction is not reversible! So for this value of @, we have an answer of No.

Thus, the information in statement (1) allows both Yes and No answers. Statement (1) is insufficient, and the answer is (B).
Eli Meyer
Kaplan GMAT Teacher
Cambridge, MA
www.kaptest.com/gmat

ImageImageImage