GMAT Diagnostic Test Question 45

Seeing how it is being solved, I can tell that "same ratio" can be dubious.
For example, I "solved" it as 10*0.9^4

Thank you! I agree - rephrasing the question...

GMAT Tiger will answer this one.

Agreed and modified the OA accordingly.

Thanks for the suggestion.

GT

The pdf and the excel sheet mention OA as E - It should be corected

I think this question is difficult from a time consuming stand point. Once a person understands what they need to do, the person just has to crunch the numbers and get close to 3 kgs less so they know A is the correct answer. I'm thinking this is about a 650-700 question. If you really wanted to make it a 750 question (in my opinion) make it a symbolism question.

I know a lot of people that are in the upper 600s that want to break through to the low 700s and into mid-700s have a very difficult time with symbolism.

Thanks!
By symbolism you mean "@"?

@ would work. Anything actually. The more abstract the better. I think @ is used often so it would be a good choice. Of course, you don't have to change the question, it was just a suggestion.

Lets make it a little polished and improved:-



It is not an easy question because it, I mean the original ones as well, doesnot have any direct/quick way to get the answer. The calculation is cumbersome and time consuming. Its difficult to solve it in 2 minuets. This way it is 700+ or 750 level question.

In terms of solution, it may not be a 750 level question.

The question was a bit confusing for me:
The heaviest box weighs x kg and then next heaviest weighs x% less than the heaviest box and the next heaviest box weighs x-x% less than the next heaviest, and so on.

The heaviest box( top box ) weighs x kg and then next heaviest (top-1 box )weighs x% less than the heaviest box (top box) and the next heaviest box ( top-1/top-2? box ) weighs x-x% less than the next heaviest (top-1 ? ), and so on.

I think the question is a little bid confusingly made. It says that the heaviest box weighs x kg and that the value of this box is 10 kg, which means that x is 10. Thus we subtract 10%. But then x equals 9% then 8,19... guess somewhere should be indicated that the x% equals the values of the boxes, not exactly 10 but each box and x is not stable but changes every time we move to the next box. Let me know your thoughts

"weighs \(x-x%\) less than the next heaviest..."
it's not easy to know what this sentence mean...

I think this question should not be on the real GMAT exam since the question itself is too confusing. I bet 90% of the people in this forum did find the expression x-x% confusing. Even someone know the concept and know what to do, it is still impossible to try to do all these calculation under 2 min without a calculator. Maybe there is another solution???

I agree. Should not we do something to clarify the x-x%??
Since the box weighs x kg, people can assume that x=10 all through the calculation?

the question is too confusing esp x - x%

if we say x - x%ofx then it would be better

or weight of (n-1)th box = Wn – (Wn % of Wn)

where Wn is the weight of nth box

not easy to phrase

This is a badly-worded question.



"The heaviest box weighs \(x\) kg and then next heaviest weighs \(x%\) less than the heaviest box"
Except for the "then" typo, so far so good.

"the next heaviest box weighs \(x-x%\) less than the next heaviest"
If I follow the OE, this is not written correctly.
First, it shouldn't say "than the next heaviest"; it should say "than the previous heaviest box".
Second, \(x-x%\) makes no sense. The OE says "The weight of the second heaviest box = x – x% of x = 10 kg – 10% of 10 kg = 9 kg". In other words, the second-heaviest box should weigh \(x - x * x%\). So the third-heaviest box should weigh \((x - x * x%)%\) less than \(x - x * x%\).
Not only is this wrong, but it's way too complicated and the wording forces you to give part of the answer away.

I would simply write:
If the heaviest box weighs \(x\) kg, then the next heaviest weighs \(x%\) less than the heaviest box. If this second-heaviest box weighs \(y\) kg, then the next heaviest weighs \(y%\) less than this second-heaviest box. And so on, for all 5 boxes.

I just worked on this question and x-x% also confused me. I used x as the original value (10) for all the boxes, not the previous weight.