Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

It appears that you are browsing the GMAT Club forum unregistered!

Signing up is free, quick, and confidential.
Join other 500,000 members and get the full benefits of GMAT Club

Registration gives you:

Tests

Take 11 tests and quizzes from GMAT Club and leading GMAT prep companies such as Manhattan GMAT,
Knewton, and others. All are free for GMAT Club members.

Applicant Stats

View detailed applicant stats such as GPA, GMAT score, work experience, location, application
status, and more

Books/Downloads

Download thousands of study notes,
question collections, GMAT Club’s
Grammar and Math books.
All are free!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. [#permalink]

Show Tags

28 Feb 2007, 14:37

2

This post received KUDOS

9

This post was BOOKMARKED

00:00

A

B

C

D

E

Difficulty:

75% (hard)

Question Stats:

48% (02:31) correct
52% (01:38) wrong based on 402 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. Korva. Mitro, and Guadar, Under the federal revenue-sharing plan, each region receives a share of federal revenues equal to the share of the total population of Ditrama residing in that region as shown by a yearly population survey. Last year the percentage of federal revenues Korva received for its share decreased somewhat even though the population survey on which the revenue-sharing was based showed that Korva's population had increased.

If the statements above are true, which one of the following must also have been shown by the population survey on which last year's revenue-sharing in Dirama was based?

(A) Of the three regions Korva had the smallest number of residents (B) The population of Korva grew by a smaller percentage than it did in previous years (C) The populations of Mitro and Guadar each increased by a percentage that exceeded the percentage by which the population of Korva increased. (D) Of the three regions. Korva's numerical increase in population was the smallest (E) Korva's population grew by a smaller percentage than did the population of at least one of the other two autonomous regions.

I debated between C and E for a long time. Eventually picked E because, it only has to be true that one country exceeded the growth rate Korva's population to decrease Korva's share of total population. It is not NECESSARILY true that both of the other two countries exceeded the population percentage increase of Korva.

Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. Korva. Mitro, and Guadar, Under the federal revenue-sharing plan, each region receives a share of federal revenues equal to the share of the total population of Ditrama residing in that region as shown by a yearly population survey. Last year the percentage of federal revenues Korva received for its share decreased somewhat even though the population survey on which the revenue-sharing was based showed that Korva's population had increased.

If the statements above are true, which one of the following must also have been shown by the population survey on which last year's revenue-sharing in Dirama was based?

(A) Of the three regions Korva had the smallest number of residents (B) The population of Korva grew by a smaller percentage than it did in previous years (C) The populations of Mitro and Guadar each increased by a percentage that exceeded the percentage by which the population of Korva increased. (D) Of the three regions. Korva's numerical increase in population was the smallest (E) Korva's population grew by a smaller percentage than did the population of at least one of the other two autonomous regions.

E. I was happy when I saw C but only after I read E, i realized that C was assuming that population of both other areas increased. Always a good practice to read all choices :)

If the Korva's population increase is less than that of the other two then it also proves the stated case.

terp26 wrote:

Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. Korva. Mitro, and Guadar, Under the federal revenue-sharing plan, each region receives a share of federal revenues equal to the share of the total population of Ditrama residing in that region as shown by a yearly population survey. Last year the percentage of federal revenues Korva received for its share decreased somewhat even though the population survey on which the revenue-sharing was based showed that Korva's population had increased.

If the statements above are true, which one of the following must also have been shown by the population survey on which last year's revenue-sharing in Dirama was based?

(A) Of the three regions Korva had the smallest number of residents (B) The population of Korva grew by a smaller percentage than it did in previous years (C) The populations of Mitro and Guadar each increased by a percentage that exceeded the percentage by which the population of Korva increased. (D) Of the three regions. Korva's numerical increase in population was the smallest (E) Korva's population grew by a smaller percentage than did the population of at least one of the other two autonomous regions.

_________________

Want to improve your CR: http://gmatclub.com/forum/cr-methods-an-approach-to-find-the-best-answers-93146.html Tricky Quant problems: http://gmatclub.com/forum/50-tricky-questions-92834.html Important Grammer Fundamentals: http://gmatclub.com/forum/key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

Re: Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. [#permalink]

Show Tags

21 Dec 2013, 06:14

I do not agree with the OA.

If the population of K is 100, the one of M is 10 and the one of G is 5 , then according to question E, we could have such as increase in population : +50% for K, 51% for M and 0% for G (K's population grew by a smaller percentage then at least one of the two others). Before the increase, the proportion of inhabitant living in K was 86.9%, after the increase it is 89.5%.... And this in contrary with the statement made in the statement!

Therefore in this case answer E does not apply and is wrong.

Re: Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. [#permalink]

Show Tags

26 Dec 2013, 11:55

I think the answer should be C. For D , I can have an example like Say init : K = 1, M = 2, G=2. On increase say K' = 3 ( Increase of 2) and M' = 5 ( increase of 3) and G' = 5. Previous % of K = 1/5. After increase %k = 3/(3+5+5)= 3/13. Now 3/13 > 1/5 thus the statement that it decreased is negated.

For c: We can assume that the % increase for K is 10% and G,M increased by 20% . Then the new ratio is 1.1K / (1.1k + 1.2G + 1.2M) . K/(K+M+G) is always greater than 1.1K/(1.1k + 1.2G+1.2M). These 2 ratios are same when G,M are 1.1 and K/K+M+G is lesser if G,M are less than 1.1.

Re: Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. [#permalink]

Show Tags

26 Dec 2013, 16:31

anjancgc wrote:

I think the answer should be C. For D , I can have an example like Say init : K = 1, M = 2, G=2. On increase say K' = 3 ( Increase of 2) and M' = 5 ( increase of 3) and G' = 5. Previous % of K = 1/5. After increase %k = 3/(3+5+5)= 3/13. Now 3/13 > 1/5 thus the statement that it decreased is negated.

For c: We can assume that the % increase for K is 10% and G,M increased by 20% . Then the new ratio is 1.1K / (1.1k + 1.2G + 1.2M) . K/(K+M+G) is always greater than 1.1K/(1.1k + 1.2G+1.2M). These 2 ratios are same when G,M are 1.1 and K/K+M+G is lesser if G,M are less than 1.1.

Re: Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Apr 2014, 11:48

Hi everyone. I know this is an old post and that the OE is E, but i still have some doubts. Please explain.

What about if our analysis goes this way (Check the attachment please)

Attachment:

Ditrama.png [ 6.59 KiB | Viewed 3581 times ]

It would prove that if just one of the other regions grows by a greater percentage than Korva did, Korva would not always have a decreased share of population. Please your help.

Re: Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. [#permalink]

Show Tags

20 Aug 2014, 10:10

2

This post received KUDOS

betofx wrote:

Hi everyone. I know this is an old post and that the OE is E, but i still have some doubts. Please explain.

What about if our analysis goes this way (Check the attachment please)

Attachment:

Ditrama.png

It would prove that if just one of the other regions grows by a greater percentage than Korva did, Korva would not always have a decreased share of population. Please your help.

Thanks in advanced

Hope this helps, i found it on another forum and found it useful

Argument states that although K's population increased their revenue went down, which means K's population increase was less than the COMBINED increase of M and G

Let's start with 2010 (last/base year) 2010 - Total population 100 K - 40 (40% of total) M - 40 (40% of total) G - 20 (20% of total)

Inference 1 : In order for K's population to increase but also for its percentage to decrease total population of Ditrama had to have increased Inference 2 : For the sake of proving E, there are 3 possible scenarios. K has a smaller increase than none, at least 1, or both other countries

2011 Total population 110 - smaller increase than one other country K - 43 (7.5% increase; 39.09% of total) M - 46 (15% increase; 41.82% of total) G - 21 (5%% increase; 19.09% of total) 2011 Total population 110 - smaller increase than both countries K - 41 (2.5% increase; 37.27% of total) M - 46 (15% increase; 41.82% of total) G - 23 (15% increase; 20.91% of total)

You can see that in both scenarios K's population increased while decreasing their share of the revenue pool (% of total population)

Now let's say that K had a bigger increase than both countries: 2011 Total population 110 K - 46 (15% increase; 41.82% of total) M - 43 (7.5% increase; 39.09% of total) G - 21 (5% increase; 19.09% of total)

In this scenario, K increased their population but also increased their share of the revenue pool (% of total population) which cannot be true according to the argument stated

I know this is a very simplified example but it seems like whatever number you plug in with accordance to the restrictions in the argument, it's impossible for K's population increase (%-wise) to be bigger than BOTH the other countries.

Hope this wasn't too confusing and if anyone finds anything wrong with my reasoning please inform!

Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. [#permalink]

Show Tags

21 Aug 2014, 07:34

1

This post received KUDOS

The key here is which of the following must be true.. C is an answer which cannot must be true option, even one of the federation population % can give you the required answer. and hence E provides best answer.

Re: Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Sep 2015, 02:05

I tried to solve it without using any calculation. Please share your strategy to solve similar problem without any calculation..

Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. Korva. Mitro, and Guadar. Under the federal revenue-sharing plan, each region receives a share of federal revenues equal to the share of the total population of Ditrama residing in that region as shown by a yearly population survey. Last year the percentage of federal revenues Korva received for its share decreased somewhat even though the population survey on which the revenue-sharing was based showed that Korva's population had increased.

Paradox: Argument says that though K's population increased, the money allotted to the region decreased. As per premise: money allotment to a region is proportional to the population of region. This means that the population growth in one or more region was greater than that of K.

If the statements above are true, which one of the following must also have been shown by the population survey on which last year's revenue-sharing in Dirama was based?

(A) Of the three regions Korva had the smallest number of residents >> Not necessary. K can have second highest growth also. (B) The population of Korva grew by a smaller percentage than it did in previous years >> Not necessary; previous year doesn't matter . Also, it doesn't compare the growth with other regions. so avoid it. (C) The populations of Mitro and Guadar each increased by a percentage that exceeded the percentage by which the population of Korva increased. >> Like A, not a correct answer. (D) Of the three regions. Korva's numerical increase in population was the smallest. >> Like A, not a correct answer. (E) Korva's population grew by a smaller percentage than did the population of at least one of the other two autonomous regions.

Re: Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. [#permalink]

Show Tags

03 Mar 2016, 01:00

terp26 wrote:

Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. Korva. Mitro, and Guadar, Under the federal revenue-sharing plan, each region receives a share of federal revenues equal to the share of the total population of Ditrama residing in that region as shown by a yearly population survey. Last year the percentage of federal revenues Korva received for its share decreased somewhat even though the population survey on which the revenue-sharing was based showed that Korva's population had increased.

If the statements above are true, which one of the following must also have been shown by the population survey on which last year's revenue-sharing in Dirama was based?

(A) Of the three regions Korva had the smallest number of residents (B) The population of Korva grew by a smaller percentage than it did in previous years (C) The populations of Mitro and Guadar each increased by a percentage that exceeded the percentage by which the population of Korva increased. (D) Of the three regions. Korva's numerical increase in population was the smallest (E) Korva's population grew by a smaller percentage than did the population of at least one of the other two autonomous regions.

Dear Experts,

Please advise difference between option C & E.

Why option C is incorrect! very tough question
_________________

"When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you’ll be successful.” - Eric Thomas

Ditrama is a federation made up of three autonomous regions. Korva. Mitro, and Guadar, Under the federal revenue-sharing plan, each region receives a share of federal revenues equal to the share of the total population of Ditrama residing in that region as shown by a yearly population survey. Last year the percentage of federal revenues Korva received for its share decreased somewhat even though the population survey on which the revenue-sharing was based showed that Korva's population had increased.

If the statements above are true, which one of the following must also have been shown by the population survey on which last year's revenue-sharing in Dirama was based?

(A) Of the three regions Korva had the smallest number of residents (B) The population of Korva grew by a smaller percentage than it did in previous years (C) The populations of Mitro and Guadar each increased by a percentage that exceeded the percentage by which the population of Korva increased. (D) Of the three regions. Korva's numerical increase in population was the smallest (E) Korva's population grew by a smaller percentage than did the population of at least one of the other two autonomous regions.

Hi, In response to a PM and also to few posts above..

Lets do first thing first-- rephrase the PARA

three regions K ,M and G have certain people of D residing in them. K, M and G recieve funds proportionate to that population. Although K's population has increased, but its share of funds has dropped..

INFERENCE--

Clearly its share is now going to ONE of the other two or may be BOTH depending on their increase, but we are sure that atleast ONE has eaten into the share..

Choices:-

(A) Of the three regions Korva had the smallest number of residents We are talking of change in share, so this is not valid here..

(B) The population of Korva grew by a smaller percentage than it did in previous years the distribution of funds is relative to all three, so does not depend on alone K and may be other have increased by even smaller %

(C) The populations of Mitro and Guadar each increased by a percentage that exceeded the percentage by which the population of Korva increased. We cannot say for sure both would have increased. Its possible that only ONE is eating into the share of other TWO..

(D) Of the three regions. Korva's numerical increase in population was the smallest A small numerical increase may be a large % increase .. 2 person increase in population of 4 is 50%.

(E) Korva's population grew by a smaller percentage than did the population of at least one of the other two autonomous regions. YES, we can say this for SURE as atleast someone would have taken that share..

Having given explanation for correct answer, the Q is FLAWED in one respect:-

Quote:

equal to the share of the total population of Ditrama residing in that region as shown by a yearly population survey

... The population of K increased, it could have just increased because other people, not of Ditrama, settled there. Here the Increase is there in population but not in share as these people do not belong to Ditrama.. May be all three decreased and K decreased by max %.. Had it been mentioned that Population survey measures ONLY people of Ditrama or not mentioned'population of Ditrama residing in that region', it would be better. _________________

Happy New Year everyone! Before I get started on this post, and well, restarted on this blog in general, I wanted to mention something. For the past several months...

It’s quickly approaching two years since I last wrote anything on this blog. A lot has happened since then. When I last posted, I had just gotten back from...

Happy 2017! Here is another update, 7 months later. With this pace I might add only one more post before the end of the GSB! However, I promised that...

The words of John O’Donohue ring in my head every time I reflect on the transformative, euphoric, life-changing, demanding, emotional, and great year that 2016 was! The fourth to...