Last visit was: 22 Jul 2024, 08:03 It is currently 22 Jul 2024, 08:03
Toolkit
GMAT Club Daily Prep
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

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.

‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x. Is [2d]

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2011
Posts: 66
Own Kudos [?]: 1280 [113]
Given Kudos: 37
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94510
Own Kudos [?]: 642986 [40]
Given Kudos: 86717
Manager
Joined: 17 Sep 2011
Posts: 158
Own Kudos [?]: 241 [5]
Given Kudos: 34
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
Schools: ISB '15
GMAT 1: 720 Q48 V40
GPA: 3.18
WE:Supply Chain Management (Manufacturing)
General Discussion
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94510
Own Kudos [?]: 642986 [1]
Given Kudos: 86717
Re: ‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x. Is [2d] [#permalink]
1
Bookmarks
Bumping for review and further discussion*. Get a kudos point for an alternative solution!

*New project from GMAT Club!!! Check HERE

All DS Functions and Custom Characters questions: search.php?search_id=tag&tag_id=40
All PS Functions and Custom Characters questions: search.php?search_id=tag&tag_id=61
Intern
Joined: 22 May 2013
Posts: 35
Own Kudos [?]: 34 [2]
Given Kudos: 10
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GPA: 3.9
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: ‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x. Is [2d] [#permalink]
2
Kudos
Smita04 wrote:
‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x. Is [2d] = 0?

(1) [d] = 0
(2) [3d] = 0

I did not jump into the equations, but tried to solve logically. Please let me know if wrong.

We need to find out if [2d] = 0?

Again its a YES or NO, question, getting Either in the statements will help us to the solutions.

(1) [d] = 0

Now according to the question [x] = integer no less than x

Hence, considering two extremes for evaluating this particular case, Lets take
[0.12] = 0 as well as [0.99] = 0 (both are valid for [d] =0)

therefore, [2d], i.e. taking the same values as above
[0.24] = 0, but [1.98] = 1
so we cant say most definitely that [2d] =0

Not Sufficient.

(2) [3d] = 0

again considering etremes here,

lets take
Minimum value => 3d = 0.12 (you can take less then this as well, i am just taking this for easy divisibility purpose, as anything less then 0.12 will also result in 0 we already know that)
and
Maximum value => 3d = 0.99
[3d] = 0 holds for both the values.

now, [2d]
minimum= [0.8] =0
maximum= [0.22] =0

hence, no matter what range we take for 3d, 2d will always be less then that.
Thus, if [3d]= 0, holds true, then [2d] =0 should hold true as well.

Hence, B
Intern
Joined: 22 May 2013
Posts: 35
Own Kudos [?]: 34 [0]
Given Kudos: 10
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GPA: 3.9
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: ‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x. Is [2d] [#permalink]
Bunuel wrote:
Bumping for review and further discussion*. Get a kudos point for an alternative solution!

*New project from GMAT Club!!! Check HERE

All DS Functions and Custom Characters questions: search.php?search_id=tag&tag_id=40
All PS Functions and Custom Characters questions: search.php?search_id=tag&tag_id=61

Hi Bunuel,

Please let me know if the above approach is correct?
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94510
Own Kudos [?]: 642986 [0]
Given Kudos: 86717
Re: ‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x. Is [2d] [#permalink]
kpali wrote:
Smita04 wrote:
‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x. Is [2d] = 0?

(1) [d] = 0
(2) [3d] = 0

I did not jump into the equations, but tried to solve logically. Please let me know if wrong.

We need to find out if [2d] = 0?

Again its a YES or NO, question, getting Either in the statements will help us to the solutions.

(1) [d] = 0

Now according to the question [x] = integer no less than x

Hence, considering two extremes for evaluating this particular case, Lets take
[0.12] = 0 as well as [0.99] = 0 (both are valid for [d] =0)

therefore, [2d], i.e. taking the same values as above
[0.24] = 0, but [1.98] = 1
so we cant say most definitely that [2d] =0

Not Sufficient.

(2) [3d] = 0

again considering etremes here,

lets take
Minimum value => 3d = 0.12 (you can take less then this as well, i am just taking this for easy divisibility purpose, as anything less then 0.12 will also result in 0 we already know that)
and
Maximum value => 3d = 0.99
[3d] = 0 holds for both the values.

now, [2d]
minimum= [0.8] =0
maximum= [0.22] =0

hence, no matter what range we take for 3d, 2d will always be less then that.
Thus, if [3d]= 0, holds true, then [2d] =0 should hold true as well.

Hence, B

No, that's not correct. Function [] rounds UP a number to the nearest integer, thus [0.12] = 1, not 0 and [0.99] = 1, not 1.
Manager
Joined: 05 Jun 2014
Posts: 57
Own Kudos [?]: 81 [0]
Given Kudos: 51
GMAT 1: 630 Q42 V35
Re: ‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x. Is [2d] [#permalink]
Meaning that even -0.99 will round UP to 0 and not -1??
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94510
Own Kudos [?]: 642986 [0]
Given Kudos: 86717
Re: ‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x. Is [2d] [#permalink]
Meaning that even -0.99 will round UP to 0 and not -1??

Yes. The function rounds UP a number to the nearest integer. The nearest integer greater than -0.99 is 0, thus [-0.99] = 0.

Check other Rounding Functions Questions in our Special Questions Directory.

Hope it helps.
Intern
Joined: 27 Apr 2015
Posts: 35
Own Kudos [?]: 47 [1]
Given Kudos: 238
GMAT 1: 370 Q29 V13
Re: ‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x. Is [2d] [#permalink]
Smita04 wrote:
‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x. Is [2d] = 0?

(1) [d] = 0
(2) [3d] = 0

Given [x] LI no less than x i.e [x]>=x
Find Is [2d]=0

Now [2d]=0 possible if 2d satisfies the inequality/range -1<2d<=0 ---equ(a)

Statement 1 [d]=0
=> Since [d]=0 so d lies in -1<d<=0
=> Multiplying the above inequality by 2 we have -2<2d<=0. So this range makes 2 cases
=> Case 1 When -2<2d<=-1 then [2d]=-1
=> Case 2 When -1<2d<=0 then [2d]=0
=> Since no unique sol. So NOT sufficient

Statement 2 [3d]=0
Since [3d]=0 so 3d lies in -1<3d<=0
=> Multiplying the above inequality by 2/3 we have -2/3<2d<=0.
=> So the above range satisfy equ (a)
=> Therefore [2d]=0
=> Since unique sol. So SUFFICIENT

Therefore "B"

Thanks
Intern
Joined: 03 Sep 2018
Posts: 8
Own Kudos [?]: 4 [0]
Given Kudos: 146
Re: ‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x. Is [2d] [#permalink]
Bunuel wrote:
kpali wrote:
Smita04 wrote:
‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x. Is [2d] = 0?

(1) [d] = 0
(2) [3d] = 0

I did not jump into the equations, but tried to solve logically. Please let me know if wrong.

We need to find out if [2d] = 0?

Again its a YES or NO, question, getting Either in the statements will help us to the solutions.

(1) [d] = 0

Now according to the question [x] = integer no less than x

Hence, considering two extremes for evaluating this particular case, Lets take
[0.12] = 0 as well as [0.99] = 0 (both are valid for [d] =0)

therefore, [2d], i.e. taking the same values as above
[0.24] = 0, but [1.98] = 1
so we cant say most definitely that [2d] =0

Not Sufficient.

(2) [3d] = 0

again considering etremes here,

lets take
Minimum value => 3d = 0.12 (you can take less then this as well, i am just taking this for easy divisibility purpose, as anything less then 0.12 will also result in 0 we already know that)
and
Maximum value => 3d = 0.99
[3d] = 0 holds for both the values.

now, [2d]
minimum= [0.8] =0
maximum= [0.22] =0

hence, no matter what range we take for 3d, 2d will always be less then that.
Thus, if [3d]= 0, holds true, then [2d] =0 should hold true as well.

Hence, B

No, that's not correct. Function [] rounds UP a number to the nearest integer, thus [0.12] = 1, not 0 and [0.99] = 1, not 1.

* Sorry but i still think, least number less than x means 0 for 0.12, and not 1

Posted from my mobile device
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94510
Own Kudos [?]: 642986 [0]
Given Kudos: 86717
Re: ‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x. Is [2d] [#permalink]
DrMudassir wrote:

* Sorry but i still think, least number less than x means 0 for 0.12, and not 1

Posted from my mobile device

You are wrong. We are given that ‎[x] denotes to be the least integer no less than x.

What is [0.12] ? What is the least integer no less than x? 0 is less than 0.12. 1 is the least integer no less than 0.12.
Tutor
Joined: 02 Oct 2015
Posts: 263
Own Kudos [?]: 41 [0]
Given Kudos: 8
Re: If [b] represents the least integer greater than or equal to [#permalink]
[b] equates the least integer greater than or equal to b, which in everyday language means that [b] rounds UP to the next integer, if it is not an integer. For example, [2.5] = 3.

So the question is, is -1< $$2b\leq{0}$$

1) -1 < $$b\leq{0}$$

Not sufficient, because 2b could move to be less than -1, with 2 increasing the magnitude of the term.

2) -1 < $$3b\leq{0}$$

If 3b is between -1 and 0, then B itself has to be between -1 and 0. Dividing out the 3 would only move it closer to 0

Sufficient

B
Re: If [b] represents the least integer greater than or equal to [#permalink]
Moderator:
Math Expert
94510 posts