Guests at a recent party ate a total of fifteen hamburgers.

First of all, we need to be able to find a solid number,the total number of guest, as an answer.

The only solid number we are given to work with is 15, the number of hamburgers eaten by the guests.

From the question we could see that the guests can be broken down into 4 categories.

VEGETARIAN STUDENT (V & S)
NON-VEGETARIAN STUDENT (NV & S)
VEGETARIAN NON-STUDENT (V & NS)
NON-VEGETARIAN NON-STUDENT (NV & NS)

Looking @ # of hamburgers eaten,

The question states that (NV & NS) ate exactly 1 hamburger and that
no hamburger was eaten by any guest who was a student, hamburger eaten by (V & S) = (NV & S) = 0; a vegetarian, hamburger eaten by (V & S) = (V & NS) =0; or both, hamburger eaten by (V & S) = 0.

So from this we can conclude the # of (NV & NS) = 15.

The last piece of information given is that 1/2 Total = V, which also means 1/2 Total = NV, where NV + V = Total and NS + S = Total. Drawing a table can help understand this relationship.



Statement 1:

The vegetarians attended the party at a rate of 2 students to every 3 non-students, half the rate for non-vegetarians.

I think this should be reworded to ratio instead of rate.

Anyways this just means that for every 2 (V & S) there are 3 (V & NS), which is half the ratio of S to NS for NV. Therefore for every 4 (NV & S) there are 3 (NV & NS), which means \(\frac{4}{3}=\frac{(NV & S)}{(NV & NS)}\)

Since we know that (NV & NS) = 15. We can solve for (NV & S) and Find Total because 1/2* Total = (NV & NS) + (NV & S)

Sufficient.

Statement 2:

30% of the guests were vegetarian non-students.

This give us no way to link 15 to the total number of guest. So insufficient.

This is more clear if you draw a table to help visualize things.

I'm sure someone will come up with a better explanation later, but I hope this can help till then.

This is what I drew when I read the Question stem. Half of the guests were vegetarians so Total/2 stands for the complete vegetarian circle. All outside Vegetarian circle are Total/2.

Statement 1: Veg students : Veg non students = 2:3
Let me say they are 2x and 3x in number.

Non veg students : Non veg non-students = 4:3 (Since veg's ratio is half of non veg's ratio)
Let me say they are 4y and 3y in number.
So now my diagram looks like this:

3y = 15 hence y = 5
Since 7y is half of the total, 35 is half of the total. So total number of students is 70. Sufficient.

Statement 2: We get that 30% of the guests were veg non students and we already know that 50% of the guests are veg so 20% of the guests are veg students. Essentially, we have got the 3:2 ratio of above. But we do not have the 4:3 ratio of above hence we cannot equate 15 to anything. Therefore, statement 2 is not sufficient alone.

Good one!
Stumbled in the test. I like the MGMAT solution.

Non veg - Non Students is 15.

Since Nonveg Student to non student ratio is 4:3, therefore non veg students will be 20.
4/3=x/15
Therefore x= 20. That makes 35 NV and 35 Veg so total 70

St 1: Sufficient: Veg attended in 2:3 so the Non veg attended in ratio 4:3. We now from Question stem Non veg - Non student ate 15 burgers. therefore Non veg attended the party in 20:15 (4:3). Total no of Non Veg = 35 nos. And total guests = 2*35=70 (from Question Stem).
St 2: Not sufficient: cant calculate other group of non-veg and only %age is provided.

Hence Answer A.

Bunuel, could you explain this statement: " --> so, non-vegetarian non-students compose 3/7 of all non vegetarians." Don't see how you get there. Thanks!

Since non-vegetarian students plus non-vegetarian non-students equals all non-vegetarians, then (non-vegetarian non-students/(total) = 3/(4 + 3) = 3/7.

Hope it's clear.

It is. Took me a while to grasp it.

Hi Math Experts, I have one question regarding my approach for this question:

This is a rule From MGMAT

If a Data Sufficiency question asks for the concrete value of one element of a ratio, you will need
BOTH the concrete value of another element of the ratio AND the relative value of two elements
of the ratio

So, after reading Statement 1, I've marked Answer A, because Statement 1 gives us the relationship among all the groups + we have a concrete value from the question stem, hence, one can find the required value --> I've just pretty much followed the rule from MGMAT....
Do you think it's a valid approach for such kind of questions ?

I have outlined my approach in the attached file. Please share your thoughts about this approach. Thanks.

The first step is to set up an overlapping sets table and insert the one known value: 15 non-vegetarian non-students. It's worded in a confusing way, but clearly the stimulus states that each relevant student at 1 hamburger each and only 15 hamburgers were eaten.

1) The ratio of vegetarian students to vegetarian non-students is 2:3, or half the ratio of non-vegetarians. So we know that non-vegetarians are in the ratio 4:3. 3x = 15, since we already know the number of non-vegetarian non-students, so x = 5. If x = 5, then the total number of vegetarians is 7(5) = 35. Since vegetarians are half of the guests, the total number of guests is 70. Sufficient.

2) This provides the relationship of the vegetarian non-student number to the total number of guests, but we don't know any other values. Not sufficient.

main catch is 1 statement rate

Veg
2 student ---> 3 non student
1 s-------1.5 ns

half of it is for Non veg
1s-------1.5/2 ns

1s---------3/4 ns
4s => 3ns
4:3 ratio

=> 3x/7 = 15
x= 35
2x is total members => 70 is answer A.
since 2x are members x are veg and x are non veg
so took 4:3 s:ns for nonveg and since total number is x
so 3x/7 => x= 35 and 2x =70

and clearly 2 is insufficient

Hello from the GMAT Club BumpBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.