Last visit was: 24 Apr 2024, 13:35 It is currently 24 Apr 2024, 13:35

Close
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
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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 23 Dec 2011
Posts: 6
Own Kudos [?]: 42 [31]
Given Kudos: 9
GMAT 1: 620 Q47 V28
Send PM
Most Helpful Reply
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 92902
Own Kudos [?]: 618803 [17]
Given Kudos: 81588
Send PM
General Discussion
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 116
Own Kudos [?]: 1488 [0]
Given Kudos: 11
Location: India
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
WE:Operations (Insurance)
Send PM
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 92902
Own Kudos [?]: 618803 [0]
Given Kudos: 81588
Send PM
Re: Is r > s ? (1) -r + s < 0 (2) r < | s | [#permalink]
Expert Reply
devinawilliam83 wrote:
Thanks but I am struggling with statement II

The statement tells us that
a) r<-s or :
s -s r r<-s? r>s?
5 -5 6 No
-5 5 -6 Yes No

b) r<s : r cannot be greater than S

both the substatements say thar r is not greater than s therefor should be sufficient


(2) \(r<|s|\) --> either \(r<s\) OR \(r<-s\). Now, try some number to see that this statement is not sufficient: if \(r=1\) and \(s=2\) then \(r<s\) BUT if \(r=1\) and \(s=-2\) then \(r>s\).

Again: this statement tells that absolute value of \(s\) is more than \(r\), but \(s\) itself may be more, as well as less than \(r\).

Hope it's clear.
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 23 Apr 2016
Posts: 15
Own Kudos [?]: 17 [0]
Given Kudos: 39
Location: Finland
Concentration: General Management, International Business
GPA: 3.65
Send PM
Re: Is r > s ? (1) -r + s < 0 (2) r < | s | [#permalink]
2) r < |s|
doesn't it mean that r lies between s and -s -s < r < s ... so r definitely is smaller than s ?
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 92902
Own Kudos [?]: 618803 [0]
Given Kudos: 81588
Send PM
Re: Is r > s ? (1) -r + s < 0 (2) r < | s | [#permalink]
Expert Reply
thapliya wrote:
2) r < |s|
doesn't it mean that r lies between s and -s -s < r < s ... so r definitely is smaller than s ?


That's not correct.

(2) \(r<|s|\) --> either \(r<s\) or \(r<-s\) (for example \(r=1\) and \(s=2\) OR \(r=1\) and \(s=-2\)). Not sufficient.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Jan 2017
Posts: 259
Own Kudos [?]: 85 [1]
Given Kudos: 932
Send PM
Re: Is r > s ? (1) -r + s < 0 (2) r < | s | [#permalink]
1
Bookmarks
Is r > s ?

(1) -r + s < 0 = I re arranged the statement, so r < s so sufficient
(2) r < | s | = here there were two cases given the modulus, so insufficient: case 1) r < s 2) -r > s

But I combined 1) + 2) where the common answer was r < s. But A is OA.
Could anyone explain the flaw in my reasoning?
Intern
Intern
Joined: 04 Apr 2017
Posts: 14
Own Kudos [?]: 26 [3]
Given Kudos: 99
Send PM
Re: Is r > s ? (1) -r + s < 0 (2) r < | s | [#permalink]
3
Kudos
Madhavi1990 wrote:
Is r > s ?

(1) -r + s < 0 = I re arranged the statement, so r < s so sufficient
(2) r < | s | = here there were two cases given the modulus, so insufficient: case 1) r < s 2) -r > s

But I combined 1) + 2) where the common answer was r < s. But A is OA.
Could anyone explain the flaw in my reasoning?



1) -r + s < 0
-r < -s
Multiple both side by -1, when u do this reverse the inequality
r>s
So, it is sufficient. Once u have statement 1 as sufficient, you can eliminate option B,C,E. Only option A and D are left now.
As statement 2 is not sufficient in itself , we eliminate option D and only possible answer is A.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2016
Posts: 280
Own Kudos [?]: 370 [1]
Given Kudos: 99
Location: Singapore
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
Send PM
Re: Is r > s ? (1) -r + s < 0 (2) r < | s | [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Madhavi1990 wrote:
Is r > s ?

(1) -r + s < 0 = I re arranged the statement, so r < s so sufficient
(2) r < | s | = here there were two cases given the modulus, so insufficient: case 1) r < s 2) -r > s

But I combined 1) + 2) where the common answer was r < s. But A is OA.
Could anyone explain the flaw in my reasoning?


According to statement 1 -> -r + s < 0 => -r < -s
Multiply both by -1 <— we need to flip the sign
R > S
Sufficient.

Statement 2 has 2 scenarios, when s <0 and when s>0 hence its insufficient.

A. Hope this helps.

Posted from my mobile device
Senior PS Moderator
Joined: 26 Feb 2016
Posts: 2873
Own Kudos [?]: 5205 [2]
Given Kudos: 47
Location: India
GPA: 3.12
Send PM
Re: Is r > s ? (1) -r + s < 0 (2) r < | s | [#permalink]
2
Kudos
Madhavi1990 wrote:
Is r > s ?

(1) -r + s < 0 = I re arranged the statement, so r < s so sufficient
(2) r < | s | = here there were two cases given the modulus, so insufficient: case 1) r < s 2) -r > s

But I combined 1) + 2) where the common answer was r < s. But A is OA.
Could anyone explain the flaw in my reasoning?


Statement 1 which reads -r + s < 0
Is nothing but -r < -s(when you subtract s from both sides)
When we multiply -1 on both sides, the greater than becomes lesser than (or) lesser than becomes greater than
Therefore, the inequality becomes r>s which alone is sufficient.

These are the options in a GMAT DS question
(A) Statement (1) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient.
(B) Statement (2) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient.
(C) BOTH statements TOGETHER are sufficient, but NEITHER statement ALONE is sufficient.
(D) EACH statement ALONE is sufficient.
(E) Statements (1) and (2) TOGETHER are NOT sufficient.

C comes into play only when either 1 or 2 is not enough to prove the statement.

Hope that helps!
IIM School Moderator
Joined: 04 Sep 2016
Posts: 1261
Own Kudos [?]: 1238 [0]
Given Kudos: 1207
Location: India
WE:Engineering (Other)
Send PM
Re: Is r > s ? (1) -r + s < 0 (2) r < | s | [#permalink]
Quote:
Is r > s ?

(1) -r + s < 0
(2) r < | s |


VeritasKarishma GMATPrepNow MentorTutoring chetan2u

How about below approach for analyzing St 2:
|s| can only be 0 or +ve.
Since r<|s|, correspondingly r can be -ve (if s=0) or r can be 0 (if s is +ve)

But in both above cases, I got r<s. Hence I can UNIQUELY ans q stem as NO.
Where did I falter?
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Posts: 3512
Own Kudos [?]: 6857 [2]
Given Kudos: 500
Re: Is r > s ? (1) -r + s < 0 (2) r < | s | [#permalink]
2
Kudos
Expert Reply
adkikani wrote:
Quote:
Is r > s ?

(1) -r + s < 0
(2) r < | s |


VeritasKarishma GMATPrepNow MentorTutoring chetan2u

How about below approach for analyzing St 2:
|s| can only be 0 or +ve.
Since r<|s|, correspondingly r can be -ve (if s=0) or r can be 0 (if s is +ve)

But in both above cases, I got r<s. Hence I can UNIQUELY ans q stem as NO.
Where did I falter?

Hello, adkikani. Thank you for tagging me. In Statement (2), what is keeping you from trying a negative value for s? Remember, the absolute value of a number is a measure of its distance from 0, which is why that value is always positive. A real-world example I give with some of my students on the concept is that if I were a skilled dancer--I am not--perhaps I could moonwalk my way to the door, but I would not say I had walked negative 8 feet to get there because I had gone backwards. Distance is a positive unit. All that Statement (2) tells us that the distance that s lies from 0 must be greater than the value of r. You might pick 10,000 for r, but s could be -10,001, and its absolute value, its distance from 0, would be greater than a value of 10,000. The question then becomes, Is 10,000 greater than -10,001? The answer would be yes, and that creates a problem. Perhaps you are conflating the absolute value part of Statement (2) with the inequality of the original question, which includes no absolute value symbol.

I hope that helps. Good luck, going forward.

- Andrew
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 14817
Own Kudos [?]: 64899 [1]
Given Kudos: 426
Location: Pune, India
Send PM
Re: Is r > s ? (1) -r + s < 0 (2) r < | s | [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
adkikani wrote:
Quote:
Is r > s ?

(1) -r + s < 0
(2) r < | s |


VeritasKarishma GMATPrepNow MentorTutoring chetan2u

How about below approach for analyzing St 2:
|s| can only be 0 or +ve.
Since r<|s|, correspondingly r can be -ve (if s=0) or r can be 0 (if s is +ve)

But in both above cases, I got r<s. Hence I can UNIQUELY ans q stem as NO.
Where did I falter?


Given statement 2 alone, s can easily be negative and r can easily be positive.
e.g. 4 < |-5| satisfies statement 2 but you get the answer "yes".
Hence stmnt 2 alone is not enough.
CEO
CEO
Joined: 07 Mar 2019
Posts: 2553
Own Kudos [?]: 1813 [0]
Given Kudos: 763
Location: India
WE:Sales (Energy and Utilities)
Send PM
Re: Is r > s ? (1) -r + s < 0 (2) r < | s | [#permalink]
DesecratoR wrote:
Is r > s ?

(1) -r + s < 0
(2) r < | s |

Well, 1st one is clear but I have some difficulties with second statement. I guessed it's not sufficient but need clarification. Thank you!


St. 1: r > s after rearranging.
SUFFICIENT.

St. 2: r < | s |
Graphical solution as below:
Attachment:
r greather than s.png
r greather than s.png [ 66.37 KiB | Viewed 7506 times ]

We have two cases here as shown in snapshot when r>s and r<s.
INSUFFICIENT.

Answer A.
Director
Director
Joined: 09 Jan 2020
Posts: 966
Own Kudos [?]: 223 [0]
Given Kudos: 434
Location: United States
Send PM
Re: Is r > s ? (1) -r + s < 0 (2) r < | s | [#permalink]
Is r > s ?

(1) -r + s < 0

s < r. Sufficient.

(2) r < | s |

-s < r < s

We don't know if s is negative or positive. Insufficient.

Answer is A.
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 09 Sep 2013
Posts: 32655
Own Kudos [?]: 821 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Is r > s ? (1) -r + s < 0 (2) r < | s | [#permalink]
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.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Is r > s ? (1) -r + s < 0 (2) r < | s | [#permalink]
Moderator:
Math Expert
92902 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne