May 24 10:00 PM PDT  11:00 PM PDT Join a FREE 1day workshop and learn how to ace the GMAT while keeping your fulltime job. Limited for the first 99 registrants. May 25 07:00 AM PDT  09:00 AM PDT Attend this webinar and master GMAT SC in 10 days by learning how meaning and logic can help you tackle 700+ level SC questions with ease. May 27 01:00 AM PDT  11:59 PM PDT All GMAT Club Tests are free and open on May 27th for Memorial Day! May 27 10:00 PM PDT  11:00 PM PDT Special savings are here for Magoosh GMAT Prep! Even better  save 20% on the plan of your choice, now through midnight on Tuesday, 5/27 May 30 10:00 PM PDT  11:00 PM PDT Application deadlines are just around the corner, so now’s the time to start studying for the GMAT! Start today and save 25% on your GMAT prep. Valid until May 30th.
Author 
Message 
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 55266

Question Stats:
37% (01:45) correct 63% (01:44) wrong based on 249 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
If \([x]\) denotes the largest integer smaller than \(x\), is \([x] \gt [x]\)? (1) \(x = [x] + 1\) (2) \(x + 1 \gt 0\)
Official Answer and Stats are available only to registered users. Register/ Login.
_________________



Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 55266

Re M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
16 Sep 2014, 01:07
Official Solution: Statement (1) by itself is insufficient. S1 only tells that \(x\) is an integer. Statement (2) by itself is insufficient. Statements (1) and (2) combined are insufficient. Adding S2 to S1 will give that \(x\) is an integer bigger than 1. However, if \(x\) is 0, the answer is "no" (\([0] = [0]\)); if \(x\) is positive, the answer is "yes". Answer: E
_________________



Intern
Joined: 11 Nov 2014
Posts: 3
GPA: 3.3
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
14 Mar 2015, 05:08
Bunuel wrote: Official Solution:
Statement (1) by itself is insufficient. S1 only tells that \(x\) is an integer. Statement (2) by itself is insufficient. Statements (1) and (2) combined are insufficient. Adding S2 to S1 will give that \(x\) is an integer bigger than 1. However, if \(x\) is 0, the answer is "no" (\([0] = [0]\)); if \(x\) is positive, the answer is "yes".
Answer: E Hi Bunuel, I think 1st statement is wrong, How can x= [x]+1 ? because x = [x] + {x}, Where {x} is fractional part, which is always less than 1. so x = [x] +1 can't be true in any circumstances.



Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 55266

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
14 Mar 2015, 06:38
prasadk wrote: Bunuel wrote: Official Solution:
Statement (1) by itself is insufficient. S1 only tells that \(x\) is an integer. Statement (2) by itself is insufficient. Statements (1) and (2) combined are insufficient. Adding S2 to S1 will give that \(x\) is an integer bigger than 1. However, if \(x\) is 0, the answer is "no" (\([0] = [0]\)); if \(x\) is positive, the answer is "yes".
Answer: E Hi Bunuel, I think 1st statement is wrong, How can x= [x]+1 ? because x = [x] + {x}, Where {x} is fractional part, which is always less than 1. so x = [x] +1 can't be true in any circumstances. x = [x] + 1 is true for all integers. For example, if x = 3, then [3] = 2 (the largest integer smaller than 3), so 3 = 2 + 1.
_________________



Intern
Joined: 11 Nov 2014
Posts: 3
GPA: 3.3
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
14 Mar 2015, 06:43
Bunuel wrote: prasadk wrote: Bunuel wrote: Official Solution:
Statement (1) by itself is insufficient. S1 only tells that \(x\) is an integer. Statement (2) by itself is insufficient. Statements (1) and (2) combined are insufficient. Adding S2 to S1 will give that \(x\) is an integer bigger than 1. However, if \(x\) is 0, the answer is "no" (\([0] = [0]\)); if \(x\) is positive, the answer is "yes".
Answer: E Hi Bunuel, I think 1st statement is wrong, How can x= [x]+1 ? because x = [x] + {x}, Where {x} is fractional part, which is always less than 1. so x = [x] +1 can't be true in any circumstances. x = [x] + 1 is true for all integers. For example, if x = 3, then [3] = 2 (the largest integer smaller than 3), so 3 = 2 + 1. Oh Sorry, My bad. It's "smaller than" , I took it for greatest integer function. You removed "equal to".



Intern
Joined: 07 Dec 2014
Posts: 9

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
01 Nov 2015, 00:42
Hi Bunuel,
I have only one doubt.. when we combined two statements.. (1) & (2)..
We understood that "x is an integer" and "x>1"
So my Q is when x = 0 then [x] = 1; [x] = 1; Hence [x]<[x] and for all other cases [x]>[x]..
Hence insufficient to draw a conclusion, so option E is correct.
But as per you when x is 0 ([0] = [0]).. it is not as per the context of question which says (largest integer smaller than x)
Am I right? let me know.. thanks



Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 55266

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
01 Nov 2015, 02:27
arunmandapaka wrote: Hi Bunuel,
I have only one doubt.. when we combined two statements.. (1) & (2)..
We understood that "x is an integer" and "x>1"
So my Q is when x = 0 then [x] = 1; [x] = 1; Hence [x]<[x] and for all other cases [x]>[x]..
Hence insufficient to draw a conclusion, so option E is correct.
But as per you when x is 0 ([0] = [0]).. it is not as per the context of question which says (largest integer smaller than x)
Am I right? let me know.. thanks If x = 0, then [0] = 1. Since 0 = 0, then [0] = 1 too.
_________________



Intern
Joined: 08 Apr 2014
Posts: 8

can the question stem be further solved into asking if "x >2?"
if [x] > [x], (x1) > (x1), x > 2?



Intern
Joined: 04 May 2014
Posts: 3

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
20 Aug 2017, 19:19
Hi Bunuel,
With all due respect, I want to point out that there is something wrong with the question and the explanation you have provided to one of the fellow students.
The GIF value of an integer I is the integer I itself and not I1, something that you have stated and the explanation implies. It can be understood by the definition and graph plot of the GIF function. [x] : the greatest integer less than or equal to x. Equal when I is an integer of course. [6.4]=6 [6]=6 [6.4]=7



Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 55266

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
21 Aug 2017, 03:34
siddharthasthana2212 wrote: Hi Bunuel,
With all due respect, I want to point out that there is something wrong with the question and the explanation you have provided to one of the fellow students.
The GIF value of an integer I is the integer I itself and not I1, something that you have stated and the explanation implies. It can be understood by the definition and graph plot of the GIF function. [x] : the greatest integer less than or equal to x. Equal when I is an integer of course. [6.4]=6 [6]=6 [6.4]=7 Not sure I understand what you mean but the function is defined as "the largest integer smaller than..." not "smaller than or equal to...". There are many other functions, this one is as it is. So, for example, [6.4]=6 and [6.4]=7 but [6]=5, not 6 because the largest integer smaller than 6 is 5.
_________________



Intern
Joined: 04 May 2014
Posts: 3

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
21 Aug 2017, 04:58
Hi Bunuel,
This is exactly what I want to point out. The GIF is indeed "the greatest integer less than or EQUAL to x." [6]=6 and not 5. I am unable to copy the link for some reason, but you can check the definition and graph of the function anywhere.



Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 55266

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
21 Aug 2017, 05:04
siddharthasthana2212 wrote: Hi Bunuel,
This is exactly what I want to point out. The GIF is indeed "the greatest integer less than or EQUAL to x." [6]=6 and not 5. I am unable to copy the link for some reason, but you can check the definition and graph of the function anywhere. It's not that function. It's a different function using same concept and notation.
_________________



Intern
Joined: 25 Sep 2017
Posts: 2

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
25 Sep 2017, 05:45
X +1 > 0 X CROSS MULTIPLY =  X × 0 > X + 1 = 0 > × + 1



Manager
Joined: 04 Jul 2017
Posts: 59
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, General Management
Schools: HBS '20, Stanford '20, Wharton '20, Sloan '20, CBS '20, Tuck '20, Yale '20, Johnson '20, INSEAD Jan '19, Insead Sept'18, ISB '19
GPA: 1
WE: Analyst (Consulting)

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
30 Sep 2017, 02:17
Bunuel wrote: If \([x]\) denotes the largest integer smaller than \(x\), is \([x] \gt [x]\)?
(1) \(x = [x] + 1\)
(2) \(x + 1 \gt 0\) This question is part of which topic?



Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 55266

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
30 Sep 2017, 05:06
aashishagarwal2 wrote: Bunuel wrote: If \([x]\) denotes the largest integer smaller than \(x\), is \([x] \gt [x]\)?
(1) \(x = [x] + 1\)
(2) \(x + 1 \gt 0\) This question is part of which topic? This is a rounding functions question. Check other Rounding Functions Questions in our Special Questions Directory.
_________________



Manager
Joined: 04 Jul 2017
Posts: 59
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, General Management
Schools: HBS '20, Stanford '20, Wharton '20, Sloan '20, CBS '20, Tuck '20, Yale '20, Johnson '20, INSEAD Jan '19, Insead Sept'18, ISB '19
GPA: 1
WE: Analyst (Consulting)

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
01 Oct 2017, 09:48
Bunuel wrote: aashishagarwal2 wrote: Bunuel wrote: If \([x]\) denotes the largest integer smaller than \(x\), is \([x] \gt [x]\)?
(1) \(x = [x] + 1\)
(2) \(x + 1 \gt 0\) This question is part of which topic? This is a rounding functions question. Check other Rounding Functions Questions in our Special Questions Directory. What these types "[x]" mean? Whenever such variables inside square brackets appear, I become clueless on to handle them or what they mean.



Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 55266

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
01 Oct 2017, 10:09
aashishagarwal2 wrote: What these types "[x]" mean? Whenever such variables inside square brackets appear, I become clueless on to handle them or what they mean.
I think practising the questions from that link should help.
_________________



Manager
Joined: 04 Jul 2017
Posts: 59
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, General Management
Schools: HBS '20, Stanford '20, Wharton '20, Sloan '20, CBS '20, Tuck '20, Yale '20, Johnson '20, INSEAD Jan '19, Insead Sept'18, ISB '19
GPA: 1
WE: Analyst (Consulting)

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
01 Oct 2017, 10:24
Bunuel wrote: aashishagarwal2 wrote: What these types "[x]" mean? Whenever such variables inside square brackets appear, I become clueless on to handle them or what they mean.
I think practising the questions from that link should help. Thanks Bunuel.



SVP
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 2176

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
02 Oct 2017, 00:41
Bunuel wrote: Official Solution:
Statement (1) by itself is insufficient. S1 only tells that \(x\) is an integer. Statement (2) by itself is insufficient. Statements (1) and (2) combined are insufficient. Adding S2 to S1 will give that \(x\) is an integer bigger than 1. However, if \(x\) is 0, the answer is "no" (\([0] = [0]\)); if \(x\) is positive, the answer is "yes".
Answer: E Can you elaborate the highlighted part pls? it is not clear enough. Thanks



Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 55266

Re: M1936
[#permalink]
Show Tags
02 Oct 2017, 00:45
Mo2men wrote: Bunuel wrote: Official Solution:
Statement (1) by itself is insufficient. S1 only tells that \(x\) is an integer. Statement (2) by itself is insufficient. Statements (1) and (2) combined are insufficient. Adding S2 to S1 will give that \(x\) is an integer bigger than 1. However, if \(x\) is 0, the answer is "no" (\([0] = [0]\)); if \(x\) is positive, the answer is "yes".
Answer: E Can you elaborate the highlighted part pls? it is not clear enough. Thanks Check here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/ifdenotest ... 01744.html
_________________







Go to page
1 2
Next
[ 22 posts ]



