Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2601:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more.
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
E
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
45%
(medium)
Question Stats:
67% (02:03) correct
33%
(02:08)
wrong
based on 233
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
As part of a certain game in which a computer generated a random number several times, 6 more numbers greater than 0 resulted than numbers less than 0. 0 never resulted. How many times was the result greater than zero?
(1) 2 more numbers greater than 1 resulted than numbers less than 1.
(2) The sum of all the numbers that resulted was 3.75.
(1) 2 more numbers greater than 1 resulted than numbers less than 1.
(2) The sum of all the numbers that resulted was 3.75.
mdbharadwaj
01 May 2013, 05:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
Option E.
For every Six positive numbers the computer generates, it will generate a negative number. ( 6 more numbers greater than 0 resulted than numbers less than 0). And 0 is never resulted.
so in a set of 7 numbers the computer generates, there are 6 positive numbers and 1 negative number.
from statement 1:
for every 2 numbers greater than 1, it generates a number less than 1. but this doesn't give info about how many times the game is played, hence we cannot determine how many times the numbers generated are >0.
insufficient.
from stmt 2:
sum of all the number is 3.75. clearly insufficient.
1+2 , again doesnt give any additonal info regarding the number of time the game is played or the values it generated that result in 3.75.
so both combined as well insufficient.
hope it is clear.
For every Six positive numbers the computer generates, it will generate a negative number. ( 6 more numbers greater than 0 resulted than numbers less than 0). And 0 is never resulted.
so in a set of 7 numbers the computer generates, there are 6 positive numbers and 1 negative number.
from statement 1:
for every 2 numbers greater than 1, it generates a number less than 1. but this doesn't give info about how many times the game is played, hence we cannot determine how many times the numbers generated are >0.
insufficient.
from stmt 2:
sum of all the number is 3.75. clearly insufficient.
1+2 , again doesnt give any additonal info regarding the number of time the game is played or the values it generated that result in 3.75.
so both combined as well insufficient.
hope it is clear.
avohden
Joined: 09 Jul 2013
Last visit: 14 Mar 2015
Posts: 403
Given Kudos: 630
Status:1,750 Q's attempted and counting
Affiliations: University of Florida
Location: United States (FL)
Schools: Warrington (A)
GMAT 1: 570 Q42 V28
GMAT 2: 610 Q44 V30
GMAT 3: 600 Q45 V29
GMAT 4: 590 Q35 V35
GPA: 3.45
WE:Accounting (Accounting)
25 Oct 2013, 14:15
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Explanation from GMAT Hacks
Answer: E The question splits the random numbers into two groups. There are p positive numbers and n negative numbers, and p = n + 6.
Statement (1) is sufficient. This also splits the numbers into two groups, but not the same groups. We can use the information to deduce how many more numbers are greater than zero than greater than one, but because we've only been given differences up to this point, we can't find the actual total. For instance, if there are 10 positive numbers, there are 4 negatives. With a total of 14, that would be 8 greater than 1 and 6 less than 1.
That scenario works, but the differences will remain the same if you add 10 to each number: 20 positives, 14 negatives, 18 greater than 1, and 16 less than 1.
Statement (2) is also insufficient. We know nothing specific about the numbers beyond their range. The answer would be much different if the numbers were closely bunched around 0 and 1 (say, 0.01 or 1.03) than if they were spread further out (say, 3 and -5).
Taken together, we still don't have enough information. Given a set of numbers that consists of a mix of positives and negatives, you can simplify the matter by assuming that many of them could cancel out. For instance, if there are 10 positives and 4 negatives, you could say that 4 of the positives are each 2 and 4 of the negatives are each -2. (That's a sum of 0.) Then you only have to consider the sum of the 6 remaining numbers, not the group of 14 as a whole. It's too time-consuming to work out a pair of contradictory examples, but since we don't know anything about the size of the numbers, we could construct many different sets that fit the requirements that sum to 3.75. Choice (E) is correct.
Answer: E The question splits the random numbers into two groups. There are p positive numbers and n negative numbers, and p = n + 6.
Statement (1) is sufficient. This also splits the numbers into two groups, but not the same groups. We can use the information to deduce how many more numbers are greater than zero than greater than one, but because we've only been given differences up to this point, we can't find the actual total. For instance, if there are 10 positive numbers, there are 4 negatives. With a total of 14, that would be 8 greater than 1 and 6 less than 1.
That scenario works, but the differences will remain the same if you add 10 to each number: 20 positives, 14 negatives, 18 greater than 1, and 16 less than 1.
Statement (2) is also insufficient. We know nothing specific about the numbers beyond their range. The answer would be much different if the numbers were closely bunched around 0 and 1 (say, 0.01 or 1.03) than if they were spread further out (say, 3 and -5).
Taken together, we still don't have enough information. Given a set of numbers that consists of a mix of positives and negatives, you can simplify the matter by assuming that many of them could cancel out. For instance, if there are 10 positives and 4 negatives, you could say that 4 of the positives are each 2 and 4 of the negatives are each -2. (That's a sum of 0.) Then you only have to consider the sum of the 6 remaining numbers, not the group of 14 as a whole. It's too time-consuming to work out a pair of contradictory examples, but since we don't know anything about the size of the numbers, we could construct many different sets that fit the requirements that sum to 3.75. Choice (E) is correct.
