What is the ratio of men to women enrolled in a certain class?

Question

(1) The number of women enrolled in the class is 3 less than half the number of men enrolled.

(2) The number of women enrolled in the class is 2/5 of the number of men enrolled.

fskilnik · Answer

? = {m \over w}\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\left( {m,w\,\, \ge 1\,\,{m{ints}}} ight)

\left( 1 ight)\,\,w = {m \over 2} - 3\,\,\,\,\left\{ \matrix{
 \,{m{Take}}\,\,\left( {m,w} ight) = \left( {8,1} ight)\,\,\,\,\, \Rightarrow \,\,\,\,\,{m{?}}\,\,{m{ = }}\,\,{m{8}}\,\, \hfill \cr 
 \,{m{Take}}\,\,\left( {m,w} ight) = \left( {10,2} ight)\,\,\,\,\, \Rightarrow \,\,\,\,\,{m{? }}\,{m{ = }}\,\,{m{5}}\,\, \hfill \cr} ight.\,\,\,\,\, \Rightarrow \,\,\,\,\,{m{INSUFF}}.

\left( 2 ight)\,\,w = {2 \over 5}m\,\,\,\,\,\mathop \Rightarrow \limits^{w\,\, 
e \,\,0} \,\,\,\,\,{5 \over 2} = {m \over w} = ?\,\,\,\,\,\, \Rightarrow \,\,\,\,\,{m{SUFF}}{m{.}}

The correct answer is therefore (B).

Regards,
Fabio.

P.S.:  Bunuel  : please take out the typo (extra "2") in the statement (2).

MWithrock · Answer

Just to make sure I'm thinking about this conceptually, This question doesn't even really need math Right?

With W+3 = 1/2M ; M & W can equal anything giving us any ratio.

With W2/5 = M ; This specifically gives us a relationship that is a ratio.

Someone please tell me if I'm off.

fskilnik · Answer

Hi  MWithrock  ,

M and W must be positive integers therefore you don´t have "all freedom" in statement (1).

On the other hand, you are right in statement (2), although W*( 5/2 )=M, of course. I explain: 
Once M/W is unique, the fact that it must be possible to be written as a ratio of positive integers is the examiner´s burden (not yours).

Regards,
Fabio.

Bunuel · Answer

________________________
Typo edited. Than you Fabio.

eswarchethu135 · Answer

Statement 1) The number of women enrolled in the class is 3 less than half the number of men enrolled.

w =  \frac{m}{2} - 3

\frac{m}{w} = \frac{m}{\frac{m}{2}-3}

Clearly INSUFFICIENT.

Statement 2) The number of women enrolled in the class is 2/5 of the number of men enrolled.

w =  \frac{2}{5}m

\frac{m}{w} = \frac{m}{\frac{2}{5}m}

\frac{m}{w} = \frac{5}{2}

SUFFICIENT.

OPTION:  B

ayakik · Answer

Hi, I know this is a relatively simple question, but I got this wrong because I defaulted to thinking "there is a clear relationship between men and women presented here, therefore statement 1 must be sufficient." Does it not work because the "-3" means that it is not a directly proportional relationship but rather one that is slightly skewed? Would the best approach be to test out different numbers for Statement 1 to see if it still holds the same relationship, or would any ratio with such addition/subtraction provide different values?

fskilnik Bunuel

fskilnik   Bunuel

gmatprepper94111 · Answer

Yeah I guess there's two ways to think about this. The first is to look for the intuitive / general idea. The second is to prove it's insufficient by counterexample.

Your intuition outlined here is right. It's the "3 less" thing that makes it insufficient. As m and n get large, the significance of that "3 less" shrinks, eventually approaching zero asymptotically.

-------------------------
Starting with the general idea
-------------------------

Let m be the count of men enrolled; let w be the count of women enrolled.

We want to know the ratio of men to women enrolled, i.e. we want a unique solution for m / w

(1) Tells us w = 0.5m - 3.

We can rearrange this a little bit:
---> w = 0.5m - 3
---> 0.5m = w + 3
---> 0.5m/w = 1 + 3 / w
---> m/w = 2 + 6 / w

We're forced to notice that the ratio of men to women depends on how many women there are (we could do it the same way to show that the ratio of men to women depends on how many men there are; it's the same thing).

It's not sufficient because we could create many different ratios.

(Actually, I'm reasonably sure we could identify a countably infinite number of pairings here. Note that w = 0.5m -3 resembles a y = mx + b equation (although well defined in this context only on a subset of integers),

----------------------
Just doing it by counterexample
----------------------

Again let m be the count of men enrolled; let w be the count of women enrolled.

If we can show two different ratios for two viable combinations of m and w, then we prove the statement is insufficient.

Let's start with m = 10, which means w = 2. Then the ratio of men to women is 5:1.

But we could also have m = 12, in which case w = 3. Then the ratio of men to women is 4:1.

Because we can show two distinct ratios, the information provided is insufficient to identify a unique ratio.

ayakik · Answer

Beautiful explanation, thank you!

bumpbot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club BumpBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

What is the ratio of men to women enrolled in a certain class?

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Data Sufficiency (DS) Questions

What is the ratio of men to women enrolled in a certain class?

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards