N real numbers (not necessarily unique) is 20. The sum of the 3 smallest of these numbers is 5. The sum of the 3 largest is 7. Which of the following are possible values for N ?
The sum of
I. 9
II. 10
III. 11
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
we need 5 digits having sum 8 to get case III so cant we take 1+1+1+1+4 please help
Log in to reply
1+1+1=3 but sum of smalest 3 nos is =5.
The smallest possible value of the third "smallest" number is 5/3, and the largest possible value of the third "largest" number is 7/3. (I put in the quotation marks to acknowledge the "not necessarily unique" condition).
Now the remaining (N - 6) numbers must add to 8. Since 5 * (5/3) = 25/3 > 8 we know that (N - 6) < 5. Next, since 3 * (7/3) = 7 < 8 we know that (N - 6) > 3.
We are thus left with N - 6 = 4, i.e., N = 10, and an example of 10 numbers meeting the conditions is 1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,3.
Thus the answer is "II only".
That's a quick analysis!
Log in to reply
Haha. Yes, I suppose it is. Charlton uses the same logic but his solution is more expansive and better formatted.
I did not understood the solution. Furthermore, I can say that the sum of six nos. is 12 and I am left with the possibilty of getting the sum as 8. Now assuming I condition when N=9. 6 numbers I have already consumed as three smallest and three largest. I am left with 3 more nos and a sum I need is 8. I can make it as 4,2,2 So it came as a possibilty. Now when N=10. I need 4 nos and sum=8. I can make it like, 2,2,2,2 For N=11 I need 5 nos and sum=8 Again I can make it as 3,2,2,1. Can you please tell me whats the flaw in my understanding and explain your way of doing it? Thanks in advance!
Log in to reply
@Arpit Kothari Since the 3rd "largest" number can be no more than 7/3, (for otherwise the sum of the three largest numbers would necessarily exceed 7), we can't have any of the (N - 6) numbers we are looking for exceed 7/3. So for N = 9 we would need to find 3 values, each a maximum of 7/3, that add to 8. But since 3 * (7/3) = 7 < 8, this can't be done, so N must be greater than 9.
Next, since the 3rd "smallest" number can be no less than 5/3, (for otherwise the sum of the three smallest numbers would necessarily be less than 5), we can't have have any of the (N - 6) numbers we are looking for be less than 5/3. So for N = 11 we would need to find 5 values, each a minimum of 5/3, that add to 8. But 5 * (5/3) = 25/3 > 8, so there is no way of finding 5 suitable values that add to 8. Thus N must be less than 11.
Finally, we have to then show that there is an example for N = 10, as this is the only possible value for N left. I have done this in my solution, hence my conclusion that "II only" is the solution.
So the "flaw" in your examples is that you included the values 4, 3 and 1, which are not suitable given the reasoning I've outlined above. I hope this helps. :)
Log in to reply
Ohh absolutely.. I get it now completely. Thanks a ton @brian charlesworth for your detailed solution, explanation and resolving my query!! Cheers!!!
I'm also didn't understand.
The sum of those mid numbers is 8. So the sum of each blocks is 5-8-7 respectively. The averages of each block must be in ascending or descending order. First Block= 5/3 = 1.67 Second Block: 8/3=2.67 X 8/4=2 / 8/5=1.6 X Third Block = 7/3= 2.33
So this will be obtained with this sequence of averages: 1.67,2,2.33 So the mid block must have 4 numbers. Hence, 10 only :)
1 2 2 ...............2 2 3
rest nos sum up to 8
all nos are 2 so 4 more nos
total 10 nos
We will show that the smallest numbers must contain a 2 , and the largest numbers must contain a 2 . Hence, the middle sequence must contain all 2 s, for a total sequence length of 1 0 ( Case II ).
The sum of the three smallest numbers must be 5 , as given. Denote the largest of these as x . We will show x ≥ 2 . Suppose:
x ≤ 0 : Then, all three numbers are non-positive and the sum is at most 0 < 5 . So, x > 0 .
x = 1 : The maximum sum is 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 < 5 . So, x > 1 .
x = 2 : For example, 1 + 2 + 2 = 5 . Hence, x ≥ 2 .
The sum of the three largest numbers must be 7 , as given. Denote the smallest of these as y . Because x ≥ 2 , then y ≥ 2 . We will show y = 2 . Suppose:
y = 2 . For example, 2 + 2 + 3 = 7 . So, y ≥ 2 .
y = 3 . Then, the smallest possible sum is 3 + 3 + 3 = 9 > 7 . Any larger y will result in a larger sum. So, y = 2 .
Because y = 2 , the largest numbers must contain a 2 . Because x ≥ 2 and y = 2 , the smallest numbers must contain a 2 as well. Hence, the middle sequence must solely contain four 2 s ( 5 + 4 ∗ 2 + 7 = 2 0 ), for a total length of 1 0 ( Case II ).
We know through logical reasoning that none of the numbers are negative. So, three numbers in the start (a,b,c) and three in the end (x,y,z). An unknown amount of numbers in the middle. We know A+B+C=5 and X+Y+Z=7. 5+7=12. We know that the sum of all the numbers is 20. So the numbers in the middle must add up to 8 (20-12).
There are a number of possibilities for the first 3 numbers.
a) 0,1,4 (3 numbers greater than or equal to 4 cant add up to 7)
b) 0,2,3 (3 numbers greater than or equal to 4 cant add up to 7)(I said 4 because 4+4 is the only way to get 8 in the middle)
c) 1,1,3 (Same argument as option (b))
d) 1,2,2 (2+2+2+2 forms 8 in the middle)(2+2+3 forms 7 in the end)
(D) is the only possible answer. Hence, 3 in the start, 3 in the end, 4 two's in the middle.
Answer : N can ONLY be 10.
First three number 1,2,2 and last three will be 2,2,3 ......so rest is 4 numbers with total sum of 8. 12,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,3
How come? How did you find the numbers?? I hope you are considering the numbers as REAL NUMBERS and not only as NATURAL NUMBERS.
yeah i know and considering sum of numbers not the numbers .......they just came this way eventually
Log in to reply
Note that for questions like this, you have to show that the other values cannot be achieved, otherwise you do not know if you chose the correct answer.
Furthermore, if you look at all of the choices given, they all include option II, and hence "we know" that II must be true. The question then requires us to figure out if case I or III is possible.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
We can infer that the ( N − 3 − 3 ) numbers in between are ≥ 3 5 and ≤ 3 7 . Thus, the largest possible number achievable by the N numbers can be obtained by ( N − 3 − 3 ) × 3 7 + 5 + 7 and the smallest possible number formed can be obtained by ( N − 3 − 3 ) × 3 5 + 5 + 7
C a s e 1 : N = 9 .We infer that the 3 numbers in the middle ≤ 7 as the sum of the 3 largest numbers are 7 , we arrive that the largest number we can achieve is 5 + 7 + 7 = 1 9 which is < 2 0 . Thus N = 9
C a s e 2 : N = 1 0 . The largest possible number we can achieve is ( 1 0 − 3 − 3 ) × 3 7 + 5 + 7 = 9 3 1 + 5 + 7 = 2 1 3 1 . Since the answer is > 2 0 , we now check for the smallest possible number which is ( 1 0 − 3 − 3 ) × 3 5 + 5 + 7 = 6 3 2 + 5 + 7 = 1 9 3 2 . Since 2 0 is within the range of the smallest possible number and the largest possible number, it is possible that N = 1 0 .
C a s e 3 : N = 1 1 . To save time, we will only work on the smallest possible number as the largest possible number is definitely > 2 0 . The smallest possible number that can be obtained is ( 1 1 − 3 − 3 ) × 3 5 + 5 + 7 = 8 3 1 + 5 + 7 = 2 0 3 1 which is > 2 0 . Thus, N = 1 1