Take This Quiz To Test Analytical Skills

To solve this, use the given ratio of muffins to croissants: 5:2. For every 5 muffins sold, 2 croissants are sold.

Determine how many groups of "5 muffins" fit into the total of 35 muffins sold: 35 muffins÷5=7 groups.

Since there are 2 croissants sold for each group of 5 muffins, multiply the number of groups by 2: 7 groups×2 croissants per group=14 croissants.

Evaluating the options:

Option A: Incorrect. 10 croissants would result from 25 muffins (not 35).

Option B: Correct. 14 croissants are sold, maintaining the 5:2 ratio.

Option C: Incorrect. 28 croissants would imply a 1:1 ratio with muffins, which doesn’t match the problem.

Option D: Incorrect. Selling only 7 croissants would occur with 17.5 muffins (half a ratio group), which is inconsistent.

After the initial order, which is Janet - Eric - Marcus - Joan - Emmanuel - Andrew - Angela, and the given changes in places. First, Janet changes places with Eric: The order becomes Eric - Janet - Marcus - Joan - Emmanuel - Andrew - Angela. Then, Eric changes places with Marcus: The order becomes Marcus - Janet - Eric - Joan - Emmanuel - Andrew - Angela. So, Angela is at the right end of the row after these changes.

The car that came last was the Dodge. Here's the breakdown:

1. Honda beat the Dodge: This means the Honda finished ahead of the Dodge.
2. Honda couldn't overtake the Smart Car: This doesn't necessarily mean the Smart Car finished ahead of the Honda. It could mean they finished in the same position, with the Honda not able to pass during the race.
3. Mini failed to overtake the Audi: This indicates the Audi finished ahead of the Mini.
4. Mini beat the Smart Car: This confirms the Mini finished ahead of the Smart Car.

Now, analyzing these clues:

• We know the Dodge was behind the Honda.
• We also know the Mini finished ahead of the Smart Car.
• Since the Honda did not overtake the Smart Car but the Mini did, it implies the Smart Car finished somewhere between the Honda and the Mini.

Therefore, the order of finish becomes:

1. Honda (didn't overtake Smart Car)
2. Smart Car (between Honda and Mini)
3. Mini (beat Smart Car)
4. Audi (Mini couldn't overtake)
5. Dodge (last, behind Honda)

Let's break down the clues and deduce the occupant of the bottom flat:

1. Peter lives on the top floor: This eliminates him from consideration for the bottom flat.
2. Madeleine lives above Sara: Since Madeline is above Sara, she cannot be in the bottom flat either.
3. Sara is in the flat below Shawn: This tells us Sara isn't on the top floor, but it doesn't necessarily place her in the bottom floor yet.
4. Claudia lives with Roger: We don't know which floor Claudia and Roger live on, so they remain possibilities for now.

Now, let's analyze the remaining possibilities:

• Shawn: We know Shawn is above Sara. Since Sara isn't in the bottom flat, Shawn automatically cannot be either.
• Claudia & Roger: If they live below Sara, then Sara wouldn't be in the flat below Shawn, contradicting the given information. Therefore, Claudia and Roger cannot be in the bottom flat.

Through elimination, we're left with Sara as the only viable occupant of the bottom flat. All other residents are placed on higher floors based on the provided clues.

Therefore, Sara confidently resides in the bottom flat.

Neil plays the violin and the flute.

Amit plays the violin but not the piano (similar to Neil's violin).

Joan plays the piano but not the flute.

Sam plays the flute but not the violin.

Based on the given information, the Honda beat the Dodge, but couldn't overtake the Smart Car. The Mini failed to overtake the Audi but beat the Smart Car. Therefore, the Smart Car came third in the race.

B & D is the most likely combination of true statements.

While we cannot definitively confirm both without knowing the exam's specifics, let's break down the reasoning:

• B) There were ten failures in the examination: This statement doesn't necessarily tell us anything about the passing threshold or total number of questions. However, it implies that not all fifty candidates passed, leaving room for ten failures.
• D) Forty candidates were successful: If fifty candidates took the exam and ten failed, the remaining forty must have passed (50 - 10 = 40).

As the question only asks for the most likely scenario, and assuming a reasonable passing threshold somewhere around half the questions, these two statements appear to be the most probable conclusions.

Based on the information provided and the statements given, let's analyze the options:

John runs faster than Jody (given).

a) Cisco is the champion runner: This statement is irrelevant to the comparison between John, Jody, and Cisco in terms of speed.

b) John can run further than Cisco: This statement compares distance, not speed.

c) John can run as fast as Cisco: This statement suggests that John and Cisco have the same speed.

d) Cisco can run faster than Jody: This statement suggests Cisco is faster than Jody.

Now, considering the options provided:

A & B: This includes statement a (irrelevant) and b (about distance).

B & D: This includes b (distance) and d (speed comparison between Cisco and Jody).

C & D: This includes c (same speed as John and Cisco) and d (Cisco faster than Jody).

B & C: This includes b (distance) and c (same speed as John and Cisco).

Given the initial information that John runs faster than Jody, the only pair that logically fits with the given condition is C & D:

C) John can run as fast as Cisco: If John runs faster than Jody and as fast as Cisco, this doesn't contradict any known information.

D) Cisco can run faster than Jody: This is consistent with John running faster than Jody and possibly Cisco running faster than Jody too.

1. Peter lives on the top floor: This eliminates him from consideration for sharing a flat with anyone.
2. Madeleine lives above Sara: This tells us two things: First, Madeleine is NOT on the bottom floor (because she's above Sara). Second, however, it DOESN'T necessarily mean she's alone on the second floor.
3. Sara is in the flat below Shawn: This confirms Sara isn't in the top three floors and places her on the floor below Shawn.
4. Claudia lives with Roger: This implies they share a flat, but we don't know which floor they're on.

Now, let's analyze the possibilities for shared flats:

• Shawn & Madeleine: Since Madeleine is above Sara and Shawn is above Sara, they BOTH could be on the second floor, sharing a flat. This fits with the clue and doesn't contradict any other information.
• Sara & Peter: We know Sara isn't on the top floor, and Peter is. Additionally, there's no indication they know each other or live on the same floor.
• Shawn & Peter: Similar to Sara and Peter, there's no indication they share a flat or live on the same floor.
• Sara & Madeleine: Madeleine is above Sara, so they cannot share the same flat on the third floor.

Therefore, the only possibility for a shared flat among the given options is Shawn and Madeleine. They both could be on the second floor together, while everyone else is positioned on different floors or living alone.

Start by organizing the data:

The first row has 4 people.

The second row has 6 people.

The third row has 2 people.

Now evaluate each statement:

Option A: Incorrect. The first row is not the most crowded. The second row has 6 people, which is more than the 4 in the first row.

Option B: Correct. The second row (6 people) indeed has twice as many people as the third row (2 people). This matches the problem’s data.

Option C: Incorrect. The third row has fewer people (2) than the first row (4). Hence, it is not more crowded.

Option D: Incorrect. The total number of people is: 4+6+2=12 people, not 10.

By carefully verifying each option, the correct answer is confirmed as B.

The longest distance is from Easter to Toronto. This is because the man drove from Cambridge to Easter, which is the first part of his journey. After stopping at Brighton, which is the halfway point, he continued driving to Toronto. Therefore, the distance from Easter to Toronto is longer than the distance from Cambridge to Easter or Brighton to Toronto.

The correct answer is A & C:

1. One-town is north-east to Three-town: This tells us the relative direction of One-town and Three-town.

2. Analyzing options:

• a) One-town is two miles north of Two-town: This aligns with the information about One-town being north-east of Three-town. If One-town is north of Two-town, it suggests it's also potentially north-east of Two-town in relation to Three-town. So, option a could be true.


• b) Two-town is two miles west of Four-town: This doesn't provide any information about the relative positions of One-town, Three-town, or Two-town. It only refers to a different town (Four-town) not mentioned in the initial statement.


• c) Three-town is two miles west of Two-town: This doesn't contradict the given information about One-town's direction relative to Three-town. However, it doesn't necessarily confirm their exact distance or positions.


• d) Four-town is south-east of One-town: This directly contradicts the original statement that places One-town north-east of Three-town. Since Three-town is north-east of One-town, Four-town cannot be south-east of One-town.

Therefore, only options a) and c) are consistent with the provided information about One-town and Three-town. They agree on the relative positioning of One-town being north of Two-town, which aligns with its north-east position relative to Three-town.

To evaluate this question, let's analyze the timeline.

The meeting after lunch takes place in the afternoon, as lunch typically occurs midday.

The meeting before dinner occurs later than the meeting after lunch, likely in the early evening.

It is explicitly stated that the meeting before dinner finishes earlier than the meeting after lunch, but that refers to completion times, not when the meetings occur.

Evaluating the options:

Option A: Correct. The meeting before dinner happens in the evening, consistent with the typical schedule of having dinner in the late evening.

Option B: Incorrect. A meeting after lunch cannot happen in the morning, as it would contradict the meaning of "after lunch."

Option C: Incorrect. Peter does not finish both meetings before evening. While the meeting after lunch may finish in the early afternoon, the meeting before dinner is in the evening.

Option D: Incorrect. The meeting after lunch happens earlier in the day than the meeting before dinner, so this statement contradicts the facts provided.