Difficulty: Medium
Correct Answer: 92
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:
Here the pattern is a clean sequence of successive divisions by descending integers. One term breaks this elegant structure.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:
Check the idea “divide by 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1”. Such a descending-divisor pattern is a standard test item.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Verification / Alternative check:
If we replace 92 with 96, the “divide by 6,5,4,3,2,1” rule holds perfectly for every step.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
480, 24, 8, 4 are completely consistent with the corrected chain of divisions.
Common Pitfalls:
Attempting to fit mixed add/subtract steps obscures the far simpler division pattern.
Final Answer:
92
Discussion & Comments