Question 1

In the series 3, 7, 6, 5, 9, 3, 12, 1, 15, ..., determine the next number by analysing the two interleaved subsequences.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This number series alternates up and down: 3, 7, 6, 5, 9, 3, 12, 1, 15, ... . The task is to find the next term. Many reasoning questions use interleaved subsequences where the first, third, fifth and other odd positions follow one rule, and the second, fourth, sixth and other even positions follow another rule. Given Data / Assumptions: The given terms are: 3 7 6 5 9 3 12 1 15 ? We assume that there are two simple and consistent patterns, one for the numbers in odd positions and one for the numbers in even positions. Concept / Approach: Whenever consecutive terms appear to jump in a non uniform way, it is helpful to separate the series into odd and even positions. Here, the odd position numbers show an increasing trend, while the even position numbers show a decreasing trend. Recognizing these as two arithmetic progressions leads directly to the missing term. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: List the numbers in odd positions (1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th): 3, 6, 9, 12, 15.Step 2: Notice that this subsequence increases by 3 each time: 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, ... . This is an arithmetic progression with common difference +3.Step 3: List the numbers in even positions (2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, and the unknown 10th): 7, 5, 3, 1, ?.Step 4: Observe that this subsequence decreases by 2 each time: 7, 5, 3, 1, ... . So the next term should be 1 - 2 = -1.Step 5: Position 10 is an even position, so we take the next value from the decreasing subsequence, which is -1. Verification / Alternative check: We can now rebuild the series by interleaving the two subsequences: Odd positions: 3, 6, 9, 12, 15Even positions: 7, 5, 3, 1, -1Interleaved series: 3, 7, 6, 5, 9, 3, 12, 1, 15, -1. This matches all the given terms and supplies a consistent next term without any contradiction, so the pattern is correct. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Values such as 2, 0 or 1 do not continue the even position subsequence 7, 5, 3, 1 with the same common difference of -2. Using any of them would break the arithmetic progression in the even positions, so they are not compatible with the observed pattern. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes try to find a single rule linking each term directly to the previous one, which is difficult in interleaved series. The key skill is to recognise that odd and even positions may follow different rules, and to separate them before searching for patterns like arithmetic progressions. Final Answer: The next number in the series, following the pattern of two interleaved progressions, is -1.

Question 2

In the series 50, 51, 47, 56, 40, ?, find the next number by observing the pattern of adding and subtracting consecutive square numbers.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This number series shows alternating increases and decreases: 50, 51, 47, 56, 40, ?. The jumps are not constant, which suggests that the differences themselves follow a special sequence. A common pattern in such questions is the use of perfect squares as the amounts added or subtracted. Given Data / Assumptions: The terms are: 50 51 47 56 40 ? We assume that from one step to the next the series alternately adds and subtracts squared numbers like 1^2, 2^2, 3^2 and so on, in order. Concept / Approach: The idea is to calculate the difference between each pair of consecutive terms and see if these differences correspond to square numbers, possibly with alternating signs. If the pattern matches 1^2, 2^2, 3^2, 4^2, 5^2, then we can easily compute the missing term using the next square in the pattern. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: From 50 to 51, the difference is +1, which is 1^2.Step 2: From 51 to 47, the difference is -4, which is -2^2.Step 3: From 47 to 56, the difference is +9, which is 3^2.Step 4: From 56 to 40, the difference is -16, which is -4^2.Step 5: This shows a pattern: add 1^2, subtract 2^2, add 3^2, subtract 4^2, and so on.Step 6: The next step should follow the pattern and add 5^2 = 25 to the current term 40.Step 7: Therefore, the missing term is 40 + 25 = 65. Verification / Alternative check: We can summarise the rule as: starting from 50, repeatedly add or subtract n^2 with signs alternating plus, minus, plus, minus, plus, and so on. That is, 50 + 1 = 51, 51 - 4 = 47, 47 + 9 = 56, 56 - 16 = 40, and 40 + 25 = 65. This reconstruction reproduces all the known terms and produces a unique, consistent value for the missing term. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Values 58, 76 and 81 do not equal 40 + 25, and using any of them would break the smooth pattern of adding and subtracting consecutive squares. They would lead to irregular differences that are not square numbers, so they are not supported by the data. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes look only for arithmetic progressions and miss that the differences themselves can form a familiar sequence like 1, 4, 9, 16, 25. Another pitfall is to forget the alternating signs and try to fit a single increasing or decreasing set of differences, which does not work here. Final Answer: The next number in the series, obtained by adding 5^2 to 40, is 65.

Question 3

In the number series 5, 14, 42, 107, 233, ?, find the missing term by examining the pattern in the successive differences.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This number series increases quite rapidly: 5, 14, 42, 107, 233, ?. The jumps between terms are not uniform, so this is not a simple arithmetic or geometric progression. Instead, the pattern is hidden in the differences between consecutive terms, which themselves turn out to be closely related to cubes of integers. Given Data / Assumptions: The known terms are: 5 14 42 107 233 ? We assume the series is generated by adding certain special numbers to each term to get the next, and that these special numbers follow a clear mathematical pattern. Concept / Approach: When numbers grow faster than a linear progression, but not by a fixed multiplicative factor, it is often very effective to compute the first differences and then see whether those differences align with values based on squares, cubes or other standard sequences. In this question, the differences between terms are one more than perfect cubes of consecutive integers starting from 2. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Compute the differences between consecutive terms.14 - 5 = 9.42 - 14 = 28.107 - 42 = 65.233 - 107 = 126.Step 2: Now examine these differences: 9, 28, 65, 126.Step 3: Express each difference in terms of cubes: 2^3 + 1 = 9, 3^3 + 1 = 28, 4^3 + 1 = 65, 5^3 + 1 = 126.Step 4: This shows a clear pattern: the nth difference is n^3 + 1, starting from n = 2.Step 5: The next difference should therefore be 6^3 + 1 = 216 + 1 = 217.Step 6: Add this to the last known term: 233 + 217 = 450. Verification / Alternative check: We can restate the rule as: starting from 5, add 2^3 + 1, then 3^3 + 1, then 4^3 + 1, then 5^3 + 1, and so on. That gives 5 + 9 = 14, 14 + 28 = 42, 42 + 65 = 107, 107 + 126 = 233. Continuing, 233 + 217 = 450. This reconstruction is consistent with all known terms and confirms 450 as the unique logical continuation. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Values 316, 384 and 479 are not equal to 233 + 217. If any of them were chosen, the difference from 233 would not equal 6^3 + 1, and the difference sequence would not match 2^3 + 1, 3^3 + 1, 4^3 + 1, 5^3 + 1, 6^3 + 1. Thus they break the discovered cube based pattern. Common Pitfalls: Many students first attempt to find a direct multiplication rule, such as multiplying by 2 or by some fraction, which does not work here. Others stop after computing first differences and fail to notice that the differences themselves follow a familiar pattern based on cubes. It is important to check whether seemingly irregular differences can be expressed in terms of standard sequences like n^2, n^3 or n^3 + 1. Final Answer: The missing term in the series is 450.

Question 4

For the number sequence 3, 5, 13, 43, 167, identify the odd man out by analysing the recursive pattern linking each term to its position in the series.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This odd man out problem involves the series 3, 5, 13, 43, 167. At first glance all numbers look somewhat prime like, so simple tests like checking for prime numbers do not immediately give a unique outlier. Instead, the hidden pattern connects each term to the previous one using its position in the series. Given Data / Assumptions: The terms are: a(1) = 3 a(2) = 5 a(3) = 13 a(4) = 43 a(5) = 167 We assume that for most terms there is a neat recurrence relation involving multiplication by the term position and then adding a small integer that depends on that position. Concept / Approach: A key idea is to test whether a(n+1) can be written as a(n) * n + (n + 1), where n is the index of a(n) starting from 1. If this works for all but one term, then that exceptional term is the odd man out. This strategy is common in series where numbers grow faster than a simple arithmetic progression but not as fast as a pure geometric progression. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: From a(1) = 3 to a(2) = 5. At n = 1, compute 3 * 1 + (1 + 1) = 3 * 1 + 2 = 5, which matches a(2).Step 2: From a(2) = 5 to a(3) = 13. At n = 2, compute 5 * 2 + (2 + 1) = 10 + 3 = 13, which matches a(3).Step 3: From a(3) = 13 to a(4) = 43. At n = 3, compute 13 * 3 + (3 + 1) = 39 + 4 = 43, which matches a(4).Step 4: From a(4) = 43 to the next term. At n = 4, the rule gives a(5) should be 43 * 4 + (4 + 1) = 172 + 5 = 177.Step 5: However, the given fifth term is 167, not 177. Therefore, 167 does not satisfy the same recurrence relation. Verification / Alternative check: We can propose the intended pattern as a(1) = 3 and, for n ≥ 1, a(n + 1) = a(n) * n + (n + 1). This formula correctly generates 5, 13 and 43 from 3, 5 and 13 respectively. Extending it gives 177 as the next value after 43. Because all earlier steps fit perfectly, the most consistent interpretation is that the correct fifth term should have been 177 and 167 is an incorrect outlier. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The terms 5, 13 and 43 are all exactly produced by the recurrence a(n + 1) = a(n) * n + (n + 1). Removing any of them would break the recurrence earlier in the sequence. Only the last term, 167, fails to satisfy the pattern, making it the natural odd man out. Common Pitfalls: It is tempting to classify numbers simply based on primality or to search for simple difference patterns. Since all the given numbers are prime, that approach does not distinguish any one element. Recognising a position dependent recursion is the key here. Always consider the possibility that the index n itself is part of the rule that generates the series. Final Answer: The number that does not follow the established recursive pattern is 167.

Question 5

In the number series 22, 26, 42, 78, 142, 244, find the odd man out by examining the pattern of adding squares of even numbers.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This series 22, 26, 42, 78, 142, 244 is an odd man out question where one term does not fit a neat pattern. The numbers grow faster and faster, so it is natural to suspect that the differences between consecutive terms might involve square numbers or some other non linear structure. Given Data / Assumptions: The numbers are: 22 26 42 78 142 244 We assume that the intended pattern uses additions of square numbers, specifically squares of even integers, applied step by step to generate the series. Concept / Approach: The first step is to compute the differences between terms. If those differences match a familiar sequence such as squares 2^2, 4^2, 6^2, 8^2, 10^2, then the term that does not match the expected difference can be identified as the odd one out. This technique is widely used in number series problems where growth accelerates. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Compute the consecutive differences.26 - 22 = 4, which is 2^2.42 - 26 = 16, which is 4^2.78 - 42 = 36, which is 6^2.142 - 78 = 64, which is 8^2.244 - 142 = 102.Step 2: Compare with the expected pattern. We see the differences 4, 16, 36, 64, which are 2^2, 4^2, 6^2, 8^2.Step 3: The natural continuation of this pattern would be to add 10^2 = 100 after 142.Step 4: So the correct next term should be 142 + 100 = 242, not 244.Step 5: Therefore, 244 does not fit the rule of adding consecutive squares of even numbers and is the odd man out. Verification / Alternative check: We can reconstruct the intended sequence: starting from 22, we add 2^2 to get 26, then add 4^2 to get 42, then add 6^2 to get 78, then add 8^2 to get 142, and finally we would add 10^2 to get 242. The given term 244 breaks this otherwise smooth pattern, confirming that it must be the incorrect or odd term. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The terms 142, 78 and 42 each fit perfectly into the pattern of consecutive even squares. If we removed any of them, we could not maintain the 2^2, 4^2, 6^2, 8^2, 10^2 difference structure. Only by replacing 244 with 242 does the pattern remain intact, so 244 is the only term that can reasonably be called the odd one out. Common Pitfalls: Some test-takers focus only on the rough size of the jumps and miss the exact square structure. Others may try to fit a single multiplicative factor, which does not hold because the ratios between terms are not constant. Looking at differences and asking whether they are squares or cubes is a key technique for solving many such questions. Final Answer: The number that does not follow the pattern of adding squares of even numbers is 244.

Question 6

In the mixed power series 2, 4, 27, 256, 3125, 46656, which number is the odd man out based on the pattern n^n for integer values of n?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question asks you to find the odd man out in a sequence: 2, 4, 27, 256, 3125, 46656. The terms look like well known powers of small integers. The key is to see which of these numbers can be written in the special form n^n, where the base and exponent are equal. Given Data / Assumptions: The terms in the list are: 2 4 27 256 3125 46656 We assume that most of the numbers are of the form n^n for some integer n ≥ 2, and that exactly one number does not fit this pattern. Concept / Approach: The strategy is to rewrite each number as a power of an integer and check whether the exponent equals the base. For example, 27 can be written as 3^3, so it is of the form n^n with n = 3. We go through each number and see which one fails to have such a representation. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Consider 4. We have 4 = 2^2, so it is of the form n^n with n = 2.Step 2: Consider 27. We have 27 = 3^3, which is of the form n^n with n = 3.Step 3: Consider 256. We have 256 = 4^4, which is of the form n^n with n = 4.Step 4: Consider 3125. We have 3125 = 5^5, again of the form n^n with n = 5.Step 5: Consider 46656. We have 46656 = 6^6, which fits the n^n pattern with n = 6.Step 6: Finally, consider 2. Powers of integers start with 1^1 = 1 and 2^2 = 4. There is no integer n such that n^n = 2. Therefore 2 does not fit the n^n pattern. Verification / Alternative check: We can explicitly list the sequence n^n for n = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 as 1, 4, 27, 256, 3125, 46656. The numbers 4, 27, 256, 3125 and 46656 all appear in this list, while 2 does not. This confirms that 2 is the only number in the given set that cannot be written as n^n for any integer n, making it the natural odd man out. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 27, 3125 and 46656 are exactly 3^3, 5^5 and 6^6 respectively, and 4 is 2^2. All of these are perfect n^n powers and are organised nicely in the pattern. Removing any of them as the odd man out would ignore the clear n^n structure and leave 2 still unmatched. Common Pitfalls: Some learners might focus only on whether numbers are squares or cubes in general, instead of noticing the more specific requirement that the exponent equals the base. It is important to check whether there is a special form like n^n in play when many terms can be written as powers in a consistent way. Final Answer: The only number that is not of the form n^n is 2.

Question 7

In the number series 720, 732, 708, 742, 696, which one is the odd man out based on divisibility by 12?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This problem presents the series 720, 732, 708, 742, 696 and asks you to find the odd man out. The numbers are all in a similar range, so a sensible approach is to check simple divisibility properties, especially by numbers like 3, 4 or 12 that are common in aptitude tests. Given Data / Assumptions: The terms given are: 720 732 708 742 696 We assume that most of these numbers share a straightforward divisibility property, while one number fails this test and therefore stands out as the odd one. Concept / Approach: A good candidate to test here is divisibility by 12, which requires that a number be divisible both by 3 and by 4. The test for divisibility by 3 uses the sum of digits, and the test for divisibility by 4 uses the last two digits. If four of the numbers are multiples of 12 and one is not, the non multiple identifies the odd one out. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Check 720. The sum of digits is 7 + 2 + 0 = 9, which is divisible by 3. The last two digits 20 give 20 / 4 = 5, so 720 is divisible by 4. Therefore, 720 is divisible by 12.Step 2: Check 732. The sum of digits is 7 + 3 + 2 = 12, divisible by 3, and 32 / 4 = 8, so 732 is divisible by 4, hence by 12.Step 3: Check 708. The sum of digits is 7 + 0 + 8 = 15, divisible by 3, and 8 / 4 = 2, so 708 is divisible by 4 and therefore by 12.Step 4: Check 696. The sum of digits is 6 + 9 + 6 = 21, divisible by 3, and 96 / 4 = 24, so 696 is divisible by 4 and thus by 12.Step 5: Check 742. The sum of digits is 7 + 4 + 2 = 13, which is not divisible by 3, so 742 fails the divisibility by 3 test and therefore cannot be divisible by 12. Verification / Alternative check: We can also divide each number directly by 12: 720 / 12 = 60, 732 / 12 = 61, 708 / 12 = 59, 696 / 12 = 58, all integers. But 742 / 12 is not an integer. This confirms that 742 is the only number that is not a multiple of 12, while all others are exact multiples of 12 with consecutive integer quotients 60, 61, 59 and 58. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The numbers 696, 708 and 732, as well as 720, all satisfy the divisibility by 12 condition. Removing any of them as the odd one out would leave a set where 742 is still not divisible by 12, which would be inconsistent. Hence, they cannot be correct choices for the odd term. Common Pitfalls: Some students may be tempted to look only at the approximate order or spacing of the numbers. However, there is no clear arithmetic or geometric sequence here. Instead, the question relies on a very standard divisibility rule, so checking divisibility by small integers is an effective and efficient strategy. Final Answer: The only number in the list that is not divisible by 12 is 742.

Question 8

In the series 3, 12, 39, 120, 364, identify the odd man out by detecting the underlying multiplicative plus constant pattern.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The series 3, 12, 39, 120, 364 contains one term that does not fit the simple pattern followed by the others. The numbers grow quickly, suggesting a rule that involves multiplication by an increasing integer and then adding a constant. Recognising and checking this type of pattern is a common requirement in number series questions. Given Data / Assumptions: The terms are: 3 12 39 120 364 We assume that there is a consistent recurrence relation of the form a(n+1) = a(n) * k + c, where k and c depend in a simple way on the position n, and that one of the terms has been misgenerated or misprinted. Concept / Approach: We test whether each term can be obtained by multiplying the previous term by 3 and then adding 3. If this rule works for all but one term, that exceptional term is the odd man out. This pattern is very typical: multiply by 3, then add a small constant, repeated across the series. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: From 3 to 12. Check 3 * 3 + 3 = 9 + 3 = 12, which matches.Step 2: From 12 to 39. Check 12 * 3 + 3 = 36 + 3 = 39, which matches.Step 3: From 39 to 120. Check 39 * 3 + 3 = 117 + 3 = 120, which matches.Step 4: From 120 to the next term according to the same rule. Compute 120 * 3 + 3 = 360 + 3 = 363.Step 5: The given next term is 364, not 363. Hence 364 does not satisfy the established rule a(n+1) = 3 * a(n) + 3. Verification / Alternative check: If we assume the intended sequence was 3, 12, 39, 120, 363, then every term after the first is exactly three times the previous term plus 3. There are no contradictions or irregularities in this corrected sequence, which strongly indicates that 364 is a misfit and should have been 363 to keep the pattern consistent. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The terms 3, 12, 39 and 120 all strictly follow the rule a(n+1) = 3 * a(n) + 3. Removing any of them as the odd man out would break the pattern earlier in the series, while still leaving 364 as an outlier. Therefore, they must be considered correct members of the sequence, and 364 is the only reasonable candidate for removal. Common Pitfalls: Some students try to analyse first differences or ratios alone and may overlook the simple linear recurrence involving multiplication and a constant addition. When numbers grow by about a factor of 3, it is very helpful to test a rule like a(n+1) = 3 * a(n) ± c before resorting to more complicated approaches. Final Answer: The number that does not fit the pattern a(n+1) = 3 * a(n) + 3 is 364.

Question 9

From the letter groups JGD, NLI, XUR and QNK, which set of three letters is the odd one out based on the positional differences in the alphabet?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question involves groups of three letters: JGD, NLI, XUR and QNK. You are asked to identify which group is the odd one out. The solution depends on the positions of the letters in the English alphabet and how those positions change from one letter to the next within each group. Given Data / Assumptions: The letter groups are: JGD NLI XUR QNK We assume that three of these groups share the same pattern of positional differences between consecutive letters, while one group breaks this pattern. Concept / Approach: To solve, we convert each letter to its numerical position in the alphabet (A = 1, B = 2, ..., Z = 26) and then calculate the differences between the first and second letters, and between the second and third letters in each group. If most groups show the same constant negative difference (for example, minus three) for both steps, then the group that does not will be the odd one out. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: JGD. J is 10, G is 7, D is 4. The differences are 10 → 7 (−3) and 7 → 4 (−3).Step 2: XUR. X is 24, U is 21, R is 18. The differences are 24 → 21 (−3) and 21 → 18 (−3).Step 3: QNK. Q is 17, N is 14, K is 11. The differences are 17 → 14 (−3) and 14 → 11 (−3).Step 4: NLI. N is 14, L is 12, I is 9. The differences are 14 → 12 (−2) and 12 → 9 (−3).Step 5: We see that in JGD, XUR and QNK, both steps reduce the letter position by 3. In NLI, the first step reduces by 2 instead of 3. Verification / Alternative check: We can summarise the pattern as follows: the groups JGD, XUR and QNK all have the shape (x, x − 3, x − 6) in terms of alphabetical positions. For example, JGD is 10, 7, 4; XUR is 24, 21, 18; QNK is 17, 14, 11. In contrast, NLI is 14, 12, 9, which corresponds to 14, 12, 9, with differences of −2 and −3. This group clearly breaks the constant difference of −3 in the first step. Why Other Options Are Wrong: JGD, XUR and QNK all demonstrate a consistent pattern: each letter is three places earlier in the alphabet than the previous letter. Removing any of them as the odd one would ignore this clear regularity and leave NLI, which does not follow the rule, still in the set. Hence, those groups are not valid choices as the odd one out. Common Pitfalls: Students may look for symmetrical positions or vowel consonant patterns instead of computing exact numerical differences. It is important to systematically map letters to their alphabetical positions and then calculate the differences, as this often reveals a simple and precise pattern that is not obvious at first glance. Final Answer: The group that does not follow the consistent minus three pattern is NLI.

Question 10

Find the next number in the series 3, 10.5, 36.75, 128.625, ? by recognising the repeated multiplication pattern.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This number series includes decimal values: 3, 10.5, 36.75, 128.625, ?. The values grow quickly, and each new term is roughly three times the previous one, but not exactly. This suggests a geometric type progression where each term is multiplied by a constant factor greater than 3. Given Data / Assumptions: The known terms are: 3 10.5 36.75 128.625 ? We assume that the same multiplicative factor is used at every step to obtain the next term, with no additional additive adjustments. Concept / Approach: To find the common ratio, we divide each term by the previous one. If the ratio is the same for all consecutive pairs, the series is geometric with that ratio. Once the common ratio is identified, we multiply the last known term by this ratio to obtain the next term in the series. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Compute the ratio between the first two terms: 10.5 / 3 = 3.5.Step 2: Compute the ratio between the second and third terms: 36.75 / 10.5 = 3.5.Step 3: Compute the ratio between the third and fourth terms: 128.625 / 36.75 = 3.5.Step 4: The ratio is consistently 3.5, so the series is geometric with common ratio r = 3.5.Step 5: To find the next term, multiply the last term by 3.5: 128.625 * 3.5.Step 6: Compute 128.625 * 3 = 385.875, and 128.625 * 0.5 = 64.3125. Adding gives 385.875 + 64.3125 = 450.1875.Step 7: The given options approximate this value as 450.187, which is the closest match. Verification / Alternative check: Once we know the series is geometric with ratio 3.5, we can also check that 3 * 3.5 = 10.5, 10.5 * 3.5 = 36.75, and 36.75 * 3.5 = 128.625. The consistency across all these steps confirms that using the same ratio again to get the next term is valid. Therefore, 128.625 * 3.5 ≈ 450.187 is the only reasonable next value. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The other options 295.651, 354.146 and 398.78 do not equal 128.625 multiplied by 3.5. Using any of them as the next term would destroy the constant ratio and produce an inconsistent set of multipliers, so they are incompatible with the identified geometric pattern. Common Pitfalls: Some candidates may attempt to compute differences between terms and hope for a simple arithmetic pattern, but the differences here (7.5, 26.25, 91.875) are clearly not constant or linearly related. Recognising that ratios, not differences, are stable is the core skill when dealing with rapidly growing decimal sequences like this one. Final Answer: The next number in the geometric series is approximately 450.187.

Question 11

In the alternating difference series 2, 19, 0, 21, -2, ?, find the next term by identifying the pattern of adding and subtracting consecutive odd numbers.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This series moves up and down: 2, 19, 0, 21, -2, ?. The jumps between terms are fairly large and alternate in sign, which hints that the series is constructed by adding and subtracting odd numbers in sequence. Recognising this type of alternating pattern is essential for many reasoning questions. Given Data / Assumptions: The known terms are: 2 19 0 21 -2 ? We assume that each step involves adding or subtracting an odd integer that itself follows a simple sequence, likely consecutive odd numbers such as 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, and so on. Concept / Approach: The first step is to compute the differences between consecutive terms and see whether they match a pattern of odd numbers with alternating signs. Once we recognise the sequence of differences, we extend it to obtain the next term in the main series. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Compute consecutive differences.From 2 to 19: 19 - 2 = +17.From 19 to 0: 0 - 19 = -19.From 0 to 21: 21 - 0 = +21.From 21 to -2: -2 - 21 = -23.Step 2: Observe the pattern in the differences: +17, -19, +21, -23.Step 3: These are consecutive odd numbers 17, 19, 21, 23 with alternating plus and minus signs.Step 4: The next difference should follow the same rule and be +25, the next odd number, with a positive sign.Step 5: Therefore, the next term is -2 + 25 = 23. Verification / Alternative check: We can summarise the pattern as: start at 2, then repeatedly add or subtract consecutive odd numbers starting from 17 with alternating signs. That is, 2 + 17 = 19, 19 - 19 = 0, 0 + 21 = 21, 21 - 23 = -2, and -2 + 25 = 23. This reconstruction reproduces all the given terms and supplies a single consistent next term. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Values 25, 27 and 29 would require differences of 27, 29 or 31 from -2, which would break the clean progression of odd differences 17, 19, 21, 23, 25. Only 23 gives a next difference of +25, so the other options do not match the identified pattern. Common Pitfalls: Some learners may look only at the absolute sizes of the numbers and not notice how the differences alternate between positive and negative. Others may try to fit a multiplication rule, which does not work with the presence of negative terms. Checking the differences and seeing whether they follow a nice sequence such as consecutive odd numbers is often the fastest path to the solution. Final Answer: The next number in the series, obtained by adding 25 to -2, is 23.

Question 12

From the numbers 3, 19, 67 and 133, which is the odd one out based on primality and composite structure?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This is a straightforward odd one out question that relies on basic number theory concepts, specifically prime and composite numbers. You are asked to identify which number among 3, 19, 67 and 133 does not share the same property as the others. Given Data / Assumptions: The numbers are: 3 19 67 133 We assume that three of these numbers are primes, while one is composite (that is, it has non trivial factors besides 1 and itself). Concept / Approach: A prime number has exactly two distinct positive divisors, 1 and the number itself. A composite number has additional divisors. To solve this question, we test each number to see whether it can be factored into smaller integers. The one that can be factored non trivially is the odd one out. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Test 3. The only positive divisors of 3 are 1 and 3, so 3 is prime.Step 2: Test 19. This number has no divisors other than 1 and 19. It is not divisible by 2, 3, 5 or any integer up to the square root of 19, so it is prime.Step 3: Test 67. It is not divisible by 2, 3, 5 or 7. Since 7^2 = 49 and 11^2 = 121, we only need to test divisors up to 7. None of them divide 67, so 67 is also prime.Step 4: Test 133. We find that 133 = 7 * 19, so it has divisors 1, 7, 19 and 133, making it composite. Verification / Alternative check: We can further confirm 133's composite nature by simple divisibility tests. It is odd, so it is not divisible by 2. The sum of its digits is 1 + 3 + 3 = 7, not a multiple of 3, so it is not divisible by 3. However, 133 / 7 = 19, which is an integer. This quick test confirms that 133 has a factor 7 and therefore is not prime. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The numbers 3, 19 and 67 are all primes. They share the same fundamental property, while 133 does not. Choosing any of the primes as the odd one would leave a composite number grouped with three primes, which would not make sense given the usual structure of such questions. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes confuse larger primes with composites because they are not familiar with prime tests beyond small numbers. It is helpful to remember that you only need to test for divisibility up to the square root of the number when checking for primality. Doing so quickly shows that 3, 19 and 67 have no small factors, while 133 does. Final Answer: The only composite number in the list, and therefore the odd one out, is 133.

Question 13

In the series 5, 11, 21, 44, ?, 175, find the missing number by analysing the pattern that doubles each term and then adjusts by a small integer.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This number series 5, 11, 21, 44, ?, 175 exhibits significant growth from term to term. The pattern appears to involve doubling each term and then adding or subtracting a small, systematically changing integer. Recognising this structure allows us to determine the missing value in the series. Given Data / Assumptions: The known terms are: 5 11 21 44 ? 175 We assume there is a fixed two step rule that takes each term to the next by using multiplication by 2 and then adding or subtracting a small sequence of integers that alternates in sign and increases. Concept / Approach: A useful idea is to test whether the rule is of the form a(n+1) = 2 * a(n) ± k, where the sign and the value of k follow a simple pattern such as +1, −1, +2, −2, +3, etc. We check this for consecutive transitions and see whether it reproduces the given terms and leads to a unique missing value that matches the last term 175. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: From 5 to 11. Check 5 * 2 + 1 = 10 + 1 = 11. So here we double and add 1.Step 2: From 11 to 21. Check 11 * 2 − 1 = 22 − 1 = 21. So we now double and subtract 1.Step 3: From 21 to 44. Check 21 * 2 + 2 = 42 + 2 = 44. Now we double and add 2.Step 4: This suggests a pattern: multiply by 2 and then alternately add and subtract, with the magnitude of the integer increasing: +1, −1, +2, −2, +3, ... .Step 5: From 44 to the missing term, we should apply the next stage of the pattern, which is double then subtract 2: 44 * 2 − 2 = 88 − 2 = 86.Step 6: From 86 to 175, check the final step: 86 * 2 + 3 = 172 + 3 = 175. This follows the next part of the pattern, double then add 3. Verification / Alternative check: We can summarise the sequence with the rule a(n+1) = 2 * a(n) + s, where s follows the cycle +1, −1, +2, −2, +3. Applying it from the start gives 5 → 11 → 21 → 44 → 86 → 175, perfectly matching all given terms when the missing term is 86. Because the final known term 175 also fits the rule when 86 is used, this strongly confirms the consistency of our solution. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Values 78, 94 and 102 would not allow the transform 2 * a(n) + s to generate 175 using the next adjustment of +3, and they would break the simple alternating pattern of ±1, ±2, ±3 in the earlier steps. Only 86 satisfies both the intermediate step from 44 and the final step to 175 with a neat and consistent adjustment sequence. Common Pitfalls: Many students look only at the raw differences between terms (6, 10, 23, ?) and do not notice the more structured rule involving doubling plus or minus small integers. When numbers grow roughly by a factor of 2, always test rules of the form 2 * a(n) ± k rather than relying solely on first differences. Final Answer: The missing number that keeps the doubling and alternating adjustment pattern consistent is 86.

Question 14

In this aptitude number series question, find the missing number in the series: 5, 9, 15, 23, ?, 45.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This aptitude question tests understanding of simple number series based on increasing differences. Such questions are common in competitive exams and interview tests where you must quickly identify the underlying pattern and use it to find the missing term in the sequence 5, 9, 15, 23, ?, 45. Given Data / Assumptions: Given series: 5, 9, 15, 23, ?, 45 Exactly one term is missing in the middle of the series. The pattern is assumed to be consistent throughout the sequence. Only one option should correctly complete the series. Concept / Approach: The most common approach in such series is to look at the differences between consecutive terms. If those differences follow a simple pattern, we can extend that pattern to find the missing number. Often, the differences may themselves form an arithmetic progression or follow a simple incremental rule. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Find the differences between consecutive terms.5 to 9: 9 - 5 = 49 to 15: 15 - 9 = 615 to 23: 23 - 15 = 8Step 2: Observe the pattern in the differences: 4, 6, 8.Step 3: The differences are increasing by 2 each time: 4, 6, 8, 10, 12.Step 4: Add the next difference 10 to 23 to get the missing term: 23 + 10 = 33.Step 5: Check the next step: 33 + 12 = 45, which matches the last given term. Verification / Alternative check: If the difference pattern is correct, all terms including the last one must fit. Using 33 as the missing term gives differences 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, forming a clean arithmetic progression with common difference 2. This confirms that 33 is consistent with the entire series. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 29: This would give a difference of 6 from 23 and then 16 to 45, breaking the smooth pattern of increasing differences by 2. 31: This would create differences 4, 6, 8, 8, 14, which do not form any simple regular pattern. 35: This would give differences 4, 6, 8, 12, 10, again destroying the consistent increase by 2 in the differences. Common Pitfalls: A common error is to look only at the numbers themselves without examining the differences, or to stop after checking only the first few steps of the pattern. Sometimes students also guess based on rough size rather than a clear numeric rule. Always verify that your chosen number keeps the pattern valid for the entire series, including the last term. Final Answer: The missing number that correctly completes the series is 33.

Question 15

In this letter sequence reasoning question, find the group of letters that does not belong to the set: KMNL, JLMK, PRSQ, VWYZ.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests pattern recognition in letter groups from the English alphabet. Such questions are common in verbal and non-verbal reasoning sections where you must observe the relative positions of letters and identify which group breaks the underlying rule. Given Data / Assumptions: Given letter groups: KMNL, JLMK, PRSQ, VWYZ Exactly one of these groups does not follow the same positional pattern. The sequence is based on alphabet positions of the letters. We assume a consistent rule in three of the groups and find the one that breaks it. Concept / Approach: The approach is to convert each letter into its alphabetical position and then look for a consistent numeric pattern. For example, A = 1, B = 2, C = 3 and so on up to Z = 26. Once the letter positions are known, we compare the differences between consecutive letters in each group to see which group behaves differently. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Convert KMNL to positions: K(11), M(13), N(14), L(12).Differences: 11 to 13 = +2, 13 to 14 = +1, 14 to 12 = -2.Step 2: Convert JLMK: J(10), L(12), M(13), K(11).Differences: 10 to 12 = +2, 12 to 13 = +1, 13 to 11 = -2.Step 3: Convert PRSQ: P(16), R(18), S(19), Q(17).Differences: 16 to 18 = +2, 18 to 19 = +1, 19 to 17 = -2.Step 4: Convert VWYZ: V(22), W(23), Y(25), Z(26).Differences: 22 to 23 = +1, 23 to 25 = +2, 25 to 26 = +1. Verification / Alternative check: In KMNL, JLMK and PRSQ the pattern of differences between letters is consistently +2, then +1, then -2. However, in VWYZ the pattern is +1, +2, +1, which clearly breaks the rule. Thus, VWYZ does not conform to the consistent structure that the other three groups share. Why Other Options Are Wrong: KMNL: Perfectly follows the +2, +1, -2 pattern of letter movements in the alphabet. JLMK: Also follows the same +2, +1, -2 pattern, so it belongs to the main group. PRSQ: Again satisfies the +2, +1, -2 pattern and is consistent with the other two correct groups. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to focus on visual similarity of the letter groups instead of translating them to numerical positions. Another error is to check only part of the pattern and miss that all three correct groups share the exact same sequence of increments and decrements. Always check the full movement pattern for each option. Final Answer: The group of letters that does not belong to the pattern is VWYZ.

Question 16

In this number series aptitude question, determine the next term in the sequence: 1, 3, 6, 11, 20, 37, ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This number series problem checks your ability to recognize patterns in second-level differences. Instead of a simple arithmetic or geometric progression, the series 1, 3, 6, 11, 20, 37, ? is built using a rule that applies to the differences between consecutive terms, and those differences themselves follow another pattern. Given Data / Assumptions: Series: 1, 3, 6, 11, 20, 37, ? Exactly one correct next term needs to be found. The pattern is consistent throughout the series. The same logic that produced earlier terms is used to produce the next term. Concept / Approach: When the pattern in the terms is not immediately obvious, a standard method is to examine the differences between consecutive terms. Sometimes these differences form a new recognizable series, such as an arithmetic progression or a pattern involving multiplication or doubling. If needed, we then check the differences of those differences, known as second-level differences. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Compute first-level differences.3 - 1 = 26 - 3 = 311 - 6 = 520 - 11 = 937 - 20 = 17So the differences are: 2, 3, 5, 9, 17.Step 2: Look for a pattern in these differences.Observe that each difference from the second one onward is obtained using the rule: next difference = 2 * previous difference - 1.Check: 2 * 2 - 1 = 3, 2 * 3 - 1 = 5, 2 * 5 - 1 = 9, 2 * 9 - 1 = 17.Step 3: Use the same rule to get the next difference.Next difference = 2 * 17 - 1 = 34 - 1 = 33.Step 4: Add this next difference to the last term.Required next term = 37 + 33 = 70. Verification / Alternative check: Rebuilding the series with the rule confirms the answer. Starting from 1 and repeatedly adding differences 2, 3, 5, 9, 17, 33 we obtain 1, 3, 6, 11, 20, 37, 70. Every step respects the formula next difference = 2 * previous difference - 1, so the pattern is consistent. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 49: Would correspond to adding only 12 to 37, which does not fit the rapid growth pattern of the differences. 56: Requires adding 19, but 19 cannot be obtained from the rule 2 * previous difference - 1 applied to 17. 64: Would require adding 27, which does not match the consistent recurrence for differences. Common Pitfalls: Students often try to force a simple arithmetic progression on the original terms, missing that the real structure lies in the differences. Another mistake is stopping after checking only one or two differences and guessing. For non-trivial series like this, always consider patterns in the first and sometimes second-level differences. Final Answer: The next number in the sequence is 70.

Question 17

In this aptitude number series question, find the odd number out from the series: 71, 88, 113, 150, 203, 277.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This reasoning problem asks you to identify the odd number out in the series 71, 88, 113, 150, 203, 277. Instead of a positional number pattern, the key idea here is to use divisibility properties to see which term behaves differently from the others. Given Data / Assumptions: Series: 71, 88, 113, 150, 203, 277 Exactly one number does not share a common property with the rest. We look for a simple and consistent numerical property, such as divisibility by a small integer. Concept / Approach: A common technique in odd one out questions is to examine divisibility by small primes like 2, 3, 5, 7 or 11. The goal is to find a property that all but one number either satisfy or fail to satisfy. Often, divisibility by 3 is the simplest and most revealing check. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Check divisibility by 3 using the sum of digits rule.71: 7 + 1 = 8, not divisible by 3.88: 8 + 8 = 16, not divisible by 3.113: 1 + 1 + 3 = 5, not divisible by 3.150: 1 + 5 + 0 = 6, which is divisible by 3.203: 2 + 0 + 3 = 5, not divisible by 3.277: 2 + 7 + 7 = 16, not divisible by 3.Step 2: Interpret the results.Only 150 has digit sum divisible by 3 and therefore is divisible by 3 itself. All other numbers are not divisible by 3. Verification / Alternative check: You can directly divide each number by 3 as a secondary check. 150 / 3 = 50 exactly, while all the other numbers leave a remainder when divided by 3. No comparable simple property (such as divisibility by 2, 5, or 7) isolates exactly one number in this set as clearly as divisibility by 3 does. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 71: Not divisible by 3, so it shares the main property with 88, 113, 203 and 277. 113: Also not divisible by 3, so it fits the common group pattern. 203: Again not divisible by 3, remaining consistent with the majority of the series. 277: Not divisible by 3, so it cannot be the odd one out based on this key property. Common Pitfalls: Many learners initially search for complex patterns involving squares, cubes or differences between terms and overlook simpler divisibility patterns. Another frequent mistake is to accept a property that applies to more than one candidate, which violates the requirement of a single odd term. Always validate that your chosen property isolates exactly one number in the series. Final Answer: The odd number out in the given series is 150.

Question 18

In this number series aptitude question, find the next number in the series: 35, 36, 55, 111, ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question examines your ability to detect a pattern where each term is generated by multiplying the previous term by an increasing factor and then adding a constant. The series 35, 36, 55, 111, ? is a good example of a slightly non-standard progression commonly used in aptitude tests. Given Data / Assumptions: Series: 35, 36, 55, 111, ? We must determine the single correct next term. The pattern is consistent and uses the previous term to generate the next term. Concept / Approach: When differences between terms are not constant, it is often helpful to consider multiplicative patterns. Sometimes, the multiplier increases by a fixed amount, or alternates in a clear way. Here, we will examine both multiplication and addition together to reveal the rule that generates the next term. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Check how 36 is related to 35.35 * 1 + 1 = 36.Step 2: Check how 55 is related to 36.36 * 1.5 + 1 = 54 + 1 = 55.Step 3: Check how 111 is related to 55.55 * 2 + 1 = 110 + 1 = 111.Step 4: Recognize the pattern in the multipliers.The factor is increasing by 0.5 each time: 1, 1.5, 2, and next will be 2.5, while we always add 1 at the end.Step 5: Apply the pattern to find the next term.Next term = 111 * 2.5 + 1 = 277.5 + 1 = 278.5. Verification / Alternative check: Rebuilding the series using the rule confirms consistency. Start from 35 and repeatedly apply multiply by 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 and add 1 each time to obtain 36, 55, 111 and 278.5 respectively. The smooth increase in the multiplier by 0.5 and constant addition of 1 indicates this is the intended logic for the series. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 264.5: This does not correspond to multiplying 111 by any natural step in the factor sequence 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 plus 1. 212.5: This value would require a lower multiplier than 2.5, breaking the increasing multiplier pattern. 202: This is too small and cannot be generated by any reasonable continuation of the factor sequence used for earlier terms. Common Pitfalls: A frequent mistake is to consider only additive differences between terms and miss a hidden multiplication pattern. Another issue is to approximate the next term based on rough size instead of deriving it from a precise rule. Always inspect both differences and ratios, especially when the numbers grow faster than in a simple arithmetic progression. Final Answer: The next number in the series is 278.5.

Question 19

In this alternating number series question, find the next term in the sequence: 11, 5.5, 10, 6.5, 9, ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This problem illustrates a classic alternating number series used in aptitude exams. The sequence 11, 5.5, 10, 6.5, 9, ? interleaves two simpler subseries. Identifying these hidden subseries is the key to quickly and accurately determining the missing term. Given Data / Assumptions: Full series: 11, 5.5, 10, 6.5, 9, ? The series alternates between two patterns, one on odd positions and one on even positions. Exactly one value correctly continues both underlying patterns. Concept / Approach: When a sequence seems to move up and down without a simple rule, it often consists of two interleaved sequences. We split the terms into two groups: those in odd positions and those in even positions. Each group is then analyzed separately for a simple arithmetic pattern such as a fixed increase or decrease. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Separate the sequence into odd and even positions.Odd positions (1, 3, 5): 11, 10, 9.Even positions (2, 4, 6): 5.5, 6.5, ?.Step 2: Analyze the odd-position series.11 to 10: decrease by 1.10 to 9: decrease by 1.Thus, odd-position terms follow: 11, 10, 9, 8, ... (subtract 1 each time).Step 3: Analyze the even-position series.5.5 to 6.5: increase by 1.Therefore, the next even-position term should be 6.5 + 1 = 7.5.Step 4: Place this result in the original sequence as the sixth term.The completed sequence becomes 11, 5.5, 10, 6.5, 9, 7.5. Verification / Alternative check: Rechecking both subseries confirms the logic. The odd-position series is a simple decreasing sequence with difference minus 1 each time. The even-position series is a simple increasing sequence with difference plus 1 each time. Since 7.5 satisfies the even-position pattern without disturbing the odd-position pattern, it is the unique correct answer. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 6.5: Repeating 6.5 would break the clean increasing pattern of the even positions. 8.5: This would introduce an increase of 2 from 6.5, which does not match the earlier step of +1. 10.5: This value is too large and does not fit either the odd or even subseries pattern. Common Pitfalls: Many learners attempt to find a single rule relating consecutive terms and become confused by the apparent irregularity. The key is to recognize that some sequences interleave two simpler progressions. Always try splitting into odd and even positions when the series seems to bounce up and down without a simple linear pattern. Final Answer: The next term in the series is 7.5.

Question 20

In this aptitude reasoning question on number series, find the odd number out from the list: 61, 66, 83, 121, 185.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question asks you to identify the odd number out from the list 61, 66, 83, 121, 185. Instead of a forward series pattern, the focus is on a distinctive numeric property that one number has and the others do not. Such classification questions are common in the number reasoning section of aptitude tests. Given Data / Assumptions: Numbers given: 61, 66, 83, 121, 185 Exactly one number must be considered different based on a clear mathematical property. The property should be simple, such as being a perfect square or cube, or relating to prime or composite status. Concept / Approach: One straightforward method is to check for perfect squares, cubes, and basic divisibility patterns. Perfect squares are numbers that can be written as n^2, where n is an integer. If exactly one number in the set is a perfect square and the others are not, that number will be the odd one out. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Test each number to see if it is a perfect square.61: Square root is between 7 and 8, so it is not a perfect square.66: Square root is between 8 and 9, not a perfect square.83: Square root is between 9 and 10, not a perfect square.121: Square root is exactly 11, so 121 = 11^2, a perfect square.185: Square root is between 13 and 14, not a perfect square.Step 2: Summarize the observation.121 alone is a perfect square. The other four numbers are not perfect squares. Verification / Alternative check: We can confirm by listing nearby perfect squares: 10^2 = 100, 11^2 = 121, 12^2 = 144. Only 121 from the given set appears in this list. No similar unique property like primality or divisibility by a small fixed number isolates any of the other values alone, making the perfect square property the cleanest discriminator. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 61: Not a perfect square, and several other numbers share this non-square property. 66: Also not a perfect square and does not have a unique easy-to-use property in this group. 83: Again not a perfect square and shares this trait with most of the other numbers. 185: Not a perfect square and not uniquely different from the rest in any simple way. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes focus too much on primes versus composites here. While 61 and 83 are prime, there are two such primes, so neither alone can be selected as the odd one out. The principle is that the odd term should be unique based on the chosen property. The perfect square property singles out exactly 121, so it is the correct answer. Final Answer: The odd number out in the given list is 121.

Odd Man Out and Series Questions