Difficulty: Medium
Correct Answer: 68
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:
The sequence is intended to follow a Fibonacci-like rule: each term equals the sum of the previous two. A single incorrect (faulty) term has been inserted. We must identify it from the choices.
Pattern Check:
Step-by-Step Conclusion:
The only violation is at the 68; it should have been 66 to preserve the “sum of the previous two” rule.
Verification / Alternative check:
All other adjacent sums hold exactly when 68 is replaced by 66.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
16, 25, 41, 107 all satisfy the recurrence with their neighbors; only 68 contradicts it.
Common Pitfalls:
Attempting to fit variable additions; the simple two-term sum explains all but the single faulty entry.
Final Answer:
68
Discussion & Comments