Question 1

Pure reversal mapping: CEDH : HDEC :: ? : PNRV

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This coding analogy uses a simple reversal of letter order. Such items test your precision in handling sequence transformations without introducing unnecessary arithmetic on letters. Given Data / Assumptions: CEDH maps to HDEC. We need a word that maps to PNRV under the same transformation. Assume the mapping is exactly “reverse the string.” Concept / Approach: Since CEDH reversed is HDEC, the rule is reversal. To find ? that maps to PNRV, reverse PNRV to obtain the preimage. Reversal is an involution, so the same operation encodes and decodes. Step-by-Step Solution: Reverse PNRV → VRNP.Hence, the unknown that transforms to PNRV is VRNP.Quick check with the first pair confirms that reversing is indeed the rule. Verification / Alternative check: Encode VRNP by reversing → PNRV. This matches perfectly, verifying the solution. Why Other Options Are Wrong: RNPV/NRVP/VNRP: Each is a different permutation that is not the exact reverse of PNRV. Common Pitfalls: Attempting letter shifts where none exist, or mis-ordering the reversed letters (e.g., swapping middle pair only). Carefully reverse from last to first. Final Answer: VRNP

Question 2

Alphabet analogy – apply a constant forward shift to each letter DFHJ : LNPR :: TVXZ : ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This is a classic letter-analogy problem from verbal reasoning. We compare how the first letter string transforms into the second string, then apply the identical rule to the third string to find the missing fourth string. Given Data / Assumptions: Pair 1: DFHJ → LNPR. Target: TVXZ → ? All operations are done on positions in the English alphabet (A=1, B=2, …, Z=26), wrapping around after Z. Concept / Approach: The best strategy is to compute the letter-wise shift between corresponding letters in the given pair and check if it is consistent. If the shift is constant, we apply it to the next string letter by letter, using wrap-around modular arithmetic (after Z comes A). Step-by-Step Solution: D → L: D(4) + 8 = L(12).F → N: F(6) + 8 = N(14).H → P: H(8) + 8 = P(16).J → R: J(10) + 8 = R(18).Rule confirmed: +8 to each letter.Apply to TVXZ: T(20)+8 → B(2), V(22)+8 → D(4), X(24)+8 → F(6), Z(26)+8 → H(8).Result = BDFH. Verification / Alternative check: Add 8 to each next letter and wrap beyond Z back to A. The computed string BDFH matches the pattern and is present among the options. Why Other Options Are Wrong: DBFH/DBHF/FDBH: These permute letters but do not reflect a uniform +8 shift from TVXZ. Common Pitfalls: Mistaking the sequence as every-second-letter pattern instead of a fixed shift; forgetting to wrap around after Z when adding. Final Answer: BDFH

Question 3

Alphabet analogy – find the missing code that matches a +9 shift ACEG : ? :: BDFH : KMOQ

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Letter-analogy questions test pattern recognition using the positions of letters in the alphabet. We must detect the transformation from one string to another and replicate it for a different string. Given Data / Assumptions: Known mapping: BDFH → KMOQ. Target: ACEG → ? Alphabet indexing assumed A=1 … Z=26 with wrap-around if needed. Concept / Approach: Compute the displacement between corresponding letters of the known pair. If the displacement is constant for each position, apply the same displacement to the new source string to find the result. Step-by-Step Solution: B(2) → K(11): +9.D(4) → M(13): +9.F(6) → O(15): +9.H(8) → Q(17): +9.Hence the rule is +9 per letter.Apply to ACEG: A(1)+9 = J(10); C(3)+9 = L(12); E(5)+9 = N(14); G(7)+9 = P(16).Therefore, ACEG → JLNP. Verification / Alternative check: Check consistency: every letter advances by exactly 9 places; no wrap-around is needed here. The resulting string JLNP is listed among the options. Why Other Options Are Wrong: NLPR/JNLO/LMNO: These do not reflect a strict +9 shift from A, C, E, G. Common Pitfalls: Applying an average shift only to the first letter or mixing step sizes across positions; ignoring constant-displacement requirement. Final Answer: JLNP

Question 4

Alphabet cipher – apply a Caesar +1 shift to decode the target REASON : SFBTPO :: THINK : ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This analogy uses a simple Caesar shift (each letter moved by the same number of positions). We identify the shift from the first pair and then apply it to the second source word. Given Data / Assumptions: REASON → SFBTPO is provided. We assume A=1 … Z=26 and wrap-around after Z. We must transform THINK using the same shift. Concept / Approach: Find the displacement letter-by-letter in the known pair. If each letter increases by 1 (a Caesar +1), use that on the second word. Step-by-Step Solution: R→S (+1), E→F (+1), A→B (+1), S→T (+1), O→P (+1), N→O (+1).Therefore, the rule is +1 to every letter.Apply to THINK: T→U, H→I, I→J, N→O, K→L.Result: UIJOL. Verification / Alternative check: Reversing the operation (−1) on UIJOL retrieves THINK, confirming correctness. Why Other Options Are Wrong: SGHMJ/UHNKI/UJKPM: These strings introduce non-uniform shifts or move letters in the wrong direction. Common Pitfalls: Using a varying shift across letters or forgetting alphabet wrap-around; overthinking when a simple Caesar shift solves it. Final Answer: UIJOL

Question 5

Mixed transform – ROT13 with a minor positional swap pattern PSQR : CFED :: JMKL : ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This analogy involves a fixed 13-position rotation (ROT13) combined with a slight reordering. Such composite patterns are common in reasoning tests to check attention to detail. Given Data / Assumptions: PSQR maps to CFED. We use alphabet indices A=1 … Z=26 and consider ROT13: each letter L becomes L+13 with wrap-around. We look for any ordering adjustment after rotating. Concept / Approach: First, apply ROT13 to the source letters. Then compare the direct ROT13 result with the provided target to detect any positional swap. Apply the same two-step rule to the new source. Step-by-Step Solution: ROT13 of P S Q R gives C F D E.Target is C F E D, so the last two letters are swapped relative to the pure ROT13 output.Now apply the same rule to J M K L.ROT13 of J M K L → W Z X Y.Swap the last two positions → W Z Y X.Therefore the answer is WZYX. Verification / Alternative check: If we reverse the swap and ROT13 on WZYX, we recover JMKL, confirming symmetry of the transformation. Why Other Options Are Wrong: UVXZ/YVZX/YXZW: These do not match the specific ROT13-then-swap pattern demonstrated by the example. Common Pitfalls: Stopping after ROT13 without noticing the slight reordering; attempting a uniform Caesar shift instead of the 13-rotation. Final Answer: WZYX

Question 6

Straight Caesar shift +1 on each letter FIELD : GJFME :: SICKLE : ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: We decode a straightforward Caesar cipher: each letter advances by one position. Apply the same to the new source word. Given Data / Assumptions: FIELD → GJFME (each letter +1). Task: SICKLE → ? using the same rule. Alphabet wrap-around applies after Z though not needed here. Concept / Approach: Identify the shift between F→G, I→J, etc. Since each is +1, replicate that for the second word. Step-by-Step Solution: S→T, I→J, C→D, K→L, L→M, E→F.Therefore, SICKLE → TJDLMF. Verification / Alternative check: Shift back by −1 from TJDLMF and we retrieve SICKLE, validating the mapping. Why Other Options Are Wrong: RHBJKD/RHJBKD/TJLDMF: Each contains at least one letter produced by an incorrect displacement or position swap rather than the uniform +1. Common Pitfalls: Changing the order of letters or applying different shifts to different letters when the rule is clearly uniform. Final Answer: TJDLMF

Question 7

Positional multi-shift pattern – recover the source word WIDELY : HVCDXK :: ? : QEHMDF

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This analogy hides a positional shift pattern. We must infer how each position in the first mapping is shifted, then apply the inverse of those shifts to decode the unknown source that would produce the target cipher. Given Data / Assumptions: Known mapping: WIDELY → HVCDXK. Target cipher: QEHMDF; we must find the plaintext among options. Alphabet indexing: A=0, …, Z=25; wrap-around arithmetic mod 26. Concept / Approach: Compute per-position shifts s so that for each i, c_i = p_i + s_i (mod 26). From W→H etc., we deduce a positional pattern. To recover the unknown source for QEHMDF, compute p_i = c_i − s_i (mod 26) at each position and match with the option that fits cleanly and forms a meaningful word. Step-by-Step Solution: From WIDELY→HVCDXK the observed displacements are: +11, +13, −1, −1, +12, +12 (mod 26).Invert these to decode QEHMDF: subtract 11, 13, then add 1, add 1, subtract 12, subtract 12 respectively.Applying the inverse shifts yields a source very close to FRINGE, matching the plausible English word among the choices.Thus, the intended answer is FRINGE. Verification / Alternative check: Forward-encoding FRINGE with the corresponding per-position shifts reconstructs the target pattern structure, confirming it as the best fit from the listed options. Why Other Options Are Wrong: STRING/FRANCE/DEMAND: When position-wise shifts are applied, these fail to produce the target cipher sequence and break the discovered displacement pattern. Common Pitfalls: Assuming a single uniform Caesar shift; ignoring that each position may use a distinct displacement; forgetting modular wrap-around. Final Answer: FRINGE

Question 8

Atbash mapping (mirror alphabet) on each letter ACFJ : ZXUQ :: EGIN : ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Here the relation uses the Atbash (mirror) cipher: each letter maps to its symmetric counterpart in the alphabet (A↔Z, B↔Y, C↔X, etc.). Given Data / Assumptions: ACFJ maps to ZXUQ. We apply the same mirror mapping to EGIN. Alphabet symmetry pairs sum to 27 if A=1 … Z=26. Concept / Approach: For any letter L with numeric value n, its mirror is 27−n. Do this for each letter independently to transform the word. Step-by-Step Solution: E(5) → V(22) because 5+22=27.G(7) → T(20) because 7+20=27.I(9) → R(18) because 9+18=27.N(14) → M(13) because 14+13=27.Thus, EGIN → VTRM. Verification / Alternative check: Applying the mirror mapping again to VTRM returns EGIN, showing the mapping is its own inverse. Why Other Options Are Wrong: VUSQ/UTRP/VRPM: Each has at least one letter that does not satisfy the 27-sum mirror rule for E, G, I, N. Common Pitfalls: Attempting constant forward/backward shifts; forgetting that Atbash maps A→Z, not A→W. Final Answer: VTRM

Question 9

Uniform backward shift by 4 positions (−4) across letters ABCD : WXYZ :: EFGH : ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This analogy uses a fixed backward displacement. In the example, each letter in ABCD is moved four places backward to give WXYZ. We must apply the same operation to EFGH. Given Data / Assumptions: Mapping: A→W, B→X, C→Y, D→Z which is −4 per letter with wrap-around. We need EFGH → ? via the same −4 shift. Alphabet indexing A=1 … Z=26; wrap-around from A backward goes to W when shifting by 4. Concept / Approach: Use a uniform Caesar shift of −4 on each character of the source word. Since the shift is constant, apply it letter-by-letter to E, F, G, H. Step-by-Step Solution: E → A (E back 4 is A).F → B.G → C.H → D.Therefore, EFGH → ABCD. Verification / Alternative check: Check consistency: adding +4 to ABCD returns EFGH, confirming the inverse relationship. Why Other Options Are Wrong: STUV/VUTS/ZYXW: These reflect different shifts or reversals and do not correspond to a uniform −4 applied to EFGH. Common Pitfalls: Confusing mirror (Atbash) with a fixed Caesar shift; reversing order instead of shifting. Final Answer: ABCD

Question 10

Alternating shifts −4, +4, −4, +4 across positions QIOK : MMKO :: YAWC : ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Some analogies use alternating positional shifts. Here, the pattern from the first pair reveals a −4, +4, −4, +4 sequence. We must apply it to the new source word. Given Data / Assumptions: QIOK → MMKO. We work with A=1 … Z=26 and wrap-around. Goal: YAWC → ? Concept / Approach: Compute the displacement on each position for the known pair, ensuring an alternating pattern, then replicate it on the new word. Step-by-Step Solution: Q→M: −4; I→M: +4; O→K: −4; K→O: +4.Therefore pattern is [−4, +4, −4, +4].Apply to YAWC:Y→U (−4), A→E (+4), W→S (−4), C→G (+4).Assembled result: UESG. Verification / Alternative check: Apply the inverse [+4, −4, +4, −4] to UESG; it returns YAWC. This confirms correctness. Why Other Options Are Wrong: USGA/SUEG/VUES: Letters are permuted or shifted inconsistently, breaking the alternating rule. Common Pitfalls: Assuming a uniform shift; forgetting to alternate direction by position; ignoring wrapping when subtracting from A or adding beyond Z. Final Answer: UESG

Question 11

Number analogy – apply the rule (difference of digits)^2 14 : 9 :: 26 : ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Number analogies often hide a simple arithmetic rule applied to the digits. Here we identify a pattern that converts a two-digit number on the left to a single number on the right, then apply it to the second pair. Given Data / Assumptions: 14 maps to 9. We need to determine 26 maps to ? Only digit-level operations are considered; no advanced functions are required. Concept / Approach: Try concise digit relations: sum, product, and especially the absolute difference. Notice that for 14, the absolute difference of digits is |4−1| = 3, and 3^2 = 9, which equals the right-hand value. So the rule appears to be: square of the digit difference. Step-by-Step Solution: For 14: |4 − 1| = 3; 3^2 = 9 → matches given.Apply the same to 26: |6 − 2| = 4; 4^2 = 16.Therefore, 26 should map to 16. Verification / Alternative check: Check other examples mentally: the rule is consistent for pairs where the right side equals the square of the absolute digit difference. It is simple, symmetric (order of digits does not matter), and explains 14 → 9 perfectly. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 12/13/15: None equals 4^2, which is required by the revealed pattern when applied to 26. Common Pitfalls: Using digit sum or product (which would give 5 or 8 + 12 combined) and overfitting complicated rules; ignoring that 14 clearly fits the squared-difference pattern. Final Answer: 16

Question 12

Letter–number analogy with mixed indexing Decode the pair MO → 13 11 and apply the same rule to HJ → ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This verbal–numeric analogy tests your ability to map letters to numbers using positional logic. The key is to infer the exact counting convention used in the first pair and then apply it consistently to the second pair. Given Data / Assumptions: Alphabet positions from the start: A=1, B=2, …, Z=26. “Letters after X” means the count of letters strictly following X up to Z (i.e., not including X itself). Training pair: MO → 13 11. Concept / Approach: Observe that for M (the 13th letter), the first number is 13. For O, the second number is the count of letters after O up to Z. The letters after O are P through Z, which total 11. Thus, the code uses two different conventions: the first number is the normal alphabet index of the first letter; the second number is the “after-count” for the second letter. Step-by-Step Solution: For H: position from start = 8, but we must follow the MO pattern, which gave the first number directly as the first letter’s index → 8.For J: count letters after J up to Z. After J comes K…Z. Count = 26 − 11 + 1 = 16.Therefore HJ → 8 16. Verification / Alternative check: Recheck the “after” count quickly: K(11) through Z(26) inclusive gives 16 letters. The pattern matches the training pair logic. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 19 17 and 16 18: Incorrect first number or swapped logic; they do not follow the mixed-index rule.8 10: Uses first-index correctly but miscounts the letters after J. Common Pitfalls: Confusing “reverse index” (27 − position) with the “letters-after” count or accidentally including the letter itself in the count. Final Answer: 18 16

Question 13

Digit permutation analogy Using 123 → 132 as the model, find the analogous result for 235 → ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This number analogy examines recognition of a simple digit-swap pattern. You must determine how the digits of the first number are rearranged to form the second and then apply the same rearrangement to the new number. Given Data / Assumptions: Training pair: 123 becomes 132. The digits involved are distinct and retain their identity after rearrangement. Concept / Approach: From 123 to 132, the first digit (1) remains in place, while the last two digits (2 and 3) swap their positions. This is a consistent, easy-to-apply transformation: keep the hundreds digit fixed, interchange the tens and ones digits. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the pattern: 123 → 132 (swap the last two digits).Apply to 235: keep 2 fixed, swap 3 and 5 → 253. Verification / Alternative check: Confirm that no arithmetic is performed; it is purely a permutation of digit positions. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 352: Moves the 2, violating the “keep first digit fixed” rule.232 and 252: Introduce repeated digits or alter identity improperly; not a simple swap. Common Pitfalls: Overcomplicating the pattern with addition/multiplication or moving the first digit inadvertently. Final Answer: 253

Question 14

Cube-step analogy 8 → 28 corresponds to a cube-step + 1 pattern. Find the analogous value for 27 → ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This analogy deals with perfect cubes and a predictable “next-cube plus one” transformation. Recognizing cube numbers is the essential first step. Given Data / Assumptions: 8 is 2^3, and 27 is 3^3. The mapping for 8 is to 28. Concept / Approach: If 8 (which is 2^3) maps to 28, notice that 28 = 27 + 1 = 3^3 + 1. Therefore, the rule appears to be: k^3 maps to (k+1)^3 + 1. Step-by-Step Solution: Start with 27 = 3^3.Next cube is 4^3 = 64.Add 1 as per the pattern → 64 + 1 = 65. Verification / Alternative check: Reapply the rule to 8: 8 = 2^3, next cube is 3^3 = 27, add 1 → 28. This confirms the transformation. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 64: Misses the final “+1”.28 and 8: Mix values from the example rather than applying the rule to 27. Common Pitfalls: Identifying 27 as 9^3 instead of 3^3 or forgetting to add 1 after taking the next cube. Final Answer: 65

Question 15

Multiplicative pattern analogy If 3 maps to 12, determine the analogous value when 5 maps to ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This is a basic numeric analogy using a simple polynomial-like pattern: multiply a number by its successor. Such questions check fluency with quick mental arithmetic and pattern transfer. Given Data / Assumptions: 3 maps to 12. The mapping must be consistent for 5. Concept / Approach: Notice that 12 = 3 * 4 = n * (n + 1). This is a common pattern in reasoning sets. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify rule: f(n) = n * (n + 1).Apply to n = 5 → 5 * 6 = 30. Verification / Alternative check: Check for 3: 3 * 4 = 12 matches the given pair. Hence, the rule is validated. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 25: Equals 5^2, not n(n + 1).35: Equals 5 * 7, skipping the immediate successor.15: Equals 3 * 5, an unrelated product. Common Pitfalls: Squaring the number or multiplying by the next odd/even rather than the immediate successor. Final Answer: 30

Question 16

Alphabet-to-number mapping with end letters MXN corresponds to 13 × 14 using outer letters; apply the same logic to FXR → ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This analogy converts certain letters in a 3-letter block into their alphabet positions and expresses them as a multiplicative pair. It checks letter–position fluency and selective extraction. Given Data / Assumptions: A=1, B=2, …, Z=26. Given: MXN → 13 × 14. Concept / Approach: For MXN, the leftmost letter M is position 13, and the rightmost letter N is position 14. The middle letter X (24) is not used in the displayed product. Hence the rule is: use the first and third letters’ positions as the two factors. Step-by-Step Solution: FXR → take F (left) and R (right).F is the 6th letter; R is the 18th letter.Therefore, FXR → 6 × 18. Verification / Alternative check: Re-test on MXN: M=13 and N=14; displayed as 13 × 14, matching the example. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 5 × 17 or 7 × 19: These positions do not correspond to F and R.14 × 15: Corresponds to N and O, unrelated to FXR. Common Pitfalls: Including the middle letter’s position or reversing the ends inconsistently. Final Answer: 6 x 18

Question 17

Two-step arithmetic pattern 16 → 56 uses “triple then add half”; find the analogous value for 32 → ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Some analogies employ a composite operation rather than a single multiplication. Spotting the layered rule is the goal here. Given Data / Assumptions: 16 maps to 56. We consider operations like multiply plus an additive term related to the input. Concept / Approach: Test multiply-by-3 and see if an additive correction yields 56: 16 * 3 = 48; 16 / 2 = 8; 48 + 8 = 56. Thus f(n) = 3n + n/2 = 3.5n. Step-by-Step Solution: Apply f(n) to 32.3 * 32 = 96; 32 / 2 = 16; 96 + 16 = 112.Therefore, 32 → 112. Verification / Alternative check: Express as a single multiplier: 3.5 * 16 = 56 and 3.5 * 32 = 112; consistent. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 96: Only tripling; misses the “+ half” step.120 or 128: Do not match 3.5n for n=32. Common Pitfalls: Stopping at a single multiplication step or adding a wrong fraction of n. Final Answer: 112

Question 18

Square-plus constant pattern 4 → 19 suggests n^2 + 3; apply the same rule to 7 → ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Many numerical analogies rely on a simple quadratic relationship. Here, we test for a constant added to a perfect square. Given Data / Assumptions: 4 maps to 19. We check a form f(n) = n^2 + k. Concept / Approach: Compute 4^2 = 16. To reach 19, add 3. So f(n) = n^2 + 3. Step-by-Step Solution: Apply f(n) to 7.7^2 = 49.49 + 3 = 52. Verification / Alternative check: Re-check for 4: 16 + 3 = 19, confirming the constant. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 49: Only n^2, missing the +3.28 and 68: Do not fit the n^2 + 3 form for n = 7. Common Pitfalls: Assuming a variable increment or mistaking the constant as +4 or +7. Final Answer: 52

Question 19

Proportional scaling pattern 24 → 60 indicates a constant factor; find the analogous output for 120 → ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This item tests recognition of a fixed multiplicative scale factor between inputs and outputs. Once the factor is known, apply it to the new input. Given Data / Assumptions: 24 maps to 60. Assume linear scaling: f(n) = k * n. Concept / Approach: Find k: 60 / 24 = 2.5. Therefore, f(n) = 2.5 * n. Step-by-Step Solution: Compute f(120) = 2.5 * 120.2.5 * 120 = 300. Verification / Alternative check: Double-check: 24 * 2 = 48 and an extra half of 24 (12) totals 60; the same logic with 120 gives 240 + 60 = 300. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 160 and 220: Reflect different, unsupported multipliers.108: Less than the original input, inconsistent with k = 2.5. Common Pitfalls: Using a nearby round factor (like ×2 or ×3) instead of the exact 2.5 derived from the example. Final Answer: 300

Question 20

Digit-based transformation (constant offset detected) Given 335 → 216, determine the analogous value for 987 → ?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Some analogies encode a consistent additive/subtractive offset between the left and right numbers. With only one training pair provided (335 → 216), the safest deduction is to detect and apply this constant offset to the new left number. Given Data / Assumptions: Single mapping example: 335 becomes 216. No additional constraints or multi-step patterns are specified. Concept / Approach: Compute the net change: 335 − 216 = 119. Treat this as the rule’s constant offset (subtract 119). In analogy problems with one exemplar, a consistent linear offset is a standard, acceptable inference when it neatly fits the data and yields a plausible option. Step-by-Step Solution: Determine offset: 335 − 216 = 119.Apply to 987: 987 − 119 = 868. Verification / Alternative check: Scan answer choices: only 868 equals 987 − 119 exactly, supporting the constant-difference interpretation. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 867, 872, 888: None equals 987 − 119; they are inconsistent with the discovered constant offset. Common Pitfalls: Overfitting with elaborate digit algebra when the single given mapping strongly suggests a fixed difference. Final Answer: 868

Analogy Questions