EPFO Assistant Prelims Mock Test - 9 - Bank Exams MCQ

Given statement:
R > M ≥ T ≤ Q = S
Thus, we can’t compare R and Q or Q and M.
Hence neither I (R > Q) nor II (Q ≥ M) is true.
Hence, option D is correct.

24 → 2 x 4 = 8

32 → 3 x 2 = 6

Following the common explanation, we get "The one who sits fifth to the left of Samuel, owns Ford car".
Hence, option C is correct.

Final arrangement:

Common Explanation:
References:
Certain number of persons is sitting in a circular table and is facing towards the center of the table.
Some of them own different cars.
No two persons have same car.
 
Inferences:
From above statements,
Keep above information in mind while solving this seating.
 
References:
Robert is sitting second to the left of Prince.
Samuel is sitting second to the left of Robert.
 
Inferences:
From above statements,
Let the position of the person be numbered as 1 to till last in clockwise direction.
Let the Prince sits at 1 and then Robert and Samuel will sit at 3 and 5 respectively.
By using above information we get the following seating,
 
 
References:
Two persons are sitting between Thakur and Prince.
Samuel and Thakur are not the immediate neighbors.
 
Inferences:
From above statements,
Thakur can’t sit at 4 (adjacent to Samuel)
Therefore, Thakur sits third to the right of Prince as shown,
Note: Thakur position is known only based on other statements.

 
References:
Qasim is sitting second to the right of Thakur.
Number of persons sitting between Qasim and Prince, when counted from right of Prince is four times as the number of persons sitting between Samuel and Qasim, when counted from left of Samuel.
 
Inferences:
From above statements,
Qasim is sitting second to the right of Thakur.
Given, Number of persons sitting between Qasim and Prince, when counted from right of Prince = 4 × number of persons sitting between Samuel and Qasim, when counted from left of Samuel
As per above seating, number of persons sitting between Qasim and Prince, when counted from right of Prince is 4
4 = 4 × number of persons sitting between Samuel and Qasim, when counted from left of Samuel
Therefore number of person sitting between Samuel and Qasim, when counted from left of Samuel, is 1.
Thus we can conclude that there are 11 persons sitting in the circle and Qasim and Thakur sit at 7 and 9 respectively as shown,
 
 
References:
The one, who sits immediate left of Samuel, owns Honda.
The one, who owns Ford, is sitting third to the left of Qasim.
The one, who owns Hyundai, is sitting second to the left of the one, who owns Ford.
Three persons are sitting between Thakur and the one, who owns Renault.
 
Inferences:
From above statements,
The one, who sits at 6, owns Honda (immediate left of Samuel)
The one, who sits at 10, owns Ford (third to the left of Qasim)
Prince owns Hyundai (second to the left of the one, who owns Ford)
Three persons are sitting between Thakur and the one, who owns Renault i.e. either Samuel or the one who sits at 2, owns Renault.
By using above information we get the following seating,

 
References:
Three persons are not sitting between the one, who owns Renault and the one, who owns Honda, when counted from the right of the one, who owns Honda.

Inferences:
From above statements,
If the one, who owns Renault, sits at 2, then there are 3 persons sitting between the one, who owns Renault and the one, who owns Honda, when counted from the right of the one, who owns Honda, which is not possible.
Therefore Samuel owns Renault.
All the given conditions get satisfied and we get the completed seating,

Following the common explanation, we get "Robert".
Robert sits third to the right of the one, who owns Honda car
Hence, option C is correct.

Final arrangement:

Common Explanation:
References:
Certain number of persons is sitting in a circular table and is facing towards the center of the table.
Some of them own different cars.
No two persons have same car.
 
Inferences:
From above statements,
Keep above information in mind while solving this seating.
 
References:
Robert is sitting second to the left of Prince.
Samuel is sitting second to the left of Robert.
 
Inferences:
From above statements,
Let the position of the person be numbered as 1 to till last in clockwise direction.
Let the Prince sits at 1 and then Robert and Samuel will sit at 3 and 5 respectively.
By using above information we get the following seating,
 
 
References:
Two persons are sitting between Thakur and Prince.
Samuel and Thakur are not the immediate neighbors.
 
Inferences:
From above statements,
Thakur can’t sit at 4 (adjacent to Samuel)
Therefore, Thakur sits third to the right of Prince as shown,
Note: Thakur position is known only based on other statements.

 
References:
Qasim is sitting second to the right of Thakur.
Number of persons sitting between Qasim and Prince, when counted from right of Prince is four times as the number of persons sitting between Samuel and Qasim, when counted from left of Samuel.
 
Inferences:
From above statements,
Qasim is sitting second to the right of Thakur.
Given, Number of persons sitting between Qasim and Prince, when counted from right of Prince = 4 × number of persons sitting between Samuel and Qasim, when counted from left of Samuel
As per above seating, number of persons sitting between Qasim and Prince, when counted from right of Prince is 4
4 = 4 × number of persons sitting between Samuel and Qasim, when counted from left of Samuel
Therefore number of person sitting between Samuel and Qasim, when counted from left of Samuel, is 1.
Thus we can conclude that there are 11 persons sitting in the circle and Qasim and Thakur sit at 7 and 9 respectively as shown,
 
 
References:
The one, who sits immediate left of Samuel, owns Honda.
The one, who owns Ford, is sitting third to the left of Qasim.
The one, who owns Hyundai, is sitting second to the left of the one, who owns Ford.
Three persons are sitting between Thakur and the one, who owns Renault.
 
Inferences:
From above statements,
The one, who sits at 6, owns Honda (immediate left of Samuel)
The one, who sits at 10, owns Ford (third to the left of Qasim)
Prince owns Hyundai (second to the left of the one, who owns Ford)
Three persons are sitting between Thakur and the one, who owns Renault i.e. either Samuel or the one who sits at 2, owns Renault.
By using above information we get the following seating,

 
References:
Three persons are not sitting between the one, who owns Renault and the one, who owns Honda, when counted from the right of the one, who owns Honda.

Inferences:
From above statements,
If the one, who owns Renault, sits at 2, then there are 3 persons sitting between the one, who owns Renault and the one, who owns Honda, when counted from the right of the one, who owns Honda, which is not possible.
Therefore Samuel owns Renault.
All the given conditions get satisfied and we get the completed seating,

E is C's daughter.

1. As per the given information, A and B are married, and B is a female member.
2. B is also the daughter-in-law of F, which means A is the son of F.
3. D is the only son of C, and E is the sister of D which suggests that both D and E are the children of C.
4. Since C is A's brother, D and E are the grandchildren of F.
5. F's husband is dead, therefore F is the mother of A and C.

Therefore, E is the daughter of C.

• A and B: They are a married couple.
• B and F: B is the daughter-in-law of F.
• A and F: A is the son of F.
• D and C: D is the son of C.
• E and D: E is the sister of D.
• C and A: C is the brother of A.
• E and C: E is the daughter of C.

• Family Tree Construction:
• First, we understand that A and B are a married couple.
• B is identified as a female and is also the daughter-in-law of F, which makes A the son of F.
• It is mentioned that F's husband is dead, so F is a widow.
• C is A's brother, so C is also a child of F.
• D is the only son of C, and E is the sister of D.

Therefore, D and E are the grandchildren of F.

• Identification of Female Members:
• B is identified as a female.
• F is identified as a female because it is stated that her husband is dead.
• E is identified as a female because she is described as the sister of D.

Males are A, C, and D.
In this family tree, the relationships are mentioned as follows:

• A and B are a married couple, with B being a female member.
• B is the daughter-in-law of F which means A is a child of F.
• D is the only son of C.
• E is the sister of D which means E and D are the children of C.
• F's husband is dead which means F is a widow and the mother of A.
• C is A's brother which means C and A are siblings and children of F.

Identifying the Males:

• A is a male because B is mentioned as the female in the married couple.
• D is a male because he is referred to as the 'only son of C'.
• C is a male because he is the brother of A.

The only word common to I and II is 'clear' and as such, only the code for 'clear' can be ascertained from the given information.

We can cleary observe from the figure that R is in either East or Southeast direction with respect to p.

The statement mentions the problem of increased migration of children to cities. But the ways to deal with the problem cannot be deduced from it. So, neither I nor II follows.

Nothing about the growth of economy is mentioned in the statement. So, I does not follow. Also, it is given that 35 per cent of national income is shared by 10 per cent of households. This indicates unequal distribution. So, II follows.

The need for separate rating agency for IT companies clearly indicates that such assessment requires a separate set of skills. So, I follows. However, the statement indicates only the need or demand and neither the future course of action nor its after-effects can be judged. So, II does not follow.

In 5 days, A would do 25% of the work. Since, B finishes the remaining 75% work in 10 days, we
can conclude that B’s work in a day = 7.5%
Thus, (A + B) = 12.5% per day.
Together they would take 100/12.5 = 8 days.

Answer – d) 26% Explanation : Let total apples be 100 first day he throws = 50*20/100 = 10 apples next day he throws = 40*40/100 = 16 apples so total = 26

Total number of candidates who qualified the test in 2009 and 2010 from various zones are:
P → (4.8 + 5.6) = 10.4
Q → (5.2 + 6.4) = 11.6
R → (6.8 + 7.4) = 14.2
S → (5.2 + 11.4) = 16.6
T → (6.9 + 9.4) = 16.3

Required percentage = 

Expenditure on steel

The three-dice combinations fall into 3 categories of outcomes: 1) All three dice have the same number 2) Two of the dice have the same number with the third having a different number than the pair 3) All three dice have different numbers By calculating the number of combinations in each category, we can determine the total number of different possible outcomes by summing the number of possible outcomes in each category.
First, let’s calculate how many combinations can be made if all 3 dice have the same number. Since there are only 6 numbers, there are only 6 ways for all three dice to have the same number (i.e., all 1’s, or all 2’s, etc.). Second, we can determine how many combinations can occur if only 2 of the dice have the same number. There are 6 different ways that 2 dice can be paired (i.e., two 1’s, or two 2’s or two 3’s, etc.). For each given pair of 2 dice, the third die can be one of the five other numbers. (For example if two of the dice are 1’s, then the third die must have one of the 5 other numbers: 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6.) Therefore there are 6 x 5 = 30 combinations of outcomes that involve 2 dice with the same number. Third, determine how many combinations can occur if all three dice have different numbers. Think of  choosing three of the 6 items (each of the numbers) to fill three "slots." For the first slot, we can choose from 6 possible items. For the second slot, we can choose from the 5 remaining items. For the third slot, we can choose from the 4 remaining items. Hence, there are 6 x 5 x 4 = 120 ways to fill the three slots. However, we do not care about the order of the items, so permutations like {1,2,5}, {5, 2, 1}, {2, 5, 1}, {2, 1, 5}, {5, 1, 2}, and {1, 5, 2} are all considered to be the same result. There are 3! = 6 ways that each group of three numbers can be ordered, so we must divide 120 by 6 in order to obtain the number of combinations where order does not matter (every 1 combination has 6 equivalent permutations). Thus there are combinations where all three dice have different numbers. The total number of combinations is the sum of those in each category or 6 + 30 + 20 = 56.

There are two different approaches to solving this problem. The first employs a purely algebraic approach, as follows: Let us assume there are n teams in a double-eliminat ion tournament. In order to crown a champion, n – 1 teams must be eliminated, each losing exactly two games. Thus, the minimum number of games played in order to eliminate all but one of the teams is 2(n – 1). At the time when the (n – 1)th team is eliminated, the surviving team (the division champion) either has one loss or no losses, adding at most one more game to the total played. Thus, the maximum number of games that can be played in an n-team double-eliminat ion tournament is 2(n – 1) + 1. There were four divisions with 9, 10, 11, and 12 teams each. The maximum number of games that could have been played in order to determine the four division champions was (2(8) + 1) + (2(9) + 1) + (2(10) + 1) + (2(11) + 1) = 17 + 19 + 21 + 23 = 80. The four division champions then played in a single-elimination tournament. Since each team that was eliminated lost exactly one game, the elimination of three teams required exactly three more games. Thus, the maximum number of games that could have been played in order to crown a league champion was 80 + 3 = 83. The correct answer choice is (B). Another way to approach this problem is to use one division as a concrete starting point. Let's think first about the 9-team division. After 9 games, there are 9 losses. Assuming that no team loses twice (thereby maximizing the number of games played), all 9 teams remain in the tournament. After 8 additional games, only 1 team remains and is declared the division winner. Therefore, 9 + 8 = 17 games is the maximum # o f games than can be played in this tournament. We can generalize this information and apply it to the other divisions. To maximize the # of games in the 10-team division, 10 + 9 = 19 games are played. To maximize the # of games in the 11-team division, 11 + 10 = 21 games are played. To maximize the # of games in the 12-team division, 12 + 11 = 23 games are played. Thus, the maximum number of games that could have been played in order to determine the four division champions was 17 + 19 + 21 + 23 = 80. After 3 games in the single elimination tournament, there will be 3 losses, thereby eliminating all but the one championship team. Thus, the maximum number of games that could have been played in order to crown a league champion was 80 + 3 = 83. Once again.

The simplest way to solve this problem is to analyze one row at a time, and one square at a time in each row if necessary. Let’s begin with the top row. First, let’s place a letter in left box; we have a choice of 3 different letters for this box: X, Y, or Z. Next, we place a letter in the top center box. Now we have only 2 options so as not to match the letter we placed in the left box. Finally, we only have 1 letter to choose for the right box so as not to match eit her of the letters in the first two boxes. Thus, we have 3 x 2 x 1 or 6 ways to fill in the top row without duplicating a letter across it. Now let’s analyze the middle row by assuming that we already have a particular arrangement of the top row, say the one given in the example above (XYZ).


Now let’s analyze the bottom row by assuming that we already have a particular arrangement of the top and middle rows. Again, let’s use top and middle row arrangements given in the example above.

We can see that given fixed top and middle rows, there is only 1 possible bottom row that will work. (In other words, the 3rd row is completely determined by the arrangement of the 1st and 2nd rows). By combining the informat ion about each row, we calculate the solut ion as follows: 6 possible top rows × 2 possible middle rows × 1 possible bottom row = 12 possible grids.

4 * 1 + 1 = 5
5 * 1.5 – 1.5= 6
6 * 2 + 2 = 14
14 * 2.5 – 2.5 = 32.5
32.5 * 3 + 3 = 100.5

Answer – A. 18 litre Explanation : [x(1-6/x)/x]³ = (8/27) [x(1-6/x)/x]³ = (2/3)³ (x-6)/x = 2/3 x = 18

Change, as the fifth most popular website on the planet → as the fifth most popular website of the planet

change, footprints on their surface would → footprints on its surface would

Backhanded compliment: A remark that appears to express admiration but could also be interpreted as an insult.

Ex: He said my presentation was "surprisingly clear". How's that for a backhanded compliment! Does that mean that I am usually not clear ?"

Gauging and judging mean the same. Out of all the options, insulting matches the meaning well.

Hence, option B is correct.

The correct order will be:
The national unity of a free people → depends upon a sufficiently even balance of political power (R)→ against a revolutionary opposition that is irreconcilably opposed to it (S)→ to make it impracticable (P)→ for there to be an arbitrary administration. (Q)

The correct order will be:
The grocer → who was in the habit of weighing less (Q)→ did not listen to the protests of customer (P)→ whom he had cheated (R)→ with great audacity. (S)

This idea is also the explanation of his government’s policy ________ Jammu and Kashmir, as reflected _________ his own pronouncements.The noun 'policy' in general is followed by the preposition 'on'. 
 Ex. The government is to introduce new liquor policy on October 1 in Vijayawada.
 This confirms 'on' as the preposition for the blank 1. 
 For the blank 2 the only choice that seems most appropriate among all is 'in'.
 This confirms option D as the correct answer.