Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

On the Mathematics chat we were recently talking about the following problem @Chris'ssis had to solve during an interview :

$$3\times 4=8$$ $$4\times 5=50$$ $$5\times 6=30$$ $$6\times 7=49$$ $$7\times 8=?$$

We have not managed to solve it so far, all we know is the solution :

$224$

How do we find this solution ?

share|improve this question
45  
What kind of interview was this? I hate it when people use equals signs to describe relations that aren't equal. –  Zach Gershkoff yesterday
9  
@martini The problem is that we can't define "reasonable" =) –  Balarka Sen yesterday
7  
"interview" and "riddle" - unless you're Tom Riddle and you're interviewing somewhere, you should never hear those two words in the same sentence. =( –  corsiKa yesterday
23  
That interview question is good sign that it's time to walk out the door. –  RQDQ yesterday
17  
I would probably have taken this question as a challenge to convince the interviewer that the answer isn't 224. The question is arbitrary, so it really just comes down to a battle of wills. Bonus points if you make the interviewer cry while he concedes your answer. –  DanielV 23 hours ago
show 17 more comments

14 Answers

up vote 40 down vote accepted

I also don't like these problems, where notations are bad, rules are arbitrary, and they expect only one answer where several could fit.

Here is one, which could be the expected one, but probably not:

To compute $a \times b$, take the numerator of $\frac{ab^2}{6}$ after simplification of the fraction.

I don't see how they could argue it is wrong :p

share|improve this answer
2  
The denominator can be just 6 instead of $(n - 3)(n + 2)$. –  Joseph Geipel yesterday
    
nice simplification, I update the answer –  Denis yesterday
3  
Holy **** how can you come up with this answer?? –  Hoàng Long 17 hours ago
6  
+1 "I also don't like these problems, where notations are bad, rules are arbitrary, and they expect only one answer where several could fit." –  Sawarnik 12 hours ago
1  
@HoàngLong similarly to anorton's answer: I entered the sequence of quotients 2,10,5,7,28 in OEIS, then people helped to simplify it in this particular case (see the comment of Joseph Geipel) –  Denis 5 hours ago
show 4 more comments

This might be a possible solution. For a positive integer $n$, let $\nu_2(n)$ be the largest $k$ such that $2^k|n$, and similarly, let $\nu_3(n)$ be the largest $k$ such that $3^k|n$. Finally let $$h(n)=\frac{n}{3^{\nu_3(n)}2^{1+4\lfloor \nu_2(n)/4\rfloor}}$$ If we consider $$ a\times ~ b {\buildrel \rm def\over =}~b h(ab) $$ then $(k-1)\times k$ coincides with the proposed results for $k=4,5,6,7$ and yields $224$ for $k=8$.

share|improve this answer
19  
Your answer made me laugh just trying to imagine an interviewer who could comprehend such a rule let alone expect anyone to come up with it on the spot during an interview. –  heropup yesterday
6  
@heropup, So, you understand my feelings while trying to to write it down! :) –  Omran Kouba yesterday
18  
How in the world did you come up with this? –  Balarka Sen yesterday
    
I don't even... –  Amal Murali 7 hours ago
add comment

The left-hand-side input and the right-hand-side output can be imagined as binary numbers in a kind of truth table:

enter image description here

All eight output bits can be calculated from the seven input bits evaluating simple Boolean expressions.

share|improve this answer
9  
I figured binary boolean logic was involved. However, without knowing the final answer to the question, you wouldn't come up with the right answer, because without knowing from 7x8=224 that h=i=d, and also not knowing that results larger than 6 bits exist, your method would give you an answer of just 100000 (32). –  KeithS 23 hours ago
    
+1 for the analysis though. –  KeithS 23 hours ago
    
All the operations are very arbitrary, though. Given just the first 4 and no solution, you could do many distinct operations for each digit and get many different solutions. You could make the "answers" to the "equations" just about any 5 numbers and come up with binary operations –  Khan 3 hours ago
add comment

Spoiler Alert: (I use the answer given above in the response below. If you don't want to see it, you may want to skip this answer...)

I'm replacing $\times$ by $\circ$, as the latter is more commonly used with unknown operations. I hate it when people redefine a common symbol, then "$=$" to describe a relationship.

Note that $$\begin{align}3\circ4 &= 4\cdot 2\\ 4\circ 5 &= 5\cdot 10\\ 5\circ 6 &= 6\cdot 5\\ 6\circ 7 &= 7\cdot 7 \\ 7\circ 8 &= 8\cdot 28 \\ \end{align}$$

Thus, we can define: $$a\circ b\quad{\buildrel \rm def\over =}\quad b\cdot x_a$$ Where $x_n$ is some sequence. OEIS yields three possible sequences: $$x_n = \frac{\binom{n+2}{2}\gcd(n,3)}{3},\quad n \ge 0$$ (A234041) $$x_n = \text{denominatorOf}\left(\frac{(n-2)(n+3)}{(n)(n+1)}\right)\quad n \ge 3$$ (A027626: GCD of $n$-th and $(n+1)$st tetrahedral numbers, offset by me for this problem)

The last sequence from OEIS is A145911 which is not promising at all. (It's a combination of, what appears to be, $3$ other sequences.)

share|improve this answer
    
Note: I may have goofed up in how I offset the sequence, but I think I did it right... –  anorton yesterday
26  
To me, this confirms that the interviewer is smoking crack. –  heropup yesterday
add comment

Easy, just define

$a \times b = (a-4)(b-5)(a-5)(b-6)(a-6)(b-7)(a-7)(b-8)/72 + 25(a-3)(b-4)(a-5)(b-6)(a-6)(b-7)(a-7)(b-8)/18 + 15(a-3)(b-4)(a-4)(b-5)(a-6)(b-7)(a-7)(b-8)/8 + 49(a-3)(b-4)(a-4)(b-5)(a-5)(b-6)(a-7)(b-8)/36 + 7(a-3)(b-4)(a-4)(b-5)(a-5)(b-6)(a-6)(b-7)/18$

share|improve this answer
7  
You mean $\frac{181 a ^{4} b ^{4} - 4318 a ^{4} b ^{3} + 37880 a ^{4} b ^{2} - 144623 a ^{4} b + 202440 a ^{4} + -3594 a ^{3} b ^{4} + 85893 a ^{3} b ^{3} - 754833 a ^{3} b ^{2} + 2886774 a ^{3} b - 4047120 a ^{3} + 26012 a ^{2} b ^{4} - 622766 a ^{2} b ^{3} + 5482627 a ^{2} b ^{2} - 21003793 a ^{2} b + 29493240 a ^{2} + -81093 a b ^{4} + 1944783 a b ^{3} - 17150580 a b ^{2} + 65813730 a b - 92559600 a + 91560 b ^{4} - 2199120 b ^{3} + 19423320 b ^{2} - 74648280 b + 105134400}{36} $? –  Axel Kemper 12 hours ago
    
@AxelKemper Multiplication has never looked so epic! –  CaptainCodeman 12 hours ago
    
Holy Mother God! –  Sid 2 hours ago
2  
Hilarous $\phantom{}$ –  Newb 1 hour ago
add comment

Here is something I did which lead me to an incorrect result, but it is still pretty close.

Since all the values we are given are of the form $a\times (a+1)$, I decided to make the function $f(a)=a\times (a+1)$. Assuming $f$ is a polynomial of grade $4$ or less we obtain $f$ is equal to $\frac{101 x^3}{6}-233 x^2+\frac{6301 x}{6}-1500$ using interpolation.

This function gives us $f(7)=208$, which comes close, but is still not correct.

share|improve this answer
add comment

56 Did the question explicitly say there was a pattern to be found or is it just like you've presented it here? The symbols for multiplication(x) and equality(=) have well defined mathematical meaning and therefore 7 x 8 = 56 regardless of what misleading noise was written before. It may just be a test of the ability to avoid presumption.

share|improve this answer
    
That is one approach, but there are a large class of problems like this (although I hate them all) that redefine either $=$ or $\times$. This is, most likely, one of these problems. –  anorton 17 hours ago
1  
+1. If you want to redefine standard mathematical operations, you should say so. Otherwise, stick to mathematical convention. If you want me to solve a "mathematics" puzzle and can't manage to bring it across properly, I don't expect we'll be able to communicate very well and this is probably not a person I want to work for :) –  CompuChip 11 hours ago
add comment

The answer is $42$.

$69$ is also the answer.

"Purple feelings" is also an answer.

The truth of each of these is, of course, vacuous. :)


If the question is posed as something other than multiplication, then it is the fault of the questioner for miscommunicating.

Although, one could arguably blame the person trying to solve this problem for not doing enough to extract enough requirements from the 'customer' to be able to provide a solution. In some settings, this is an extremely important skill.

share|improve this answer
add comment

This is what I have so far, it seems a bit more intuitive than Omran's solution.

Based on the flip-flopping numbers, I figured the answer has to rely on the prime factorization of the numbers in question. So in particular, we see:

$$3 \times 2^2 \Rightarrow 2$$ $$2^2 \times 5 \Rightarrow 2*5$$ $$5 \times 2 * 3 \Rightarrow 5$$ $$2 * 3 \times 7 \Rightarrow 7$$ $$7 \times 2^3 \Rightarrow 2^2*7$$

So my initial hypothesis, which is that you took the highest prime and any primes with power greater than $1$ fails for the first equation. But it does look like a promising lead.

share|improve this answer
add comment

$$p(x)=$$

$$-\frac{1486263915627335609976345925580307452480}{198824918770116952269605821139049374259}-\frac{23535858736574459335924875719051524464677 x}{1789424268931052570426452390251444368331}+\frac{1532186339457747628597246965489647712097745599 x^2}{742539494635629574624160683858739355082631760}-\frac{5300973178829466500668773673899060773511329723 x^3}{62373317549392884268429497444134105826941067840}+\frac{425139989729581169917246837619141657974952401 x^4}{374239905296357305610576984664804634961646407040}-\frac{15160892592292573821061148160317799661783 x^5}{7128379148502043916391942565043897808793264896}+\frac{2379833487879115598578638026951579913181 x^6}{1496959621185429222442307938659218539846585628160}-\frac{133849478325585275186149006837381343 x^7}{249493270197571537073717989776536423307764271360}+\frac{9291465647310545015926219743101 x^8}{136087238289584474767482539878110776349689602560}$$

Then
$$\begin{array}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline x & 12\color{grey}{(3\times 4)} & 20\color{grey}{(4\times 5)} & 30\color{grey}{(5\times 6)} &42\color{grey}{(6\times 7)}&48\color{grey}{(7\times 8)}& \color{grey}{1729}&\color{grey}{2014}&\color{grey}{2015}&\color{grey}{2016}\\ \hline p(x)& 8 & 50 & 30 &49&\color{red}{224}& \color{grey}{1729}&\color{grey}{2014}&\color{grey}{2015}&\color{grey}{2016} \\ \hline \end{array}$$

To learn to play this 'game', read me.

share|improve this answer
add comment

One solution is to define the operation $\times$ between two integers as

$m \times n = n \cdot \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \frac{1}{3}\sum_{k=1}^m k &\mbox{if } 3 \mid \sum_{k=1}^m k \\ \sum_{k=1}^m k &\mbox{otherwise.} \end{array} \right.$

The point is, that what remains of the RHS after dividing by $n$ can be recognized as the sum of the first $m$ integers, divided by $3$ should that be possible.

share|improve this answer
add comment

The answer stares you right in the face.

7 x 8 is a question mark.

share|improve this answer
add comment

The first multiplicant is given. So the open question is "what is the second multiplicant"?

The list can be grouped in sixes. So lines 1-6 is one group, the rules count for each group.

  • Define fm as the given first multiplicant of the row. Start with 4. Increment fm by one on each row
  • Set cm (current multiplicant) to 1
  • The result for each row is result = fm * cm. You only change cm from row to row

These are the rules for the six rows

  1. cm := cm + 1
  2. cm := fm * cm
  3. cm := fm - 1
  4. cm := fm
  5. cm := cm * fm / 2
  6. cm := (fm - 1) / 2

The sequence of cm would be

2, 10, 5, 7, 28, 4, 5, 55, 11, 13, 91, 7, 8, 136, 17, 19, 190, 10

I think you can continue like that

share|improve this answer
    
In order to add to @user164475's result I give the result for 21 . 22 = 22 X 11 = 242 –  devnull69 6 hours ago
add comment

numbers sequence

3 . 4 = 4 X 2 = 8

4 . 5 = 5 X 10 = 50

5 . 6 = 6 X 5 = 30

6 . 7 = 7 X 7 = 49

7 . 8 = 8 X 28 = 224

8 . 9 = 9 X 4 = 36

9 . 10 = 10 X 5 = 50

10 . 11 = 11 X 55 = 605

11 . 12 = 12 X 11 = 132

12 . 13 = 13 X 13 = 169

13 . 14 = 14 X 91 = 1274

14 . 15 = 15 X 7 = 105

15 . 16 = 16 X 8 = 128

16 . 17 = 17 X 136 = 2312

17 . 18 = 18 X 17 = 306

18 . 19 = 19 X 19 = 361

19 . 20 = 20 X 190 = 3800

20 . 21 = 21 X 10 = 210

share|improve this answer
    
Could you elaborate how you got to these answers? –  Deruijter 7 hours ago
    
Where did you get that sequence? Did you just make it up? –  anorton 7 hours ago
1  
i made excel spreadsheet with formulas to calculate the fourth number. –  user164475 6 hours ago
    
the fourth number sequence is 2, 10, 5, 7, 28, 4, 5, 55, 11, 13, 91, 7,….etc –  user164475 6 hours ago
    
1) make groups of 3 numbers:second number 10 is 2*5(first*third number) –  user164475 6 hours ago
show 1 more comment

protected by Arthur Fischer 6 hours ago

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality answers, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site.

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.