If neither Frank nor Keisha is assigned to the organizers booth, then which one of the following is a complete and ac...

Sharon on February 16 at 01:16AM

Need explanation

Can you please explain the questions

1 Reply

on February 17 at 08:47PM

Hello @sharonk0912,

I gave you the setup in response to another question that you asked, but I'm going to copy parts of it here.

For this particular question, we are given that neither Frank nor Keisha is assigned to the organizers booth. Let's consider what we already know about the organizers booth. We know that G, H, and M cannot be there. We can now add F and K to the list. This leaves L as the only one that can be at the organizers booth, and every booth needs someone. This is why A is the correct answer.

See below for how I made these inferences.

People: F G H K L M (6)

Three booths: O R V.
Each booth must have at least one person assigned to it.

Pay very close attention to our first rule, which I express with R>V. This rule gives us our distribution, which makes it very important. How many ways could the retailer booth have more people than the visitor booth? The retail booth must have at least 2 spots. The visitor booth cannot have more than 2. (I've placed some variables, but just pay attention to the number of people at each booth for now.) It goes 3-2-1, 1-3-2, 2-3-1, or 1-4-1

1.
O: F K L
R: G M
V: H

2.
O _
R _ _ _
V _ _

3.
O _ _
R G M _
V H/L

4.
O _
R G M _ _
V H/L

Let's continue with our other rules.
V: not F and not K
O: not G and not H
GM are together. (This means M also cannot be at organizers booth.)