Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pre RMO 2013 Answers, Hints, Solutions, Analysis Set - A
Pre RMO 2013 Answers, Hints, Solutions, Analysis Set - A
Set –A
Analysis: The question is a simple application of a very useful technique of finding sum of a
sequence popularly known as the telescopic sum. In such a sum, to add a series, say 𝑎1 +
𝑎2 + 𝑎3 + ⋯ + 𝑎𝑛 , try writing each term as difference of consecutive terms of some other
sequence. i.e. writing 𝑎1 = 𝑏2 − 𝑏1 , 𝑎2 = 𝑏3 − 𝑏2 , … , 𝑎𝑛 = 𝑏𝑛+1 − 𝑏𝑛 . In that case, the sum
simply becomes 𝑏𝑛+1 − 𝑏1 as the middle terms collapse just like the inner cylinders or a
telescope leaving the first and the last term. Note that it may not always be possible to write a
term as difference of two terms mentioned above. This makes it a difficult method to use in
many questions. Such a technique therefore needs many skills like simplifying, factorizing,
manipulating the expressions, observing some of the properties of the expression etc. But it is
nonetheless a powerful method and in this particular question, the difference presents itself
once the rationalization is done.
The problem here is similar to finding integral of a function. Given a function, we can always
find its derivative, i.e. given a sequence we can always find the difference of consecutive
terms, but the converse is not only difficult, but at times impossible. It is no wonder that the
second fundamental theorem of calculus gives the result that looks familiar to the above sum
𝑏
(Compare ∑𝑛1 𝑎𝑛 = 𝑏𝑛+1 − 𝑏𝑛 with ∫𝑎 𝑓(𝑥 ) 𝑑𝑥 = 𝐹 (𝑏) − 𝐹(𝑎)). A proof of the second
fundamental theorem can be given in terms of a telescopic sum and the reader here is asked
to explore the same.
Analysis: A direct question from our question bank (Q. 44) luckily whose answers also
match! A good application of mid-point theorem. The answer here can be guessed from
intuition, so a clever student will get it without having to prove it. Nevertheless, such a
guesswork are many times needed in order to solve a question. In case one has no idea where
to start, make a guess, assume something and work in that direction. If you conclude
something obvious, then work backwards and deduce what is needed. This approach is many
times useful especially in proving inequalities. There is nothing wrong in doing so as long as
all the steps are equivalent. In case you need to square or multiply somewhere, there may be
loss or gain of additional information giving extra solutions or missing some, but these can
mostly be countered. However, in this particular question, there’s no need to justify as there’s
no place for justifying the answer, so do the justification only if you’ve some time left.
Analysis: This was apparently the most formidable question which even takes significant
amount of time even to understand fully. Mostly one needs to draw the diagram several times
to get it right. Such question are best kept at the end of the paper as chances are that one
would spend significant amount of time without getting any conclusion. The key idea is a
clear figure, some basic properties of circles touching each other and off course the
Pythagoras’s theorem (30 − 60 − 90 triangle is just its application). One more key idea is to
draw a separate diagram once some of the features of the old diagram are used and there’s no
scope for further constructions so as to have some insight into the problem.
There is however a scope for confusion in the language of the problem where it doesn’t
mention which diameter the point 𝑋 lies on, although it can be safely assumed as the diameter
of 𝑆 for the question to make sense.