[striker_kk]

Originally Posted by ygdrasil24

Reffering to Q 16 Ace Cat 1:

My approach :

Last digit of 5^563 will always be 5.
Last digit of 2^585 will be 2 as cyclcity is of 4 , and 2^1=2.

to find last non zero digit of 5^563 * 2^585....
answer should be 1.

Whats wrong in my approach.?

U are not considering the carry thats generated in the multiplication.

(---5)*(----2)=(---10)... so u say 1 must be the last non zero.

another possibility:

(---5)*(----12)=(----60)

here 6 can be the answer. This is the flaw in ur approach.
i think am clear enough!

[sjmit4]

Originally Posted by ygdrasil24

Reffering to Q 16 Ace Cat 1:

My approach :

Last digit of 5^563 will always be 5.
Last digit of 2^585 will be 2 as cyclcity is of 4 , and 2^1=2.

to find last non zero digit of 5^563 * 2^585....
answer should be 1.

Whats wrong in my approach.?

dude in the approach u had the flaw was that
when u considered only last digit it turned out to be 5 * 2 = 10
but u interpreted it wrong it just tells you that the last digit is zero and has nothing to do with second last digit
on the same lines if u carry out a multiplication of last two digits u'll get ans 100(25 * 32) but that tells u that last two digits are zero and does not tell you anything about third last digit

so to get ans by your approach u'll have to consider last 564 digits in each (ie, in 5^563 and in 2^585) and thats a task

hope i have helped u to understand where have u gone wrong!! cheers

[vinayfantastic]

Originally Posted by ygdrasil24

Dude....this soln is already in IMS....I want to know what mistake I am commiting as mine is a diff approach .

All the 5's that you are counting will be consumed in 10^563.
So you cannot count/multiply the last digit of 5^563.

[beacon]

Originally Posted by ygdrasil24

Reffering to Q 16 Ace Cat 1:

My approach :

Last digit of 5^563 will always be 5.
Last digit of 2^585 will be 2 as cyclcity is of 4 , and 2^1=2.

to find last non zero digit of 5^563 * 2^585....
answer should be 1.

Whats wrong in my approach.?

You determined the last digit of both the terms, but that will give you the last digit of the product which is clearly zero, you cant use it to find last digit before zeroes!! Do tell me if you didn't understand what I mean, I will elaborate.

[sauvik_nerd]

Originally Posted by coolbryan_love

THis is pretty logical as u have not maximised ur score in any of the section...u need to have 99+ in 1 or 2 section or atleast 98+ in couple of sections to improve ur overall score...Clearin section cut offs is juz a pre requisite..
and if u compare any mock...sum of the 95%ile of sectionals is never greater than or equal to 95%ile overall...

Hope that helps in ur further mocks...

ATB

well dear, i took cat last year and 16 ims simcats in the process...my experience tells me that wth about 95.XX across sections u generally get around 98.XX overall.... ur logic is correct when u say that one needs to maximise across sections but the figures r different...let me tell u 95.XX across sections is actually a good score(not boasting)...and historically fetches a very high overall....
overall percentile always soars above the sectional ones..unless u get 70.XX in a section..
wth a balanced 90.XX + across sections u r bound to get a very high overall percentile..
.i believe most experienced puys wud agree...wat say ppl ??

[sauvik_nerd]

Originally Posted by beacon

Check out the attachment....people are being given random percentiles!!!...84 marks get 100 percentile..and 91 only 98!!! Toppers list attached

absolutely....i agree..it's gotta b skewed...
the overall percentile looks totally illogical ...

[sauvik_nerd]

overall cutoff 87.75 and 100 percentile gets 84....aint that funny..???

[beacon]

Originally Posted by sauvik_nerd

well dear, i took cat last year and 16 ims simcats in the process...my experience tells me that wth about 95.XX across sections u generally get around 98.XX overall.... ur logic is correct when u say that one needs to maximise across sections but the figures r different...let me tell u 95.XX across sections is actually a good score(not boasting)...and historically fetches a very high overall....
overall percentile always soars above the sectional ones..unless u get 70.XX in a section..
wth a balanced 90.XX + across sections u r bound to get a very high overall percentile..
.i believe most experienced puys wud agree...wat say ppl ??

Exactly...sames been my experience...moreover overall cut-offs also take into account the number of people clearing all cutoffs....Hope IMS comes up with more sensible percentile predictions next time

[abhir_88]

i just gave the acecat1 at the centre... i scored 81.25
dint clear cutoff in quant (which is my biggest strength..toooo many silly mistakes...basically overconfidence)
scored 99 in the other 2 sections but still the overall is less...i guess therz sumthn rong wid the mapper...
hope they put more realistic percentiles..

[ygdrasil24]

Yes...I think what you say is correct..I think there is some logic that goes behind based on remainder theorem.To get 2nd last digit get answer in 10 X form ....3rd digit ..100 X.....