Alle diskussioner > Steam-fora > Off Topic > Trådoplysninger
起风了 26. nov. kl. 19:12
Criminal Investigation Logic Puzzle
1. The answer to this question is:

A. A

B. B

C. C

D. D

2. The answer to question 5 is:

A. C

B. D

C. A

D. B

3. Which of the following questions has an answer different from the other three?

A. Question 3

B. Question 6

C. Question 2

D. Question 4

4. Which two of the following questions have the same answer?

A. Questions 1 & 5

B. Questions 2 & 7

C. Questions 1 & 9

D. Questions 6 & 10

5. Which question below has the same answer as this one?

A. Question 8

B. Question 4

C. Question 9

D. Question 7

6. Which two questions below have the same answer as question 8?

A. Questions 2 & 4

B. Questions 1 & 6

C. Questions 3 & 10

D. Questions 5 & 9

7. Among these ten questions, the letter option chosen least often is:

A. C

B. B

C. A

D. D

8. Which question below has an answer whose letter is not adjacent to the answer letter of question 1 in the alphabet?

A. Question 7

B. Question 5

C. Question 2

D. Question 10

9. Given that the truth value of “Question 1 and Question 6 have the same answer” is opposite to that of “Question X and Question 5 have the same answer,” X is:

A. Question 6

B. Question 10

C. Question 2

D. Question 9

10. In these ten questions, the difference between the maximum and minimum occurrence counts of the letters A, B, C, D is:

A. 3

B. 2

C. 4

D. 1
< >
Viser 1-15 af 18 kommentarer
起风了 26. nov. kl. 19:19 
According to an interview question reportedly from a certain year's criminal investigation department, I couldn't come up with the answer even after spending an entire morning. Do you have any quick and easy approach?
#1
Houseman 26. nov. kl. 19:46 
What does this have to do with criminal investigation?
#2
Langkard 26. nov. kl. 20:20 
It is a self-referential logic puzzle. You need to find a set of answers which are true for all 10 questions. There is no real quick and easy approach.

So, start with question #1 and try each answer: A, B, C, D

Then move to question #8, since it involves the answer to #1:
You will see that if #1 is B, then D is the only letter not adjacent to B or if #1 is C than A is the only possible answer not adjacent. The other 2 choices for #1 lead to 2 possible answers of not adjacent, so trying B or C for #1 is the easiest.

After that it becomes more complicated.

#8 implies that only one of questions 7, 5, 2, and 10 can equal D if the answer to #1 is B and so on.

Sidst redigeret af Langkard; 26. nov. kl. 20:36
#3
Langkard 26. nov. kl. 20:39 
Oprindeligt skrevet af Houseman:
What does this have to do with criminal investigation?

Very complicated logic. Each answer A-D for each question changes the answers to all of the other questions. Only one choice for each can be true while making all of the others true as well.

And the best part is, it really freaks out Google's AI mode. It gives a different solution every time you ask the same question. Try it. It's fun. Copy and paste all 10 questions as one long Google search and the AI will give a different answer every time. Just one more reason why AI in its current state sucks.
Sidst redigeret af Langkard; 26. nov. kl. 20:45
#4
Houseman 26. nov. kl. 21:04 
Oprindeligt skrevet af Langkard:

Very complicated logic. Each answer A-D for each question changes the answers to all of the other questions. Only one choice for each can be true while making all of the others true as well.
Yes, I understood that.
But, once again, what does this have to do with criminal investigation?

No crime has ever been solved by answering a series of stupid "the answer to question 1 is the answer to question 3, divided by the answers to question 2 and 6, where question 9 is...."

We see this all the time in the software developer interview scene, where interviewers think that stupid puzzler questions like this find the best candidates. Experienced coders don't waste their time with these.
#5
Grimble Grumble 26. nov. kl. 21:07 
hmm, good one. Often it helps to rephrase what you know or can infer

7, 10 require knowledge of near the entire set so likely solved last... but you can infer from them that only one letter is used least (so no ties for last place) and that no letter can be used more than 5 times.

If you know 5, you know 2

Because the way it is worded, one and only one of the following is true: 8A, 4B, 9C or 7D
which is:
  • 7's letter is adjacent to 1's answer
  • 2=7
  • 2 is related to 5 opposite of how 1 is related to 6
  • D is the least common

3 out of 3,6,2 and 4 are the same, one is different (and the answer to 3). So solving 3 is huge.

Since each of the 40 data points is either true or false, it might be solvable with a grid.

Eh it's nearly 1 AM, so I'll have to let someone else do this one.
Sidst redigeret af Grimble Grumble; 26. nov. kl. 21:42
#6
Grimble Grumble 26. nov. kl. 22:37 
Oprindeligt skrevet af Grimble Grumble:
7, 10 require knowledge of near the entire set so likely solved last... but you can infer from them that only one letter is used least (so no ties for last place) and that no letter can be used more than 5 times.

Since the set of answers must total 10 elements, min gap 1 max gap 4
Lowest cannot be used twice or more (2,3,3,3>10)
If lowest is only used once, gap is 2 or more (since 1+2+2+2<10)
If lowest is never used, gap is 4 (0,3,4,4) since (0,3,3,3<10)
10 cannot be D (1)

Disttrubution of answers is:
0,3,4,4
1,3,3,3
1,2,3,4
or 1,2,2,5
#7
起风了 27. nov. kl. 1:13 
Oprindeligt skrevet af Houseman:
What does this have to do with criminal investigation?
Idk. But this was indeed part of the written exam at that time. I also think this should actually be related to logic instead of criminal investigation.:Mirro_KetsunoAna:
#8
起风了 27. nov. kl. 1:18 
Answer:
BCACA CDABA
#9
起风了 27. nov. kl. 1:23 
Oprindeligt skrevet af Langkard:
Oprindeligt skrevet af Houseman:
What does this have to do with criminal investigation?

Very complicated logic. Each answer A-D for each question changes the answers to all of the other questions. Only one choice for each can be true while making all of the others true as well.

And the best part is, it really freaks out Google's AI mode. It gives a different solution every time you ask the same question. Try it. It's fun. Copy and paste all 10 questions as one long Google search and the AI will give a different answer every time. Just one more reason why AI in its current state sucks.
So true. Sometimes AI gives you a wrong answer with a straight face—especially when it comes to highly logical questions.
#10
起风了 27. nov. kl. 1:23 
If you have any doubts about the answer, feel free to share your thoughts in the comments section.:Mirro_love:
#11
Grimble Grumble 27. nov. kl. 10:42 
Oprindeligt skrevet af 起风了:
Oprindeligt skrevet af Houseman:
What does this have to do with criminal investigation?
Idk. But this was indeed part of the written exam at that time. I also think this should actually be related to logic instead of criminal investigation.:Mirro_KetsunoAna:
Deductive reasoning is one of the core skills of criminal investigation. These sorts of puzzles are the very essence of the old Holmes adage of ""when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth".
#12
Houseman 27. nov. kl. 10:53 
Oprindeligt skrevet af Grimble Grumble:
Oprindeligt skrevet af 起风了:
Idk. But this was indeed part of the written exam at that time. I also think this should actually be related to logic instead of criminal investigation.:Mirro_KetsunoAna:
Deductive reasoning is one of the core skills of criminal investigation. These sorts of puzzles are the very essence of the old Holmes adage of ""when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth".

Yes, people also believe in the fallacy that solving obtuse, abstract puzzles is the "core skill" that makes one a good programmer.

It's like asking someone to construct a wheel out of toothpicks and gum, and if they can't, they aren't qualified to work at NASA. It might make some HR person think that they're clever, but people with actual job experience roll their eyes and look elsewhere.
#13
Grimble Grumble 27. nov. kl. 11:12 
Oprindeligt skrevet af Houseman:
Oprindeligt skrevet af Grimble Grumble:
Deductive reasoning is one of the core skills of criminal investigation. These sorts of puzzles are the very essence of the old Holmes adage of ""when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth".

Yes, people also believe in the fallacy that solving obtuse, abstract puzzles is the "core skill" that makes one a good programmer.

It's like asking someone to construct a wheel out of toothpicks and gum, and if they can't, they aren't qualified to work at NASA. It might make some HR person think that they're clever, but people with actual job experience roll their eyes and look elsewhere.
Thank you for providing a perfect example of why screening for logical competency might be beneficial.
#14
Grimble Grumble 27. nov. kl. 16:12 
There is a circular reference in 2 and 5:

5. Which question below has the same answer as this one?

A. Question 8 (A, 7 is a letter not adjacent to 1)
B. Question 4 (B, 2=7)
C. Question 9 (C, 2 is to 5 opposite what 1 is to 6)
D. Question 7 (D, D is the least common answer)

If
B. Question 4 (B, 2=7)
2. The answer to question 5 is: ("B", so D)
7. Among these ten questions, the letter option chosen least often is:(D)

Since the least used is used either 0 or 1 times (see post 17) it can not be D for both 2 and 7
Therefore we can eliminate 5 B

That's 2 out of 40!
#15
< >
Viser 1-15 af 18 kommentarer
Per side: 1530 50

Alle diskussioner > Steam-fora > Off Topic > Trådoplysninger
Dato opslået: 26. nov. kl. 19:12
Indlæg: 18
Start en ny diskussion

Diskussionsregler og retningslinjer