Systems of Linear Equations: Chapter Test
20 multiple-choice questions and 10 free-response questions, drawn from across the chapter and mixed together.
Multiple choice
Answer in any order and change your mind as often as you like. When you submit, your answers lock and every question shows its worked solution.
Free response
10 questions in parts, 144 points in total. Work them out on paper. There are no hints here: reveal each question's answer, worked solution, and rubric when you are ready to mark that one.
Reset the free-response section?
This re-seals every answer you have revealed and clears your flags.
-
1. Three candidates, and a condition that has to be met twice . 12 points. Question 1 of 10.
Two conditions are laid on the same pair of numbers:
Three candidate pairs are on offer: , and .
- Part A.
Work out what each of the three candidates gives on the left side of , and say which of them satisfy that equation.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 3 points
- Part B.
Now do the same three tests in , and then name the candidate that solves the system made of both equations.
Carry your own answer forward Read your part A verdicts alongside the ones you reach here, whatever part A gave you, and name the candidate your own two sets of verdicts agree on. The credit is for combining the two tests, not for a particular pair.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 4 points
- Part C.
Each of the two equations on its own is satisfied by endlessly many pairs, and each of the two rejected candidates was accepted by one of them. Explain what a system asks of a pair that a single equation does not. Then say how many pairs in all can satisfy these two equations at once, and what you looked at to decide.
Explain why it works A sentence or two. Reasons, not steps. 5 points
The answer
Part A
gives and gives , so both satisfy it. gives , so it does not.
- the three left-side values , and are what the verdicts rest on; a verdict with no value behind it is not yet an answer
Part B
gives and gives , while gives . Only satisfies both equations, so it is the one that solves the system.
Part C
A system asks one pair to meet both conditions at the same time, so passing either equation alone counts for nothing. Exactly one pair does it here: each equation's solutions make a line, and is not a scaled copy of , so the two lines are not parallel and cross once.
Worked solution
Part A
The first number of a pair is the value of and the second is the value of .
Two of the three match the required .
Part B
Test each candidate in the second equation.
So passes only the first equation and only the second. The pair passes both, and passing both is what solving the system means.
Part C
What the system asks. A single equation asks one condition, and a whole line of pairs meets it. A system asks one pair to meet two conditions at once, which is why and are rejected: each satisfies one equation and fails the other.
How many pairs manage it. Compare the coefficients:
Neither list is a multiple of the other, so the two lines are not parallel and not the same line either. Two such lines cross exactly once, so exactly one pair satisfies both equations, and part B has already found it.
In one line
In the candidates give , and ; in they give , and . So passes only the first equation, only the second, and passes both, which is what solving the system means. Exactly one pair can do so, because the coefficient lists and are not multiples of one another, so the two lines are neither parallel nor the same line and cross exactly once.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 3 points
Substitutes each pair in the correct order, first number for and second for , and evaluates all three left sides. . Worth 2 points.
States a verdict for each candidate, comparing its value against the right side rather than against another candidate. . Worth 1 point.
Part B 4 points
Evaluates all three candidates in the second equation and reports a verdict for each. . Worth 2 points.
Selects the candidate on the strength of BOTH sets of verdicts, not on the second equation alone. . Worth 2 points.
Part C 5 points
Locates the difference in the demand that ONE pair meet both conditions at once, using a rejected candidate to show that passing one equation settles nothing. . Worth 3 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Gives a count and supports it by comparing the two equations' coefficients rather than by pointing at the pair already found. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
-
-
2. A column that has to be built . 13 points. Question 2 of 10.
A system arrives with no column ready to cancel:
The first decision is what each equation has to be multiplied by.
- Part A.
Name a multiplier for each equation that turns one letter's two coefficients into opposites, and write down the two scaled equations.
Write the expression An equation or an expression is enough here. Show how you built it. 3 points
- Part B.
Combine your two scaled equations, finish the system, and test the pair in the two equations as they were originally given.
Carry your own answer forward Combine whichever scaled equations part A produced, even if they were not the expected ones, and finish honestly from them. The credit here is for the combination, for recovering the second coordinate, and for testing against the equations as they were first written.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 5 points
- Part C.
Part A moved both equations. Decide whether this same system could have been reduced by scaling one equation only, and support the decision by saying what has to be true of a letter's two coefficients before that is available. If your answer depends on what kind of multiplier is allowed, say so.
Justify your claim State the claim, then give the reason it has to be true. 5 points
The answer
Part A
Multiply the first by and the second by , giving and .
- multiplying the first by and the second by matches the terms instead, at and , and is equally good; what is not the same is scaling only one side of an equation
Part B
. Both original equations hold: and .
Part C
Not with whole-number multipliers: moving one equation alone needs one of a letter's coefficients to divide the other, and neither and nor and does. With a fractional multiplier it is possible, since on the first equation matches the terms. Divisibility decides, and fractions are the price.
Worked solution
Part A
The coefficients are and . The smallest size both reach is , so scale each equation by what its own coefficient is missing.
Every term on both sides is scaled, which is what keeps each equation saying the same thing.
Part B
Adding the scaled equations removes .
Then gives . Testing in the equations as given, not in the scaled ones: and .
Part C
Scaling one equation alone matches a letter's coefficients only if one of them already divides the other, so that a whole multiplier closes the gap. Neither pair here does: does not divide , and does not divide .
A fractional multiplier lifts the restriction. Scaling only the first equation by gives
so again. The answer is untouched; what changed is that the arithmetic now runs in halves. So the real condition is divisibility, and moving one equation only costs fractions whenever it fails.
In one line
Scaling the first equation by and the second by gives and , which add to , so the solution is and both original equations hold. One equation could not have been scaled alone with a whole multiplier, because that needs one of a letter's coefficients to divide the other and neither and nor and does. With a fractional multiplier it can: on the first equation gives and the same , so divisibility decides the question and fractions are what it costs.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 3 points
Chooses multipliers that make one letter's coefficients equal in size and opposite in sign. . Worth 2 points.
Applies each multiplier to every term of its equation, right side included. . Worth 1 point.
Part B 5 points
Combines the scaled equations with the operation that actually cancels, and solves for the surviving letter. . Worth 2 points.
Recovers the second coordinate and reports the answer as an ordered pair. . Worth 1 point.
Checks the pair in both equations as originally given rather than in the scaled work that produced it. . Worth 2 points.
Part C 5 points
States the condition on a letter's two coefficients that allows one equation to be scaled alone, and tests it against both letters of this system. . Worth 3 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Separates what is impossible from what is merely costly, saying what changes when the kind of multiplier allowed changes. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
-
-
3. One letter fewer, and the coordinate that has to come back . 13 points. Question 3 of 10.
A system of two equations in two letters cannot be marched to an answer while both letters are still standing:
- Part A.
Isolate one letter in one of the two equations, then write the single equation in one unknown that putting that expression into the other equation produces. Write the substitution down before simplifying it.
Write the expression An equation or an expression is enough here. Show how you built it. 4 points
- Part B.
Solve the equation you produced, recover the other coordinate, and test the finished pair in both equations as they were given.
Carry your own answer forward Solve whichever equation part A produced, and recover the second coordinate from your own isolation. The credit here is for distributing across the bracket, for bringing the second coordinate back, and for testing in the equations as first written.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 5 points
- Part C.
The equation you solved in part A mentions only , yet the answer to the system is a pair. Say what the value of on its own describes, what the isolation then does with it, and what would be left of the answer if the equation were struck out of the problem altogether.
Carry your own answer forward Describe what your own value of from part B stands for, and what your own isolation does with it. The credit here is for the account of what a single number describes and what the second equation contributes, not for a particular pair.
Explain what it means Words, not just symbols. Say what the number is telling you about the situation. 4 points
The answer
Part A
Isolating in the first equation gives , and the second equation becomes .
- isolating in the first equation instead gives and a legitimate equation in ; what is not acceptable is putting the expression back into the equation it came from
Part B
. Both given equations hold: and .
Part C
The value on its own describes every pair whose first coordinate is , a whole family rather than an answer. The isolation picks the one member of that family that also satisfies . Strike out the second equation and nothing does the choosing: every pair satisfying would be an answer.
Worked solution
Part A
The first equation's has coefficient , so isolating it needs no division.
The whole quantity replaces , brackets and all, and it goes into the equation it did NOT come from.
Part B
Distribute the across both terms of the bracket.
The isolation then returns the second coordinate: . Testing in the equations as given, and .
Part C
A single number is not a solution of a two-letter system. On its own
a whole family, one for each . The isolation then names which member of that family is wanted, and only then is there a pair to report.
Without there is nothing left to cut the family down: one condition on two letters is met by endlessly many pairs, and every pair satisfying would qualify. The second equation is what turns a family into a single pair.
In one line
Isolating gives , so the second equation becomes , that is ; the solution is and both given equations hold. The value on its own describes every pair with first coordinate , and the isolation is what selects the single member of that family satisfying . Strike out the equation and the problem keeps every pair on : the second condition is exactly what turns a family into one pair.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 4 points
Produces a correct isolation, with every term that crossed the equals sign changing sign. . Worth 2 points.
Substitutes into the OTHER equation, keeping the replacing expression in brackets. . Worth 2 points.
Part B 5 points
Distributes the multiplier across every term inside the bracket, signs included, and solves for the surviving letter. . Worth 2 points.
Uses the isolation to produce the second coordinate rather than leaving the answer as a single number. . Worth 2 points.
Reports an ordered pair and checks it in both equations as originally given. . Worth 1 point.
Part C 4 points
Says what a value of one letter alone describes in a two-letter problem, naming a family of pairs rather than a single answer. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Attributes the cutting down to the second equation, and says what would be left of the answer without it. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
-
-
4. Two speeds sharing one clock, and a second ride to judge . 14 points. Question 4 of 10.
A courier rides kilometres in hours. Part of the ride is on the flat, where the bicycle holds kilometres an hour, and the rest is uphill, where it holds kilometres an hour. Distance is speed multiplied by time.
- Part A.
Name two unknowns, saying what each one measures and in what unit, and write the two equations the ride imposes. Do not solve them here.
Model the situation Name your unknown first, then write every other quantity in terms of that one letter. 4 points
- Part B.
Solve the system, then answer what the ride was actually asked about: how many kilometres were covered on each kind of road?
Carry your own answer forward Solve whichever system you wrote in part A, and convert your own times into distances using your own speeds. The credit here is for solving correctly and for answering in the quantity the question asked for, not for particular numbers.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 4 points
- Part C.
A second ride is described in the same terms and at the same two speeds: kilometres in hours. Work out what the algebra returns for it, and say what that return reports about the second ride.
Explain what it means Words, not just symbols. Say what the number is telling you about the situation. 6 points
The answer
Part A
Let be the hours ridden on the flat and the hours ridden uphill. The clock gives and the distance gives .
Part B
hours and hours, so kilometres on the flat and kilometres uphill.
Part C
It returns hours and hours. Both satisfy the two equations, so the algebra has not slipped; what fails is the description, since no ride lasts a negative number of hours. In hours the fastest of the two speeds covers at most kilometres, so was never available.
Worked solution
Part A
Two facts are stated, so two equations are available. Let and be the hours spent on the flat and uphill.
The first counts hours and the second counts kilometres, each leg contributing its own speed multiplied by its own time.
Part B
Substituting into the distance equation leaves one letter.
The question asks for distances, not times: kilometres on the flat and uphill, which together make the stated in the stated hours.
Part C
The same model with the new total gives
That pair satisfies both equations exactly, so nothing has gone wrong in the algebra. It fails the meaning attached to the letters: counts hours ridden, and a ride cannot last of an hour.
The reason is a ceiling the model cannot break. Every hour covers at most kilometres, so hours cover at most , and a described is beyond anything these two speeds can produce.
In one line
With and the hours ridden on the flat and uphill, the ride gives and , so and : kilometres on the flat and uphill. The kilometre ride returns and , a pair that satisfies both equations perfectly and describes no ride at all, since hours ridden cannot be negative. At kilometres an hour, hours cover at most kilometres, so the second description was impossible from the start.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 4 points
Names each unknown with the quantity and the unit it measures, rather than leaving a bare letter. . Worth 2 points.
Writes one equation for the time and one for the distance, keeping each equation in a single unit throughout. . Worth 2 points.
Part B 4 points
Solves the system correctly, reaching a value for each unknown. . Worth 2 points.
Converts the solution into the quantity asked for rather than reporting the letters, and states both answers with units. . Worth 2 points.
Part C 6 points
Solves the changed system and reports the pair it returns, including the negative value, before judging it. . Worth 2 points.
Separates the algebra from the situation, crediting the pair as a genuine solution of the equations and locating the failure in what the letters stand for. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Explains why the description was impossible, arguing from the largest distance the stated speeds allow in the stated time. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
-
-
5. Three conditions, and what each one contributes . 16 points. Question 5 of 10.
A triple is asked to satisfy three equations at once:
- Part A.
Find the triple that satisfies all three equations, and confirm it in each of the three as they were given.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 5 points
- Part B.
Strike out equation and keep the other two. Show that endlessly many triples satisfy the pair that is left, by producing two different ones, and then describe the whole family.
Justify your claim State the claim, then give the reason it has to be true. 6 points
- Part C.
Two equations left a whole family of triples and the third cut it down to one. Each equation draws a plane in space and your family draws a line. Say what the plane of equation had to do to that line for a single triple to survive, and describe what would have happened instead had it done either of the two other things available to it.
Carry your own answer forward Argue about whichever family you produced in part B and whichever triple you found in part A. The credit here is for the account of how a plane can meet a line and what each case does to the count of solutions, not for particular coordinates.
Explain what it means Words, not just symbols. Say what the number is telling you about the situation. 5 points
The answer
Part A
, and all three equations hold, giving , and in turn.
Part B
Adding and gives , and then gives , so every triple satisfies both, one for each number . Two of them are and . Two conditions cannot pin down three letters, so one letter is left free to run.
Part C
The plane of had to cross the line at exactly one point, and that point is the triple from part A. Had it contained the line, every triple of the family would still satisfy all three equations, so there would be infinitely many. Had it run parallel to the line and missed it, none would survive.
Worked solution
Part A
Adding and removes , and adding twice to removes it again.
Subtracting leaves , so , then and gives . In the three original equations the triple gives , and .
Part B
Work with and alone. Adding them removes :
and then gives . Writing for the free value of , every triple of the family
satisfies both equations. At that is , giving and ; at it is , giving and again. Nothing in the two equations chooses between them, because two conditions can fix at most two letters and a third is left free.
Part C
The planes of and are not parallel, so they meet in a line, and part B's family is exactly the points of that line. A third plane meets a line in one of three ways.
Here it crossed once, at the point , so a single triple survived. Had contained the line, every triple of the family would satisfy it too and the system would have infinitely many solutions, the whole line. Had been parallel to the line without containing it, nothing on the line would satisfy it and the system would have no solution at all, even though no two of the three planes are parallel.
In one line
The system is solved by , which gives , and in the three equations as written. Without equation , every triple satisfies what is left, among them and : two conditions cannot fix three letters. That family is a line, and the plane of crossed it at exactly one point. Had that plane contained the line, the whole family would have survived and the system would have infinitely many solutions; had it run parallel to the line and missed it, none would have survived at all.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 5 points
Removes the SAME letter from two different pairs of equations, using all three equations across the two combinations. . Worth 2 points.
Solves the two-letter system that is left and recovers the letter that was set aside. . Worth 2 points.
Confirms the triple in all three equations as originally given, not only in the ones used at the end. . Worth 1 point.
Part B 6 points
Exhibits two different triples and verifies each in both remaining equations, rather than asserting that many exist. . Worth 2 points.
Describes the whole family in terms of one free value, not just the two examples. . Worth 2 points.
Grounds the endlessness in there being fewer conditions than letters, so one letter is free. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Part C 5 points
Identifies the family as a line and says what the third plane did to it to leave exactly one triple. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Gives both alternative cases with the count of solutions each produces, rather than only naming them. . Worth 3 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
-
-
6. Two statements, and what happens to each when the other is thrown away . 13 points. Question 6 of 10.
A substitution turns a system into a different pair of statements, and the answer is only allowed to transfer if the trade neither loses a pair nor invents one. Work with
- Part A.
Carry out the substitution, report the pair it leads to, and test that pair in both equations as they were given.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 4 points
- Part B.
After the substitution the work holds two statements: and . Show that keeping only the first of them loses something, by producing a pair that satisfies and neither of the two equations you were given.
Construct a counterexample Give one specific case, and show it breaks the claim. 4 points
- Part C.
Part B shows that the two statements cannot be split up. Now settle the other direction: decide whether the two statements TAKEN TOGETHER admit any pair that the system you were given does not, and say what feature of the substitution step makes your answer inevitable rather than a piece of luck about these particular numbers.
Carry your own answer forward Argue about whichever pair of statements your part A produced, even if they were not the expected ones. The credit here is for the account of why the trade admits nothing new, not for reaching a particular pair.
Justify your claim State the claim, then give the reason it has to be true. 5 points
The answer
Part A
. Both given equations hold, since and .
Part B
satisfies , and it fails both given equations: , not , and , not .
Part C
No pair sneaks in. Any pair meeting both statements has and , and putting back wherever the expression stands turns into . The substitution replaced a letter by a quantity equal to it, so the step can be run backwards, and a step that can be undone neither loses a pair nor invents one.
Worked solution
Part A
Replace by the quantity equal to it in the equation it did not come from.
and the isolation returns . In the equations as given, and .
Part B
The statement says nothing whatever about , so any second coordinate may be attached to .
So the first statement on its own admits a whole vertical family of pairs, almost none of which solve the system. What has been lost is every restriction on the second coordinate.
Part C
Suppose a pair satisfies both statements. Then holds outright, so wherever the quantity appears, may be written back in its place:
So the pair satisfies both given equations, and no pair is admitted that the system does not admit.
Nothing in that argument used the numbers , or . The substitution replaced a letter by a quantity the other statement declares equal to it, and such a replacement can always be run backwards while the isolation is still standing. That is why the trade is safe in general and not merely here, and it is also why part B's half of the work cannot be dropped: the backwards run needs the isolation.
In one line
The substitution gives , so the solution is and both given equations hold. Keeping only loses every restriction on the second coordinate, as shows by passing it and failing both originals. Taken together, though, the two statements admit nothing new: lets the quantity be traded back for , turning into . The substitution replaced a letter by a quantity equal to it, so it can be run backwards, and an undoable step can neither lose a pair nor invent one.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 4 points
Substitutes into the equation the expression did not come from, and simplifies to one letter. . Worth 2 points.
Reports an ordered pair and confirms it in both equations as originally given. . Worth 2 points.
Part B 4 points
Produces a specific pair and shows it passing the kept statement and failing both given equations. . Worth 3 points.
Says what the discarded statement was carrying: the only restriction on the second coordinate. . Worth 1 point.
Part C 5 points
Reaches a verdict for this direction and supports it by turning the statements back into the original equations, rather than by checking the one pair already found. . Worth 3 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Locates the guarantee in the replacement being reversible while the isolation still stands, so the argument does not depend on these numbers. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
-
-
7. Two recorded facts, and a membership to pin down . 16 points. Question 7 of 10.
A club records two facts about its membership. Twice the number of juniors added to the number of seniors comes to . Four times the number of juniors added to twice the number of seniors comes to .
- Part A.
Name the two unknowns, saying what each counts, write the two recorded facts as equations, and solve the system.
Model the situation Name your unknown first, then write every other quantity in terms of that one letter. 5 points
- Part B.
Report every pair of counts the club could actually have, given that each count is a whole number and neither is negative.
Carry your own answer forward Work from whichever shared condition your part A arrived at. The credit here is for turning the situation's own restrictions into bounds on the counts and for reporting a complete list rather than examples.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 5 points
- Part C.
Two unknowns with two stated facts is usually enough to fix both. Say why it is not enough here. Then give a third fact that WOULD fix the counts and a third fact that would not, and state what separates the two kinds.
Carry your own answer forward Argue from whichever condition survived in your part A and whichever set of pairs you reported in part B. The credit here is for the account of why one fact can repeat another and for testing your two proposed facts against your own set, not for particular counts.
Justify your claim State the claim, then give the reason it has to be true. 6 points
The answer
Part A
With the number of juniors and the number of seniors, the facts are and . The second is the first doubled, so every pair satisfying satisfies both, and the two counts are not fixed.
Part B
There are possible pairs: may be any whole number from to , and is then , running from down to in steps of .
Part C
The second fact is the first restated at twice the size, so the club has stated one condition, not two. A fact such as "there are seniors" fixes the counts at juniors and seniors. A fact such as "six times the juniors added to three times the seniors comes to " fixes nothing: it is the same condition a third time.
Worked solution
Part A
Let count juniors and count seniors.
Eliminating by doubling the first equation and subtracting the second gives
a statement true whatever and are. Nothing has been ruled out, so the system has infinitely many solutions: every pair with .
Part B
Rearranging the shared condition gives the senior count from the junior count.
Both counts must be whole and neither may be negative, so and , that is . Every whole from to delivers a whole , and that is pairs in all, from to .
Part C
Why two facts were not two conditions. Multiplying through by produces exactly, and multiplying an equation by a nonzero number changes no pair that satisfies it. So the second record repeats the first and adds nothing, which is what the leftover was reporting.
A fact that fixes the counts. Suppose . Then
and the membership is settled at juniors and seniors.
A fact that does not. Suppose instead . That is the original condition scaled by , so every one of the admissible pairs still satisfies it and nothing has been narrowed.
What separates them is the ratio of the coefficients, not whether the fact looks new. A fact whose coefficients are not in the same ratio cuts the line of pairs down to one; a fact in that same ratio either repeats the condition, when its constant follows too, or contradicts it and leaves no pair at all, as would.
In one line
With juniors and seniors the records give and , and the second is the first doubled, so the reduction ends in and the counts are not fixed. Admissible pairs are those with and a whole number from to , which is possibilities from to . A fact such as "there are seniors" settles the membership at juniors and seniors, while a fact such as settles nothing, being the same condition scaled by .
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 5 points
Names each unknown with what it counts and turns each recorded fact into its own equation. . Worth 2 points.
Reaches a leftover statement that is true whatever the letters are, and reads it as nothing having been ruled out rather than as an empty system. . Worth 3 points.
Part B 5 points
Expresses one count in terms of the other from the surviving condition. . Worth 1 point.
Turns whole and non-negative into an upper and a lower bound, rather than listing a few pairs. . Worth 2 points.
Reports the complete set of admissible pairs and says what each number in it counts. . Worth 2 points.
Part C 6 points
Shows that the second recorded fact is the first scaled, and ties that to the system's leftover statement. . Worth 3 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Supplies both kinds of third fact and works out what each one does to the set of admissible pairs. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
States the general test that separates the two kinds of fact. . Worth 1 point.
-
-
8. Trading both equations at once . 15 points. Question 8 of 10.
Elimination trades an equation for a combination of the two it started with. Nothing forbids trading BOTH equations at once, and the question is what such a trade has to satisfy for the answer to survive it. Work with
- Part A.
Build a new system by replacing the first equation with the first minus the second, and the second equation with the sum of the two. Solve the new system, and compare its solution with the original system's.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 4 points
- Part B.
Now build a different new system, replacing both equations by multiples of the FIRST one alone: and . Produce a pair that satisfies this system but not the original one, and say what the trade has thrown away.
Construct a counterexample Give one specific case, and show it breaks the claim. 5 points
- Part C.
In part A each replacement was built from both original equations; in part B both were built from one. State the condition a pair of replacements has to meet if the new system is to have exactly the solutions of the old one, and then test your condition against each of the two parts.
Carry your own answer forward Test your condition against the two new systems as you actually built them in parts A and B. The credit here is for stating a condition with both directions in it and for applying it honestly to your own work.
Justify your claim State the claim, then give the reason it has to be true. 6 points
The answer
Part A
The new system is and , whose solution is , the same pair the original system has.
Part B
satisfies both new equations, giving and , and it fails , giving . Both new equations say only , so the second condition has been thrown away and a whole line of pairs now qualifies.
Part C
Each new equation must be a combination of the two originals, AND the two originals must be rebuildable from the new pair. Part A meets it: the sum of the new pair halves to and their difference halves to . Part B fails the second half, since nothing built from the first equation alone can ever return the second.
Worked solution
Part A
Build the two replacements term by term, both sides included.
Solving the new pair: gives , so and . The original system gives the same: with has , since and .
Part B
Halving the first new equation and dividing the second by both return , so the new system states one condition twice.
So passes the new system and fails the original. Every pair on the line satisfies the new system, and all of them except fail the discarded condition too, and what has gone is the whole content of .
Part C
The condition. Two things are needed, and they run in opposite directions. Each new equation must be built from the originals, which is what stops the new system rejecting a pair the old one accepted. And each original must be rebuildable from the new pair, which is what stops the new system accepting a pair the old one rejected. Only both together make the trade reversible.
Part A meets it. Both replacements were built from the originals. Going back:
Both originals return, so the two systems have exactly the same solutions, which is why part A's answer was unchanged.
Part B fails it. The first half holds, since both new equations are multiples of an original. The second half cannot: every combination of and is again a multiple of , so is unreachable. That is precisely why part B admitted a pair the original system rejects.
In one line
Replacing the equations by their difference and their sum gives with , whose solution is the original's . Replacing both by multiples of the first alone gives a system that satisfies while returns , so the second condition has gone. The condition a trade must meet runs both ways: each new equation must be built from the originals, and each original must be rebuildable from the new pair. Part A satisfies both, since the sum and difference of the new pair halve back to the originals; part B satisfies only the first, and every combination of its two equations is another multiple of .
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 4 points
Forms both replacements correctly, applying each operation to the right sides as well as the left. . Worth 2 points.
Solves the new system and states the comparison with the original solution explicitly. . Worth 2 points.
Part B 5 points
Produces a specific pair and shows it passing both new equations and failing an original one. . Worth 3 points.
Identifies that the two new equations state a single condition, so the second original has no representative left. . Worth 2 points.
Part C 6 points
States a condition carrying both directions, not only that the replacements come from the originals. . Worth 3 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Tests the condition on part A by actually rebuilding the original equations from the new pair. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Says which half of the condition part B fails, and connects that failure to the pair produced there. . Worth 1 point.
-
-
9. One constant apart . 17 points. Question 9 of 10.
Two systems share every coefficient and differ in a single constant.
- Part A.
Reduce system I and describe every triple that satisfies all three of its equations, giving two of them.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 5 points
- Part B.
Show that system II has no solution at all, working from its three equations as they stand rather than carrying out a full reduction.
Justify your claim State the claim, then give the reason it has to be true. 5 points
- Part C.
The two systems have identical coefficients and differ in a single constant, yet your parts A and B reached opposite verdicts about them. Compare what a full reduction of each one announces, saying why leftover statements of the same shape can carry opposite verdicts. Then describe how the three planes sit in each system.
Carry your own answer forward Compare the endings your own parts A and B produced. The credit here is for saying why two leftover statements of the same shape can carry opposite verdicts and for describing both arrangements of planes, not for a particular family.
Compare the two methods Say what each one costs you, and when you would reach for it. 7 points
The answer
Part A
Every triple satisfies all three equations, one for each number . Two of them are and .
Part B
Adding the first two equations of II gives , while its third equation states . One quantity cannot be both and , so no triple satisfies all three.
Part C
I reduces to , true whatever the letters are, so nothing is ruled out and the family survives; II reduces to the false , so nothing does. In I the planes share a whole line. In II no two are parallel, yet no point is common: each pair meets in a line, and those three lines are distinct and parallel.
Worked solution
Part A
Adding the first two equations removes and gives , which is the third equation exactly, so the third condition repeats what the first two already say.
Writing for the free value of , every triple satisfies all three. At that is , giving , and ; at it is , giving , and again.
Part B
The first two equations of II are the first two of I, so adding them gives the same result:
Any triple satisfying those two equations therefore makes the quantity equal to . The third equation of II demands that the same quantity equal . A number is not both and , so no triple satisfies all three, and system II has no solution.
Part C
What each reduction says. Subtracting the derived from the third equation leaves in system I and in system II. Both have the shape "a number equals a number", with every letter gone, and that is exactly why the shape alone settles nothing:
The coefficients decided that the third condition would carry no new information; the constants decided whether it agreed with the other two or contradicted them.
How the planes sit. In I the third plane contains the line where the first two meet, so all three share that whole line, which is the family of part A. In II the third plane has slid parallel to itself and no longer catches the line. No two of the three planes are parallel there, since no list of coefficients is a multiple of another, so each pair still meets in a line; but no point lies on all three, so those three lines are distinct and parallel to one another, in the arrangement of the three long faces of a triangular prism.
In one line
System I is satisfied by every triple , among them and , because its first two equations already give and its third repeats that. System II has no solution, since its first two equations force while its third demands . The reductions end and : the same shape, opposite verdicts, because one statement is true and the other false. In I the three planes share the whole line of the family; in II no two planes are parallel, yet no point is common to all three, so each pair meets in a line and those three lines are distinct and parallel.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 5 points
Reduces to a leftover statement that is true whatever the letters are, and reads it as one condition repeating rather than as an empty system. . Worth 2 points.
Describes the whole family in terms of one free value and checks two of its members in all three equations. . Worth 3 points.
Part B 5 points
Derives a value for the same quantity that the third equation constrains, using only the equations as given. . Worth 3 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Draws the contradiction as a statement about one quantity being asked to take two values, and concludes for every triple rather than for tested ones. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Part C 7 points
Distinguishes the two endings by whether the leftover statement is true or false, rather than by the letters having vanished in both. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Attributes the shared feature to the coefficients and the differing verdict to the constants. . Worth 2 points.
Describes both arrangements, and establishes for system II that no two planes are parallel before describing how three planes can still miss each other. . Worth 3 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
-
-
10. A crossing, a takings figure, and every total that was ever available . 15 points. Question 10 of 10.
A ferry charges dollars for a foot passenger and dollars for a car, and carries nothing else. One crossing carried fares in all and took dollars.
- Part A.
Find how many foot passengers and how many cars the crossing carried, and confirm both stated facts.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 4 points
- Part B.
Write the takings of any crossing carrying exactly fares as a single expression in the number of cars, and say which totals that expression can produce.
Write the expression An equation or an expression is enough here. Show how you built it. 4 points
- Part C.
A later crossing is recorded as fares and dollars. Decide whether that record can be right, and support the decision with a statement about every total a -fare crossing can produce. Say also what your statement does NOT rule out.
Carry your own answer forward Argue from the expression you produced in part B, whatever it was. The credit here is for turning it into a statement about every reachable total, for testing the record against that statement, and for being honest about the statement's limits.
Justify your claim State the claim, then give the reason it has to be true. 7 points
The answer
Part A
foot passengers and cars. Both facts hold: fares and dollars.
Part B
The takings are dollars, where is a whole number from to . So the total runs from to dollars, moving in steps of .
- is the same expression with the common factor taken out; with is the same information in two lines rather than one
Part C
It cannot be right. A -fare crossing takes dollars, always a multiple of , and leaves over. The statement rules out nothing about crossings with a different number of fares, and a total that IS a multiple of still has to have its own falling between and .
Worked solution
Part A
Let count foot passengers and count cars.
Substituting gives , so and . Both facts check out: , and dollars.
Part B
With fares in all, the foot passengers number , so the takings depend on alone.
Each car in place of a foot passenger adds dollars, which is the in the expression. The number of cars runs over the whole numbers from to , so the takings run from dollars, with no cars, to dollars, with nothing but cars, in steps of .
Part C
Take the factor out of part B's expression:
So the takings of a -fare crossing are always a whole multiple of dollars. Dividing the record by gives with left over, so is not such a multiple and no whole number of cars produces it. The record cannot be right, and this settles it without solving anything: with has the solution , a genuine pair that no crossing can realise.
Two things the statement leaves open. It says nothing about a crossing carrying some other number of fares, where the takings follow a different expression. And being a multiple of is not on its own enough: is one, but it needs , that is cars, which exceeds the fares carried.
In one line
The crossing carried foot passengers and cars, since and . Any crossing of fares takes dollars, so its takings run from to dollars in steps of . The record of dollars cannot be right: is not a multiple of , leaving over, so no whole number of cars produces it. That argument says nothing about crossings carrying a different number of fares, and a multiple of is not on its own enough either, since would need cars on a crossing of fares.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 4 points
Writes one equation counting fares and one counting dollars, with each fare priced by its own kind. . Worth 2 points.
Solves the system and reports both counts, saying what each number counts. . Worth 2 points.
Part B 4 points
Uses the fare count to write the other quantity in the same letter, reaching one expression rather than two equations. . Worth 2 points.
States the range the expression can produce, using the bounds the situation puts on the number of cars. . Worth 2 points.
Part C 7 points
Turns the expression into a property every reachable total must have, and tests the recorded figure against it. . Worth 3 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Reaches a verdict on the record and locates the failure in the situation rather than in the algebra. . Worth 2 points.
Names at least one thing the statement does not settle, with a case showing why. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
-