I keep on disputing numerous problems of this type. I don't understand why the answer is so obvious to the author.

In my opinion, these questions are not really good.

I'll take Spiked Math's help to illustrate this out:

Moral:There are infinite formulae that fits a finite number of elements. There is no best fit formula. It is just your perception

## Comments

Sort by:

TopNewestimage

Fit this polynomial – Krishna Sharma · 2 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

"very logic"

LMAO!!! – John Muradeli · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

Find the next number of the sequence

\(1, 1, 1, 120, ?\)

Ans: \(25852016738884976640000\), because

\(\Gamma (\Gamma (1))=1\)

\(\Gamma (\Gamma (2))=1\)

\(\Gamma (\Gamma (3))=1\)

\(\Gamma (\Gamma (4))=120\)

\(\Gamma (\Gamma (5))=25852016738884976640000\) – Michael Mendrin · 2 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

– Pi Han Goh · 2 years ago

Oh man, I just saw this post, I should have used this for TKC.Log in to reply

Hi; whenever I see those type questions I always just fit a polynomial through them. Admittedly, it was tough with Q2. – Bobbym None · 2 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

– Agnishom Chattopadhyay · 2 years, 3 months ago

:D I agree with you. I fit the polynomial too. But when I try to enter the answer, Brilliant says that only integer values are allowed.Log in to reply

Loved it . – Azhaghu Roopesh M · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

So, here's the ultimate way to cure this problem:

Let us come up with a way to put a polynomial through any set of inputs and outputs x and y.

Any clues?

For example, I defined one as follows:

Find the next number in the sequence: \(0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,__\)

Ans: 10!

Now if there was a way to, say, put a function through something like 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, __ - that'd be great. – John Muradeli · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

replace {1,4,9,16} with a set of your own data – Agnishom Chattopadhyay · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

Well I am against those" odd number out of the set" type questions. I mean there we will always be able to choose a suitable prime p for which any 3 are quadratic residues while left one isn't – Subrata Saha · 2 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

1,3, and guess what's next? Something incomputable. Its the tree function. Next, 1, 1, 2, and guess what? Depends on the number of !'s. 0!!...=1, 1!!...=1, 2!!...=2, 3!!...=??? – Aloysius Ng · 2 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply