Triangle Inequality Rule on the GMAT
Posted on
09
Feb 2021

Triangle Inequality Rule

By: Rich Zwelling, Apex GMAT Instructor
Date: 9th February, 2021

One of the less-common but still need-to-know rules tested on the GMAT is the “triangle inequality” rule, which allows you to draw conclusions about the length of the third side of a triangle given information about the lengths of the other two sides.

Often times, this rule is presented in two parts, but I find it is easiest to condense it into one, simple part that concerns a sum and a difference. Here’s what I mean, and we’ll use a SCENARIO:

Suppose we have a triangle that has two sides of length 3 and 5:

triangles inequalities 1

What can we say about the length of the third side? Of course, we can’t nail down a single definitive value for that length, but we can actually put a limit on its range. That range is simply the difference and the sum of the lengths of the other two sides, non-inclusive.

So, in this case, since the difference between the lengths of the other two sides is 2, and their sum is 8, we can say for sure that the third side of this triangle must have a length between 2 and 8, non-inclusive. [Algebraically, this reads as (5-3) < x < (5+3) OR 2 < x < 8.]

If you’d like to see that put into words:

**The length of any side of a triangle must be shorter than the sum of the other two side lengths and longer than the difference of the other two side lengths.**

It’s important to note that this works for any triangle. But why did we say non-inclusive? Well, let’s look at what would happen if we included the 8 in the above example. Imagine a “triangle” with lengths 3, 5, and 8. Can you see the problem? (Think about it before reading the next paragraph.)

Imagine a twig of length 3 inches and another of length 5 inches. How would you form a geometric figure of length 8 inches? You’d simply join the two twigs in a straight line to form a longer, single twig of 8 inches. It would be impossible to form a triangle with a side of 8 inches with the original two twigs.

triangle inequalities 2

 

If you wanted to form a triangle with the twigs of 3 and 5, you’d have to “break” the longer twig of 8 inches and bend the two twigs at an angle for an opportunity to have a third side, guaranteed to be shorter than 8 inches:

triangle inequalities 3

The same logic would hold for the other end of the range (we couldn’t have a triangle of 3, 5, and 2, as the only way to form a length of 5 from lengths of 2 and 3 would be to form a longer line segment of 5.)

Now that we’ve covered the basics, let’s dive into a few problems, starting with this Official Guide problem:

If k is an integer and 2 < k < 7, for how many different values of k is there a triangle with sides of lengths 2, 7, and k?
(A) one
(B) two
(C) three
(D) four
(E) five

Strategy: Eliminate Answers

As usual with the GMAT, it’s one thing to know the rule, but it’s another when you’re presented with a carefully worded question that tests your ability to pay close attention to detail. First, we are told that two of the lengths of the triangle are 2 and 7. What does that mean for the third side, given the triangle inequality rule? We know the third side must have a length between 5 (the difference between the two sides) and 9 (the sum of the two sides).

Here, you can actually use the answer choices to your advantage, at least to eliminate some answers. Notice that k is specified as an integer. How many integers do we know now are possible? Well, if k must be between 5 and 9 (and remember, it’s non-inclusive), the only options possibly available to us are 6, 7, and 8. That means a maximum of three possible values of k, thus eliminating answers D and E.

Since the GMAT is a time-intensive test, you might have to end up guessing now and then, so if you can strategically eliminate answers, it increases your chances of guessing correctly.

Now for this problem, there’s another condition given, namely that 2 < k < 7. We already determined that k must be 6, 7, or 8. However, of those numbers, only 6 fits in the given range 2 < k < 7. This means that 6 is the only legal value that fits for k. The correct answer is A.

Note:

It’s important to emphasize that the eliminate answers strategy is not a mandate. We’re simply presenting it as an option that works here because it is useful on many GMAT problems and should be explored and practiced as often as possible.

Check out the following links for our other articles on triangles and their properties:

A Short Meditation on Triangles
The 30-60-90 Right Triangle
The 45-45-90 Right Triangle
The Area of an Equilateral Triangle
Triangles with Other Shapes
Isosceles Triangles and Data Sufficiency
Similar Triangles
3-4-5 Right Triangle
5-12-13 and 7-24-25 Right Triangles

Read more
Isosceles Triangles and Data Sufficiency title
Posted on
26
Jan 2021

Isosceles Triangles and Data Sufficiency

By: Rich Zwelling, Apex GMAT Instructor
Date: 21st January, 2021

Although we’ve already discussed isosceles triangles a bit during our discussion of 45-45-90 (i.e. isosceles right) triangles, it’s worth discussing some other contexts in which you may see isosceles triangles on the GMAT, specifically on Data Sufficiency problems. 

As we discussed before, an isosceles triangle is any triangle that features two equal sides and thus two equal opposite angles:

Isosceles Triangles and Data Sufficiency picture 1

That’s an easy enough definition to remember, but how does the GMAT turn this into more challenging problems? For that, let’s take a look at the following Official Guide problem. Try to solve before reading the explanation below the problem:

Isosceles Triangles and Data Sufficiency picture 2

In the figure above, what is the value of x + y ?
(1) x = 70
(2) ABC and ADC are both isosceles triangles

Explanation

In this case, it’s straightforward enough to determine that each statement alone will be insufficient. Statement (1) gives us a definitive value for x, but no information about y, thus we cannot answer the question (the value of x+y). And although Statement (2) labels each triangle in the diagram as isosceles, we have no way of knowing the specific angles involved nor their relationships. 

However, as with many Data Sufficiency problems, especially those involving Geometry, things can get thorny when we have to combine the statements. The two statements look very complimentary, and that could lead us to prematurely conclude the answer is C (i.e. the two statements are sufficient when combined). But we must do a thorough check. 

Reframing the question

Remember that at any point during a Data Sufficiency problem — beginning, middle, or end — you can reframe the question for simplicity. The question asks for the value of x+y. But now that we are combining the statements, we already know that x=70. In terms of sufficiency, then, what information do we need? The only thing missing is a definitive value of y. The question now might as well be “What is the value of y?”

Now, here’s where the GMAT thinking really comes into play. It’s one thing to understand what an isosceles triangle is. It’s quite another to judge what a diagram of an isosceles triangle does or does not tell you and what you can or cannot extrapolate from it. 

One of my personal favorite things about Geometry Data Sufficiency problems is that they tend to be very intuitive visually. You can often answer them by manipulating figures. 

We know that triangle ADC is isosceles, but is that enough to give us definitive measurements? Visually, which of these does it look like?  

Isosceles Triangles and Data Sufficiency picture 3

Without any numerical evaluations, we can see that we can’t get a definitive measure for the angle at D, which in this case is our y. So even when we combine the statements, we cannot get an answer to our question. The correct answer is E

Here’s another case of a tricky Data Sufficiency problem involving isosceles triangles:

In isosceles triangle RST, what is the measure of angle R?

  • The measure of angle T is 100 degrees
  • The measure of angle S is 40 degrees

Again, give the problem a shot before reading the answer and explanation.

Explanation

This is one for which you can draw a diagram, but it’s not necessary. The trick here is to remember another key property of triangles, namely that all angles in the triangle must sum to 180 degrees.

Since the triangle is isosceles, and since each statement gives you only one angle of three, the temptation can be to say that each statement is insufficient on its own. This is certainly the case for Statement (2), because the 40-degree angle could be one of a pair (in which case we would have a 40-40-100 triangle) or the 40-degree angle could be the odd angle out (in which case we would have a 40-70-70 triangle). 

Because the problem asks for the value of R, and since R could be 40, 70, or 100 depending on the situations outlined above, Statement (2) is INSUFFICIENT.

However, there’s a catch when evaluating Statement (1). Notice that angle T is an obtuse angle, meaning it is greater than 90 degrees. Is it possible that there are two 100-degree angles in a triangle? This would produce a total of 200 degrees, which would exceed the 180-degree total for any triangle. As such, the only possibility is that the 100 degree angle is the odd angle out, and the other two angles are equal acute angles (specifically, we have a 40-40-100 triangle). 

Now we know R must be 40 degrees. Statement (1) is sufficient, and the correct answer is A.

But notice how the GMAT sets the statements up to bait you into thinking that you must combine the two statements to figure out the value of angle R. 

Now that we’ve finished talking about the basic triangle types, we can move on to talking about what happens when triangles are used within different shapes. In the meantime, here are links to our other triangle articles:

A Short Meditation on Triangles
The 30-60-90 Right Triangle
The 45-45-90 Right Triangle
The Area of an Equilateral Triangle
Triangles with Other Shapes
Isosceles Triangles and Data Sufficiency
Similar Triangles
3-4-5 Right Triangle
5-12-13 and 7-24-25 Right Triangles

Read more