Worksheet generator

1.C — 14KA-0051Complementary counting

• AI counted the multiples of 3 and gave that instead of the numbers that are not multiples.
• BI counted 21 as a multiple of 3 inside the range, so I removed one too many.
• DI removed only the multiples of 3 that are also even, so I subtracted three instead of six.
• EI gave the size of the whole range and forgot to remove anything at all.

2.C — 6KA-0054Counting shapes hidden inside a figure

• AI counted only the three small rectangles drawn as separate cells and stopped there.
• BI counted the three small rectangles and the whole one, and forgot the two made of two cells.
• DI counted a rectangle made of the left and right cells, even though they are not next to each other.
• EI assumed any pair of the four vertical lines makes a rectangle without checking each one.

3.C — 9KA-0072Systematic listing

• AI counted only the numbers with two identical digits, like 11, 22 and 33.
• BI required the two digits to be different, even though repeats are allowed.
• DI allowed a fourth digit that was not in the list.
• EI counted three-digit numbers instead of two-digit ones.

4.D — 6KA-0003Counting shapes hidden inside a figure

• AI counted only the three small triangles I could see as separate cells and stopped there.
• BI counted the three small triangles and added the whole big one, but forgot the two made of two cells.
• CI found the three small ones and one pair, but missed the second pair of neighbouring triangles.
• EI assumed every choice of two of the four lines would make a triangle, without checking each one.

5.D — 75KA-0023The multiplication principle

• AI added the number of options at each step instead of multiplying them.
• BI treated the two digits as one choice of ten rather than two independent choices of five.
• CI assumed the two digits had to be different, so I used 5 times 4 for them.
• EI used 5 choices for the letter position as well, forgetting there are only three letters.

6.D — 9KA-0046Counting by position (sliding window)

• AI cut the board into four separate 2 by 2 blocks instead of sliding the square one step at a time.
• BI counted the three sliding positions along the top and doubled them for two rows.
• CI counted the positions along the top row and down the left column and added them.
• EI counted the sixteen small squares on the board rather than the 2 by 2 squares.

7.B — 4KA-0069Inclusion–exclusion with two sets

• AI added 18 and 14 without removing the overlap, then subtracted from 30.
• CI subtracted the 6 who play both twice instead of once.
• DI subtracted only the footballers from the class and forgot the chess players entirely.
• EI found how many play at least one sport and gave that instead of how many play neither.

8.B — 15KA-0074Selections of a few objects

• AI doubled the group size instead of counting pairs.
• CI allowed a student to be paired with themselves, adding six impossible pairs.
• DI counted each pair twice, once in each order, and forgot to halve.
• EI multiplied 6 by 6, counting every ordered pair including a student with themselves.

9.A — 4KA-0154Inclusion–exclusion with two sets

• BI found how many students play at least one of the two and answered with that instead.
• CI added 18 and 15 to get 33, subtracted the 30 in the class, and used the 3 left over.
• DI removed the 7 from both groups and subtracted 11 and 8 from 30, taking the overlap away twice.
• EI answered with the number who play both, which is what the question gave me rather than what it asked for.

10.A — 56KA-0163Selections of a few objects

• BI counted ordered selections, so I counted the same three people once for every order they could stand in.
• CI multiplied the 8 members by the 3 places, which counts something quite different from a selection.
• DI divided the 336 ordered selections by 3 instead of by 3 factorial.
• EI chose 2 people rather than 3.

11.A — 6KA-0173Counting up to symmetry

• BI counted every colouring of the four edges and forgot that rotations make some of them identical.
• CI divided 16 by 4, but that only works when no painting is left unchanged by a rotation, and some are.
• DI halved 16, treating only the 180 degree turn as a symmetry.
• EI listed by how many edges are black but forgot that two black edges can be adjacent or opposite.

12.C — 8KA-0012Casework

• AI counted each pair of digits once instead of counting both orders, such as 17 and 71.
• BI listed the pairs starting from 1 and 7 and forgot the number 80, where the second digit is zero.
• DI included 08 as a two-digit number, but a two-digit number cannot start with zero.
• EI counted both orders of every pair and then counted the pairs that reverse to themselves twice as well.

13.D — 19KA-0018Complementary counting

• AI counted the codes that avoid 3 entirely and gave that as my answer without subtracting.
• BI counted the codes with a 3 in the first position only and forgot the other two positions.
• CI counted the codes with exactly one 3 and forgot the ones with two or three of them.
• EI counted every possible code and forgot to remove the ones with no 3 at all.

14.C — 4KA-0040The pigeonhole principle

• AI answered with the lucky case, where the first two socks happen to match.
• BI used the number of colours as my answer without adding one for the sock that must repeat.
• DI worked from the number of socks of each colour instead of the number of colours.
• EI took the whole drawer, guaranteeing a pair but far more socks than are needed.

15.A — 12KA-0071Overcount, then correct

• BI divided the 120 arrangements by 6 rather than by the 10 movements that leave a bracelet looking the same.
• CI allowed for turning the bracelet but forgot it can also be flipped over.
• DI halved the 120 for flipping but forgot that turning also gives the same bracelet.
• EI counted every arrangement in a line, as if the bracelet had a fixed first bead.

16.C — 7KA-0077The pigeonhole principle

• AI answered with the luckiest case, where the first three balls happen to match.
• BI found the worst case of two of each colour and forgot to take one more.
• DI multiplied the three colours by the three balls I need, rather than thinking about the worst case.
• EI worked from the number of balls of each colour rather than from the number of colours.

17.C — 55KA-0078Extremal / worst-case counting

• AI found the smallest possible total of the other nine and gave that instead of what is left.
• BI assumed the biggest number could be at most half the total.
• DI made the other nine numbers all equal to 1, forgetting that they have to be different from each other.
• EI ignored the other nine numbers entirely, as if the biggest could take the whole total.

18.B — 7KA-0157The pigeonhole principle

• AI thought that one more than the number of colours must give three of a kind, which only guarantees a PAIR.
• CI got to two of each colour, then added one more for each colour instead of one more in total.
• DI assumed the worst case meant emptying the largest pile of 12 reds first.
• EI answered with the number of socks I want rather than the number I must take to be sure of them.

19.A — 91/216KA-0168Complementary counting

• BI added 1/6 three times, which counts the overlapping cases more than once and would exceed 1 for seven rolls.
• CI worked out the probability of NO six and forgot to subtract it from 1.
• DI found the probability of three sixes instead of at least one.
• EI gave the probability for a single roll and ignored that there are three.

20.A — 54KA-0177Overcount, then correct

• BI counted every line joining two vertices and forgot to remove the 12 sides.
• CI counted each diagonal from both of its endpoints and forgot to halve.
• DI used 12 x 10 without halving, double counting every diagonal.
• EI subtracted 24 rather than 12, removing each side twice.