⏱️ Ten-minute starters — Foundation

Answer key

1. (b) £100 — Over 250 games, the expected total winnings are 250 × (1/5) × £12 = £600, since a player wins on 1 of the 5 equally likely sections. The total cost of playing is 250 × £2 = £500. The players' expected profit is the winnings minus the cost: £600 − £500 = £100. Writing £500 is wrong because that is only the total cost of playing, without any winnings included. Writing £600 is wrong because that is only the total expected winnings, without subtracting what was paid to play. Writing £2,500 is wrong because it assumes a win on every single game (250 × £12 = £3,000) instead of using the 1-in-5 probability, then subtracts the cost: £3,000 − £500 = £2,500. The players' expected profit over the 250 games is £100.
2. (a) y = −2x − 1 — Method: the gradient is the change in y divided by the change in x with both differences taken in the same order, and the constant then comes from substituting either point into y = mx + c. Working: m = (−9 − 3) ÷ (4 − (−2)) = (−12) ÷ 6 = −2, so the line is y = −2x + c; substituting (−2, 3) gives 3 = −2 × (−2) + c = 4 + c, so c = 3 − 4 = −1. Answer: y = −2x − 1. The distractors: y = −2x + 1 comes from rearranging 3 = 4 + c the wrong way round and taking the constant as 4 − 3; y = 2x + 7 comes from losing the minus sign when −12 is divided by 6 and then substituting correctly, 3 = 2 × (−2) + c; y = −(1/2)x + 2 comes from writing the gradient upside down as the change in x over the change in y, 6 ÷ (−12).
3. (a) They always charge the same, since 3(2n + 4) = 6n + 12. — Expand Advert A's formula by multiplying both terms inside the bracket by 3: 3 × 2n = 6n, and 3 × 4 = 12, giving 3(2n + 4) = 6n + 12, which is identical to Advert B's formula — so the two adverts always charge the same amount, whatever n is. Getting 6n + 4 comes from multiplying the 2n by 3 but leaving the 4 unmultiplied. Getting 2n + 7 comes from adding 3 to the bracket instead of multiplying by it. Saying it depends on n avoids expanding the bracket at all — once expanded, both formulas are identical for every value of n, so the cost can be compared directly.
4. (a) 0.15 — Let P(water) = x, so P(coffee) = 3x. The four outcomes are exhaustive: 0.36 + 0.04 + x + 3x = 1, so 0.4 + 4x = 1, giving 4x = 0.6 and x = 0.15. So P(water) = 0.15. Reporting 3x, the coffee probability, instead of water gives 0.45. Splitting the remaining 0.6 evenly between coffee and water, ignoring the 3:1 ratio, gives 0.30. Stopping once the remaining probability 0.6 is found, without dividing by the four equal shares, gives 0.60.
5. (b) (5, −2) — Reflecting in the x-axis keeps the x-coordinate the same and changes the sign of the y-coordinate, so (5, 2) → (5, −2). ((−5, 2) comes from reflecting in the y-axis instead, changing the sign of the x-coordinate; (−5, −2) comes from changing the sign of both coordinates, as for a reflection in the origin; (2, 5) comes from swapping the coordinates, which is what happens for a reflection in the line y = x.)
6. (b) SAS (two sides and the included angle) — PQ = ST and QR = TU are two pairs of matching sides, and the angle between them (angle Q and angle T) is 90° in both triangles — two sides and the angle between them are equal, so the triangles are congruent by SAS, using only the measurements given. RHS needs the hypotenuses to be known equal; here only the two legs are given, so you would first have to work out each hypotenuse by Pythagoras' theorem — extra working the question rules out. SSS has the same problem: the third side of each triangle is not given, only calculable. ASA needs two angles and the side between them, but here it is two sides and the angle between them that are given, not two angles.
7. (c) 5 × 10⁻³ — Method: in standard form the coefficient must be at least 1 and less than 10, and for a number smaller than 1 the index is negative and counts the places the decimal point moves to the right. Working: the only significant digit is 5, so the coefficient is 5; moving the decimal point in 0.005 three places to the right gives 5, so the index is −3. Answer: 5 × 10⁻³. The distractors: 0.5 × 10⁻² is the same value written the wrong way, because 0.5 is smaller than 1 and so is not an allowed coefficient; 5 × 10⁻² comes from counting the two zeros after the decimal point instead of the three places the point moves; 5 × 10³ comes from taking the index as positive, which describes a number in the thousands rather than one smaller than 1.
8. (b) 13 — Using the sum of interior angles formula, (n − 2) × 180° = 1980°, so n − 2 = 1980 ÷ 180 = 11, and n = 11 + 2 = 13. 11 stops after the division, forgetting to add 2 back to find n. 15 adds 2 twice by mistake, giving 11 + 2 + 2. 22 divides 1980 by 90 instead of 180.
9. (c) 27.7 cm — Arc length = (150 ÷ 360) × 2 × 3.14 × 6 = (5 ÷ 12) × 37.68 = 15.7 cm. The perimeter of a sector also includes the two straight radii, so perimeter = 15.7 + 6 + 6 = 27.7 cm. (15.7 cm comes from stopping after the arc length and forgetting the two straight edges; 21.7 cm comes from adding only one radius instead of two; 31.4 cm comes from doubling the arc length instead of adding the two straight edges.)
10. (a) 42 — Find the value of one part: 18 ÷ 3 = 6. Find the number of dogs: 4 × 6 = 24. Add the cats and the dogs to find the total: 18 + 24 = 42. (24 is the number of dogs only, not the total number of animals. 126 comes from multiplying the number of cats by the total number of parts, 18 × 7, instead of finding one part first. 25 comes from adding the ratio numbers 3 and 4 directly to the number of cats.)
11. (d) £144 — Method: find the length (perimeter) scale factor by taking the square root of the area ratio, then apply it to the cost. Working: 12 : 27 simplifies to 4 : 9, and the square root of each part gives the length ratio 2 : 3, so the scale factor from the smaller to the larger pond is 3 ÷ 2 = 1.5. Cost = £96 × 1.5 = £144. Answer: £144. £216 comes from using the area ratio itself as the cost ratio, £96 × (27 ÷ 12) = £216, without taking the square root. £64 comes from using the length ratio the wrong way round, £96 × (2 ÷ 3) = £64. £111 comes from simply adding the difference in area, 27 − 12 = 15, onto the original cost, £96 + £15 = £111, instead of scaling proportionally.
12. (c) 18 — Rearranging F + V − E = 2 gives E = F + V − 2. Substitute F = 8 and V = 12: 8 + 12 − 2 = 18 edges. Choosing 20 comes from adding the faces and vertices but forgetting to subtract the 2 (8 + 12 = 20). Choosing 22 comes from adding the 2 instead of subtracting it (8 + 12 + 2 = 22). Choosing 16 comes from subtracting 2 twice by mistake (8 + 12 − 2 − 2 = 16).