Eight people were seated between W and Q where Q is seated to the right of W.
Four people were seated between W and R. Only two people were seated between R and M who was not seated adjacent to Q.
Case 1:
Case 2:
Only two people were seated between R and M.
Case 1a:
Case 1b:
Case 2a:
Case 2b:
Number of people seated between M and W is equal to the number of people seated between Q and N.
Case 1a(i):
Case 1a(ii):
Case 1b (i):
Case 1b(ii):
Case 2a(i):
Case 2a(ii):
Case 2b:
Number of people seated to the right of N is one more than twice the number of people seated between R and W. Not more than 25 people were seated in the row.
So, case 1b(i), 2a(ii) are invalid.
Five people are seated between N and P where P is to the right of N.
Case 1a(i):
As many people were seated to the left of M as were seated to the right of P.
T was seated second from the left end of the row and was not a neighbour of R.
So, this case is invalid.
Case 1a(ii):
As many people were seated to the left of M as were seated to the right of P.
T was seated second from the left end of the row and was not a neighbour of R.
So, this case is invalid.
Case 1b(ii):
But no three people whose information is known were seated together. Hence this case is invalid.
Case 2a(i):
As many people were seated to the left of M as were seated to the right of P.
T was seated second from the left end of the row and was not a neighbour of R.
So, this case is invalid.
Case 2b:
O is seated eighth to the right of T. S is fifth to the right of O.
22 people were seated in the row.
Study Notes
Category
