Raven's Matrices thread

[Anonymous No.9738596]

post and try solving Raven's Matrices, no easy ones allowed

[Anonymous No.9738600]

>>9738596
2

i have an 89 IQ and solved it instantly

[Anonymous No.9738605]

>>9738600
this is considered and moderate or even a hard example, good job. you might have had experiences or your brain might be good at solving this specific one easily. how do you know you IQ is 89?

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738608]

>>9738596
It's 2
Basically substract outside from inside: 3 - 7 = -4

next

[Anonymous No.9738612]

>>9738596
Idk. I have a 150iq when tested any other way but fuck these

[Anonymous No.9738613]

>>9738605
WAIS-IV back in 2013

[Anonymous No.9738623]

>>9738608
>next
actually this is the only one I have saved, I was hoping you would help me fill my folder with more interesting ones.
>>9738612
these are all that matters to determine heritable IQ, culturally unbiased IQ.
>>9738613
how old were you? do you feel like a brainlet? are you successful in life?

[Anonymous No.9738628]

[Anonymous No.9738643]

>>9738628
89 iq here
i think it might be B? or C?

i think it's b because bottom left portion of each box rotates and the next one has to be 2 and 2 on top and bottom like in B
next i wrote down the patterns 2, 4, 3, 5 for the top left and saw that it goes + 2, -1, +2, -1 so the pattern in top left has to be a 4 which checks out

i tried the same with top right
3, 2, 4, 3 which goes -1, +2, -1, +2, so next should be 5

yeah i think it's B

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738648]

>>9738628
B

Top left quadrant goes:
2, 4, 3, 5, so next is 4
Top right quadrant goes:
3, 2, 4, 3, so next is 5
Bottom left quadrant goes:
4, 4, 4, 4, so next is 4
Bottom right quadrant goes:
1, 3, 2, 4, so next is 3

[Anonymous No.9738649]

>>9738623
I was 16 at the time. I do feel like a brainlet most days. I was a NEET for a while and I'm going back to school for Geology with 3 years left, so I'm not really successful.

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738651]

>>9738648
>>9738643
fuuuuck you beat me to it again
there's no way you're only 89 iq btw

[Anonymous No.9738654]

>>9738651
i do I swear
then again I also have major depression that might have lowered it but I did in fact get an 89 in the composite IQ score on the WAIS-IV

[Anonymous No.9738660]

>>9738600
>>9738643
>an 89 IQ is smarter than me

[Anonymous No.9738665]

>>9738660
to be fair my highest subscore was in matrix reasoning, which was like 90th percentile

[Anonymous No.9738672]

>>9738665
Interesting. What did you score on other subtests?

[Anonymous No.9738679]

>>9738665
Then you are high IQ, that's all that matters. you are probably a lazy autistic NEET as well and don't have much experience to solve well in other kind of tests.

[Anonymous No.9738683]

>>9738596
I did so many of these in my teens because I had an obsession with IQ tests that I'm not sure I can ever get my IQ accurately assessed. Most of the harder problems usually involve some form of rotation, overlay and elimination. Once you've practiced enough of these, it's not hard to recognize which type of problem it is and find the solution.

[Anonymous No.9738686]

>>9738672
i don't remember but I scored below average on vocab and information/knowledge, along with pretty much everything in having to do with memory like memorizing strings of numbers and naming them back or having to name them back backwards.
the worst was this test where you had to use pieces to make a pattern with a time limit. i was dogshit at that.

[Anonymous No.9738687]

[Anonymous No.9738690]

>>9738679
The RAVEN is actually one of the lowest g-loaded IQ tests. Vocabulary size is genuinely a better predictor of IQ, surprisingly.

[Anonymous No.9738694]

/sci/ desperately trying to convince themselves that the 89 IQ doesn't have an 89 IQ
lmao

[Anonymous No.9738695]

>>9738600
How well you score on online tests?

[Anonymous No.9738697]

>>9738694
I'm the low IQ guy and I might just retake an IQ test one of these days.

[Anonymous No.9738699]

>>9738694
Lowest IQ boards;
/sci/
/his/
/lit/

Highest IQ ones:
/pol/
/int/
/r9k/

[Anonymous No.9738726]

>>9738660
they're very popular on the internet and on /sci/ as well, those two examples

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738728]

>>9738687
it's the first one
explanation coming

[Anonymous No.9738729]

>>9738687
It's the first one from the left.

When the square picture count number is odd (1st, 3rd, 5th) the smallest rectangle stays at the bottom.

Every second picture bubbles must remain in the same position. So, the 5th picture will have bubbles of the 3rd picture plus two more. So, the answer is first one from the left.

[Anonymous No.9738739]

>>9738687
Choice 1

[Anonymous No.9738743]

>>9738687
black dot added to either the left side or right side in each frame. It alternates between adding to the right and left side from frame to frame. A green block is added to the left side in a horizontal position. Green blocks are added as necessary to keep the total number of elements on the right side at 4. Green blocks are added to the left side in ascending order of size. If a green block is placed back to the left side to keep the total number at 4, it is put back in the position it was in in the first frame. This is what I noticed, but I can't put it all together to find the answer.

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738748]

>>9738728
Let's start at the very first picture.
On the left side you see a dot.
In the next picture one of the rectangles on the right will be moved over to this spot (sideways), leaving behind a dot in it's original location.
And in the picture after that, this rectangle will always be moved back.
So all you have to do is look at the dots on the left side, these will always be replaced by rectangles. And the rectangles which are on the left side will always just go back to their original place.

[Anonymous No.9738751]

>>9738748
wow this is way easier to see

[Anonymous No.9738763]

>>9738687
in each frame, a new dot is added on the left side.

each dot is mapped one-to-one to a vertical rectangle with which it swaps position every frame.

thus on the 5th frame there should be 2 dots, 2 bars, and a new dot. and any rectangle on the left in frame 4 should now be on the right, and vice versa. thus the answer is #1.

[Anonymous No.9738770]

>>9738763
as an example of the one to one mapping i mean , consider the top left dot mapped to the smallest rectangle on the right

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738836]

I don't have a Raven's Matrice, but I came up with a sequence for you to solve instead:

43, 47, 54, 59, 68, 76, ?

[Anonymous No.9738844]

>>9738836
literally infinite solutions

[Anonymous No.9738851]

>>9738687
the dot that bounces from TL to BR spawns a new dot on the left (when bouncing to the right) or to the right (when bouncing to the left)

so the next pic should have a dot in the TL position, and 5 dots in total, 2 on the right, 2 on the left (besides the moving one)

the ones on the right replace a shape and teleport it to the left side, and after 1 pic the dots on the right move to a bigger shape, so the new pic should have a new dot on the top right shape, and the previous dot should've moved to the longest shape

i hate these tests, it clearly shows that it's all about statistics, either you guess the "correct", i.e. what the test-maker was thinking of when he designed the test, or your points are lowered

by this I want to emphasize the fact that IQ tests are predictors, they are not tests that can be used to say that you are 100% of low or high intelligence

i mean, this is clearly obvious when you think of all the factors that can influence these tests and yes, even cultural factors

>>9738596
this test is a lot easier for people who are used to read/write from left to right

so yeah, no cultural bias, amirite guys??

[Anonymous No.9738862]

>>9738851
since they're good at being predictors, I wanted to say that there is a chance, i.e. it's possible that you did not think exactly of the abstract ideas the test maker was thinking of, so you solved the problem in your own way, but the tests are made in such a way that the solution the testmaker was thinking is "correct" is non-ambiguous enough such that brainlets are filtered by the process, but this does not entirely exclude blunders, different (but valid) mental models and solutions, etc.

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738863]

>>9738844
you're supposed to find a pattern retard

you can't just answer "literally infinite solutions" on every question on a test like this:
http://news.generiq.net/Trilogica/algebrica.html

that would result in you not having very high IQ

[Anonymous No.9738875]

>>9738863
you clearly missed the point of these tests brainlet, and you're also definitely not studying anything related to STEM if you're telling us that an integer sequence has always only one valid "next number" if you are to stop it at some specific point

https://oeis.org/

have fun, brainlet

[Anonymous No.9738882]

>>9738836
43, 47, 54, 59, 68, 76, 89, 102, 121, 141

[Anonymous No.9738888]

>>9738836
82?

[Anonymous No.9738889]

>>9738882
Am I correct?

[Genius PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738894]

>>9738889
Try again

[Genius PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738898]

>>9738889
don't do the flipping, piggot

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738899]

>>9738875
>you clearly missed the point of these tests brainlet
And what point is that?
Your argument would make the IQ test I posted and others like it completely invalid, is that really what you're claiming? fucking retard
And it's not like I'm the one who came up with the concept of using sequences in IQ tests

>and you're also definitely not studying anything related to STEM if you're telling us that an integer sequence has always only one valid "next number"
I am.
It's about finding the simplest pattern, just like it is with the Raven Matrices.
You could make an autistic argument like "a Raven Matrice doesn't always have one valid answer" just as easily.
Pretty sure you're just upset cause you can't find the pattern.

>>9738882
wrong

[Anonymous No.9738901]

>>9738836
>>9738888
the pattern I noticed seems to be the second number doubles, if 2 digits only 2nd number is added, and if the 1st number is either progressing or repeating itself, it the first number is repeating itself then plus 1 is added to the second one.
am I retarded?

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738904]

>>9738901
I have no idea what you're saying

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738905]

>>9738888
wrong

[Anonymous No.9738908]

>>9738904
that confirm it then, I'm retarded. is 82 correct or not?

[Genius PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738909]

>>9738899
relax, turd-boy, don't overwork your nutsack-like brain, let me explain it to you in simpler terms such that you finally understand

IQ tests should have choices, because yes, there are a very large number of interpretations and possible solutions for tests that can contain permutations, different numbers, different positions, etc.

your question amounts to "what number am I thinking of?" which even a 6 year old child knows is an impossible joke question

but you're clearly not yet at the level of a 6yo, "genius"

in conclusion, brainlet piggot detected

[Anonymous No.9738913]

>>9738904
you're an illiterate muck-dweller

by the way, this is the real test of intelligence, wait for it

[Anonymous No.9738915]

>>9738899
oh no, I'm so sorry, I was too ambiguous for Mr Banana monkey man, let me be more specific

to add to >>9738909
you need choices so that you limit the possible answer set, so that you try to minimize the number of alternative / possible / valid / semi-valid answers to your question

your brainlet "test" amounts to, as I said, to "what number am I thinking of?"

you need to be more specific and to clearly specify what are the patterns that we need to analyze and choose from when we give our answers

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738917]

>>9738909
>your question amounts to "what number am I thinking of?"
nope, it amounts to finding a very simple pattern in the sequence of numbers, to determine the next, it's really not that hard
nice try though

[Anonymous No.9738924]

>>9738899
this is why I said that you clearly missed the point of these sets, windowlicker

these tests are not about "there is only one valid answer and it's the one in my head, high IQ means you're a mind-reader", these tests are about analyzing the population in such a way that high IQ people are the ones that usually (statistically speaking) pick the "valid" choices that can be found in the lists of possible answers for each question

or, if there is no answer set, you need to define a metric, some kind of distance function with which to calculate the distance between the answer that a high-IQ person is decided to be most likely to choose

if you go full retard and just go with "what number am I thinking of?" it clearly shows that you're either incredibly stupid, or you missed the point of IQ tests

either way you're a brainlet, if we follow the set of guidelines proposed by /sci/ with which we can decide when to call people brainlets

[Anonymous No.9738929]

>>9738836
89?

54 - 43 = 11
59 - 47 = 12
68 - 54 = 14
76 - 59 = 17

so we spot a pattern here

12 - 11 = 1, 14 - 12 = 2, 17 - 14 = 3, so then next in this series is 21 - 17 = 4.

so then, we need x - 68 = 21, which is 89

[Anonymous No.9738932]

>>9738917
no, it amounts to "what number am I thinking of?" you incurable brainlet

why do you think IQ tests have sets of possible answers, or at least define metrics which calculate the distance from the chosen valid answer and the answer given by the user?

don't answer, I'm not interested in any answer that you'd be able to defecate, brainlet

[Anonymous No.9738937]

>>9738929
so then, next number would be 76 + 26 = 102

and so on

[Anonymous No.9738941]

>>9738929
alternatively, we see that

43, 47, 54, 59, 68, 76 corresponds to

+4, +7, +5, +9, +8
which corresponds to

+3, +2, -4, -1

so you add 5 and subtract 5 to the second sequence obtained

so then, next number in 2nd sequence is 11, which corresponds to 87 in the original sequence

[Anonymous No.9738944]

>>9738894
It's late in the evening, I'm tired and my mind is anchored to my initial solution. So, I really can't be bothered to.

Here's my thought process, tell me how I'm wrong.

43 47 54 59 68 76 89
+4 +7 +5 +9 +8 +13
+3 -2 +4 -1 +5

[Anonymous No.9738946]

>>9738941
idk I can't think of anything else. honestly i'm fucking stumped

[Anonymous No.9738949]

>>9738941
fuck, meant -2
so then it would be +5 and still 89 not 87

pretty much what this guy said

>>9738944

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738950]

>>9738932
wrong
but it's a pretty good pattern
so I will agree with you >>9738915 here, I should've provided multiple choice answers to prevent this

>>9738941
>>9738944
also wrong

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738952]

>>9738929
wrong
but it's a pretty good pattern
so I will agree with you >>9738915 here, I should've provided multiple choice answers to prevent this

>>9738941
>>9738944
also wrong

[Anonymous No.9738953]

>>9738950
none of the ones offered are wrong, they are just not the ones you have in mind

[Anonymous No.9738955]

>>9738743
It's interesting the different ways people approach matrices problems. I thought of each piece as "shifting" to the other side and leaving a hole whenever they go, with the "goal" of covering up holes on the other side.

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738962]

>>9738953
okay, I agree with you
this one >>9738929 is simple enough of a pattern to be considered correct
I should've made it multiple choice

[Anonymous No.9738969]

>>9738952
If you're just going to yell wrong without explaining, I'm just going to assume you're bullshitting.

The patterns for 89 are perfectly sound. And the pattern being sound is enough for the answer 89 to be correct since you haven't given us multiple choice answers to limit our logic in solving this sequence.

At least, give us a multiple choice answer, or I'm just going to assume you just sperged out that your "hard" pattern (hard in your tiny mind) was solved almost instantly.

[Anonymous No.9738975]

Complete :

81 ; 73 ; 54 ; 46 ; ...

[Anonymous No.9738977]

>>9738969
calm down, brainlet

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738981]

>>9738969
Okay fine, I'll give you the answer:
Each step add the biggest digit in the number to the number.
So it's 83.

[Anonymous No.9738983]

>>9738981
it's always the dumb one that are hard

[Anonymous No.9738984]

>>9738981
>mfw attempting some alternations of multiplications of 11 and 12 since 11*4 = 44 - 1 = 43, 12 *4 = 48 - 1 = 47, 11 * 5 = 55 - 1 = 54, 12 * 5 = 60 -1 =59.. etc

>it was this simple

god damn it

[Anonymous No.9738987]

>>9738941
>didn't even see the pattern with the +4, +7, +5, written out

behold. i told you guys I had an 89 IQ

[Anonymous No.9738990]

>it's another "sci brainlets overcomplicate an easy problem" episode

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9738992]

>>9738975
27?

[Anonymous No.9738995]

>>9738975
>>9738992
Yeah, this one is too short to see any pattern more reasonable than -8, - 19, - 8, - 19...

[Anonymous No.9738997]

>>9738992
>>9738995
yes ! bravo guys

[Anonymous No.9739000]

>>9738997
got one. saw it on an IQ test

1, 1, 2, 8, 12, 27, 45, 60

[Anonymous No.9739014]

>>9739000
70, 88, 99 ?

Also I was wondering : are you allowed to use pen and paper while doing these series ? Using notes to analyze a series is much easier

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9739015]

>>9739014
>70, 88, 99
I'm curious what your reasoning is?

[Anonymous No.9739031]

>>9739015
1*1 = 1
1*1 = 1
2*1 = 2
2*4 = 8
3*4 = 12
3*9 = 27
5*9 = 45
6*10
7*10
8*11

Looking at it now, it's pretty sketchy. I would have rather said 5*16 = 90 as the next number

[Anonymous No.9739038]

>>9739000
71

[Anonymous No.9739041]

>>9739038
>>9739031
>>9739014
i just typed random numbers honestly

[Anonymous No.9739044]

>>9739041
It looks significant lmao. All of them have pretty simple prime divisors and the 8 and 27 make it seem like cubes are involved.

[Genius !!PQVMDriJJ5D No.9739048]

>>9739041
fuck you lmao
I've been staring at it since you posted it

[Anonymous No.9739052]

>>9739041
That's how IQ tests are created though.

[Anonymous No.9739060]

>>9739041
kek

[Anonymous No.9739072]

>>9739031
>5*16=90
Yeah maybe get a good night sleep kiddo

[Anonymous No.9739078]

>>9738863
stupid fuck

[Anonymous No.9739080]

>>9739031
So it's like prime number * square of a natural number

[Anonymous No.9739109]

>>9738596
2
Work downwards, think of outside as being negative numbers and inside as being positive numbers.
Actually working left to right is also fine.

>no easy ones allowed
You broke your own rule.

[Anonymous No.9739116]

>>9738651
>>9738660
That image was posted here a couple days ago. He probably saw it and the arguments for the solution.

[Anonymous No.9739141]

>>9739116
the first one is so easy, i'd believe an 89 IQ solving it

[Anonymous No.9739146]

>>9739141
Yeah, the first one was super easy. It took me less than a minute.

[Anonymous No.9739160]

>>9739116
or maybe he solved it
christ these aren't hard

[Anonymous No.9739404]

>>9738836
83

[Anonymous No.9739624]

>>9739404
solution posted

[Anonymous No.9739731]

leaning more towards 5 than 2
138-142iq on mensa test

[Anonymous No.9739771]

Post moar matrices

[Anonymous No.9739781]

>>9739731
well the answer is 2

[Anonymous No.9739801]

>>9738596
2.
Took me a depressingly long time to figure out the stupidly simple trick.

One word will spoil it:
subtraction

[Anonymous No.9740265]

>>9738596
5? it follows the pattern from the first one where you have inner dots left after you subtract the two squares.

[Anonymous No.9740279]

>>9739731
Mensa confirmed worthless.

[Anonymous No.9740284]

>>9739801
Not subtraction.
Positive (inside) and negative (outside) numbers.
All you do is addition.
-4 5 1
-3 -2 -5
-7 3 ?
Left to right
-4 + 5 = 1
-3 + -2 = -5
-7 + 3 = -4
Top to bottom
-4 + -3 = -7
5 + -2 = 3
1 + -5 = -4

The answer is -4, so four dots on the outside.

[Anonymous No.9740286]

>>9740284
Should also mention you could even have positive as outside dots and negative as inside dots, it makes no difference.