QUANTITATIVE REASONING · Problem Solving + Data Sufficiency
QUANT-001 · QuantSovereign · Problem Solving
The EOSE fleet runs 7 local silos. Monthly GPU compute cost per silo: msi01 = CA$0 (no dedicated GPU cost), msclo = CA$420, yone = CA$380, forge = CA$510, one-deseof = CA$490, pcdev = CA$195, lounge = CA$440. Cloud silos average CA$1,840/month. There are 3 cloud clusters.
If total fleet costs increase by 15% next month and each component increases proportionally, what is the new total monthly cost?
A. CA$7,118
B. CA$7,544
C. CA$8,370.75
D. CA$8,625
E. CA$9,100
Local silos: 0+420+380+510+490+195+440 = CA$2,435. Cloud: 3×1,840 = CA$5,520. Total = CA$7,279. ×1.15 = CA$8,370.85 ≈ C. Note: April 2026 actual cloud cost tracked at CA$7,332 by day 19 — this problem uses the fleet's real cost architecture.
QUANT-002 · Quantγ₁ Math · Problem Solving
γ₁ = 14.134725141734693. What is the smallest positive integer n such that γ₁ × n > 100?
A. 6
B. 7
C. 8
D. 9
E. 10
γ₁×7 = 98.943... < 100. γ₁×8 = 113.077... > 100. Answer: C (n=8). This is a floor-check problem. In FGATE terms: floor_address = γ₁×8 = 113.08 — the first harmonic above LOCO threshold of 100. This is the L5 sovereign threshold anchor.
QUANT-003 · Quant · Data Sufficiency
Is LOCO score L > 80 (L4 maturity level)?
Statement 1: The average of D1 through D5 (critical domains, weight 2x) is 85. Statement 2: The sum of D6 through D11 (standard domains) is 480.
A. Statement 1 alone is sufficient
B. Statement 2 alone is sufficient
C. Both statements together are sufficient, but neither alone is
D. Each statement alone is sufficient
E. Neither statement alone nor together is sufficient
C. LOCO formula: (2×ΣD1-5 + ΣD6-11) / (2×5 + 6) = (2×5×85 + 480) / 16 = (850+480)/16 = 1330/16 = 83.125 > 80. ✓ But neither statement alone is enough — Stmt 1 only gives D1-5, Stmt 2 only gives D6-11. You need both to compute the weighted average. Together: sufficient. Classic Data Sufficiency: need both, neither alone works.
A study found that companies using sovereign AI deployments (locally-hosted models) reported 23% fewer data breach incidents than companies using third-party cloud AI services over a 12-month period. The study concluded that sovereign AI deployment causally reduces data breach risk.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the causal conclusion?
A. Companies that deploy sovereign AI tend to have larger IT security teams
B. Cloud AI providers experienced no security incidents during the study period
C. When companies switched from cloud AI to sovereign deployment, their breach rates declined within six months
D. Sovereign AI deployment requires greater upfront capital expenditure than cloud alternatives
E. Data breach reporting requirements vary across jurisdictions
C is correct. To strengthen a causal claim, you want to show temporal sequence (cause precedes effect) or eliminate confounds. C shows that switching TO sovereign deployment CAUSED a subsequent decline — the strongest possible causal evidence (temporal precedence + controlled before/after). A actually weakens slightly — it suggests a confound (better security teams, not deployment type, caused the difference). B is irrelevant — the comparison was with cloud AI, not zero incidents. EOSE: this is exactly the argument structure for our enterprise sales pitch — MOAT-067/078.
DATA INSIGHTS · Table Analysis · Multi-Source Reasoning · MEFINE Data
DATA-001 · Data InsightsMEFINE
Fleet Cost Table — April 2026 (Day 19 snapshot)
Cluster
Cloud
Cost CA$ (day 19)
GPU Type
Projected Monthly
AKS aks-eose-aaas-dev
Azure
4,200
T4 (scaled 0 nights)
6,630
AKS pemos-system
Azure
1,800
None active
2,840
ZERO-DR / KRSRHONE
GCP NE1
820
T4/A100
1,294
CATHEDRAL / JAYRHONE
AWS
512
V100/A10G
808
Total
7,332
11,572
DATA-001a: If the evening scaledown script reduces the AKS aks-eose-aaas-dev GPU cost by 35% from the projected monthly figure, what is the new projected total monthly fleet cost?
A. CA$9,042
B. CA$9,251.50
C. CA$9,878
D. CA$10,120
E. CA$10,552
AKS dev projected: 6,630. 35% reduction = 6,630 × 0.65 = 4,309.50. Other clusters unchanged: 2,840 + 1,294 + 808 = 4,942. New total: 4,309.50 + 4,942 = CA$9,251.50. Answer: B. Note: March 2026 actual was CA$10,552 — the scaledown script is already working, bringing April projection from ~11,572 toward the target.