Correct Option (4)
The question requires identifying the smallest 1-digit number possessing exactly 4 distinct factors. A systematic enumeration of 1-digit numbers (1 through 9) and their corresponding factors reveals the following:
- Numbers with 1 factor: 1 ({1})
- Numbers with 2 factors: 2 ({1, 2}), 3 ({1, 3}), 5 ({1, 5}), 7 ({1, 7})
- Numbers with 3 factors: 4 ({1, 2, 4}), 9 ({1, 3, 9})
- Numbers with 4 factors: 6 ({1, 2, 3, 6}), 8 ({1, 2, 4, 8})
From this analysis, the 1-digit numbers with exactly 4 distinct factors are 6 and 8. The smallest among these is 6. Since the answer (6) can be definitively determined through direct analysis of 1-digit numbers, the question can be answered without relying on either Statement I or Statement II.
Incorrect Options:
The question can be answered by direct analysis, rendering the statements unnecessary.
- Option 1: The Question can be answered by using one of the Statements alone, but cannot be answered using the other statement alone.
- Statement I (2 is one of the factors): Both 6 and 8 satisfy this condition. Since both 6 and 8 have exactly 4 distinct factors, Statement I alone is insufficient to uniquely identify the smallest number (6).
- Statement II (3 is one of the factors): Among the numbers with exactly 4 distinct factors (6 and 8), only 6 has 3 as a factor. Thus, Statement II alone is sufficient to identify 6.
- While Statement II is sufficient, the overarching fact that the question can be answered without any statement makes this option incorrect.
- Option 2: The Question can be answered by using either Statement alone.
- As established, Statement I is insufficient because it applies to both 6 and 8. Therefore, this option is incorrect.
- Option 3: The Question can be answered by using both the Statements together, but cannot be answered using either Statement alone.
- Statement II alone is sufficient to identify the number as 6. Therefore, it is not accurate to state that neither statement alone is sufficient or that both statements are required. This option is incorrect.