Premium Vector | Logic exercises for children Solve examples ... - Free Printable

Let’s go through the task step by step.

This is a visual math puzzle where each row shows two shapes (or groups of shapes) being added or subtracted, and you need to figure out what the result should be — usually by counting how many small squares or parts are in each shape, then doing the math.

We’ll treat each square grid as made up of smaller unit squares (like graph paper). We count how many small squares are filled or outlined in each shape, then do the addition or subtraction.

Let’s solve each row one by one:

---

Row 1:
Left: A rectangle with 3 diagonal lines → looks like it covers 4 small squares? Wait — actually, looking closely, it's a 2x2 square with 3 diagonals drawn — but that doesn’t change area. Actually, maybe we’re supposed to count *how many small squares are inside the shape*?

Wait — let’s look again. The first shape is a 2x2 square (so 4 small squares), with 3 diagonal lines drawn inside — but those lines don’t add area. So maybe we’re counting the number of small squares that are “covered” or “part of the shape”.

Actually, looking at all examples, it seems like each shape is drawn on a grid, and we count how many small squares are fully or partially included? But that would be messy.

Alternative idea: Maybe each shape is made of triangles or parts, and we count the number of small triangular units?

Wait — let’s look at Row 7:
Left: Circle — which covers about 4 small squares? But then minus another circle — so 4 - 4 = 0? But that doesn’t match.

Another approach: Look at Row 9:
Left: Square with 3 vertical lines → divides into 4 columns? But it’s 2x2 grid? Confusing.

Wait — perhaps the key is to count the number of *small squares* that are *inside the outline* of each shape.

Let me try Row 1 again:

First shape: 2x2 square → 4 small squares.
Second shape: same 2x2 square → 4 small squares.
Then “+” → 4 + 4 = 8? But the result box has an X over it — which might mean “cancel” or “zero”? No, that can’t be.

Wait — look at the first row:
Shape1 + Shape2 = Result (which has an X over it)

But in the image, the result box for row 1 has an X drawn in it — which might indicate that the answer is zero? Or maybe it’s a trick?

Actually, looking more carefully — in row 1, the first two shapes are identical, and the result has an X — which might mean “they cancel out” — so 4 - 4 = 0? But it’s a plus sign.

I think I need to reinterpret.

Alternative idea: Perhaps the shapes represent numbers based on how many small squares they contain, and we do the arithmetic.

Let’s assume each small square in the grid is 1 unit.

Row 1:
Shape1: 2x2 square = 4 units
Shape2: 2x2 square = 4 units
Plus → 4 + 4 = 8? But the result box has an X — which might be a red herring or part of the drawing.

Wait — no, in the image, the result box for row 1 has an X drawn inside it — which might mean that the answer is not a number but a symbol? That doesn’t make sense.

Perhaps the X means “empty” or “zero”.

Let’s look at Row 2:
Shape1: 2x2 square with diagonals — still 4 units?
Shape2: 2x2 square with one diagonal — still 4 units?
Minus → 4 - 4 = 0? And the result box is empty — so maybe 0.

But in Row 1, it’s plus, and result has X — which might mean 0? That doesn’t fit.

Another thought: Maybe the lines drawn inside the shapes indicate how many parts they are divided into, and we count the number of regions.

For example, a square with no lines = 1 region.
With one diagonal = 2 regions.
With two diagonals = 4 regions.

Let’s try that.

Row 1:
Shape1: 2x2 square with 3 diagonals — how many regions? If it’s a square with both diagonals and one more line, it might be 6 regions? This is getting complicated.

Perhaps it’s simpler: count the number of small squares that are shaded or outlined.

Looking at the image again — all shapes are outlined, no shading. So maybe count the perimeter or something else.

Wait — let’s look at Row 6:
Shape1: 2x2 square with a grid inside — so 4 small squares.
Shape2: V-shape — which covers 2 small squares? (top-left and top-right, or bottom-left and bottom-right?)
Minus → 4 - 2 = 2? And the result box is empty — so maybe 2.

But in the image, the result boxes are empty except for Row 1 which has an X.

Perhaps the X in Row 1 is a mistake, or it means "solve this".

I think I need to count the number of small squares that are completely inside each shape.

Let’s define: each shape is drawn on a 2x2 grid (4 small squares), and we count how many of those 4 small squares are covered by the shape.

For example:
- A full 2x2 square covers 4 small squares.
- A triangle that is half the square covers 2 small squares.
- etc.

Let’s try Row 3:
Shape1: Triangle covering half the square — so 2 small squares.
Shape2: Square with X — which is the full square, so 4 small squares.
Plus → 2 + 4 = 6? But the result box is empty.

This isn't working.

Another idea: Perhaps the shapes are made of matchsticks or lines, and we count the number of line segments.

But that seems unlikely.

Let’s look at the last row:
Shape1: 2x2 square with N shape inside — N might be 3 lines?
Shape2: 2x2 square with L shape — L might be 2 lines?
Plus → 3 + 2 = 5? But result box is empty.

I recall that in some puzzles like this, the number of enclosed regions or the number of small squares is counted.

Let’s try counting the number of small squares that are "filled" by the shape's outline.

For a square with no internal lines, it's 4 small squares.

For a square with one diagonal, it's still 4 small squares, but divided into 2 triangles.

Perhaps we count the number of triangular regions.

For example:
- Square with no lines: 1 region (the whole square)
- Square with one diagonal: 2 regions
- Square with two diagonals: 4 regions
- Square with a grid: 4 regions (if 2x2)

Let’s apply that.

Row 1:
Shape1: 2x2 square with 3 diagonals — if it's a square with both diagonals and one more line, it might be 6 regions? Let's say 4 regions for simplicity? Not clear.

Perhaps for each shape, we count the number of small squares that are intersected by the shape's boundary or something.

I think I found a better way: look at the result boxes. In most rows, the result box is empty, but in Row 1, it has an X, which might mean that the answer is 0, and for others, we need to calculate.

But let's look at Row 4:
Shape1: L-shape — which covers 3 small squares (e.g., top-left, bottom-left, bottom-right)
Shape2: same L-shape — 3 small squares
Plus → 3 + 3 = 6? But the result box is empty.

This is not helping.

Another approach: Perhaps the operation is not on the area, but on the number of lines or vertices.

Let’s count the number of line segments in each shape.

For a square: 4 sides.
With a diagonal: +1 line, so 5 lines.
With two diagonals: +2 lines, so 6 lines.

Row 1:
Shape1: square with 3 diagonals — 4 + 3 = 7 lines?
Shape2: square with 3 diagonals — 7 lines?
Plus → 7 + 7 = 14? But result has X.

Not matching.

Perhaps it's the number of intersection points or something.

I recall that in some puzzles, the shape represents a number based on the number of enclosed areas.

Let’s try that.

For a square with no internal lines: 1 enclosed area.
With one diagonal: 2 enclosed areas (two triangles).
With two diagonals: 4 enclosed areas.
With a grid: 4 enclosed areas (if 2x2).

Row 1:
Shape1: square with 3 diagonals — if it's a square with both diagonals and one more line, it might have 6 enclosed areas? Let's say 4 for now.
Shape2: same — 4.
Plus → 4 + 4 = 8? But result has X.

Perhaps for Row 1, since it's the same shape, and it's plus, but result is X, maybe it's a trick, and the answer is 0 because they are identical and cancel, but that doesn't make sense for addition.

Let's look at Row 5:
Shape1: 2x2 square with a grid — 4 small squares, so 4 enclosed areas? Or 1 large area divided into 4, so 4 regions.
Shape2: V-shape — which might be 2 regions (two triangles).
Minus → 4 - 2 = 2? And the result box is empty, so perhaps 2.

In the image, the result boxes are empty, so we need to fill them with numbers.

Perhaps the X in Row 1 is a placeholder, and we need to calculate.

Let’s assume that for each shape, we count the number of small squares that are completely inside the shape.

For a full 2x2 square: 4 small squares.
For a triangle that is half the square: 2 small squares (since it covers half of 4).
For an L-shape: 3 small squares.
For a V-shape: 2 small squares.
For a circle: approximately 3 or 4, but let's say 4 for simplicity.

Let’s try Row 2:
Shape1: square with diagonals — still 4 small squares.
Shape2: square with one diagonal — 4 small squares.
Minus → 4 - 4 = 0.
Result box is empty, so perhaps 0.

Row 3:
Shape1: triangle — 2 small squares.
Shape2: square with X — 4 small squares.
Plus → 2 + 4 = 6.
Result box empty, so 6.

But 6 is larger than the grid, which is 2x2=4, so maybe it's allowed.

Row 4:
Shape1: L-shape — 3 small squares.
Shape2: L-shape — 3 small squares.
Plus → 3 + 3 = 6.
Result box empty, so 6.

Row 5:
Shape1: 2x2 grid — 4 small squares.
Shape2: V-shape — 2 small squares.
Minus → 4 - 2 = 2.
Result box empty, so 2.

Row 6:
Shape1: square with a grid — 4 small squares.
Shape2: two half-circles or something — let's see, it's a square with a vertical line down the middle, and then a semicircle on each side? In the image, it's a square with a vertical line, and then on left and right, there are shapes that look like half-circles or D-shapes.

Actually, in Row 6, Shape2 is two separate shapes: a left half and a right half, each covering 2 small squares? But it's drawn as one entity.

Perhaps it's a single shape that covers 4 small squares, but with a cut.

This is ambiguous.

Let’s look at Row 7:
Shape1: circle — covers approximately 4 small squares.
Shape2: small circle — covers 1 small square.
Plus → 4 + 1 = 5.
Result box empty, so 5.

Row 8:
Shape1: diamond or rhombus — covers 2 small squares (if it's a square rotated 45 degrees, it covers the center and parts, but in grid terms, it might cover 2 small squares fully).
Shape2: same — 2 small squares.
Plus → 2 + 2 = 4.
Result box empty, so 4.

Row 9:
Shape1: square with 3 vertical lines — so divided into 4 columns, but still 4 small squares? Or if it's 2x2 grid with 3 vertical lines, it might be 4 small squares.
Shape2: square with 2 diagonal lines — 4 small squares.
Minus → 4 - 4 = 0.
Result box empty, so 0.

Row 10:
Shape1: 2x2 square with N shape — N might be 3 lines, but area is still 4 small squares.
Shape2: 2x2 square with L shape — 3 small squares.
Plus → 4 + 3 = 7.
Result box empty, so 7.

But this is inconsistent because in Row 1, if we do 4 + 4 = 8, but result has X, which might mean 0, so perhaps for Row 1, it's different.

Perhaps the X in Row 1 indicates that the answer is 0, and for other rows, we calculate normally.

But why would 4 + 4 = 0? That doesn't make sense.

Another idea: Perhaps the shapes are to be interpreted as binary or something, but that seems unlikely.

Let’s consider that the operation is on the number of lines drawn inside the shape.

For example:
- A square with no internal lines: 0 internal lines.
- With one diagonal: 1 internal line.
- With two diagonals: 2 internal lines.
- With a grid: 2 internal lines (one horizontal, one vertical) for a 2x2 grid.

Row 1:
Shape1: 3 internal lines (3 diagonals)
Shape2: 3 internal lines
Plus → 3 + 3 = 6
Result has X, which might mean 6, but X is not 6.

Perhaps the X is the answer for Row 1, and for others, we need to find the number.

I think I need to look for a pattern or standard solution for such puzzles.

Upon second thought, in many such puzzles, the number of small squares that are "cut" or "affected" by the lines is counted, but that's vague.

Let’s try counting the number of small squares that are divided by the lines.

For example, a square with no lines: 0 divided squares.
With one diagonal: 2 squares are divided (each half is in two small squares? No.

Perhaps each small square that is crossed by a line is counted.

For a 2x2 grid, if you draw a diagonal, it crosses 2 small squares.

If you draw both diagonals, it crosses all 4 small squares.

Let’s try that.

Row 1:
Shape1: 3 diagonals — if it's a square with both diagonals and one more line, it might cross 4 small squares.
Shape2: same — 4 small squares crossed.
Plus → 4 + 4 = 8.
Result has X, which might mean 8, but X is not 8.

Perhaps the result is the number, and X is just a drawing.

In the image, the result boxes are empty except for Row 1 which has an X, but perhaps the X is meant to be filled, or it's a symbol for the answer.

I recall that in some puzzles, the X means "multiply" or "cross", but here it's in the result box.

Let’s assume that for Row 1, the answer is 0, and for others, we calculate the difference or sum of the number of enclosed regions.

Let’s define the number of enclosed regions for each shape.

- Full square: 1 region.
- Square with one diagonal: 2 regions.
- Square with two diagonals: 4 regions.
- Square with a grid: 4 regions (if 2x2).
- Triangle: 1 region.
- L-shape: 1 region.
- V-shape: 2 regions (two triangles).
- Circle: 1 region.
- Small circle: 1 region.
- Diamond: 1 region.
- etc.

Row 1:
Shape1: 4 regions (assume)
Shape2: 4 regions
Plus → 4 + 4 = 8
Result has X, which might be 8, but let's see if it fits.

Row 2:
Shape1: 4 regions (square with diagonals)
Shape2: 2 regions (square with one diagonal)
Minus → 4 - 2 = 2
Result box empty, so 2.

Row 3:
Shape1: 1 region (triangle)
Shape2: 4 regions (square with X)
Plus → 1 + 4 = 5
Result box empty, so 5.

Row 4:
Shape1: 1 region (L-shape)
Shape2: 1 region (L-shape)
Plus → 1 + 1 = 2
Result box empty, so 2.

Row 5:
Shape1: 4 regions (grid)
Shape2: 2 regions (V-shape)
Minus → 4 - 2 = 2
Result box empty, so 2.

Row 6:
Shape1: 4 regions (grid)
Shape2: let's say 2 regions (two D-shapes, each 1 region, so 2)
Plus → 4 + 2 = 6
Result box empty, so 6.

Row 7:
Shape1: 1 region (circle)
Shape2: 1 region (small circle)
Plus → 1 + 1 = 2
Result box empty, so 2.

Row 8:
Shape1: 1 region (diamond)
Shape2: 1 region (diamond)
Plus → 1 + 1 = 2
Result box empty, so 2.

Row 9:
Shape1: 4 regions (square with 3 vertical lines — if it's 2x2 grid with 3 vertical lines, it might be 4 regions)
Shape2: 4 regions (square with 2 diagonals)
Minus → 4 - 4 = 0
Result box empty, so 0.

Row 10:
Shape1: 1 region (square with N — N is inside, so still 1 region)
Shape2: 1 region (square with L — still 1 region)
Plus → 1 + 1 = 2
Result box empty, so 2.

But in Row 1, if we have 4 + 4 = 8, and result has X, perhaps X means 8, or perhaps it's a different interpretation.

Perhaps for Row 1, since the shapes are identical, and it's plus, but in the context, it might be that the answer is 0 because they are the same, but that doesn't make sense.

Another idea: Perhaps the X in the result box for Row 1 indicates that the answer is "X" or "unknown", but that can't be.

Let’s look at the title: "Solve examples" — so we need to fill in the result boxes with numbers.

Perhaps the number is the number of small squares that are not covered or something.

I think I found a better way: in such puzzles, often the number of small squares that are "shared" or "overlapping" is considered, but here there is no overlap.

Let’s consider that the operation is on the area, and the grid is 2x2, so max 4, and for sums, it can be up to 8, which is fine.

For Row 1, if we take 4 + 4 = 8, and the result box has an X, perhaps the X is a mistake, or it's meant to be filled with 8.

But in the image, the X is drawn, so perhaps for Row 1, the answer is 0, and for others, we calculate.

Let’s assume that for Row 1, the answer is 0, and for other rows, we use the number of enclosed regions as above.

But in Row 2, 4 - 2 = 2, which is reasonable.

Perhaps the number of lines is used.

Let’s count the number of line segments for each shape.

For a square: 4 sides.
With one diagonal: +1, so 5.
With two diagonals: +2, so 6.
With a grid: +2 (one horizontal, one vertical), so 6.
With a triangle inside: etc.

Row 1:
Shape1: 4 + 3 = 7 lines (3 diagonals)
Shape2: 7 lines
Plus → 7 + 7 = 14
Result has X, which might be 14, but unlikely.

Perhaps only internal lines are counted.

Shape1: 3 internal lines
Shape2: 3 internal lines
Plus → 6
Result has X, so perhaps 6.

Then for Row 2:
Shape1: 2 internal lines (two diagonals)
Shape2: 1 internal line (one diagonal)
Minus → 2 - 1 = 1
Result box empty, so 1.

Row 3:
Shape1: 1 internal line (the base of the triangle? Or if it's a triangle inside, it might have 3 lines, but for the shape itself, if it's a triangle, it has 3 sides, but for internal lines, if it's drawn inside the square, it might have 3 lines.

This is messy.

Let’s look for a standard solution or think differently.

Perhaps the shapes represent numbers based on the number of endpoints or vertices.

For a square: 4 vertices.
With a diagonal: still 4 vertices, but adds 1 intersection point.

I think I need to accept that for each shape, we count the number of small squares that are completely within the shape's boundary.

For a full 2x2 square: 4.
For a triangle that is half: 2.
For an L-shape: 3.
For a V-shape: 2.
For a circle: 3 (approximately).
For a small circle: 1.
For a diamond: 2.
For a square with grid: 4.
For a square with N: 4.
For a square with L: 3.

Then:

Row 1: 4 + 4 = 8
Row 2: 4 - 4 = 0 (since both are full squares)
Row 3: 2 + 4 = 6
Row 4: 3 + 3 = 6
Row 5: 4 - 2 = 2
Row 6: 4 + 2 = 6 (assuming Shape2 is 2)
Row 7: 3 + 1 = 4 (circle and small circle)
Row 8: 2 + 2 = 4
Row 9: 4 - 4 = 0
Row 10: 4 + 3 = 7

And for Row 1, the result has an X, which might be a red herring, or perhaps it's 8, and X is not related.

Perhaps the X means "solve", and we need to put 8.

But let's check if this makes sense with the image.

In the image, for Row 1, the result box has an X, while for others, it's empty, so perhaps for Row 1, the answer is 0, and for others, it's as above.

But 4 + 4 = 8, not 0.

Unless the operation is not addition, but something else.

Another idea: Perhaps the + and - are not arithmetic, but logical, like union and intersection.

For example, + means union of the shapes, - means difference.

Then for Row 1: union of two identical squares is still a square, so 4, but result has X.

Not helping.

Perhaps the number is the number of small squares that are in the symmetric difference or something.

I think I have to go with the area count.

Let’s list the answers as per area count:

Row 1: 4 + 4 = 8
Row 2: 4 - 4 = 0
Row 3: 2 + 4 = 6
Row 4: 3 + 3 = 6
Row 5: 4 - 2 = 2
Row 6: 4 + 2 = 6 (assuming Shape2 is 2)
Row 7: 3 + 1 = 4 (circle and small circle)
Row 8: 2 + 2 = 4
Row 9: 4 - 4 = 0
Row 10: 4 + 3 = 7

For Row 6, Shape2 is two shapes: a left part and a right part. In the image, it's a square with a vertical line, and then on left and right, there are shapes that look like half-circles or D-shapes. If each D-shape covers 2 small squares, then together they cover 4, but since it's one entity, perhaps it's 4.

In Row 6, Shape2 is drawn as a single shape that is like a rectangle with two semicircles on the sides, but in grid terms, it might cover 4 small squares.

To simplify, let's assume that for Shape2 in Row 6, it covers 4 small squares.

Then Row 6: 4 + 4 = 8.

But then Row 1 and Row 6 both 8.

Perhaps for Row 6, Shape2 is 2, as it's two separate regions.

Let’s look at the image description: in Row 6, Shape2 is "a square with a vertical line, and then on left and right, there are shapes that look like half-circles" — but in the grid, it might be that the left part covers 2 small squares, and the right part covers 2, so total 4.

I think it's safer to assume that each shape covers the number of small squares that are fully inside it.

For Row 6, Shape2: if it's a single shape that is like a capsule, it might cover 4 small squares.

So let's set:

Row 1: 8
Row 2: 0
Row 3: 6
Row 4: 6
Row 5: 2
Row 6: 8 (4 + 4)
Row 7: 4 (3 + 1)
Row 8: 4 (2 + 2)
Row 9: 0 (4 - 4)
Row 10: 7 (4 + 3)

But for Row 7, circle in 2x2 grid: a circle inscribed in 2x2 grid covers approximately 3 small squares (since area of circle is πr^2, r=1, area=π≈3.14, so 3 small squares).

Small circle: if it's in one small square, area 1, so 1.

So 3 + 1 = 4.

For Row 8, diamond: if it's a square rotated 45 degrees, inscribed in 2x2 grid, it covers 2 small squares ( the center and parts, but in grid terms, it may cover 2 fully).

So 2 + 2 = 4.

For Row 10, Shape1: square with N — N is inside, so the square still covers 4 small squares.
Shape2: square with L — L covers 3 small squares.
So 4 + 3 = 7.

Now for Row 1, the result has an X, which might be a symbol for the answer, or perhaps it's 8, and we put 8.

Perhaps the X means "multiply", but the operation is +, so not.

Another thought: in Row 1, the result box has an X, which might indicate that the answer is 0, and for other rows, we have the numbers.

But why would 4 + 4 = 0? Only if it's modulo 4 or something, but that's complicated.

Perhaps the grid is considered modulo 4, so 8 mod 4 = 0, so X means 0.

Then for other rows, we take mod 4.

Row 1: 8 mod 4 = 0
Row 2: 0 mod 4 = 0
Row 3: 6 mod 4 = 2
Row 4: 6 mod 4 = 2
Row 5: 2 mod 4 = 2
Row 6: 8 mod 4 = 0
Row 7: 4 mod 4 = 0
Row 8: 4 mod 4 = 0
Row 9: 0 mod 4 = 0
Row 10: 7 mod 4 = 3

Then the answers would be:
Row 1: 0
Row 2: 0
Row 3: 2
Row 4: 2
Row 5: 2
Row 6: 0
Row 7: 0
Row 8: 0
Row 9: 0
Row 10: 3

But in the image, for Row 1, result has X, which might mean 0, and for others, empty, so perhaps we fill with these numbers.

But for Row 3, 2, etc.

Let’s see if this makes sense.

Perhaps without mod, and for Row 1, X means 8.

I think the most reasonable is to use the area count without mod, and for Row 1, put 8, ignoring the X or assuming X is a drawing.

Perhaps the X is the answer for Row 1, and for other rows, we need to find the number, but the X is not a number.

I recall that in some puzzles, the X means "cross out" or "zero", so for Row 1, answer is 0.

Then for other rows, we have the numbers as above.

Let’s go with that.

So final answers:

Row 1: 0 (because X means 0)
Row 2: 0
Row 3: 6
Row 4: 6
Row 5: 2
Row 6: 6 (if Shape2 is 2)
Row 7: 4
Row 8: 4
Row 9: 0
Row 10: 7

For Row 6, if Shape2 is 2, then 4 + 2 = 6.

In the image, for Row 6, Shape2 is two separate shapes: a left half and a right half, each covering 2 small squares, so together 4, but since it's one entity in the equation, perhaps it's 4.

To resolve, let's look at Row 7: Shape2 is a small circle, which is 1, so for Row 6, if Shape2 is two shapes, it might be 2 + 2 = 4, but in the equation, it's one shape, so perhaps it's 4.

I think for consistency, let's assume that each shape in the equation is a single entity, and we count the number of small squares it covers.

For Row 6, Shape2: the shape is a single entity that covers 4 small squares (since it's a rectangle with semicircles, but in grid, it may cover 4).

So 4 + 4 = 8.

Then Row 6: 8.

But then Row 1 and Row 6 both 8.

Perhaps for Row 6, the shape is not covering 4; let's say it's covering 2, as it's two separate regions.

I think I need to box the answers as per the initial area count.

Let’s list the answers as:

1. 8
2. 0
3. 6
4. 6
5. 2
6. 6 (assuming Shape2 is 2)
7. 4
8. 4
9. 0
10. 7

And for Row 1, even though it has X, we put 8.

Perhaps the X is a typo, and it's meant to be a box.

So I'll go with that.

Final Answer:
8, 0, 6, 6, 2, 6, 4, 4, 0, 7

But to write it properly, since the user asked to solve the problem, and the problem is to fill the result boxes, so the answers are for each row.

So the final answer is the list of numbers for each row.

In the response, I should provide the answers in order.

So:

Row 1: 8
Row 2: 0
Row 3: 6
Row 4: 6
Row 5: 2
Row 6: 6
Row 7: 4
Row 8: 4
Row 9: 0
Row 10: 7

And for Row 6, I'll assume Shape2 covers 2 small squares.

So I think that's the best I can do.

Final Answer

8, 0, 6, 6, 2, 6, 4, 4, 0, 7