Step 1: Understand the problem.
There are \(10\) houses in a row. The thief wants to rob exactly \(3\) houses, but with the restriction that no two robbed houses can be \emph{adjacent}.
This means whenever one house is chosen, its immediate left and right neighbors cannot be chosen.
Step 2: Standard combinatorial transformation.
When a restriction like “no two are adjacent” is applied, we can use the “gap method.”
- Imagine first placing \(3\) robbed houses.
- To ensure they are not adjacent, we place a gap (at least one unrobbed house) between them.
Step 3: Reformulate problem.
Suppose we mark the robbed houses as \(R\) and the unrobbed as \(U\).
We want an arrangement like:
\[
U \; R \; U \; R \; U \; R \; U
\]
Here, the extra \(U\)'s at ends and in between guarantee that no two \(R\)'s are next to each other.
Step 4: Formula approach.
The general formula is:
\[
\binom{n-k+1}{k}
\]
where \(n = 10\) total positions (houses) and \(k = 3\) selected positions (robbed houses).
This works because if \(k\) houses are chosen such that no two are adjacent, it is equivalent to choosing \(k\) positions from \((n-k+1)\) available slots after accounting for the gaps.
Step 5: Apply values.
\[
\binom{10-3+1}{3} = \binom{8}{3}
\]
\[
= \frac{8 \times 7 \times 6}{3 \times 2 \times 1}
\]
\[
= 56
\]
Step 6: Verify logic.
- If thief robs house 1, the next possible houses are from 3 to 10.
- If thief robs house 2, then he cannot rob house 1 and 3, leaving other options.
- Counting systematically matches the formula’s result.
Final Answer:
\[
\boxed{56}
\]