The answer is indeed D.In CR , the most possible error is gut feel rather then the question scope.For option C , are you sure that this possibility is having high chances then option D or are u certain in making that logic?
I too think the answer is D. Climbing trees and diving into foliage distinguishes the kind of predator. hence this contributes most as the explanation for warning given by monkeys to distinguish the predators.....
Given a choice between C and D, most of the people will choose D.
Although custom prosthetic bone replacements produced through a new computer-aided design process will cost more than twice as much as ordinary replacements, custom replacements should still be cost-effective. Not only will surgery and recovery time be reduced, but custom replacements should last longer, thereby reducing the need for further hospital stays.
Which of the following must be studied in order to evaluate the argument presented above?
(A) The amount of time a patient spends in surgery versus the amount of time spent recovering from surgery (B) The amount by which the cost of producing custom replacements has declined with the introduction of the new technique for producing them (C)The degree to which the use of custom replacements is likely to reduce the need for repeat surgery when compared with the use of ordinary replacements (D) The degree to which custom replacements produced with the new technique are more carefully manufactured than are ordinary replacements (E) The amount by which custom replacements produced with the new technique will drop in cost as the production procedures become standardized and applicable on a larger scale.
Although custom prosthetic bone replacements produced through a new computer-aided design process will cost more than twice as much as ordinary replacements, custom replacements should still be cost-effective. Not only will surgery and recovery time be reduced, but custom replacements should last longer, thereby reducing the need for further hospital stays. Which of the following must be studied in order to evaluate the argument presented above? (A) The amount of time a patient spends in surgery versus the amount of time spent recovering from surgery (B) The amount by which the cost of producing custom replacements has declined with the introduction of the new technique for producing them
(C)The degree to which the use of custom replacements is likely to reduce the need for repeat surgery when compared with the use of ordinary replacements (D) The degree to which custom replacements produced with the new technique are more carefully manufactured than are ordinary replacements (E) The amount by which custom replacements produced with the new technique will drop in cost as the production procedures become standardized and applicable on a larger scale. EXP: (A) The amount of time a patient spends in surgery versus the amount of time spent recovering from surgery suppose patient spends 1 hr in surgery and 1 day to recover for computer aided process, and more or less for ordinary, but what if new process leads to repeated surgery which will be expensive. close . but wrong (B) The amount by which the cost of producing custom replacements has declined with the introduction of the new technique for producing them irrelevant (C)The degree to which the use of custom replacements is likely to reduce the need for repeat surgery when compared with the use of ordinary replacements it is mentioned in the passage that new process takes less surgery time and recovery time than ordinary process takes. So by saying new process eliminates the possibility of repeated visits to hospital, this will help in evaluating which process is cost effective. correct. (D) The degree to which custom replacements produced with the new technique are more carefully manufactured than are ordinary replacements Doest not help (E) The amount by which custom replacements produced with the new technique will drop in cost as the production procedures become standardized and applicable on a larger scale. unnecessary info.
Although custom prosthetic bone replacements produced through a new computer-aided design process will cost more than twice as much as ordinary replacements, custom replacements should still be cost-effective. Not only will surgery and recovery time be reduced, but custom replacements should last longer, thereby reducing the need for further hospital stays.
Which of the following must be studied in order to evaluate the argument presented above?
(A) The amount of time a patient spends in surgery versus the amount of time spent recovering from surgery irrelevant (B) The amount by which the cost of producing custom replacements has declined with the introduction of the new technique for producing them irrelevant (C)The degree to which the use of custom replacements is likely to reduce the need for repeat surgery when compared with the use of ordinary replacements looks the best
(D) The degree to which custom replacements produced with the new technique are more carefully manufactured than are ordinary replacements irrelevant (E) The amount by which custom replacements produced with the new technique will drop in cost as the production procedures become standardized and applicable on a larger scale. irrelevant
Share your thoughts!! ;)
We are looking for an option that compares either the surgery time or the surgery frequency. C fits best.
In the past six pro football drafts, 4 of the 6 players selected by Team A are now starters on the squad. On Team B, only 2 of the 6 players selected in the draft are starters. So, a football players selected by Team A from the draft pool has a higher probability of becoming a starter than if he is selected by Team B.
Which of the following if true, would be the best reason to reject the argument? a. Two of the four starters on the Team A are sons of the coach.
b. Team B has a new owner and coaching staff.
c. Team B has a new state-of-the-art gym.
d. Team B's pick is a quarterback, and the starting quarterback is retiring.
e. Team A has had the first draft pick for the past six years, while Team B had the last pick. This year it is reversed.
In the past six pro football drafts, 4 of the 6 players selected by Team A are now starters on the squad. On Team B, only 2 of the 6 players selected in the draft are starters. So, a football players selected by Team A from the draft pool has a higher probability of becoming a starter than if he is selected by Team B.
Which of the following if true, would be the best reason to reject the argument? a. Two of the four starters on the Team A are sons of the coach.
b. Team B has a new owner and coaching staff.
c. Team B has a new state-of-the-art gym.
d. Team B's pick is a quarterback, and the starting quarterback is retiring.
e. Team A has had the first draft pick for the past six years, while Team B had the last pick. This year it is reversed.
Ques: best reason to reject the argument
Argument: a football players selected by Team A from the draft pool has a higher probability of becoming a starter than if he is selected by Team B
Passage: In the past six pro football drafts, 4 of the 6 players selected by Team A are now starters on the squad. On Team B, only 2 of the 6 players selected in the draft are starters.
Points to Notice: A had had a good run with selection so far as compared to B. This can be attributed to either luck, talent, some biasing or some other unknown reason. Since we are looking for "reason to reject", we should try and explore the unknown reason.. ;)
a. Two of the four starters on the Team A are sons of the coach. -- No reference in the passage
b. Team B has a new owner and coaching staff. -- NA
c. Team B has a new state-of-the-art gym. -- NA
d. Team B's pick is a quarterback, and the starting quarterback is retiring. -- NA
e. Team A has had the first draft pick for the past six years, while Team B had the last pick. This year it is reversed. -- Clear advantage for A so far, as A used to get a bigger pool to chose from. This year the tables have turned and this year B would have a bigger pool to chose from, which might help team B to chose better players.
Argument: a football players selected by Team A from the draft pool has a higher probability of becoming a starter than if he is selected by Team B
Passage: In the past six pro football drafts, 4 of the 6 players selected by Team A are now starters on the squad. On Team B, only 2 of the 6 players selected in the draft are starters.
Points to Notice: A had had a good run with selection so far as compared to B. This can be attributed to either luck, talent, some biasing or some other unknown reason. Since we are looking for "reason to reject", we should try and explore the unknown reason.. ;)
a. Two of the four starters on the Team A are sons of the coach. -- No reference in the passage
b. Team B has a new owner and coaching staff. -- NA
c. Team B has a new state-of-the-art gym. -- NA
d. Team B's pick is a quarterback, and the starting quarterback is retiring. -- NA
e. Team A has had the first draft pick for the past six years, while Team B had the last pick. This year it is reversed. -- Clear advantage for A so far, as A used to get a bigger pool to chose from. This year the tables have turned and this year B would have a bigger pool to chose from, which might help team B to chose better players.
see.. my doubt arose from the fact that "repeat surgery" is not mentioned in the passage.. how did OG as well as all the repondents assumed this as a considerable point..?..
Not that I am supporting any other option, in fact I also marked the same while practicing, however I got confused when I read the explanation..
OG question;
Although custom prosthetic bone replacements produced through a new computer-aided design process will cost more than twice as much as ordinary replacements, custom replacements should still be cost-effective. Not only will surgery and recovery time be reduced, but custom replacements should last longer, thereby reducing the need for further hospital stays.
Which of the following must be studied in order to evaluate the argument presented above?
(A) The amount of time a patient spends in surgery versus the amount of time spent recovering from surgery (B) The amount by which the cost of producing custom replacements has declined with the introduction of the new technique for producing them
(C)The degree to which the use of custom replacements is likely to reduce the need for repeat surgery when compared with the use of ordinary replacements (D) The degree to which custom replacements produced with the new technique are more carefully manufactured than are ordinary replacements (E) The amount by which custom replacements produced with the new technique will drop in cost as the production procedures become standardized and applicable on a larger scale.
EXP:
(A) The amount of time a patient spends in surgery versus the amount of time spent recovering from surgery suppose patient spends 1 hr in surgery and 1 day to recover for computer aided process, and more or less for ordinary, but what if new process leads to repeated surgery which will be expensive. close . but wrong (B) The amount by which the cost of producing custom replacements has declined with the introduction of the new technique for producing them irrelevant (C)The degree to which the use of custom replacements is likely to reduce the need for repeat surgery when compared with the use of ordinary replacements it is mentioned in the passage that new process takes less surgery time and recovery time than ordinary process takes. So by saying new process eliminates the possibility of repeated visits to hospital, this will help in evaluating which process is cost effective. correct. (D) The degree to which custom replacements produced with the new technique are more carefully manufactured than are ordinary replacements Doest not help (E) The amount by which custom replacements produced with the new technique will drop in cost as the production procedures become standardized and applicable on a larger scale.
unnecessary info.
delhiboy1979 Says
We are looking for an option that compares either the surgery time or the surgery frequency. C fits best.
Companies often re-organize in order to adapt to changes in the world around them but the market place changes much faster than organizations can re-organize. If you choose a simple organization you can then spend your effort on teaching the people in the organization to be flexible and adapt to changes in the market place.
Which of the following conclusions can be most properly inferred from the premises above.
Companies should invest in staff training to increase their adaptability.
Companies should invest in research to keep abreast of changes in the market place.
Companies should choose a simple organizational structure and keep it that way.
Companies should continuously re-organize to keep up with changes in the market place.
Companies should choose a matrix structure which can be re-organized more rapidly than other organizational structures.
Companies often re-organize in order to adapt to changes in the world around them but the market place changes much faster than organizations can re-organize. If you choose a simple organization you can then spend your effort on teaching the people in the organization to be flexible and adapt to changes in the market place.
Which of the following conclusions can be most properly inferred from the premises above.
Companies should invest in staff training to increase their adaptability.
Companies should invest in research to keep abreast of changes in the market place.
Companies should choose a simple organizational structure and keep it that way.
Companies should continuously re-organize to keep up with changes in the market place.
Companies should choose a matrix structure which can be re-organized more rapidly than other organizational structures.
I think it should be 4. The inference should be related to the market place not the world in general. 1 looks good to. If I have to pick one I will go for 4.
Companies often re-organize in order to adapt to changes in the world around them but the market place changes much faster than organizations can re-organize. If you choose a simple organization you can then spend your effort on teaching the people in the organization to be flexible and adapt to changes in the market place.
Which of the following conclusions can be most properly inferred from the premises above.
Companies should invest in staff training to increase their adaptability.
Companies should invest in research to keep abreast of changes in the market place.
Companies should choose a simple organizational structure and keep it that way.
Companies should continuously re-organize to keep up with changes in the market place.
Companies should choose a matrix structure which can be re-organized more rapidly than other organizational structures.
The conclusion talks about spending effort on teaching ppl in organisation to be flexible to adopt changes in the market place.
Thus, I would go with option 1, as it says companies should invest in staff training to increase adaptability.
companies,market place re-organize to adapt to changes in the world. "If you choose a simple organization you can then spend your effort on teaching the people in the organization to be flexible and adapt to changes in the market place." This statement says that one should strive to adapt to changes in the market place. I would go with option D. I feel option 1 is limited to small companies, what a small company can do to adapt to changes in the market place. But in case of a large company, may be it should follow someother means re-organise. so it is important( can be inferred ) that companies should reorganise to adapt to changes in the market place. Please correct me if im wrong. rgds- sri
Companies often re-organize in order to adapt to changes in the world around them but the market place changes much faster than organizations can re-organize. If you choose a simple organization you can then spend your effort on teaching the people in the organization to be flexible and adapt to changes in the market place.
Which of the following conclusions can be most properly inferred from the premises above.
Companies should invest in staff training to increase their adaptability.
Companies should invest in research to keep abreast of changes in the market place.
Companies should choose a simple organizational structure and keep it that way.
Companies should continuously re-organize to keep up with changes in the market place.
Companies should choose a matrix structure which can be re-organized more rapidly than other organizational structures.
1. This is not the most suitable conclusion. If companies invest in staff training, then again the market can change. 2. This seems to be viable option as by research the company will know how the market is going to change and it can reorganize. 3. This is not OK. Just because the market changes abruptly, a company should not prevent itself from reorganizing and doing any changes. 4. this is already being done by the company. 5. Matrix structure: Nothing is mentioned about the matrix structure. We are not sure if matrix structure is better than other structures.
Neighboring landholders: Air pollution from the giant aluminum refinery that has been built next to our land is killing our plants. Company spokesperson: The refinery is not to blame, since our study shows that the damage is due to insects and fungi.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn by the company spokesperson?
The study did not measure the quantity of pollutants emitted into the surrounding air by the aluminum refinery.
The neighboring landholders have made no change in the way they take care of their plants.
Air pollution from the refinery has changed the chemical balance in the plants' environment, allowing the harmful insects and fungi to thrive.
Pollutants that are invisible and odorless are emitted into the surrounding air by the refinery.
The various species of insects and fungi mentioned in the study have been occasionally found in the locality during the past hundred years.
I'll take a shot : C If insects and fungi are caused/enhanced by refinery, then the refinery would be ultimately responsible. Also, this beats the argument.
Neighboring landholders: Air pollution from the giant aluminum refinery that has been built next to our land is killing our plants. Company spokesperson: The refinery is not to blame, since our study shows that the damage is due to insects and fungi.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn by the company spokesperson?
The study did not measure the quantity of pollutants emitted into the surrounding air by the aluminum refinery.
The neighboring landholders have made no change in the way they take care of their plants.
Air pollution from the refinery has changed the chemical balance in the plants' environment, allowing the harmful insects and fungi to thrive.
Pollutants that are invisible and odorless are emitted into the surrounding air by the refinery.
The various species of insects and fungi mentioned in the study have been occasionally found in the locality during the past hundred years.
Should be 3, that is the only option which is relevant and comes close to weaken the companys statement
Neighboring landholders: Air pollution from the giant aluminum refinery that has been built next to our land is killing our plants. Company spokesperson: The refinery is not to blame, since our study shows that the damage is due to insects and fungi.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn by the company spokesperson?
The study did not measure the quantity of pollutants emitted into the surrounding air by the aluminum refinery.
The neighboring landholders have made no change in the way they take care of their plants.
Air pollution from the refinery has changed the chemical balance in the plants' environment, allowing the harmful insects and fungi to thrive.
Pollutants that are invisible and odorless are emitted into the surrounding air by the refinery.
The various species of insects and fungi mentioned in the study have been occasionally found in the locality during the past hundred years.
I would go with 2. The landowners have not mentioned anything about the insects and fungi. The stem asks for the argument which weakens the stand of the company, thus effectively asking for the argument that supports the landowners' statement, as is.
Companies often re-organize in order to adapt to changes in the world around them but the market place changes much faster than organizations can re-organize. If you choose a simple organization you can then spend your effort on teaching the people in the organization to be flexible and adapt to changes in the market place.
Which of the following conclusions can be most properly inferred from the premises above.
Companies should invest in staff training to increase their adaptability.
Companies should invest in research to keep abreast of changes in the market place.
Companies should choose a simple organizational structure and keep it that way.
Companies should continuously re-organize to keep up with changes in the market place.
Companies should choose a matrix structure which can be re-organized more rapidly than other organizational structures.
delhiboy1979 Says
I think it should be 4. The inference should be related to the market place not the world in general. 1 looks good to. If I have to pick one I will go for 4.
The conclusion talks about spending effort on teaching ppl in organisation to be flexible to adopt changes in the market place.
Thus, I would go with option 1, as it says companies should invest in staff training to increase adaptability.
What is the correct ans?
companies,market place re-organize to adapt to changes in the world. "If you choose a simple organization you can then spend your effort on teaching the people in the organization to be flexible and adapt to changes in the market place." This statement says that one should strive to adapt to changes in the market place. I would go with option E. I feel option 1 is limited to small companies, what a small company can do to adapt to changes in the market place. But in case of a large company, may be it should follow someother means re-organise. so it is important( can be inferred ) that companies should reorganise to adapt to changes in the market place. Please correct me if im wrong. rgds- sri
1. This is not the most suitable conclusion. If companies invest in staff training, then again the market can change. 2. This seems to be viable option as by research the company will know how the market is going to change and it can reorganize. 3. This is not OK. Just because the market changes abruptly, a company should not prevent itself from reorganizing and doing any changes. 4. this is already being done by the company. 5. Matrix structure: Nothing is mentioned about the matrix structure. We are not sure if matrix structure is better than other structures.
Neighboring landholders: Air pollution from the giant aluminum refinery that has been built next to our land is killing our plants. Company spokesperson: The refinery is not to blame, since our study shows that the damage is due to insects and fungi.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn by the company spokesperson?
The study did not measure the quantity of pollutants emitted into the surrounding air by the aluminum refinery.
The neighboring landholders have made no change in the way they take care of their plants.
Air pollution from the refinery has changed the chemical balance in the plants' environment, allowing the harmful insects and fungi to thrive.
Pollutants that are invisible and odorless are emitted into the surrounding air by the refinery.
The various species of insects and fungi mentioned in the study have been occasionally found in the locality during the past hundred years.
My take:- option (3). Here, the company spokesperson is trying to shift the blame on the insects & fungi for killing the plants of the neighbouring land on the basis of their study. But if option (3) is true, then it`s the refinery to be blamed afterall it is responsible for the menance of insects & fungi. Hence, this would most seriously weaken the conclusion drawn by the company spokesperson.
Neighboring landholders: Air pollution from the giant aluminum refinery that has been built next to our land is killing our plants. Company spokesperson: The refinery is not to blame, since our study shows that the damage is due to insects and fungi.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn by the company spokesperson?
The study did not measure the quantity of pollutants emitted into the surrounding air by the aluminum refinery.
The neighboring landholders have made no change in the way they take care of their plants.
Air pollution from the refinery has changed the chemical balance in the plants' environment, allowing the harmful insects and fungi to thrive.
Pollutants that are invisible and odorless are emitted into the surrounding air by the refinery.
The various species of insects and fungi mentioned in the study have been occasionally found in the locality during the past hundred years.
