Strengthening Arguments

40 soru

Soru 21Soru

A municipal transit authority recently introduced electric buses on city routes to reduce urban air pollution. City officials claim that expanding this electric bus fleet will significantly improve overall air quality in the downtown area over the next two years. However, critics point out that generating electricity for these buses relies on nearby coal-fired power plants.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for the city officials' claim?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The coal-fired power plants operate with advanced filtration systems that emit significantly fewer pollutants per unit of energy produced than conventional gasoline-powered buses.

Cevap

Power generation for electric buses produces significantly fewer emissions per unit of energy than conventional gasoline buses emit.
The city officials claim that expanding the electric bus fleet will improve downtown air quality, but critics raise concern about the emissions from coal-fired power plants supplying the electricity. The statement that coal plants produce significantly fewer emissions per unit of energy than conventional buses directly resolves the critics' objection, proving that replacing old buses with electric ones creates a net reduction in pollution.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion and the vulnerability brought up by critics.
Conclusion: Expanding electric buses will improve downtown air quality. Objection: Electricity generation relies on coal power plants.
To strengthen an argument facing a potential counter-factor, new evidence must demonstrate that the net effect remains positive.
2
Evaluate the impact of comparing emissions per unit of energy.
If coal power generation releases fewer pollutants per energy unit than traditional bus engines, switching to electric buses lowers overall emissions.
This confirms that the objection does not outweigh the environmental benefits of the electric bus fleet.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening an argument by neutralizing a counter-argument and establishing net benefit
Soru 22Soru

Archaeologists studying ancient agricultural settlements along the Zanja River basin found that around 3,000 years ago, crop yields increased dramatically immediately following the adoption of terraced hillside farming. The lead researchers concluded that the construction of terraces was the direct cause of this agricultural surplus, as terraces prevented soil erosion and retained rainfall on cultivated slopes. Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the lead researchers' conclusion?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Neighboring lowland settlements along the Zanja River that did not adopt terraced farming experienced no increase in crop yields during the same historical period.

Cevap

The argument is strengthened by establishing that lowland settlements without terracing experienced no yield increase, effectively ruling out broader external factors and providing a control group.
The correct answer provides a comparison group: neighboring settlements in the exact same region that did not construct terraces saw no increase in crop yields. This demonstrates that the yield increase was specific to the settlements that implemented terraced farming, ruling out broad environmental factors (such as favorable weather across the whole basin) and strengthening the causal link.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the core argument and conclusion
Premise: Crop yields surged after adopting terraced farming. Conclusion: Constructing terraces directly caused the crop yield increase by preventing erosion and retaining water.
To strengthen a causal argument, one must support the causal connection or rule out alternative explanations.
2
Evaluate potential strengthening mechanisms
Demonstrating that the effect (increased yields) did not occur in similar populations where the cause (terraced farming) was absent acts as a control group, strongly supporting the causal claim.
Ruling out regional confounding variables confirms that terracing was the specific factor driving the yield improvement.
3
Match against the available options
The option comparing neighboring lowland settlements without terracing directly serves as this control group.
It eliminates the possibility that a widespread regional factor increased yields everywhere.

Anahtar Kavram

Causal Argument Strengthening via Control Group / Eliminating Alternative Explanations
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 23Soru

A commercial vineyard introduced autonomous weeding robots designed to eliminate weeds using targeted laser bursts instead of traditional chemical herbicides. After one year of using the robots, the vineyard recorded a 20 percent increase in grape yield per acre compared to the previous year. The vineyard manager concluded that eliminating chemical herbicides in favor of laser weeding directly improved the productivity of the grapevines. Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the vineyard manager's argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Neighboring vineyards in the same region that continued using traditional chemical herbicides during the same year experienced no increase in grape yield per acre.

Cevap

Neighboring vineyards in the same region that continued using traditional chemical herbicides during the same year experienced no increase in grape yield per acre.
The conclusion asserts a direct cause-and-effect relationship between switching to laser weeding robots and increased grapevine productivity. The statement showing that neighboring vineyards subject to the same climate experienced no yield increase while continuing herbicide use serves as a control group. This rules out broader environmental factors (like ideal weather) as the true cause of the yield increase, thereby significantly strengthening the manager's causal conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the premise and conclusion of the argument.
Premise: Grape yield per acre increased by 20% after switching from chemical herbicides to laser weeding robots. Conclusion: Replacing chemical herbicides with laser weeding directly improved grapevine productivity.
Understanding the precise causal link asserted by the author is essential for evaluating candidate strengthening statements.
2
Determine the underlying assumption and potential vulnerabilities.
The argument assumes that no other factor (such as weather, irrigation, or pest changes) was responsible for the increased yield during that year.
Causal conclusions in GMAT Critical Reasoning are vulnerable to alternative causes; ruling out an alternative cause strengthens the conclusion.
3
Evaluate the options to find evidence that eliminates alternative explanations or confirms the causal link.
The statement regarding neighboring vineyards acting as a control group confirms that regional factors (like weather) alone were not responsible for the yield jump, thus isolating laser weeding as the primary driver.
A control group finding directly strengthens a causal claim by ruling out confounding environmental variables.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments by Ruling Out Alternative Causes
Soru 24Soru

A winery recently released thousands of beneficial predatory beetles into its vineyards to combat vine mites, which damage grape crops. At the end of the harvest season, the winery reported a 20 percent increase in usable grape yield compared to the previous year. The vineyard manager concluded that introducing the predatory beetles was the primary reason for the increased crop yield.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the vineyard manager's conclusion?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Vineyards in the same immediate region that did not introduce predatory beetles experienced no increase in grape yield over the same period.

Cevap

Vineyards in the same immediate region that did not introduce predatory beetles experienced no increase in grape yield over the same period.
The argument attributes the 20 percent yield increase specifically to the introduction of predatory beetles. The correct response strengthens this causal claim by providing a control group: neighboring vineyards under similar environmental conditions that did not use beetles saw no increase in yield. This eliminates general regional factors (like weather or rainfall) as alternative causes, making it much more likely that the beetles caused the increase.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion and premises
Premise: Beetles were released and grape yield increased by 20%. Conclusion: The beetles caused the yield increase.
Isolating the causal assertion is required before evaluating strengthening evidence.
2
Determine how to strengthen a causal claim
A causal claim is strengthened by showing that when the cause is absent, the effect does not occur, or by ruling out alternative explanations.
Establishing a control comparison isolates the proposed cause as the key variable.
3
Evaluate the choices for a valid control group or eliminated alternative cause
The statement showing neighboring vineyards without beetles had no yield increase serves as a control group, supporting the conclusion.
This makes it significantly more likely that the beetles, rather than general regional conditions, caused the yield increase.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments via Control Groups
Soru 25Soru

A logistics company recently replaced its human-driven delivery fleet with autonomous electric vans in City Y. Over the subsequent six months, management noted a sharp decrease in parcel delivery delays across the city. Management concluded that switching to autonomous electric vans was directly responsible for the improved delivery timeliness. Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports management's conclusion?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: During the six-month period, City Y experienced no major changes in traffic congestion, road construction, or total parcel volume.

Cevap

The statement that City Y experienced no major changes in traffic congestion, road construction, or total parcel volume during the six-month period provides the strongest support for the conclusion.
The correct answer strengthens the argument by ruling out potential confounding factors (such as decreased traffic or reduced package volume). If traffic and workload remained constant, it becomes significantly more likely that the new autonomous vans were indeed the factor responsible for the reduced delivery delays.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion and premises of the argument.
Premise: Delay times dropped after introducing autonomous vans. Conclusion: The autonomous vans caused the reduction in delays.
Understanding the precise causal claim (autonomous vans -> reduced delays) is essential to strengthening it.
2
Determine what assumptions or vulnerabilities exist in the causal argument.
The argument assumes that no other external factor (like lighter traffic or fewer packages) caused the delay reduction.
In Causal Strengthening questions, ruling out alternative potential causes solidifies the author's proposed cause.
3
Evaluate the options to find the statement that eliminates alternative causes.
Confirming that traffic, roadwork, and parcel volume remained stable eliminates potential confounding variables.
If external conditions remained unchanged, the introduction of the autonomous vans stands as the primary difference responsible for the outcome.

Anahtar Kavram

Ruling out alternative explanations to strengthen a causal claim
Soru 26Soru

To reduce the loss of native pollinator populations, agricultural planners in Region X recommend that almond growers replace synthetic pesticides with a newly developed bio-fungicide derived from soil bacteria. The planners argue that adopting this bio-fungicide will significantly increase total annual crop yields across Region X. They base this claim on field tests showing that orchards treated with the bio-fungicide sustained 40 percent less honeybee mortality than orchards treated with synthetic alternatives.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for the agricultural planners' argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The bio-fungicide is at least as effective as synthetic pesticides at controlling the fungal infections that typically cause severe almond crop losses in Region X.

Cevap

The argument is most strongly supported by the statement establishing that the bio-fungicide is at least as effective as synthetic pesticides at controlling fungal infections in Region X.
The conclusion asserts that replacing synthetic pesticides with bio-fungicides will increase overall crop yields because reduced honeybee mortality improves pollination. However, for total yields to increase, the bio-fungicide must also successfully perform its primary job: protecting crops against fungal disease. The correct option establishes that the bio-fungicide is at least as effective as synthetic pesticides in preventing fungal crop losses. By ruling out the possibility that fungal damage will spike and offset pollination gains, this choice provides essential support for the conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the argument structure
Premise: Orchards treated with bio-fungicide showed 40 percent lower honeybee mortality compared to synthetic pesticides. Conclusion: Adopting bio-fungicide will significantly increase total annual almond crop yields.
Identifying the premises and conclusion reveals the underlying logic gap between lower bee mortality and total crop yield.
2
Identify the unstated logical gap
The argument assumes that saving honeybees will raise yields without introducing new yield-reducing factors, such as failing to protect crops from fungal disease.
If the bio-fungicide fails to suppress fungal outbreaks, crop loss from disease could outweigh the pollination benefits of reduced bee mortality.
3
Evaluate the option that closes this logical gap
Confirming that the bio-fungicide matches synthetic pesticides in controlling disease removes a major potential weakness, ensuring a net yield gain.
A strengthening statement must validate key assumptions or eliminate competing explanations that would undermine the conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal & Comparative Arguments by Ruling Out Deficits in Alternative Functions
Soru 27Soru

Coastal towns along Gulf Bay recently enacted mandatory nocturnal light-shielding regulations near beach areas to encourage endangered loggerhead sea turtles to nest. Marine biologists observed a 25 percent increase in recorded turtle nests on Gulf Bay beaches in the season following the mandate's implementation. Consequently, conservationists concluded that the light-shielding regulations were directly responsible for the increased nesting activity along Gulf Bay.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the conservationists' conclusion?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Beaches in adjacent regions that experienced identical weather and tidal conditions but did not implement light-shielding regulations saw no increase in loggerhead nesting activity during the same period.

Cevap

Beaches in adjacent regions that experienced identical weather and tidal conditions but did not implement light-shielding regulations saw no increase in loggerhead nesting activity during the same period.
The correct option provides a control comparison that isolates the light-shielding policy as the cause of the increased nesting. By showing that adjacent beaches sharing identical environmental factors (weather and tides) but lacking the policy did not see any nesting increase, it effectively eliminates alternative environmental explanations.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the argument structure.
Premise: Mandatory light-shielding regulations were enacted, followed by a 25% increase in loggerhead turtle nests. Conclusion: Light-shielding regulations directly caused the increase in nesting activity.
Identifying the core causal premise and conclusion is essential before evaluating potential strengthening evidence.
2
Identify logical vulnerabilities in the causal leap.
The argument assumes correlation implies causation and overlooks alternative potential causes, such as favorable weather, tidal changes, or regional turtle population growth.
Causal arguments on the GMAT can be strengthened by ruling out alternative explanations or supplying a control comparison.
3
Evaluate the choices for a strengthening mechanism.
Showing that nearby control beaches with identical environmental conditions but no lighting regulations experienced no change in nesting activity isolates the light regulations as the primary cause.
A control group confirms that the observed effect occurs only when the proposed cause is present.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments via Control Comparison
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 28Soru

A logistics company recently replaced human inspectors with an automated software system designed to audit shipping manifests for tariff misclassifications. Whenever discrepancies are flagged, the affected containers undergo mandatory physical inspections. Management claims that adopting this software will decrease total vessel departure delays attributable to documentation errors, despite critics pointing out that the automated software flags twenty percent more paperwork discrepancies than human inspectors previously identified.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for management's claim?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The automated software audits manifests days prior to vessel arrival, enabling inspections of flagged containers to finish before loading begins, whereas human inspectors flagged errors during active loading.

Cevap

The argument is most strongly supported by the statement indicating that automated auditing occurs prior to vessel arrival, allowing physical inspections to finish before loading begins rather than interrupting active loading.
The correct response bridges the logical gap between increased discrepancy flags and reduced departure delays. By establishing that automated audits occur before vessel arrival, inspections are completed prior to loading. This eliminates the active loading disruptions caused by human inspectors, directly supporting management's claim.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion and premises of the argument.
Conclusion: Adopting the software will decrease vessel departure delays caused by paperwork errors. Premise: The software flags 20% more discrepancies than human inspectors did, leading to mandatory physical inspections.
To strengthen an argument, one must first identify the logical gap between the premise (more flagged discrepancies creating inspections) and the conclusion (fewer departure delays).
2
Evaluate the missing assumption or logical gap.
The critics argue that more flags equal more inspections, which should cause more delays. Management's claim can only hold true if the inspections triggered by the software do not interfere with departure schedules.
A valid strengthening statement must explain why an increase in flagged discrepancies will not translate into vessel departure delays.
3
Assess the correct option against the logical gap.
If automated auditing takes place prior to vessel arrival, physical inspections are completed before loading starts. Under human inspection, errors were caught during loading, directly holding up departures.
Shifting the inspection window entirely out of the active departure timeline explains how total departure delays decrease even though more containers are inspected.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Arguments via Timing and Operational Mechanisms
Soru 29Soru

Telecommunication firms operating subsea fiber-optic cables currently rely on annual physical inspections by diving teams to detect outer armoring degradation. However, divers can only safely inspect shallow-water segments near coastal landings, leaving deep-sea stretches unexamined. To decrease catastrophic cable ruptures, a major operator plans to replace diving inspections with automated acoustic monitoring. This system emits continuous sonar pulses along the cable's internal core, detecting structural micro-fractures in the outer armoring across its entire length. The operator claims that implementing this technology will reduce the overall number of unexpected cable ruptures.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for the telecommunication operator's claim?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: A significant majority of deep-sea cable ruptures originate from gradual micro-fracturing of the outer armoring rather than sudden events such as undersea landslides.

Cevap

The argument is most strengthened by establishing that a significant majority of deep-sea cable ruptures originate from gradual micro-fracturing of the outer armoring rather than sudden events such as undersea landslides.
The correct answer provides critical support by establishing that the primary cause of deep-sea cable ruptures is gradual micro-fracturing of the armoring. Because the acoustic monitoring system is specifically designed to detect micro-fractures along the entire cable length, proving that deep-sea failures stem from this specific defect confirms that expanding monitoring to deep waters will successfully detect impending failures and reduce overall ruptures.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument into premise and conclusion.
Premise: Divers only inspect shallow waters; acoustic monitoring continuously monitors micro-fractures along the entire cable including deep-sea stretches. Conclusion: Replacing divers with acoustic monitoring will reduce overall unexpected cable ruptures.
Understanding the logical jump from premise to conclusion reveals the gap in the author's reasoning.
2
Identify the logical vulnerability/assumption in the argument.
The argument assumes that deep-sea ruptures are actually caused by micro-fractures (which the new system detects) and that monitoring deep water will yield actionable warnings before catastrophic failures occur.
If deep-sea ruptures are caused by sudden unpredictable events (like landslides) rather than micro-fractures, monitoring micro-fractures won't prevent those deep-sea failures.
3
Evaluate choices for the option that bridges this logical gap.
Confirming that deep-sea ruptures primarily stem from gradual micro-fractures directly links the capabilities of the acoustic technology to the stated goal of reducing total ruptures.
Validating this key assumption strengthens the causal link between implementing the monitoring system and preventing ruptures.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Arguments via Assumption Confirmation
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 30Soru

Municipal water authorities in a large urban district recently installed high-sensitivity acoustic sensors along major underground distribution conduits to detect structural micro-fractures before major pipe bursts occur. Although installing and maintaining these sensors requires a substantial initial financial investment, utility administrators conclude that deploying the network will decrease the city's total annual water infrastructure repair expenses over the next five years. Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for the utility administrators' conclusion?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Addressing minor micro-fractures proactively costs a small fraction of the expense required to fix catastrophic pipe ruptures and repair surrounding municipal road infrastructure.

Cevap

The statement showing that repairing minor micro-fractures proactively costs a small fraction of fixing catastrophic ruptures provides the strongest support for the conclusion.
The argument concludes that investing in acoustic sensors will lead to a net reduction in annual repair costs. To strengthen this claim, an option must show that early detection translates into cost savings that exceed the cost of the sensors and minor repairs. The statement explaining that repairing micro-fractures costs only a small fraction of repairing major burst damage provides this critical link, confirming substantial net savings.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument core
Premise: Acoustic sensors detect micro-fractures early but require high upfront and maintenance investments. Conclusion: Sensor deployment will lower total annual infrastructure repair expenses over 5 years.
Understanding the gap between the cost of the intervention and the claimed net savings is essential.
2
Identify the unstated assumption required to strengthen the conclusion
The money saved by preventing major bursts must outweigh the cost of installing sensors and fixing micro-fractures.
To prove a net decrease in spending, the savings mechanism must be financially validated.
3
Evaluate the choices for logical impact
Demonstrating that proactive micro-fracture repairs cost only a small fraction of catastrophic burst repairs confirms that early detection yields substantial net savings.
This establishes that the financial benefit directly exceeds the expenditure required for implementation.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening a financial trade-off argument by confirming that cost savings exceed implementation expenses.
Soru 31Soru

Six months ago, a maritime freight company equipped its fleet of cargo ships with automated wind sails designed to reduce diesel fuel consumption. Over this period, the fleet recorded only a 2 percent drop in fuel consumption per nautical mile, far short of the manufacturer's advertised 10 percent reduction. Nevertheless, the company's logistics analysts conclude that the wind sails successfully provided fuel savings consistent with expectations.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the logistics analysts' conclusion?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: During the past six months, new maritime regulations required the fleet to increase its average cargo weight per trip by 25 percent, an adjustment that typically increases fuel consumption per nautical mile by at least 8 percent.

Cevap

The argument is most strongly supported by the statement indicating that increased cargo weight during the trial period would normally have raised fuel consumption by at least 8 percent.
The correct answer demonstrates that an unmentioned confounding factor—a 25 percent increase in cargo weight—would normally have increased fuel consumption by at least 8 percent per nautical mile during the trial period. If fuel consumption would have increased to 108 percent of baseline without the sails, but instead decreased to 98 percent (a 2 percent overall drop), the sails actually achieved an effective savings of approximately 10 percent, perfectly matching the original expectations.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion and premises of the argument.
Premise: The fleet saw only a 2% reduction in fuel consumption per nautical mile instead of the expected 10%. Conclusion: The wind sails were nevertheless effective and delivered fuel savings consistent with expectations.
Understanding the discrepancy between the observed 2% reduction and the expected 10% reduction is necessary to find information that resolves the gap.
2
Determine what type of evidence is needed to strengthen the conclusion.
Evidence showing that external factors increased baseline fuel usage during the trial period would account for the missing savings percentage.
If baseline fuel consumption would have risen in the absence of the sails, the observed 2% net drop represents a much larger gross savings than it appears.
3
Evaluate the choices to find the statement that accounts for this baseline change.
The option stating that heavier cargo loads would normally increase fuel consumption by 8% establishes that without sails, fuel usage would have been 108% of normal. A net drop to 98% means the sails achieved a 10% effective reduction.
This confirms the analysts' conclusion by establishing that the sails performed exactly as expected once confounding variables are controlled.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal and Evaluative Arguments by Controlling Confounding Variables
Soru 32Soru

In an effort to increase agricultural production, an agricultural board in a drought-prone province advised tomato growers to replace conventional overhead sprinkler systems with subsurface drip irrigation, which delivers water directly below the soil surface to root zones. The board claimed that adopting subsurface drip irrigation will significantly increase average tomato yields per acre across farms in the province. The board reasoned that because subsurface drip irrigation minimizes surface evaporation, it ensures consistent moisture levels near the plant roots, which is crucial for healthy fruit development.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for the agricultural board's claim regarding tomato yields?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Consistently stable moisture levels in the root zone prevent a soil-borne fungal infection common to the province that severely reduces tomato plant yields.

Cevap

The statement that consistently stable moisture levels in the root zone prevent a soil-borne fungal infection common to the province that severely reduces tomato yields provides the strongest support for the argument.
The argument concludes that subsurface drip irrigation will increase tomato yields per acre because it maintains consistent root-zone moisture by preventing evaporation. The option stating that stable root-zone moisture prevents a common local fungal infection that severely reduces yields provides a concrete biological mechanism explaining WHY consistent moisture will result in higher yields, thus strongly reinforcing the conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion and core premise of the argument.
Premise: Subsurface drip irrigation minimizes evaporation and keeps root zone moisture levels consistent. Conclusion: Adopting subsurface drip irrigation will significantly increase average tomato yields per acre in the province.
Understanding the precise logical gap between consistent root zone moisture and increased crop yield is necessary to evaluate potential strengtheners.
2
Evaluate how an additional fact can bridge the gap between premise and conclusion.
If consistent root zone moisture directly prevents a prevalent local disease that normally cuts yields, then maintaining that moisture level will logically cause overall yields to increase.
A valid strengthening statement establishes a direct causal connection between the operational mechanism and the desired outcome.
3
Eliminate choices that weaken the argument, focus on cost/water savings, or introduce out-of-scope details.
Options raising concerns about system clogging weaken the claim; options discussing electricity or total water savings address collateral benefits rather than yield per acre; options discussing greenhouse farming in other regions are out of scope.
Only facts directly bolstering the mechanism driving higher crop yield per acre serve as valid strengthening evidence.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Arguments
Soru 33Soru

Conservators at a national museum suspect that a famous seventeenth-century oil painting suffered discolored fading primarily due to historical exposure to trace hydrogen sulfide gas released by nineteenth-century coal heating systems. To prevent further chemical degradation, the museum plans to install specialized ambient air filtration units designed to absorb hydrogen sulfide gas from the gallery. The head curator concludes that installing these units will effectively halt the ongoing chemical discoloration of the painting.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for the head curator's conclusion?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Air quality sensors in the gallery have recently measured continuous trace levels of hydrogen sulfide entering the building from outside vehicle exhaust.

Cevap

The argument is most strongly supported by the statement indicating that air quality sensors in the gallery have recently measured continuous trace levels of hydrogen sulfide entering the building from outside vehicle exhaust.
The curator concludes that filtering hydrogen sulfide will halt ongoing discoloration. For this plan to succeed, hydrogen sulfide must currently be present in the gallery environment. Demonstrating that modern vehicle exhaust introduces continuous trace levels of hydrogen sulfide into the gallery confirms that an active threat exists for the filters to neutralize, directly supporting the conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument into premise and conclusion.
Premise: The painting suffered past damage from hydrogen sulfide gas, and the museum plans to install units that filter hydrogen sulfide from gallery air. Conclusion: The filtration units will halt the painting's ongoing discoloration.
Identifying the logical leap helps isolate unstated assumptions.
2
Identify the critical gap in reasoning.
The argument assumes that hydrogen sulfide is currently present in the gallery air and actively contributing to ongoing discoloration. If no hydrogen sulfide is present today, filtering it will have no effect on current discoloration.
A strengthening option must bridge this gap by confirming that hydrogen sulfide remains an active threat in the gallery.
3
Evaluate the choices against the logical gap.
The option establishing that sensors currently detect hydrogen sulfide from vehicle exhaust confirms that the gas is actively present today, making the filtration units effective at halting the ongoing damage.
Supplying missing evidence of a current hazard directly validates the curator's prediction.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Plans by Confirming Present-Day Hazard
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 34Soru

To cut heating costs, the management of a high-rise office complex replaced all single-pane windows with double-pane low-emissivity glass. Although weather conditions over the following winter were identical to those of the previous winter, the building's overall energy consumption for heating increased by 8 percent. The management concluded that the new windows were defective and failed to provide the promised thermal insulation.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the conclusion drawn by the building management?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: A building-wide policy implemented prior to the second winter reduced evening office hours, which under typical operating conditions lowers overall heating energy demand by at least 10 percent.

Cevap

The argument is most strengthened by the statement indicating that a building-wide policy reduced evening office hours, which normally lowers heating energy demand by at least 10 percent.
The conclusion asserts that defective window insulation caused an unexpected 8% increase in heating energy consumption despite identical weather conditions. The option stating that evening operating hours were reduced—a change that normally cuts heating demand by 10%—strongly supports the conclusion. If heating demand dropped, energy consumption should have decreased; the fact that it rose by 8% demonstrates an even severe failure in thermal efficiency than the raw figures initially suggested.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument into premises and conclusion
Premises: Single-pane windows were replaced with double-pane low-emissivity glass; weather conditions were identical across both winters; heating energy consumption increased by 8%. Conclusion: The new windows were defective and failed to insulate properly.
Identifying the core causal claim (defective windows caused increased energy consumption) isolates the logical gap that needs support.
2
Determine the required strengthening mechanism
To strengthen the conclusion, we must rule out alternative explanations for the energy increase or show that energy consumption should have dropped even further under normal operations.
Demonstrating that operational factors pushed heating demand down makes the actual 8% energy increase even more anomalous and directly attributable to defective window insulation.
3
Evaluate the impact of reduced operating hours
If reduced operating hours should have lowered heating demand by 10%, an actual increase of 8% represents an 18% net deficit in thermal performance, strongly confirming window defectiveness.
Eliminating operational workload as a driver of energy consumption rules out confounders and confirms the insulating failure.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments by Ruling Out Alternative Causes and Establishing Baseline Expectations
Soru 35Soru

To reduce fuel costs, a regional cargo airline operating primarily in high-altitude mountainous terrain plans to retrofit its turboprop fleet with newly engineered lightweight winglets. Flight tests conducted at sea level demonstrated that these winglets reduced fuel consumption by 8 percent by minimizing aerodynamic drag. Based on these sea-level test results, executives conclude that retrofitting the fleet with these winglets will significantly decrease the carrier's overall fuel expenditure on its mountain routes.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for the executives' conclusion?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Aerodynamic drag accounts for a greater proportion of total engine workload during flight maneuvers in high-altitude mountain conditions than during sea-level flight.

Cevap

The argument is most strongly supported by the statement indicating that aerodynamic drag accounts for a greater proportion of total engine workload during flight maneuvers in high-altitude mountain conditions than during sea-level flight.
The correct answer directly connects the premise (sea-level drag reduction) with the target scenario (high-altitude mountain flights). By establishing that aerodynamic drag represents a larger share of engine workload in mountain conditions, it confirms that reducing drag will yield significant fuel savings in the specific environment where the fleet operates.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's premises and conclusion.
Premise: Winglets reduced fuel consumption by 8% during tests at sea level by cutting aerodynamic drag. Conclusion: Installing the winglets will significantly cut overall fuel expenditure on high-altitude mountain routes.
Deconstructing the argument reveals the logical gap between sea-level test results and real-world high-altitude performance.
2
Identify the unstated assumption required for the argument to hold.
The argument assumes that aerodynamic drag reduction observed at sea level remains significant and effective under high-altitude mountain flight conditions.
If high-altitude conditions alter aerodynamic workload, sea-level results might not guarantee expected savings.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to find the statement that confirms or enhances this core connection.
Showing that aerodynamic drag plays an even larger role in engine workload at high altitudes validates and strengthens the assumption that drag-reducing winglets will generate substantial fuel savings on mountain routes.
Direct evidence confirming the relevance of drag reduction in the target operating environment directly strengthens the conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Arguments by Confirming Key Assumptions across Environments
Soru 36Soru

A city plans to introduce high-speed automated optical sorting machines at its primary municipal recycling facility to process post-consumer textile waste. Currently, textile recycling is limited because manual sorting cannot efficiently distinguish between pure cotton and synthetic-blend fabrics. City officials claim that deploying these optical sorters will double the annual volume of pure cotton recovered and sold to textile manufacturers. Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for the city officials' claim?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The volume of textile waste delivered to the facility currently contains more than enough uncollected pure cotton to support a doubling of recovered output.

Cevap

The argument is most strengthened by establishing that the incoming waste stream contains a sufficient volume of pure cotton to allow the recovered output to double.
The city officials' claim relies on the assumption that the main bottleneck to recovering pure cotton is sorting efficiency rather than raw supply. Showing that incoming waste already contains sufficient pure cotton eliminates the possibility of a supply shortage, thereby directly strengthening the conclusion that output can double.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the premise and conclusion of the argument.
Premise: Manual sorting fails to distinguish pure cotton from synthetic blends. Conclusion: Automated optical sorting will double the volume of pure cotton recovered and sold.
Understanding the logic gap helps determine what assumption or missing link is necessary to support the conclusion.
2
Evaluate potential weaknesses or unstated assumptions in the reasoning.
The argument assumes that technology is the only limiting factor. If incoming waste lacks enough pure cotton, improved sorting technology alone cannot double output.
A valid strengthening statement must address a potential bottleneck or validate a core underlying assumption.
3
Select the option that confirms the necessary supply condition.
Confirming that the raw waste already contains enough uncollected pure cotton proves that doubling output is physically viable.
This directly strengthens the feasibility of the city officials' claim.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal & Plan-Based Arguments by Confirming Key Assumptions
Soru 37Soru

To reduce long-term infrastructure expenses, the coastal transit authority of Metropolis plans to install continuous ultrasonic vibration sensors on the underwater concrete pillars of its main commuter bridges. Engineers argue that by detecting micro-fractures in real time, maintenance crews can perform minor localized patch repairs before major structural fatigue occurs, thereby significantly lowering total repair expenditures over the next decade.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for the engineers' argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The cost to purchase, install, and maintain the ultrasonic sensors is substantially lower than the net financial savings produced by preventing even a single major structural overhaul.

Cevap

The statement establishing that the cost of purchasing, installing, and maintaining the ultrasonic sensors is substantially lower than the net financial savings produced by preventing a major structural overhaul.
The correct answer provides the missing piece of economic logic necessary for the plan's success. The author claims that performing minor localized repairs guided by sensors will lower total repair expenditures over ten years. However, if buying and maintaining these continuous sensors costs more than the money saved by preventing major overhauls, overall expenditures would increase. Confirming that sensor acquisition and maintenance expenses are substantially lower than the savings from avoiding overhauls directly supports the conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the core argument structure
Premise: Installing ultrasonic sensors allows detection of micro-fractures so minor patch repairs can be made early. Conclusion: This plan will significantly lower total repair expenditures over the next decade.
Identifying the premise-to-conclusion leap reveals the underlying assumption needed to reach the conclusion.
2
Identify logical gaps in the plan
The argument assumes that the financial savings from avoiding major overhauls will exceed the costs of buying, installing, and servicing the sensors.
If the technology itself is excessively expensive to run, overall expenditures could rise despite avoiding major overhauls.
3
Evaluate the choices to find the one that confirms the assumption
The option stating that sensor costs are substantially lower than savings from preventing a major overhaul directly bridges this financial gap and confirms net savings.
Providing evidence that net savings are positive strongly reinforces the conclusion that expenditures will decline.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Arguments by Supplying Missing Financial Link / Cost-Benefit Viability
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 38Soru

To prevent soil degradation in arid farmland, agricultural researchers propose planting salt-tolerant halophytes alongside commercial crops. Halophytes absorb excess sodium ions from topsoil, which the researchers claim will allow commercial crops to absorb soil nitrogen more efficiently and thereby increase overall crop yields within two growing seasons.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for the researchers' argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: High concentrations of sodium ions in topsoil chemically inhibit the molecular channels that commercial crop roots use to absorb nitrogen.

Cevap

High concentrations of sodium ions in topsoil chemically inhibit the molecular channels that commercial crop roots use to absorb nitrogen.
The correct answer supplies the underlying physiological mechanism required for the argument to hold. If topsoil sodium ions actively inhibit root channels responsible for nitrogen uptake, then reducing sodium via halophyte absorption removes this inhibition, directly enabling commercial crops to absorb nitrogen more effectively and boost yields.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Isolate the premises and conclusion of the argument.
Premise: Halophytes absorb excess sodium ions from topsoil. Conclusion: Halophytes will enable commercial crops to absorb nitrogen more efficiently and increase overall yields.
Strengthening an argument requires identifying the logical gap between the evidence provided and the claim being made.
2
Identify the unstated assumption linking topsoil sodium to nitrogen absorption.
The argument assumes that sodium ions currently hinder nitrogen uptake, and that removing sodium will resolve this bottleneck.
Without a causal connection between sodium levels and nitrogen absorption efficiency, the conclusion remains unproven.
3
Evaluate the options for a premise that establishes this causal connection.
Confirming that sodium ions directly block root transport channels for nitrogen proves that removing sodium enables increased nitrogen absorption.
Supplying the missing biological mechanism directly validates the core premise-to-conclusion transition.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments via Underlying Mechanism
Soru 39Soru

Ecologists studying endangered forest elephants in a central African preserve recently introduced an automated acoustic monitoring network to track herd movements via low-frequency infrasound calls. The researchers hypothesized that installing these acoustic sensors at key waterholes would allow them to accurately estimate total elephant population trends across the preserve over time. However, skeptics argued that because elephants frequently travel between waterholes, acoustic detections at waterholes would lead to double-counting individual animals, thereby rendering population trend estimates unreliable.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the ecologists' argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Each elephant's low-frequency call possesses a unique vocal signature that allows the automated software to identify and distinguish individual animals across different sensor locations.

Cevap

The statement showing that each elephant possesses a unique vocal signature allowing the software to distinguish individual animals across locations provides the strongest support.
The core objection raised against the ecologists' hypothesis is that elephants traveling between waterholes will be counted multiple times, distorting the overall population estimates. The statement providing that each elephant has a unique vocal signature that automated software uses to track individuals directly resolves this issue. By demonstrating that double-counting can be avoided, the finding defends the validity of the data and strongly supports the conclusion that population trends can be estimated accurately.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion and premises of the argument.
Conclusion: Acoustic sensors at waterholes will accurately estimate overall elephant population trends over time. Vulnerability/Objection: Elephants visit multiple waterholes, causing double-counting.
To strengthen an argument facing a specific counterargument, we must find evidence that overcomes or neutralizes that specific weakness.
2
Evaluate the impact of demonstrating individual vocal signatures.
If the software identifies unique vocal signatures, moving between waterholes will not lead to double-counting because the system recognizes repeat individuals.
Eliminating the potential cause of data distortion directly protects the premise-to-conclusion logical path.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening an Argument by Neutralizing a Key Objection / Ruling Out Data Distortion
Soru 40Soru

To combat urban air pollution, the municipal transit authority of a major city plans to replace its entire fleet of diesel buses with electric buses powered by lithium-iron-phosphate (LFP) batteries. Opponents of the plan argue that the frequent fast-charging required during peak operational hours will cause rapid battery degradation, forcing costly battery replacements within three years and rendering the transition economically unviable. However, transit officials maintain that the transition will substantially lower overall fleet maintenance costs over a ten-year period. Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for the transit officials' contention?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Lithium-iron-phosphate batteries subjected to frequent fast-charging in transit conditions retain over 85 percent of their initial operational capacity after eight years of service.

Cevap

The statement showing that lithium-iron-phosphate batteries retain over 85 percent of their capacity after eight years of frequent fast-charging provides the strongest support for the transit officials' claim.
The transit officials claim that transitioning to electric buses will reduce maintenance costs over a 10-year period, while opponents argue that battery degradation within 3 years will destroy any financial benefit. The option stating that LFP batteries maintain over 85 percent capacity after 8 years of fast-charging directly disproves the opponents' premise of early failure and provides factual backing for the officials' 10-year savings projection.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the argument structure
Premise: Switching to electric buses reduces pollution, but opponents claim frequent fast-charging degrades batteries within 3 years, causing high replacement costs. Conclusion: Transit officials contend the switch will substantially lower overall fleet maintenance costs over 10 years.
Identifying the conclusion and the opponents' counter-argument is essential to determine what assumption needs support.
2
Identify the weakness or gap in the argument
The officials' conclusion depends on overcoming the opponents' premise that rapid battery degradation within 3 years will negate long-term savings.
A strong supporting premise must rule out the primary financial obstacle raised by the opponents.
3
Evaluate the choices to find the statement that solidifies the officials' conclusion
Showing empirically that LFP batteries endure eight years of fast-charging with minimal capacity loss directly removes the opponents' objection and supports the 10-year savings claim.
Demonstrating data reliability and battery durability bridges the gap between battery life expectancy and 10-year cost reductions.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Arguments by Ruling Out Alternative Vulnerabilities and Invalidating Opponents' Premises
ÖncekiSayfa 2 / 2