Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: Çok zorExplaining Surprising Outcomes

To improve the durability of its flagship rugged smartphone, the Trekker, a telecommunications company analyzed thousands of broken units that customers had sent to the company's centralized repair facility over the past year. The engineers found that 85 percent of the damaged Trekkers had shattered outer screens, while only 5 percent had damaged internal processors. Based on this data, the engineering team proposed heavily reinforcing the screens on the next generation of the Trekker. However, the chief product architect rejected this proposal, arguing that if the goal is to maximize the average operational lifespan of the Trekker in the field, the company must instead prioritize reinforcing the internal processors.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy between the repair data and the architect's recommendation?

  1. When a Trekker's internal processor is damaged, the device typically becomes immediately inoperable and is discarded by the user, whereas units with shattered screens usually remain functional enough to justify the effort of returning them for repair.Cevap
  2. B
    The advanced glass used for the Trekker's screen is currently the most durable material available on the market, meaning that further reinforcement would add significant weight without meaningfully increasing shatter resistance.
  3. C
    The internal processors used in the Trekker are already housed within a specialized shock-absorbent chassis that provides substantially more impact protection than the outer screen's casing.
  4. D
    The proportion of returned Trekker smartphones with shattered screens is significantly higher than the proportion of standard, non-rugged smartphones that are returned for screen repairs.
  5. E
    The majority of customers who experience internal processor failure also simultaneously experience a shattered screen due to the high-impact nature of severe drops.

Cevap

The statement explaining that devices with damaged processors are typically discarded, while those with shattered screens are returned for repair.
The correct answer provides a mechanism (survivorship bias) that perfectly reconciles the repair data with the architect's recommendation. If a damaged processor causes the user to instantly throw the phone away, those phones never make it to the repair facility to be counted. Conversely, a shattered screen leaves the phone functional enough to be mailed in. Therefore, the repair data vastly underestimates processor failures in the field. The architect realizes that to extend the phone's life, they must protect the component that causes total device death, not the one that merely results in a repair request.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the apparent discrepancy or paradox in the stimulus.
Repair data shows screens break 85% of the time and processors only 5%. Yet, the architect insists that reinforcing processors is the key to maximizing the phone's lifespan.
Resolving a paradox requires clearly defining the two conflicting facts that need to be reconciled.
2
Analyze the nature of the evidence provided.
The data only comes from 'units that customers had sent to the company's centralized repair facility'.
In LSAT Logical Reasoning, the source and scope of data are critical. If data only represents a specific subset (returned phones), it may not accurately reflect the whole picture (all broken phones in the field).
3
Evaluate the options to find a factual statement that explains how both sides of the paradox can be true simultaneously.
The correct answer must explain why processor damage is actually a massive threat to the phone's lifespan despite barely showing up in the repair facility's data.
A valid resolution must bridge the gap without contradicting either of the established facts.
4
Select the option that introduces a selection bias into the data pool.
The correct option reveals that phones with broken processors are thrown away (thus never counted in the 5%), while those with broken screens survive long enough to be mailed in (inflating the 85%).
This perfectly explains why the repair data is skewed and why the architect is correct to focus on the fatal flaw (the processor) to extend actual field lifespan.

Anahtar Kavram

Selection Bias and Representativeness in Paradoxes
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Explaining Surprising Outcomes

Bu konudan daha fazla soru