Examkin

Paradox and Resolution

87 soru

Tüm türler87Çoktan seçmeli45Çoklu seçim7Doğru / Yanlış15Eşleştirme20
Soru 81Soru →

Veridium Industries recently installed a new automated quality-control system for the raw components used in its smartphone assembly plant. This new system detects and discards defective components with 99.9 percent accuracy, successfully eliminating almost all pre-existing component flaws before assembly. However, over the following year, the percentage of fully assembled smartphones failing the standard post-assembly functionality tests due to hardware defects actually increased by 20 percent, even though the final assembly procedures, the workforce, and the post-assembly testing standards remained entirely unchanged.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy described above?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The automated quality-control system relies on intense magnetic fields that inadvertently magnetize certain metallic components, causing them to short-circuit only when connected to the smartphone's power supply during final testing.

Cevap

The option stating that the automated system relies on intense magnetic fields that inadvertently magnetize components, causing them to short-circuit during final testing.
The correct answer provides a mechanism that bridges both sides of the discrepancy. It accepts Premise A (the system successfully removes pre-existing flaws) but introduces a critical new variable: the system itself creates a latent defect (magnetization). Because this latent defect only causes a short-circuit when the phone is finally powered on during the post-assembly test, it perfectly explains why the final failure rate increased (Premise B) despite the components being 'flawless' when they originally entered the assembly line.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the first conflicting premise (Premise A).
The new automated QC system successfully eliminates 99.9% of pre-existing component flaws before the components are assembled into smartphones.
Understanding the baseline expectation helps frame the paradox.
2
Identify the second conflicting premise (Premise B).
Despite the nearly perfect components entering assembly, the percentage of fully assembled smartphones failing final hardware tests increased by 20%, with no changes to the assembly process itself.
This establishes the unexpected outcome that contradicts the baseline expectation.
3
Define the precise nature of the discrepancy.
If components are entering the assembly process flawless, and the assembly process itself has not changed, how can there be a 20% increase in hardware defects at the final testing stage?
A clear definition of the gap is required to evaluate the answer choices accurately.
4
Evaluate the options for a bridging mechanism.
The correct answer must explain how a new defect is introduced either during or after the QC process, but before or during the final functionality test.
Only an option that addresses both the 'flawless input' and the 'flawed output' can resolve the paradox.
5
Select the correct option.
The option involving magnetic fields explains that the QC machine itself creates a latent defect (magnetization) that bypasses the assembly process undetected but triggers a failure during the final power test.
This perfectly reconciles the flawless initial state with the increased final failure rate.

Anahtar Kavram

Eliminating One-Sided Explanations
Soru 82Soru →

During the 1920s, several major banking institutions installed intricate pneumatic tube networks to route paperwork internally. These networks propelled physical documents between departments in mere seconds, achieving a rate of transfer exponentially faster than the prior reliance on human clerks. Nevertheless, archival operational records from these institutions demonstrate that the total duration required to finalize a standard commercial loan application actually expanded significantly in the years immediately following the transition to the tube networks.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the apparent discrepancy presented in the information above?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: A technological upgrade that drastically accelerated the transit speed of necessary components was accompanied by an overall increase in the time required to complete a procedure reliant on those components.

Cevap

The correct answer is the option that notes a technological upgrade vastly accelerating the speed of necessary components was accompanied by an increase in the total time to complete a procedure reliant on them.
The correct answer flawlessly distills the specific contradiction found in the text into an abstract format. It acknowledges both the dramatic increase in the speed of transferring materials (the documents via tubes) and the paradoxical increase in the total time needed to finish a larger task relying on those materials (the loan applications). It does so neutrally, without assuming causation.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the prompt to determine the exact task.
The question stem asks to 'accurately describe the apparent discrepancy'. This means we must isolate the conflicting facts without trying to solve or explain the conflict.
Different question types require completely different approaches. Identifying a discrepancy is not the same as resolving one.
2
Identify the two contrasting factual premises in the stimulus.
Fact 1: Pneumatic tubes made internal document transfer exponentially faster. Fact 2: The total time required to finalize a loan application significantly expanded.
A discrepancy always involves two pieces of information that seem to contradict each other or produce an unexpected outcome.
3
Evaluate the options to find the one that accurately synthesizes these two facts in abstract terms.
The correct option perfectly captures the tension: a faster component speed (transit) coincided with a slower overall procedure time (loan finalization).
The correct answer must encompass both sides of the tension neutrally.

Anahtar Kavram

Isolating the precise logical tension between two unexpected coexisting facts without attempting to introduce external explanatory information.
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 83Soru →

At the Apex Manufacturing plant, management recently replaced all cutting equipment on both Floor A and Floor B with identical new X-200 automated cutting machines. In the month following the upgrade, the amount of material waste produced on Floor A decreased by 30 percent compared to the previous month. However, during the exact same period, the amount of material waste produced on Floor B, which cuts the exact same materials to produce the exact same products, increased by 50 percent.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy described above?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Prior to the upgrade, Floor A utilized error-prone manual labor for its cutting tasks, whereas Floor B utilized older, highly precise laser cutters that the X-200 replaced solely to increase production speed.

Cevap

The correct answer states that prior to the upgrade, Floor A used error-prone manual labor while Floor B used older, highly precise laser cutters.
The correct answer provides a unified historical context that explains both divergent outcomes. The paradox arises because identical new machines produced opposite results on two identical production lines. By revealing that the floors started from vastly different baselines—Floor A using inaccurate manual labor and Floor B using highly accurate laser cutters—the introduction of the X-200 machines logically results in an improvement for Floor A and a degradation for Floor B.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the two conflicting premises in the stimulus.
Premise A: Waste on Floor A decreased by 30%. Premise B: Waste on Floor B increased by 50%. Both floors received identical new machines and process identical materials.
Understanding the exact parameters of the paradox is required to evaluate potential resolutions.
2
Determine the criteria for a successful resolution.
The correct answer must explain BOTH why Floor A's performance improved AND why Floor B's performance worsened following the exact same equipment upgrade.
An explanation that only accounts for one floor's change is incomplete and falls into a one-sided explanation trap.
3
Evaluate the answer choices against the established criteria.
Only the correct answer establishes a bridge by showing that the two floors had different starting baselines before the upgrade, meaning the new machines represented an upgrade in precision for Floor A but a downgrade in precision for Floor B.
This single piece of new information perfectly reconciles both halves of the apparent discrepancy.

Anahtar Kavram

Eliminating One-Sided Explanations
Soru 84Soru →

A recent municipal initiative in the city of Belmont provided heavy subsidies for homeowners to install high-efficiency solar panels. Within two years, over 60 percent of households adopted the panels, drastically reducing their reliance on the city's main electrical grid during daylight hours. However, the total amount of coal burned by the city's central power plant—its sole source of electricity generation—actually increased by 15 percent over the same two-year period.

The apparent logical discrepancy in this scenario is that the total amount of coal burned by the city's central power plant increased by 15 percent, even though the total amount of electricity consumed by Belmont households decreased over the same two-year period.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: False

Cevap

False
The statement is false because it mischaracterizes the given facts by shifting the scope. The stimulus explicitly states that reliance on the grid during daylight hours decreased, but it never states that total electricity consumption decreased. A correct identification of the apparent discrepancy must rely solely on the facts explicitly presented in the text.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the stimulus to identify the two explicitly stated conflicting facts.
Fact 1: Over 60 percent of households drastically reduced their reliance on the grid during daylight hours. Fact 2: The total amount of coal burned by the central power plant increased by 15 percent.
Isolating the precise factual premises is required to accurately identify the logical discrepancy without making outside assumptions.
2
Examine the proposed discrepancy statement for accuracy.
The statement claims the tension exists because total electricity consumed by households decreased while coal burned increased.
The proposed statement must perfectly match the facts provided in the stimulus to be correct.
3
Compare the facts in the proposed statement to the facts in the stimulus.
The stimulus discusses 'reliance on the main electrical grid during daylight hours', whereas the statement shifts the scope to 'total amount of electricity consumed'.
Identifying subtle scope shifts is critical for evaluating LSAT logical reasoning statements.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying the Apparent Discrepancy
Soru 85Soru →

Consider the following historical discrepancy:

Between 1300 and 1350 CE, the ancient settlement of Qalhat experienced a massive population boom and a significant expansion of its stone infrastructure. However, geological records indicate that during this exact same fifty-year period, the region's only nearby freshwater reservoir shrank drastically, reducing the local water supply to less than a third of its previous capacity.

Match each of the following hypothetical findings to its logical function in relation to this apparent discrepancy.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Excavations reveal that an extended period of lower-than-average precipitation in the broader geographic basin led to a steady drop in the regional water table during the fourteenth century.
The majority of the new stone infrastructure built during this period consisted of deep subterranean cisterns that allowed the settlement to capture and efficiently store heavy, seasonal monsoon rains for year-round use.
In 1301 CE, the settlement became the administrative capital of a newly unified empire, which mandated that all regional trade pass through the city's newly constructed stone markets.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The precipitation finding explains only the reduced water supply. The cisterns finding reconciles the discrepancy. The administrative capital finding explains only the population boom.
A valid resolution to a paradox must act as a bridge between the two conflicting facts. The finding regarding the subterranean cisterns is the only one that achieves this, demonstrating how the infrastructure boom itself bypassed the need for the shrinking reservoir. The other findings represent classic one-sided traps: one explains the drought while ignoring the population growth, and the other explains the population growth while ignoring the drought.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the two conflicting premises that create the discrepancy.
Premise A is the population and infrastructure boom. Premise B is the drastically shrinking freshwater reservoir.
Resolving a paradox requires clearly isolating the two facts that appear to contradict each other.
2
Evaluate the precipitation finding against both premises.
It provides a cause for the shrinking reservoir (Premise B) but leaves the population boom (Premise A) unexplained in the face of a drought.
An explanation that only addresses one side of a discrepancy does not resolve the paradox.
3
Evaluate the cisterns finding against both premises.
It reveals that the new infrastructure captured alternate water sources (monsoons), bridging the gap between population growth and the loss of the reservoir.
A true resolution must provide a mechanism that allows both apparently conflicting premises to coexist logically.
4
Evaluate the administrative capital finding against both premises.
It explains the cause of the population and infrastructure boom (Premise A) but entirely ignores the constraint of the shrinking water supply (Premise B).
Identifying the catalyst for growth does not explain how that growth was sustained without water.

Anahtar Kavram

Eliminating one-sided explanations in paradox questions by ensuring the correct answer accounts for both conflicting premises.
Soru 86Soru →

Below are four short scenarios, each containing an apparent logical discrepancy. Match each scenario to the abstract description that most accurately isolates its precise point of logical tension.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

To discourage non-essential driving and alleviate severe gridlock, a municipal government implemented a heavy congestion pricing toll on all major downtown arteries. Surprisingly, within six months of the toll's introduction, the average time that downtown commuters spent stuck in traffic had actually increased by twenty percent.
Seeking to aggressively maximize its market share, a software company drastically reduced the annual subscription price of its flagship enterprise productivity suite. However, over the subsequent fiscal quarter, the total number of enterprise licenses the company sold was significantly lower than in any previous quarter.
Wildlife conservationists successfully eliminated a predatory invasive snake species from a protected island ecosystem specifically to save a critically endangered ground-nesting bird. Yet, during the two years following the predator's complete eradication, the population of the endangered bird fell by more than half.
A manufacturing plant replaced its aging manual assembly line with highly automated robotics engineered to minimize power consumption per unit produced. Despite keeping production volume entirely flat, the plant's overall electricity expenditure surged during the first year of the new system's operation.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The traffic toll scenario matches the financial disincentive abstraction; the software pricing scenario matches the minimizing cost barriers abstraction; the island ecology scenario matches the eradicating an external threat abstraction; and the manufacturing plant scenario matches the per-unit efficiency versus aggregate expenditure abstraction.
Each abstraction accurately strips away the topical details (traffic, software, birds, robotics) to describe the underlying logical paradox. The correct pairings precisely map the specific causal actions (toll, price cut, predator removal, automation) to their generalized structural equivalents (disincentive, cost barrier reduction, threat eradication, unit-efficiency).

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the structural components of the traffic toll scenario (Left 1).
Identified a financial penalty (toll) aimed at reducing a systemic issue (traffic), which paradoxically worsened.
Abstracting the concrete facts into generalized logical structures allows us to identify the core tension.
2
Analyze the structural components of the software pricing scenario (Left 2).
Identified a financial incentive (price drop) aimed at increasing volume (sales), which paradoxically resulted in lower volume.
Separating the economic action from the outcome isolates the discrepancy without being distracted by the subject matter.
3
Analyze the structural components of the ecology scenario (Left 3).
Identified the complete removal of a negative variable (predator) to protect a vulnerable subject (bird), followed by the subject's severe decline.
This isolates the causal paradox of an intended protective environmental measure immediately preceding further harm.
4
Analyze the structural components of the manufacturing scenario (Left 4).
Identified an improvement in individual unit efficiency resulting in an overall total increase in resource consumption.
Distinguishing between rates (per-unit) and absolute numbers (total expenditure) is critical for identifying this specific logical tension.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying the Apparent Discrepancy requires abstracting the specific factual premises of a stimulus to isolate the precise points of logical tension, stripping away the topical narrative to reveal the underlying structural paradox.
Soru 87Soru →

Recently, the national retail chain BargainMart drastically reduced the variety of products it stocks, cutting its inventory from roughly 50,000 unique items to just 20,000. Surprisingly, despite offering far fewer choices to its customers, BargainMart's total revenue from sales increased by 15% over the exact same period, even though overall retail spending in the country remained flat.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy described above?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The items that BargainMart eliminated were primarily slow-moving products that had severely cluttered the aisles, and their removal made it much easier for customers to locate and purchase the chain's most popular, high-priced goods.

Cevap

The correct answer explains that the removed items were cluttering the aisles, and their elimination helped customers locate and buy popular, high-priced goods.
The correct answer successfully bridges the gap between the two surprising facts. By stating that the eliminated items were cluttering the aisles and preventing shoppers from finding popular, high-priced goods, it provides a logical mechanism for how drastically reducing product variety directly caused an increase in sales revenue.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the apparent discrepancy in the stimulus.
Premise A states BargainMart cut its inventory from 50,000 to 20,000 items. Premise B states that total revenue increased by 15% despite offering fewer choices.
Resolving a paradox requires clearly understanding the two conflicting facts that need to be bridged.
2
Determine what a correct resolution must accomplish.
The correct answer must explain how drastically reducing product variety could actually lead to, or at least be consistent with, a significant increase in total sales revenue.
An answer that explains only one side of the discrepancy is a trap.
3
Evaluate the options against the one-sided explanation trap.
Options providing reasons for the inventory cut, like logistics costs, or alternative reasons for revenue growth, like extended hours, fail to link the two facts.
One-sided explanations leave the core tension unresolved.
4
Identify the option that reconciles both premises.
The option explaining that the removed items were cluttering the store and hiding high-priced goods successfully connects the inventory reduction directly to the revenue increase.
This establishes a causal bridge, showing how the first premise facilitated the second premise.

Anahtar Kavram

Eliminating One-Sided Explanations
ÖncekiSayfa 5 / 5
Paradox and Resolution Alıştırma Soruları — LSAT — Sayfa 5 | Examkin