Read the following passage carefully:
Under the 2026 Municipal Algorithmic Welfare Allocation Framework, local governing bodies in metropolitan districts are mandated to transition social housing distribution to automated vulnerability scoring systems. These systems calculate household eligibility exclusively using digitized tax declarations, utility consumption metrics, and municipal healthcare records from the preceding three financial years. The framework explicitly prohibits administrative committees from overriding algorithmic scoring outcomes through discretionary human intervention, except in cases where a documented technical glitch leads to missing municipal records. Additionally, the protocol dictates that any household whose automated score falls below the median vulnerability threshold is automatically queued for secondary auditing before any welfare benefit is denied. However, households that fail to maintain continuous digitized tax declarations over the three-year baseline are categorized as unverified, rendering them ineligible for both automated scoring and subsequent audit queuing.
Based strictly on the passage provided above, which of the following conclusions can be logically inferred regarding the welfare allocation process?
- A household categorized as unverified under the framework will not undergo secondary auditing prior to being denied welfare benefits.Cevap
- BDiscretionary human intervention by administrative committees is inherently biased and inevitably increases corruption in social welfare schemes.
- CTransitioning to automated vulnerability scoring guarantees that social housing will be distributed with complete accuracy and zero errors.
- DAdministrative committees maintain the authority to manually adjust algorithmic scores whenever they deem a household's poverty level exceptionally severe.