Logical Reasoning and Analytical Ability

493 soru

Soru 421Soru

Following a breakdown in negotiations regarding the provision of specialized safety gear, the primary labor union representing workers at the state's largest underground coal facility has initiated an indefinite walkout. This sudden stoppage has halted fuel extraction, posing an imminent threat to the coal reserves of the regional thermal power plant.

Which of the following proposed courses of action are logically sound and practically advisable for the authorities to implement? Select all that apply.

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The state energy department should proactively initiate emergency power procurement from the national grid to secure the region's electricity supply against potential shortfalls.; The mining corporation management should urgently resume mediated discussions with the labor union to address and resolve the specific safety gear grievances.

Cevap

The logically sound courses of action are to proactively initiate emergency power procurement from the national grid and to urgently resume mediated discussions with the labor union.
The correct choices focus on balanced, dual-track crisis management. Proactively procuring emergency power from the national grid mitigates the immediate public threat of an electricity shortfall. Simultaneously, resuming mediated discussions directly addresses the root cause of the labor strike—the safety gear dispute—through constructive and lawful means.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the core issues presented in the administrative scenario.
The scenario presents two interconnected problems: an immediate threat to the regional power supply (consequence) and an unresolved labor dispute regarding safety gear (root cause).
Effective courses of action must directly address either the immediate critical consequences or the underlying root cause of the crisis.
2
Evaluate the actions proposed to address the immediate consequences.
Procuring emergency power from the national grid is a practical and necessary step to prevent a regional electricity collapse.
Administrative bodies must prioritize public welfare and the continuity of essential services during supply chain disruptions.
3
Evaluate the actions proposed to address the root cause of the walkout.
Resuming mediated discussions over the safety gear grievance is a proportional, legally sound method to resolve the dispute.
Feasible administrative solutions rely on established negotiation and procedural channels rather than coercion.
4
Reject invalid, extreme, or procedurally flawed courses of action.
Distributing uncertified hardhats violates safety protocols, while arresting union leaders is an extreme, disproportionate punitive measure.
Courses of action must comply with statutory safety regulations and avoid disproportionate, authoritarian responses to legitimate labor grievances.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating immediate mitigation strategies and root-cause resolution while avoiding extreme punitive measures or statutory violations.
Soru 422Soru

Consider the two situations presented below regarding the national logistics and travel infrastructure:

Situation X: Major commercial airlines have raised their domestic flight ticket prices by an average of 20% over the last fortnight.
Situation Y: The consortium of inter-state road freight operators has introduced a uniform 15% hike in their baseline transportation rates.

What is the most logical causal relationship between these two situations?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Both Situation X and Situation Y are effects of some common cause.

Cevap

Both situations are effects of a common underlying cause, such as a substantial increase in fuel prices.
Both situations describe simultaneous cost increases in different segments of the transportation sector. These segments (air travel and road freight) do not directly dictate each other's pricing. However, because both rely heavily on the same fundamental resource (fuel), a concurrent price hike strongly indicates they are both responding to a shared external trigger, such as an increase in crude oil prices. Therefore, both are effects of a common cause.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the nature of the events described in both situations.
Both situations describe a significant increase in prices within the broader transportation and logistics sector (aviation and road freight) occurring in a similar timeframe.
Identifying the core theme helps determine if there is a direct link or a shared underlying macroeconomic factor.
2
Evaluate for a direct cause-and-effect relationship between the two situations.
Neither event directly causes the other; airline passenger prices and road freight tariffs cater to different operational needs and do not trigger each other directly.
This rules out options stating that one is the direct cause of the other.
3
Determine if the events are independent or linked by a common driver.
Since both modes of transport heavily rely on petroleum-based fuels, a simultaneous price hike in both strongly points to a shared external variable, such as a rise in global crude oil prices, making them parallel effects of a common cause.
This distinguishes between effects of independent causes and effects of a common cause.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying common underlying macroeconomic variables that produce parallel effects across distinct sub-sectors.
Soru 423Soru

Consider the following premises from an urban planning report: 'All zero-emission zones are areas with restricted traffic' and 'No industrial parks are zero-emission zones'. Based purely on these premises, it is a valid logical deduction to conclude that 'No areas with restricted traffic are industrial parks'.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: False

Cevap

The deduction is logically invalid.
The conclusion is logically invalid because it commits the fallacy of illicit process. It attempts to make a definitive claim excluding all 'areas with restricted traffic' when the original premises only provided information about a specific subset of them (the zero-emission zones).

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Translate the statements into standard categorical propositions.
Premise 1: All Z are R (where Z = zero-emission zones, R = restricted traffic). Premise 2: No I are Z (where I = industrial parks). Proposed Conclusion: No R are I.
Standardizing the statements allows us to accurately apply the formal rules of syllogistic logic.
2
Analyze the distribution of the terms in the premises.
In Premise 1 (an 'All S is P' statement), the predicate 'R' is undistributed. In Premise 2 (a 'No S is P' statement), both 'I' and 'Z' are distributed.
Validity rules require checking whether terms that are distributed in the conclusion were also distributed in the given premises.
3
Examine the distribution of terms in the proposed conclusion.
The proposed conclusion 'No R are I' is a universal negative proposition, which distributes both its subject ('R') and its predicate ('I').
If a term is distributed in the conclusion, it logically must have been distributed in its corresponding premise.
4
Determine the validity based on distribution rules.
The term 'R' is distributed in the conclusion but was undistributed in Premise 1. Therefore, the deduction is invalid.
This specific violation is known as the fallacy of the illicit minor. We cannot make a universal claim about all restricted traffic areas based on a premise that only provides information about a subset of them.

Anahtar Kavram

Rules of Distribution and the Fallacy of Illicit Process
Soru 424Soru

Five musicians—Harper, Ian, Jade, Kael, and Lana—are sitting around a circular stage facing the center. Jade is sitting immediately to the left of Kael. Harper is sitting exactly between Ian and Kael. Based on this arrangement, who is sitting immediately to the right of Lana?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Jade

Cevap

Jade is sitting immediately to the right of Lana.
In a circular arrangement facing the center, 'left' translates to a clockwise direction and 'right' to a counter-clockwise direction. Starting with Kael, placing Jade to the immediate left means Jade is clockwise. Because Harper is between Ian and Kael, and Jade is already on Kael's left, Harper must be seated on Kael's right (counter-clockwise), followed by Ian. This places Lana in the final empty seat, sandwiched between Ian and Jade. Following the counter-clockwise (rightward) sequence from Lana, the next person is Jade.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Determine the orientation for left and right.
Since everyone is facing the center of the circle, 'left' corresponds to the clockwise direction, and 'right' corresponds to the counter-clockwise direction.
Establishing relative directions is required before placing individuals in their seats.
2
Place Kael and Jade based on the first clue.
Jade sits immediately to the left of Kael. This means Jade is placed in the seat immediately clockwise from Kael.
This establishes a starting reference point for the arrangement.
3
Place Harper and Ian based on the second clue.
Harper is exactly between Ian and Kael. Since Jade occupies Kael's left side, Harper must be placed immediately to the right of Kael (counter-clockwise). Consequently, Ian sits immediately to the right of Harper.
To satisfy the condition of Harper being between Kael and Ian, they must be placed in sequential order on the available side of Kael.
4
Place Lana in the remaining seat and answer the question.
The only remaining seat is between Ian and Jade, so Lana sits there. In counter-clockwise order, the full circle is Kael, Harper, Ian, Lana, Jade. The person immediately to the right (counter-clockwise) of Lana is Jade.
All five seats are now filled, allowing for the direct identification of Lana's immediate right neighbor.

Anahtar Kavram

Circular seating arrangements with inward-facing relative directions.
Soru 425Soru

Read the following statements carefully.

1. All municipal water treatment facilities are classified as critical infrastructure.
2. No critical infrastructure is entirely exempt from federal oversight.
3. Some renewable energy grids are entirely exempt from federal oversight.

Which of the following conclusions logically follow from the given statements? (Select all that apply)

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: No municipal water treatment facilities are entirely exempt from federal oversight.; Some renewable energy grids are not classified as critical infrastructure.

Cevap

The valid conclusions are that no municipal water treatment facilities are entirely exempt from federal oversight, and some renewable energy grids are not classified as critical infrastructure.
The valid conclusions correctly apply deductive rules. First, a chain of universally quantified statements (All water facilities are critical; No critical infrastructure is exempt) definitively proves that No water facilities are exempt. Second, combining a particular affirmative with a universal negative (Some renewable grids are exempt; No critical infrastructure is exempt) proves that Some renewable grids are not critical infrastructure.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the logical relationship between municipal water treatment facilities and federal oversight.
All water treatment facilities are critical infrastructure, and critical infrastructure is never exempt from federal oversight. Therefore, water treatment facilities are never exempt.
This establishes the validity of the first correct conclusion using a standard hypothetical syllogism (All A are B, No B are C, therefore No A are C).
2
Analyze the logical relationship between renewable energy grids and critical infrastructure.
Some renewable energy grids are exempt from oversight, while critical infrastructure is never exempt. Therefore, the specific grids that are exempt cannot possibly be critical infrastructure.
This establishes the validity of the second correct conclusion (Some A are C, No B are C, therefore Some A are not B).
3
Evaluate the remaining options for logical fallacies.
The statement regarding all critical infrastructure being water treatment facilities incorrectly reverses the first premise. The statement linking water treatment with renewable energy assumes an unsupported overlap.
This step ensures that invalid inferences relying on flawed logic or external knowledge are successfully ruled out.

Anahtar Kavram

Statement and Conclusions or Inferences
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 426Soru

Issue Report: Structural engineers have officially warned that unauthorized and aggressive sand extraction along the embankments of the Mithi River has eroded the base of the primary flood-control barrier, putting thousands of residents at immediate risk of inundation during the approaching monsoon season.

Proposed Courses of Action:
I. The local administration should urgently dispatch law enforcement to halt all unauthorized extraction in the vicinity and commission emergency reinforcement of the barrier.
II. The state government should permanently ban all commercial sand mining activities across the entire state to ensure such structural threats do not occur elsewhere.

Based on the report, which of the proposed courses of action logically follows?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Only I follows

Cevap

Only the first proposed course of action logically follows.
The first proposed action directly addresses the localized emergency by stopping the illegal activity and repairing the immediate danger, which is a practical and necessary administrative response. The second action is a disproportionate and extreme measure; banning all commercial sand mining statewide because of unauthorized activity in one specific location would severely disrupt the state's economy and construction sector. Therefore, only the first action is a logically sound step.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the core problem presented in the issue report.
The problem is localized, unauthorized sand extraction causing immediate structural threat to a specific flood-control barrier.
Understanding the scale and urgency of the problem is required to evaluate the validity of any proposed administrative actions.
2
Evaluate Course of Action I against the problem.
Dispatching law enforcement and reinforcing the barrier directly addresses both the illegal activity and the structural damage.
A valid course of action must be practical and directly mitigate the stated issue without causing disproportionate harm.
3
Evaluate Course of Action II against the problem.
A statewide ban on all commercial sand mining is a severe overreaction to localized unauthorized mining.
Courses of action that are extreme, economically destructive, or fail to target the specific parameters of the problem are logically invalid.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating Administrative Courses of Action
Tahmini Süre:1m 15s
Soru 427Soru

Analyze the following extract from a regional infrastructure guideline and determine which of the given conclusions logically follows.

Statement: Under the new urban mobility framework, any metropolitan sector exceeding a population density of 8,000 residents per square kilometer must dedicate a minimum of 15% of its annual transit budget to pedestrian walkways.

Conclusion I: A metropolitan sector with a population density of 6,000 residents per square kilometer is not permitted to dedicate 15% of its transit budget to pedestrian walkways.
Conclusion II: If a metropolitan sector dedicates only 5% of its annual transit budget to pedestrian walkways, its population density does not exceed 8,000 residents per square kilometer.

Which of the conclusions logically follows from the given statement?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Only conclusion II follows

Cevap

Only conclusion II follows.
The correct answer accurately applies the rule of logical contraposition. If a sector exceeding the density threshold must allocate at least 15%, then any sector allocating less than 15% (such as the 5% mentioned in conclusion II) cannot possibly exceed that density threshold. Conclusion I is logically invalid because it incorrectly assumes the inverse of the statement.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the formal logical structure of the original statement.
The statement can be expressed conditionally: If Density > 8,000, then Pedestrian Budget >= 15%.
Identifying the formal conditional relationship prevents assumption-based errors and clarifies the direction of the rule.
2
Evaluate Conclusion I against the formal conditional statement.
Conclusion I assumes: If Density <= 8,000, then Pedestrian Budget cannot be 15%. This logic does not hold.
A conditional statement establishes a requirement for a specific group; it does not forbid other groups from voluntarily meeting that same criteria (the inverse fallacy).
3
Evaluate Conclusion II against the formal conditional statement.
Conclusion II states: If Pedestrian Budget is 5% (which is < 15%), then Density <= 8,000. This is logically valid.
This represents the contrapositive of the original statement. If the necessary condition (Budget >= 15%) is not met, the sufficient condition (Density > 8,000) cannot possibly be true.

Anahtar Kavram

Logical Deduction, Modus Tollens, and Conditional Statements
Soru 428Soru

Five judges—Valerie, Winston, Xavier, Yara, and Zane—are seated in a single row facing South. The chairs are numbered 1 to 5 from West to East (left to right from an observer's perspective). The following conditions apply:

• Xavier sits in the exact middle.
• Valerie sits to the immediate left of Xavier.
• Zane sits at the extreme right end of the row.
• Winston is not an immediate neighbor of Zane.

Based on this arrangement, which of the following statements are correct? (Select all that apply)

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Yara is seated in chair 2.; Winston is seated in chair 5.

Cevap

The statements confirming Yara is in chair 2 and Winston is in chair 5 are correct.
Based on the South-facing orientation, Zane is in chair 1, Yara is in chair 2, Xavier is in chair 3, Valerie is in chair 4, and Winston is in chair 5. Therefore, the statements correctly identifying Yara in chair 2 and Winston in chair 5 accurately reflect the deduced arrangement.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Determine the orientation and numbering of the chairs.
Chairs are numbered 1 to 5 from West to East. Because the judges face South, their 'right' is towards the West (chair 1) and their 'left' is towards the East (chair 5).
Establishing the correct directional frame of reference is critical before placing any individuals.
2
Place Xavier and Zane based on their absolute positions.
Xavier sits in the middle, which is chair 3. Zane sits at the extreme right end from the judges' perspective, which corresponds to chair 1 (West).
Direct absolute positional clues provide the strongest starting point.
3
Place Valerie using her relative position to Xavier.
Valerie sits to the immediate left of Xavier. Since they face South, left means East, placing Valerie in chair 4.
Connecting relative directional clues to established absolute positions continues to fill the arrangement.
4
Place Winston and Yara based on remaining constraints.
Chairs 2 and 5 are empty. Winston cannot be an immediate neighbor of Zane (chair 1), so Winston must be placed in chair 5. Yara is placed in the final remaining chair, which is chair 2.
The process of elimination resolves the final positions.

Anahtar Kavram

Linear seating arrangements with an inverted directional perspective (facing South).
Soru 429Soru

Incident Overview: During the past six months, cybersecurity agencies have recorded a 40% surge in targeted ransomware attacks against the automated flow-control systems of the state's primary water treatment facilities, raising severe alarms about potential large-scale water contamination.

Recommended Administrative Action: The regional water board should indefinitely sever all internet connectivity to the treatment plants and revert entirely to manual valve operations utilizing onsite personnel.

Logical Assessment: The recommended administrative action constitutes a practically feasible and logically sound remedy to the crisis.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: False

Cevap

False
The recommended administrative action is logically invalid (False) because it represents an extreme and disproportionate response. While cybersecurity is absolutely critical, indefinitely dismantling automated municipal infrastructure and reverting to manual labor is practically impossible for a modern regional water board and highly regressive. A logically sound course of action would instead focus on strengthening cybersecurity defenses, implementing redundant fail-safes, and upgrading firewall architectures rather than entirely abandoning digital infrastructure.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the core problem presented in the incident overview.
The primary issue is a significant increase in sophisticated cyber-attacks on automated municipal water control systems.
Understanding the exact nature of the threat is required to evaluate the appropriateness of the response.
2
Evaluate the recommended administrative action for practical feasibility and proportionality.
The recommended action is to indefinitely abandon digital networks and revert completely to manual, onsite human operations.
A valid course of action must address the problem without creating secondary crises that are worse than the original issue.
3
Apply logical reasoning to determine if the action is a sound administrative remedy.
Indefinitely abandoning automated systems is an extreme, regressive measure that would cripple modern municipal infrastructure. It is neither practically feasible nor proportionate.
Sound administrative decisions must balance security imperatives with operational sustainability and modernization.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating Administrative Proportionality and Feasibility
Soru 430Soru

Analyze the family structure based on the given statements about six individuals: H,J,K,L,M,H, J, K, L, M, and NN.

- LL is the mother of HH.
- MM is the spouse of HH, and together they have exactly two children: one son and one daughter.
- JJ is the sister of KK.
- NN is the son of KK.
- HH is a male.

Match each pair of individuals on the left with the correct relationship on the right. (The relationship defines how the first person is related to the second person).

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

NN's relation to JJ
JJ's relation to NN
LL's relation to KK
MM's relation to LL

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

N is the Nephew of J; J is the Aunt of N; L is the Grandmother of K; M is the Daughter-in-law of L.
Based on the family tree deduced: L (Generation 1) is the mother of H. H (Generation 2) is married to M, making M the daughter-in-law of L. H and M have two children: J (daughter) and K (son). L is the mother of K's father, making L the grandmother. N (Generation 4) is the son of K. J is the sister of N's father, making J the aunt. N is the son of J's brother, making N the nephew.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Determine the gender and relationship of H and M.
H is explicitly male and M is his spouse, making M his wife.
This establishes the parental unit of the second generation.
2
Determine the genders of the children, J and K.
J is female (she is a sister) and K is male (he is a brother).
H and M have exactly one son and one daughter. Since J is the sister of K, J must be the daughter, leaving K to be the only son.
3
Map the inter-generational links to form the full tree.
L is the mother of H (Generation 1). H and M are Generation 2. J and K are Generation 3. N is the son of K, making N Generation 4.
Building the complete family tree is necessary to accurately evaluate the specific relationship pairs.
4
Evaluate each relationship pair based on the complete tree.
N is J's nephew. J is N's aunt. L is K's grandmother. M is L's daughter-in-law.
These match exactly with the provided relationship options.

Anahtar Kavram

Multi-generational Family Tree Analysis and Directional Relationships
Soru 431Soru

Consider the following directives and observation regarding highway transport:

1. Any commercial vehicle transporting hazardous chemicals must display a prominent Class-9 warning placard.
2. A commercial vehicle traveling on the northern expressway is currently displaying a prominent Class-9 warning placard.

Conclusion: The commercial vehicle traveling on the northern expressway is transporting hazardous chemicals.

The conclusion logically follows from the provided directives and observation.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: False

Cevap

False. The conclusion does not logically follow from the given statements.
The deduction commits the formal logical fallacy of affirming the consequent. The first statement dictates that carrying hazardous chemicals guarantees the presence of a placard, but it does not state that the presence of a placard guarantees the vehicle is actively carrying hazardous chemicals.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the logical structure of the first statement.
It forms a conditional statement: If transporting hazardous chemicals (Condition A), then display Class-9 placard (Condition B).
To establish the exact boundaries of the rule provided in the prompt.
2
Analyze the observation provided in the second statement.
The observation confirms that Condition B is present (the placard is displayed).
To determine what known facts can be applied to the rule.
3
Evaluate the conclusion against formal logical rules.
The conclusion asserts that because Condition B is present, Condition A must be occurring. This is an invalid deduction.
Affirming the consequent (assuming 'If A then B' means 'If B then A') is a formal logical fallacy.

Anahtar Kavram

Logical Deduction and the Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent
Soru 432Soru

A cyber-security researcher is mapping relationships between different cryptographic systems based on the following definitive premises:

1. All theoretical omni-ciphers are unbreakable algorithms.
2. No unbreakable algorithms are publicly audited protocols.
3. Some publicly audited protocols are legacy systems.

Applying modern formal logic principles, which of the following conclusions logically follow? (Select all valid deductions)

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: No theoretical omni-ciphers are publicly audited protocols.; Some legacy systems are not unbreakable algorithms.

Cevap

The valid logical deductions are that no theoretical omni-ciphers are publicly audited protocols, and some legacy systems are not unbreakable algorithms.
The valid conclusions depend on chaining the categorical premises together. Because all theoretical omni-ciphers fall into the category of unbreakable algorithms, and no unbreakable algorithms intersect with publicly audited protocols, the two categories are entirely disjoint. Furthermore, since some publicly audited protocols are legacy systems, those specific legacy systems cannot belong to the unbreakable category.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Map the categorical propositions to formal variables
Let O = Theoretical omni-ciphers, U = Unbreakable algorithms, P = Publicly audited protocols, L = Legacy systems. Premises: (1) All O are U. (2) No U are P. (3) Some P are L.
Translating statements into variables prevents real-world bias and clarifies strict logical boundaries.
2
Combine Premises 1 and 2 to evaluate the relationship between O and P
If All O are U, and No U are P, then No O are P. This confirms the deduction that no theoretical omni-ciphers are publicly audited protocols.
The transitive property of universal categorical syllogisms dictates that a subset inherits the universal exclusions of its superset.
3
Combine Premises 2 and 3 to evaluate the relationship between L and U
If Some P are L, and No U are P (which means No P are U), then Some L are not U. This confirms the deduction that some legacy systems are not unbreakable algorithms.
Applying a particular affirmative premise with a universal negative premise always yields a particular negative conclusion.
4
Evaluate remaining options for formal logical fallacies
Reject the claim that 'All U are O' as an illicit conversion. Reject the claim that 'At least one O exists' as an existential fallacy.
Logical deductions must strictly follow from the premises without assuming unstated converses or assuming the physical existence of theoretical subjects.

Anahtar Kavram

Categorical Syllogisms, Existential Fallacy, and Illicit Conversion
Soru 433Soru

Six friends—Hassan, Imran, Jamal, Kabir, Latif, and Momin—are watching a movie, seated in a single row of six chairs facing the screen (North). Their seating arrangement is as follows:

- Imran is sitting at the extreme right end of the row.
- Latif is sitting second to the left of Imran.
- Jamal is sitting exactly between Kabir and Latif.
- Hassan is sitting immediately to the left of Kabir.

Based on the above information, who is sitting at the extreme left end of the row?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Hassan

Cevap

Hassan is sitting at the extreme left end of the row.
By mapping the 6 seats from left to right (numbered 1 to 6), we know Imran is at position 6. Latif is second to the left of Imran, making Latif at position 4. Jamal is exactly between Kabir and Latif, so Jamal must be at 3 and Kabir at 2. Hassan is immediately to the left of Kabir, putting Hassan at 1. The sequence from left to right is Hassan, Kabir, Jamal, Latif, Momin, and Imran. The extreme left position is 1, which is occupied by Hassan.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Set up the seating positions and place the explicitly anchored person.
Create positions 1 to 6 from left to right. Place Imran at position 6 (extreme right).
Starting with a definitive end position provides a solid anchor for the rest of the arrangement.
2
Place Latif relative to Imran.
Place Latif at position 4.
Latif is second to the left of Imran. Moving two spots left from position 6 lands on position 4.
3
Determine the positions for Jamal and Kabir.
Place Jamal at position 3 and Kabir at position 2.
Jamal is exactly between Kabir and Latif. Since Latif is at position 4, the only way Jamal can be exactly in the middle is if Jamal is at position 3 and Kabir is at position 2.
4
Place Hassan based on Kabir's position.
Place Hassan at position 1.
Hassan is immediately to the left of Kabir. Since Kabir is at position 2, Hassan must be at position 1.
5
Identify the person at the extreme left end.
The person at position 1 is Hassan.
The question asks for the person sitting at the extreme left end of the row, which corresponds to position 1.

Anahtar Kavram

Linear Seating Arrangement
Soru 434Soru

Statement: Recent independent laboratory tests have confirmed that a massive consignment of fortified grain supplied to the state's public distribution network across four districts contains dangerous levels of synthetic adulterants.

Courses of Action:
I. The food safety department should immediately halt the distribution of the current consignment, seal the regional warehouses, and arrange for an alternative supply of safe grain.
II. The state police should immediately arrest all retail shop owners operating under the public distribution network in these four districts to prevent further sales.

Which of the following logically follows from the given statement and courses of action?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Only Course of Action I follows

Cevap

Only the first course of action logically follows as a sound administrative decision.
The option stating 'Only Course of Action I follows' is correct because halting the distribution of contaminated food and securing an alternative supply is a practical, direct, and proportionate response to the crisis. It addresses both the health hazard and the public's need for food.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the problem presented in the statement.
The core problem is a public health threat due to adulterated grain circulating in a government distribution network.
Understanding the exact nature and scale of the problem is required to evaluate the feasibility of the proposed solutions.
2
Evaluate Course of Action I against administrative principles.
Halting distribution, sealing warehouses, and finding alternative supplies directly mitigates the health risk and solves the immediate supply issue without violating any procedures.
Valid courses of action must be practical, solve the immediate problem, and follow standard crisis management protocols.
3
Evaluate Course of Action II against administrative principles.
Arresting all retail owners is an extreme, punitive measure against downstream endpoints who likely did not adulterate the state-supplied grain. A formal investigation must precede any arrests.
Administrative actions must not be disproportionate, reactionary, or bypass legal investigation protocols.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating the feasibility, proportionality, and procedural validity of administrative responses to a crisis.
Soru 435Soru

Six startup founders—Alice, Bob, Charlie, Diana, Ethan, and Fiona—are sitting in a straight row facing the audience during a panel discussion. The seats are numbered 1 to 6 from left to right.

Based on the following conditions, arrange the founders in the correct order from seat 1 (far left) to seat 6 (far right):
- Fiona is seated at one of the extreme ends of the row.
- Charlie sits exactly halfway between Alice and Fiona.
- Alice is seated third to the left of Diana.
- Bob is seated immediately next to Ethan.
- Ethan does not sit next to Diana.

Arrange the founders in their correct seating order from left to right.

Öğeleri doğru sıraya koymak için sürükleyin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The correct order from seat 1 to seat 6 is Fiona, Charlie, Alice, Ethan, Bob, and Diana.
The sequence must satisfy all constraints simultaneously. Fiona at an extreme end with Charlie halfway between her and Alice forces them into seats 1, 2, and 3. Alice being third to the left of Diana safely places Diana at seat 6. Finally, Ethan and Bob occupy seats 4 and 5, with Ethan at 4 to avoid sitting next to Diana.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Determine the possible positions for Fiona, Charlie, and Alice.
Fiona is at seat 1, Charlie at seat 2, and Alice at seat 3.
Fiona is at an extreme end (1 or 6). If Fiona is at 6 and Charlie is halfway between her and Alice, they could occupy 6, 5, 4 (F, C, A) or 6, 4, 2 (F, C, A). If Alice is at 4, Diana must be at 7 (4+3=7), which is impossible. If Alice is at 2, Diana is at 5, leaving seats 1 and 3 empty. Bob and Ethan must be adjacent, but seats 1 and 3 are separated. Thus, Fiona must be at seat 1, forcing Charlie to seat 2 and Alice to seat 3.
2
Determine Diana's position based on Alice.
Diana is at seat 6.
Alice is at seat 3. Since Alice is third to the left of Diana, Diana must be placed three seats to the right of Alice (3 + 3 = 6).
3
Place Ethan and Bob in the remaining seats.
Ethan is at seat 4 and Bob is at seat 5.
The only remaining empty seats are 4 and 5. Bob and Ethan must sit together. Since Ethan cannot sit next to Diana (who is at seat 6), Ethan cannot be at seat 5. Therefore, Ethan must sit at seat 4, leaving seat 5 for Bob.

Anahtar Kavram

Linear seating arrangement with relative positioning and exclusion criteria
Soru 436Soru

Evaluate the statements regarding agricultural export protocols and the subsequent conclusions.

Statement 1: Under the revised National Agricultural Export Policy of 2026, all shipments of organic mangoes destined for the European market must undergo a mandatory hot water treatment to eliminate fruit fly larvae.
Statement 2: The Horizon Agrotech cooperative has successfully exported 50 metric tons of organic mangoes to the European market this month in full compliance with the new policy framework.

Conclusion I: The mangoes exported by the Horizon Agrotech cooperative this month were subjected to hot water treatment prior to shipment.
Conclusion II: The European market has enacted a strict import ban on conventionally grown (non-organic) mangoes due to the risk of fruit fly larvae.

Which of the given conclusions logically follows from the statements?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Conclusion I alone is logically valid

Cevap

The correct evaluation is that Conclusion I alone is logically valid.
The correct answer identifies that only the first conclusion is a valid logical deduction. Statement 1 establishes an absolute condition: all shipments of organic mangoes to the European market must undergo hot water treatment. Statement 2 confirms that the cooperative successfully exported such a shipment under this policy. Therefore, it is a direct and necessary logical inference that this specific shipment underwent the treatment (Conclusion I). Conclusion II introduces external concepts about non-organic mangoes and import bans which are not mentioned in the text.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze Statement 1 to identify the universal rule being established.
The rule states: If organic mangoes are exported to the European market under the 2026 policy, then they must undergo hot water treatment.
Establishing the logical premise is necessary to determine what conditions must be met.
2
Analyze Statement 2 to identify the specific case provided.
The case states: Horizon Agrotech exported organic mangoes to the European market under the new policy.
Connecting the specific case to the universal rule allows for direct logical deduction.
3
Evaluate Conclusion I against the synthesized facts.
Conclusion I states the cooperative's mangoes were treated. Because the case fulfills the 'if' condition of the rule in Step 1, the 'then' condition must logically follow. Conclusion I is valid.
This confirms the conclusion is derived strictly from the given statements.
4
Evaluate Conclusion II against the synthesized facts.
Conclusion II discusses policies regarding conventionally grown (non-organic) mangoes. The original statements provide zero information about non-organic agricultural exports or total bans.
Identifying missing information confirms that the conclusion requires unwarranted assumptions and is therefore invalid.

Anahtar Kavram

Applying deductive logic to extract direct inferences while avoiding unwarranted assumptions about unstated scenarios.
Soru 437Soru

In a certain artificial language used for genealogical tracking, familial relationships are denoted by mathematical symbols as follows:

XYX \star Y signifies that XX is the biological father of YY.
XYX \bullet Y signifies that XX is the biological mother of YY.
XYX \diamond Y signifies that XX is the brother of YY.
XYX \circ Y signifies that XX is the sister of YY.

Evaluate the genealogical string PQRSTP \bullet Q \diamond R \star S \circ T. Which of the following accurately describes the relationship of QQ to TT?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Paternal uncle

Cevap

Paternal uncle
In the given expression, tracing from right to left reveals that SS and TT are siblings. Moving to the next element, RR is the father of SS, which means RR is also the father of TT. Further left, QQ is the brother of RR. The brother of a person's father is their paternal uncle. Therefore, QQ is the paternal uncle of TT.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the relationship at the right end of the string between S and T.
STS \circ T means SS is the sister of TT. They are siblings, but TT's gender remains completely undetermined.
To establish the generational baseline and identify the youngest generation.
2
Analyze the relationship of R to S and T.
RSR \star S means RR is the father of SS. Because SS and TT are siblings, RR is also the father of TT.
To move up one generation and identify the common parent of the siblings.
3
Analyze the relationship of Q to R.
QRQ \diamond R means QQ is the brother of RR.
To establish QQ's generational level and relationship to TT's father.
4
Determine the final relationship from Q to T.
Since QQ is the brother of RR, and RR is the father of TT, QQ is the brother of TT's father. This makes QQ the paternal uncle of TT.
To connect the full chain and directly answer the specific question asked.

Anahtar Kavram

Coded Blood Relations and Generational Tracing
Soru 438Soru

Read the given statements carefully and determine which of the conclusions logically follows.

Statement 1: Under the 'Digital Panchayat' policy, rural broadband funding is disbursed only to village councils that have fully digitized their financial records for the preceding three years.
Statement 2: The Haripur village council recently received rural broadband funding under this policy.

Conclusions:
I. The Haripur village council has fully digitized its financial records for the preceding three years.
II. The primary objective of the 'Digital Panchayat' policy is to promote financial transparency in village administration.

Which of the following options is correct?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Only Conclusion I follows

Cevap

Only Conclusion I follows
Conclusion I is a direct logical deduction because Statement 1 establishes digitizing financial records as an absolute prerequisite ('only to') for funding. Since Statement 2 confirms Haripur received funding, they must have fulfilled this prerequisite. Conclusion II introduces unstated information about the policy's primary objective, which cannot be logically derived from the text.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the logical structure of Statement 1.
The phrase 'disbursed only to' creates a necessary condition. It implies that receiving funding guarantees the village council has fully digitized its records.
Identifying necessary and sufficient conditions is required to evaluate logical deductions accurately.
2
Evaluate Conclusion I against the statements.
Statement 2 confirms Haripur received the funding. Based on the rule in Statement 1, Haripur must have met the necessary condition. Therefore, Conclusion I is logically valid.
Applying the specific case from Statement 2 to the general rule in Statement 1 verifies the conclusion.
3
Evaluate Conclusion II against the statements.
Conclusion II introduces the 'primary objective' of the policy. The given statements only outline a funding prerequisite, not the intent or ultimate goals of the policy. Therefore, Conclusion II does not follow.
Valid conclusions must be derived strictly from the provided text, without bringing in external real-world assumptions.

Anahtar Kavram

Logical Deduction from Conditional Statements
Soru 439Soru

According to the definitive rules of a stellar taxonomy system, every pulsar is categorized as a neutron star, and certain neutron stars are simultaneously classified as magnetars.

From these conditions alone, it is logically valid to deduce that at least some pulsars must be magnetars.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: False

Cevap

The statement is false because the deduction is logically invalid due to an undistributed middle term.
The deduction is logically invalid. In syllogistic logic, the middle term linking two concepts must be distributed in at least one premise. Since 'neutron star' is not distributed in either premise, we cannot definitively link pulsars and magnetars.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Translate the given conditions into standard categorical propositions.
Premise 1: All Pulsars are Neutron Stars (All P are N). Premise 2: Some Neutron Stars are Magnetars (Some N are M). Conclusion: Some Pulsars are Magnetars (Some P are M).
Standardizing the propositions makes it easier to apply the formal rules of syllogistic logic.
2
Identify the middle term that connects the two premises.
The middle term is 'Neutron Stars' (N).
The middle term is crucial because its distribution determines whether a link can be formed between the major and minor terms.
3
Evaluate the distribution of the middle term in both premises.
In 'All P are N', 'N' is the predicate of a universal affirmative proposition, so it is undistributed. In 'Some N are M', 'N' is the subject of a particular affirmative proposition, so it is also undistributed.
A valid syllogism requires the middle term to be distributed (referring to the entire class) in at least one premise.
4
Determine the validity of the deduction based on the distribution.
Because the middle term is never distributed, the deduction is invalid.
Without a distributed middle term, it is entirely possible for 'Pulsars' and 'Magnetars' to occupy completely separate portions of the 'Neutron Stars' category.

Anahtar Kavram

Categorical Syllogisms and the Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle
Soru 440Soru

The State Board of Industrial Development (SBID) allocates industrial plots in the "Tech-Park Zone".

Criteria for allocation of an industrial plot, as of August 14, 2026, are as follows.
An applicant company must:
1. Have a registered corporate office in the state for at least the last 5 years.
2. Have an annual turnover of not less than ₹50 Crores in the last financial year (2025-2026).
3. Guarantee direct employment generation for at least 150 local residents.
4. Have an approved eco-friendly waste management plan certified by the State Pollution Control Board (SPCB).
5. Deposit an initial earnest money of ₹10 Lakhs.

Exceptions:
However, if an applicant company satisfies all the above criteria EXCEPT:
(A) at (2) above, but is a recognized "Green-Tech Startup" registered under the Central Startup Scheme, the case is referred to the Secretary of SBID.
(B) at (3) above, but guarantees to invest more than ₹20 Crores in automated robotic manufacturing, the case is referred to the Tech-Park Director.
(C) at (4) above, but has deposited an additional environmental security fund of ₹5 Lakhs, the case is referred to the Environmental Compliance Committee (ECC).

"Zenith Eco-Systems" was registered and established its corporate office in the state in May 2019. The company's annual turnover in the 2025-2026 financial year was ₹75 Crores. It has an SPCB-certified waste management plan and has successfully deposited the ₹10 Lakhs earnest money. The company guarantees direct employment for 120 local residents, and to offset this, has submitted a binding guarantee to invest ₹25 Crores exclusively in automated robotic manufacturing.

Based on the information above, what administrative decision should be taken regarding this application?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The case should be referred to the Tech-Park Director.

Cevap

The case should be referred to the Tech-Park Director.
The company satisfies all primary criteria except for criterion 3 (employment generation), as it only provides 120 jobs instead of the required 150. However, because the company guarantees an investment of ₹25 Crores exclusively in automated robotic manufacturing, it satisfies the condition of the second exception. According to this exception rule, such cases must be referred to the Tech-Park Director.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Evaluate Criterion 1 (Corporate office for 5 years)
Satisfied
The company was registered in May 2019, which is over 7 years ago as of August 2026.
2
Evaluate Criterion 2 (Turnover ≥ ₹50 Crores)
Satisfied
The company's turnover in the 2025-2026 financial year was ₹75 Crores.
3
Evaluate Criterion 3 (Employment ≥ 150)
Failed
The company only guarantees direct employment for 120 local residents.
4
Evaluate Criterion 4 (SPCB-certified plan) and Criterion 5 (₹10 Lakh deposit)
Satisfied
The company possesses the required SPCB certificate and has successfully deposited the earnest money.
5
Check for applicable exceptions for the failed criterion
The second exception applies
The company fails only criterion 3 and meets the specific exception condition by guaranteeing a ₹25 Crores investment in automated robotic manufacturing. Therefore, the prescribed action is a referral to the Tech-Park Director.

Anahtar Kavram

Applying multiple conditional rules and exception protocols in administrative scenarios to reach a procedural decision.
ÖncekiSayfa 22 / 25Sonraki
Logical Reasoning and Analytical Ability Alıştırma Soruları — State PSC Exam — Sayfa 22 | Examkin