• EMPOWERgmat Slider
    1 Hour Free
    BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    EMPOWERgmat Slider
  • Varsity Tutors
    Award-winning private GMAT tutoring
    Register now and save up to $200

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Varsity Tutors
  • e-gmat Exclusive Offer
    Get 300+ Practice Questions
    25 Video lessons and 6 Webinars for FREE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    e-gmat Exclusive Offer
  • Kaplan Test Prep
    Free Practice Test & Review
    How would you score if you took the GMAT

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Kaplan Test Prep
  • Target Test Prep
    5-Day Free Trial
    5-day free, full-access trial TTP Quant

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Target Test Prep
  • Magoosh
    Magoosh
    Study with Magoosh GMAT prep

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Magoosh
  • Economist Test Prep
    Free Trial & Practice Exam
    BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Economist Test Prep
  • Veritas Prep
    Free Veritas GMAT Class
    Experience Lesson 1 Live Free

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Veritas Prep
  • PrepScholar GMAT
    5 Day FREE Trial
    Study Smarter, Not Harder

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    PrepScholar GMAT

A CR -- less articles

This topic has 3 expert replies and 3 member replies
zoe Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
04 Apr 2016
Posted:
113 messages
Upvotes:
1

A CR -- less articles

Post Sun Jun 12, 2016 5:48 pm
Dear friends,
Please help explain A,B, D,
thanks in advance.

Journalist: In physics journals, the number of articles reporting the results of experiments involving particle accelerators was lower last year than it had been in previous years. Several of the particle accelerators at major research institutions were out of service the year before last for repairs, so it is likely that the low number of articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the journalist's argument?
(A) Every article based on experiments with particle accelerators that was submitted for publication last year actually was published.
(B) The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last several years.
(C) The number of physics journals was the same last year as in previous years.
(D) Particle accelerators can be used for more than one group of experiments in any given year.
(E) Recent changes in the editorial policies of several physics journals have decreased the likelihood that articles concerning particle-accelerator research will be accepted for publication


IMO:
(A) says one reason that cause low number of articles, so I think (A) can weaken the argument. while, OG says (A) eliminates the 3rd cause to rend support. I cannot get the OG's idea,
(B) says the waiting time decline, seems more chance to get accelerators, so I think it weaken the argument.
(D) says the accelerators can be used multi-experiments, that weaken the "decline availability", so I think (D) can weaken the argument as well.

please clarify my errors.

waiting for your reply.

thanks so much.
have a nice day.

>_~

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Need free GMAT or MBA advice from an expert? Register for Beat The GMAT now and post your question in these forums!
Top Reply
Post Fri Jun 17, 2016 6:58 am
Quote:
for A, i totally agree with you, but i am afraid i need more help because i haven't getten the idea why A is incorrect, i thought again and again after reading your explanation on A, would you please point out my fault...
(A) Every article based on experiments with particle accelerators that was submitted for publication last year actually was published
in a short , every article that was submitted acutally was published...
I think A means that articles cann't be published because they was published before, that the 3rd reason cause low number of articles...

if we want to weaken the conclusion, we can find/show 3rd cause which can cause the effect..
in this question, the cause = low avialibility of accelerator, effect = low nomber of articles,
you can realize, A shows a 3rd cause that cause the low number of articles. that's why i think A weaken the argument.
while both you and OA think A strengthen the argument..
i don't know what is my fault
The conclusion of the argument is "it is likely that the low number of articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators." But the articles in question are "articles reporting the results of experiments." The assumption that we're being asked to make is that lower availability of accelerators last year --> lead to fewer experiments performed last year --> lead to fewer articles published last year.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by
Quote:
I think A means that articles cann't be published because they was published before, that the 3rd reason cause low number of articles...
The entire scope of the argument is what happened last year. If last year every accelerator yielded the same number of experiments performed, and every experiment performed yielded one article written, and every article written was published, this chain of logic would hold. I think you're maybe interpreting A as a comparison to some other time period?

_________________


Ceilidh Erickson
Manhattan Prep GMAT & GRE instructor
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education


Manhattan Prep instructors all have 99th+ percentile scores and expert teaching experience.
Sign up for a FREE TRIAL, and learn why we have the highest ratings in the GMAT industry!

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Free Manhattan Prep online events - The first class of every online Manhattan Prep course is free. Classes start every week.
zoe Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
04 Apr 2016
Posted:
113 messages
Upvotes:
1
Top Reply
Post Fri Jun 17, 2016 9:01 pm
ceilidh.erickson wrote:
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by
I think A means that articles cann't be published because they was published before, that the 3rd reason cause low number of articles...
ceilidh.erickson wrote:
The entire scope of the argument is what happened last year. If last year every accelerator yielded the same number of experiments performed, and every experiment performed yielded one article written, and every article written was published, this chain of logic would hold. I think you're maybe interpreting A as a comparison to some other time period?
thanks so much again Ceilidh,

I think I know why you didn't catch what I say.

obviously you think of this question as a chain issue, I did not realize that at beginning, thank you for your mention. also, I read all links you told me, all these links are chain flaws in the questions.

I think of this question as a cause - effect question, because here is a obviously indicator "due to". so the cause is decine availability, the effect is low number of articles...

i have read both BIBLE and MANHATTAN, one difference between these two is that cause effect question is one type in BIBLE, while there is no CE (cause effect)type in MANHATTAN.

maybe that's why you did not catch what i say.

I like your excellect explanation...it helped a lot.

i just want to know why A is incorrect if consider it a CE question, because i am weak on CE questions, always can't distinguish Weaken or strengthen choices..
so bad.....and hope to overcome it.

thank you for your excellent explanation and your patience.

it will be great appreciate if you can point out my flaw if consider it CE question.

have a nice day
>_~

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Post Fri Jun 17, 2016 6:58 am
Quote:
for A, i totally agree with you, but i am afraid i need more help because i haven't getten the idea why A is incorrect, i thought again and again after reading your explanation on A, would you please point out my fault...
(A) Every article based on experiments with particle accelerators that was submitted for publication last year actually was published
in a short , every article that was submitted acutally was published...
I think A means that articles cann't be published because they was published before, that the 3rd reason cause low number of articles...

if we want to weaken the conclusion, we can find/show 3rd cause which can cause the effect..
in this question, the cause = low avialibility of accelerator, effect = low nomber of articles,
you can realize, A shows a 3rd cause that cause the low number of articles. that's why i think A weaken the argument.
while both you and OA think A strengthen the argument..
i don't know what is my fault
The conclusion of the argument is "it is likely that the low number of articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators." But the articles in question are "articles reporting the results of experiments." The assumption that we're being asked to make is that lower availability of accelerators last year --> lead to fewer experiments performed last year --> lead to fewer articles published last year.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by
Quote:
I think A means that articles cann't be published because they was published before, that the 3rd reason cause low number of articles...
The entire scope of the argument is what happened last year. If last year every accelerator yielded the same number of experiments performed, and every experiment performed yielded one article written, and every article written was published, this chain of logic would hold. I think you're maybe interpreting A as a comparison to some other time period?

_________________


Ceilidh Erickson
Manhattan Prep GMAT & GRE instructor
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education


Manhattan Prep instructors all have 99th+ percentile scores and expert teaching experience.
Sign up for a FREE TRIAL, and learn why we have the highest ratings in the GMAT industry!

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Free Manhattan Prep online events - The first class of every online Manhattan Prep course is free. Classes start every week.
zoe Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
04 Apr 2016
Posted:
113 messages
Upvotes:
1
Post Fri Jun 17, 2016 9:01 pm
ceilidh.erickson wrote:
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by
I think A means that articles cann't be published because they was published before, that the 3rd reason cause low number of articles...
ceilidh.erickson wrote:
The entire scope of the argument is what happened last year. If last year every accelerator yielded the same number of experiments performed, and every experiment performed yielded one article written, and every article written was published, this chain of logic would hold. I think you're maybe interpreting A as a comparison to some other time period?
thanks so much again Ceilidh,

I think I know why you didn't catch what I say.

obviously you think of this question as a chain issue, I did not realize that at beginning, thank you for your mention. also, I read all links you told me, all these links are chain flaws in the questions.

I think of this question as a cause - effect question, because here is a obviously indicator "due to". so the cause is decine availability, the effect is low number of articles...

i have read both BIBLE and MANHATTAN, one difference between these two is that cause effect question is one type in BIBLE, while there is no CE (cause effect)type in MANHATTAN.

maybe that's why you did not catch what i say.

I like your excellect explanation...it helped a lot.

i just want to know why A is incorrect if consider it a CE question, because i am weak on CE questions, always can't distinguish Weaken or strengthen choices..
so bad.....and hope to overcome it.

thank you for your excellent explanation and your patience.

it will be great appreciate if you can point out my flaw if consider it CE question.

have a nice day
>_~

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
zoe Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
04 Apr 2016
Posted:
113 messages
Upvotes:
1
Post Thu Jun 16, 2016 6:54 pm
ceilidh.erickson wrote:
This question is #69 in OG2016.

If we're asked to UNDERMINE (weaken) an argument, we first must find the logical flaw between the premises and conclusion.

Premises:
- the number of articles was lower last year
- several particle accelerators were out of service

Conclusion:
- fewer articles = due to decline in activity of particle accelerators

Logical Gaps:
- does the number of articles directly correlate to the number of experiments? Or might there be some other factor influencing what these journals want to publish? Quality of experiments, general interest, the state of the publishing industry, etc.
- does the number of accelerators directly influence the number of experiments conducted? Or could there have been more total experiments performed, even if a few accelerators were out of service?

We need a new piece of information that disrupts the assumption that number of accelerators --> number of experiments --> number of articles.

(A) Every article based on experiments with particle accelerators that was submitted for publication last year actually was published.
This would actually strengthen the argument, by giving us a direct connection between number of articles and number of experiments. That's the opposite of what we're looking for.

Quote:
(A) says one reason that cause low number of articles, so I think (A) can weaken the argument
To your question - this isn't giving us a different explanation than the journalist's, because it's an extension of the same causation chain: number of accelerators --> number of experiments --> number of articles

thanks ceilidh, thanks for your excellent explanation.

for A, i totally agree with you, but i am afraid i need more help because i haven't getten the idea why A is incorrect, i thought again and again after reading your explanation on A, would you please point out my fault...
(A) Every article based on experiments with particle accelerators that was submitted for publication last year actually was published
in a short , every article that was submitted acutally was published...
I think A means that articles cann't be published because they was published before, that the 3rd reason cause low number of articles...

if we want to weaken the conclusion, we can find/show 3rd cause which can cause the effect..
in this question, the cause = low avialibility of accelerator, effect = low nomber of articles,
you can realize, A shows a 3rd cause that cause the low number of articles. that's why i think A weaken the argument.
while both you and OA think A strengthen the argument..
i don't know what is my fault

please help again..

thanks a lot
have a nice day
>_~

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
800_or_bust Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
26 Apr 2014
Posted:
199 messages
Followed by:
4 members
Upvotes:
16
Test Date:
7/9/2016
GMAT Score:
780
Post Tue Jun 14, 2016 10:03 am
zoe wrote:
Dear friends,
Please help explain A,B, D,
thanks in advance.

Journalist: In physics journals, the number of articles reporting the results of experiments involving particle accelerators was lower last year than it had been in previous years. Several of the particle accelerators at major research institutions were out of service the year before last for repairs, so it is likely that the low number of articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the journalist's argument?
(A) Every article based on experiments with particle accelerators that was submitted for publication last year actually was published.
(B) The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last several years.
(C) The number of physics journals was the same last year as in previous years.
(D) Particle accelerators can be used for more than one group of experiments in any given year.
(E) Recent changes in the editorial policies of several physics journals have decreased the likelihood that articles concerning particle-accelerator research will be accepted for publication


IMO:
(A) says one reason that cause low number of articles, so I think (A) can weaken the argument. while, OG says (A) eliminates the 3rd cause to rend support. I cannot get the OG's idea,
(B) says the waiting time decline, seems more chance to get accelerators, so I think it weaken the argument.
(D) says the accelerators can be used multi-experiments, that weaken the "decline availability", so I think (D) can weaken the argument as well.

please clarify my errors.

waiting for your reply.

thanks so much.
have a nice day.

>_~
The correct answer is actually E. The remaining answer choices are irrelevant to the argument presented in the passage.

_________________
800 or bust!

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag

Best Conversation Starters

1 lheiannie07 112 topics
2 swerve 64 topics
3 LUANDATO 64 topics
4 ardz24 61 topics
5 AAPL 57 topics
See More Top Beat The GMAT Members...

Most Active Experts

1 image description Scott@TargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep

227 posts
2 image description Brent@GMATPrepNow

GMAT Prep Now Teacher

176 posts
3 image description Jeff@TargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep

168 posts
4 image description Rich.C@EMPOWERgma...

EMPOWERgmat

138 posts
5 image description GMATGuruNY

The Princeton Review Teacher

129 posts
See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts