IMO:B

D

Only choice D relates to Color difference in weeds and crops...

A is irrelevant as it distinguishes between Colors of different weeds.. not the color difference between weeds and crops...

D, the others are out of scope

IMO D

Next one is as follows :

A company plans to develop a prototype weeding machine that uses cutting blades with optical sensors and microprocessors that distinguish weeds from crop plants by differences in shade of color. The inventor of the machine claims that it will reduce labor costs by virtually eliminating the need for manual weeding.

Which of the following is a consideration in favor of the company’s implementing its plan to develop the prototype?

A. There is a considerable degree of variation in shade of color between weeds of different species. ... Irrelevant .. we are looking for shade between plant and weed

B. The shade of color of some plants tends to change appreciably over the course of their growing season. ..Irrelevant .. we are looking for shade between plant and weed

C. When crops are weeded manually, overall size and leaf shape are taken into account in distinguishing crop plants from weeds. ... Don't know what to deduce from this

D. Selection and genetic manipulation allow plants of virtually any species to be economically bred to have a distinctive shade of color without altering their other characteristics. ... Right answer.. If this were true, even if the plant and weed have same color, plant can be modified to have a different color and thus enable the use of prototype.

E. Farm laborers who are responsible for the manual weeding of crops carry out other agricultural duties at times in the growing season when extensive weeding is not necessary. ... Again. irrevelant

Yes the OA for the previous one is D as explained by Madhur.

Here is the next one.

In this case, we know that

actor = exuberant
exuberant = extroverted

Therefore
actor = extroverted

We also know that

[some] shy = actors

So therefore
[some] shy = actors = exuberant = extroverted

A) Some shy people are extroverts.

This must be true, since some shy people are actors and all actors are extroverts. Eliminate.

B) Some shy extroverts are not actors.

This could be true, but it doesn't need to be so it is the correct answer. All shy extroverts could be actors, and we could still fulfill the question that there are some shy actors.

C) Some exuberant people who are actors are shy.

This must be true. If actors = exuberant and some actors = shy, then some shy = exuberant.

D) All people who are not extroverts are not actors.

This must be true. We know that actors = extroverts (and vice versa) so if someone is NOT an extroverts, then they cannot, by definition, be an actor, since an actor must be an extrovert.

E) Some extroverts are shy.

This must be true, since some actors are shy and all actors = extroverts.


IMO the answer is B. This one feels like math...

IMO E

Answer is B.

Yes the answer is B

Agree with myohmy, this one was more mathematical than logical.

Here goes the next one.

Well to narrow this down.The fight is between A and B.I look forward for some good discussion with this one.

good question (finally) its B ...the stem says MUST be true.

Pretty close A and B ..But would go with A . [--This answer from me is for Fredida and Erik' sreponse one ---]

IMO:A

would go for B.
if Erik counters Frieda's argument, he should have shown an alternate method to prevent damage from overloaded circuits since he claims overloaded circuits cause more damage than lightning does

this is interesting, I would wait for some more answer

Karan,

Answer might be A or C.