IMO E
There are four distinct sets
1.explosive-alert
2.explosive-no alert
3.no explosive-alert
4.no explosive-no alert
Clearly sets (1&2) are independent of sets (3&4). The author has given information only on (3&4) and proceeds to draw a conclusion about (1&2) which is flawed. Hence the answer.
airport
-
heshamelaziry
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 869
- Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 3:49 pm
- Location: California
- Thanked: 13 times
- Followed by:3 members
There is no OA here or at thegmatclub.com, but guys who support E seem quite confident. I read all explanation for E, but don't understand what probability ahs to do with the question?
Anyone one would like to give a down to earth explanation? easy and straightforward.
Anyone one would like to give a down to earth explanation? easy and straightforward.
-
mehravikas
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1161
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 2:52 am
- Location: Sydney
- Thanked: 23 times
- Followed by:1 members
-
heshamelaziry
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 869
- Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 3:49 pm
- Location: California
- Thanked: 13 times
- Followed by:3 members
that's say we have 100 baggage all without explosive!!!
and detector gave false alarm to 1 baggage...
but the argument states that 99 baggage will have explosive ...
it clearly substitutes one group for a different group!
and detector gave false alarm to 1 baggage...
but the argument states that 99 baggage will have explosive ...
it clearly substitutes one group for a different group!
Last edited by mariah on Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
heshamelaziry
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 869
- Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 3:49 pm
- Location: California
- Thanked: 13 times
- Followed by:3 members
mariah wrote:that's say we have 100 baggage all without explosive!!!
and detector gave false alarm to 1 baggage...
stimulus says that 99 baggage will have explosive ...
it clearly substitutes one group for a different group!
Hi maria,
Which groups were substituted ? I don't think the conclusion is doing so.












