I am so confused. I read D and was like wait isn’t this explicitly stated in the stim? Got it right this time but I feel like I mad an assumption or something that could bite me later. Seems D is not only obvious, not only MBT, but explicitly stated in the prompt. I don’t see what I’m assuming though.
EDIT: Oh I see. The stim says “x2 speed accompanied by x2 cost”. And D) says “x2 cost accompanied by x2 transistors”
But since x2 transistors is the same as x2 speed, and “accompanied by” is bidirectional by definition, this is all the same, which is the test of the question.
I don't understand how we can assume that the doubling in speed that occurred during the mid-1990s was also achieved by doubling transistors. Therefore, we can't be certain doubling cost accompanied doubling transistors. What if they developed a different way to speed up a chip's computing speed (besides doubling transistors)? That explanation would also align with the sudden onset in rising costs in the mid-1990's, too. Is the wording/grammar of "each SUCH doubling in a microchip's computing speed" supposed to indicate that the doubling was achieved in the same way?
@mmartinez130 Hi! I think this was actually explicitly stated in the stimulus. The first sentence uses "hence" to indicate that the doubling in computing speed is resulting from/caused by the doubling number of transistors. The stimulus continues with "...from the mid-1990s into the next decade, each such doubling in a microchip's computing speed was accompanied by a doubling in the cost of producing that microchip." Here, "such" is referring to the doubling of microchip's computing speed through the doubling of number of transistors, and thus indicates the doubling cost of producing the microchips also accompanied the doubling number of transistors.
I cannot understand how he is right when he says "Each time there was a doubling in cost, oh, look, there was a doubling in the number of transistors in those chips. ya that must be true." when explaining D.
This feels like he's committed the "most classic trap". The only information he has is that a doubling of transistors means a doubling of cost, not the doubling of cost means the doubling of transistors. He gets the problem right but seems to explain it wrong.
@JohnYule Yeah, you're right there is a mis-speak in that moment. What he means is that each time there was a doubling in speed, there was a doubling in cost. Which is why we can say that a doubling in cost "accompanied" (meaning, happened along with) a doubling in speed.
@JohnYule I thought the same thing, but I don't think this is making a conditional statement more like a biconditional but even then, I didn't see it like that at first. I spent like 30 seconds thinking about it but "accompanied" didn't trigger necessity or sufficiency in my mind so I understood it as the two things (doubling transistors and doubling cost) to be affected simultaneously. Almost like a graph with an x axis and y axis. Its explained better in the last 2 minutes of the video.
Help? Can some explain to me why and how are we able to (or allowed to) assume that the subset of mid-1990's subset falls into the "for several decades" superset? Isn't it possible that there is no overlap in time period? Can't "for several decades" refer to the 1920's? Am I missing something here?
@CL10235 Hi, the grammar indicates that the "several decades" is the most recent several decades through the use of "has". If the statement said "For several decades, microchip speed doubled", we wouldn't really know whether this group of decades happened in the early 20th century or in the LAST few decades. But when they say "For several decades, microchip speed HAS doubled", we know that it refers to the last few decades.
Said differently (online source): "The difference between "has done" (present perfect) and "did" (simple past/past done) lies in the relationship of the action to the present moment. "Has done" links a past action to the present (result, experience, or recent completion), while "did" indicates a completed action at a specific time in the past with no necessary connection to the present."
Such an easy question, but took me 12 min, and did not comprehend, that the doubling of the cost after the mid 1990s, was not a one off occurrence. Its been 6 hours, time to log off.
I got this one right, but my timing is very high like almost 4 minutes more than the expected time, but I am finally feeling way way better about this exam!
how are we supposed to distinguish between answers that restate evidence (that are incorrect) and then answers that restate the passage that are correct? Can that be inferred from the question type?
@AlexHaro Well, if you have a "properly inferred" question, then a restatement of content in the premise would certainly be the correct answer. However, if the question is "what is the conclusion" then any part of the premise in an answer that is not the conclusion would be wrong. So short answer, yes.
Re: D, why isn't it possible that the price could've doubled without the speed/transistors doubling? Couldn't there have been other reasons, at intervals other than 18 months?
I sort of get that the word "accompanied" is doing a lot of the heavy lifting here, but when JY draws the bi-conditional it destroys my understanding of the relationship.
@bappel In a MBT question we have to take the stimulus as true so in this case D says exactly what the stimulus said. The stimulus said that from the 1990s into the next decade a doubling in a microchip's computing speed was accompanied by a doubling cost of producing that microchip. So if we take that to be true like we're supposed to on Must Be True questions, D says the same thing just in the opposite way. Instead of saying that a doubling in a microchip's computing speed was accompanied by a doubling cost of producing said microchip, D says that a doubling in fabrication of the microchip was accompanied by a doubling in transistors which equates to computing speeds because from my interpretation they're dependent or necessary on each other, computing speed doubled, transistors doubled and vice versa. Hope that helped!
Does anyone else sometiems feel llike they dont see all the questions until they retake or do blind review? D is so clearly the answer but i dont remember seeing it before i went back to review.
Am I the only one who thought that fabricating in question D meant creating fake versions of microchips. With that definition in mind i felt like the passage didn't say anything about making fake chips so i just guessed.
@spoon Not necessarily. For c to be correct the stimulus should imply something about engineers or cost containment. If it did, it would be correct for an assumption question
I was down to C and D and chose C because I felt like D simply restated the conclusion.. like how is that an inference? After the explanation, I know why I was wrong though
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Sorry, you need a subscription for that.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
135 comments
MAYBE IF I KNEW HOW TO READ CORRECTLY, I COULD ANSWER THE QUESTION CORRECTLY.
From here on out, my monitor better start flinching when i click submit..
I am so confused. I read D and was like wait isn’t this explicitly stated in the stim? Got it right this time but I feel like I mad an assumption or something that could bite me later. Seems D is not only obvious, not only MBT, but explicitly stated in the prompt. I don’t see what I’m assuming though.
EDIT: Oh I see. The stim says “x2 speed accompanied by x2 cost”. And D) says “x2 cost accompanied by x2 transistors”
But since x2 transistors is the same as x2 speed, and “accompanied by” is bidirectional by definition, this is all the same, which is the test of the question.
@danjpeach96 Same, I spent so long on this question cause D felt wrong because it was so similar to the passage
Eliminated wrong answer choices made this very easy for me.
B, C, E all go way outside of what the stim says. retail cost? engineers focused on? engineers will ever be able to? All never stated or implied.
A does a classic. It takes a given statement/result (raised speeds) and says its the only cause/result. Also not implied in the stim.
Therefore even if D is a little confusing, all the others are 100% wrong.
@Rose955 B, C, & D are wrong, but D is right?
@danjpeach96 A typo, apologies!
It's questions like these that make me feel the need to boost my vocabulary. The use of "fabricated" made me hesitant.
help!!, i am getting my blind reviews right but cant seem to get it right the first time
I don't understand how we can assume that the doubling in speed that occurred during the mid-1990s was also achieved by doubling transistors. Therefore, we can't be certain doubling cost accompanied doubling transistors. What if they developed a different way to speed up a chip's computing speed (besides doubling transistors)? That explanation would also align with the sudden onset in rising costs in the mid-1990's, too. Is the wording/grammar of "each SUCH doubling in a microchip's computing speed" supposed to indicate that the doubling was achieved in the same way?
@mmartinez130 Hi! I think this was actually explicitly stated in the stimulus. The first sentence uses "hence" to indicate that the doubling in computing speed is resulting from/caused by the doubling number of transistors. The stimulus continues with "...from the mid-1990s into the next decade, each such doubling in a microchip's computing speed was accompanied by a doubling in the cost of producing that microchip." Here, "such" is referring to the doubling of microchip's computing speed through the doubling of number of transistors, and thus indicates the doubling cost of producing the microchips also accompanied the doubling number of transistors.
Whyyyyy do I get the level 5s right and the easier ones wrong
I cannot understand how he is right when he says "Each time there was a doubling in cost, oh, look, there was a doubling in the number of transistors in those chips. ya that must be true." when explaining D.
This feels like he's committed the "most classic trap". The only information he has is that a doubling of transistors means a doubling of cost, not the doubling of cost means the doubling of transistors. He gets the problem right but seems to explain it wrong.
@JohnYule Yeah, you're right there is a mis-speak in that moment. What he means is that each time there was a doubling in speed, there was a doubling in cost. Which is why we can say that a doubling in cost "accompanied" (meaning, happened along with) a doubling in speed.
@JohnYule I thought the same thing, but I don't think this is making a conditional statement more like a biconditional but even then, I didn't see it like that at first. I spent like 30 seconds thinking about it but "accompanied" didn't trigger necessity or sufficiency in my mind so I understood it as the two things (doubling transistors and doubling cost) to be affected simultaneously. Almost like a graph with an x axis and y axis. Its explained better in the last 2 minutes of the video.
Help? Can some explain to me why and how are we able to (or allowed to) assume that the subset of mid-1990's subset falls into the "for several decades" superset? Isn't it possible that there is no overlap in time period? Can't "for several decades" refer to the 1920's? Am I missing something here?
@CL10235 Hi, the grammar indicates that the "several decades" is the most recent several decades through the use of "has". If the statement said "For several decades, microchip speed doubled", we wouldn't really know whether this group of decades happened in the early 20th century or in the LAST few decades. But when they say "For several decades, microchip speed HAS doubled", we know that it refers to the last few decades.
Said differently (online source): "The difference between "has done" (present perfect) and "did" (simple past/past done) lies in the relationship of the action to the present moment. "Has done" links a past action to the present (result, experience, or recent completion), while "did" indicates a completed action at a specific time in the past with no necessary connection to the present."
YAY!! First time I've been under the time limit and got it right!
yayay got it right and was only 5 seconds over the time frame! :)
Thank you, Chip War.
Such an easy question, but took me 12 min, and did not comprehend, that the doubling of the cost after the mid 1990s, was not a one off occurrence. Its been 6 hours, time to log off.
I got this one right, but my timing is very high like almost 4 minutes more than the expected time, but I am finally feeling way way better about this exam!
how are we supposed to distinguish between answers that restate evidence (that are incorrect) and then answers that restate the passage that are correct? Can that be inferred from the question type?
@AlexHaro Well, if you have a "properly inferred" question, then a restatement of content in the premise would certainly be the correct answer. However, if the question is "what is the conclusion" then any part of the premise in an answer that is not the conclusion would be wrong. So short answer, yes.
This was such an obvious answer, but I selected C because I thought I was being thrown a curveball. Smh.
@ElliotRosin This is so relatable. I keep overthinking these questions.
#help
Re: D, why isn't it possible that the price could've doubled without the speed/transistors doubling? Couldn't there have been other reasons, at intervals other than 18 months?
I sort of get that the word "accompanied" is doing a lot of the heavy lifting here, but when JY draws the bi-conditional it destroys my understanding of the relationship.
@bappel In a MBT question we have to take the stimulus as true so in this case D says exactly what the stimulus said. The stimulus said that from the 1990s into the next decade a doubling in a microchip's computing speed was accompanied by a doubling cost of producing that microchip. So if we take that to be true like we're supposed to on Must Be True questions, D says the same thing just in the opposite way. Instead of saying that a doubling in a microchip's computing speed was accompanied by a doubling cost of producing said microchip, D says that a doubling in fabrication of the microchip was accompanied by a doubling in transistors which equates to computing speeds because from my interpretation they're dependent or necessary on each other, computing speed doubled, transistors doubled and vice versa. Hope that helped!
I though D was a mistaken reversal until BR where I noticed "accompanied each"... I need to slow down.
Does anyone else sometiems feel llike they dont see all the questions until they retake or do blind review? D is so clearly the answer but i dont remember seeing it before i went back to review.
@Sunday_Blues13 100%
@Sunday_Blues13 Totally, it's insane that I didn't spot it before.
I got this one right and under time..yay.
Am I the only one who thought that fabricating in question D meant creating fake versions of microchips. With that definition in mind i felt like the passage didn't say anything about making fake chips so i just guessed.
@SoluObiorah yes
@SoluObiorah That's exactly why I didn't choose D.
got it right! 30 seconds over but regardless ... interesting how im doing better on these latter questions than the first, a good sign lol
i cant believe i was cooking on the first few questions in this module and now i'm getting all of them wrong lmao
Would C be right if they asked for a hypothesis
@spoon Not necessarily. For c to be correct the stimulus should imply something about engineers or cost containment. If it did, it would be correct for an assumption question
I was down to C and D and chose C because I felt like D simply restated the conclusion.. like how is that an inference? After the explanation, I know why I was wrong though
@vf7965432 my guess is because it relied on outside inferences instead of whats was specifically given from the stim