#help

This seems like a very weird way to go about strengthening an argument. I feel like it depends too heavily on the test taker thinking of the right alternative hypothesis to discredit so that they can identify the corresponding piece of evidence that contradicts it. Why not cut to the chase and ask yourself which answer choice makes the conclusion more likely to be more, similar to an MSS question?

#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.

#help

Can someone explain how the distribution of the "not" symbol is working here?

#help

For Q3, I would've translated the embedded conditional as:

/NEA --> (OC --> PMPO)

If using the Domain + Rule technique, why is the domain not found by taking the outside sufficient condition (i.e., D: /NEA)?