User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Joined
Apr 2025
Subscription
Free
PrepTests ·
PT120.S2.P2.Q11
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Sunday, Dec 22 2024

Well I'm not a crook, I've earned everything I've got.

1
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Friday, Nov 15 2024

I'm not a crook.

10
PrepTests ·
PT125.S3.P2.Q8
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Sunday, Sep 22 2024

If this is a 4 star art passage I don't even wanna know what a 5 star art passage looks like

3
PrepTests ·
PT104.S2.P4.Q26
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Tuesday, Sep 17 2024

exactly, this passage was so stupid

1
User Avatar

Friday, Sep 06 2024

jdiluigi291

Average test question difficulty

Based on recent tests and how 7sage grades question difficulty, does anyone know what the average (mean) question difficulty would be around? My guess would be around 3 (medium) but I am curious if anyone knows for sure.

0
PrepTests ·
PT106.S3.Q16
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Sunday, Sep 01 2024

it's not just "some" it's "some not" the negation of "some not" is "all"

0
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Thursday, Aug 29 2024

I think means your intuition is getting stronger, I'm noticing the same thing

5
PrepTests ·
PT117.S2.Q13
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Thursday, Aug 29 2024

Can anyone tell me if my reasoning makes sense?

since it is required that the solutions are economically enticing, it wouldn’t be possible for any ecological problems to be solved. So the fact that few can be solved (conclusion) without economic enticement, means it must be the case that those few that are solved have to be a result of government mismanagement, since none can be solved without economic enticement that are not a result of government mismanagement.

0
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Tuesday, Aug 27 2024

YES, I did this the exact same way as you and still got it right on blind review even though technically I had a premise as the conclusion and the conclusion as a premise.

0
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Monday, Aug 26 2024

This question is the same difficulty as the last one, yet this one felt 10 times easier for me somehow.

1
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Monday, Aug 26 2024

I got this question wrong for the dumbest reason, I forgot about the laws of supersets and subsets. (E) says none of the candidates already works for Arvue, which would mean that none of the fully qualified candidates work for Arvue. Somehow I forgot about this rule.

3
PrepTests ·
PT130.S4.Q20
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Monday, Aug 19 2024

Don't we have to assume that "abnormally low blood pressure" is lower than "very low" blood pressure? Because if we don't assume this, I don't see how E would make any sense. Like if we assumed "very low" and "abnormally low" were the same, if E were true, their blood pressures should still increase from "very low" which is not consistent with the stimulus.

0
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Wednesday, Aug 14 2024

I am also wondering about this

0
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Friday, Aug 09 2024

never mind the next lesson explains it lol

0
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Friday, Aug 09 2024

If a question asks for "main point" instead of "main conclusion" does that mean the same thing?

0
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Sunday, Aug 04 2024

A.K.A B10+ and /R -> /OpNo

0
User Avatar
jdiluigi291
Sunday, Aug 04 2024

Can't you also translate "If a resident lives in a building with more than ten units, then either she has an inalienable right to keep a pet or she has not kept that pet openly and notoriously." to

"If a resident lives in a building with more than ten units and does not have an inalienable right to keep a pet then she must not have kept that pet openly and notoriously"

1

Confirm action

Are you sure?