LR was very hard. Water volume question... ugh. Throughout the section were odd ACs and stimulus. RC and LG were relatively easy. While RC had some tricky passages, the questions weren't all that challenging.

For you, I think it can be made simpler. Do not change your answer unless you are 100% certain the original choice is wrong - even if you feel like another choice is equivalently correct. You'll reduce your overall number of changes, which is good assuming the change error ratio remains constant. Basically, you'll be saving yourself points by not changing your answer more than you sacrifice them.

Knowing how often you go wrong->wrong would help, as would knowing how long you generally spend on successful changes vs unsuccessful changes. It would also be helpful to know if you're more or less certain when making good changes compared versus bad changes.

Also, in general, I would recommend trying not to revisit the first 10 questions at all. They're usually the easiest and ideally you are confident enough in them to leave them in the past.

In my personal strategy, I have a soft-sort for which questions I revisit first. I try to balance the amount of text with my overall confidence in my original choice. Ideally the ordering is as follows: least text/most confidence -> most text/least confidence.

I figure I can iron out more corrections in less time if I focus on the easier stuff first, since the risk of draining all my time on a single question is higher if I start with the hard stuff. I also tend to only have four or five questions flagged, tough.

13 is the first question I've seen with a curve where the 50th percentile was a 180.

Personally, I opted out of A because maybe the LHB coincided with another meteoric event that was in decline for Mars.

Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

Can someone give a more thorough explanation as to why A on 17 isn't a giant assumptive leap?

I suppose I kinda take issue with the use of "significant," but even so one should still arrive at answer E.

Fuck this question

I feel you. I've been having nightmares about test day for a week now.

For 23, doesn't the fifth paragraph offer an explanation of how a big bang could result from a cold universe? #help

Is there a way to set a PT to be 3 section?

Q27. What constitutes a "detail?"

Something I've noticed with curve-breakers is that just because the meaning of a term is ambiguous in an answer choice, does not mean it's wrong. This is a notion that doesn't get touched on very often. In these circumstances, you will almost always be able to rule out the other choices on grounds that do not relate to how you define a word. For instance the choice of C, the latter half of the answer is (albeit opaquely) incorrect regardless of how you define "policy." The argument in Passage 2, though in a context relating to established authorities, does not actually use their views as evidence in support of the author's own view.

Very, very rarely, a question wherein two reasonable answers have ambiguous terms contained will emerge. In those cases, you must evaluate how crucial the ambiguous term is to the meaning of the answer choice.

In the case of 27 however, all the other choices can be ruled out with no consideration of how ambiguously used terms are defined. Only A remains, and you can comfortably presume a usage of "detail" that allows the choice to remain correct.

I got this right, but I feel like the relevance of the term "successful" is kinda questionable, no?

This is some grammar nazi torture shit right here. If vs only if. Is it that simple? It happens so fast.

If indicted for a crime, you should resign.

If convicted for a crime, resign. But only if convicted. Otherwise, don't resign.

Sufficiency vs necessity. Am I right in my understanding here? Why is A not an equally valid flaw? #help

I completely understand this question but god damn is it hard. It's literally a three word "blink and you'll miss it" error in reasoning. Gonna be hard to pick up on this kind of thing on a full test.

@ said:

@ said:

Yes to all of these. There are minor differences (font choices?) but functionally everything works the same. I wouldn't worry about the format

actually the font was a huge deal to me lol

i think i kinda bombed my first flex because of the font lmao

In what way was the font different? What font would you compare it to?

We have three bubbles.

The outermost bubble contains all computer scientists.

Completely inside that bubble is a another bubble. This bubble contains all people who understand computer architecture.

Completely inside that bubble is another bubble. This bubble contains all people who appreciate technological advances.

The argument says that only people in the smallest bubble are in the big bubble. In other words, to be in the outermost bubble you have to be in the innermost bubble. The premises used in the argument do not support this conclusion, since they allow you to be in the outermost bubble without being in the innermost bubble.

The argument hits you with this switch-up so fast you might miss it.

#help #help #help

My understanding is this:

A particular path the eye must follow is required for reading.

Paintings have no particular path the eye must follow in order to read the painting.

Therefore paintings cannot be read.

Reading is an act that requires a time dimension.

Because paintings cannot be read, they have no time dimension.

So, this argument's flaw is moreso that it fails to acknowledge ways of experiencing a time dimension in art that are not "reading." Or am I reading the stimulus wrong, because none of the answers seem to conform well to this flaw.

Kinda related: Does "several" not read directly as "some"? On answer choice E, specifically, JY seems to read several as "barely any."

Or can we make no assumptions about the amount "several" means without context

Ugh I got tricked by A

Wow, that's a relief. I had heard it was a little different, and my mind spiraled quickly into imagining a lack of any feature buildout whatsoever in the official ProctorU test experience.

if you're stuck on C:

just because it meets the stated necessary criteria for being great, doesn't mean it meets any other unmentioned criteria. It's necessary for a car to have gas in the tank to start. This car has gas in the tank. Can you guarantee this car will start? No! It might not have an engine!

I don't get how the assumption in C is warranted but the assumption in A is not.

1. We assume that diseases, in general, will affect the overall consumption of plant life by moose.

2. We assume that fewer predators, in general, will affect the overall consumption of plant life by moose.

Aren't these the same assumption?

Questions that require how "rational" assumptions we as test takers make are fucking bullshit.

Seems gross that we need to rely on the likelihood that a universe that isnt textually supported is to occur.

yo just saying that i hate the wording of c.

I'm struggling to extricate "learning" and "training" as terms. A and C seem like equivalently logical answers to me!

#help