PT125.S4.Q14 > Analytics

SECTION 1 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5

PASSAGE 2

Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12

PASSAGE 3

Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19

PASSAGE 4

Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 2 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 3 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7

PASSAGE 2

Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15

PASSAGE 3

Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20

PASSAGE 4

Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 4 · lr

Some researchers say that for an antenna to work equally well at all frequencies, it’s necessary that the antenna be symmetrical and have a fractal structure. The author concludes this claim is wrong. This is based on the fact that there is an antenna that meets those necessary conditions, but does not work equally well at all frequencies.

The author confuses sufficient and necessary conditions. The researchers did not say that having a symmetrical shape and fractal structure is sufficient for working equally well at all frequencies; they said it those features were necessary. So pointing out that there’s an antenna that has those features but does not work equally well does not show that the the researchers’ claim is false.

The argument doesn’t need to define “fractal.” The word simply takes on its ordinary dictionary definition.

The author doesn’t rely on the claims of authorities. The author identifies an antenna made by researchers, but the premise isn’t based on what researchers claim.

The premise does not assert that there’s not enough evidence to show the researchers are correct. The premise points out an antenna that is supposed to be a counterexample to the researchers’ claim.

The researchers asserted that symmetry and fractal nature were necessary for an antenna to work equally well at all frequencies. But the author interpreted this as a claim those conditions were sufficient for working equally well.

The author does not exclude the possibility of antennas working at exactly 250 megahertz. The evidence happens to involve an antenna that works better at below 250 than above, but that doesn’t imply the author think exactly 250 is impossible.

Question

82% of people who answer get this correct

This is a moderately difficult question.

CURVE

Score of students with a 50% chance of getting this right

25% 139

148

75% 157

Question Stem Tags

Flaw or descriptive weakening

Stimulus Tags

Conditional reasoning

Popularity Avg. score

151

155

157

82%

164

155

You don't have any history with this question.. yet!

PrepTest 125 - Section 4 - Question 14

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action