PT147.S1.Q24 > Analytics

SECTION 1 · 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 2 · 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

PASSAGE 3

Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22

PASSAGE 4

Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 3 · rc

PASSAGE 1

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

PASSAGE 2

Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13

PASSAGE 3

Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21

PASSAGE 4

Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 4 · lr

A computer program that uses all of the information in the human genome is not enough to create AI. The biologist’s support is complex: For AI, we need to have information about interactions of proteins, whose structural information is in the human genome.

Frankly, the assumption is difficult to see. Realistically, you may need to go into the answer choices and rely on negation until you find the negated answer choice that ruins the argument.

You may read this and think, “So, the biologist is saying that some scientists are wrong, as in, we can’t use X by itself because we need Y. But Y is already found in X, so I don’t understand why the biologist has a problem.” The issue is, the biologist actually didn’t say that Y is found in X. We don’t know that protein-interaction information is found in the human genome. That is the assumption.

(A) is essentially saying that AI is impossible to achieve. That isn’t what the biologist is saying, though. The biologist is just saying that one particular route (computer program with human genome info) is not enough on its own to make AI.

If negated, then we can find what we need within the human genome, and the argument fails. (B) fills a gap that is initially difficult to see: We know that we have structural info of these proteins, but we don’t know whether we have info on the interactions between proteins.

Too strong. It isn’t necessary that there be only one way to make AI. The argument is only saying that one particular route is not enough, on its own, to make AI. If there are multiple paths to AI, the conclusion could still be true.

Difficulty level is irrelevant. Whether doing this is easily done or not, the argument is unaffected.

Like (D), difficulty level doesn’t matter. Either one could be more difficult, or they could be of equal ease, and it won’t affect the argument.

Question

70% of people who answer get this correct

This is a difficult question.

CURVE

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

25% 146

154

75% 163

Question Stem Tags

Necessary assumption

Stimulus Tags

Conditional reasoning

Popularity Avg. score

11%

157

70%

164

11%

159

151

157

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

PrepTest 147 - Section 1 - Question 24

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action