satyaachanta wrote:
Can some one explain how can it be 'C' ? , I felt confused at 'if reports were increased by 50%, how can we conclude that those 50% reports doesn't constitute to 50% of mechanical problems ?'. Here I assume 50% mechanical problems as the problems that are newly raised. Thankyou
Hi
I am not expert, but expert can comment on my reasoning
Because of stringent rules for identifying and reporting mechanical problems are in effect, reports of airplane mechanical problems have increased
in frequency by 50 percent since last August.
Eg. before stringent rules mechanical problems reported were 50 , but actually there were 75 problems. So 25 were not reported.
After stringent rules, mechanical problems reported are 75 and in reality also 75 problems are there.
This means reports of airplane mechanical problems increased
in frequency by 50 percent but actual problems have not increased. this is choice C which supports that only report frequency has increased , not actual problems count are same.
This assumption is needed because author specifically says --- more stringent rules for identifying and reporting mechanical probbeen ilems have n effect. That accounts for the fact that reports -----
If actual problems itself are increasing then we cant attribute increase in reporting to stringent rules.
We have to show, problems are all same only more stringent rules have helped to identify the problem.