Last visit was: 23 Apr 2024, 15:04 It is currently 23 Apr 2024, 15:04

Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 1010
Own Kudos [?]: 6339 [39]
Given Kudos: 178
Location: Ukraine
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Technology
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V33
GMAT 2: 740 Q50 V40
Send PM
Most Helpful Reply
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Status: enjoying
Posts: 5265
Own Kudos [?]: 42103 [20]
Given Kudos: 422
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Send PM
Manager
Manager
Joined: 21 Jun 2015
Posts: 96
Own Kudos [?]: 45 [20]
Given Kudos: 38
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V35
GPA: 2.61
Send PM
General Discussion
Intern
Intern
Joined: 08 Dec 2016
Posts: 25
Own Kudos [?]: 36 [1]
Given Kudos: 559
Location: Italy
Schools: IESE '21
Send PM
Benford’s Law, stating that certain numbers appear more often in [#permalink]
1
Bookmarks
Harley1980 wrote:
Benford’s Law, stating that certain numbers appear more often in nature than do others, is so counterintuitive that when used as evidence in trials where financial fraud is concerned, it is often construed as a desperate ploy on the part of the prosecution, even if the numbers strongly point to malfeasance.

A) when used as evidence in trials where financial fraud is concerned, it is often construed as a desperate ploy on the part of the prosecution, even if
B) if used as evidence in trials in which financial fraud is concerned, it is often construed to be a desperate ploy by the prosecution, even when
C) when used as evidence in financial fraud trials, it is often construed to be a desperate ploy on the prosecution’s part, even if
D) if used as evidence in trials in which financial fraud is concerned, the evidence is often construed by the prosecution as a desperate ploy, even when
E) when used as evidence in trials concerning financial fraud, such evidence is often construed as a desperate ploy used by the prosecution, even when


Interesting one:
- Idiom construed as right idiom
- A -> where VS in which or ing-modifier

Choice E
Intern
Intern
Joined: 04 Jan 2018
Posts: 30
Own Kudos [?]: 16 [1]
Given Kudos: 10
Send PM
Re: Benford’s Law, stating that certain numbers appear more often in [#permalink]
1
Kudos
A) when used as evidence in trials where financial fraud is concerned, it is often construed as a desperate ploy on the part of the prosecution, even if
B) if used as evidence in trials in which financial fraud is concerned, it is often construed to be a desperate ploy by the prosecution, even when
C) when used as evidence in financial fraud trials, it is often construed to be a desperate ploy on the prosecution’s part, even if
D) if used as evidence in trials in which financial fraud is concerned, the evidence is often construed by the prosecution as a desperate ploy, even when
E) when used as evidence in trials concerning financial fraud, such evidence is often construed as a desperate ploy used by the prosecution, even when


if ---is used for conditions
so B,D are out

C----financial fraud trials---meaning is changed

out of A,E-----E seems better with construction and usage
Retired Moderator
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Posts: 1267
Own Kudos [?]: 5650 [2]
Given Kudos: 416
Send PM
Benford’s Law, stating that certain numbers appear more often in [#permalink]
1
Kudos
1
Bookmarks

MAGOOSH Official Explanation



This question is very subtle, and very deceptive. First off, it’s not testing an if/when distinction. Either is fine, in this case, since we are dealing with an outcome that is a likely or expected (you want to use “if”, not “when”, if the outcome is uncertain, or if you are dealing with a purely hypothetical matter, e.g. “Imagine they use Benford’s Law in trials. If they did so…) In other words, when/if Benford’s law is used in certain trials it has an expected result. The second use of when/if can also use either word since it is describing something that could likely result: numbers that speak to malfeasance.

The when/if distinction is so subtle and it is a good idea to look for more typical GMAT SC culprits. That said, this is a very difficult question and there aren’t too many obvious errors. There are two good places to start: the idiom “consider (no preposition) Noun” or, in this case, “Noun + is considered (no preposition), and the ambiguous use of “it”.

First, “considered TO BE” is incorrect. Eliminate (A) and (B). “Considered…AS”, which we get in (D), is also incorrect.

Secondly, the “it” in (B) and (C). It illogically refers to Benford’s Law, not the “evidence”, as is clearly stated in the original sentence. It is not the law that is considered a desperate ploy, but the evidence that is considered a desperate ploy.

Therefore, we can eliminate (A), (B), and (C) in one fell swoop.

That leaves (E) as the answer.

Of course, there is more going on in one of the answer choices, but this so subtle as to be diabolical.

Some who miss the idiom error end up picking (D). It superficially seems right since it uses “when” and “if” (remember, this isn’t an actual split), though (D) actually changes the original meaning of the sentence. It says “considered by the prosecution as a desperate ploy”, whereas the original sentence—and indeed all the other answer choices—indicate that the evidence is often considered a desperate ploy by the prosecution. In other words, people (presumably the court) perceive the prosecution as being desperate, not the other way around. The good news is that “considered as” is an idiomatic error, so you don’t even have to get tangled up in the semantics of the sentence to eliminate (D).

(E) correctly uses “such evidence” instead of “it”. Also, it does change the meaning of the sentence the way that (D) did.


Answer: (E)
Manager
Manager
Joined: 05 May 2019
Posts: 166
Own Kudos [?]: 289 [0]
Given Kudos: 222
GPA: 3
Send PM
Re: Benford’s Law, stating that certain numbers appear more often in [#permalink]
I think mikemcgarry can help.
daagh @e-gmat GMATNinja, please feel free to add what you can to this discussion.

This isn't an official question, but nevertheless, a tough one.

the official answer is E and not D for the reason that D has an idiom error - "construed as"
but doesn't E also have the same construction (error) ?

Help me out, please.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Mar 2017
Posts: 274
Own Kudos [?]: 76 [0]
Given Kudos: 406
Location: Saudi Arabia
GMAT 1: 700 Q47 V39
GPA: 3.36
Send PM
Re: Benford’s Law, stating that certain numbers appear more often in [#permalink]
aragonn wrote:

MAGOOSH Official Explanation



This question is very subtle, and very deceptive. First off, it’s not testing an if/when distinction. Either is fine, in this case, since we are dealing with an outcome that is a likely or expected (you want to use “if”, not “when”, if the outcome is uncertain, or if you are dealing with a purely hypothetical matter, e.g. “Imagine they use Benford’s Law in trials. If they did so…) In other words, when/if Benford’s law is used in certain trials it has an expected result. The second use of when/if can also use either word since it is describing something that could likely result: numbers that speak to malfeasance.

The when/if distinction is so subtle and it is a good idea to look for more typical GMAT SC culprits. That said, this is a very difficult question and there aren’t too many obvious errors. There are two good places to start: the idiom “consider (no preposition) Noun” or, in this case, “Noun + is considered (no preposition), and the ambiguous use of “it”.

First, “considered TO BE” is incorrect. Eliminate (A) and (B). “Considered…AS”, which we get in (D), is also incorrect.

Secondly, the “it” in (B) and (C). It illogically refers to Benford’s Law, not the “evidence”, as is clearly stated in the original sentence. It is not the law that is considered a desperate ploy, but the evidence that is considered a desperate ploy.

Therefore, we can eliminate (A), (B), and (C) in one fell swoop.

That leaves (E) as the answer.

Of course, there is more going on in one of the answer choices, but this so subtle as to be diabolical.

Some who miss the idiom error end up picking (D). It superficially seems right since it uses “when” and “if” (remember, this isn’t an actual split), though (D) actually changes the original meaning of the sentence. It says “considered by the prosecution as a desperate ploy”, whereas the original sentence—and indeed all the other answer choices—indicate that the evidence is often considered a desperate ploy by the prosecution. In other words, people (presumably the court) perceive the prosecution as being desperate, not the other way around. The good news is that “considered as” is an idiomatic error, so you don’t even have to get tangled up in the semantics of the sentence to eliminate (D).

(E) correctly uses “such evidence” instead of “it”. Also, it does change the meaning of the sentence the way that (D) did.


Answer: (E)


Doesn't (E) also use the same idiom construction ?
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 17206
Own Kudos [?]: 848 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Benfords Law, stating that certain numbers appear more often in [#permalink]
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Benfords Law, stating that certain numbers appear more often in [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6917 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne