Last visit was: 18 Apr 2025, 15:39 It is currently 18 Apr 2025, 15:39
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Reviews
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
805+ Level|   Non-Math Related|         
User avatar
macjas
User avatar
Joined: 09 May 2012
Last visit: 30 Jul 2015
Posts: 308
Own Kudos:
9,483
 [68]
Given Kudos: 100
Affiliations: UWC
Location: Canada
Schools: Rotman '15 (A) Schulich '15 (M)
GMAT 1: 620 Q42 V33
GMAT 2: 680 Q44 V38
GPA: 3.43
WE:Engineering (Media/Entertainment)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Rotman '15 (A) Schulich '15 (M)
GMAT 2: 680 Q44 V38
Posts: 308
Kudos: 9,483
 [68]
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in Updated on: 12 Jun 2024, 00:47
Originally posted by macjas on 07 Jun 2012, 01:52.
Last edited by Bunuel on 12 Jun 2024, 00:47, edited 7 times in total.
Kudos
Add Kudos
68
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
00:00
Start Timer
Pause Timer
Resume Timer
Show Answer
Hide Answer
Hide
Show
History
Assumption
required: The next cup to be recovered from the site will likely be made of porcelain. Possible
fact: Other cups have been recovered from the archaeological site, all of which were made of porcelain.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

45% (02:12) correct 55% (02:38) wrong based on 1517 sessions

History

Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in eighteenth-century Britain, among them Bristol, Plymouth, and New Hall. Each center developed a unique recipe for its porcelain that might include flint glass, soapstone, bone ash, clay, quartz, and so on. We will therefore be able to determine, on the basis of compositional analysis, where the next cup we recover from this archaeological site was made.

Indicate two different statements as follows: one statement identifies an assumption required by the archaeologist's argument and the other identifies a possible fact that, if true, would, provide significant logical support for the required assumption.­

Show Spoiler
ID: 100399
Assumption
required 		Possible
fact
Other cups have been recovered from the archaeological site, all of which were made of porcelain.
Some of the cups recovered from the archeological site were not made of porcelain.
The next cup to be recovered from the site will likely be made of porcelain.
Porcelain makers often traveled between centers, experimeriting with one another's recipes.
There was considerable overlap of materials in the recipes used by the various centers.
Most porcelain in 18th century Britain was made at one of the several centers.
Submit Answer
Start the Timer above, select the radio buttons, and click "Submit" to add this question to your Error log.
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Assumption
required: The next cup to be recovered from the site will likely be made of porcelain. Possible
fact: Other cups have been recovered from the archaeological site, all of which were made of porcelain.
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
Swoosh617
User avatar
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Last visit: 24 Aug 2015
Posts: 131
Own Kudos:
188
 [14]
Given Kudos: 13
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, General Management
Schools: HBS '16 (D) CBS '16 (D) Wharton '16 (D) Booth '16 (A) Anderson '16 (A) Stanford '16 (D)
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.69
WE:Analyst (Mutual Funds and Brokerage)
Schools: HBS '16 (D) CBS '16 (D) Wharton '16 (D) Booth '16 (A) Anderson '16 (A) Stanford '16 (D)
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V42
Posts: 131
Kudos: 188
 [14]
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in 07 Jun 2012, 07:46
11
Kudos
Add Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Here's how I approached it:

First, a two second summary of archaeologist claim: Because porcelain cups have unique compositions, archaeologists can use composition analysis to determine where the next discovered cup comes from.

So looking at the statements, I try to eliminate the statements that do not support the archaeologist's claim:
a) RELEVANT: Says that they have previous porcelain cups, so these are the cups that they could use for their composition analysis
b) ELIMINATE: Cups that are not made of porcelain do not support his claim
c) RELEVANT: The next cup has to be porcelain, archaeologist only talks about identifying cups that are porcelain
d) ELIMINATE: Hurts archaeologist claim because it introduces reasoning to why composition analysis might not lead to correct origin of cup
e) ELIMINATE: Hurts archaeologist claim because composition analysis might not point to correct origin if two origins produce the same type of composition
f) ELIMINATE: Seems like irrelevant information

So between A and C, it's not too hard to tell which one is the archaeologist assumptions and which one is possible fact. The archaeologist is assuming that they can find out where the next cup comes from because the next cup will be porcelain, and they can use composition analysis. The fact that all of the cups they have previously found were porcelain strengthens the assumption that the next one will be porcelain as well.

If you reversed it, and said that the assumption is all of the past cups found were porcelain, the possible fact that the next one will be porcelain does nothing to strengthen your assumption.
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Apr 2025
Posts: 15,889
Own Kudos:
72,675
 [6]
Given Kudos: 462
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 15,889
Kudos: 72,675
 [6]
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in 03 Jun 2024, 02:07
6
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
macjas
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in eighteenth-century Britain, among them Bristol, Plymouth, and New Hall. Each center developed a unique recipe for its porcelain that might include flint glass, soapstone, bone ash, clay, quartz, and so on. We will therefore be able to determine, on the basis of compositional analysis, where the next cup we recover from this archaeological site was made.

Indicate two different statements as follows: one statement identifies an assumption required by the archaeologist's argument and the other identifies a possible fact that, if true, would, provide significant logical support for the required assumption.­
­
There were many porcelain-production centers in 18th-century Britain.
Each center developed a unique recipe for its porcelain.

Conclusion: We will therefore be able to determine, on the basis of compositional analysis, where the next cup we recover from this archaeological site was made.

The conclusion is talking about being able to figure out the source of the next cup that is recovered, mind you, not the next porcelain cup but the next cup. What is the assumption here? The gap? That the cup we recover will be a porcelain cup. The premises only talk about porcelain at these centres. 

Hence look for the assumption first. Only once you find will you find what strengthens it. 
Third option works: The next cup to be recovered from the site will likely be made of porcelain.

Why is the last option not valid: Most porcelain in 18th century Britain was made at one of the several centers.
Negation: Less than 50% porcelain in 18th century Britain was made at one of the several centers.

Ok, even if less than 50% of porcelain was made at one these centres, it is will possible that the cup we recover next, if made of porcelain, was made at one of these centres. So our conclusion doesn't fall. 

Hence,
ASSUMPTION: The next cup to be recovered from the site will likely be made of porcelain.

What makes it more likely that the next cup to be recovered will be made of porcelain?

POSSIBLE FACT: Other cups have been recovered from the archaeological site, all of which were made of porcelain.

If we have already got other cups and they were all made of porcelain, then it is likely that the next cup will also be made of porcelain. 







 
General Discussion
User avatar
MacFauz
User avatar
Joined: 02 Jul 2012
Last visit: 19 Mar 2022
Posts: 998
Own Kudos:
3,275
 [3]
Given Kudos: 116
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy
Schools: Ross '16 (D) McCombs '16 (D) Kenan-Flagler '16 (WA) Olin '16 (M$) Tepper '16 (D)
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE:Engineering (Energy)
Schools: Ross '16 (D) McCombs '16 (D) Kenan-Flagler '16 (WA) Olin '16 (M$) Tepper '16 (D)
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
Posts: 998
Kudos: 3,275
 [3]
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in 04 Oct 2012, 04:30
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The question seems quite straightforward.
Conclusion is that the origin of the next cup discovered can be easily determined.
Going through the answer choices we can find that the argument clearly assumes that the next cup to be discovered would be made of porcelain. Although we can also apply the LEN method : The next cup to be discovered need not be porcelain. This clearly kills the argument. So "C" is the right answer.
Now we have to select a choice which as a fact could strengthen the assumption. We can see that choice "A" clearly strengthens this assumption.
avatar
bangu
avatar
Joined: 11 Jul 2018
Last visit: 25 Aug 2018
Posts: 17
Own Kudos:
26
 [3]
Posts: 17
Kudos: 26
 [3]
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in 12 Jul 2018, 03:31
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Fact 1: 18th-century Britain had several porcelain-production centers.
Fact 2: Each center developed a unique recipe for its porcelain.
Fact 3: There is an archaeological site.
Assumption: They will be able to recover cup from this archaeological site.
Assumption: Cup from this archaeological site will be made in Britain.

A: Other cups have been recovered from the archaeological site, all of which were made of porcelain.
Cannot be inferred from above facts or assumption.

B:Some of the cups recovered from the archaeological site were not made of porcelain.
Cannot be inferred from above facts or assumption.

C:The next cup to be recovered from the site will likely be maid of porcelain.
Cannot be inferred from above facts or assumption.

D:Porcelain makers often traveled between centers, experimenting with one another's recipes.
Cannot be inferred from above facts or assumption.

E:There was considerable overlap of materials in the recipes used by the various centers.
Cannot be inferred from above facts or assumption.

F:Most porcelain in 18th century Britain was made at one of the several centers.
Can we inferred from Fact 1, although word Most is bit of a stretch.
User avatar
gvij2017
User avatar
Joined: 09 Aug 2017
Last visit: 18 Jun 2024
Posts: 676
Own Kudos:
459
Given Kudos: 778
Posts: 676
Kudos: 459
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in 26 Jul 2018, 18:11
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
C:The next cup to be recovered from the site will likely be made of porcelain.: Possible fact to support assumption
F:Most porcelain in 18th century Britain was made at one of the several centers.: Assumption.

Am I correct?
User avatar
swe_anon
User avatar
Joined: 15 Mar 2024
Last visit: 19 May 2024
Posts: 1
Posts: 1
Kudos: 0
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in 27 Apr 2024, 09:44
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
Any idea why the last statement isn't a possible fact? I reasoned that it would help if we knew that most porcelain was indeed made at one of the several centers. Otherwise, the porcelain recovered at the archaeological site could have been made by an independent artisan, in another country, etc.
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 18 Apr 2025
Posts: 4,576
Own Kudos:
32,108
 [1]
Given Kudos: 679
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Products:
Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,576
Kudos: 32,108
 [1]
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in 29 Apr 2024, 07:19
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
 
Quote:
­Any idea why the last statement isn't a possible fact? I reasoned that it would help if we knew that most porcelain was indeed made at one of the several centers. Otherwise, the porcelain recovered at the archaeological site could have been made by an independent artisan, in another country, etc.
Hi,
Let me try to help.


The questions asks us to
  1. identify an assumption required by the archaeologist's argument
  2. identify a possible fact that, if true, would, provide significant logical support for the required assumption.
So, the correct answer to #2 needs to support the assumption you have identified in #1.

Clearly, there is no statement that acts as an assumption and can be supported by the last statement. Hence, it cannot be the correct answer for "Possible fact".




Hope that helps,
Happy learning!­
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Apr 2025
Posts: 7,276
Own Kudos:
67,562
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1,916
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,276
Kudos: 67,562
 [1]
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in 21 May 2024, 08:23
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
swe_anon
GMATNinja

Any idea why the last statement isn't a possible fact? I reasoned that it would help if we knew that most porcelain was indeed made at one of the several centers. Otherwise, the porcelain recovered at the archaeological site could have been made by an independent artisan, in another country, etc.


 
­Looks like egmat beat us to the punch, but their response is spot-on. We're looking for something that provides support for the assumption -- something that gives us reason to believe that the next cup to be recovered from the site will, in fact, be made of porcelain.

And that's exactly what we get in the first option: if all of the cups so far have been made of porcelain, we have reason to believe that the next one will be porcelain too.

The final option might support the ARGUMENT, but that's not quite what we're looking for here.

I hope that helps!­
User avatar
Dwadesh72
User avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2023
Last visit: 14 Apr 2025
Posts: 8
Own Kudos:
2
Given Kudos: 24
Posts: 8
Kudos: 2
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in 01 Jun 2024, 09:17
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most porcelain in 18th century Britain was made at one of the several centers.

I know C fits better as an assumption but wanted to know, on what basis can we eliminate the above option ? Because if we negate it it will say that- most porcelain in 18th century Britain was not made at one of the several centres. Which would render the conclusion invalid as we wont be able to determine that where the cup was made ?

KarishmaB chetan2u GMATNinja egmat.
User avatar
chetan2u
User avatar
GMAT Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Apr 2025
Posts: 11,324
Own Kudos:
40,147
 [3]
Given Kudos: 333
Status:Math and DI Expert
Products:
My Reviews
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 11,324
Kudos: 40,147
 [3]
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in 01 Jun 2024, 10:26
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
 
Dwadesh72
Most porcelain in 18th century Britain was made at one of the several centers.

I know C fits better as an assumption but wanted to know, on what basis can we eliminate the above option ? Because if we negate it it will say that- most porcelain in 18th century Britain was not made at one of the several centres. Which would render the conclusion invalid as we wont be able to determine that where the cup was made ?

KarishmaB chetan2u GMATNinja egmat.
Hi,

I would just analyse the statement and work upon that, with negation playing its part on its own. 

Most porcelain in 18th century Britain was made at one of the several centers.
Does it really affect the argument?
We know the unique recipe at each center, so we should be able to tell from where did that porcelain come from. If maximum came from one center or from several centers does not affect our argument.

The option means if 100 tons were made in 18th century Britian, more than 50 tons was made at one of the centers. But say not more than 5 tons was made at any one center. It really does not make our argument fall flat.

The scenario where the statement could be an assumption.
Bristol had the maximum production of all centers, and there is more than 50% probability that next porcelain found would be from Bristol.

Now, the above would be an assumption, as for probability to be more than 50%, Bristol should be the place where at least 50% of the procelain in the 18th century was made.

 ­
User avatar
Dwadesh72
User avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2023
Last visit: 14 Apr 2025
Posts: 8
Own Kudos:
2
Given Kudos: 24
Posts: 8
Kudos: 2
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in 03 Jun 2024, 06:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thanks for the explanation. Really appreciate it.
User avatar
SMQazi
User avatar
Joined: 31 Aug 2021
Last visit: 06 Jan 2025
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
4
Given Kudos: 2
Location: India
Schools: Stanford Sloan (MIT)
GPA: 3.73
Schools: Stanford Sloan (MIT)
Posts: 15
Kudos: 4
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in 27 Jun 2024, 05:38
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Fact A presented in the paragraph: all cups are porcelain cups, supported by 'Each center developed a unique recipe for its porcelain'. We need fact and assumption that leads us to the origin of the next cup. We're looking to Support the archaeologists findings.

A. Other cups have been recovered from the archaeological site, all of which were made of porcelain.
a possible fact, that strengthens the claim. So it's relevant.

B. Some of the cups recovered from the archeological site were not made of porcelain.
a possible fact that goes against fact A. Eliminate.

C. The next cup to be recovered from the site will likely be made of porcelain.
an assumption, strengthens the claim. So it's relevant.

D. Porcelain makers often traveled between centers, experimenting with one another's recipes.
an assumption, weakens the claim, goes against fact A, makes it harder to determine origin. Eliminate.

E. There was considerable overlap of materials in the recipes used by the various centers.
a possible fact, weakens the claim, makes it harder to determine origin. Eliminate.

F. Most porcelain in 18th century Britain was made at one of the several centers.
a possible fact, that doesn't add any value to the assumption (remember the question? a fact that logically supports the assumption, this doesn't), no positive or negative bias. Eliminate.­
User avatar
Gemmie
User avatar
Joined: 19 Dec 2021
Last visit: 06 Apr 2025
Posts: 510
Own Kudos:
304
Given Kudos: 76
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Technology, Economics
GMAT Focus 1: 695 Q87 V84 DI83
GPA: 3.55
GMAT Focus 1: 695 Q87 V84 DI83
Posts: 510
Kudos: 304
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in 29 Jun 2024, 09:36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
­Required Assumption: The next cup to be recovered from the site will likely be made of porcelain.

The archaeologist's argument assumes that the next cup to be recovered from the archaeological site will likely be made of porcelain. This assumption is necessary because the entire argument is based on the premise that compositional analysis of the recovered cup will allow determination of its origin based on the unique recipes used by different porcelain-production centers.


Supporting Fact: Other cups have been recovered from the archaeological site, all of which were made of porcelain.

Other cups have been recovered from the archaeological site, all of which were made of porcelain. This fact provides significant logical support for the assumption. If previous cups recovered from the site were all made of porcelain, it suggests a pattern or trend that porcelain items were commonly used or produced at the site during the period under study. This pattern increases the likelihood that future recoveries, including the next cup, will also be made of porcelain. This consistency in the material of recovered items strengthens the archaeologist's inference that the next cup will likely conform to this pattern.­
User avatar
Blackcrow1972
User avatar
Joined: 04 Jun 2024
Last visit: 13 Apr 2025
Posts: 67
Own Kudos:
105
Given Kudos: 40
Posts: 67
Kudos: 105
Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in 02 Dec 2024, 00:23
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The statement "Most porcelain in 18th century Britain was made at one of the several centers" is incorrect as the "possible fact" in this context because it does not provide direct support for the archaeologist's assumption that the next cup to be recovered from the site will likely be made of porcelain.
Moderators:
Bunuel
Math Expert
100754 posts
chetan2u
GMAT Expert
11324 posts
Bismuth83
DI Forum Moderator
654 posts