GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 22 Sep 2018, 20:15

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

Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 16 Oct 2015
Posts: 15
Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 23 May 2016, 07:21
mba1382 wrote:
Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that a few of a famous Flemish artist’s works are forgeries, and are actually the work of noted forger Elmyr de Hory. While such a development may emit violent reverberations through the art world, even those museums that have a wealth of the Flemish artist in their collections should not be overly concerned. Hundreds of this Flemish artist’s works were tested to determine whether they were forgeries, yet only a slim few turned out to be actual forgeries. Thus, the master’s reputation as one of the greatest artists humanity has ever produced will surely remain undiminished.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the art historian’s conclusion?

A. The computer analysis involved is more likely to mistake an actual work as a forgery than to mistake a forgery as an actual work.
B. Many of the Flemish artist’s well known portraits are in the collection of private owners and were therefore not subjected to computer analysis.
C. Some of the works upon which Flemish artist’s standing rests were identified by the computer analysis to be the work of de Hory.
D. Some museums, worrying that their most prized painting from the Flemish artist would be deemed forgeries, and thus lose value, only offered up the artist’s lesser known works for computer analysis.
E. Though few in the art world dispute the outcome of the computer analysis of the Flemish artist’s work, many contend that the identified forgeries are not the work of Elmyr de Hory but some other highly skilled forger.

I am posting this question as I am not convinced with OA and OE too. Need some discussions to understand the reasoning put by people here. Will post OA along with OE once few discussions are there. Requesting expert inputs as well.



Hi there,

The statement says that hundreds were tested but only a few turned out to be forgeries. Based on this, the historian concludes that "the master’s reputation as one of the greatest artists humanity has ever produced will surely remain undiminished". So the historian concludes this after the tests, he can´t conclude anything based on what has not happened. The way I see it one might pre-think the following: what if the the few works that were identified as forgeries are part of the Flemish artist most important/most influential work or contributions to the world of art due to its technique, style, etc. Then, its reputation could be questioned. And this is exactly what option "C" talks about. Hence, the answer is "C".


It would not have the same impact on Leonardo Da Vinci´s legacy if the Mona Lisa or The Last Supper were identified as forgeries as it would be the case if some sketches supposedly drawn by the artist were fake.

Hope this helps.

Best,

EISP

Originally posted by edusacco on 20 May 2016, 10:14.
Last edited by edusacco on 23 May 2016, 07:21, edited 1 time in total.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
P
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8288
Location: Pune, India
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2016, 21:54
edusacco wrote:
mba1382 wrote:
Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that a few of a famous Flemish artist’s works are forgeries, and are actually the work of noted forger Elmyr de Hory. While such a development may emit violent reverberations through the art world, even those museums that have a wealth of the Flemish artist in their collections should not be overly concerned. Hundreds of this Flemish artist’s works were tested to determine whether they were forgeries, yet only a slim few turned out to be actual forgeries. Thus, the master’s reputation as one of the greatest artists humanity has ever produced will surely remain undiminished.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the art historian’s conclusion?

A. The computer analysis involved is more likely to mistake an actual work as a forgery than to mistake a forgery as an actual work.
B. Many of the Flemish artist’s well known portraits are in the collection of private owners and were therefore not subjected to computer analysis.
C. Some of the works upon which Flemish artist’s standing rests were identified by the computer analysis to be the work of de Hory.
D. Some museums, worrying that their most prized painting from the Flemish artist would be deemed forgeries, and thus lose value, only offered up the artist’s lesser known works for computer analysis.
E. Though few in the art world dispute the outcome of the computer analysis of the Flemish artist’s work, many contend that the identified forgeries are not the work of Elmyr de Hory but some other highly skilled forger.

I am posting this question as I am not convinced with OA and OE too. Need some discussions to understand the reasoning put by people here. Will post OA along with OE once few discussions are there. Requesting expert inputs as well.



Hi there,

The statement says that hundreds were tested but only a few turned out to be forgeries. Based on this, the historian concludes that "the master’s reputation as one of the greatest artists humanity has ever produced will surely remain undiminished". So the historian concludes this after the tests, he can´t conclude anything based on what has not happened. The way I see it one might pre-think the following: what if the the few works that were identified as forgeries are part of the Flemish artist most important/most influential work or contributions to the world of art due to its technique, style, etc. Then, its reputation could be questioned. And this is exactly what option D talks about. Hence, the answer is "D".


It would not have the same impact on Leonardo Da Vinci´s legacy if the Mona Lisa or The Last Supper were identified as forgeries as it would be the case if some sketches supposedly drawn by the artist were fake.

Hope this helps.

Best,

EISP


Yes, this makes the answer (C), not (D).
(C) is the OA.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >

GMAT self-study has never been more personalized or more fun. Try ORION Free!

VP
VP
avatar
S
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 1038
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 May 2016, 02:36
VERY HARD one because we can not see conclusion and evidence clearly
who can summarise long argument into simple argement is the winner. I miss this one

evidence, a few work of Flemming is fake
conclusion, standing of flemming dose not diminish.

we need to criticize argument before going to answer choices.
though a few works are fake, those work is most important to standing of Flemming

going to choices. C matches.

this argument is still typical of gmat cr but because the argument are longer, we do not see clearly evidence and are wrong.
_________________

visit my facebook to help me.
on facebook, my name is: thang thang thang

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 16 Oct 2015
Posts: 15
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 May 2016, 16:49
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
edusacco wrote:
mba1382 wrote:
Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that a few of a famous Flemish artist’s works are forgeries, and are actually the work of noted forger Elmyr de Hory. While such a development may emit violent reverberations through the art world, even those museums that have a wealth of the Flemish artist in their collections should not be overly concerned. Hundreds of this Flemish artist’s works were tested to determine whether they were forgeries, yet only a slim few turned out to be actual forgeries. Thus, the master’s reputation as one of the greatest artists humanity has ever produced will surely remain undiminished.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the art historian’s conclusion?

A. The computer analysis involved is more likely to mistake an actual work as a forgery than to mistake a forgery as an actual work.
B. Many of the Flemish artist’s well known portraits are in the collection of private owners and were therefore not subjected to computer analysis.
C. Some of the works upon which Flemish artist’s standing rests were identified by the computer analysis to be the work of de Hory.
D. Some museums, worrying that their most prized painting from the Flemish artist would be deemed forgeries, and thus lose value, only offered up the artist’s lesser known works for computer analysis.
E. Though few in the art world dispute the outcome of the computer analysis of the Flemish artist’s work, many contend that the identified forgeries are not the work of Elmyr de Hory but some other highly skilled forger.

I am posting this question as I am not convinced with OA and OE too. Need some discussions to understand the reasoning put by people here. Will post OA along with OE once few discussions are there. Requesting expert inputs as well.



Hi there,

The statement says that hundreds were tested but only a few turned out to be forgeries. Based on this, the historian concludes that "the master’s reputation as one of the greatest artists humanity has ever produced will surely remain undiminished". So the historian concludes this after the tests, he can´t conclude anything based on what has not happened. The way I see it one might pre-think the following: what if the the few works that were identified as forgeries are part of the Flemish artist most important/most influential work or contributions to the world of art due to its technique, style, etc. Then, its reputation could be questioned. And this is exactly what option D talks about. Hence, the answer is "D".


It would not have the same impact on Leonardo Da Vinci´s legacy if the Mona Lisa or The Last Supper were identified as forgeries as it would be the case if some sketches supposedly drawn by the artist were fake.

Hope this helps.

Best,

EISP


Yes, this makes the answer (C), not (D).
(C) is the OA.


Yes, Karishma my bad... That´s what I meant. Thank you. I edited my past post!
Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 23 Dec 2015
Posts: 23
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Jun 2016, 22:03
1
C) Some of the works upon which Flemish artist’s standing rests were identified by the computer analysis to be the work of de Hory.

Though it may appear as a re statement of a premise in the argument, there is a diifernece here.

This statement means some of the works which gave reputation to Flemish artist were identified as forgeries. Since the reputed works of the artist are forgeries then it would definitely cast doubt on the historian's conclusions
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 18 Jan 2010
Posts: 254
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jun 2016, 01:33
mba1382 wrote:
Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that a few of a famous Flemish artist’s works are forgeries, and are actually the work of noted forger Elmyr de Hory. While such a development may emit violent reverberations through the art world, even those museums that have a wealth of the Flemish artist in their collections should not be overly concerned. Hundreds of this Flemish artist’s works were tested to determine whether they were forgeries, yet only a slim few turned out to be actual forgeries. Thus, the master’s reputation as one of the greatest artists humanity has ever produced will surely remain undiminished.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the art historian’s conclusion?

A. The computer analysis involved is more likely to mistake an actual work as a forgery than to mistake a forgery as an actual work.
B. Many of the Flemish artist’s well known portraits are in the collection of private owners and were therefore not subjected to computer analysis.
C. Some of the works upon which Flemish artist’s standing rests were identified by the computer analysis to be the work of de Hory.
D. Some museums, worrying that their most prized painting from the Flemish artist would be deemed forgeries, and thus lose value, only offered up the artist’s lesser known works for computer analysis.
E. Though few in the art world dispute the outcome of the computer analysis of the Flemish artist’s work, many contend that the identified forgeries are not the work of Elmyr de Hory but some other highly skilled forger.

I am posting this question as I am not convinced with OA and OE too. Need some discussions to understand the reasoning put by people here. Will post OA along with OE once few discussions are there. Requesting expert inputs as well.



This is an excellent question.

(A) This actually strengthens the conclusion by hinting that there are chances that errors might be caused by computer analysts. It also hints that there was a higher probability that analysts would label a genuine work as forgery. So this does not weaken. Hence OUT.
(B) Those were not analysed; so we cant say that all those paintings were genuine. This choice sems to weaken the conclusion but actually it merely says that there were a large number of paintings that were not analysed. Hence OUT
(C) The argument core is that even of few paintings were forgeries, famous Flemish artist’s work is not undermined. So the argument focuses on "percentage" and indicates that since the percentage is low, this discrepancy can be ignored.
(D) This again is similar to reasoning given in B. There is no concrete scenario in this statement. The statement C highlights a specific and concrete case. So this is OUT
However this argument does not hold water if these few paintings were in some way critical. Argument C brings out that aspect.
(E) This is totally irrelevant. OUT.

C is the answer.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 27 Jul 2016
Posts: 14
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Jul 2016, 21:39
I wasn't sure between C & D and then realized something...

That museums held back their great works isn't strong evidence, since we don't know the proportion of works analyzed that were in museums vs private collections. Could be 90% of the works were from private collections in which case the behavior of museums would be far less important.

C skips that question and gets straight to the point.
Director
Director
User avatar
B
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 636
Location: India
Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Aug 2017, 15:48
The conclusion conveys a positive sense about the artist's reputation. So the answer should convey a negative sense about the reputation. Choice C best does that implying that the reputation of the artist would be affected.
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna Holistic Solutions
http://www.sravnatestprep.com

Holistic and Systematic Approach

SVP
SVP
avatar
P
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1789
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Sep 2017, 14:01
eliminate A and E.
D may and may not weaken b/c D does change the sample of the test; however, D is not good enough.
B relies on more an assumption that the reputation depends on the number of paintings is forged.
For C, at least test takers have to know the meaning of the word "standings"; otherwise, I do not know how a person can choose C without using POE.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 02 Apr 2014
Posts: 477
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Oct 2017, 02:16
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
mba1382 wrote:
Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that a few of a famous Flemish artist’s works are forgeries, and are actually the work of noted forger Elmyr de Hory. While such a development may emit violent reverberations through the art world, even those museums that have a wealth of the Flemish artist in their collections should not be overly concerned. Hundreds of this Flemish artist’s works were tested to determine whether they were forgeries, yet only a slim few turned out to be actual forgeries. Thus, the master’s reputation as one of the greatest artists humanity has ever produced will surely remain undiminished.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the art historian’s conclusion?

A. The computer analysis involved is more likely to mistake an actual work as a forgery than to mistake a forgery as an actual work.
B. Many of the Flemish artist’s well known portraits are in the collection of private owners and were therefore not subjected to computer analysis.
C. Some of the works upon which Flemish artist’s standing rests were identified by the computer analysis to be the work of de Hory.
D. Some museums, worrying that their most prized painting from the Flemish artist would be deemed forgeries, and thus lose value, only offered up the artist’s lesser known works for computer analysis.
E. Though few in the art world dispute the outcome of the computer analysis of the Flemish artist’s work, many contend that the identified forgeries are not the work of Elmyr de Hory but some other highly skilled forger.

I am posting this question as I am not convinced with OA and OE too. Need some discussions to understand the reasoning put by people here. Will post OA along with OE once few discussions are there. Requesting expert inputs as well.


In this question, both (C) and (D) weaken the conclusion but I went with (C) because it is much more straight forward i.e. you don't need to assume anything to weaken the conclusion if (C) is correct. Let me analyze it in detail:

Premises:
Computer analysis has revealed that a few of a famous Flemish artist’s works are forgeries
But very few turned out to be actual forgeries when 100s were tested (so basically it is saying that only a very small %age were forgeries)

Conclusion:
The master’s reputation as one of the greatest artists humanity has ever produced will surely remain undiminished.

The conclusion is about master's reputation remaining undiminished. We need to weaken it i.e. we need to select the option that diminishes his reputation.

(C) Some of the works upon which Flemish artist’s standing rests were identified by the computer analysis to be the work of de Hory.
Some works on which the artist's standing rests were forgeries. So even though a very small %age were forgeries, the ones which are forgeries are the ones on which the artist's standing depends. Then obviously, his standing/reputation will be diminished. This certainly weakens the conclusion.

(B) Many of the Flemish artist’s well known portraits are in the collection of private owners and were therefore not subjected to computer analysis.
There is no reason to assume that the collections of private owners will have many more forgeries than those of museums. The argument doesn't say that all his paintings were tested. It only says that many were tested and very few turned out to be forgeries. It doesn't matter whether the ones owned by museums were tested or the ones in the collection of private owners were tested. Ideally, we might believe that museums are more thorough in their research before they buy/accept paintings and hence they will have fewer forgeries but it is an assumption we need to make.

(D) Some museums, worrying that their most prized painting from the Flemish artist would be deemed forgeries, and thus lose value, only offered up the artist’s lesser known works for computer analysis.
This tells us that important paintings (the paintings on which the artist's reputation depends) were not tested. If this is the case, we cannot conclude that the artist's reputation is undiminished but to say that his reputation is actually diminished, we need to assume that there will be forgeries in the works on which his standing depends i.e. in the most prized collection. So there is an assumption involved here too.

Answer (C)


Hi Karishma,

Thanks for the clarification.

But i still some queries.

A: how do we eliminate this choice?

I am not able to see A not weakening the conclusion, say museum has 100 articles, out of which 90 forged, 10 original work.
Then computer analysis has less chance of detecting 90 forged articles.

can you please help?
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 12 Dec 2011
Posts: 32
Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 May 2018, 19:37
Background: computer analysis points out several Flemish's paintings were forged by Hory.

Premise: Among hundreds of works that were tested, only few were forgeries.
Conclusion: The small amount of flaws won't damage Flemish's reputation.

A, In any cases, this could potentially support the conclusion. If the computer can't tell the differences clearly then nothing bad (nothing good either) is going to happy to Flemish's reputation.

B, If the work in the private owner is not subject to testing, then it won't have any connection with whatever the testing results. Thus, this is irrelevant. Please remember, the whole conclusion and premise are built based on the testing results. If the testing results don't matter or something is out of scope, then it bears no impact on the conclusion.

C, Some works are forgeries. But in the question, the statement/premise is that "only a slim few" are forgeries. This "some" broadens the range of the forged works. Now, the forgeries are not few but some. What will the author reply?

D, Same as B. If it's not in the testing, it bears no impact. Also, if those museums don't present the work, which they worry about, for testing, how will we/author know whether those works are forged or real? If we don't even know that, how that will weaken the argument?

E, Irrelevant, the forgery master's identity is not important here.

Feel free to discuss.
GMAT Club Bot
Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that &nbs [#permalink] 16 May 2018, 19:37

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 31 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.