It is currently 18 Oct 2017, 02:56

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

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

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
Posts: 218

Kudos [?]: 394 [1], given: 172

GPA: 3.46
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Premium Member
Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Feb 2014, 07:20
1
This post received
KUDOS
21
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

29% (01:47) correct 71% (02:01) wrong based on 604 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

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.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by mba1382 on 10 Feb 2014, 20:22, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 394 [1], given: 172

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 34

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 0

Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Feb 2014, 07:41
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.

Conclusion is based on the fact that very few turned out to be forgeries. What would weaken the conclusion? not all were tested.

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. -> not all were tested.

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: Final Lap
Joined: 25 Oct 2012
Posts: 282

Kudos [?]: 398 [0], given: 85

Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.54
WE: Project Management (Retail Banking)
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Feb 2014, 07:43
Hi there,

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

I see three strong contenders among the five answer choices : B,C and D:

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.

The tone of the author when he adressed his conclusion shows some certainty and thus, in order to weaken his argument, we must look for answer choice that points a wide range of artists who are concerned with forgery. While C and D do that in some way, the scope pointed is a little bit reduced to some i.e some of the works and some museum and so maybe it is just a minority and therefore the conclusion can still stand. In the other hand , B threatens seriously the conclusion in that it suggests that many artists are concerned and if the collection of private owners was to be subjected to comupter analysis then the conclusion will fall apart.

So, i'll go for B.
_________________

KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

"If you don't change your life, your life will change you"

Kudos [?]: 398 [0], given: 85

Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 07 Apr 2013
Posts: 3

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 5

Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT Date: 07-15-2013
GPA: 3
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Feb 2014, 09:06
Hi All,
C and E seems to be OUT ...Between B&D ...as the statement given in question ..."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. " ...So Both Options seems to be OUT ...As they talk about Hiding Flemish's Work ..but hundreds have be "quoted" as tested...
Please Tell the QA!

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 5

Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 28 Apr 2012
Posts: 306

Kudos [?]: 474 [0], given: 142

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT 1: 650 Q48 V31
GMAT 2: 770 Q50 V47
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Feb 2014, 13:09
is it A ??

If the computer analysis finds very few to be fake, so the reputation of the painter stands unaffected. what happens, if the situation is reversed ? i.e. the computer analysis finds very few to be original ?
_________________

"Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well."
― Voltaire


Press Kudos, if I have helped.
Thanks!

Kudos [?]: 474 [0], given: 142

Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 14 Jan 2013
Posts: 152

Kudos [?]: 376 [0], given: 30

Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GMAT Date: 08-01-2013
GPA: 3.7
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Feb 2014, 16:39
IMO A....

If reverse holds true , then most of the work is forgeries.....
_________________

"Where are my Kudos" ............ Good Question = kudos

"Start enjoying all phases" & all Sections

__________________________________________________________________
http://gmatclub.com/forum/collection-of-articles-on-critical-reasoning-159959.html

http://gmatclub.com/forum/percentages-700-800-level-questions-130588.html

http://gmatclub.com/forum/700-to-800-level-quant-question-with-detail-soluition-143321.html

Kudos [?]: 376 [0], given: 30

2 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
Posts: 218

Kudos [?]: 394 [2], given: 172

GPA: 3.46
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Premium Member
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Feb 2014, 20:22
2
This post received
KUDOS
Updated OA. Source: Magoosh

Here is the OE :

The argument: only a few of a famous artist’s works, according to a nifty computer program, are forgeries; therefore, the artist’s reputation will be unaffected. The correct answer will call this conclusion into question.

Though the paintings identified as fakes were few, if they happen to be some of the artist’s best known works, as (C) suggests, then surely the artist’s reputation will be affected. Therefore, (C) is the correct answer.

(A) suggests that there is a greater likelihood that the computer program identified actual paintings as forgeries than the other way around. So even fewer than a ‘slim few’ are actually forgeries. If anything, (A) strengthens the argument.

(B) suggests that many of the paintings tested were not among the artist's most famous. This knowledge, however, does not help us weaken the conclusion. Because we're mostly talking about museums, the fact that private owners may have some potential forgeries does not really erode the conclusion.

(D) This one is certainly very tempting! However, you must keep in mind that there are often several answers that are arguably correct, but you have to pick the best one that has the most evidence supporting in.

So this answer could potentially cast doubt on the conclusion—if the most famous works were not tested, there is a possibility they could be forgeries. But we have to assume too much for this fact to actually weaken the argument.

(E) is out. It is the original artist’s reputation at stake; if his paintings are forgeries, it does not matter who the forger was.

I was caught up between B & C. Finally I fell for B but then my question is that where does the stem say that it's concerned about museums only and not private owners. As per stem
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.

Also conclusion says - Thus, the master’s reputation as one of the greatest artists humanity has ever produced will surely remain undiminished.

Request expert inputs here. Thanks :-)

Kudos [?]: 394 [2], given: 172

2 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Jan 2014
Posts: 67

Kudos [?]: 16 [2], given: 77

Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Feb 2014, 22:25
2
This post received
KUDOS
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.


Good question.

C is the only correct answer in this stem, because others go too far. Here is my reasons.

Background: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.

Premise: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.

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

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.

This option actually strengthened the conclusion, If the computer analysis works like this, then it will be easy to treat the real masterpieces as fake stuffs, needless to say that the fake stuff will totally be terminated. but in the stem few pictures have been demonstrated as fake stuff. Strengthen 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.

This option is irrelevant. First, it told us nothing about the sample in the test. Second, we don't know whether the pieces in the collection of private owners are authentic or counterfeit, we can't conclude that the more the private owners have, the more authentic the pieces are. In the stem we can't find out this assumption.

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.

NOTICE:SOME OF,this option is very tricky because it seems like the reversion of the stem, please NOTCIE the quote in the stem,"Hundreds of this Flemish artist’s works were tested to determine whether they were forgeries". We don't know whether there are other pieces, it just hundreds. What if the painter got thousands of works? Maybe the tester unfortunately chose the right one to demonstrate and then make a conclusion. Weaken

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.

irrelevant. Again, the wrong assumption here is: The greater the works are, the less likely the fake is. We can't simply jump to the conclusion with that assumption to weak the argument because the stem does not tell us this assumption.

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.

irrelevant.. This one is tricky because it introduced some other highly skilled forger. But it didn't attack the conclusion. Even if the forgeries are work of other skilled forger, then what? The data told us that forgeries is FEW, so this option changes nothing of the argument.

Hope it helps.

Kudos [?]: 16 [2], given: 77

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 06 Dec 2013
Posts: 16

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 18

Location: United States
GPA: 3.5
WE: Brand Management (Consulting)
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Feb 2014, 04:15
this looks to be a tough one for me,I was between B and D,but saw the OA as C,can someone please explain more on C

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 18

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Jan 2014
Posts: 67

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 77

Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Feb 2014, 04:37
karanwalia wrote:
this looks to be a tough one for me,I was between B and D,but saw the OA as C,can someone please explain more on C


Please see this one. art-historian-recently-computer-analysis-has-revealed-that-167348.html#p1330563

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 77

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
Posts: 218

Kudos [?]: 394 [0], given: 172

GPA: 3.46
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Premium Member
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Feb 2014, 06:57
I honestly do not agree the way you justified and explained B as Irrelevant.

Here are my comments and request your input on below

First, it told us nothing about the sample in the test. Second, we don't know whether the pieces in the collection of private owners are authentic or counterfeit, we can't conclude that the more the private owners have, the more authentic the pieces are.

Now where exactly does the stem says that we are only concerned about museum works only. The stem only mentions 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.
.
In the stem we can't find out this assumption. Does it mean that to weaken, we need to have an assumption stated and no new information is needed to weaken an argument? This will mean that weakening always means finding stated assumption/info and then only we can weaken an argument. Seems flawed to me honestly. :-)

samsmalldog 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.


Good question.

C is the only correct answer in this stem, because others go too far. Here is my reasons.

Background: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.

Premise: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.

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

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.

This option actually strengthened the conclusion, If the computer analysis works like this, then it will be easy to treat the real masterpieces as fake stuffs, needless to say that the fake stuff will totally be terminated. but in the stem few pictures have been demonstrated as fake stuff. Strengthen 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.

This option is irrelevant. First, it told us nothing about the sample in the test. Second, we don't know whether the pieces in the collection of private owners are authentic or counterfeit, we can't conclude that the more the private owners have, the more authentic the pieces are. In the stem we can't find out this assumption.

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.

NOTICE:SOME OF,this option is very tricky because it seems like the reversion of the stem, please NOTCIE the quote in the stem,"Hundreds of this Flemish artist’s works were tested to determine whether they were forgeries". We don't know whether there are other pieces, it just hundreds. What if the painter got thousands of works? Maybe the tester unfortunately chose the right one to demonstrate and then make a conclusion. Weaken

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.

irrelevant. Again, the wrong assumption here is: The greater the works are, the less likely the fake is. We can't simply jump to the conclusion with that assumption to weak the argument because the stem does not tell us this assumption.

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.

irrelevant.. This one is tricky because it introduced some other highly skilled forger. But it didn't attack the conclusion. Even if the forgeries are work of other skilled forger, then what? The data told us that forgeries is FEW, so this option changes nothing of the argument.

Hope it helps.

Kudos [?]: 394 [0], given: 172

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Jan 2014
Posts: 67

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 77

Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Feb 2014, 07:40
mba1382 wrote:
I honestly do not agree the way you justified and explained B as Irrelevant.

Here are my comments and request your input on below

First, it told us nothing about the sample in the test. Second, we don't know whether the pieces in the collection of private owners are authentic or counterfeit, we can't conclude that the more the private owners have, the more authentic the pieces are.

Now where exactly does the stem says that we are only concerned about museum works only. The stem only mentions 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.
.
In the stem we can't find out this assumption. Does it mean that to weaken, we need to have an assumption stated and no new information is needed to weaken an argument? This will mean that weakening always means finding stated assumption/info and then only we can weaken an argument. Seems flawed to me honestly. :-)

samsmalldog 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.


Good question.

C is the only correct answer in this stem, because others go too far. Here is my reasons.

Background: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.

Premise: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.

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

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.

This option actually strengthened the conclusion, If the computer analysis works like this, then it will be easy to treat the real masterpieces as fake stuffs, needless to say that the fake stuff will totally be terminated. but in the stem few pictures have been demonstrated as fake stuff. Strengthen 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.

This option is irrelevant. First, it told us nothing about the sample in the test. Second, we don't know whether the pieces in the collection of private owners are authentic or counterfeit, we can't conclude that the more the private owners have, the more authentic the pieces are. In the stem we can't find out this assumption.

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.

NOTICE:SOME OF,this option is very tricky because it seems like the reversion of the stem, please NOTCIE the quote in the stem,"Hundreds of this Flemish artist’s works were tested to determine whether they were forgeries". We don't know whether there are other pieces, it just hundreds. What if the painter got thousands of works? Maybe the tester unfortunately chose the right one to demonstrate and then make a conclusion. Weaken

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.

irrelevant. Again, the wrong assumption here is: The greater the works are, the less likely the fake is. We can't simply jump to the conclusion with that assumption to weak the argument because the stem does not tell us this assumption.

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.

irrelevant.. This one is tricky because it introduced some other highly skilled forger. But it didn't attack the conclusion. Even if the forgeries are work of other skilled forger, then what? The data told us that forgeries is FEW, so this option changes nothing of the argument.

Hope it helps.


Well, you are right. I explained this option in a wrong way.New assumption and informatin can attack the conclusion and then weaken the argument. But they have to be convinced or relevant.

But this one seemed miss the point .

Thanks to correct my mistakes. If I made other mistakes, please point out. Thanks anyway. :)

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 77

Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 28 Apr 2012
Posts: 306

Kudos [?]: 474 [0], given: 142

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT 1: 650 Q48 V31
GMAT 2: 770 Q50 V47
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Feb 2014, 13:23
samsmalldog 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.


Good question.

C is the only correct answer in this stem, because others go too far. Here is my reasons.

Background: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.

Premise: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.

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

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.

This option actually strengthened the conclusion, If the computer analysis works like this, then it will be easy to treat the real masterpieces as fake stuffs, needless to say that the fake stuff will totally be terminated. but in the stem few pictures have been demonstrated as fake stuff. Strengthen 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.

This option is irrelevant. First, it told us nothing about the sample in the test. Second, we don't know whether the pieces in the collection of private owners are authentic or counterfeit, we can't conclude that the more the private owners have, the more authentic the pieces are. In the stem we can't find out this assumption.

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.

NOTICE:SOME OF,this option is very tricky because it seems like the reversion of the stem, please NOTCIE the quote in the stem,"Hundreds of this Flemish artist’s works were tested to determine whether they were forgeries". We don't know whether there are other pieces, it just hundreds. What if the painter got thousands of works? Maybe the tester unfortunately chose the right one to demonstrate and then make a conclusion. Weaken

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.

irrelevant. Again, the wrong assumption here is: The greater the works are, the less likely the fake is. We can't simply jump to the conclusion with that assumption to weak the argument because the stem does not tell us this assumption.

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.

irrelevant.. This one is tricky because it introduced some other highly skilled forger. But it didn't attack the conclusion. Even if the forgeries are work of other skilled forger, then what? The data told us that forgeries is FEW, so this option changes nothing of the argument.

Hope it helps.


How does A strengthens ?

as per premise: 100 tested, 90 original, 10 found fake.
with option A: 10 original, 90 fake
which case will question the credibility of the artist ?

Option C says - the identified 10 fakes are the ones the Artist is famous for.

Obviously option C is better, but to say A strengthens the argument doesn't sound reasonable.
_________________

"Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well."
― Voltaire


Press Kudos, if I have helped.
Thanks!

Kudos [?]: 474 [0], given: 142

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Jan 2014
Posts: 67

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 77

Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Feb 2014, 18:07
ConnectTheDots wrote:
samsmalldog 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.


Good question.

C is the only correct answer in this stem, because others go too far. Here is my reasons.

Background: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.

Premise: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.

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

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.

This option actually strengthened the conclusion, If the computer analysis works like this, then it will be easy to treat the real masterpieces as fake stuffs, needless to say that the fake stuff will totally be terminated. but in the stem few pictures have been demonstrated as fake stuff. Strengthen 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.

This option is irrelevant. First, it told us nothing about the sample in the test. Second, we don't know whether the pieces in the collection of private owners are authentic or counterfeit, we can't conclude that the more the private owners have, the more authentic the pieces are. In the stem we can't find out this assumption.

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.

NOTICE:SOME OF,this option is very tricky because it seems like the reversion of the stem, please NOTCIE the quote in the stem,"Hundreds of this Flemish artist’s works were tested to determine whether they were forgeries". We don't know whether there are other pieces, it just hundreds. What if the painter got thousands of works? Maybe the tester unfortunately chose the right one to demonstrate and then make a conclusion. Weaken

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.

irrelevant. Again, the wrong assumption here is: The greater the works are, the less likely the fake is. We can't simply jump to the conclusion with that assumption to weak the argument because the stem does not tell us this assumption.

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.

irrelevant.. This one is tricky because it introduced some other highly skilled forger. But it didn't attack the conclusion. Even if the forgeries are work of other skilled forger, then what? The data told us that forgeries is FEW, so this option changes nothing of the argument.

Hope it helps.


How does A strengthens ?

as per premise: 100 tested, 90 original, 10 found fake.
with option A: 10 original, 90 fake
which case will question the credibility of the artist ?

Option C says - the identified 10 fakes are the ones the Artist is famous for.

Obviously option C is better, but to say A strengthens the argument doesn't sound reasonable.


Well, I seem this option strengthen because I didn't think the extreme way you point out, "more likely to mistake" quote from option A didn't fit in you case, which the analysis is extremely mistake.

as per premise: 100 tested, 90 original, 10 found fake.
with option A: 70 original, 30 fake

in this case, the analysis undiminished the painter's reputation because most of the paint are authentic. Also, this option tell us the unconvinced result from the analysis, so we can argue that the number of the original paints will larger than the result from the test. Further affirm the painter's reputation.

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 77

Expert Post
6 KUDOS received
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7674

Kudos [?]: 17345 [6], given: 232

Location: Pune, India
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Feb 2014, 21:16
6
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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)
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 17345 [6], given: 232

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
Posts: 218

Kudos [?]: 394 [0], given: 172

GPA: 3.46
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Premium Member
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Feb 2014, 21:46
Thanks Karishma. Really helpful :-)

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)

Kudos [?]: 394 [0], given: 172

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Jan 2014
Posts: 67

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 77

Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Feb 2014, 22:46
Hi Karishma,really helps!

I'm confused with your explanation on option D, Is this a weaken option? Here is a quote from your words "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." So could I say that there is no assumption here? . Oh I see! you don't need to assume anything to weaken the conclusion if (C) is correct. Now I get it! :-D


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)

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 77

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 354

Kudos [?]: 149 [0], given: 70

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: XLRI GM"18
GPA: 4
WE: Human Resources (Human Resources)
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Feb 2014, 10:03
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.


ONLY C STANDS....QUESTION ON CREDIBILITY OF Flemish IS NOT %( WHICH IS LOW) OF WORKS FOUND TO BE FORGERY.... BUT THAT THE IMPORTANT AND WELL KNOWN FEW WERE FORGERY........

Kudos [?]: 149 [0], given: 70

GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10117

Kudos [?]: 261 [0], given: 0

Premium Member
Re: Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jun 2015, 06:19
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.

Kudos [?]: 261 [0], given: 0

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 10 Jan 2015
Posts: 8

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 58

Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 May 2016, 22:49
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.


Can you mention the source please?

I think many people misunderstand this weaken question. we are asked to pick an option which casts doubt on the author's conclusion.This does not necessarily mean that we have to diminish the reputation of the artist.It is sufficient if we find an option which just casts a doubt on the conclusion.

Here the historian says "only a slim few turned out to be actual forgeries and thus the artists reputation will remain undiminished".

a) this actually strengthens
b)this casts a doubt since many of the works are yet to be scanned but there is a chance that none may turn out to be forgeries,hence we cannot be sure yet(hold this option for now)
c)If the forgeries are not forgeries but the work of some other artist then the whole argument is wrong.this certainly casts a doubt on the authors conclusion (though we do not know this might or might not diminish the reputation).
d)irrelevant.
e) doesnt matter if forgeries are the work of x or y or z.

clearly option c looks better than b.

forgive typos.

regards,
suhas

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 58

Art Historian: Recently, computer analysis has revealed that   [#permalink] 11 May 2016, 22:49

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 32 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  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| 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®.