Recently the museums in Cremia were in news when one of the most visit

Solution...

A museum was caught using fake paintings. investigating officer conclusion that Using of fake paintings can stop if public stopped using these museums...

we are looking for assumption, and our assumption has to be something to do with public visiting the museums or/and practice stopping

lets see the statements-

(1) Museums resort to such tactics to generate revenues.
This is already mentioned in argument and also it does not have anything to do with the conclusion..

(2) The Administration does not have any mechanism to stop museums from displaying such fake paintings.
We are speaking about people visiting and the practice of using fake paintings stopping, so OUT of scope

(3) The people visiting these museums can find whether a museum displays fake paintings or not.
Correct. If the Investing Officer feels that public stops using these museums, so he must be assuming that people can find whether museum displays fake paintings.
If people are unable to find whether the museum indulges in these practices, the conclusion will NOT stand

(4) Not all museums resort to displaying fake paintings to generate revenue.
Out of scope

(5) The museums will keep indulging in these malpractices if people do not stop visiting them.
Again a tempting choice- 50% have choosen this as ANSWER... But it is an extreme choice - WHY?
the IO concluded that the practice will stop if people stop visiting them, BUT does it mean that if people continue visiting them, the museums will keep following these practices - NO..
this would be TRUE if conclusion said - "The investigating officer concluded that this could stop ONLY if the public did not visit such museums."
so there may be some other method which can stop this practice, may be governments interference or media coverage or heavy penalty... The conclusion just states that people not visiting them is one such way

Possible Assumption: For the investigating officers conclusion to hold true, the public must be able to distinguish between a fake painting and an original painting.

C aligns with our assumption.

Answer: C

Conclusion: The investigating officer concluded that this could stop if the public did not visit such museums.

In most of the assumptions, the correct answer will not be talking about the future. Eliminate "C".

Only B and E are relevant.

B - The Administration does not have any mechanism to stop museums from displaying such fake paintings.
It provides the reason as to why the officer is asking the people to stop visiting.
Negation: If the administration was able to stop the fake painting by itself, then it wouldn't ask the people to stop visiting. Breaks the conclusion.

E - The museums will keep indulging in these malpractices if people do not stop visiting them.
This is also somewhat correct i feel the choice "B" is stronger.

My pick - B

chetan2u, with due respect, people are talked about only in the last statement. Conclusion says that if people stop going, malpractices will stop. It doesn't mean that people can find out weather museums display fake or real paintings.

I feel that there must be a connection to show negative impression on people's mind because of the fake paintings in museums and unwillingness to visit these museums. Please advise.

In addition to the clarification given by Chetan, I want to point out that Option E is a prediction rather than an assumption. So E cannot be the answer choice.

Dear Mod ,
Thanks for the wonderful question I enjoyed solving however I have a doubt that If we negate E argument falls in this question and Negation technique is the one I am learning to apply . So i would be thankful if you can explain negation in E option in this case

Option E negated is:
The museums will stop these malpractices if people do not stop visiting them.

Option E negated is just the opposite of what the conclusion states. It does not break the link between premise to conclusion. In order to be the correct assumption, the negated statement must break the link between premise and conclusion, not just be the opposite of conclusion.

You talked about word "such", what about the word "most visited" in first line. This museum was already most visited ...so people were clearly not able to identify the paintings. Doesn't this make C irrelevant?

GMATNinja - is this a high quality question? Pls opine how option C is right and if negative can impact the conclusion

­This doesn't appear to be an official question, so I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.