Eva: A “smart highway” system should be installed, one that would moni

Question

Eva: A “smart highway” system should be installed, one that would monitor areawide traffic patterns and communicate with computers in vehicles or with programmable highway signs to give drivers information about traffic congestion and alternate routes. Such a system, we can infer, would result in improved traffic flow in and around cities that would do more than improve drivers’ tempers; it would decrease the considerable loss of money and productivity that now results from traffic congestion.

Luis: There are already traffic reports on the radio. Why would a “smart highway” system be any better?

If Eva responded to Luis by saying that the current one-minute radio reports are too short to give a sufficient description of overall patterns of traffic congestion, which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen Luis’s challenge?

(A) Bad weather, which radio stations report, would cause traffic to slow down whether or not a “smart highway” system was in operation.

(B) It would be less costly to have radio stations that give continual, lengthier traffic reports than to install a “smart highway” system.

(C) Radio reports can take note of congestion once it occurs, but a “smart highway” system could anticipate and forestall it in many instances.

(D) The proposed traffic monitoring would not reduce the privacy of drivers.

(E) Toll collection booths, which constitute traffic bottlenecks, would largely be replaced in the “smart highway” system by electronic debiting of commuters’ accounts while traffic proceeded at full speed.

GMATNinja · Accepted Answer

Ok, one explanation coming up! First, let's take a look at the passage to make sure we understand the points that Eva and Luis are making:

Eva claims that a "smart highway" should be installed and lists a series of benefits this "smart highway" would provide 
 Luis asks why the "smart highway" would be any better than the traffic reports already provided by local radio stations

Now imagine that Eva says that radio reports  "are too short to give a sufficient description of overall patterns of traffic congestion."  How could Luis respond to this argument? Remember, Luis thinks the "smart highway" thing is stupid because we  already have radio reports . We want to STRENGTHEN that position, despite the fact that Eva has pointed out an issue with the radio reports.

So, we'll be looking to cross out anything that does not strengthen Luis's challenge.

Let's take a look at the answer choices to see which one of them best helps Luis's challenge:
 
The  weather reports  are not the same as the  traffic reports . We are trying to compare the benefits of the "smart highway" to the  traffic reports  Luis asks about.

(A) is not useful in strengthening Luis challenge because it gives us no additional information about the relative helpfulness of the  traffic reports . For this reason (A) is out.

We're asked to find the answer choice that strengthens Luis's challenge if Eva had said  "that the current one-minute radio reports are  too short to give a sufficient description  of overall patterns of traffic congestion."

If we could  increase the length  of the traffic reports and have them broadcast continually so they gave a sufficient description of overall patterns of congestion, this would provide a similar benefit to that provided by the "smart highway." We're also told that this would be  less expensive  than installing the "smart highway."

This suggests that, with a few changes, the radio reports could be  just as effective  as the "smart highway" but would be  cheaper .

This helps Luis's challenge -- (B) looks good, let's keep it for now and examine the other answer choices.

This does not help Luis's challenge. It makes Eva's side of the argument stronger by comparing the performance of the "smart highway" to the radio reports and showing the "smart highway" would be  more  effective.

(C) is not the answer to this question.

We are not concerned with the  privacy  of the drivers. We are comparing the  effectiveness  of the "smart highway" and the radio reports.

(D) does not help us with this comparison so we can rule it out as a possible answer choice.

Like (C), this is another answer choice that helps Eva's side of the argument. By removing a bottleneck, the "smart highway" would help traffic flow more smoothly in a way that the radio reports could not match.

Since this works against Luis's challenge, (E) cannot be the answer to this question.

That leaves (B) as the only answer not crossed out -- (B) is our answer.

I hope that helps!

eakabuah · Answer

B is the right answer.

Reasoning 
Eva says that a smart highway system should be installed to provide drivers information about traffic congestion and alternate routes. Why? Because such a system would result in improved traffic flow in and around the cities and this system would do more than improve the temper of drivers and decrease the loss of money and productivity that now results from traffic congestion. But then Luis chipped in by stating that there are already traffic reports on the radio; hence he questioned why a smart highway system would be any better. We are asked to assume that Eva responded to Luis by saying that the current one-minute radio reports are too short to give a sufficient description of overall patterns of traffic. Based on this response from Eva, we are to identify the answer choice if true, would most strengthen Luis's challenge.

At this point, we are only supposed to look for an answer option that addresses Eva's concern that the current one-minute radio reports are too short to give sufficient descriptions of the overall patterns of traffic and that also presents an additional advantage of the radio traffic reports over the smart highway system. Scanning through the answer choices, option B satisfies this requirement elegantly, and hence B is the correct answer.

This option does not address Eva's concern that the current one-minute radio reports are too short to give sufficient descriptions of the overall traffic patterns. A is thus out of scope and incorrect.

B is correct as per the reasoning above. It addresses Eva's concerns thereby making the radio reports effective in providing comprehensive reports on traffic patterns. In addition, this option provides an evidence that shows that the use of radio stations to provide comprehensive reports on traffic patterns are less costly compared to the installation of a smart highway system.

This option provides an evidence that strengthens Eva's agreement rather than weakens it. C is thus incorrect.

This option does not address Eva's concerns in anyway instead, it provides an evidence that is out of scope and hence irrelevant to the argument. D is incorrect.

The replacement of toll collection booths, which constitute traffic bottlenecks, in the smart highway system with electronic debiting of commuters' while traffic proceeded does not address Eva's concern of the inadequate time allotted currently to radio traffic reporting. E is thus incorrect.

PRIYANSHU1111 · Answer

Experts, could you please an explanation?

cp2020 · Answer

here in this question the concern is not about the cost ,main point is about the too short information given by radio .plesse explain

elavendan1 · Answer

Hi GMATNinja, 
I have eliminated A, because, though Radios provide bad weather, smart highway would still detect the congestion and direct the drivers through an alternate route. In a way option A weakens Luis's challenge. 
On seeing your response, I doubt whether there is a gap in my understanding.

Please let me know whether this is the right way to eliminate option A here.

unraveled · Answer

Eva: A “smart highway” system should be installed, one that would monitor areawide traffic patterns and communicate with computers in vehicles or with programmable highway signs to give drivers information about traffic congestion and alternate routes. Such a system, we can infer, would result in improved traffic flow in and around cities that would do more than improve drivers’ tempers; it would decrease the considerable loss of money and productivity that now results from traffic congestion.

Luis: There are already traffic reports on the radio. Why would a “smart highway” system be any better?

If Eva responded to Luis by saying that the current one-minute radio reports are too short to give a sufficient description of overall patterns of traffic congestion, which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen Luis’s challenge?

(A) Bad weather, which radio stations report, would cause traffic to slow down whether or not a “smart highway” system was in operation.

(B) It would be less costly to have radio stations that give continual, lengthier traffic reports than to install a “smart highway” system.

(C) Radio reports can take note of congestion once it occurs, but a “smart highway” system could anticipate and forestall it in many instances.

(D) The proposed traffic monitoring would not reduce the privacy of drivers.

(E) Toll collection booths, which constitute traffic bottlenecks, would largely be replaced in the “smart highway” system by electronic debiting of commuters’ accounts while traffic proceeded at full speed.

I was dumb to read this one in totally an erratic manner, wasting my time and effort. Hope that does not happen with anyone in actual exam. So, here's how i went through this one.
When I read question stem that Eva responded to Luis I thought that first sentence(by Eva) was in response to Luis(2nd sentence). Such was the irony of my error of understanding.

I read Luis's comment first and then Eva's, only later realising that Luis's comment doesn't make mush sense without Eva's.

Now, the passage is easily understandable but the trick lies in question stem itself - in the way how Luis would respond to Eva's claim that one-minute radio reports are too short. Thus, we are finding Luis's response to this claim.

Finally, there are two things that need to be dealt with - radio reports being too short for system's effectivity(eventually radio reports can be effective if reports are larger, of course some assumption needs to be made) and "Smart highway" being more effective.
It was between B and C, I chose C.

It was a gross error of understanding C that i made - may be because of the way i started. C helps Eva's claim more than it Luis's by elaborating one more advantage.

Answer B.

I read Luis's comment first and then Eva's, only later realising that Luis's comment doesn't make mush sense without Eva's. Now, the passage is easily understandable but the trick lies in question stem itself - in the way how Luis would respond to Eva's claim that one-minute radio reports are too short. Thus, we are finding Luis's response to this claim. Finally, there are two things that need to be dealt with - radio reports being too short for system's effectivity(eventually radio reports can be effective if reports are larger, of course some assumption needs to be made) and "Smart highway" being more effective. It was between B and C, I chose C.

It was a gross error of understanding C that i made - may be because of the way i started. C helps Eva's claim more than it Luis's by elaborating one more advantage. Answer B.

VerbalBot · Answer

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.

Eva: A “smart highway” system should be installed, one that would moni

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Eva: A “smart highway” system should be installed, one that would moni

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards