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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Select the dropdowns below and click "Submit" to add this question to your Error log.
Difficulty:
45%
(medium)
Question Stats:
69%
(02:48)
correct 31%
(02:48)
wrong
based on 2642
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
For the years 2000 to 2011, the graph shows for the number of successful cyber attacks that year on two companies, as well as the amount of money (in thousands of dollars) each company spent that year in prevention of cyber attacks. Neither company had experienced successful cyber attacks before the year 2000.
Use the drop-down menus to form the most accurate statements based on the given information.
From 2000 to 2011, the number of successful cyber attacks that Company A experienced was the number of successful cyber attacks that Company B experienced.
The only year where increased spending coincided with a decrease in successful cyber attacks (compared to the previous year) for both companies was .
1. We are first asked to compare the number of successful attacks on company A vs B.
2. To do this, we don't have to sum up all the attacks, but rather calculate the delta between A and B.
3. The graph tells us that the number of attacks on B is (+8+2+3+4-4-6-6-9+1) = -7 larger than for A. In other words, company A had more successful cyberattacks than company B.
4. Next, we are asked to find the year when both companies increased funding and the number of cyberattacks decreased.
5. Notice that funding only increases for both companies throughout the years.
6. The number of cyberattacks on A decreases only in years 2010 and 2011. The number of cyberattacks on B decreases only in years 2009 and 2011 (earlier years aren't important since funding was 0). So, our answer is 2011.
For the years 2000 to 2011, the graph shows for the number of successful cyber attacks that year on two companies, as well as the amount of money (in thousands of dollars) each company spent that year in prevention of cyber attacks. Neither company had experienced successful cyber attacks before the year 2000.
Use the drop-down menus to form the most accurate statements based on the given information.
From 2000 to 2011, the number of successful cyber attacks that Company A experienced was the number of successful cyber attacks that Company B experienced.
The only year where increased spending coincided with a decrease in successful cyber attacks (compared to the previous year) for both companies was .
On the graph, for each of the years 2000-2011, the height of that year’s dot on the red line stands for the year’s number of successful cyber attacks on Company A, while the height of that year’s dot on the blue line stands for the year’s number of successful cyber attacks on Company B, as shown by the vertical scale on the graph’s left. Summing these numbers on the red line, we find that Company A experienced a total of 56 successful cyber attacks. Summing the numbers on the blue line, we find that Company B experienced a total of 49 such attacks. Thus, from 2000 to 2011, the number of successful cyber attacks Company A experienced was greater than the number Company B experienced.
The correct answer is greater than.
RO2:
As explained above, the height of each year’s dot on the red line stands for the year’s number of successful cyber attacks on Company A, while the height of each year’s dot on the blue line stands for the year’s number of successful cyber attacks on Company B. The graph shows that the only year when the number of successful cyber attacks declined for both companies was 2011. This alone is enough to tell that the only answer that could be correct in the second drop-down menu is 2011. But also note for 2011, the orange bar that stands for the number of thousands of dollars Company A spent that year to prevent cyber attacks and the blue bar that stands for the number of thousands of dollars Company B spent that year to prevent cyber attacks are both taller than the corresponding bars for 2010. That means both companies increased their annual spending to prevent cyber attacks from 2010 to 2011. Thus, 2011 was the only year shown in which such increased spending coincided with a decrease in cyber attacks for both companies.
Would you guys suggest eyeballing the first question? I got the correct answer by watching at it but I wasn't really that sure. Adding up every point would be time consuming though. Also, if you did eyeball and had a methodical process which you'd care to explain I'd be glad.
Would you guys suggest eyeballing the first question? I got the correct answer by watching at it but I wasn't really that sure. Adding up every point would be time consuming though. Also, if you did eyeball and had a methodical process which you'd care to explain I'd be glad.
Appreciate it.
Show more
Try adding the difference with -ve and +ve sign with reference to company A values; that way you have to add only once. If you get a +ve number means it is greater than the company B.
# of years A<B : 5 # of years A=B : 3 # of years A>B : 3
The years where A is less than B, the difference in value of cyber attacks is less than the years where A is greater than B. By approximation, Company A experienced greater number of successful cyber attacks that Company B experienced.
This can also be calculated best by measuring the differences. However this graph data was not close but I have seen graph questions where data be close enough where just by comparing number of years > or < we can predict wrongly. Calculating Difference is a more sustainable approach is what I believe.
AnukaS
RO1:
# of years A<B : 5 # of years A=B : 3 # of years A>B : 3
The years where A is less than B, the difference in value of cyber attacks is less than the years where A is greater than B. By approximation, Company A experienced greater number of successful cyber attacks that Company B experienced.
For the first question eye balling works perfectly fine. Just look at the 2 trends. In the first part where the blue line has number higher than that of orange line, there are 4 times of such cases. In second phase of the line where the orange line has number higher than that of blue lines, there are also 4 cases of such. The last phase, is roughly the same for both line. This implies the first 2 phases will be used to decide which trend has a higher total number. Now if you watch the 2 phases closely, u will notice that the gap between the second phase was so much wider than that of the first phase across the 4 points. With this, we can be sure that total number will be higher for company A than for company B
Razara
Would you guys suggest eyeballing the first question? I got the correct answer by watching at it but I wasn't really that sure. Adding up every point would be time consuming though. Also, if you did eyeball and had a methodical process which you'd care to explain I'd be glad.
Another way to see this is apreciating it as solid areas, I agree...no way to sum and calculate... it's so time consuming.
Scholar94
For the first question eye balling works perfectly fine. Just look at the 2 trends. In the first part where the blue line has number higher than that of orange line, there are 4 times of such cases. In second phase of the line where the orange line has number higher than that of blue lines, there are also 4 cases of such. The last phase, is roughly the same for both line. This implies the first 2 phases will be used to decide which trend has a higher total number. Now if you watch the 2 phases closely, u will notice that the gap between the second phase was so much wider than that of the first phase across the 4 points. With this, we can be sure that total number will be higher for company A than for company B
Can you share an example of questions where this method doesn't work?
APram
This can also be calculated best by measuring the differences. However this graph data was not close but I have seen graph questions where data be close enough where just by comparing number of years > or < we can predict wrongly. Calculating Difference is a more sustainable approach is what I believe.