Last visit was: 21 Apr 2026, 07:33 It is currently 21 Apr 2026, 07:33
Home
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 21 Apr 2026
Posts: 7,391
Own Kudos:
70,784
Given Kudos: 2,126
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,391
Kudos: 70,784
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 22 Nov 2019, 08:31
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
zoezhuyan
GMATNinja
jayarora

The passage makes which of the following claims about patent quality in the semiconductor industry?

(A) It was higher in the early 1980???s than it was a decade later.
(B) It is largely independent of the number of patents granted.
(C) It changed between 1982 and 1992 in ways that were linked to changes in research and development expenditures.
(D) It is not adequately discussed in the industry???s technical literature.
(E) It was measured by inappropriate means during the period from 1982 to 1992.

Hi, Could someone explain the answer to the above question? If the citations per semiconductor(alias for quality according to the passage) declined during the 1980s, how can we infer that the quality was higher than that in 1990? or am I missing out something here?
Answering this question is entirely process of elimination, so let's start with A and make our way down the line.

Quote:
(A) It was higher in the early 1980's than it was a decade later.
The passage tells us that Ziedonis and Hall studied trends in semi-conductor patenting between 1982 (the early 1980's) and 1992 (a decade later). Then, the author writes:

    "Moreover, Ziedonis and Hall found that as patenting activity at semiconductor firms increased in the 1980's, the consensus among industry employees was that the average quality of their firms' patents declined."

Between the early 1980's and a decade later, the average quality of firms' semiconductor patents declined. Therefore, patent quality was higher in the early 1980's than it was a decade later. We'll keep (A) as the best choice for now.


hi GMATNinja or other experts, SajjadAhmad, u1983, GMATNinjaTwo, workout, Gnpth

I didn't picked up A because of my interpretation.
    "Moreover, Ziedonis and Hall found that as patenting activity at semiconductor firms increased in the 1980's, the consensus among industry employees was that the average quality of their firms' patents declined."

because in 1980's, the activity increased, and the average quality of patent also declined in 1980, then I can infer that the quality is lower in 1980's than pre 1980's, but have no idea about the later evade. that's why I picked up D
Show more
Remember that Ziedonis and Hall studied the period from 1982 to 1992, "the industry's most feverish period of patenting." And once the author has set up this 10-year-span as the the period being studied, the author tells us that average patent quality declined during the 1980's. So according to the author, quality was higher in early 1980s than it was when the early 1990s began.

Now, did quality suddenly make a huge turnaround in 1990 and 1991, even as patent activity continued to increase? I suppose that's possible, since we aren't explicitly told anything about the years 1990-1992. But it would be a huge stretch, and would go against the reason the author's reason for discussing the quality of patents during the 1980's in the first place.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
tkorzhan18
User avatar
Joined: 22 Apr 2020
Last visit: 10 May 2024
Posts: 16
Own Kudos:
3
Given Kudos: 3
Posts: 16
Kudos: 3
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 24 Dec 2020, 17:40
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Could you please explain why E is not correct?
2. The passage suggests which of the following about patenting in the semiconductor industry during the period from 1982 to 1992 ?

(A) The declining number of citations per semiconductor patent in the technical literature undermines the notion that patenting activity increased during this period.
(B) A decline in patent quality forced firms to change the way they managed the patenting process.
(C) Increased efficiencies allowed firms to derive more patents from existing research and development expenditures.
(D) Firms’ emphasis on filing patents for strategic purposes may have contributed to a decline in patent quality.
(E) Firms’ attempts to derive more patents from existing research and development expenditures may have contributed to a decline in infringement suites.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 21 Apr 2026
Posts: 7,391
Own Kudos:
70,784
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,126
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,391
Kudos: 70,784
 [1]
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 02 Jan 2021, 17:03
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post

Question 2


tkorzhan18
Could you please explain why E is not correct?
2. The passage suggests which of the following about patenting in the semiconductor industry during the period from 1982 to 1992 ?

(A) The declining number of citations per semiconductor patent in the technical literature undermines the notion that patenting activity increased during this period.
(B) A decline in patent quality forced firms to change the way they managed the patenting process.
(C) Increased efficiencies allowed firms to derive more patents from existing research and development expenditures.
(D) Firms’ emphasis on filing patents for strategic purposes may have contributed to a decline in patent quality.
(E) Firms’ attempts to derive more patents from existing research and development expenditures may have contributed to a decline in infringement suites.
Show more
Take another look at the portion of the passage that mentions infringement suits:

    Rather than patenting to win exclusive rights to a valuable new technology, patents were filed more for strategic purposes, to be used as bargaining chips to ward off infringement suits or as a means to block competitors' products.

So, the purpose of squeezing more patents out of existing research and development was to use those patents to turn away infringement suits and to block competitors products. But we don’t know whether this strategy was ultimately successful.

Now here’s (E):

Quote:
(E) Firms’ attempts to derive more patents from existing research and development expenditures may have contributed to a decline in infringement suits.
Show more
(E) suggests two things: there WAS a decline in infringement suits from 1982 to 1992, and firms’ attempts to derive more patents MAY HAVE contributed to that decline. The passage does suggest that the attempt to derive more patents COULD be used to ward off infringement suits. The problem is that (E) assumes that infringement suits DID, in fact, decline. We simply don’t know that infringement suits ACTUALLY declined. Maybe companies were successful in warding off suits, and maybe they weren’t.

The passage does not indicate one way or another, so (E) is not supported by the passage. Eliminate (E).

I hope that helps!
User avatar
TrungTiger
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jun 2020
Last visit: 18 Apr 2026
Posts: 17
Own Kudos:
3
Given Kudos: 38
Posts: 17
Kudos: 3
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for Updated on: 21 Feb 2021, 02:05
Originally posted by TrungTiger on 20 Feb 2021, 10:02.
Last edited by TrungTiger on 21 Feb 2021, 02:05, edited 1 time in total.
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi GMATNinja
According to your analyzing, I saw there is an imbalance structure in the passage if the primary concern is “connection between innovation and patenting”, because Author shifted the flow to another topic-decline in quality- and discussed it
almost a haft of passage. I do not see the rest haft of passage support for “connection patenting and innovation”.

Moreover, Ziedonis and Hall found that as patenting activity at semiconductor firms increased in the 1980's, the consensus among industry employees was that the average quality of their firms' patents declined. Though patent quality is a difficult notion to measure, the number of times a patent is cited in the technical literature is a reasonable yardstick, and citations per semiconductor patent did decline during the 1980's. This decline in quality may be related to changes in the way semi-conductor firms managed their patenting process: rather than patenting to win exclusive rights to a valuable new technology, patents were filed more for strategic purposes, to be used as bargaining chips to ward off infringement suits or as a means to block competitors' products.

Please help.

GMATNinja

Question 1 Answer Choice A, Explained


Nived
Hi! Have gone through all the responses above, but still not clear why A is not the answer for question 1.

(A) a study suggesting that the semiconductor industry’s approach to patenting during the period from 1982 to 1992 yielded unanticipated results

Because of patent, we would expect patenting activity to be directly related with becoming more innovative.

However, a study (Ziedonis and Hall) yielded results contrary to expectations (unanticipated results). Hence, I thought A is the answer.

Could it be that A is correct, but not the main idea?
An answer choice can be a true statement while still being an incorrect answer choice. That's because the correct answer choice is the one that best answers the specific question being asked. This is a minor distinction in wording, but it's a major difference in how we eliminate answer choices and select the choice that is truly correct for a given question. It's all part of the joy of test-taking in GMAT Land. :)

Quote:
1. The passage is primarily concerned with discussing

(A) a study suggesting that the semiconductor industry's approach to patenting during the period from 1982 to 1992 yielded unanticipated results
Like answer choice (E), choice (A) on its own is true. However, is the author primarily concerned with discussing a study and its results?

Nope. Instead, this passage is structured to:

  • Introduce us to the original purpose of granting patents.
  • Present studies on the semi-conductor industry (especially the study by Ziedonis and Hall) to illustrate the point that firms do not necessarily become more innovative as they increase their patenting activity.
  • Analyze the findings of the Z&H study in the context of measuring patent quality.
  • Suggest a possible explanation for why semi-conductor patent quality declined during the 1980s.

Studies, and in particular the Z&H study, make up a crucial piece of this passage. However, the author's overall purpose is to analyze the relationship between patents and innovation.

Quote:
(C) the connection between patenting and innovation in the semiconductor industry during the period from 1982 to 1992
Choice (C) best expresses this overall purpose.


Thanks for the questions, everyone! I hope this helps.
Show more

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
mSKR
User avatar
Joined: 14 Aug 2019
Last visit: 10 Mar 2024
Posts: 1,211
Own Kudos:
959
 [2]
Given Kudos: 381
Location: Hong Kong
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.81
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
Posts: 1,211
Kudos: 959
 [2]
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 21 Feb 2021, 01:34
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
TrungTiger
Hi GMATNinja
According to your analyzing, I saw there is an imbalance structure in the passage if the primary concern is “connection between innovation and patenting”, because Author shifted the flow to another topic-decline in quality- and discussed it
almost a haft of passage. I do not see the rest haft of passage support for “connection pantenting and innovation”.

Please help.

GMATNinja

Question 1 Answer Choice A, Explained


Nived
Hi! Have gone through all the responses above, but still not clear why A is not the answer for question 1.

(A) a study suggesting that the semiconductor industry’s approach to patenting during the period from 1982 to 1992 yielded unanticipated results

Because of patent, we would expect patenting activity to be directly related with becoming more innovative.

However, a study (Ziedonis and Hall) yielded results contrary to expectations (unanticipated results). Hence, I thought A is the answer.

Could it be that A is correct, but not the main idea?
An answer choice can be a true statement while still being an incorrect answer choice. That's because the correct answer choice is the one that best answers the specific question being asked. This is a minor distinction in wording, but it's a major difference in how we eliminate answer choices and select the choice that is truly correct for a given question. It's all part of the joy of test-taking in GMAT Land. :)

Quote:
1. The passage is primarily concerned with discussing

(A) a study suggesting that the semiconductor industry's approach to patenting during the period from 1982 to 1992 yielded unanticipated results
Like answer choice (E), choice (A) on its own is true. However, is the author primarily concerned with discussing a study and its results?

Nope. Instead, this passage is structured to:

  • Introduce us to the original purpose of granting patents.
  • Present studies on the semi-conductor industry (especially the study by Ziedonis and Hall) to illustrate the point that firms do not necessarily become more innovative as they increase their patenting activity.
  • Analyze the findings of the Z&H study in the context of measuring patent quality.
  • Suggest a possible explanation for why semi-conductor patent quality declined during the 1980s.

Studies, and in particular the Z&H study, make up a crucial piece of this passage. However, the author's overall purpose is to analyze the relationship between patents and innovation.

Quote:
(C) the connection between patenting and innovation in the semiconductor industry during the period from 1982 to 1992
Choice (C) best expresses this overall purpose.


Thanks for the questions, everyone! I hope this helps.

Posted from my mobile device
Show more


See the structure of passage again:
1st Part
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for the exploitation of new technologies, was originally established as an incentive to the pursuit of risky new ideas.
Yet studies of the most patent-conscious business of all—the semi-conductor industry—suggest that firms do not necessarily become more innovative as they increase their patenting activity.

2nd part
Ziedonis and Hall, for example, found that investment in research and development (a reasonable proxy for innovation) did not substantially increase between 1982 and 1992, the industry's most feverish period of patenting. Instead, semiconductor firms simply squeezed more patents out of existing research and development expenditures.
Moreover, Ziedonis and Hall found that as patenting activity at semiconductor firms increased in the 1980's, the consensus among industry employees was that the average quality of their firms' patents declined.
Though patent quality is a difficult notion to measure, the number of times a patent is cited in the technical literature is a reasonable yardstick, and citations per semiconductor patent did decline during the 1980's. This decline in quality may be related to changes in the way semi-conductor firms managed their patenting process: rather than patenting to win exclusive rights to a valuable new technology, patents were filed more for strategic purposes, to be used as bargaining chips to ward off infringement suits or as a means to block competitors' products.

1st part is core of this passage. 2nd part refers to findings. findings of a study ( mentioned in 1st part). findings of what study?- a study ( innovative vs patenting activity)
this summarizes the primary purpose of passage.

(A) a study suggesting that the semiconductor industry’s approach to patenting during the period from 1982 to 1992 yielded unanticipated results- what was the anticipation?
(B) a study of the semiconductor industry during the period from 1982 to 1992 that advocates certain changes in the industry’s management of the patenting process- not advocating
(C) the connection between patenting and innovation in the semiconductor industry during the period from 1982 to 1992- study showing connection between innovation and patenting - core of passage. ( 2nd line of passage)
(D) reasons that investment in research and development in the semiconductor industry did not increase significantly during the period from 1982 to 1992- just some part of 2nd part of passage
(E) certain factors that made the period from 1982 to 1992 a time of intense patenting activity in the semiconductor industry
mentioned in 2nd part- can not be primary. we want to know findings of what study ( thats core of passage)
User avatar
mSKR
User avatar
Joined: 14 Aug 2019
Last visit: 10 Mar 2024
Posts: 1,211
Own Kudos:
959
Given Kudos: 381
Location: Hong Kong
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.81
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
Posts: 1,211
Kudos: 959
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 21 Feb 2021, 01:49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
4. Which of the following, if true, would most clearly serve to weaken the author’s claim about what constitutes a reasonable yardstick for measuring patent quality?

(A) It is more difficult to have an article accepted for publication in the technical literature of the semiconductor industry than it is in the technical literature of most other industries.
(B) Many of the highest-quality semiconductor patents are cited numerous times in the technical literature.
(C) It is difficult for someone not familiar with the technical literature to recognize what constitutes an innovative semiconductor patent.
(D) There were more citations made per semiconductor patent in the technical literature in the 1970’s than in the 1980’s.
(E) Low-quality patents tend to be discussed in the technical literature as frequently as high-quality patents.
Show more

Though patent quality is a difficult notion to measure, the number of times a patent is cited in the technical literature is a reasonable yardstick, and citations per semiconductor patent did decline during the 1980's.

Citations per semiconductor patent in technical literature is a measurable quantity.

We need to weaken conclusion based on this claim.

What if people who count these citations are not clear about what citations refers to patent .
As counting citations per semiconductor patent was not standardized then it was prone to error .

C says : if someone is not familiar with technical literature , he may come up with wrong number and that may give wrong results.
Since this counting is prone to risk, it is quite possible that results based on this counting may not be true
Hence C also tends to weaken the claim.

Note: I understand E weakens more strongly . E is best answer. But C also tends to weaken to some extend, is not it?

Please suggest your opinion on C option
GMATNinja AndrewN
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,490
Own Kudos:
7,660
 [1]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,490
Kudos: 7,660
 [1]
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 21 Feb 2021, 11:43
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
mSKR
Quote:
4. Which of the following, if true, would most clearly serve to weaken the author’s claim about what constitutes a reasonable yardstick for measuring patent quality?

(A) It is more difficult to have an article accepted for publication in the technical literature of the semiconductor industry than it is in the technical literature of most other industries.
(B) Many of the highest-quality semiconductor patents are cited numerous times in the technical literature.
(C) It is difficult for someone not familiar with the technical literature to recognize what constitutes an innovative semiconductor patent.
(D) There were more citations made per semiconductor patent in the technical literature in the 1970’s than in the 1980’s.
(E) Low-quality patents tend to be discussed in the technical literature as frequently as high-quality patents.

Though patent quality is a difficult notion to measure, the number of times a patent is cited in the technical literature is a reasonable yardstick, and citations per semiconductor patent did decline during the 1980's.

Citations per semiconductor patent in technical literature is a measurable quantity.

We need to weaken conclusion based on this claim.

What if people who count these citations are not clear about what citations refers to patent .
As counting citations per semiconductor patent was not standardized then it was prone to error .

C says : if someone is not familiar with technical literature , he may come up with wrong number and that may give wrong results.
Since this counting is prone to risk, it is quite possible that results based on this counting may not be true
Hence C also tends to weaken the claim.

Note: I understand E weakens more strongly . E is best answer. But C also tends to weaken to some extend, is not it?

Please suggest your opinion on C option
GMATNinja AndrewN
Show more
Your interpretation of (C) takes a major liberty, mSKR. Counting is not mentioned explicitly anywhere in that answer choice. Rather, the focus is more qualitative, specifically on what constitutes an innovative semiconductor patent, not on how many times a patent is cited. You seem to have taken information from the passage—you did single out the correct line for the task—and shaped (C) into something that would fit that information. What (C) actually says is that someone outside the industry would have trouble judging how innovative a semiconductor patent would be, nothing more. It takes your mind to fill in the gap and say that this means the counting would be thrown off. Choice (E) is much harder to debate, since it speaks directly to the frequency or the number of times semiconductor patents of different quality are discussed in the literature. (If you find yourself bending over backwards to justify an answer, it is probably incorrect. The answer should ease the mental burden for you.)

- Andrew
User avatar
krndatta
User avatar
Joined: 09 Feb 2020
Last visit: 17 Oct 2024
Posts: 380
Own Kudos:
46
Given Kudos: 433
Location: India
Posts: 380
Kudos: 46
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 26 Jun 2022, 23:45
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AndrewN,

Question-4 ( Option-A)

Author's claim:- The number of times a patent is cited in the technical literature is a reasonable yardstick. We have to weaken this claim by saying that number of citations is not a reasonable yardstick.

Option A:- mentions that it is difficult to publish an article in Technical Literature.:- Doesn't this weaken the claim? It is difficult to publish and hence the number of citations is not a reasonable yardstick.

Please evaluate where am I going wrong.

Thanks
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,490
Own Kudos:
7,660
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,490
Kudos: 7,660
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 27 Jun 2022, 04:15
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
krndatta
AndrewN,

Question-4 ( Option-A)

Author's claim:- The number of times a patent is cited in the technical literature is a reasonable yardstick. We have to weaken this claim by saying that number of citations is not a reasonable yardstick.

Option A:- mentions that it is difficult to publish an article in Technical Literature.:- Doesn't this weaken the claim? It is difficult to publish and hence the number of citations is not a reasonable yardstick.

Please evaluate where am I going wrong.

Thanks
Show more
Hello, krndatta. I think GMATNinja addressed this exact line of reasoning in an earlier post, here. Please let me know if it does not clarify the matter (and specify why), and I will take a stab at answering your query myself. If, on the other hand, the Ninja has spoken to your satisfaction, I will not be offended. (It looks like a fine response to me.)

Thank you for thinking to ask.

- Andrew
User avatar
krndatta
User avatar
Joined: 09 Feb 2020
Last visit: 17 Oct 2024
Posts: 380
Own Kudos:
46
 [1]
Given Kudos: 433
Location: India
Posts: 380
Kudos: 46
 [1]
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 27 Jun 2022, 04:26
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AndrewN,
I did read his post before posting a query to you. Actually I didn't get that explanation.
We have to weaken the claim that number of citations is not a reasonable yardstick. Am I right in this?
So option A does this by saying that publishing is difficult. Hence, citations are not a reasonable yardstick.
I guess I have understood the question wrong or my understanding of passage is incorrect.
Can you give a shot at this please?
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,490
Own Kudos:
7,660
 [1]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,490
Kudos: 7,660
 [1]
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 27 Jun 2022, 06:13
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
krndatta
AndrewN,
I did read his post before posting a query to you. Actually I didn't get that explanation.
We have to weaken the claim that number of citations is not a reasonable yardstick. Am I right in this?
So option A does this by saying that publishing is difficult. Hence, citations are not a reasonable yardstick.
I guess I have understood the question wrong or my understanding of passage is incorrect.
Can you give a shot at this please?
Show more
That is fair, krndatta. Yes, question 4 is asking us to find an answer choice that would most weaken the author’s claim about what constitutes a reasonable yardstick for measuring patent quality. And again, the pertinent line is found closer to the end of the passage:

Quote:
Though patent quality is a difficult notion to measure, the number of times a patent is cited in the technical literature is a reasonable yardstick
Show more
I think that what you are missing in answer choice (A) is that the comparison does not allow us to judge what to make of the pertinent information. For reference:

Quote:
(A) It is more difficult to have an article accepted for publication in the technical literature of the semiconductor industry than it is in the technical literature of most other industries.
Show more
Specifically, more difficult runs into less meaningful territory, because we have no idea just how difficult it may for an article to be published in any other industry. For the sake of argument, assume that 95 percent of articles are published in the technical literature of, say, the fashion industry, while 75 percent of articles are published in the technical literature of the semiconductor industry. We have gone from 1 in 20 rejections to 1 to 4, so we can say with certainty that it is more difficult, in our hypothetical scenario, for someone to publish in the literature of the semiconductor industry. But what does that fact indicate about patent quality within the semiconductor industry, or about the number of patent citations in the literature, which are not discussed? How does the comparison shed light on the point the author was making? I cannot see any connection.

Your assumption that option A [weakens the claim] by saying that publishing is difficult is a step removed from what the answer choice actually says: more difficult should not necessarily be interpreted to mean difficult. And, of course, if a claim about quality is based on citations, then you should look for information centered on citations to weaken that claim, not on publications (the content of which we are not made aware in answer choice (A)). That is GMAT™ straight-arrow logic at its best, and if you look at answer choice (E) again, you might see it in a different light.

Thank you for following up.

- Andrew
User avatar
mohitwadhwa28
User avatar
Joined: 06 Sep 2016
Last visit: 24 Oct 2023
Posts: 25
Own Kudos:
12
Given Kudos: 1,531
Location: India
Concentration: International Business, Strategy
Schools: ISB '23 IIMA PGPX'23
GPA: 3.01
WE:Engineering (Consulting)
Schools: ISB '23 IIMA PGPX'23
Posts: 25
Kudos: 12
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 18 Jul 2022, 00:39
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
hi GMATNinja,

I am having a tough time in understanding this solution on how is E a weakener?
Can you please explain this more?

Thanks much.

GMATNinja
ameyaprabhu
Can someone please explain why option A is wrong for Question 4

Conclusion: the number of times a patent is cited in the technical literature is a reasonable yardstick, and citations per semiconductor patent did decline during the 1980's

As per option A = IF It is more difficult to have an article accepted for publication in the technical literature of the semiconductor industry than it is in the technical literature of most other industries. THEN it would explain why the number of citations were less.

4. Which of the following, if true, would most clearly serve to weaken the author's claim about what constitutes a reasonable yardstick for measuring patent quality?
A. It is more difficult to have an article accepted for publication in the technical literature of the semiconductor industry than it is in the technical literature of most other industries.
B. Many of the highest-quality semiconductor patents are cited numerous times in the technical literature.
C. It is difficult for someone not familiar with the technical literature to recognize what constitutes an innovative semiconductor patent.
D. There were more citations made per semiconductor patent in the technical literature in the 1970's than in the 1980's.
E. Low-quality patents tend to be discussed in the technical literature as frequently as high-quality patents.
Choice (A) might explain why there are fewer articles per semiconductor patent COMPARED to articles per patent in most other industries, but this does NOT explain why citations per semiconductor patent declined during the 1980's.

For example, say that in the early 1980's, on average, 50 articles were published per semiconductor patent and 100 articles were published per patent in most other industries. In the late 1980's, only 10 articles were published per semiconductor patent while the number per patent in most other industries remained roughly the same. This is consistent with choice (A) because it suggests that it is more difficult to have an article accepted for publication in the technical literature of the semiconductor industry. However, choice (A) does NOT explain why the number of citations per semiconductor patent declined during the 1980's. Thus, the citations evidence could still support the idea that patent quality declined during the 1980's, and (A) must be eliminated.

However, what if the number of LOW quality semiconductor patents decreased while the number of HIGH quality semiconductor patents remained the same? If "low-quality patents tend to be discussed in the technical literature as frequently as high-quality patents" (choice (E)), this would explain why the number of citations per semiconductor patent would have declined EVEN IF patent quality did not decline. Thus, choice (E) weakens the author's argument and is the correct answer.
Show more
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 21 Apr 2026
Posts: 7,391
Own Kudos:
70,784
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,126
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,391
Kudos: 70,784
 [1]
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 19 Jul 2022, 06:59
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post

Question 4


mohitwadhwa28
hi GMATNinja,

I am having a tough time in understanding this solution on how is E a weakener?
Can you please explain this more?

Thanks much.
Show more
Question 4 asks which answer choice would weaken the author’s claim about what constitutes a reasonable yardstick for measuring patent quality.

That yardstick is discussed near the end of the passage: "Though patent quality is a difficult notion to measure, the number of times a patent is cited in the technical literature is a reasonable yardstick, and citations per semiconductor patent did decline during the 1980's."

Here, the author is using the number of citations as a way to measure patent quality. He/she argues that the number of citations declining shows that patent quality declined.

Take a look at (E):
Quote:
(E) Low-quality patents tend to be discussed in the technical literature as frequently as high-quality patents.
Show more
This completely breaks the link between the number of citations and patent quality. If low-quality patents are cited just as frequently as high-quality patents, then the number of citations tells us nothing at all about the quality of the patent. This weakens the argument that the number of citations can be used as a yardstick for patent quality.

(E) is the correct answer to question 4.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
Maxsparrow
User avatar
Joined: 19 Aug 2023
Last visit: 07 Jun 2024
Posts: 63
Own Kudos:
59
Given Kudos: 82
Location: Indonesia
GMAT Focus 1: 695 Q85 V83 DI85
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V27
GMAT 2: 640 Q50 V26
GMAT Focus 1: 695 Q85 V83 DI85
GMAT 2: 640 Q50 V26
Posts: 63
Kudos: 59
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 31 Dec 2023, 22:46
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
ameyaprabhu
Can someone please explain why option A is wrong for Question 4

Conclusion: the number of times a patent is cited in the technical literature is a reasonable yardstick, and citations per semiconductor patent did decline during the 1980's

As per option A = IF It is more difficult to have an article accepted for publication in the technical literature of the semiconductor industry than it is in the technical literature of most other industries. THEN it would explain why the number of citations were less.

4. Which of the following, if true, would most clearly serve to weaken the author's claim about what constitutes a reasonable yardstick for measuring patent quality?
A. It is more difficult to have an article accepted for publication in the technical literature of the semiconductor industry than it is in the technical literature of most other industries.
B. Many of the highest-quality semiconductor patents are cited numerous times in the technical literature.
C. It is difficult for someone not familiar with the technical literature to recognize what constitutes an innovative semiconductor patent.
D. There were more citations made per semiconductor patent in the technical literature in the 1970's than in the 1980's.
E. Low-quality patents tend to be discussed in the technical literature as frequently as high-quality patents.
Choice (A) might explain why there are fewer articles per semiconductor patent COMPARED to articles per patent in most other industries, but this does NOT explain why citations per semiconductor patent declined during the 1980's.

For example, say that in the early 1980's, on average, 50 articles were published per semiconductor patent and 100 articles were published per patent in most other industries. In the late 1980's, only 10 articles were published per semiconductor patent while the number per patent in most other industries remained roughly the same. This is consistent with choice (A) because it suggests that it is more difficult to have an article accepted for publication in the technical literature of the semiconductor industry. However, choice (A) does NOT explain why the number of citations per semiconductor patent declined during the 1980's. Thus, the citations evidence could still support the idea that patent quality declined during the 1980's, and (A) must be eliminated.

However, what if the number of LOW quality semiconductor patents decreased while the number of HIGH quality semiconductor patents remained the same? If "low-quality patents tend to be discussed in the technical literature as frequently as high-quality patents" (choice (E)), this would explain why the number of citations per semiconductor patent would have declined EVEN IF patent quality did not decline. Thus, choice (E) weakens the author's argument and is the correct answer.
Show more

Hi Ninja, and All. I am sorry but I still cannot comprehend the questions
I would like to confirm the situation:
1. Argument state the method of Qualification is based on number of citation: High Citation = greater quality
2. Option E fully contradicts the method, since it says whether the patent's quality is high or low it would still be cited proportionately frequent
what weaken the author’s claim about what constitutes a reasonable yardstick for measuring patent quality means what weaken the base principle / method (constitutes a for measuring )
Do I interpret it right?
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 21 Apr 2026
Posts: 7,391
Own Kudos:
70,784
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,126
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,391
Kudos: 70,784
 [1]
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 05 Jan 2024, 16:52
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Maxsparrow


Hi Ninja, and All. I am sorry but I still cannot comprehend the questions

I would like to confirm the situation:

Argument state the method of Qualification is based on number of citation: High Citation = greater quality

Option E fully contradicts the method, since it says whether the patent's quality is high or low it would still be cited proportionately frequent

what weaken the author’s claim about what constitutes a reasonable yardstick for measuring patent quality means what weaken the base principle / method (constitutes a for measuring )

Do I interpret it right?
Show more
Your reasoning sounds correct!

As you suggest, the author claims that the "number of times a patent is cited" is a reasonable yardstick for patent quality. In other words, more citations means greater quality. But if low quality patents are discussed just as frequently as high quality patents, that would weaken this claim. And for that reason, (E) is correct.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
Anshika.g
User avatar
Joined: 11 Nov 2023
Last visit: 03 Mar 2025
Posts: 14
Own Kudos:
3
Given Kudos: 36
Location: India
Posts: 14
Kudos: 3
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 12 Jul 2024, 04:08
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I am still not clear why Option B in Question 1 is incorrect. This is exactly what's mentioned in the last sentence of the passage.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 21 Apr 2026
Posts: 7,391
Own Kudos:
70,784
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,126
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,391
Kudos: 70,784
 [1]
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 16 Aug 2024, 09:00
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post

Question 1


Anshika.g
I am still not clear why Option B in Question 1 is incorrect. This is exactly what's mentioned in the last sentence of the passage.­
Show more
­The last sentence does talk about "changes" in the way semi-conductor firms managed their patenting process­. But the passage doesn't talk about a specific study that advocates or supports those changes -- those changes are simply presented as a possible explanation for the decline in patent quality coinciding with the increase in patent activity during the 80s.

And those trends are part of a larger discussion as described by choice (C): the connection between patenting and innovation in the semiconductor industry during the period from 1982 to 1992.

For more on choice (C), check out this post: https://gmatclub.com/forum/the-system-of-patent-granting-which-confers-temporary-monopolies-for-176226.html#p2084068.­
User avatar
Utkarsha20
User avatar
Joined: 25 Jan 2025
Last visit: 20 Apr 2026
Posts: 23
Own Kudos:
1
Given Kudos: 408
Location: India
Schools: ESADE'26 Imperial'26 (D) FT MBA '26 Bocconi'26 HEC Sept '26
GMAT Focus 1: 565 Q78 V80 DI76
GMAT Focus 2: 515 Q79 V76 DI70
GMAT Focus 3: 645 Q82 V85 DI78
GPA: 8.46
Schools: ESADE'26 Imperial'26 (D) FT MBA '26 Bocconi'26 HEC Sept '26
GMAT Focus 3: 645 Q82 V85 DI78
Posts: 23
Kudos: 1
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 14 Jan 2026, 06:00
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
For question 4 I marked option A and I had a very hard time understanding why A is the wrong answer but then I noticed that in the passage it's mentioned that "citations per semiconductor patent did decline during the 1980's". So we are not talking about number of citations but citations per semiconductor patent. If we were told that number of citations declined then Option A would be a perfect "weakener". You could argue that the drop in citations wasn't due to bad quality, but simply because there were fewer technical journals available to publish them. But since "per patent" drop is mentioned that would mean that even if number of publications declined the average number of citation should not have declined if the patent was of good quality. Hence this would not weaken the author's claim.
User avatar
kartickdey
User avatar
Joined: 13 Sep 2024
Last visit: 20 Apr 2026
Posts: 207
Own Kudos:
10
Given Kudos: 403
Location: India
Products:
My Reviews GMAT Club Tests
Posts: 207
Kudos: 10
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 15 Jan 2026, 08:39
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Regarding Question 3, it is stated in the passage that the quality of patent declined in 1980s. That is fine. But how can I conclude from that it was higher in early 1980s than a decade later. No information regarding the extent of declination within that decade is given within the passage.
I option B it has been stated that the number of patents is largely independent of the quality of the patent. It appears to me true. In the passage, an example from a particular period is given to show that at there was a negative correlation between the two. There is also an indication that investment in R& D sector could lead to high number of high quality of papers. So I could not understand why option B is wrong.
GMATNinja

Question 1 Answer Choice A, Explained



An answer choice can be a true statement while still being an incorrect answer choice. That's because the correct answer choice is the one that best answers the specific question being asked. This is a minor distinction in wording, but it's a major difference in how we eliminate answer choices and select the choice that is truly correct for a given question. It's all part of the joy of test-taking in GMAT Land. :)


Like answer choice (E), choice (A) on its own is true. However, is the author primarily concerned with discussing a study and its results?

Nope. Instead, this passage is structured to:

  • Introduce us to the original purpose of granting patents.
  • Present studies on the semi-conductor industry (especially the study by Ziedonis and Hall) to illustrate the point that firms do not necessarily become more innovative as they increase their patenting activity.
  • Analyze the findings of the Z&H study in the context of measuring patent quality.
  • Suggest a possible explanation for why semi-conductor patent quality declined during the 1980s.

Studies, and in particular the Z&H study, make up a crucial piece of this passage. However, the author's overall purpose is to analyze the relationship between patents and innovation.


Choice (C) best expresses this overall purpose.

Question 3, Explained



Answering this question is entirely process of elimination, so let's start with A and make our way down the line.


The passage tells us that Ziedonis and Hall studied trends in semi-conductor patenting between 1982 (the early 1980's) and 1992 (a decade later). Then, the author writes:


"Moreover, Ziedonis and Hall found that as patenting activity at semiconductor firms increased in the 1980's, the consensus among industry employees was that the average quality of their firms' patents declined."

Between the early 1980's and a decade later, the average quality of firms' semiconductor patents declined. Therefore, patent quality was higher in the early 1980's than it was a decade later. We'll keep (A) as the best choice for now.


Choice (B) is not supported by any statement we can see in the passage. Furthermore, this choice is contradicted by the very same portion of the passage that reinforces choice (A):


"...as patenting activity at semiconductor firms increased...the average quality of their firms' patents declined."

The author links the rise in number of patents granted to a fall in quality, so let's eliminate (B).


The author doesn't mention any change in R&D expenditures. In fact, the author suggests that there was little change in these expenditures during the time period being studied:


"...investment in research and development (a reasonable proxy for innovation) did not substantially increase between 1982 and 1992."

So let's eliminate (C), too.


This is also contradicted in the passage, when the author writes:


"Though patent quality is a difficult notion to measure, the number of times a patent is cited in the technical literature is a reasonable yardstick, and citations per semiconductor patent did decline during the 1980's."

The technical literature seems adequate enough for the author to use as a reference point in this passage. Eliminate (D).


The very same portion of the passage we used to rule out choice (D) can be used to rule out choice (E). The author thinks that quality was measured by "a reasonable yardstick" in the technical literature.

Eliminate (E), and we're left with (A) as the best answer choice.


Who's Got GMAT Fever?



When someone does something "feverishly," she is putting a great amount of energy or excitement into it. If I write GMAT explanations feverishly, then you might picture me staying up all night, writing many, many explanations, one after the next, without taking a break.

This is related to the idiomatic use of "fever" or "crazy" in a statement showing how much a person is driven to a certain action:

  • My friend's got GMAT fever! He spent seven hours reading and posting on GMAT Club last night.
  • Oh, Peter is crazy about mangoes. Once mango season begins, he'll eat them feverishly, until he's literally sick.

By using the word "feverish," this passage tells us that the period between 1982 and 1992 was the semiconductor industry's most prolific, enthusiastic, energetic period of patenting. For the record, I'm personally much more crazy about reading and mangoes than I'll ever be about patents.


A Closer Read to Answer Question 5




At the start of the passage, we're told:


"The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for the exploitation of new technologies, was originally established as an incentive to the pursuit of risky new ideas."

Later, the author writes:


"rather than patenting to win exclusive rights to a valuable new technology, patents were filed more for strategic purposes, to be used as bargaining chips to ward off infringement suites or as a means to block competitors' products."

We know that the intended purpose of the patent-granting system was to incent companies to develop new technologies. The author then identifies the use of patents as bargaining chips in order to show that firms turned away from this intended purpose, and towards a different strategic purpose. That's why choice (C) works.

Thanks for the questions, everyone! I hope this helps.
Show more
User avatar
guddo
User avatar
Joined: 25 May 2021
Last visit: 21 Apr 2026
Posts: 1,002
Own Kudos:
11,291
 [1]
Given Kudos: 32
Posts: 1,002
Kudos: 11,291
 [1]
The system of patent-granting, which confers temporary monopolies for 15 Jan 2026, 09:52
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
kartickdey
Regarding Question 3, it is stated in the passage that the quality of patent declined in 1980s. That is fine. But how can I conclude from that it was higher in early 1980s than a decade later. No information regarding the extent of declination within that decade is given within the passage.
I option B it has been stated that the number of patents is largely independent of the quality of the patent. It appears to me true. In the passage, an example from a particular period is given to show that at there was a negative correlation between the two. There is also an indication that investment in R& D sector could lead to high number of high quality of papers. So I could not understand why option B is wrong.

Show more
The passage states patent quality declined during the 1980s, so it was higher at the start of that decade (early 1980s) than at the end (around 1990). That supports A.

B says quality is independent of the number of patents. The passage shows they are related: as patenting increased, quality decreased. Therefore, B is incorrect.

For more you can refer to several other posts explaining this question in this thread.
   1   2   3   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
AbhishekP220108
494 posts
bhanu29
358 posts