GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 14 Dec 2019, 14:23

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

Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 59725
Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Sep 2019, 21:13
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  5% (low)

Question Stats:

85% (01:30) correct 15% (02:01) wrong based on 87 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Competition Mode Question



Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an interesting experiment with small robots. The robots were programmed to get as many individual points as possible by finding small metal pucks and taking them to a nest in a corner of the lab. Robots were rewarded with points whenever they found a puck. But their excessive self-interest led to poor performance as robots repeatedly interfered with one another and battled over pucks. Researchers then reprogrammed the robots to share information: Robots would announce when they found a puck and listen to what other robots had to say. The robots were able to gather twice as many pucks as they had before they were reprogrammed.

Which of the following conclusions can be drawn from the experiment described in this passage?

A. Robots can be taught human behaviors.
B. The robots were poorly programmed in the first experiment.
C. The researchers were shocked by the difference in results between the two experiments.
D. Sharing information can dramatically improve the productivity of a group.
E. Self-interest leads to unproductive behavior.

_________________
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
P
Status: Whatever it takes!
Joined: 10 Oct 2018
Posts: 382
GPA: 4
Re: Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Sep 2019, 21:49
2
Let's jot down the points:
Robots programmed to find metal punks- then get points
Robot self interest- interference in each others work-less productivity
Reprogrammed-coordination between robots & earned double points than before

Conclusion must be something that reprogramming improved programming and efficiency.

A. Robots can be taught human behaviors.
INCORRECT. Robots were reprogrammed, not taught.Plus nothing about human behavior is mentioned in the paragrapgh that we can conclude this as conclusion because these behaviors are not related to just humans.

B. The robots were poorly programmed in the first experiment.
INCORRECT. Nowhere in the passage it is mentioned that the first programming was wrong. Just because robots had some behavioral issue doesn't mean programming went wrong.

C. The researchers were shocked by the difference in results between the two experiments.
INCORRECT. Out of scope. Feelings about researchers are nowhere mentioned.

D. Sharing information can dramatically improve the productivity of a group.
CORRECT. Yes. This is similar to our probable answer!

E. Self-interest leads to unproductive behavior.
INCORRECT. Robots did earn points when they had self interest. Can't say the experiment was unsuccessful. This can't be a logical conclusion.

IMO answer is option D
Posted from my mobile device
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 05 Aug 2018
Posts: 72
Location: Thailand
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.68
WE: Business Development (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Sep 2019, 22:13
1
Researchers conduct two experiments.
1. Robots rewards point when they gather pucks
, however, in this case, they are excessive self-interest
2. Researchers change that robots share information to each other, resulting in double productivity

A. Robots can be taught human behaviors. - out of scope, nothing about human behavior is mention
B. The robots were poorly programmed in the first experiment. - they were not poorly programmed, it was just the different input
C. The researchers were shocked by the difference in results between the two experiments. - no mention that the reservation shock from the results btw those two experiments
D. Sharing information can dramatically improve the productivity of a group. - it can be conclude that sharing info (as robot) can improve productivity of a group because robots productivity increase twice when they share info.
E. Self-interest leads to unproductive behavior. - the passage mentions that self-interest lead to poor performance but not unproductive behavior.

therefore, D

Posted from my mobile device
Director
Director
avatar
P
Joined: 18 May 2019
Posts: 556
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Sep 2019, 22:19
1
D is the answer in my view. We know from the argument that when the robots were programmed to work in a group without sharing information, they performed poorly as they were all trying to get to the same point to pick up the metal pucks. However when they shared information, it resulted in increased productivity, twice the results when they didn’t share information. So it can logically be concluded that sharing of information can dramatically improve performance in a group.

A is incorrect because nothing in the statement suggests that robots are being taught human behaviors.

B is incorrect because they were programmed specifically to behave in a certain way. That cannot in any way be interpreted that they were programmed poorly.

C is incorrect because nothing in the argument suggests shock on the part of the researchers.

E is incorrect because the argument is not about self interest. It’s about sharing information. The association of reward in the first programming is a distraction.

Posted from my mobile device
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
P
Joined: 07 Mar 2019
Posts: 461
Location: India
GMAT 1: 580 Q43 V27
WE: Sales (Energy and Utilities)
CAT Tests
Re: Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Sep 2019, 23:15
1
The argument conclusion must hinge around the last sentence which states that twice many pucks were gathered when robots shared information.

A. Robots can be taught human behaviors. – WRONG. While the option may look true in reality but nothing as such about human behavior is discussed in the argument. Though the findings can be compared to situations in which human involvement is there but that would require few more assumptions that must have been discussed in the argument.
B. The robots were poorly programmed in the first experiment. – WRONG. Poorly programmed or not is not relevant to the argument. It is concerned about the contrasting findings.
C. The researchers were shocked by the difference in results between the two experiments. – WRONG. Again the option looks fine at first instance but before that we must consider that it is the researchers at the Brandeis University who programmed the robots not some other researchers. Brandeis University researchers must be expecting the change in the results thus them getting shocked is illogical.
D. Sharing information can dramatically improve the productivity of a group. – CORRECT. Any improvement is welcomed so twice the initial numbers is dramatic improvement. Earlier programming was done with the purpose of getting as many individual points as possible but the later one shifted the focus on robots’ sharing information before gathering pucks.
E. Self-interest leads to unproductive behavior. – WRONG. This one’s not right since argument already discusses it in the middle of the argument and that’s why the researchers reprogrammed the robots.

Answer (D).
_________________
Ephemeral Epiphany..!

GMATPREP1 590(Q48,V23) March 6, 2019
GMATPREP2 610(Q44,V29) June 10, 2019
GMATPREPSoft1 680(Q48,V35) June 26, 2019
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 14 May 2018
Posts: 95
Re: Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Sep 2019, 01:55
The huge difference in results after the robots were reprogrammed makes d the most logical conclusion: Sharing information can dramatically improve the productivity of a group. Choice a is incorrect for several reasons. First, self-interest and sharing arent exclusively human behaviors; animals are also driven by self-interest, and many animals also share (information, food, etc.). Second, the robots were programmed, not taught. The experiment doesnt really show that the robots learned anything; they did what they were programmed to do, and as a result, they were more successful. Choice b is incorrect because the passage does not suggest that the robots were incorrectly programmed in the first experiment. Nothing indicates how the researchers felt about the results, so choice c is not a logical conclusion. Although the robots were far less productive when they were self-interested, choice e is not logical because they did indeed gather some pucks and because in many instances self-interest can result in highly productive behavior (e.g., self-preservation).
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 10 Aug 2018
Posts: 341
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
WE: Operations (Energy and Utilities)
Reviews Badge
Re: Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Sep 2019, 03:27
IMO it's D because it says that after reprogramming to share information, the productivity improved.

Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an interesting experiment with small robots. The robots were programmed to get as many individual points as possible by finding small metal pucks and taking them to a nest in a corner of the lab. Robots were rewarded with points whenever they found a puck. But their excessive self-interest led to poor performance as robots repeatedly interfered with one another and battled over pucks. Researchers then reprogrammed the robots to share information: Robots would announce when they found a puck and listen to what other robots had to say. The robots were able to gather twice as many pucks as they had before they were reprogrammed.

Which of the following conclusions can be drawn from the experiment described in this passage?

D. Sharing information can dramatically improve the productivity of a group.
_________________
On the way to get into the B-school and I will not leave it until I win. WHATEVER IT TAKES.

" I CAN AND I WILL"
Director
Director
avatar
P
Joined: 24 Nov 2016
Posts: 972
Location: United States
Re: Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Sep 2019, 04:47
Quote:
Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an interesting experiment with small robots. The robots were programmed to get as many individual points as possible by finding small metal pucks and taking them to a nest in a corner of the lab. Robots were rewarded with points whenever they found a puck. But their excessive self-interest led to poor performance as robots repeatedly interfered with one another and battled over pucks. Researchers then reprogrammed the robots to share information: Robots would announce when they found a puck and listen to what other robots had to say. The robots were able to gather twice as many pucks as they had before they were reprogrammed.

Which of the following conclusions can be drawn from the experiment described in this passage?

A. Robots can be taught human behaviors.
B. The robots were poorly programmed in the first experiment.
C. The researchers were shocked by the difference in results between the two experiments.
D. Sharing information can dramatically improve the productivity of a group.
E. Self-interest leads to unproductive behavior.


ARGUMENT
[premise] robots programmed to win as much as possible performed poorly in the first experiment because of EXCESSIVE self-interest; [premise] after the robots were reprogrammed to share information, their performance increased considerably.

A. not stated;
B. "excessive self-interest" was the cause in the first experiment, this doesn't mean "poorly programmed";
C. results were different, but nowhere does the passage state the researchers were "shocked";
E. "excessive self-interest", not "self-interest", leads to unproductive;

Answer (D)
Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 59725
Re: Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Sep 2019, 21:04
Bunuel wrote:

Competition Mode Question



Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an interesting experiment with small robots. The robots were programmed to get as many individual points as possible by finding small metal pucks and taking them to a nest in a corner of the lab. Robots were rewarded with points whenever they found a puck. But their excessive self-interest led to poor performance as robots repeatedly interfered with one another and battled over pucks. Researchers then reprogrammed the robots to share information: Robots would announce when they found a puck and listen to what other robots had to say. The robots were able to gather twice as many pucks as they had before they were reprogrammed.

Which of the following conclusions can be drawn from the experiment described in this passage?

A. Robots can be taught human behaviors.
B. The robots were poorly programmed in the first experiment.
C. The researchers were shocked by the difference in results between the two experiments.
D. Sharing information can dramatically improve the productivity of a group.
E. Self-interest leads to unproductive behavior.


Official Explanation



Correct Answer: D

The huge difference in results after the robots were reprogrammed makes d the most logical conclusion: Sharing information can dramatically improve the productivity of a group. Choice a is incorrect for several reasons. First, self-interest and sharing aren’t exclusively human behaviors; animals are also driven by self-interest, and many animals also share (information, food, etc.). Second, the robots were programmed, not taught. The experiment doesn’t really show that the robots learned anything; they did what they were programmed to do, and as a result, they were more successful. Choice b is incorrect because the passage does not suggest that the robots were incorrectly programmed in the first experiment. Nothing indicates how the researchers felt about the results, so choice c is not a logical conclusion. Although the robots were far less productive when they were self-interested, choice e is not logical because they did indeed gather some pucks and because in many instances self-interest can result in highly productive behavior (e.g., self-preservation).
_________________
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an   [#permalink] 12 Sep 2019, 21:04
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne