A company has developed a new sensing device that, according to the co

With POE technique, I eliminated A, D, E and zeroed in on B & C.
Conclusion is that new device has improved ability to detect quickly human in wrecked building.
B is strengthening the conclusion, stating that device gives distinctive reading after detecting human heartbeat from other livings.

It was between B and D according to me other options are out of scope.

D. Ultralow-frequency signals are not the only electromagnetic signals that can pass through almost any physical obstruction-- This option does not tell whether the frequency of human heart can pass. Apart from the electromagentic signals there can be numerous signals which pass but we don't have any evidence that will suggest heart signals can.

B. The device gives a distinctive reading when the signals it detects come from human beings rather than from any other living beings.---There might be a dog trapped under the building too thus this assurance strengthens the fact that the instrument can be used.

A company has developed a new sensing device that, according to the company's claims, detects weak, ultralow-frequency electromagnetic signals associated with a beating heart. These signals, which pass through almost any physical obstruction, are purportedly detected by the device even at significant distances. Therefore, if the company's claims are true, their device will radically improve emergency teams' ability to locate quickly people who are trapped within the wreckage of collapsed buildings.

Type- Strengthen
Boil it down - if the company's claims are true, their device will radically improve emergency teams' ability to locate quickly people who are trapped within the wreckage of collapsed buildings.

A. People trapped within the wreckage of collapsed buildings usually have serious injuries that require prompt medical treatment.-- Irrelevant

B. The device gives a distinctive reading when the signals it detects come from human beings rather than from any other living beings. -- Correct - it tells that device can help us distinguish between humans and other living things such as animals, birds etc

C. Most people who have survived after being trapped in collapsed buildings were rescued within two hours of the building's collapse. -- Irrelevant

D. Ultralow-frequency signals are not the only electromagnetic signals that can pass through almost any physical obstruction. - Irrelevant

E. Extensive training is required in order to operate the device effectively. - Irrelevant

Answer B

A company has developed a new sensing device that, according to the company's claims, detects weak, ultralow-frequency electromagnetic signals associated with a beating heart. These signals, which pass through almost any physical obstruction, are purportedly detected by the device even at significant distances. Therefore, if the company's claims are true, their device will radically improve emergency teams' ability to locate quickly people who are trapped within the wreckage of collapsed buildings.
Reasoning Used :
their device will radically improve emergency teams' ability to locate quickly people who are trapped within the wreckage of collapsed buildings.
A company has developed a new sensing device that, according to the company's claims, detects weak, ultralow-frequency electromagnetic signals associated with a beating heart.
These signals, which pass through almost any physical obstruction, are purportedly detected by the device even at significant distances.


Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?


A. People trapped within the wreckage of collapsed buildings usually have serious injuries that require prompt medical treatment.
Out of scope

B. The device gives a distinctive reading when the signals it detects come from human beings rather than from any other living beings.
Correct: In line with original Reasoning

C. Most people who have survived after being trapped in collapsed buildings were rescued within two hours of the building's collapse.
Out of scope

D. Ultralow-frequency signals are not the only electromagnetic signals that can pass through almost any physical obstruction.
Out of scope

E. Extensive training is required in order to operate the device effectively.
Weakens the argument as it will delay the operation.

A company has developed a new sensing device that, according to the company's claims, detects weak, ultralow-frequency electromagnetic signals associated with a beating heart. These signals, which pass through almost any physical obstruction, are purportedly detected by the device even at significant distances. Therefore, if the company's claims are true, their device will radically improve emergency teams' ability to locate quickly people who are trapped within the wreckage of collapsed buildings.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?


A. People trapped within the wreckage of collapsed buildings usually have serious injuries that require prompt medical treatment.
Out of Scope since it doesn't talk about the device.

B. The device gives a distinctive reading when the signals it detects come from human beings rather than from any other living beings.
Correct Answer.Talks about how people can be detected quickly by the device.

C. Most people who have survived after being trapped in collapsed buildings were rescued within two hours of the building's collapse.
Out of Scope since it doesn't talk about the device.

D. Ultralow-frequency signals are not the only electromagnetic signals that can pass through almost any physical obstruction.
Out of Scope since it doesn't talk about the device. It only talks about an ultra-low frequency signal. It's also mentioned in the premise.

E. Extensive training is required in order to operate the device effectively.
Out of Scope since it talks about training required to use the device as opposed to the effectiveness of the device itself.

Must be (B), as it bridges the gap between Detection of Heart beat of Human beings and Use of new sensing device.

A. People trapped within the wreckage of collapsed buildings usually have serious injuries that require prompt medical treatment. Conclusion does not talk about seriousness of injury

B. The device gives a distinctive reading when the signals it detects come from human beings rather than from any other living beings. Correct

C. Most people who have survived after being trapped in collapsed buildings were rescued within two hours of the building's collapse. Not relevant

D. Ultralow-frequency signals are not the only electromagnetic signals that can pass through almost any physical obstruction. Not relevant

E. Extensive training is required in order to operate the device effectively.Not relevant. The conclusion is about the device itself

B. The device gives a distinctive reading when the signals it detects come from human beings rather than from any other living beings -->> but human beings from other living being..how could B explain this ?

Hi,
The conclusion says that " their device will radically improve emergency teams' ability to locate quickly people who are trapped within the wreckage of collapsed buildings."

The key is the ability to detect human in the collapsed building.
For choice B, it eliminates the possibility that the device can detect other living things. If the device can detect animals, then this device cannot help to save human.

Hope this will help

PREMISE: New sensor detects signals from beating heart
PREMISE: Signals pass through almost everything
CONCLUSION: New sensor will help locate trapped people quickly

Now let's examine each answer choice while reminding ourselves of the conclusion.

A) Does this strengthen the conclusion that the new sensor will help locate trapped people quickly?
No, the conclusion is concerned only with the new sensor's ability to locate trapped people. Whether or not those people have serious injuries has no bearing on the conclusion. As such, answer choice A cannot strengthen the argument. ELIMINATE A.

B) Does this strengthen the conclusion that the new sensor will help locate trapped people quickly? YES! If it were the case that the sensor detected heartbeats from ALL living creatures, then emergency teams would waste a lot of time following signals emitted by non-human such as rats, mice or other animals with a heartbeat. So if the sensor detects only the signals from humans then the emergency teams will definitely be able to locate people quickly. KEEP answer choice B for now.

C) Does this strengthen the conclusion that the new sensor will help locate trapped people quickly? NO. ELIMINATE C.

D) Does this strengthen the conclusion that the new sensor will help locate trapped people quickly? NO. It makes no difference whether there are other electromagnetic signals that can pass through physical obstructions. ELIMINATE D.

E) Does this strengthen the conclusion that the new sensor will help locate trapped people quickly? NO. It makes no difference whether training is required. ELIMINATE E.

Answer: B

Cheers,
Brent

GMATNinja GMATNinjaTwo

Hey! Would option D be a good weakener? Thanks.

New device detects weak, ultralow-frequency electromagnetic signals associated with a beating heart.
These signals are detected by the device even at significant distances.

Conclusion: if the company's claims are true, their device will radically improve emergency teams' ability to locate quickly people who are trapped within the wreckage of collapsed buildings.

We need to strengthen it.

(A) People trapped within the wreckage of collapsed buildings usually have serious injuries that require prompt medical treatment.

"Why" we need to quickly locate trapped people is irrelevant to our argument. The question is "can" we quickly locate trapped people.

(B) The device gives a distinctive reading when the signals it detects come from human beings rather than from any other living beings.

The conclusion states that the device will be able to locate "people". The company's claim talk about heart beat, not just human heart beat. This option tells us that the device helps locate humans vs other living beings with a heart. This does help our conclusion. We will be able to locate people quickly (else identifying humans might have taken longer if all say rodents also gave the same signal)

(C) Most people who have survived after being trapped in collapsed buildings were rescued within two hours of the building's collapse.

"Why" we need to quickly locate trapped people is irrelevant to our argument. The question is "can" we quickly locate trapped people.

(D) Ultralow-frequency signals are not the only electromagnetic signals that can pass through almost any physical obstruction

Which other signals pass through is irrelevant. Our device detects only ultralow-frequency electromagnetic signals which the heart emits. So other signals also passing through may have no impact.

(E) Extensive training is required in order to operate the device effectively.

This makes us question whether the device will actually be utilised well. Doesn't strengthen our argument.

Answer (B)

We need information about the device that is beneficial for the trapped people.
A. This is not related to the sensing device.
B. It confirms that the sensing device not only traces sensation but also can differentiate sense among human and other living objects. CORRECT
C. Irrelevant with the device.
D. This option looks fine and likely to be correct but this is the premise of the passage. The Question stem doesn't ask about it.
E. Weakens the usefulness of the device adding additional training. That means everyone can not use the machine.

The Answer is B.

Hi Karishma,
I understand the company's claim about the device detecting heartbeat in general and that Option B fills in the gap between Heartbeat and human heartbeat specifically but i am unable to reason out C

IMO If most survivors were rescued within 2 hours of the collapse, the device would now help in locating more survivors within the 2 hours (contributing to the Teams' ability to locate more people) -> more people end up being rescued.

Or would a more relevant question be: "HOW is the device +ly contributing to the emergency teams’ ability ?"
Kindly shed some light over this.

Conclusion: if the company's claims are true, their device will radically improve emergency teams' ability to locate quickly people who are trapped within the wreckage of collapsed buildings.

The question is whether the device will improve the teams' ability to LOCATE people quickly. Can the device help in locating people under the rubble quickly?
Why they need to locate people quickly is out of scope for us. The point that medical care received on time will increase the survival rate is out of scope. Both options (A) and (C) focus on this and hence, both are incorrect.

P. S. - Request you to please tag me on your queries directed to me else I might miss them. Using @ before my username will tag me.