Responding to the public’s fascination with―and sometimes undue alarm

Responding to the public’s fascination with―and sometimes undue alarm over―possible threats from asteroids, a scale developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may collide with Earth.


(C) astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be to collide --original form is WRONG
(C1)astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet to collide --- how likely to happen - should not be WRONG ?
(C2)astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet to be collided ( be collided by xx - is wrong)
(C3)astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet MAY collide - should be correct ( likely and may would have been redundant together)
C4)astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet MAY collide - WRONG ( likely and may are redundant together)

I would like to confirm if any of above new version of C -C1 and C3- can be correct and C2 and C4 are wrong?


AjiteshArun AndrewN : please suggest.

Hello, mSKR. I am not fond of any of the to rate how likely variants. The language is kind of juvenile with the inclusion of how within what is described as being rated. That is, you rate something. You do not rate how something. Consider:

1) I rate the performance of each athlete.
2) I rate each athlete based on performance.
3) I rate how each athlete performs.

Although I preferred to rate in (C) to its counterpart for rating in (D), I did not let that preference cloud my judgment when it came to the next key splits: how likely [something] will be to collide versus the likelihood that [something] will collide. Choice (D) wins, hands down.

Again, learn what you can from this question and keep going. I would call this a low-frequency topic and would focus more on selecting an answer based on what I felt was easier to argue against.

- Andrew

egmat GMATNinja
in option D, Is using "for verbing" correct because astronomers have developed it for a purpose shouldn't we use "to-verb " here?

I'd be very careful about trying to establish a general rule here. Consider some simple examples:

1) Tim painted mustaches on his children's Frozen dolls to teach his kids a lesson.

Here, "to teach" gives us information about the main verb of the clause, telling us why Tim painted mustaches on Disney princesses.

2) Tim punished his kids for violating curfew.

Now, "for violating" also gives us information about the main verb of the sentence, telling us why Tim punished his kids.

3) Tim bought a device for measuring the size of his children's cranium.

In this case, "for measuring," seems to describe "the device," giving us information about what kind of device.

4) Tim bought a device to measure the size of his children's cranium.

Now "to measure" seems to tell tell us why Tim bought a device, but I suppose you could also argue that it's describing what the device is used for.

The point is that these modifiers appear to be fairly versatile, and their meaning is determined more by context than by any strict usage rule.

Put another way, I wouldn't use "to" vs "for" as a viable decision point, at least not in isolation. Instead, as others have pointed out, I'd see that "to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be" doesn't make sense. They're not rating how likely it is for a comet to be, or exist; they're rating the likelihood that the comet will collide with Earth. That's enough to remove (C), without agonizing over whether "to" or "for" is better here.

I hope that helps!

AndrewN - Between option C and D, "a scale to rate" and "a scale for rating", isn't "a scale to rate" more preferred?

I understand the other major issue in Option C, but just wanted to know why infinitive of purpose is not preferred. We have seen numerous examples in which infinitive of purpose is preferred over "for -ing" forms.
For example- I went to my friend's place to collect my book. [correct]
I went to my friend's place for collecting my book. [wrong]

Am I missing anything? Request you to please highlight. Thanks in advance.

Hello, Pankaj0901. No, you are not missing anything. In fact, I touched on this very split in my earlier post:


Not to paint a dire picture of the SC task, but not every split proves to be a decisive one. Sometimes there are simply multiple (valid) ways of expressing the same notion. Only eliminate an answer choice if you know something is wrong. I even keep a running tally of doubts when I get into some of the more difficult and nuanced questions, just in case nothing seems too obvious.

- Andrew

(A) a scale developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may
First this provides 2 ambigious meaning

(B) a scale that astronomers have developed rates how likely it is for a particular asteroid or comet to
it is not the scale that rates but the scale is used to rates

(C) astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be to
Will be is not the right tense and sccale to isn't right mwaning

(D) astronomers have developed a scale for rating the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet will
Yes this iron out all the flaws and gives us the right meaning

(E) astronomers have developed a scale that rates the likelihood of a particular asteroid or comet that may
Scale is not rating but rather the astronemrs are rating
Hence IMO D

What about the difference in "to rate" vs "for rating" here?

As far as I know, for is supposed to be followed by a noun. Here the correct option has "for rating" and rating is a verb here.

divyangmunshi

-ing words are not verbs. "Rating" is an activity, so it's working as a noun here. For instance, we could say "Rating the likelihood is difficult."

Options A & B are incorrect as "Responding to the public’s fascination...." should modify "astronomer" not a scale.
In Option C , "Will be to " is ungrammatical.
Option E intended meaning of the sentence is changed.As It appears that Scale is rating likelihood of the event as mentioned.

Hence,Option D is best option.

Responding to the public’s fascination with―and sometimes undue alarm over―possible threats from asteroids, a scale developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may collide with Earth.


(A) a scale developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may (What/Who should respond to the public's fascination, obviously not the scale, eliminate A)

(B) a scale that astronomers have developed rates how likely it is for a particular asteroid or comet to (Same as choice A)

(C) astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be to (likely should be used to describe the event that the asteroid or comet may collide with Earth, instead of asteroid or comet, eliminate)

(D) astronomers have developed a scale for rating the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet will (correct)

(E) astronomers have developed a scale that rates the likelihood of a particular asteroid or comet that may ( same problem as C, likelihood is incorrectly used to modify asteroid ( or comet ), eliminate)

in C, "will be to collide" dose not exist in english
"to be to do" is used to say about plan/future action
I am to learn gmat next week. this is a plan I want to do.
I will be to learn gmat. this dose not exist in english

Hello, everyone. I was asked by PM to comment on (E) specifically, so I will reproduce that behind-the-scenes response here, in hopes that it may help a curious onlooker.

It is not actually the redundancy in (E) that stood out to me right away, although that is a valid point. Rather, the phrasing is off. Take a look at the sentence with (E) inserted:

Responding to the public’s fascination with―and sometimes undue alarm over―possible threats from asteroids, astronomers have developed a scale that rates the likelihood of a particular asteroid or comet that may collide with Earth.

You should be asking yourself what, exactly, the likelihood refers to. It should be the likelihood that a collision will occur, not the likelihood of an asteroid or comet that something. Note that you could say the likelihood of an asteroid or comet colliding, but the infinitive collide cannot pair with this "likelihood of" construct. In short, (E) does not make sense: the sentence is not commenting on a scale of likelihood of [the existence of] an asteroid or comet; the collision should be front and center instead.

- Andrew

Hi avigutman - tried using a more meaning based approach to eliminate choices but i think it backfired on the split i chose.

Based on the blue highlights discussed in class, i agree the meaning in option D is better compared to the meaning in option E.

however , why isnt the following meaning based approach working :

On my 2nd attempt - my eyes went first to the will vs may split (the red circles)

I eliminated D (on my 2nd attempt) because i used the following meaning- based approach on the will vs may split

- Will is definitive whereas May is more probabilistic

From a meaning perspective in D - how can one rate the likelihood of an event THAT WILL HAPPEN

Isn't the likelihood 100 % in the following sentences ?

• I will eat
• I will sleep
• I will get a 700 + on the GMT

Rating the likehood all of these above sentence is 100 %.

So it doesnt make sense to rate the likelihood when you use will (meaning wise) because the rating will always be 100 %

Makes more sense to rate the likelihood with word "may" instead

• I may eat ..
• I may sleep
• I may get a 700 + on the GMT

Maybe the likelyhood is only 30 % for these events with the word "may"

Thus i chose E > D

Isnt' this meaning based approach back firing ?

jabhatta2 Using a meaning based approach certainly backfired in this case (assuming you would have otherwise picked the correct answer).
However, you're likely to learn a lot more from this mistake than you would otherwise.
You missed the following issues:
1. we can rate the likelihood that some particular thing will happen. To use your example, this is a perfectly valid question: what is the likelihood that you will get 700+ on the GMAT?
2. Answer E has a nonsensical meaning, specifically in this phrase: the likelihood of a particular asteroid or comet that may collide with Earth.
What are we rating here, exactly? The likelihood of an asteroid.
What kind of asteroid? an asteroid that may collide with earth.
What is the likelihood of an asteroid? This is nonsensical.

Thanks Avi - yes regarding the red - the will cannot stand for 100 % surety because the statement in red is in the form of a quetsion

So if i say the following :

The likelihood that I will score a 700 + on GMAT is 50 %
The likelihood that I may score a 700 + on GMAT is 50 %

I think "Will" is MORE CERTAIN than "May" but will does not indicate 100 % all the time.

Will indicates >= 50 % probability

My take-away isnt % but instead
- Will indicates a bit more confidence comapred to May
- Will means >= 50 % probability (dont assume, will automatically means 100 %)

Video solution from Quant Reasoning:
Subscribe for more: https://www.youtube.com/QuantReasoning? ... irmation=1