It is currently 24 Nov 2017, 00:51

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Apr 2012
Posts: 445

Kudos [?]: 80 [0], given: 58

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2013, 10:53
Shawshank wrote:
Radio stations with radio data system (RDS) technology broadcast special program information that only radios with an RDS feature can receive. Between 1994 and 1996, the number of RDS radio stations in Verdland increased from 250 to 600. However, since the number of RDS-equipped radios in Verdland was about the same in 1996 as in 1994, the number of Verlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Few if any of the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994 broadcast to people with RDS-equipped radios living in areas not previously reached by RDS stations.
B. In 1996 most Verdlanders who lived within the listening area of an RDS station already had a radio equipped to receive RDS.
C. Equipping a radio station with RDS technology does not decrease the station's listening area.
D. In 1996 Verlanders who did not own radios equipped to receive RDS could not receive any programming from the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994.
E. The RDS radio stations in Verdland in 1996 did not all offer the same type of programming.

Help with this one....
We are talking about the number of people recieving the new data.
Since there are more stations that transmit it now, the number of people receiveing it (
if people have not decreased) should be more...
Thoughts?

Kudos [?]: 80 [0], given: 58

Current Student
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
Posts: 1969

Kudos [?]: 745 [0], given: 355

Concentration: Finance

### Show Tags

25 Mar 2014, 18:29
jlgdr wrote:
Shawshank wrote:
Radio stations with radio data system (RDS) technology broadcast special program information that only radios with an RDS feature can receive. Between 1994 and 1996, the number of RDS radio stations in Verdland increased from 250 to 600. However, since the number of RDS-equipped radios in Verdland was about the same in 1996 as in 1994, the number of Verlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Few if any of the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994 broadcast to people with RDS-equipped radios living in areas not previously reached by RDS stations.
B. In 1996 most Verdlanders who lived within the listening area of an RDS station already had a radio equipped to receive RDS.
C. Equipping a radio station with RDS technology does not decrease the station's listening area.
D. In 1996 Verlanders who did not own radios equipped to receive RDS could not receive any programming from the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994.
E. The RDS radio stations in Verdland in 1996 did not all offer the same type of programming.

I reached A by POE but I don't really get the logic here, would some expert kindly explain this one?

Thanks!
Cheers
J

OK I dunno if this is best practice in GMAT Club but I will try to respond to myself (Do I still get a Kudos for this?)

Thing is that radio stations have increased in number and we know that the RDS equipped radios have not done so comparably, therefore the stimulus basically implies that there is not an increase in the number of people receiving this special program information. Now what A tells us is that previously there could have been some people that had RDS equipment but in a time when stations did not reach their locations. Thus, if this were true then the argument would be weakened cause actually the number of listeners will not be higher. Therefore A stands as the correct answer

Hope it helps
Cheers
J

Kudos [?]: 745 [0], given: 355

Intern
Joined: 21 Mar 2013
Posts: 14

Kudos [?]: 3 [1], given: 13

### Show Tags

16 Apr 2014, 02:17
1
KUDOS
amitdgr wrote:
Source : GMATPrep

Radio stations with radio data system (RDS) technology broadcast special program information that only radios with an RDS feature can receive. Between 1994 and 1996, the number of RDS radio stations in Verdland increased from 250 to 600. However, since the number of RDS-equipped radios in Verdland was about the same in 1996 as in 1994, the number of Verlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. few if any of the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994 broadcast to people with RDS-equipped radios living in areas not previously reached by RDS stations.

B. In 1996 most Verdlanders who lived within the listening area of an RDS station already had a radio equipped to receive RDS. Good to know, but what happened before 1996? What about the same people in 1994?

C. Equipping a radio station with RDS technology does not decrease the stationâ€™s listening area.Even if it would decrease the listening area... the argument claims the number of the radios equipped with RDS remained the same, therefore this fact wouldnt have any influence...

E. The RDS radio stations in Verdland in 1996 did not all offer the same type of programming. Who cares about the type of programming.

The assumption must be something NOT stated in the argument. Something that links
1 the nr. of stations,
3 and nr of people receiving the programme...
4 eventually the period btw 94 and 96

Hope this helps

Kudos [?]: 3 [1], given: 13

Manager
Joined: 04 Jan 2014
Posts: 121

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 24

### Show Tags

16 Apr 2014, 23:57
D? Without radios listeners are not able to tune to the stations?

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 24

Intern
Joined: 08 Mar 2012
Posts: 13

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

18 Apr 2014, 13:44
I just dont get it!!! I chose A as correct answer, but according to the Gmatprep software the correct answer is D.

When I read the stimulus and question answer, I agree. Ok, the argument concludes that because the number of RDS equipped radios is the same in 1996 as in 1994, the number of Verdalanders receiving the special info will not increase. But the number of RDS radios is not the same that the number of people receiving the information, so the assumption should be the answer choice that indicates that both things are the same. And Ok, D is agree with this logical, but what about A? Why A is wrong? And in other forums says that A is correct and D inrrelevant!!

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7750

Kudos [?]: 17874 [0], given: 235

Location: Pune, India

### Show Tags

27 Jul 2014, 20:42
pleezy wrote:

I was wondering. If C instead said:
Equipping a radio station with RDS technology does not increase the station's listening area.

This would be a valid assumption too right?

No, that wouldn't be an assumption either.

Note that the point is not how far the RDS stations can transmit. Even if they transmit everywhere now, it is worthless if people do not have RDS equipped radios. Since no of people with RDS equipped radios has stayed the same, the author is saying that number of people receiving RDS programming is the same as before even if RDS stations cover more area now. So even if RDS tech increases the listening area, still number of people receiving the RDS programming could be the same since number of RDS equipped radios is the same. Hence the modified statement is not an assumption.
The assumption is that the new stations are not broadcasting in areas where RDS programming was not available before but people still had RDS equipped radios. If this were not true, people with RDS equipped radios would have started receiving RDS programming and the author's conclusion would be violated.

This argument has a parallel in the real world. In 1980s and early 1990s, most cities in India did not have FM channels but most radios came with FM because it became a standard feature - so that people living in cities with FM channels can access them.
Then in 1990s, many new FM channels came up in many cities. Did many more people buy FM equipped radios? Perhaps no. But did many *new* people start receiving FM channels? Sure. They already had FM equipped radios and FM broadcasting started in their cities so they started receiving it.

So when we say that since many new radios with RDS were not bought so people getting RDS did not increase, we are assuming that RDS programming did not start in areas which did not have it before but where people had RDS equipped radios.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 17874 [0], given: 235

Current Student
Joined: 29 Apr 2014
Posts: 128

Kudos [?]: 61 [0], given: 17

Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT 1: 640 Q50 V26
GMAT 2: 660 Q51 V27
GMAT 3: 680 Q50 V31
GMAT 4: 710 Q50 V35
GMAT 5: 760 Q50 V42

### Show Tags

24 Apr 2015, 02:46
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
The question asks for an assumption. (i.e. what is necessarily true to make the conclusion true?)
The gist of the argument is that since no. of radios is about the same, number of people receiving the RDS programming is also the same.

Option D - In 1996 Verlanders who did not own radios equipped to receive RDS could not receive any programming from the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994.

- Even if people without RDS equipped radios could access RDS programming (say on neighbor's RDS radio) in 1996, they could have done the same in 1994 as well. They could have received RDS programs from existing radio stations (using neighbors radio). The number of people receiving the programming then may not have changed. So the argument could still hold even if option (D) is false. It is not necessary for it to be true for the argument to be true. Then option (D) is not an assumption.

(At Veritas, we call this method Assumption Negation Technique (ANT). Assumption is something which needs to be true for the conclusion to be true. That is why it is called an assumption. If an option is negated and the conclusion could still hold, it is not an assumption)

On the other hand, if we negate option (A) and say that some RDS radio stations started broadcasting in areas which were not previously reached by RDS but where people owned RDS equipped radios, then the number of people receiving RDS increases in 1996 and the conclusion does not hold. Hence option (A) is the assumption.

I'm sorry for excavated this topic. But I want be clarified more what D is incorrect.
As you explained "they could have done the same in 1994 as well". However, the choice said "after 1994". A possible scenerio could be:
- In 1994, 200.000 Verlanders got these programs because all of them had RDS equipped radios;
- After 1994, 50.000 more Verlanders somehow got these programs even though they did't have RDS equipped radios (maybe by installing a software as you supposed).
- If this is the case, then the argment would not hold anymore.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

In addition, I was confused by the word "any programs" in choice D and "special programs" in the argument. If "any programs" include special programs and other non-special programs, then D is possibly incorrect because when it is negated, the argument could still hold because 50.000 more Verlanders above could receive the non-special programs.

Kudos [?]: 61 [0], given: 17

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7750

Kudos [?]: 17874 [0], given: 235

Location: Pune, India

### Show Tags

26 Apr 2015, 23:16
tronghieu1987 wrote:
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
The question asks for an assumption. (i.e. what is necessarily true to make the conclusion true?)
The gist of the argument is that since no. of radios is about the same, number of people receiving the RDS programming is also the same.

Option D - In 1996 Verlanders who did not own radios equipped to receive RDS could not receive any programming from the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994.

- Even if people without RDS equipped radios could access RDS programming (say on neighbor's RDS radio) in 1996, they could have done the same in 1994 as well. They could have received RDS programs from existing radio stations (using neighbors radio). The number of people receiving the programming then may not have changed. So the argument could still hold even if option (D) is false. It is not necessary for it to be true for the argument to be true. Then option (D) is not an assumption.

(At Veritas, we call this method Assumption Negation Technique (ANT). Assumption is something which needs to be true for the conclusion to be true. That is why it is called an assumption. If an option is negated and the conclusion could still hold, it is not an assumption)

On the other hand, if we negate option (A) and say that some RDS radio stations started broadcasting in areas which were not previously reached by RDS but where people owned RDS equipped radios, then the number of people receiving RDS increases in 1996 and the conclusion does not hold. Hence option (A) is the assumption.

I'm sorry for excavated this topic. But I want be clarified more what D is incorrect.
As you explained "they could have done the same in 1994 as well". However, the choice said "after 1994". A possible scenerio could be:
- In 1994, 200.000 Verlanders got these programs because all of them had RDS equipped radios;
- After 1994, 50.000 more Verlanders somehow got these programs even though they did't have RDS equipped radios (maybe by installing a software as you supposed).
- If this is the case, then the argment would not hold anymore.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

In addition, I was confused by the word "any programs" in choice D and "special programs" in the argument. If "any programs" include special programs and other non-special programs, then D is possibly incorrect because when it is negated, the argument could still hold because 50.000 more Verlanders above could receive the non-special programs.

"Special programming" is "RDS programming" i.e. programs from RDS stations. This is the same as "any programming from the RDS radio stations"

The question asks for an assumption. (i.e. what is necessarily true to make the conclusion true?) If (D) is false but the argument COULD still hold, then (D) is not an assumption. You have to look for ways in which the argument CAN HOLD. Not the ways in which the argument can be made false.

The gist of the argument is that since no. of radios is about the same, number of people receiving the RDS programming is also the same.

Option D - In 1996 Verlanders who did not own radios equipped to receive RDS could not receive any programming from the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994.

- Even if people without RDS equipped radios could access RDS programming (say on neighbor's RDS radio) in 1996, they could have done the same in 1994 as well. They could have received RDS programs from existing radio stations (using neighbors radio). The number of people receiving the programming then MAY NOT have changed. So the argument COULD still hold even if option (D) is false. It is not necessary for it to be true for the argument to be true. Then option (D) is not an assumption.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 17874 [0], given: 235

Current Student
Joined: 03 Feb 2013
Posts: 941

Kudos [?]: 1079 [6], given: 548

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V44
GPA: 3.88
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 07:26
6
KUDOS
Radio stations with radio data system (RDS) technology broadcast special program information that only radios with an RDS feature can receive. Between 1994 and 1996, the number of RDS radio stations in Verdland increased from 250 to 600. However, since the number of RDS-equipped radios in Verdland was about the same in 1996 as in 1994, the number of Verlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly.

Premise 1 : The number of RDS station increased from 250 (1994) to 600 (1996).
Premise 2: The number of RDS equipped radios (receiver) is still the same.
Conclusion : The number of people receiving the special (RDS) program did not increase significantly

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

Argument structure:
Stations have increased -> but the number of people receiving the signal didn't increase.
What connects between Stations and people -> Coverage of the stations
So the coverage remains the same

A. few if any of the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994 broadcast to people with RDS-equipped radios living in areas not previously reached by RDS stations.

The option actually says the "few" RDS stations were broadcasting to people after 1994 previously not reached by RDS statitions.
which implies that
Even though the number of the stations have increased significantly, but the coverage area remains the same
This is exactly same as that of argument structure analysis - Correct

B. In 1996 most Verdlanders who lived within the listening area of an RDS station already had a radio equipped to receive RDS.
We are comparing number of people receiving programs in 1996 and in 1994. This option talks about number of people owning radios in 1996 -> this options doesn't add any value to support the conclusion.

C. Equipping a radio station with RDS technology does not decrease the station's listening area.
This option talks about the "coverage" .
But this option also says that RDS doesn't increase the coverage area. But not only we are enabling RDS , we are also increasing the number of stations and increasing the number of stations is the premise of the argument. This option doesn't talk about the effect of the increasing number of the stations to the coverage of the people receiving the special programs.

D. In 1996 Verlanders who did not own radios equipped to receive RDS could not receive any programming from the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994.
We are not talking about the people who are not receiving the RDS programs.

E. The RDS radio stations in Verdland in 1996 did not all offer the same type of programming.
Type of programming is out of scope
_________________

Thanks,
Kinjal

My Application Experience : http://gmatclub.com/forum/hardwork-never-gets-unrewarded-for-ever-189267-40.html#p1516961

Kudos [?]: 1079 [6], given: 548

Manager
Joined: 26 Nov 2014
Posts: 106

Kudos [?]: 105 [0], given: 8

### Show Tags

18 Jul 2015, 10:59
close call b/w A & D. Seems A) betters it !
_________________

Consider Kudos for my post, if it is helpful.
TIA

Kudos [?]: 105 [0], given: 8

Senior Manager
Joined: 01 Nov 2013
Posts: 343

Kudos [?]: 233 [0], given: 403

GMAT 1: 690 Q45 V39
WE: General Management (Energy and Utilities)

### Show Tags

28 Aug 2015, 06:04
Jp27 wrote:
Radio stations with radio data system (RDS) technology broadcast special program information that only radios with an RDS feature can receive. Between 1994 and 1996, the number of RDS radio stations in Verdland increased from 250 to 600. However, since the number of RDS-equipped radios in Verdland was about the same in 1996 as in 1994, the number of Verlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. few if any of the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994 broadcast to people with RDS-equipped radios living in areas not previously reached by RDS stations.

B. In 1996 most Verdlanders who lived within the listening area of an RDS station already had a radio equipped to receive RDS.

C. Equipping a radio station with RDS technology does not decrease the stationâ€™s listening area.

D. In 1996 Verlanders who did not own radios equipped to receive RDS could not receive any programming from the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994.

E. The RDS radio stations in Verdland in 1996 did not all offer the same type of programming.

Cheers

OA after some discussion.

Confused with D.

However, D can not be correct answer because it is actually a RESTATEMENT of the premise.It is not an assumption.

Option D- In 1996 Verlanders who did not own radios equipped to receive RDS could not receive any programming from the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994.

I think premise 1 makes it clear enough that option D is useless as an assumption.The argument is self-limiting because in the very first sentence it knocks out the possibility that option D can ever be right as an assumption. At best , option D is best as a premise.

I DO NOT MIND KUODS
_________________

Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time.

I hated every minute of training, but I said, 'Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion.-Mohammad Ali

Kudos [?]: 233 [0], given: 403

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7750

Kudos [?]: 17874 [0], given: 235

Location: Pune, India

### Show Tags

28 Aug 2015, 20:47
jaituteja wrote:
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
piyushagarwal wrote:
I am not at all able to make out what A want to say..

Since this questions seems to have confused people, let's try to break it down.

Radio stations with radio data system (RDS) technology broadcast special program information that only radios with an RDS feature can receive. Between 1994 and 1996, the number of RDS radio stations in Verdland increased from 250 to 600. However, since the number of RDS-equipped radios in Verdland was about the same in 1996 as in 1994, the number of Verlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly.

None of the other choices qualify as an assumption.

Hi Karishma,

I have a doubt and need clarity...

"the number of Verlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly".

"increase significantly".. Does it mean that the "the number of Verlanders receiving program information were same in 1996 as in 1994" or "there was an increase, but not to the same percentage/level as that of RDS radio stations(250 to 600)".

It means there was no "significant increase". If there was an increase, it was what you would expect in the normal course of things.

For example, the number of people watching channel A varies from 10 million to 10.5 million from time to time. Last Feb, data showed that 10.3 million people were regulars. A new set of programs were introduced in March. Till July, there was no significant increase. It mean that in July the numbers might have been 10.4 or 10.5 but nothing that we could say happened because of the new set of programs. It implies it was not out of the ordinary and that the programs did not have any/much effect.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 17874 [0], given: 235

Manager
Joined: 14 Apr 2015
Posts: 79

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 48

### Show Tags

24 Oct 2015, 00:12
amitdgr wrote:
Source : GMATPrep

Radio stations with radio data system (RDS) technology broadcast special program information that only radios with an RDS feature can receive. Between 1994 and 1996, the number of RDS radio stations in Verdland increased from 250 to 600. However, since the number of RDS-equipped radios in Verdland was about the same in 1996 as in 1994, the number of Verlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. few if any of the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994 broadcast to people with RDS-equipped radios living in areas not previously reached by RDS stations.

B. In 1996 most Verdlanders who lived within the listening area of an RDS station already had a radio equipped to receive RDS.

C. Equipping a radio station with RDS technology does not decrease the stationâ€™s listening area.

D. In 1996 Verlanders who did not own radios equipped to receive RDS could not receive any programming from the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994.

E. The RDS radio stations in Verdland in 1996 did not all offer the same type of programming.

Got it right, A. If no. of RDS stations increase, then reach increase. But still people receiving RDS program did not increase. Means, either the increased reach (bcoz of more stations) did not cover areas previously outside reach (Assuming that atleast some people with RDS radio were out of reach) OR all the people with RDS radios were already covered by RDS stations (before increase in their nos.) A is correct of the 1st assumption, but B is a distortion of 2nd assumption, B. In 1996 most Verdlanders who lived within the listening area of an RDS station already had a radio equipped to receive RDS. means out of 100 people within reach, say 90 had RDS radio. But what if apart from 90, some 20-30 had RDS radio but out of reach (NEGATES MY 2ND ASSUMPTION). So A.

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 48

Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Nov 2014
Posts: 362

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 17

Location: India
WE: Project Management (Telecommunications)

### Show Tags

06 Aug 2016, 03:58
I don't understand how can we infer this from Option A
Choice A is basically saying the additional RDS stations are in the same broadcast area as the previous RDS stations.

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 17

Board of Directors
Status: Aiming MBA
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 2778

Kudos [?]: 920 [0], given: 67

Location: India
GPA: 3.65
WE: Information Technology (Health Care)

### Show Tags

06 Aug 2016, 05:00
paidlukkha wrote:
I don't understand how can we infer this from Option A
Choice A is basically saying the additional RDS stations are in the same broadcast area as the previous RDS stations.

Question is about assumption not inference.

When you negate this statement, it will shatter the conclusion. Hence, it is the correct answer.
_________________

How I improved from V21 to V40! ?

Kudos [?]: 920 [0], given: 67

Manager
Joined: 26 Feb 2015
Posts: 110

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 109

GPA: 3.92

### Show Tags

17 Dec 2016, 16:44
herman2210 wrote:
I just dont get it!!! I chose A as correct answer, but according to the Gmatprep software the correct answer is D.

When I read the stimulus and question answer, I agree. Ok, the argument concludes that because the number of RDS equipped radios is the same in 1996 as in 1994, the number of Verdalanders receiving the special info will not increase. But the number of RDS radios is not the same that the number of people receiving the information, so the assumption should be the answer choice that indicates that both things are the same. And Ok, D is agree with this logical, but what about A? Why A is wrong? And in other forums says that A is correct and D inrrelevant!!

D is irrelevant because it discusses "programming" and not "special programming." Small differences matter.

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 109

Manager
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Posts: 199

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 30

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2017, 06:10
Dear experts,
I read lots of posts about option D for this case, but my confusion has not sorted out.

First, my confusion is the conclusion that the number of Verdlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly. I am not sure whether only I have this problem as below.
my doubt is the number of people receiving. The argument does state radio with an RDS feature can receive from those radio station with RDS , but does not state how people receive. for example, if 4 people are round the a radio with RDS , then 4 people can receive, if 400 people are round the same radio, then 400 people receive , right?
therefore, I think it is a big gap between the number of people receiving and the radio with RDS,
I did not negate D, (I am so poor at negating), when I read D, I get that people who have no RDS radio can not receive, so it eliminate my concern above. in other words , those who have no RDS radio won't get the access to special information through other methods, such as go to their friend who have RDS radios.
that's why I picked up D.

Review A, the core is radio station cannot early reach by RDS station, I think that it destroy the premise "radio with RDS is the only way to receive the special program information." whenever we meet CR, we accept the premises from the prompts, that's why I cross off A.

this question does confused me a lot. although I read lots of posts.

have a nice day

>_~

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 30

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4503

Kudos [?]: 8789 [0], given: 106

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2017, 16:00
zoezhuyan wrote:
Dear experts,
I read lots of posts about option D for this case, but my confusion has not sorted out.

First, my confusion is the conclusion that the number of Verdlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly. I am not sure whether only I have this problem as below.
my doubt is the number of people receiving. The argument does state radio with an RDS feature can receive from those radio station with RDS , but does not state how people receive. for example, if 4 people are round the a radio with RDS , then 4 people can receive, if 400 people are round the same radio, then 400 people receive , right?
therefore, I think it is a big gap between the number of people receiving and the radio with RDS,
I did not negate D, (I am so poor at negating), when I read D, I get that people who have no RDS radio can not receive, so it eliminate my concern above. in other words , those who have no RDS radio won't get the access to special information through other methods, such as go to their friend who have RDS radios.
that's why I picked up D.

Review A, the core is radio station cannot early reach by RDS station, I think that it destroy the premise "radio with RDS is the only way to receive the special program information." whenever we meet CR, we accept the premises from the prompts, that's why I cross off A.

this question does confused me a lot. although I read lots of posts.

have a nice day

>_~

Dear zoezhuyan
I'm happy to respond.

My friend, you are confused about a few things in this question. First of all, I want to teach you a pair of technical logical words, to highlight one of your misunderstandings. These are the words "necessary" and "sufficient." One way to say it is as follows:
"A is necessary for B." Here we know that if A doesn't happen, then B would not happen. If A doesn't happen, then it may or may not be true that B can happen.
For example, A might be "car has gasoline" and B might be "car is able to transport someone." It's absolutely true that if a car does not have any gas, it will not go anywhere. If the car has gas, it may be operational, or there many be any one of a host of other automotive difficulties that prevent it from going anywhere.
The word "sufficient" summaries the opposite relationship.
"A is sufficient for B." This means that if A happens, we know that B must be true; in other words, A is a guarantee for B. If A doesn't happen, then B may or may not be true. For example, here, A could "car is able to transport someone" and B would be "car has gasoline." If I drive the car from one place to the next, it is guaranteed that at least during the time I was driving, the car had gas. On the other hand, if I can't even turn the car on, it may be out of gas, or it may have another problem.
Overall, we can that "having gas" is necessary but not sufficient for a car to be able to travel.

This prompt says that: "Radio stations with radio data system (RDS) technology broadcast special program information that only radios with an RDS feature can receive." Much in the same way, having a radio with RDS technology is necessary but not sufficient for receiving this "special program information." If my radio does NOT have RDS technology, then there's no way that I will receive that information. If my radio DOES have RDS technology, then that's helpful, but not a guarantee that I will receive the information. The radio may be not plugged in, or out of batteries, receiving poor reception, or be out of range, or the information might be broadcast in a language that I don't understand. Any of these scenarios, and many more, would result in cases in which my radio did have the RDS technology and still did not receive the information. All of this is consistent with the statement in the prompt. The mistake which caused you to cross off (A) was reading this "necessary" statement as a "sufficient" statement.

Your point about many people listening to a single radio is interesting. There aren't many real world scenarios, at least in the more developed countries, in which a large number of people regularly listen to a single radio. Also, typically, such places would be constructed specifically for that purpose: it would be quite unusual if a place were created that could accommodate 400 listeners, but at first, only four listeners were using it. No one constructs a big space if it looks as if only a handful of people are likely to use it.

Choice (D) is particularly interesting, because it is absolutely something that must be true, based on the statements in the prompt. If the prompt question had been, "If the statements above are true, which of the following also must be true," then (D) would be the correct answer. It's the correct answer for the wrong question. It doesn't answer the question that actually was asked: "Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?" We can't really use negating to eliminate (D), because it has to be true given that the prompt statements are true. It's something true that must be true, based on the prompt, but it is not an assumption because it doesn't help link the premises to the conclusion.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Kudos [?]: 8789 [0], given: 106

Manager
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Posts: 199

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 30

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2017, 20:08
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
mikemcgarry wrote:
zoezhuyan wrote:
Dear experts,
I read lots of posts about option D for this case, but my confusion has not sorted out.

First, my confusion is the conclusion that the number of Verdlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly. I am not sure whether only I have this problem as below.
my doubt is the number of people receiving. The argument does state radio with an RDS feature can receive from those radio station with RDS , but does not state how people receive. for example, if 4 people are round the a radio with RDS , then 4 people can receive, if 400 people are round the same radio, then 400 people receive , right?
therefore, I think it is a big gap between the number of people receiving and the radio with RDS,
I did not negate D, (I am so poor at negating), when I read D, I get that people who have no RDS radio can not receive, so it eliminate my concern above. in other words , those who have no RDS radio won't get the access to special information through other methods, such as go to their friend who have RDS radios.
that's why I picked up D.

Review A, the core is radio station cannot early reach by RDS station, I think that it destroy the premise "radio with RDS is the only way to receive the special program information." whenever we meet CR, we accept the premises from the prompts, that's why I cross off A.

this question does confused me a lot. although I read lots of posts.

have a nice day

>_~

Dear zoezhuyan
I'm happy to respond.

My friend, you are confused about a few things in this question. First of all, I want to teach you a pair of technical logical words, to highlight one of your misunderstandings. These are the words "necessary" and "sufficient." One way to say it is as follows:
"A is necessary for B." Here we know that if A doesn't happen, then B would not happen. If A doesn't happen, then it may or may not be true that B can happen.
For example, A might be "car has gasoline" and B might be "car is able to transport someone." It's absolutely true that if a car does not have any gas, it will not go anywhere. If the car has gas, it may be operational, or there many be any one of a host of other automotive difficulties that prevent it from going anywhere.
The word "sufficient" summaries the opposite relationship.
"A is sufficient for B." This means that if A happens, we know that B must be true; in other words, A is a guarantee for B. If A doesn't happen, then B may or may not be true. For example, here, A could "car is able to transport someone" and B would be "car has gasoline." If I drive the car from one place to the next, it is guaranteed that at least during the time I was driving, the car had gas. On the other hand, if I can't even turn the car on, it may be out of gas, or it may have another problem.
Overall, we can that "having gas" is necessary but not sufficient for a car to be able to travel.

This prompt says that: "Radio stations with radio data system (RDS) technology broadcast special program information that only radios with an RDS feature can receive." Much in the same way, having a radio with RDS technology is necessary but not sufficient for receiving this "special program information." If my radio does NOT have RDS technology, then there's no way that I will receive that information. If my radio DOES have RDS technology, then that's helpful, but not a guarantee that I will receive the information. The radio may be not plugged in, or out of batteries, receiving poor reception, or be out of range, or the information might be broadcast in a language that I don't understand. Any of these scenarios, and many more, would result in cases in which my radio did have the RDS technology and still did not receive the information. All of this is consistent with the statement in the prompt. The mistake which caused you to cross off (A) was reading this "necessary" statement as a "sufficient" statement.

Your point about many people listening to a single radio is interesting. There aren't many real world scenarios, at least in the more developed countries, in which a large number of people regularly listen to a single radio. Also, typically, such places would be constructed specifically for that purpose: it would be quite unusual if a place were created that could accommodate 400 listeners, but at first, only four listeners were using it. No one constructs a big space if it looks as if only a handful of people are likely to use it.

Choice (D) is particularly interesting, because it is absolutely something that must be true, based on the statements in the prompt. If the prompt question had been, "If the statements above are true, which of the following also must be true," then (D) would be the correct answer. It's the correct answer for the wrong question. It doesn't answer the question that actually was asked: "Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?" We can't really use negating to eliminate (D), because it has to be true given that the prompt statements are true. It's something true that must be true, based on the prompt, but it is not an assumption because it doesn't help link the premises to the conclusion.

Does all this make sense?
Mike

Hi mikemcgarry,
so happy to get reply from you, your explanation is sooooo crystal , it makes me relax suddenly, very helpful.

after reading, I review my poor performance at CR, I realized two problems caused my poor performance, one is my English interpretation, you suggested earlier, and my worse approach , which makes me feel CR is so rough.

as so far, I get there is a new method -- sufficient and necessary -- to sort out some CR questions.

thanks so much..

have a nice day
>_~

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 30

Manager
Joined: 21 Apr 2016
Posts: 197

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 79

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2017, 21:33
Here is a slightly different take -

The question stem states "the number of Verlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly". Pay attention to the last phrase "did not increase significantly". This hints me that there was a super slight increase in the number of people receiving from RDS radio stations.

That super slight increase comes from, as pointed by a few above, the "few if any" in (A).

Although I answered it wrong, re-reading the question built my train of thought.

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 79

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5    Next  [ 87 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by