The ability of neuroscientists to pinpoint the exact locations in the

With great regard for Magoosh, may I ask whether the purported OA is indeed C? I have a feeling that it is substantially varying from the original in that,
A. The subject changes from ‘the ability of the neuroscientists’ to “neuroscientists” in C – Is ‘the ability of the neuroscientists’ as the subject really that bad?
B. “Such as a logic-based board game or a series of violent images” is changed to “such a variety of stimuli as a logical puzzle or violent images”. The doubt is whether a logical puzzle is the same as a logic-based board game and whether “a series of violent images “is synonymous with just “violent images”.
C. Do we really need to inverse the subject verb as “where occur complex sensory responses?”

C)Neuroscientists have become able to pinpoint ever more precisely the exact locations in the brain where occur complex sensory responses to such a variety of stimuli as a logical puzzle or violent images

E)Neuroscientists’ ability to pinpoint the exact locations in the brain where complex sensory responses occur to a variety of stimuli such as a logic-based board game or a series of violent images has become ever more precise

Though in C, where occur does seem awkward but in E- it's mentioned "ability has become more precise." Can we say ability has become more precise or its better to say- able to pinpoint precisely the exact locations?

Hi,
Few Issues on which the Qs tests us..
1) SV agreement..
A incorrectly uses VERB 'Have' for 'The ability of neuroscientists'

2) Use of Such as--
such as is the correct usage.. D incorrectly uses LIKE
such as is giving examples of stimuli so should be placed next to it.. A and B incorrectly place next to OCCUR..
such a variety of stimuli as.. is better to lay emphasis on varieties

3) responses occur to a variety of stimuli vs occur responses to a variety of stimuli ..
the correct usage in the context of sentence is occur responses to a variety of stimuli .. so E is out..

Left is only C, but with its share of some problems--
A)To make a sentence concise, the original meaning should be conveyed..
Logical puzzle and a logic-based board game are two different things,.. One can be part of Other but cannot be used for each other..
Similarly a series of Images has different connotation than just images..
B)Even 'Neuroscientists have become able ' is not better than the Original construction..

I eliminated C straightaway because of the construction - "have become able to". Isnt is much better to say - " Neuroscientists are able to" ?

I marked E, but OA is C. I know the mistake I did, but to me even C doesn't seems right.
Although all the other answer choices are wrong, C is the weirdest of them all.
Can we expect such types of questions in the real exam.

C is not a good answer, although I agree that we can eliminate the rest, too. However, be careful about eliminating choices because they seem a bit awkward or because they differ from the "original." There really is no original! Treat answer choice A just like all the others, as one of five possible answers. We don't need to justify every change of wording between A and the other choices.

Thankyou DmitryFarber for the advice.
I guess in verbal one has to pick the least worst choice for at least some questions.

Could you please elaborate why E is out?

Thanks.

there is totally fine with E in term of logic and grammar issues. However, E looks more like informal language.

Can you please explain what gives C the edge here ?

Hi i may not be an expert, But am glad to throw some light on how i solved the question.

E is wrong because The ability by itself can not become more precise. Moreover An ability cannot become precise but we can precisely pinpoint.

Only C says that they are now able to PRECISELY Pin point.

Furthermore, GMAT loves to use verbs rather than noun where ever possible. So i opted C over E.

Thank you

I definitely wouldn't recommend studying from this. The credited answer does not model good English grammar or style at all, and it would not be valid on the GMAT.

Official Explanation

Choice (A): Here, the subject is indirect, the “ability of neuroscientists.” Then, there’s modifiers & modifiers, and five miles away is the main verb, “have become.” The subject is singular and the verb is plural: a SVA mistake. This choice is incorrect.

Choice (B): The words “able” and “ability” idiomatically take an infinitive 100% of the time. Even when “ability” is the subject and the action is after the verb, the action still has to be in infinitive form. Here, we have the “ability … in pinpointing.” This is idiomatically wrong. This choice is incorrect.

Choice (C): This is a direct and well organized sentence. In the “where” clause, the verb elegantly comes before the subject, because that subject “complex sensory responses” is followed by a long noun modifier.

Choice (D): The phrasing “where … responses are to occur” is very strange. This phrasing suggests some preordained plan, as if we knew the fundamental designs of the human brain from on high. Everything about this phrasing is inconsistent with the nature of science and the subject of the sentence. This choice is incorrect.

Choice (E): As in (A), the main subject is “ability,” a punchless choice, and the verb is five miles aware. The verb here is “became”: the past tense of this verb is inconsistent with the subject matter, which discusses current scientific research.

The only possible answer is (C).

This isn't a good question whatsoever

Usage of ability to and capability of is tested.
Here the ability has not become more precise.......

My ability to notice a Terrible question is pretty good.

Is B wrong only because it says "in pinpointing" as opposed to " to pinpoint"? Or are there any other reasons too?