The graph below shows the seven-year trend for the national debt, as a

Question

The graph below shows the seven-year trend for the national debt, as a percentage of GDP, for the country of Martinia, a figure that is calculated once each year by Martinia's Department of Economic Research.

Based on the graph, please determine which of the conclusions below can be logically drawn.

1. Martinia's national debt was higher in 2000 than it was in 1997.

2. Martinia's debt as a percentage of GDP doubled between 1994 and 2000.

The Last question based on this stem can be found here.

Show Spoiler

Attachment:

5.jpg [ 50.92 KiB | Viewed 12700 times ]

Submit Answer

Start the Timer above, select the dropdowns, and click "Submit" to add this question to your Error log.

Show Answer

Official Answer

Dropdown 1: Cannot be logically concluded Dropdown 2: Cannot be logically concluded

chetan2u · Accepted Answer

Do not confuse these with DS questions. In that you are looking at whether data is sufficient to answer the question. Answer could be yes or no or some value.

This is asking for truthfulness of the sentence, whether it can be concluded from the para.

rocky620 · Answer

1.1 Martinia's national debt was higher in 2000 than it was in 1997.
  
If the GDP in 2000 was 100 usd, then its debt would be 36 usd. If the debt in 1997 was 200 usd, then its debt would be 52 usd. So, this statement cannot be logically concluded.

A. Can be logically concluded
 B. Cannot be logically concluded

1.2 Martinia's debt as a percentage of GDP doubled between 1994 and 2000.
  
Change in Martinia's debt as a percentage of GDP between 1994 & 2000 =  \frac{36-28}{28}  ~  28.6%

A. Can logically be concluded
 B. Cannot logically be concluded

1.3 Between the years 1997 and 2000, if Martinia's GDP did not shrink then its debt must have increased.
  
Since the GDP did not shrink, let us assume that it remained constant at 100 usd.
  Debt (in usd) in:  
1997 = 26
1998 = 31
1999 = 33
2000 = 36

If the GDP increases then the Debt increase will be even higher than that depicted above.
So, its debt increased.

A. Can logically be concluded 
B. Cannot logically be concluded

Sans8 · Answer

1.2 Martinia's debt as a percentage of GDP doubled between 1994 and 2000.

Change in Martinia's debt as a percentage of GDP between 1994 & 2000 = (36−28)/28 =~ 28.6%

A. Can logically be concluded
B. Cannot logically be concluded
Which means that we can  logically conclude  YES/NO answer from the graph!
But, then why the answer is  Cannot logically be concluded 
 Sajjad1994   BottomJee  need your support

1616 · Answer

Hello @Experts,

In this question, What does logically conclude means, what we can get the information whether correct or incorrect? or is the incorrect information also not logically concluded?...I am confused please support!!

akshitab2912 · Answer

chetan2u  sir can you pls explain Q2 here? I selected that the answer can be logically deduced from the chart. Why is that wrong?

chetan2u · Answer

' Logically concluded ': I would take that to mean - You have to draw out a conclusion using logic, here logic would mean analysis of graph. It does not mean - Can we answer in Yes or No.
  2x^2 = 8 : Can we logically conclude that x=3? No, we cannot logically conclude that x=3 because it cannot be 3 under any circumstances. We can logically conclude that |x| = 2.
  So, do not confuse a 'conclusion' with data sufficiency..

Let us touch upon the question -

1. Martinia's national debt was higher in 2000 than it was in 1997.

What we are given is debt as a % of GDP. So, we know that as a % of GDP, national debt was higher in 2000 than in 1997. But we do not know the exact values of national debt in the two years or a comparison in the the two.
  Thus, we cannot logically conclude.

2 Martinia's debt as a percentage of GDP doubled between 1994 and 2000. 
In 1994, the % was 26% or so and increased to 36% in 2000. Surely the conclusion is wrong and the answer is that we   cannot logically conclude the above statement.

akshitab2912   1616

sayan640 · Answer

Is not this question ambiguous ? I thought since we can arrive at a conclusion in the second question , the answer should be can be concluded for Martinia's debt as a percentage of GDP doubled between 1994 and 2000. kindly help.
 KarishmaB   chetan2u

aashnaag · Answer

As for the first question - Martinia's national debt was higher in 2000 than it was in 1997
We don't know the exact national debt - only the national debt as a % of the GDP and since we do not know the GDP of each year, this cannot be logically concluded. That's how I understand it.

2 Martinia's debt as a percentage of GDP doubled between 1994 and 2000
We can see that the GDP % did not double -   we are being able to come to a conclusion - why can we not logically conclude this? A bit confused here.

Sahith_Manikanta · Answer

KarishmaB   chetan2u  please help
We can logically conclude for 2nd question that the answer is false. Why is the answer cannot be logically concluded here? Is it an issue with the question stem?

KarishmaB · Answer

Look at the question stem:

Based on the graph, please determine which of the conclusions below can be logically drawn.

We select "Can be logically drawn" only if the conclusion can be logically drawn i.e. only if I can say that yes, this is logical and correct.

Is this a conclusion we can draw (infer) from the given data: Martinia's debt as a percentage of GDP doubled between 1994 and 2000?
No, it isn't. It is incorrect as per the given data.

On the other hand, for statement 1 we do not have enough data. So that also cannot be logically drawn.

We will select "Can be logically drawn" only if data is enough to tell me that the statement is TRUE.

Sahith_Manikanta · Answer

Hi Karishma,
Thanks for your reply.

Coming to your response, I can see that we can logically draw conclusion for 2nd question here based on given data. Isn't it what the question is asking? If you can logically come to a conclusion for the question based upon the given data.

KarishmaB · Answer

No, you are confusing "Can be determined" with "Can be concluded"

Select Yes if it can be determined from the information provided that the statement is true   - you select 'Yes' if you have sufficient data. You are already given that the statement is true.

Please determine which of the conclusions below can be logically drawn    - you select 'can be logically drawn' only if you have enough data and the statement is true.

Take a simple example:

Data:
Lina was in the Peace Corps.
Peace Corps takes only brave volunteers.

What conclusion can we logically draw? 
That Lina is brave.

We cannot logically draw both the below given conclusions:
Lina is 6 feet tall - Not enough data
Lina is not brave - Incorrect as per given data

harishramesh · Answer

For Q2 I think the answer mentioned in the tool is wrong. The answer should be can be concluded

cheshire · Answer

How? 36% is not double 28% therefore the answer cannot be concluded.

The graph below shows the seven-year trend for the national debt, as a

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Graphs and Tables (G&T) Questions

The graph below shows the seven-year trend for the national debt, as a

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards