Answers:
1>B
2>E
3>A

Can you please explain 1&3?

Please explain 1 & 3

My answer: 1- (B): With lower number of French soldiers, crowding effect would have reduced
3- (E): This directly questions the credibility of the very source of the information
_________________

Can anyone explain why 3-D is correct?
I marked 3-E.

The lines, the conclusion drawn on which, in the second paragraph are:

As a result, researchers now believe that the high French casualties were more likely caused by the crushing and smothering effects of a stampeding crowd rather than the military superiority of English troops.

We have to weaken this conclusion. Some thing that will weaken the argument must prove or try to prove that the reason for the French causalities was not the crowding effect and was something else, and that the English troops superiority might played in between.

Now let see the answer choices.

A. An investigation using period armor and battlefield soil reveals that many French knights probably drowned in thick mud.

This option tries to provide unnecessary outside illogical information. This option want to temper our pre-thinking about the conclusion.

B. A compilation of firsthand accounts convincingly demonstrates that considerable numbers of French knights survived the battle.

All right If this statement is true do it really weakens the argument? Not at all we don't know the number of causalities and this option is trying to trap us into quantity puzzle.

C. The computer algorithms used to calculate the overcrowding effects at Agincourt in 1415 were based on behavior studies done on college students in 2010.

Again this option is trying to trap us in the illogical or wrongly related fact (A fact which might be related to argument overall but not to the conclusion particularly)

D. An archeological study suggests that the English deliberately shaped the battlefield with trenches that would create an overcrowding effect.

Yes! This option directedly attacks the conclusion above, This option talks about both the crowding effect and the gimmicks played by the English troops. It says that the fake overcrowding effect was created rather than the real crowding effect took place.

E. Research suggests that computer simulations of historic events lack credibility.

This option simply trying to deny all above stated but this is not the logical way to weaken the GMAT arguments, it is like the passage conclude that X=Y and answer option trying to weaken the conclusion by saying that no value of x is there actually.

Answer: D

GMATNinja can u give a detailed solution for question 1(MY answer was E)

Question #1 is an inference question, we have to pick an answer which can be logically valid based on the text of the passage. Here are a few examples how we logically concludes from the statements:

Jack has passed the test.

We can logically infer that Jack has not failed the test.

I tossed up a coin and a head occurred.

We can safely infer that a coin has been tossed and a tail has not occurred.

I went asleep at 8 pm and wake up at 12 pm next day.

One can safely conclude that I slept more than 15 hours.

Let's get to the question.

A. human responses to overcrowding vary.

We cannot infer it by the help of the text available.

B. the French may have been better positioned to win had they attacked with a smaller force.

A lot of text in the passage overall help us to conclude this. The lines in the passage directly and indirectly state this.

a small English force of less than 9,000 troops and archers faced a French army that, by some accounts, numbered 50,000.

We can use these lines as support to B

the English won, suffering only modest casualties while delivering devastating losses to the French.

The French numbers contributed to overcrowding on the field-a narrow plot of recently ploughed land

And the conclusion in the last

researchers suspect, a stampede effect took over, as soldiers from behind trampled those caught in front. As a result, researchers now believe that the high French casualties were more likely caused by the crushing and smothering effects of a stampeding crowd rather than the military superiority of English troops.

All above lines support B is correct.

C. computers will replace on-the-ground examination in historical research.

Passage has not given any surety about future, this option is trying to induct outside information.

D. crowd behavior has evolved in pace with an expanding world population.

Same as C: This option invalidly trying to exaggerate the text and extending it scope to the outside of the passage.

E. the English victory at the Battle of Agincourt can be best explained as a matter of luck

Keep one thing in mind, what could be true in the real world doesn't necessarily be true in the GMAT, this option is out of scope. It might be 100% correct that the English have won by just the matter of luck but we can not conclude this because passage has not suggest anything to conclude as such. If text of the argument said that all humans are immortal we are forced to believe (for the sake of the GMAT) that yes all humans are immortal while the fact is totally against it.

Answer: B

Hi,
Shouldn't the right answer be 'A' For Question no.3? The conclusion is that the main reason behind soldiers dying is overcrowding and the evidence presented in the passage is in the form of the findings of the researchers and computer simulations. The assumption leading to the conclusion is that overcrowding is the only possible explanation for the death of French soldiers. So, in order to weaken the conclusion, we need to weaken the assumption that they could have died some other way which is exactly what option 'A' does. Option 'D' on the contrary strengthens the conclusion that overcrowding is the only possible explanation for the death of French soldiers by suggesting that English deployed their tactic to induce overcrowding.

Sajjad1994 Why is option (B) wrong for Q2?
I am stuck between (B) and (E).

Since, heavily armored knights could not be attacked, English decided to attack the horses. Isn't it an example of superior military tactics by the British?

Hi sting8

Yes! it could be example of superior military tactics by the British but we have to know the intentions of the author why he wrote the word. The author as suggested in the end of the first paragraph is reasoning why the French loses the battle, so the intention of the author to use the word "dismounted" here is to explain how French become powerless in spite of being heavily armored.

E is the answer.

PS: If you still think B should be correct then read the passage again and look into the pattern of writing you will know the intention of the author.

Good luck

1. It can be inferred from this passage that

A. human responses to overcrowding vary. Incorrect. No different scenarios to infer this statement mentioned in the passage.
B. the French may have been better positioned to win had they attacked with a smaller force. Correct. Since the passage is mentioning the over crowding as a reason for failure of French in the battle.
C. computers will replace on-the-ground examination in historical research. Incorrect. No Such information.
D. crowd behavior has evolved in pace with an expanding world population. Incorrect. No Such information.
E. the English victory at the Battle of Agincourt can be best explained as a matter of luck. Incorrect. No Such information.

2. The author most likely mentions the knights being "dismounted" in order to

A. create sympathy for the loss of horses at Agincourt. Incorrect. The knights are mentioned to explain the overcrowding effect and not for sympathy.
B. provide an example of superior English tactics in the battle. Incorrect. The passage suggest the advantage of smaller force again larger force in a small place and not the superior tactics.
C. paint a dramatic portrait of the confusion and chaos of medieval combat. Incorrect. Dramatic impact is not the purpose.
D. underscore the difficulties faced by all medieval armies in the face of enemy archers.. Incorrect. Medieval armies not discussed in the passage.
E. explain how falling horses aggravated the conditions that led to the French defeat. Correct. The dismounting knights explain the overcrowding effect leading to failure of french armies.

3. Which statement, if true, would most weaken the conclusion drawn in the second paragraph?

Any statement which explains the superiority of English army will weaken the reason of crowding effect for the french failure.

A. An investigation using period armor and battlefield soil reveals that many French knights probably drowned in thick mud. Incorrect Does not help.
B. A compilation of firsthand accounts convincingly demonstrates that considerable numbers of French knights survived the battle. Incorrect does not show the superiority of English army.
C. The computer algorithms used to calculate the overcrowding effects at Agincourt in 1415 were based on behavior studies done on college students in 2010. Incorrect. No information weakening the conclusion.
D. An archeological study suggests that the English deliberately shaped the battlefield with trenches that would create an overcrowding effect. Correct. This strengthens the possibility of English army to win the battle.
E. Research suggests that computer simulations of historic events lack credibility. Incorrect. No information weakening the conclusion.

Hi rahulgarg02,

Please refer the reply by expert here:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/the-psychology-of-crowds-has-come-under-increasing-scrutiny-masses-of-347055.html#p2717209


Let us know if you still have doubts.
Thanks.