Last visit was: 25 Apr 2026, 02:33 It is currently 25 Apr 2026, 02:33
Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
dolortempore
Joined: 15 Aug 2025
Last visit: 22 Jan 2026
Posts: 47
Own Kudos:
44
 [1]
Given Kudos: 9
Posts: 47
Kudos: 44
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
chasing725
Joined: 22 Jun 2025
Last visit: 13 Jan 2026
Posts: 176
Own Kudos:
173
 [1]
Given Kudos: 5
Location: United States (OR)
Schools: Stanford
Schools: Stanford
Posts: 176
Kudos: 173
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
remdelectus
Joined: 01 Sep 2025
Last visit: 24 Apr 2026
Posts: 58
Own Kudos:
48
 [1]
Given Kudos: 3
Posts: 58
Kudos: 48
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
adityaprateek15
Joined: 26 May 2023
Last visit: 24 Apr 2026
Posts: 346
Own Kudos:
170
 [1]
Given Kudos: 323
Location: India
GPA: 2.7
Products:
Posts: 346
Kudos: 170
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The argument incorrectly assumes that a quality possessed by the group automatically transfers to the individual work as well. We don't know how much Dr. Lin contributed to the group's success. The correct choice will provide a parallel reasoning.

A. Incorrect. This choice presents a different flawed argument where the person wasn't even a part of the success group.

B. Incorrect. This choice presents the quality of one project and links it with a separate project worked by the same person. Structure is different.

C. Incorrect. This choice states the opposite of the original flaw.

D. Correct. This choice perfectly mirrors structure in the original argument.

E. Incorrect.This choice presents a logically valid argument. There's no flaw here.

Option D

Bunuel
A leading tech journal recently praised the joint research panel assembled by NVIDIA, calling its twelve-engineer task force “remarkably rigorous and unbiased” in its evaluation of emerging AI safety standards. Since Dr. Lin served on that task force, corporate clients adopting her independent AI-audit reports can confidently expect the same level of rigor and impartiality.

Which of the following exhibits flawed reasoning most similar to that in the passage?

A. A team at a robotics company won an award for designing a drone-navigation module. Since Caleb worked on a different product line at the same company, his new project is also likely award-winning.

B. An open-source contributor helped build a widely trusted machine-learning benchmark suite. Since he tested a separate model last year, that model must also represent industry-standard quality.

C. The AI ethics division at Priya’s university is widely respected for its rigorous verification methods. Since Priya recently published a rigorous verification review, she is likely one of the contributors to the division’s strong reputation.

D. A multi-institutional consortium produced a highly reliable dataset for autonomous-vehicle training. Since Dr. Ahmadi was a member of that consortium, her solo data-labeling work for a different project will be just as reliable.

E. A group of analysts at a cloud-security firm unanimously voted to support a shift to zero-trust architecture. Since Jordan is one of those analysts, she also supports a transition to zero-trust practices.

Gift
12 Days of Christmas Competition
This question is part of our holiday event
Win $40,000 in prizes: courses, tests, and more
User avatar
Lizaza
Joined: 16 Jan 2021
Last visit: 29 Mar 2026
Posts: 240
Own Kudos:
282
 [1]
Given Kudos: 7
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V40
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V40
Posts: 240
Kudos: 282
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The flaw is saying that since the GROUP was rigorous and unbiased, ONLY ONE representative will have exactly the same level of rigor and objectivity.

A mentions a completely unrelated Caleb, while B speaks about the same solo contributor rather than group effort. C tries to place an individual within a group based on her similar features.

The right answer is D, since it illstrates the error perfectly. E is a distractor, since there's actually no error there (the vote was nanimous, so yes, Jordan supports it).
User avatar
sanjitscorps18
Joined: 26 Jan 2019
Last visit: 03 Mar 2026
Posts: 723
Own Kudos:
742
 [1]
Given Kudos: 130
Location: India
Schools: IMD'26
Products:
Schools: IMD'26
Posts: 723
Kudos: 742
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Logic is
A group produces good work -> One individual from team produces same quality work

A -> In this the individual is from a different group
B -> This refers to different works of the same individual
C -> This is reverse logic by associating the person with the group to justify the work quality
D -> Correct. Group produces highly reliable dataset. Individual from group (Dr. Ahmadi) also produces similar work.
E -> This refers to one work and citing a member separately while she also says the same thing and as part of the group.

Option D
Bunuel
A leading tech journal recently praised the joint research panel assembled by NVIDIA, calling its twelve-engineer task force “remarkably rigorous and unbiased” in its evaluation of emerging AI safety standards. Since Dr. Lin served on that task force, corporate clients adopting her independent AI-audit reports can confidently expect the same level of rigor and impartiality.

Which of the following exhibits flawed reasoning most similar to that in the passage?

A. A team at a robotics company won an award for designing a drone-navigation module. Since Caleb worked on a different product line at the same company, his new project is also likely award-winning.

B. An open-source contributor helped build a widely trusted machine-learning benchmark suite. Since he tested a separate model last year, that model must also represent industry-standard quality.

C. The AI ethics division at Priya’s university is widely respected for its rigorous verification methods. Since Priya recently published a rigorous verification review, she is likely one of the contributors to the division’s strong reputation.

D. A multi-institutional consortium produced a highly reliable dataset for autonomous-vehicle training. Since Dr. Ahmadi was a member of that consortium, her solo data-labeling work for a different project will be just as reliable.

E. A group of analysts at a cloud-security firm unanimously voted to support a shift to zero-trust architecture. Since Jordan is one of those analysts, she also supports a transition to zero-trust practices.

Gift
12 Days of Christmas Competition
This question is part of our holiday event
Win $40,000 in prizes: courses, tests, and more
User avatar
Mardee
Joined: 22 Nov 2022
Last visit: 02 Feb 2026
Posts: 225
Own Kudos:
191
 [1]
Given Kudos: 20
Posts: 225
Kudos: 191
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A. Irrelevant as this is a different flaw since a company's reputation is directly linked to a product quality instead of a group to individual
B. Irrelevant as this is a different flaw since benchmarks cant be linked to model quality and its not group to individual
C. Irrelevant as this flaw mentions about Priya's earlier role and doesent mention anything about the quality of the work
D. Relevant as this shows a group to individual link and the conclusion is basically saying group reliability is transferred to the individual's work
E. Irrelevant as this isnt mentioning any flaw. The statement given is valid as the vote was unanimous

D.
User avatar
Ayeka
Joined: 26 May 2024
Last visit: 22 Apr 2026
Posts: 528
Own Kudos:
402
 [1]
Given Kudos: 158
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q82 V83 DI80
GPA: 4.2
Schools: ISB
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q82 V83 DI80
Posts: 528
Kudos: 402
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The passage assumes that because an individual was part of a high functioning group where there views and contribution of many people, that same individual will produce the same quality of work when acting alone. The flaw ignores the possibility that the group’s achievements might come from collaboration and work of other people except dr.lin.
Option D resonates the most with it. It talks about collective success and then assumes a persons excellence.
A multi institutional consortium produced a highly reliable data set for autonomous vehicle training. Since Dr Ahmadi was a member of that her so data labelling work for a different project will be just as reliable.

D
User avatar
truedelulu
Joined: 01 Sep 2025
Last visit: 24 Jan 2026
Posts: 81
Own Kudos:
70
 [1]
Given Kudos: 16
Products:
Posts: 81
Kudos: 70
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Passage: A group is praised as rigorous and unbiased. Dr Lin was a member of this group => Dr Lin's independent work will therefore also rigorous and unbiased.

Flaw: It infer a group result to an individual result without clearly consider the individual's role.

A. Incorrect. The flaw relies more on organizational association rather than group evaluation.
B. Incorrect. It infer contributor to product quality.
C. Incorrect. This infer individual to group.
D. CORRECT. This infer group to individual performance.
E. Incorrect. This is not a flawed reasoning.
Bunuel
A leading tech journal recently praised the joint research panel assembled by NVIDIA, calling its twelve-engineer task force “remarkably rigorous and unbiased” in its evaluation of emerging AI safety standards. Since Dr. Lin served on that task force, corporate clients adopting her independent AI-audit reports can confidently expect the same level of rigor and impartiality.

Which of the following exhibits flawed reasoning most similar to that in the passage?

A. A team at a robotics company won an award for designing a drone-navigation module. Since Caleb worked on a different product line at the same company, his new project is also likely award-winning.

B. An open-source contributor helped build a widely trusted machine-learning benchmark suite. Since he tested a separate model last year, that model must also represent industry-standard quality.

C. The AI ethics division at Priya’s university is widely respected for its rigorous verification methods. Since Priya recently published a rigorous verification review, she is likely one of the contributors to the division’s strong reputation.

D. A multi-institutional consortium produced a highly reliable dataset for autonomous-vehicle training. Since Dr. Ahmadi was a member of that consortium, her solo data-labeling work for a different project will be just as reliable.

E. A group of analysts at a cloud-security firm unanimously voted to support a shift to zero-trust architecture. Since Jordan is one of those analysts, she also supports a transition to zero-trust practices.

Gift
12 Days of Christmas Competition
This question is part of our holiday event
Win $40,000 in prizes: courses, tests, and more
User avatar
msignatius
Joined: 28 Aug 2025
Last visit: 09 Apr 2026
Posts: 131
Own Kudos:
98
 [1]
Given Kudos: 31
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT Focus 1: 705 Q86 V85 DI84
GPA: 3.5
WE:Marketing (Consulting)
Products:
GMAT Focus 1: 705 Q86 V85 DI84
Posts: 131
Kudos: 98
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
NVIDIA's task force, the argument claims, is exceptional in how well it evaluates emerging AI safety standards. Dr Lin, a part of the task force, will benefit immensely from the praise the task force has garnered, as her clientele who adopts her independent reports - related ones, or new ones in the future - can hold her by the same standards.

Naturally, we need to pick a choice with the same flaw - That just because A did B correct, her doing of C, D, E and will also be correct.

Let's see which choice most conforms to this thinking.

A. This essentially states, because X team won an award, Caleb, who WAS NOT a part of the time, will design something award-winning. As there's no participation of Caleb in the winning team, this isn't the same logic.

B: This essentially states, X found success with his benchmarking suite. His role with Y, another product, will have another qualitative advantage. Eliminate, because we're looking at variable advantages here.

C: Priya's university is widely respected. Priya's a part of the university - so she has to be the reason why the university is widely respected. Definitely eliminate.

D: This states, a company produced a strong product. A person part of it, his future / alternate work, will be just as reliable. Direct parallel to the reasoning.

E: This talks about analysts who voted to support something, rather than an achievement / success, and thus, predicts behavior rather than presents a continuation of success. Please eliminate.
Bunuel
A leading tech journal recently praised the joint research panel assembled by NVIDIA, calling its twelve-engineer task force “remarkably rigorous and unbiased” in its evaluation of emerging AI safety standards. Since Dr. Lin served on that task force, corporate clients adopting her independent AI-audit reports can confidently expect the same level of rigor and impartiality.

Which of the following exhibits flawed reasoning most similar to that in the passage?

A. A team at a robotics company won an award for designing a drone-navigation module. Since Caleb worked on a different product line at the same company, his new project is also likely award-winning.

B. An open-source contributor helped build a widely trusted machine-learning benchmark suite. Since he tested a separate model last year, that model must also represent industry-standard quality.

C. The AI ethics division at Priya’s university is widely respected for its rigorous verification methods. Since Priya recently published a rigorous verification review, she is likely one of the contributors to the division’s strong reputation.

D. A multi-institutional consortium produced a highly reliable dataset for autonomous-vehicle training. Since Dr. Ahmadi was a member of that consortium, her solo data-labeling work for a different project will be just as reliable.

E. A group of analysts at a cloud-security firm unanimously voted to support a shift to zero-trust architecture. Since Jordan is one of those analysts, she also supports a transition to zero-trust practices.

Gift
12 Days of Christmas Competition
This question is part of our holiday event
Win $40,000 in prizes: courses, tests, and more
User avatar
msignatius
Joined: 28 Aug 2025
Last visit: 09 Apr 2026
Posts: 131
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 31
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT Focus 1: 705 Q86 V85 DI84
GPA: 3.5
WE:Marketing (Consulting)
Products:
GMAT Focus 1: 705 Q86 V85 DI84
Posts: 131
Kudos: 98
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
hr1212, did I make the cut on this one? It shows a minute past the 24-hour-window, but just checking in case there's a one-minute grace period ;)
msignatius
NVIDIA's task force, the argument claims, is exceptional in how well it evaluates emerging AI safety standards. Dr Lin, a part of the task force, will benefit immensely from the praise the task force has garnered, as her clientele who adopts her independent reports - related ones, or new ones in the future - can hold her by the same standards.

Naturally, we need to pick a choice with the same flaw - That just because A did B correct, her doing of C, D, E and will also be correct.

Let's see which choice most conforms to this thinking.

A. This essentially states, because X team won an award, Caleb, who WAS NOT a part of the time, will design something award-winning. As there's no participation of Caleb in the winning team, this isn't the same logic.

B: This essentially states, X found success with his benchmarking suite. His role with Y, another product, will have another qualitative advantage. Eliminate, because we're looking at variable advantages here.

C: Priya's university is widely respected. Priya's a part of the university - so she has to be the reason why the university is widely respected. Definitely eliminate.

D: This states, a company produced a strong product. A person part of it, his future / alternate work, will be just as reliable. Direct parallel to the reasoning.

E: This talks about analysts who voted to support something, rather than an achievement / success, and thus, predicts behavior rather than presents a continuation of success. Please eliminate.

   1   2   3 
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
504 posts
358 posts