Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2301:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Struggling with GMAT Verbal as a non-native speaker? Harsh improved his score from 595 to 695 in just 45 days—and scored a 99 %ile in Verbal (V88)! Learn how smart strategy, clarity, and guided prep helped him gain 100 points.
Apr 2308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
Updated on: 14 Mar 2019, 04:35
Originally posted by anilnandyala on 16 Dec 2010, 23:41.
Last edited by Skywalker18 on 14 Mar 2019, 04:35, edited 2 times in total.
Last edited by Skywalker18 on 14 Mar 2019, 04:35, edited 2 times in total.
formatted
Kudos
Bookmarks
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
35%
(medium)
Question Stats:
70% (01:37) correct
30%
(02:01)
wrong
based on 2956
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
An oil field prospector and developer reported a large oil deposit in southwestern Texas. As a result, a large oil and gas company purchased the field with the intention of drilling oil wells in the area soon afterwards. However, the company found that what had been reported to be a large oil deposit was actually much smaller than had been indicated. Thus, the methods that the prospector had used to determine the size of the oil deposit must have been inaccurate.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. The company's methods of measuring the size of the oil deposit were determined by a third party to be more accurate than those used by the prospector.
B. The prospector did not purposefully fabricate or misrepresent the size of the oil deposit.
C. Though smaller than originally thought, the oil deposit contained enough oil to make drilling commercially feasible.
D. The prospector did not explore other oil fields and use the same methods to determine the magnitude of the oil present, if any.
E. The company had successfully drilled for oil in other large oil fields in Texas throughout the early twentieth century.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. The company's methods of measuring the size of the oil deposit were determined by a third party to be more accurate than those used by the prospector.
B. The prospector did not purposefully fabricate or misrepresent the size of the oil deposit.
C. Though smaller than originally thought, the oil deposit contained enough oil to make drilling commercially feasible.
D. The prospector did not explore other oil fields and use the same methods to determine the magnitude of the oil present, if any.
E. The company had successfully drilled for oil in other large oil fields in Texas throughout the early twentieth century.
14 Jun 2012, 14:06
Kudos
Bookmarks
For assumption questions, a great technique is something called the Negation Test. I'll teach it to you right now.
The concept rests on the information that the argument depends on the assumption. So how would you test dependence with something else, such as a table with legs? You'd remove a leg. If the table falls down, the table depended on that leg. If it doesn't fall down, it didn't depend on it. Same concept here. Negate (make negative) each answer choice. If that negation were true, it should make the argument's conclusion fall apart.
Let's look at this argument.
Step 1: Construct your table by listing the conclusion and premises of this argument.
Premise: The company found that what had been reported to be a large oil deposit was actually much smaller than had been indicated.
Assumption: ?
Conclusion: Thus, the methods that the prospector had used to determine the size of the oil deposit must have been inaccurate.
Step 2: Negate each answer choice:
Answer A:
The company's methods of measuring the size of the oil deposit were determined by a third party to be more accurate than those used by the prospector.
Think: What if the company's methods were NOT determined by a third party?
Result: So what? The prospector may still have been inaccurate. Eliminate.
Answer B: The prospector did not purposefully fabricate or misrepresent the size of the oil deposit.
Think: What if the prospector DID purposefully fabricate or misrepresent?
Result: Winner. If he lied, then maybe his results were NOT inaccurate at all. This is your answer. (Often, the right answer on an assumption question will contain the word "not".)
Answer C: Though smaller than originally thought, the oil deposit contained enough oil to make drilling commercially feasible.
Think: What if it did NOT contain enough oil to be commercially feasible?
Result: So what? The prospector may still have been inaccurate. Eliminate.
Answer D: The prospector did not explore other oil fields and use the same methods to determine the magnitude of the oil present, if any.
Think: What if the prospector DID explore other oil fields and use the same method?
Result: So what? The prospector may still have been inaccurate every time. Eliminate.
Answer E: The company had successfully drilled for oil in other large oil fields in Texas throughout the early twentieth century.
Think: What if the company did NOT successfully drill in other fields?
Result: So what? The prospector may still have been inaccurate.
You can use the negation test on any assumption question on the GMAT, whether it appears as a critical reasoning question in the Verbal, in the reading comp section, or in the IR section.
Best of luck in your GMAT study.
The concept rests on the information that the argument depends on the assumption. So how would you test dependence with something else, such as a table with legs? You'd remove a leg. If the table falls down, the table depended on that leg. If it doesn't fall down, it didn't depend on it. Same concept here. Negate (make negative) each answer choice. If that negation were true, it should make the argument's conclusion fall apart.
Let's look at this argument.
Step 1: Construct your table by listing the conclusion and premises of this argument.
Premise: The company found that what had been reported to be a large oil deposit was actually much smaller than had been indicated.
Assumption: ?
Conclusion: Thus, the methods that the prospector had used to determine the size of the oil deposit must have been inaccurate.
Step 2: Negate each answer choice:
Answer A:
The company's methods of measuring the size of the oil deposit were determined by a third party to be more accurate than those used by the prospector.
Think: What if the company's methods were NOT determined by a third party?
Result: So what? The prospector may still have been inaccurate. Eliminate.
Answer B: The prospector did not purposefully fabricate or misrepresent the size of the oil deposit.
Think: What if the prospector DID purposefully fabricate or misrepresent?
Result: Winner. If he lied, then maybe his results were NOT inaccurate at all. This is your answer. (Often, the right answer on an assumption question will contain the word "not".)
Answer C: Though smaller than originally thought, the oil deposit contained enough oil to make drilling commercially feasible.
Think: What if it did NOT contain enough oil to be commercially feasible?
Result: So what? The prospector may still have been inaccurate. Eliminate.
Answer D: The prospector did not explore other oil fields and use the same methods to determine the magnitude of the oil present, if any.
Think: What if the prospector DID explore other oil fields and use the same method?
Result: So what? The prospector may still have been inaccurate every time. Eliminate.
Answer E: The company had successfully drilled for oil in other large oil fields in Texas throughout the early twentieth century.
Think: What if the company did NOT successfully drill in other fields?
Result: So what? The prospector may still have been inaccurate.
You can use the negation test on any assumption question on the GMAT, whether it appears as a critical reasoning question in the Verbal, in the reading comp section, or in the IR section.
Best of luck in your GMAT study.
10 Apr 2021, 01:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
anilnandyala
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
The conclusion of the argument is contained in the last sentence, that "the methods that the prospector had used to determine the size of the oil deposit must have been inaccurate." The evidence provided is that the prospector reported a large oil deposit that was later determined to be much smaller in size. We are asked to find an unstated assumption that makes the conclusion valid based upon this evidence. In order to do this, we need to assume that there is not another reason why the prospector might have reported a larger oil deposit than actually existed.
(A) It is not necessary to the conclusion that a third party affirmed the company's determination that the oil deposit turned out to be small. The conclusion accepts that the oil deposit was indeed smaller than indicated by the prospector, and focuses on the cause of the discrepancy as opposed to the discrepancy itself.
(B) CORRECT. The argument concludes that the prospector's methods resulted in inaccurate measurements of the size of the oil deposit. This assumes that the prospector did not simply misreport or misrepresent the measurements, presumably for personal gain. This answer choice addresses the most plausible alternative explanation to the one given, and is necessary for the conclusion to stand based upon the evidence presented.
(C) The commercial feasibility or profitability of the oil deposit is not integral to the argument, or its conclusion. This statement is not an assumption that would support the conclusion. (D) Whether or not the prospector utilized the same methods in regards to measuring the oil deposits in other locations is not relevant to the argument, or the conclusion.
(E) The fact that the company had a long operating history and experience in drilling oil wells is not relevant, in that the company's measurements of the size of the oil field are accepted as given in the argument.
