I think option D must be true.
Here’s how I visualized it:
4th floor > 2nd floor > 1st floor
For the 3rd floor, the passage says “most but not all” offices are larger than any office on the 2nd floor.
That means:
• most 3rd-floor offices > all 2nd-floor offices
• but at least one 3rd-floor office is NOT larger than every 2nd-floor office
And since every 4th-floor office is larger than every 2nd-floor office, the smallest 4th-floor office is still bigger than all 2nd-floor offices.
So that weaker/smaller 3rd-floor office must be smaller than at least some 4th-floor offices.
That directly supports option D:
“Some third-floor offices are not as large as the smallest fourth-floor offices.”
---
Why the other choices are not guaranteed:
(A) Nothing connects 1st-floor offices to the size of the smallest 4th-floor office.
(B) Same issue. We cannot conclude anything comparing 1st-floor offices with the smallest 3rd-floor offices.
(C) This reverses the comparison too strongly.
All 2nd-floor offices are larger than all 1st-floor offices, but the passage never says any 3rd-floor office is smaller than a 1st-floor office.
(E) We do not know whether some 4th-floor offices are smaller than the largest 3rd-floor offices.
It is possible that all 4th-floor offices are larger than all 3rd-floor offices.
So D is the only statement that must be true based on the relationships given.
— Rajdeep