With reference to this table, a statistician has proposed the followin

Question

With reference to this table, a statistician has proposed the following criteria for determining the “most geographically typical” of the listed Australian states/territories:
    State/territory    Land area
(km^2)    Population
(2006)    Population density
(people/km^2)    % of population
in capital     Australian Capital
Territory   2358  344200  137.53  99.6    New South Wales  800642  6967200  8.44  63    Northern Territory  1349129  219900  0.15  54    Queensland  1730648  4279400  2.26  46    South Australia  983482  1601800  1.56  73.5    Tasmania  68401  498200  7.08  41    Victoria  227416  5297600  22  71    Western Australia  2529875  2163200  0.79  73.4     ( Sort ↕  the table by clicking on the headers)

For each of the four categories of statistics, a state/territory is typical if and only if it is neither among the 25% of listed states/territories with the least values for that category nor among the 25% of listed states/territories with the greatest values for that category.

For each of the following statements, select Yes if the statement is accurate based on the statistician’s criteria; otherwise select No.

egmat · Accepted Answer

This TA question comes with a simple table but an involved translation. To solve it efficiently, you need to:
 
 Translate the definition of “typical” into simpler terms using the strategic pausing technique. Doing this upfront ensures that evaluation of the statements is not a time hog. 
 Make inferences when direct information is not provided. This is true about statement 2 in the question in which we needed to extend the given definition of “typical” to find the “most geographically typical” state/territory. 
 Determine the approach to evaluate each statement before plunging into the 32 data points in the table. This is to keep you focused on just what is needed. Observe how we used tally marks to solve one of the statements and how that same tally chart was used in the rest of the statements as well. So, do not shy away from doing the work that is expected to answer each statement. And do not think that same amount of work will be required for all statements. Be open to reusing the analysis that you have done for the statements.

As you watch the video solution, observe how absolute comfort in how to work with a table in a TA question is imperative for our goal of “owning the dataset”. Here, you sort by not one or two but all 4 columns to infer the information that is then used in each statement. Call the analysis of this question done once you have determined why you answered this question incorrectly or why you took longer to answer it. Most likely reasons:
 
 You did not translate the meaning of “typical”. 
 You did not create your own table with tally marks for the states that are “typical”.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlAvb3SUIQ0

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Official Explanation

RO1: Apply

There are eight listed states and territories, so when the table is sorted in ascending order in any category, the four states and territories appearing in rows 3–6 are precisely those states considered typical in that category. The following table lists the typical states and territories, by category:

Although no other states and territories are typical in more than two categories, both New South Wales and South Australia are typical in exactly three categories. Therefore New South Wales is not typical in more categories than the other listed states and territories.

The correct answer is No.

RO2: Apply

According to the table produced in the analysis of RO1, both South Australia and New South Wales are more typical than every other listed state or territory; so there is no listed state or territory that is more typical than South Australia.

The correct answer is Yes.

Show Spoiler

Attachment:

1.jpg [ 57.18 KiB | Viewed 17336 times ]

bM22 · Answer

Lets go Category wise from lowest to highest: Typical Countries.
Land Area: Australian Capital Territory, Tasmania, Victoria,  New South Wales, South Australia, Northern Territory ,Queensland, Western Australia.
Population: Northern Territory, Australian Capital Territory,  Tasmania, South Australia, Western Australia, Queensland,  Victoria, New South Wales.
Population Density: Northern Territory, Western Australia,  South Australia, Queensland, Tasmania, New South Wales , Victoria, Australian Capital Territory.
% of Population in capital: Tasmania, Queensland,  Northern Territory, New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia ,South Australia, Australian Capital Territory.

Now 25% of 8 = 2.
1. New South Wales is typical in more categories than any other listed state/territory. 
Now we can see from above that New South Wales, is typical only in Population, so 
 Answer No. .

I think the OA for 2nd should also be No, since New South Wales is geographically typical equal as compared to South Australia.
 SajjadAhmad , kindly correct me if I am wrong.
2. No listed state/territory is more geographically typical than South Australia.
As we can see that New South wales is equally typical, so
 Answer - No.

3. The Australian Capital Territory is not typical in any of the categories.
As we can in the data in bold above, we can see that Australian Capital Territory is not typical in any of the categories, so
 Answer - Yes

poojakhanduja3017 · Answer

Very Interesting Set, Kudos for that one. Answers as No, Yes and Yes

Logic Building   : 
 1) 25% means 2 states on each side 
2) There are 8 states, so typical means 3-6th positions in that category.

Statement 1  : New South Wales is typical in more categories than any other listed state/territory.
We check the 1st category: 4th place : typical
 2nd category: 8th place : not typical
 3rd category: 6th place: typical 
 4th category: 4th place: typical. 
 So 3 categories. We quickly check other territories and reject those who are not typical in at least 2 categories. After this  South Australia is also typical in 3 categories.

Statement 2  : No listed state/territory is more geographically typical than South Australia.

From the first statement, we know that SA is equally typical in 3 categories. The wording states that SA should be maximum and it is (even though it shares that spot with South Wales

Statement 3  : The Australian Capital Territory is not typical in any of the categories.
 On a quick glance, we see that ACT is always in the highest/lowest places. So this is true.

Apt0810 · Answer

1)No,In terms of Land area New South Wales is on 4th rank,
In terms of Population New South Wales is on 8th rank,
In terms of Population density New South Wales is on 5th rank,
In terms of % population New South Wales is on 4th rank,

So it is typical in 3 categories but South Australia is also typical in 3 categories

B)Yes,since South Wales is equal in terms of that criteria

C)Yes,Since Australian capital territory is twice in top 2 and twice in bottom 2 so it is not typical

Posted from my mobile device

ACT3010 · Answer

Could someone please explain the logic of typical states lying in row 3-6? Why can't they be in row 4 and 5, with 3 above and 3 below. That would also count as the median, right? There's something I'm not able to understand in the conditions given in the question for a state qualifying as typical. Please help.

"For each of the four categories of statistics, a state/territory is typical if and only if it is among the 50% of listed states and territories that are closest to the median value for that category. For any two listed states and territories, if one is typical in a greater number of categories than the other, the former is to be considered more geographically typical than the other."

dropthebase64 · Answer

ACT3010  Notice that your prompt is different than the original post. I have the same as yours and got the 3rd question wrong and am trying to understand why. To restate it, the question in my OG package is all the same except for the measure of criteria. To restate it, the question has changed by saying:

For each of the four categories of statistics, a state/territory is typical if and only if it is among the 50% of listed states and territories that are closest to the median value for that category. For any two listed states and territories, if one is typical in a greater number of categories than the other, the former is to be considered more geographically typical than the other.

This is quite different. For calculating the median, I am sorting by column and taking the average of position 4 and 5. Then, I find the 4 closest to that median value. So for Population:
(1601800 + 2163200)/2 = 1882500.

For the third yes/no question: 
The Australian Capital Territory is not typical in any of the categories.

This is where I think it differs from the original posted based on the definition of 'typical'

Southern Australia and Western Australia are easy to see they are 'typical' so that is 2 of the 4. It's also easy to see that Victoria and New South Wales are 'not typcial' by just a glance. For the remaining I did the math:

Tasmania:
1882500-498200 = 1,384,300

Queensland:
4279400 - 1882500 = 2,396,900

(we now know that Tasmania makes the 3rd of the 4 typical)

Australian Capital Territory:
1882500-34200 = 1,848,300

Since ACT is closer to the median than Queensland, according to the definition I provided above for typical, this SHOULD be typical making the answer "No" since the statement does not match the statement...

However, the OG still says this is "Yes" with the provided explanation:
----
RO3: Apply

The Australian Capital Territory does not appear in the table of typical states and territories produced in the analysis of RO1. Therefore the Australian Capital Territory is not typical in any category.

The correct answer is Yes.
----

If I have made an error, feel free to correct me.

KarishmaB · Answer

We have 8 states given. Also given "a state/territory is typical if and only if it is neither among the 25% of listed states/territories with the least values for that category nor among the 25% of listed states/territories with the greatest values for that category." This means that a state is typical only if it it is neither in the top 2 (25% of 8) and nor in the bottom 2 when you sort by any category. So it is typical if it lies in one of the middle 4 rows. New South Wales is typical in more categories than any other listed state/territory So New South Wales (NSW) is typical if it lies within the mid 4 rows (neither top 2 nor bottom 2) for the category. Sort by all 4 categories and note that NSW is typical in 3 of them - Land Area, Pop density and %Pop in capital. So we need to find if any other state is typical in 3 or more categories. Sort by Land Area - Typical are NSW, V, SA, NT Sort by Population - SA is still typical here. V and NT are not. Sort by Population Density - SA is still typical. This means NSW is NOT typical more categories than SA. SA is also typical in at least 3 categories. No state is typical in all 4 categories. Select No No listed state/territory is more geographically typical than South Australia. We already have the answer to this. SA is typical in 3 categories and no state is typical in more than 3. Select Yes The Australian Capital Territory is not typical in any of the categories. Quick sort all 4 categories. ACT is not in the mid 4 rowsl in any. Select Yes Here is a discussion on another table question: https://youtu.be/UtEAoNLP4dw The point of this question is quick sorting.

MMZZZA · Answer

I agree here

Nikhils29 · Answer

You are right.
I also did the same thing, the answer of OG seems wrong.

Nikhils29 · Answer

You are right.
I also did the same thing, the answer of OG seems wrong.

Nikhils29 · Answer

You are right.
I also did the same thing, the answer of OG seems wrong.

Nikhils29 · Answer

You are right.
I also did the same thing, the answer of OG seems wrong.

With reference to this table, a statistician has proposed the followin

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

State/territory	Land area (km^2)	Population (2006)	Population density (people/km^2)	% of population in capital
Australian Capital Territory	2358	344200	137.53	99.6
New South Wales	800642	6967200	8.44	63
Northern Territory	1349129	219900	0.15	54
Queensland	1730648	4279400	2.26	46
South Australia	983482	1601800	1.56	73.5
Tasmania	68401	498200	7.08	41
Victoria	227416	5297600	22	71
Western Australia	2529875	2163200	0.79	73.4

Yes	No
		New South Wales is typical in more categories than any other listed state/territory.
		No listed state/territory is more geographically typical than South Australia.
		The Australian Capital Territory is not typical in any of the categories.

GMAT Graphs and Tables (G&T) Questions

With reference to this table, a statistician has proposed the followin

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