1 Crore+ students have signed up on EduRev. Have you? 
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
It is very pleasant to entertain a new idea, a new notion or concept to think about and to look at the world with. Indeed, it can have the exciting and intoxicating feel of discovering hidden treasure.
Unfortunately, most ideas are bad  wrong, misleading, dangerous, or of very limited use or relevance. Even more unfortunately, that doesn't prevent them from gaining our interest and enthusiasm. The problem is that getting an idea is just a matter of understanding it (or thinking that you do) and this is just as easy in the case of bad ideas as it is for good ones. In contrast, checking the quality of ideas by interrogating the arguments for them is laborious and distinctly unrewarding  and so avoided as much as possible. The result is that the world is drowning in bad ideas and their dreadful consequences, from conspiracy theories to religions to academic bloopers like critical race theory.
The attraction of ideas is that they promise to help us make sense of the world. But we are too ready to accept ideas for what they seem to offer, without checking to see if the offer is real. Indeed they do allow us to see the world differently. But while that shift in perspective generates a feeling of insight, that is not in itself evidence that we are now seeing things as they truly are. We confuse the 'oomph' of intellectual novelty, that comes from seeing things differently, with actual significance or value (an entire industry called 'the news' also feasts on this cognitive bias). We allow ideas' psychological effects on us rather their logical qualities to determine how we receive them.
Unfortunately, given the way human minds work, bad ideas are more likely to have these attractive psychological effects than good ones. Consider the perennial attraction of conspiracy theories (and most religions), which offer an alternative simplified way of making sense of the strange and unwelcome things happening in the world by turning them into a meaningful story with ourselves at the centre. This has the benefit of reducing the cognitive burdens of understanding the world. In addition, the structure of these theories is distinctly flattering to believers: since the conspiracists are trying so hard to fool us, we must be important after all; since we can see through their ploys, we must be more powerful than we seemed.
But besides these wellknown benefits, novelty plays a particularly significant role in the attractiveness of conspiracy theories and other kooky ideas. It is not merely comforting (a kind of intellectual junk food) but intellectually exciting to come to think that the world is run by Bill Gates or NASA or whoever. It makes you see everything from a fresh perspective, which makes all sorts of new connections and meanings jump out to you. This in turn gives you the feeling of gaining genuinely new and important knowledge, of enlightenment: of seeing further and truer than you did before and than all those other people still stuck in their dark cave.
To sum up. New ideas make our brains light up, but that phenomenology of enlightenment easily misleads us about their value. We need quality control and therefore we need to work through the impartial arguments for the exciting new ideas we come across; but we don't because that would be way more work and way less fun. The result is that our minds are abuzz with things we think we know, and which feel important to know, but which probably aren't either.
Q. The central idea of the passage is that
In the passage, the author comments on a human fallacy. They are more excited about the 'oomph' factor associated with comprehending an idea and are less concerned about analysing the idea's quality, as it's laborious and often unrewarding. This often results in people misinterpreting the true value/usefulness of the idea.
Option A is a distortion as the passage does not state that people are primarily motivated by an idea's ability to disrupt the prevalent worldview.
Option B talks about gratification, which is tangential to the discussion.
Option C conveys the above inference. People are drawn to ideas, but they are often reluctant to carry out a qualitative analysis, leading to false impressions about the true worth of these ideas. Option C is the answer.
Option D has not been implied in the passage.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
It is very pleasant to entertain a new idea, a new notion or concept to think about and to look at the world with. Indeed, it can have the exciting and intoxicating feel of discovering hidden treasure.
Unfortunately, most ideas are bad  wrong, misleading, dangerous, or of very limited use or relevance. Even more unfortunately, that doesn't prevent them from gaining our interest and enthusiasm. The problem is that getting an idea is just a matter of understanding it (or thinking that you do) and this is just as easy in the case of bad ideas as it is for good ones. In contrast, checking the quality of ideas by interrogating the arguments for them is laborious and distinctly unrewarding  and so avoided as much as possible. The result is that the world is drowning in bad ideas and their dreadful consequences, from conspiracy theories to religions to academic bloopers like critical race theory.
The attraction of ideas is that they promise to help us make sense of the world. But we are too ready to accept ideas for what they seem to offer, without checking to see if the offer is real. Indeed they do allow us to see the world differently. But while that shift in perspective generates a feeling of insight, that is not in itself evidence that we are now seeing things as they truly are. We confuse the 'oomph' of intellectual novelty, that comes from seeing things differently, with actual significance or value (an entire industry called 'the news' also feasts on this cognitive bias). We allow ideas' psychological effects on us rather their logical qualities to determine how we receive them.
Unfortunately, given the way human minds work, bad ideas are more likely to have these attractive psychological effects than good ones. Consider the perennial attraction of conspiracy theories (and most religions), which offer an alternative simplified way of making sense of the strange and unwelcome things happening in the world by turning them into a meaningful story with ourselves at the centre. This has the benefit of reducing the cognitive burdens of understanding the world. In addition, the structure of these theories is distinctly flattering to believers: since the conspiracists are trying so hard to fool us, we must be important after all; since we can see through their ploys, we must be more powerful than we seemed.
But besides these wellknown benefits, novelty plays a particularly significant role in the attractiveness of conspiracy theories and other kooky ideas. It is not merely comforting (a kind of intellectual junk food) but intellectually exciting to come to think that the world is run by Bill Gates or NASA or whoever. It makes you see everything from a fresh perspective, which makes all sorts of new connections and meanings jump out to you. This in turn gives you the feeling of gaining genuinely new and important knowledge, of enlightenment: of seeing further and truer than you did before and than all those other people still stuck in their dark cave.
To sum up. New ideas make our brains light up, but that phenomenology of enlightenment easily misleads us about their value. We need quality control and therefore we need to work through the impartial arguments for the exciting new ideas we come across; but we don't because that would be way more work and way less fun. The result is that our minds are abuzz with things we think we know, and which feel important to know, but which probably aren't either.
Q. Which of the following statements is the author LEAST likely to agree with?
I. Bad ideas are more likely to raise human interest and enthusiasm than good ideas.
II. People are cognizant of bad ideas but still rely on them to make sense of the world.
III. New ideas can lead to fresh perspectives on the functioning of the world.
IV. Most ideas have very little bearing on the functioning of the world.
"We allow ideas' psychological effects on us rather their logical qualities to determine how we receive them. Unfortunately, given the way human minds work, bad ideas are more likely to have these attractive psychological effects than good ones." Statement I can be inferred from these lines. Hence, the author is likely to agree with it.
Statement II has not been implied in the passage. In the penultimate paragraph, the author comments that the feeling of gaining new knowledge and perspective clouds our ability to judge the quality of the ideas, including the bad ones. Furthermore, the statement is in sharp contrast to what the author discusses. To conclude that an idea is bad or good, people must assess its quality. But according to the author, people almost always avoid this exercise. Hence, Statement II is wrong.
The author states the following about new ideas {Indeed they do allow us to see the world differently. But while that shift in perspective generates a feeling of insight, that is not in itself evidence that we are now seeing things as they truly are.} So, the author does believe in an idea's ability to generate a fresh perspective but wants people to carry out a qualitative evaluation before confirming it. Hence, the author will agree with Statement III.
Statement IV is a distortion. The author states, "Unfortunately, most ideas are bad  wrong, misleading, dangerous, or of very limited use or relevance. " But he is also worried about the dreadful consequences of bad ideas, like conspiracy theories. So, though of little value, these ideas can have a big impact on the functioning of the world. Statement IV does not align with the author's view.
Statement II and IV are not likely to receive the author's approval. Hence, Option B is the answer.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
It is very pleasant to entertain a new idea, a new notion or concept to think about and to look at the world with. Indeed, it can have the exciting and intoxicating feel of discovering hidden treasure.
Unfortunately, most ideas are bad  wrong, misleading, dangerous, or of very limited use or relevance. Even more unfortunately, that doesn't prevent them from gaining our interest and enthusiasm. The problem is that getting an idea is just a matter of understanding it (or thinking that you do) and this is just as easy in the case of bad ideas as it is for good ones. In contrast, checking the quality of ideas by interrogating the arguments for them is laborious and distinctly unrewarding  and so avoided as much as possible. The result is that the world is drowning in bad ideas and their dreadful consequences, from conspiracy theories to religions to academic bloopers like critical race theory.
The attraction of ideas is that they promise to help us make sense of the world. But we are too ready to accept ideas for what they seem to offer, without checking to see if the offer is real. Indeed they do allow us to see the world differently. But while that shift in perspective generates a feeling of insight, that is not in itself evidence that we are now seeing things as they truly are. We confuse the 'oomph' of intellectual novelty, that comes from seeing things differently, with actual significance or value (an entire industry called 'the news' also feasts on this cognitive bias). We allow ideas' psychological effects on us rather their logical qualities to determine how we receive them.
Unfortunately, given the way human minds work, bad ideas are more likely to have these attractive psychological effects than good ones. Consider the perennial attraction of conspiracy theories (and most religions), which offer an alternative simplified way of making sense of the strange and unwelcome things happening in the world by turning them into a meaningful story with ourselves at the centre. This has the benefit of reducing the cognitive burdens of understanding the world. In addition, the structure of these theories is distinctly flattering to believers: since the conspiracists are trying so hard to fool us, we must be important after all; since we can see through their ploys, we must be more powerful than we seemed.
But besides these wellknown benefits, novelty plays a particularly significant role in the attractiveness of conspiracy theories and other kooky ideas. It is not merely comforting (a kind of intellectual junk food) but intellectually exciting to come to think that the world is run by Bill Gates or NASA or whoever. It makes you see everything from a fresh perspective, which makes all sorts of new connections and meanings jump out to you. This in turn gives you the feeling of gaining genuinely new and important knowledge, of enlightenment: of seeing further and truer than you did before and than all those other people still stuck in their dark cave.
To sum up. New ideas make our brains light up, but that phenomenology of enlightenment easily misleads us about their value. We need quality control and therefore we need to work through the impartial arguments for the exciting new ideas we come across; but we don't because that would be way more work and way less fun. The result is that our minds are abuzz with things we think we know, and which feel important to know, but which probably aren't either.
Q. Which of the following is NOT one of the effects associated with believing in conspiracy theories?
"Consider the perennial attraction of conspiracy theories (and most religions), which offer an alternative simplified way of making sense of the strange and unwelcome things happening in the world by turning them into a meaningful story with ourselves at the centre. This has the benefit of reducing the cognitive burdens of understanding the world." Option B can be inferred from these lines.
"In addition, the structure of these theories is distinctly flattering to believers: since the conspiracists are trying so hard to fool us, we must be important after all; since we can see through their ploys, we must be more powerful than we seemed." Option C can be inferred as well.
"This, in turn, gives you the feeling of gaining genuinely new and important knowledge, of enlightenment: of seeing further and truer than you did before and than all those other people still stuck in their dark cave." Option D can be inferred from these lines.
Option A has not been implied. The author does not assert that believing in conspiracy theories causes people to look down on or belittle others. Therefore, Option A is the correct answer.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
It is very pleasant to entertain a new idea, a new notion or concept to think about and to look at the world with. Indeed, it can have the exciting and intoxicating feel of discovering hidden treasure.
Unfortunately, most ideas are bad  wrong, misleading, dangerous, or of very limited use or relevance. Even more unfortunately, that doesn't prevent them from gaining our interest and enthusiasm. The problem is that getting an idea is just a matter of understanding it (or thinking that you do) and this is just as easy in the case of bad ideas as it is for good ones. In contrast, checking the quality of ideas by interrogating the arguments for them is laborious and distinctly unrewarding  and so avoided as much as possible. The result is that the world is drowning in bad ideas and their dreadful consequences, from conspiracy theories to religions to academic bloopers like critical race theory.
The attraction of ideas is that they promise to help us make sense of the world. But we are too ready to accept ideas for what they seem to offer, without checking to see if the offer is real. Indeed they do allow us to see the world differently. But while that shift in perspective generates a feeling of insight, that is not in itself evidence that we are now seeing things as they truly are. We confuse the 'oomph' of intellectual novelty, that comes from seeing things differently, with actual significance or value (an entire industry called 'the news' also feasts on this cognitive bias). We allow ideas' psychological effects on us rather their logical qualities to determine how we receive them.
Unfortunately, given the way human minds work, bad ideas are more likely to have these attractive psychological effects than good ones. Consider the perennial attraction of conspiracy theories (and most religions), which offer an alternative simplified way of making sense of the strange and unwelcome things happening in the world by turning them into a meaningful story with ourselves at the centre. This has the benefit of reducing the cognitive burdens of understanding the world. In addition, the structure of these theories is distinctly flattering to believers: since the conspiracists are trying so hard to fool us, we must be important after all; since we can see through their ploys, we must be more powerful than we seemed.
But besides these wellknown benefits, novelty plays a particularly significant role in the attractiveness of conspiracy theories and other kooky ideas. It is not merely comforting (a kind of intellectual junk food) but intellectually exciting to come to think that the world is run by Bill Gates or NASA or whoever. It makes you see everything from a fresh perspective, which makes all sorts of new connections and meanings jump out to you. This in turn gives you the feeling of gaining genuinely new and important knowledge, of enlightenment: of seeing further and truer than you did before and than all those other people still stuck in their dark cave.
To sum up. New ideas make our brains light up, but that phenomenology of enlightenment easily misleads us about their value. We need quality control and therefore we need to work through the impartial arguments for the exciting new ideas we come across; but we don't because that would be way more work and way less fun. The result is that our minds are abuzz with things we think we know, and which feel important to know, but which probably aren't either.
Q. According to the author, good ideas and bad ideas
"....getting an idea is just a matter of understanding it (or thinking that you do) and this is just as easy in the case of bad ideas as it is for good ones..." Thus, the author opines that both good ideas and bad ideas require a similar intellectual effort to understand them. However, since they are classified in the passage as good and bad by the author, they differ in quality by default.
Option A is a distortion. It is not possible to conclude that these ideas are understood equally by all. There could always be a subjective element involved.
Option B is wrong. They are distinguishable and are not of equal quality.
Option C conveys the author's position correctly and is the answer.
Option D has not been implied in the passage. It can be eliminated.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
The silent treatment goes by many names: shunning, social isolation, stonewalling, ghosting. Although psychologists have nuanced definitions for each term, they are all essentially forms of ostracism. And the tactic is nothing new. Ancient Greeks expelled for 10 years citizens who were thought to be a threat to democracy, and early American settlers banished people accused of practising witchcraft.
“My research suggests that two in three individuals have used the silent treatment against someone else; even more have had it done to them,” Williams said. Experts told me that although they need more data to know for certain, instances of the silent treatment have likely increased over the years as new forms of communication have been invented. “Every new method of connection can be used as a form of disconnection,” Williams said.
Ostracism can also manifest in lesser ways: someone walking out of the room in the middle of a conversation, a friend at school looking the other way when you wave at them, or a person addressing comments from everyone in a message thread except you. “Partial ostracism,” Williams told me, might mean monosyllabic replies—a terse period at the end of a oneword text message. But in serious cases, ostracism can take a heavy toll whereby victims become anxious, withdrawn, depressed, or even suicidal. “Because we humans require social contact for our mental health, the ramifications of isolation can be severe,” Joel Cooper, a psychology professor at Princeton, told me. “In the short term, the silent treatment causes stress. In the long term, the stress can be considered abuse.”
The silent treatment is a particularly insidious form of abuse because it might force the victim to reconcile with the perpetrator in an effort to end the behavior, even if the victim doesn’t know why they’re apologizing. “It’s especially controlling because it deprives both sides from weighing in,” Williams said.
The silent treatment might be employed by passive personality types to avoid conflict and confrontation, while strong personality types use it to punish or control. Some people may not even consciously choose it at all. “A person may be flooded with feelings they can’t put into words, so they just shut down,” Anne Fishel, the director of the Family and Couples Therapy Program at Massachusetts General Hospital, told me. But regardless of the reason for the silent treatment, it can be received by victims as ostracism.
One study found that social rejection provoked a response in its victims similar to that of victims of physical abuse; the anterior cingulate cortex area of the brain—the area thought to interpret emotion and pain—was active in both instances. “Exclusion and rejection literally hurt,” John Bargh, a psychology professor at Yale, told me.
But the silent treatment ultimately harms the person causing it, too. Humans are predisposed to reciprocate social cues, so ignoring someone goes against our nature, Williams said. The perpetrator is therefore forced to justify the behaviour in order to keep doing it; they keep in mind all the reasons they’re choosing to ignore someone. Worse, the silent treatment can become addictive. The father who couldn’t force himself to speak to his son again suffered the way many addicts suffer—through repeating an activity despite knowing its harm. “Most people who start giving the silent treatment never intend for it to go on for as long as it does, but it can be very difficult to stop,” Williams told me. “It’s psychological quicksand.”
Q. Which of the following is not true as per the passage?
Let us pay heed to the following excerpt: {"...it might force the victim to reconcile with the perpetrator in an effort to end the behaviour, even if the victim doesn’t know why they’re apologizing..."} The author claims that the victims of ostracism might apologise to reconcile with the perpetrator despite being unaware of their mistake (unable to pinpoint them). However, the author doesn't establish a corollary to the same, which suggests that the perpetrators are at fault and are not justified in their treatment of the victims, hence undeserving of an apology. Hence, Option A is not true as per the passage.
"...Some people may not even consciously choose it at all..."  this line from the passage makes Option B true.
"...The silent treatment might be employed by passive personality types to avoid conflict and confrontation..."  this line from the passage makes option D true as well.
"One study found that social rejection provoked a response in its victims similar to that of victims of physical abuse; the anterior cingulate cortex area of the brain—the area thought to interpret emotion and pain—was active in both instances." The silent treatment is a form of social rejection. Hence, option C is true.
Hence, Option A is the correct choice.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
The silent treatment goes by many names: shunning, social isolation, stonewalling, ghosting. Although psychologists have nuanced definitions for each term, they are all essentially forms of ostracism. And the tactic is nothing new. Ancient Greeks expelled for 10 years citizens who were thought to be a threat to democracy, and early American settlers banished people accused of practising witchcraft.
“My research suggests that two in three individuals have used the silent treatment against someone else; even more have had it done to them,” Williams said. Experts told me that although they need more data to know for certain, instances of the silent treatment have likely increased over the years as new forms of communication have been invented. “Every new method of connection can be used as a form of disconnection,” Williams said.
Ostracism can also manifest in lesser ways: someone walking out of the room in the middle of a conversation, a friend at school looking the other way when you wave at them, or a person addressing comments from everyone in a message thread except you. “Partial ostracism,” Williams told me, might mean monosyllabic replies—a terse period at the end of a oneword text message. But in serious cases, ostracism can take a heavy toll whereby victims become anxious, withdrawn, depressed, or even suicidal. “Because we humans require social contact for our mental health, the ramifications of isolation can be severe,” Joel Cooper, a psychology professor at Princeton, told me. “In the short term, the silent treatment causes stress. In the long term, the stress can be considered abuse.”
The silent treatment is a particularly insidious form of abuse because it might force the victim to reconcile with the perpetrator in an effort to end the behavior, even if the victim doesn’t know why they’re apologizing. “It’s especially controlling because it deprives both sides from weighing in,” Williams said.
The silent treatment might be employed by passive personality types to avoid conflict and confrontation, while strong personality types use it to punish or control. Some people may not even consciously choose it at all. “A person may be flooded with feelings they can’t put into words, so they just shut down,” Anne Fishel, the director of the Family and Couples Therapy Program at Massachusetts General Hospital, told me. But regardless of the reason for the silent treatment, it can be received by victims as ostracism.
One study found that social rejection provoked a response in its victims similar to that of victims of physical abuse; the anterior cingulate cortex area of the brain—the area thought to interpret emotion and pain—was active in both instances. “Exclusion and rejection literally hurt,” John Bargh, a psychology professor at Yale, told me.
But the silent treatment ultimately harms the person causing it, too. Humans are predisposed to reciprocate social cues, so ignoring someone goes against our nature, Williams said. The perpetrator is therefore forced to justify the behaviour in order to keep doing it; they keep in mind all the reasons they’re choosing to ignore someone. Worse, the silent treatment can become addictive. The father who couldn’t force himself to speak to his son again suffered the way many addicts suffer—through repeating an activity despite knowing its harm. “Most people who start giving the silent treatment never intend for it to go on for as long as it does, but it can be very difficult to stop,” Williams told me. “It’s psychological quicksand.”
Q. Which of the following can be inferred from the passage?
"The silent treatment is a particularly insidious form of abuse because it might force the victim to reconcile with the perpetrator in an effort to end the behavior, even if the victim doesn’t know why they’re apologizing. “It’s especially controlling because it deprives both sides from weighing in,” Williams said." From these lines, it is clear that both the victim and the perpetrator may not be entirely approving of the manner of reconciliation. But nevertheless, the author does not assert that the perpetrators reject these reconciliatory efforts in most cases. Further evidence is required to validate this claim. Hence, option A cannot be inferred.
It is mentioned in the passage that giving the silent treatment may become addictive for the perpetrator, but it is not enough for us to infer whether the extent of addiction is the same as that associated with the consumption of hard drugs. Option C cannot be inferred.
In the passage, it has been mentioned that not only does the victim get harmed, but also the perpetrator himself. But, from this, we cannot infer the relative degree of harm caused. Option D cannot be inferred.
From the fifth paragraph, we can infer that the perpetrator can either consciously or unintentionally give someone a silent treatment. If the choice was made consciously, then the reasons would vary with different personality types. But it does not matter to the victim. What matters to him is that he feels abandoned. So, option B can be inferred.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
The silent treatment goes by many names: shunning, social isolation, stonewalling, ghosting. Although psychologists have nuanced definitions for each term, they are all essentially forms of ostracism. And the tactic is nothing new. Ancient Greeks expelled for 10 years citizens who were thought to be a threat to democracy, and early American settlers banished people accused of practising witchcraft.
“My research suggests that two in three individuals have used the silent treatment against someone else; even more have had it done to them,” Williams said. Experts told me that although they need more data to know for certain, instances of the silent treatment have likely increased over the years as new forms of communication have been invented. “Every new method of connection can be used as a form of disconnection,” Williams said.
Ostracism can also manifest in lesser ways: someone walking out of the room in the middle of a conversation, a friend at school looking the other way when you wave at them, or a person addressing comments from everyone in a message thread except you. “Partial ostracism,” Williams told me, might mean monosyllabic replies—a terse period at the end of a oneword text message. But in serious cases, ostracism can take a heavy toll whereby victims become anxious, withdrawn, depressed, or even suicidal. “Because we humans require social contact for our mental health, the ramifications of isolation can be severe,” Joel Cooper, a psychology professor at Princeton, told me. “In the short term, the silent treatment causes stress. In the long term, the stress can be considered abuse.”
The silent treatment is a particularly insidious form of abuse because it might force the victim to reconcile with the perpetrator in an effort to end the behavior, even if the victim doesn’t know why they’re apologizing. “It’s especially controlling because it deprives both sides from weighing in,” Williams said.
The silent treatment might be employed by passive personality types to avoid conflict and confrontation, while strong personality types use it to punish or control. Some people may not even consciously choose it at all. “A person may be flooded with feelings they can’t put into words, so they just shut down,” Anne Fishel, the director of the Family and Couples Therapy Program at Massachusetts General Hospital, told me. But regardless of the reason for the silent treatment, it can be received by victims as ostracism.
One study found that social rejection provoked a response in its victims similar to that of victims of physical abuse; the anterior cingulate cortex area of the brain—the area thought to interpret emotion and pain—was active in both instances. “Exclusion and rejection literally hurt,” John Bargh, a psychology professor at Yale, told me.
But the silent treatment ultimately harms the person causing it, too. Humans are predisposed to reciprocate social cues, so ignoring someone goes against our nature, Williams said. The perpetrator is therefore forced to justify the behaviour in order to keep doing it; they keep in mind all the reasons they’re choosing to ignore someone. Worse, the silent treatment can become addictive. The father who couldn’t force himself to speak to his son again suffered the way many addicts suffer—through repeating an activity despite knowing its harm. “Most people who start giving the silent treatment never intend for it to go on for as long as it does, but it can be very difficult to stop,” Williams told me. “It’s psychological quicksand.”
Q. According to the passage, the perpetrators of silent treatment are compelled to justify their behavior because
In the last paragraph, the author makes the following observation  "Humans are predisposed to reciprocate social cues, so ignoring someone goes against our nature, Williams said. The perpetrator is therefore forced to justify the behaviour in order to keep doing it; they keep in mind all the reasons they’re choosing to ignore someone."
So, the perpetrators are forced to justify their behaviour because it goes against inherent human nature. Comparing the options, option B captures this idea correctly and is the answer.
Options A and C have not been implied in the passage and can be safely eliminated.
Though the silent treatment can be addictive, the author does not discuss the link between justification and prolonging the addiction in the passage. Option D can be eliminated as well.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
The silent treatment goes by many names: shunning, social isolation, stonewalling, ghosting. Although psychologists have nuanced definitions for each term, they are all essentially forms of ostracism. And the tactic is nothing new. Ancient Greeks expelled for 10 years citizens who were thought to be a threat to democracy, and early American settlers banished people accused of practising witchcraft.
“My research suggests that two in three individuals have used the silent treatment against someone else; even more have had it done to them,” Williams said. Experts told me that although they need more data to know for certain, instances of the silent treatment have likely increased over the years as new forms of communication have been invented. “Every new method of connection can be used as a form of disconnection,” Williams said.
Ostracism can also manifest in lesser ways: someone walking out of the room in the middle of a conversation, a friend at school looking the other way when you wave at them, or a person addressing comments from everyone in a message thread except you. “Partial ostracism,” Williams told me, might mean monosyllabic replies—a terse period at the end of a oneword text message. But in serious cases, ostracism can take a heavy toll whereby victims become anxious, withdrawn, depressed, or even suicidal. “Because we humans require social contact for our mental health, the ramifications of isolation can be severe,” Joel Cooper, a psychology professor at Princeton, told me. “In the short term, the silent treatment causes stress. In the long term, the stress can be considered abuse.”
The silent treatment is a particularly insidious form of abuse because it might force the victim to reconcile with the perpetrator in an effort to end the behavior, even if the victim doesn’t know why they’re apologizing. “It’s especially controlling because it deprives both sides from weighing in,” Williams said.
The silent treatment might be employed by passive personality types to avoid conflict and confrontation, while strong personality types use it to punish or control. Some people may not even consciously choose it at all. “A person may be flooded with feelings they can’t put into words, so they just shut down,” Anne Fishel, the director of the Family and Couples Therapy Program at Massachusetts General Hospital, told me. But regardless of the reason for the silent treatment, it can be received by victims as ostracism.
One study found that social rejection provoked a response in its victims similar to that of victims of physical abuse; the anterior cingulate cortex area of the brain—the area thought to interpret emotion and pain—was active in both instances. “Exclusion and rejection literally hurt,” John Bargh, a psychology professor at Yale, told me.
But the silent treatment ultimately harms the person causing it, too. Humans are predisposed to reciprocate social cues, so ignoring someone goes against our nature, Williams said. The perpetrator is therefore forced to justify the behaviour in order to keep doing it; they keep in mind all the reasons they’re choosing to ignore someone. Worse, the silent treatment can become addictive. The father who couldn’t force himself to speak to his son again suffered the way many addicts suffer—through repeating an activity despite knowing its harm. “Most people who start giving the silent treatment never intend for it to go on for as long as it does, but it can be very difficult to stop,” Williams told me. “It’s psychological quicksand.”
Q. Why does Williams tag ostracism as " psychological quicksand"?
The reason behind this labelling can be found in the following excerpt: { Worse, the silent treatment can become addictive. The father who couldn’t force himself to speak to his son again suffered the way many addicts suffer—through repeating an activity despite knowing its harm. “Most people who start giving the silent treatment never intend for it to go on for as long as it does, but it can be very difficult to stop,” Williams told me. “It’s psychological quicksand.” } The author highlights the detriment that silent treatment causes to the perpetrators  it becomes difficult to escape such behaviour. A quicksand often appears to be deceptively solid to tread; however, the moment you step on it, it entraps you and makes it nearly impossible to escape. Thus, from the above lines, it is evident that the 'psychological quicksand' is a metaphor for the addictive and nonabating nature of ostracism. On comparing the given options, we notice that Option C is closest to this interpretation.
The other options are tangential to the discussion and do not convey the point discussed above:
Option A: The focus is on the perpetrators and not on the victims. Thus, Option A can be eliminated.
Option B: The statement here partially captures the idea but fails to fails to hit the nail on the head. "What kind of behavioural transformation occurs?"  This question needs to be answered. The option, in this case, does not tell us about the manner of this psychological change and hence, can be discarded.
Option D: This contains a distortion of the vicious cycle and thus can be eliminated.
Hence, Option C is the correct answer.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
Attempts at gun control, the argument goes, contravene the oldest truth of politics in organized society a myopic minority is more powerful than a distracted majority. Most Americans may well be, as the polls show, in favor of some kind of gun reform. But they have many other issues and desires on their minds, too. For those who are committed to guns, though, no other issue takes equal prominence, or directs their electoral intentions so narrowly. The threequarters of the people who have, over the years, been for gun regulation... are helpless in the face of the minority who believe that their right to own guns is essential to their personal freedom.
Yglesias makes an analogy between the regulation of guns and the regulation of alcohol. After a rather vivid era devoted to prohibiting alcohol—driven largely by women activists...the country recognized the practical impossibility of a ban, and has accepted limited, statelevel alcohol restrictions ever since. As with the demon rum, so with the demon gun: we have to learn to live with some things if we’re to go on living with our fellowcitizens. Such thinking is, in its way, both a counsel of pragmatism and a policy of despair—accepting regular gun massacres as a feature of American life. Americans, in the end, like most people, seem to be better at acceptance than at resistance.
Yet this counsel need not be the last word. Positive things can still get done. An instructive, if counterintuitive, example, perhaps, is the fight for the right to life, as it is called, which, has, through smallbore actions, effectively curtailed abortion rights throughout the South, particularly for lowincome women and women of color. This is a repellent parallel for progressives, but it makes the point: big change happens through incremental measures. It is often said that the states alone can’t counter the gun lobby, given that guns pass so easily from state to state, but states with strong gun laws already have significantly fewer gun deaths.
That pattern is reflected, to a lesser degree, in state liquor laws, but the analogy of guns to alcohol does not map exactly; alcohol is not the instrument of action in the same way that guns are. A better analogy is to cars, which are dangerous and often deadly, particularly with a drunk driver behind the wheel; nearly thirty people are killed every day in D.U.I. incidents. In fact, there are nearly as many motorvehicle deaths each year in this country as there are firearm deaths, but far more people have access to cars on a daily basis than to guns. So, what do we do about cars? We regulate them. We have mandatory insurance in nearly all states, we have compulsory lessons, we have universal licensing. We create, at the state and local levels, ever more ingenious ways of preventing people from driving while impaired. According to the Violence Policy Center, autorelated deaths have declined over the past two decades, while gun deaths have risen.
The truth of reform is that it can begin anywhere, on any scale, and, once begun, it tends to be selfrenewing. And, as reformers well know, it does not always matter where the reform starts—if it starts at all, it magnetizes other reforms toward it.
Q. "A myopic minority is more powerful than a distracted majority." Which of the following statements best captures the essence of this statement?
The author explains the relevance of the statement using the American example, which has tried, albeit without success, to regulate the usage of guns. This is because, even though nearly twothirds of the population favours gun regulation, they are not entirely devoted to this one cause. On the contrary, the minority, which voices the gun's role in protecting personal freedom, is almost exclusively devoted to this cause. Comparing the options, option D conveys this inference correctly.
All other options are either distorted or do not convey the inference elucidated above. Option A talks about shortterm and longterm objectives, which is a distortion.
Option B adds the distortion of homogenous and heterogeneous groups. The passage does not say that the group for guns is homogenous or the one opposed is heterogeneous.
Option C is a stretch. It cannot be concluded based on the passage that strength due to number is irrelevant. Further, focus on one cause cannot be equated to depth.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
Attempts at gun control, the argument goes, contravene the oldest truth of politics in organized society a myopic minority is more powerful than a distracted majority. Most Americans may well be, as the polls show, in favor of some kind of gun reform. But they have many other issues and desires on their minds, too. For those who are committed to guns, though, no other issue takes equal prominence, or directs their electoral intentions so narrowly. The threequarters of the people who have, over the years, been for gun regulation... are helpless in the face of the minority who believe that their right to own guns is essential to their personal freedom.
Yglesias makes an analogy between the regulation of guns and the regulation of alcohol. After a rather vivid era devoted to prohibiting alcohol—driven largely by women activists...the country recognized the practical impossibility of a ban, and has accepted limited, statelevel alcohol restrictions ever since. As with the demon rum, so with the demon gun: we have to learn to live with some things if we’re to go on living with our fellowcitizens. Such thinking is, in its way, both a counsel of pragmatism and a policy of despair—accepting regular gun massacres as a feature of American life. Americans, in the end, like most people, seem to be better at acceptance than at resistance.
Yet this counsel need not be the last word. Positive things can still get done. An instructive, if counterintuitive, example, perhaps, is the fight for the right to life, as it is called, which, has, through smallbore actions, effectively curtailed abortion rights throughout the South, particularly for lowincome women and women of color. This is a repellent parallel for progressives, but it makes the point: big change happens through incremental measures. It is often said that the states alone can’t counter the gun lobby, given that guns pass so easily from state to state, but states with strong gun laws already have significantly fewer gun deaths.
That pattern is reflected, to a lesser degree, in state liquor laws, but the analogy of guns to alcohol does not map exactly; alcohol is not the instrument of action in the same way that guns are. A better analogy is to cars, which are dangerous and often deadly, particularly with a drunk driver behind the wheel; nearly thirty people are killed every day in D.U.I. incidents. In fact, there are nearly as many motorvehicle deaths each year in this country as there are firearm deaths, but far more people have access to cars on a daily basis than to guns. So, what do we do about cars? We regulate them. We have mandatory insurance in nearly all states, we have compulsory lessons, we have universal licensing. We create, at the state and local levels, ever more ingenious ways of preventing people from driving while impaired. According to the Violence Policy Center, autorelated deaths have declined over the past two decades, while gun deaths have risen.
The truth of reform is that it can begin anywhere, on any scale, and, once begun, it tends to be selfrenewing. And, as reformers well know, it does not always matter where the reform starts—if it starts at all, it magnetizes other reforms toward it.
Q. Which of the following statements can be inferred from the passage?
"In fact, there are nearly as many motorvehicle deaths each year in this country as there are firearm deaths, but far more people have access to cars on a daily basis than to guns." Even though the frequency of access to firearms is much lesser than the access to cars, the number of deaths is almost equal. So, option A is wrong.
"..fight for the right to life, as it is called, which, has, through smallbore actions, effectively curtailed abortion rights throughout the South, particularly for lowincome women and women of colour. This is a repellent parallel for progressives..." From these lines, it can be inferred that progressives are against the curtailment of abortion rights, but it cannot be concluded that women of colour and lowincome women back progressive measures. Option B can be eliminated.
".. big change happens through incremental measures." The author backs this statement with the help of the abortion rights and motorvehicle regulation examples, where incremental actions have led to significant developments. Hence, option C can be inferred.
"..And, as reformers well know, it does not always matter where the reform starts.." The phrase is not categorical. It seldom matters but could matter in some cases, nevertheless. Hence, it cannot be concluded that the origin is inconsequential or irrelevant in all cases
Option C is the answer.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
Attempts at gun control, the argument goes, contravene the oldest truth of politics in organized society a myopic minority is more powerful than a distracted majority. Most Americans may well be, as the polls show, in favor of some kind of gun reform. But they have many other issues and desires on their minds, too. For those who are committed to guns, though, no other issue takes equal prominence, or directs their electoral intentions so narrowly. The threequarters of the people who have, over the years, been for gun regulation... are helpless in the face of the minority who believe that their right to own guns is essential to their personal freedom.
Yglesias makes an analogy between the regulation of guns and the regulation of alcohol. After a rather vivid era devoted to prohibiting alcohol—driven largely by women activists...the country recognized the practical impossibility of a ban, and has accepted limited, statelevel alcohol restrictions ever since. As with the demon rum, so with the demon gun: we have to learn to live with some things if we’re to go on living with our fellowcitizens. Such thinking is, in its way, both a counsel of pragmatism and a policy of despair—accepting regular gun massacres as a feature of American life. Americans, in the end, like most people, seem to be better at acceptance than at resistance.
Yet this counsel need not be the last word. Positive things can still get done. An instructive, if counterintuitive, example, perhaps, is the fight for the right to life, as it is called, which, has, through smallbore actions, effectively curtailed abortion rights throughout the South, particularly for lowincome women and women of color. This is a repellent parallel for progressives, but it makes the point: big change happens through incremental measures. It is often said that the states alone can’t counter the gun lobby, given that guns pass so easily from state to state, but states with strong gun laws already have significantly fewer gun deaths.
That pattern is reflected, to a lesser degree, in state liquor laws, but the analogy of guns to alcohol does not map exactly; alcohol is not the instrument of action in the same way that guns are. A better analogy is to cars, which are dangerous and often deadly, particularly with a drunk driver behind the wheel; nearly thirty people are killed every day in D.U.I. incidents. In fact, there are nearly as many motorvehicle deaths each year in this country as there are firearm deaths, but far more people have access to cars on a daily basis than to guns. So, what do we do about cars? We regulate them. We have mandatory insurance in nearly all states, we have compulsory lessons, we have universal licensing. We create, at the state and local levels, ever more ingenious ways of preventing people from driving while impaired. According to the Violence Policy Center, autorelated deaths have declined over the past two decades, while gun deaths have risen.
The truth of reform is that it can begin anywhere, on any scale, and, once begun, it tends to be selfrenewing. And, as reformers well know, it does not always matter where the reform starts—if it starts at all, it magnetizes other reforms toward it.
Q. Which of the following statements is the author LEAST likely to agree with?
"And, as reformers well know, it does not always matter where the reform starts—if it starts at all, it magnetizes other reforms toward it." So, once one reform movement starts, it could expand to include under its umbrella other reform movements as well. Option A can be inferred.
In the antepenultimate paragraph, the author discusses how state and local level regulations have resulted in a decrease in motorvehicle incidents. Also, in the third paragraph, the author points out that states with strong gun laws have significantly fewer gun deaths. Hence, the author would agree with option B.
"The truth of reform is that it can begin anywhere, on any scale, and, once begun, it tends to be selfrenewing." Reform, once it has begun, can be selfrenewing. Hence, option c can be inferred.
Option D runs contrary to the author's efforts in the passage. The author mentions Yglesias' counsel and says that this is a policy of despair. In fact, he argues in the subsequent paragraphs that we need not resign ourselves to this policy. Hence, the author is not likely to argue for heeding the counsel.
Therefore, Option D is the correct answer.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
Attempts at gun control, the argument goes, contravene the oldest truth of politics in organized society a myopic minority is more powerful than a distracted majority. Most Americans may well be, as the polls show, in favor of some kind of gun reform. But they have many other issues and desires on their minds, too. For those who are committed to guns, though, no other issue takes equal prominence, or directs their electoral intentions so narrowly. The threequarters of the people who have, over the years, been for gun regulation... are helpless in the face of the minority who believe that their right to own guns is essential to their personal freedom.
Yglesias makes an analogy between the regulation of guns and the regulation of alcohol. After a rather vivid era devoted to prohibiting alcohol—driven largely by women activists...the country recognized the practical impossibility of a ban, and has accepted limited, statelevel alcohol restrictions ever since. As with the demon rum, so with the demon gun: we have to learn to live with some things if we’re to go on living with our fellowcitizens. Such thinking is, in its way, both a counsel of pragmatism and a policy of despair—accepting regular gun massacres as a feature of American life. Americans, in the end, like most people, seem to be better at acceptance than at resistance.
Yet this counsel need not be the last word. Positive things can still get done. An instructive, if counterintuitive, example, perhaps, is the fight for the right to life, as it is called, which, has, through smallbore actions, effectively curtailed abortion rights throughout the South, particularly for lowincome women and women of color. This is a repellent parallel for progressives, but it makes the point: big change happens through incremental measures. It is often said that the states alone can’t counter the gun lobby, given that guns pass so easily from state to state, but states with strong gun laws already have significantly fewer gun deaths.
That pattern is reflected, to a lesser degree, in state liquor laws, but the analogy of guns to alcohol does not map exactly; alcohol is not the instrument of action in the same way that guns are. A better analogy is to cars, which are dangerous and often deadly, particularly with a drunk driver behind the wheel; nearly thirty people are killed every day in D.U.I. incidents. In fact, there are nearly as many motorvehicle deaths each year in this country as there are firearm deaths, but far more people have access to cars on a daily basis than to guns. So, what do we do about cars? We regulate them. We have mandatory insurance in nearly all states, we have compulsory lessons, we have universal licensing. We create, at the state and local levels, ever more ingenious ways of preventing people from driving while impaired. According to the Violence Policy Center, autorelated deaths have declined over the past two decades, while gun deaths have risen.
The truth of reform is that it can begin anywhere, on any scale, and, once begun, it tends to be selfrenewing. And, as reformers well know, it does not always matter where the reform starts—if it starts at all, it magnetizes other reforms toward it.
Q. Why does the author draw an analogy between guns and cars?
The author makes the analogy in the fourth paragraph. He is prompted to do so to counter the analogy between guns and alcohol. Yglesias argued that banning guns would be as ineffective as banning alcohol. The author disagrees and instead puts forward the analogy between guns and cars  similar to guns, cars when used irresponsibly can kill people. The author then uses the example of cars to drive home two points  given their potential for deadly harm, access to cars is heavily regulated with licenses and training. Similarly, local and statelevel regulations, that have been effective in the case of cars, can also be effective for gun control. Thus, the overall purpose of making the analogy is to argue that gun control is not futile as argued by Yglesias. Car regulations show that gun control reforms are possible. Option B which captures this is the right answer.
Option A is an exaggeration. The author does not extend his argument for all instruments of action with potential deadly use. Moreover, the focus is not on the fact that both are instruments of action but on making the case for gun control reforms.
Option C is beyond the scope of the passage. The author does not discuss which level of regulation is more effective.
Option D is a distortion of what is given in the passage. The author never says that limiting access to guns is less important. The author says that even though cars are more accessible than guns, the number of deaths caused by cars is lesser due to regulation. Thus, the author does not say that one form of gun control is more important than another.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
Attempts at gun control, the argument goes, contravene the oldest truth of politics in organized society a myopic minority is more powerful than a distracted majority. Most Americans may well be, as the polls show, in favor of some kind of gun reform. But they have many other issues and desires on their minds, too. For those who are committed to guns, though, no other issue takes equal prominence, or directs their electoral intentions so narrowly. The threequarters of the people who have, over the years, been for gun regulation... are helpless in the face of the minority who believe that their right to own guns is essential to their personal freedom.
Yglesias makes an analogy between the regulation of guns and the regulation of alcohol. After a rather vivid era devoted to prohibiting alcohol—driven largely by women activists...the country recognized the practical impossibility of a ban, and has accepted limited, statelevel alcohol restrictions ever since. As with the demon rum, so with the demon gun: we have to learn to live with some things if we’re to go on living with our fellowcitizens. Such thinking is, in its way, both a counsel of pragmatism and a policy of despair—accepting regular gun massacres as a feature of American life. Americans, in the end, like most people, seem to be better at acceptance than at resistance.
Yet this counsel need not be the last word. Positive things can still get done. An instructive, if counterintuitive, example, perhaps, is the fight for the right to life, as it is called, which, has, through smallbore actions, effectively curtailed abortion rights throughout the South, particularly for lowincome women and women of color. This is a repellent parallel for progressives, but it makes the point: big change happens through incremental measures. It is often said that the states alone can’t counter the gun lobby, given that guns pass so easily from state to state, but states with strong gun laws already have significantly fewer gun deaths.
That pattern is reflected, to a lesser degree, in state liquor laws, but the analogy of guns to alcohol does not map exactly; alcohol is not the instrument of action in the same way that guns are. A better analogy is to cars, which are dangerous and often deadly, particularly with a drunk driver behind the wheel; nearly thirty people are killed every day in D.U.I. incidents. In fact, there are nearly as many motorvehicle deaths each year in this country as there are firearm deaths, but far more people have access to cars on a daily basis than to guns. So, what do we do about cars? We regulate them. We have mandatory insurance in nearly all states, we have compulsory lessons, we have universal licensing. We create, at the state and local levels, ever more ingenious ways of preventing people from driving while impaired. According to the Violence Policy Center, autorelated deaths have declined over the past two decades, while gun deaths have risen.
The truth of reform is that it can begin anywhere, on any scale, and, once begun, it tends to be selfrenewing. And, as reformers well know, it does not always matter where the reform starts—if it starts at all, it magnetizes other reforms toward it.
Q. Why does the author refer to the 'fight for right to life' example as a counterintuitive example?
The author uses the 'fight for the right to life' example to drive home the point that positive and progressive changes can still be achieved, despite the pragmatism of the masses and the reluctance to rally for a change. However, the example discussed curtailed abortion rights in the South, which goes against the progressive grain of thrust. Hence, though the example is instructive, it contradicts the purpose. Comparing the options, option B conveys this position correctly.
All other options are either tangential to the discussion or do not convey the above point.
Option A is a distortion. The 'fight for life' movement was driven by a number of smallscale actions, but that does not make them any less important and cannot be called 'trivial'. Hence, option A is wrong.
Option C asserts that gun control is a universal good, which cannot be verified based on the information presented in the passage.
Option D claims that the fight for life movement was largely orchestrated by select few individuals. But the author does not make such an observation in the passage.
Option B is the answer.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
It’s tempting to think that viral misinformation is a modern invention of social media and malicious actors. In fact, “fake news” is as old as news itself. For centuries, falsehoods have been shared widely as facts and stood uncorrected for months or years, even becoming accepted truth. Many of these stories were consequencefree, such as the widely believed report in 1569 of a Leicestershire woman who was “confirmed” to have given birth to a cat. Others led to tragedy and horror, such as viral rumors that the Black Plague was caused by Jews poisoning wells, which led to executions and violent pogroms throughout Europe
Regardless of the era, rumors and falsehoods spread via two basic steps: discovery, then amplification of unverified knowledge. What’s different now is that today’s communication platforms have fundamentally transformed the way information flows, propelling viral rumors exponentially faster and farther than ever. Widespread belief in certain types of viral rumors poses a threat to institutions that we rely on, including democracy itself. An urgent question has emerged: How can we mitigate the kind of highconsequence misinformation that’s increasingly plaguing our communication ecosystem? Friction, a system of checks to limit the spread of content, we believe, is the answer.
Before the printing press, viral rumors spread through wordofmouth chatter in the market square or pub. Still, businesspeople, rulers, and religious authorities required trustworthy knowledge, and they would spend enormous sums on timely, accurate news. For those under their employ, the earliest protojournalists, sourcing truth was a constant struggle. Newsmen added “friction” to the process of sharing knowledge, painstakingly validating stories through second and thirdhand sources before they published—lest they lose their reputation and sponsors. This tension between speed and accuracy came to define early news reporting. News that was both timely and accurate was incredibly expensive, requiring verified couriers and messengers, known as postal systems. We can still see this holdover in the title of “post” in many newspaper names today.
Early journalists were far from perfect, and many of the first newspapers competed for attention by aggressively peddling false, outrageous, or nakedly partisan stories, gruesome crime coverage in particular. But during the 19th century, some papers slowly matured and professionalized, building reputations for publishing factual narratives, and engendering trust as “objective” news sources. Through fits and starts, this patchwork system of newsgathering and distribution became the dominant way we empirically verify information before amplifying it. We learned to trust journalists, largely because they factcheck rumors.
The internet—and social media in particular—blew the system of journalistic friction to pieces. First the internet transformed publishing. Blogging platforms enabled anyone to publish whatever, whenever, without the critical eye of a journalistic colleague. Publishing was now a democratized, zerocost endeavor. When the social networks emerged, distribution and reach were also transformed. Hundreds of millions of people found themselves perpetually online in new, targetable, frictionless communities. Groups became digital gathering places for ordinary people, and not gatekeepers, to share information. The singleclick Share button turned people into active participants in the distribution and amplification of information.
Reduced friction has enabled important new voices to be heard, but it has also led to the rapid spread of significantly impactful viral misinformation. Hence, It’s time for proactive solutions; it’s time to reintroduce the sort of friction that can assist with collective sensemaking.
Q. Which of the following statements is definitely TRUE according to the passage?
Option A cannot be inferred from the passage. In the third paragraph, the author states that there existed a tension between speed and accuracy and that intellectuals paid hefty sums for timely and accurate information. Hence, quick and prompt reporting need not necessarily compromise accuracy.
Option B is a distortion. Promulgation of falsehoods and rumours have always followed the same basic steps  discovery and amplification. But, from the printing press to social media, different channels have been employed.
Option C cannot be inferred from the passage. The author does not say that the newspapers took any such action with the intention of protecting trust.
{"Early journalists were far from perfect, and many of the first newspapers competed for attention by aggressively peddling false, outrageous, or nakedly partisan stories, gruesome crime coverage in particular."} Option D can be inferred from this line.
Hence, Option D is the correct answer.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
It’s tempting to think that viral misinformation is a modern invention of social media and malicious actors. In fact, “fake news” is as old as news itself. For centuries, falsehoods have been shared widely as facts and stood uncorrected for months or years, even becoming accepted truth. Many of these stories were consequencefree, such as the widely believed report in 1569 of a Leicestershire woman who was “confirmed” to have given birth to a cat. Others led to tragedy and horror, such as viral rumors that the Black Plague was caused by Jews poisoning wells, which led to executions and violent pogroms throughout Europe
Regardless of the era, rumors and falsehoods spread via two basic steps: discovery, then amplification of unverified knowledge. What’s different now is that today’s communication platforms have fundamentally transformed the way information flows, propelling viral rumors exponentially faster and farther than ever. Widespread belief in certain types of viral rumors poses a threat to institutions that we rely on, including democracy itself. An urgent question has emerged: How can we mitigate the kind of highconsequence misinformation that’s increasingly plaguing our communication ecosystem? Friction, a system of checks to limit the spread of content, we believe, is the answer.
Before the printing press, viral rumors spread through wordofmouth chatter in the market square or pub. Still, businesspeople, rulers, and religious authorities required trustworthy knowledge, and they would spend enormous sums on timely, accurate news. For those under their employ, the earliest protojournalists, sourcing truth was a constant struggle. Newsmen added “friction” to the process of sharing knowledge, painstakingly validating stories through second and thirdhand sources before they published—lest they lose their reputation and sponsors. This tension between speed and accuracy came to define early news reporting. News that was both timely and accurate was incredibly expensive, requiring verified couriers and messengers, known as postal systems. We can still see this holdover in the title of “post” in many newspaper names today.
Early journalists were far from perfect, and many of the first newspapers competed for attention by aggressively peddling false, outrageous, or nakedly partisan stories, gruesome crime coverage in particular. But during the 19th century, some papers slowly matured and professionalized, building reputations for publishing factual narratives, and engendering trust as “objective” news sources. Through fits and starts, this patchwork system of newsgathering and distribution became the dominant way we empirically verify information before amplifying it. We learned to trust journalists, largely because they factcheck rumors.
The internet—and social media in particular—blew the system of journalistic friction to pieces. First the internet transformed publishing. Blogging platforms enabled anyone to publish whatever, whenever, without the critical eye of a journalistic colleague. Publishing was now a democratized, zerocost endeavor. When the social networks emerged, distribution and reach were also transformed. Hundreds of millions of people found themselves perpetually online in new, targetable, frictionless communities. Groups became digital gathering places for ordinary people, and not gatekeepers, to share information. The singleclick Share button turned people into active participants in the distribution and amplification of information.
Reduced friction has enabled important new voices to be heard, but it has also led to the rapid spread of significantly impactful viral misinformation. Hence, It’s time for proactive solutions; it’s time to reintroduce the sort of friction that can assist with collective sensemaking.
Q. The author discusses the examples of the Leicestershire woman and the Black Plague to drive home the point that
In the first paragraph, the author makes the following observation
{Many of these stories were consequencefree, such as the widely believed report in 1569 of a Leicestershire woman who was “confirmed” to have given birth to a cat. Others led to tragedy and horror, such as viral rumours that the Black Plague was caused by Jews poisoning wells, which led to executions and violent pogroms throughout Europe} Thus, the consequences of rumours were not always serious but, on occasions, have attracted tragedy and horror. Comparing the options, Option A conveys this inference correctly.
Option B: deceives the author's tone in the passage. The author is wary of the consequences of peddling fake news. Option B is more of a reassuring statement, which is not the author's intention. Additionally, the author doesn't talk about the repercussions with a time span in his mind; instead, his focus is on the severity of the outcome. Option B can be eliminated.
Option C: Although the examples discussed led to consequences that fall on either end of the spectrum, this cannot be generalised. This is not the author's main intention.
Option D: comes close but contains 2 distortions. The author does not say that the pogroms against the Jews were unexpected. Also, the degree has been altered from 'many' to 'most' when it comes to the number of cases that are harmless.
Hence, Option A is the correct answer.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
It’s tempting to think that viral misinformation is a modern invention of social media and malicious actors. In fact, “fake news” is as old as news itself. For centuries, falsehoods have been shared widely as facts and stood uncorrected for months or years, even becoming accepted truth. Many of these stories were consequencefree, such as the widely believed report in 1569 of a Leicestershire woman who was “confirmed” to have given birth to a cat. Others led to tragedy and horror, such as viral rumors that the Black Plague was caused by Jews poisoning wells, which led to executions and violent pogroms throughout Europe
Regardless of the era, rumors and falsehoods spread via two basic steps: discovery, then amplification of unverified knowledge. What’s different now is that today’s communication platforms have fundamentally transformed the way information flows, propelling viral rumors exponentially faster and farther than ever. Widespread belief in certain types of viral rumors poses a threat to institutions that we rely on, including democracy itself. An urgent question has emerged: How can we mitigate the kind of highconsequence misinformation that’s increasingly plaguing our communication ecosystem? Friction, a system of checks to limit the spread of content, we believe, is the answer.
Before the printing press, viral rumors spread through wordofmouth chatter in the market square or pub. Still, businesspeople, rulers, and religious authorities required trustworthy knowledge, and they would spend enormous sums on timely, accurate news. For those under their employ, the earliest protojournalists, sourcing truth was a constant struggle. Newsmen added “friction” to the process of sharing knowledge, painstakingly validating stories through second and thirdhand sources before they published—lest they lose their reputation and sponsors. This tension between speed and accuracy came to define early news reporting. News that was both timely and accurate was incredibly expensive, requiring verified couriers and messengers, known as postal systems. We can still see this holdover in the title of “post” in many newspaper names today.
Early journalists were far from perfect, and many of the first newspapers competed for attention by aggressively peddling false, outrageous, or nakedly partisan stories, gruesome crime coverage in particular. But during the 19th century, some papers slowly matured and professionalized, building reputations for publishing factual narratives, and engendering trust as “objective” news sources. Through fits and starts, this patchwork system of newsgathering and distribution became the dominant way we empirically verify information before amplifying it. We learned to trust journalists, largely because they factcheck rumors.
The internet—and social media in particular—blew the system of journalistic friction to pieces. First the internet transformed publishing. Blogging platforms enabled anyone to publish whatever, whenever, without the critical eye of a journalistic colleague. Publishing was now a democratized, zerocost endeavor. When the social networks emerged, distribution and reach were also transformed. Hundreds of millions of people found themselves perpetually online in new, targetable, frictionless communities. Groups became digital gathering places for ordinary people, and not gatekeepers, to share information. The singleclick Share button turned people into active participants in the distribution and amplification of information.
Reduced friction has enabled important new voices to be heard, but it has also led to the rapid spread of significantly impactful viral misinformation. Hence, It’s time for proactive solutions; it’s time to reintroduce the sort of friction that can assist with collective sensemaking.
Q. Which of the following courses of action is the author LEAST likely to endorse?
In the passage, the author advocates the need for verifying the content that's circulated online and is wary of the pace and scale at which misinformation is promulgated in the absence of a friction mechanism.
Option A is in line with the author's concern. It would slow down the pace of information exchange and sharing. It would also nudge people to evaluate the content before sharing. Similarly, Options C and D do not contradict the author's viewpoint. They serve to render requisite friction (the option to verify content) and thereby reduce the spread of misinformation.
In the last paragraph, the author mentions that "Reduced friction has enabled important new voices to be heard". The author is more concerned about the veracity of the information and not the source of it. The measure described in Option B may stifle genuine information from sources that wish to be anonymous, and hence, the author might be reluctant to agree with such a proposition.
Hence, Option B is the correct choice.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
It’s tempting to think that viral misinformation is a modern invention of social media and malicious actors. In fact, “fake news” is as old as news itself. For centuries, falsehoods have been shared widely as facts and stood uncorrected for months or years, even becoming accepted truth. Many of these stories were consequencefree, such as the widely believed report in 1569 of a Leicestershire woman who was “confirmed” to have given birth to a cat. Others led to tragedy and horror, such as viral rumors that the Black Plague was caused by Jews poisoning wells, which led to executions and violent pogroms throughout Europe
Regardless of the era, rumors and falsehoods spread via two basic steps: discovery, then amplification of unverified knowledge. What’s different now is that today’s communication platforms have fundamentally transformed the way information flows, propelling viral rumors exponentially faster and farther than ever. Widespread belief in certain types of viral rumors poses a threat to institutions that we rely on, including democracy itself. An urgent question has emerged: How can we mitigate the kind of highconsequence misinformation that’s increasingly plaguing our communication ecosystem? Friction, a system of checks to limit the spread of content, we believe, is the answer.
Before the printing press, viral rumors spread through wordofmouth chatter in the market square or pub. Still, businesspeople, rulers, and religious authorities required trustworthy knowledge, and they would spend enormous sums on timely, accurate news. For those under their employ, the earliest protojournalists, sourcing truth was a constant struggle. Newsmen added “friction” to the process of sharing knowledge, painstakingly validating stories through second and thirdhand sources before they published—lest they lose their reputation and sponsors. This tension between speed and accuracy came to define early news reporting. News that was both timely and accurate was incredibly expensive, requiring verified couriers and messengers, known as postal systems. We can still see this holdover in the title of “post” in many newspaper names today.
Early journalists were far from perfect, and many of the first newspapers competed for attention by aggressively peddling false, outrageous, or nakedly partisan stories, gruesome crime coverage in particular. But during the 19th century, some papers slowly matured and professionalized, building reputations for publishing factual narratives, and engendering trust as “objective” news sources. Through fits and starts, this patchwork system of newsgathering and distribution became the dominant way we empirically verify information before amplifying it. We learned to trust journalists, largely because they factcheck rumors.
The internet—and social media in particular—blew the system of journalistic friction to pieces. First the internet transformed publishing. Blogging platforms enabled anyone to publish whatever, whenever, without the critical eye of a journalistic colleague. Publishing was now a democratized, zerocost endeavor. When the social networks emerged, distribution and reach were also transformed. Hundreds of millions of people found themselves perpetually online in new, targetable, frictionless communities. Groups became digital gathering places for ordinary people, and not gatekeepers, to share information. The singleclick Share button turned people into active participants in the distribution and amplification of information.
Reduced friction has enabled important new voices to be heard, but it has also led to the rapid spread of significantly impactful viral misinformation. Hence, It’s time for proactive solutions; it’s time to reintroduce the sort of friction that can assist with collective sensemaking.
Q. Which of the following statements CANNOT be inferred from the passage?
I. Ubiquitous access to the internet and social networking websites has led to the repudiation of established facts.
II. Fear of losing their reputation and sponsors was one of the reasons that forced the earliest newsmen to filter out erroneous information scrupulously.
III. People trust journalists not because they report accurate information but because they debunk rumours.
IV. Misinformation campaigns could potentially amend the core values that define a democratic society.
Statement I has not been implied in the passage (no mention of established facts being refuted) and hence, cannot be inferred.
"Newsmen added “friction” to the process of sharing knowledge, painstakingly validating stories through secondand thirdhand sources before they published—lest they lose their reputation and sponsors." Statement II can be inferred from this line.
In the fourth paragraph, the author states, "We learned to trust journalists, largely because they factcheck rumours." But this has not been laid out as the sole reason. The author does not negate the role the publishing of authentic information plays in generating trust. Hence, statement III cannot be inferred.
Statement IV is a distortion. In the second paragraph, the author states, "Widespread belief in certain types of viral rumours poses a threat to institutions that we rely on, including democracy itself." But this observation cannot be equated to the "amendment of the core values." Misinformation campaigns undermine the institution itself. Statement IV cannot be inferred.
Hence, statements I, III and IV can not be inferred from the passage  Option C is the correct answer.
Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:
It’s tempting to think that viral misinformation is a modern invention of social media and malicious actors. In fact, “fake news” is as old as news itself. For centuries, falsehoods have been shared widely as facts and stood uncorrected for months or years, even becoming accepted truth. Many of these stories were consequencefree, such as the widely believed report in 1569 of a Leicestershire woman who was “confirmed” to have given birth to a cat. Others led to tragedy and horror, such as viral rumors that the Black Plague was caused by Jews poisoning wells, which led to executions and violent pogroms throughout Europe
Regardless of the era, rumors and falsehoods spread via two basic steps: discovery, then amplification of unverified knowledge. What’s different now is that today’s communication platforms have fundamentally transformed the way information flows, propelling viral rumors exponentially faster and farther than ever. Widespread belief in certain types of viral rumors poses a threat to institutions that we rely on, including democracy itself. An urgent question has emerged: How can we mitigate the kind of highconsequence misinformation that’s increasingly plaguing our communication ecosystem? Friction, a system of checks to limit the spread of content, we believe, is the answer.
Before the printing press, viral rumors spread through wordofmouth chatter in the market square or pub. Still, businesspeople, rulers, and religious authorities required trustworthy knowledge, and they would spend enormous sums on timely, accurate news. For those under their employ, the earliest protojournalists, sourcing truth was a constant struggle. Newsmen added “friction” to the process of sharing knowledge, painstakingly validating stories through second and thirdhand sources before they published—lest they lose their reputation and sponsors. This tension between speed and accuracy came to define early news reporting. News that was both timely and accurate was incredibly expensive, requiring verified couriers and messengers, known as postal systems. We can still see this holdover in the title of “post” in many newspaper names today.
Early journalists were far from perfect, and many of the first newspapers competed for attention by aggressively peddling false, outrageous, or nakedly partisan stories, gruesome crime coverage in particular. But during the 19th century, some papers slowly matured and professionalized, building reputations for publishing factual narratives, and engendering trust as “objective” news sources. Through fits and starts, this patchwork system of newsgathering and distribution became the dominant way we empirically verify information before amplifying it. We learned to trust journalists, largely because they factcheck rumors.
The internet—and social media in particular—blew the system of journalistic friction to pieces. First the internet transformed publishing. Blogging platforms enabled anyone to publish whatever, whenever, without the critical eye of a journalistic colleague. Publishing was now a democratized, zerocost endeavor. When the social networks emerged, distribution and reach were also transformed. Hundreds of millions of people found themselves perpetually online in new, targetable, frictionless communities. Groups became digital gathering places for ordinary people, and not gatekeepers, to share information. The singleclick Share button turned people into active participants in the distribution and amplification of information.
Reduced friction has enabled important new voices to be heard, but it has also led to the rapid spread of significantly impactful viral misinformation. Hence, It’s time for proactive solutions; it’s time to reintroduce the sort of friction that can assist with collective sensemaking.
Q. According to the passage, today's communication platforms enable all of the following, EXCEPT
{"Groups became digital gathering places for ordinary people, and not gatekeepers, to share information. The singleclick Share button turned people into active participants in the distribution and amplification of information."}. The author also mentions that the people are part of frictionless communities. Hence, options B and C can be inferred.
{"What’s different now is that today’s communication platforms have fundamentally transformed the way information flows, propelling viral rumours exponentially faster and farther than ever."} Option A can be inferred from this line.
Option D is not mentioned in the passage. Communication platforms, like blogging platforms, have democratized publishing. This is not the same as access to journals and other related publications. The author does not expand on this topic. Hence, Option D is the answer.
The passage given below is followed by four summaries. Choose the option that best captures the author’s position.
It’s more useful to learn foundational principles that won’t go out of date than it is to go allin on the latest fad. When it comes to understanding people, we can learn a lot by studying human universals that exist across cultures and time. These universals give us insight into how to create connections in a way that fosters social cohesion and cooperation. One such universal is dance. At every point throughout history, all over the world, people from every walk of life have come together to dance; to move in unison alongside music, singing, and other rhythmic input, like drumming or stomping. The specifics and the names attached vary. But something akin to dance is an everpresent cultural feature throughout human history.
In the passage, the author comments on the importance of cultural features that have existed throughout human history, like dance, in comprehending people and their role in fostering cohesive social relations.
Option A captures the above inference precisely.
Option B is close but goes beyond the passage's scope by claiming that these features don't change over time.
Option C covers only part of the sum. The author highlights the importance of human universals and then explains his viewpoint, leveraging the example of dance.
Option D is vague. The author specifically refers to cultural features that have persisted throughout human history; Option D fails to capture this point.
Hence, Option A is the correct answer.
The four sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4) below, when properly sequenced, would yield a coherent paragraph. Decide on the proper sequencing of the order of the sentences and key in the sequence of the four numbers as your answer:
1. The dialogue was paralleled by the signing of the JapanAustralia Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation in March 2007, and joint military exercises between the United States, India, Japan, and Australia, titled Exercise Malabar.
2. The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue was initiated in August 2007 by then Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan on "seas of freedom and prosperity", with the support of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India, Vice President Dick Cheney of the US and Prime Minister John Howard of Australia.
3. The Chinese government responded to the Quad by issuing formal diplomatic protests to its members.
4. The diplomatic and military arrangement was widely viewed as a response to increased Chinese economic and military power.
The passage talks about the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue coupled with the joint military exercises between the United States, India, Japan, and Australia. The author mentions that this was initiated as a response to China's growing economic and militaristic strength. Statement 2 cites the origin of this initiative, thereby being the introductory comment. Statement 1 follows 2 as 'the dialogue' in 1 refers to the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue introduced earlier. The additional element to this joint drill is further stated (military exercises). Statement 4 presents the rationale behind the aforementioned enterprise (Quad Security dialogue + military exercises)  the intention was to counteract or respond to China's growing economic and military strength. Statement 3 concludes the discussion by depicting China's response (in the form of diplomatic protests) to this alliance. Hence, 2143 forms a coherent paragraph.
The four sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4) below, when properly sequenced, would yield a coherent paragraph. Decide on the proper sequencing of the order of the sentences and key in the sequence of the four numbers as your answer:
1. Last month, astronauts collected samples from across the interior of the ISS to build an unprecedented threedimensional map of its microbiome.
2. We do not even know the full spectrum of spacefaring species living onboard the International Space Station (ISS), but new studies are designed to change that.
3. Yet we are still mostly in the dark about how these communities of microscopic hitchhikers react to microgravity.
4. Each astronaut voyaging offworld is accompanied by up to 100 trillion bacteria, viruses and other microorganisms, any number of which could jeopardize human health.
The passage discusses the lack of knowledge concerning the microbiome at the ISS and how this aspect is being dealt with. Sentence 4 is the starting sentence because it sets the context. It mentions the presence of about 100 trillion microorganisms (carried mainly by astronauts to space), many of which can jeopardise human health. Sentence 3 will follow 4 as it states that despite the fact stated in 4, we are still in the dark about how these microorganisms react to microgravity. Sentence 2 resonates with the idea in 3 and highlights the intention to change the status quo (by undertaking new studies). Sentence 1 elaborates on one such 'new study'. Therefore, we notice that 4321 forms a coherent paragraph.
Five sentences related to a topic are given below. Four of them can be put together to form a meaningful and coherent short paragraph. Identify the odd one out.
1. The concurrent rise of fascist governments in Europe led to a fear of a German nuclear weapon project, especially among scientists who were refugees from Nazi Germany and other fascist countries.
2. Fascists believed that liberal democracy is obsolete and regarded the complete mobilization of society under a totalitarian oneparty state as necessary to prepare a nation for armed conflict and to respond effectively to economic difficulties.
3. When their calculations showed that nuclear weapons were theoretically feasible, the British and United States governments supported an allout effort to build them.
4. The creation of nuclear weapons arose from scientific and political developments of the 1930s.
5. The decade saw many new discoveries about the nature of atoms, including the existence of nuclear fission.
Sentence 2 is the odd one out because it talks explicitly about 'fascism', while the rest of the sentences give us a background about the development of nuclear weapons. Fascism is not the focal point of the given discussion.
Arranging the sentences in the sequence 4513, we get a coherent paragraph:
Sentence 4 sets the stage for subsequent discussion on the creation of nuclear weapons. Sentence 5 will follow it because the term 'the decade' in 5 refers to the period  1930s  mentioned in sentence 4. Statement 1 talks about another concurrent factor that might have played a crucial role in the nuclear race  the fear of the fascist governments pushing for nuclear supremacy. Statement 3 will follow 1 because the word 'their' in 3 refers to the refugee scientists mentioned in Statement 1. Hence, the correct sequence is 4513 and Statement 2 is out of context.
The five sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) given in this question, when properly sequenced, form a coherent paragraph. Each sentence is labelled with a number. Decide on the proper order for the sentences and key in this sequence of five numbers as your answer.
1. Camelids are unusual in that their modern distribution is almost the reverse of their origin.
2. The original camelids of North America remained common until the quite recent geological past, but then disappeared, possibly as a result of hunting or habitat alterations by the earliest human settlers, and possibly as a result of changing environmental conditions after the last ice age, or a combination of these factors.
3. Camelids first appeared around 45 million years ago during the middle Eocene, in presentday North America.
4. Three species groups survived: the dromedary of northern Africa and southwest Asia; the Bactrian camel of central Asia; and the South American group, which has now diverged into a range of forms that are closely related, but usually classified as four species: llamas, alpacas, guanacos and vicuñas.
5. The family remained confined to the North American continent until only about two or three million years ago, when representatives arrived in Asia, and (as part of the Great American Interchange that followed the formation of the Isthmus of Panam1] South America.
At first glance, either 1 or 3 would make a suitable opening sentence; but on looking through all the sentences, it becomes clear that sentence 1 encapsulates the main topic of the paragraph (the distribution of camelids) better, and so makes for a better first sentence. Sentences 3 and 5 then follow from 1, as they talk about the origin and spread of camelids, respectively, in chronological order. Sentence 2 states that the original camelids of North America disappeared; and sentence 4 lists the species groups of camelids that survived on other continents. Thus, 2 and 4 illustrate the point stated in the first sentence – that the current distribution of camelids is the reverse of their origin – and therefore, together, they conclude the paragraph. Hence, 13524.
The five sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) given in this question, when properly sequenced, form a coherent paragraph. Each sentence is labelled with a number. Decide on the proper order for the sentences and key in this sequence of five numbers as your answer.
1. Gradually, they expanded the tentacles of Norse contacts and trade over huge areas of the north.
2. They crossed the stormy North Sea with impressive confidence, raided towns and villages in eastern Britain, ransacked isolated Christian settlements, and returned home each winter laden with booty
3. The explorations of these Norse, otherwise known as Vikings or ‘Northmen’, were a product of overpopulation, short growing seasons and meagre soils in remote Scandinavian fjords.
4. The Norse also travelled far east, down the Vistula, Dnieper, and Volga rivers to the Black and Caspian seas, besieged Constantinople more than once and founded cities from Kiev to Dublin.
5. During the seventh century, young Norse ‘rowmen’ left in their long ships each summer in search of plunder, trading opportunities and adventure.
Sentence 5 is preferable as an opening sentence as it introduces the explorations of the Norse by providing the reasons for the same, while the rest of the sentences simply describe these explorations. Then 3 makes most sense as the sentence following 3, as it describes the beginning of such explorations. This is followed by sentence 2, which describes what the Norse typically did on such explorations. Sentences 1 and 4 are linked: 1 states that the Norse expanded over huge areas of the north, while 4 says that they also expanded over the east. Hence, 53214.
In an academy of 900 students, a poll was conducted as to which cricket clubs the students follow regularly. There was a list of 4 top clubs A, B, C and D. The following points are known regarding the results of the poll:
1. A total of 45 students do not follow any of the abovementioned clubs.
2. Ratio of the students who follow only A to those who follow only B to those who follow only C is 2:1:3.
3. The number of students who follow only A is 20 times the number of students who follow all the 4 clubs.
4. Any student who follows Club D also necessarily follows Club C.
5. Ratio of the students who follow only A and B to those who follow only A and C to those who follow only C and D to those who follow only B and C is 3:4:5:6. Also, it is known that the number of students who follow only A, C and D, the number of students who follow only A, B and C, and the number of students who follow only B, C and D are in the form of N^{2} + 8, (N + 1)^{2 }+ 8 and (N + 3)^{2} + 8 respectively, where N is a natural number and the sum of the number of these students is 190.
6. The number of students who are fans of C but not D is 407.
Based on the information given above, answer the questions that follow.
Q. What is the number of students who follow and C and D?
This is a 4circle Venn Diagram.
Also, point (4) mentions that anyone who follows D must necessarily follow C.
So, D is a subset of C.
The entire Venn Diagram comes out as,
From point (2), let the number of students who follow only A be 2x, the number of students who follow only B be x and the number of students who follow only C be 3x.
Also, from point (3), the number of people who followed all of A, B, C and D = 2x/20 = x/10
Also from point (5), let the number of students who follow only A and B be 3y, the number of students who follow only A and C be 4y, the number of students who follow only C and D be 5y and the number of students who follow only B and C be 6y. Adding the same in the Venn Diagrams, we get:
From point (5)
N^{2} + 8 + (N + 1)^{2} + 8 + (N + 3)^{2} + 8 = 190
N^{2} + (N + 1)^{2} + (N + 3)^{2 }= 166
We can either expand the expression and solve the quadratic equation, or we can use hit and trial since we know that N is a natural number.
Solving, we get N = 6,
Hence, the number of students who follow only A, C and D = 44
The number of students who follow only A, B and C = 57
The number of students who follow only B, C and D = 89
Applying them in the Venn Diagram, we get,
We know that the total number of students = 900, Hence,
2x + x + 3x + 0.1x + 3y + 4y + 5y + 6y + 44 + 57 + 89 + 45 = 900
6.1x + 18y = 665 ...(1)
Also, the number of students who are fans of C but not D = 407
Therefore, 4y + 3x + 6y + 57 = 407
3x + 10y = 350 ...(ii)
Solving equation 1 and 2 we get, x = 50 and y = 20
Hence the Venn Diagram comes out as,
Number of students who follow a maximum of 2 clubs = Number of students who follow no club + Number of students who follow one club + Number of students who follow 2 clubs = 45 + 100 + 50 + 150 + 60 + 80 + 100 + 120 = 705
Alternate solution using 4set Venn Diagram:
We can denote the 4set Venn Diagram as follows:
Also, point (4) mentions that anyone who follows D must necessarily follow C.
From point (2), let the number of students who follow only A be 2x, the number of students who follow only B be x and the number of students who follow only C be 3x.
Also, from point (3), the number of people who followed all of A, B, C and D =
Also from point (5), let the number of students who follow only A and B be 3y, the number of students who follow only A and C be 4y, the number of students who follow only C and D be 5y and the number of students who follow only B and C be 6y. Adding the same in the Venn Diagrams, we get:
From point (5)
N^{2} + 8 + (N + 1)^{2} + 8 + (N + 3)^{2} + 8 = 190
N^{2 }+ (N + 1)^{2} + (N + 3)^{2} = 166
We can either expand the expression and solve the quadratic equation, or we can use hit and trial since we know that N is a natural number.
Solving, we get N = 6,
Hence, the number of students who follow only A, C and D = 44
The number of students who follow only A, B and C = 57
The number of students who follow only B, C and D = 89
Applying them in the Venn Diagram, we get,
We know that the total number of students = 900, Hence,
2x + x + 3x + 0.1x + 3y+ 4y + 5y + 6y + 44 + 57 + 89 + 45 = 900
6.1x + 18y = 665 .......(i)
Also, the number of students who are fans of C but not D = 407
Therefore, 4y + 3x + 6y + 57 = 407
3x + 10y = 350 .......(ii)
Solving equation 1 and 2 we get, x = 50 and y = 20
Hence the Venn Diagram comes out as,
The number of students who follow only C and D is 100.
In an academy of 900 students, a poll was conducted as to which cricket clubs the students follow regularly. There was a list of 4 top clubs A, B, C and D. The following points are known regarding the results of the poll:
1. A total of 45 students do not follow any of the abovementioned clubs.
2. Ratio of the students who follow only A to those who follow only B to those who follow only C is 2:1:3.
3. The number of students who follow only A is 20 times the number of students who follow all the 4 clubs.
4. Any student who follows Club D also necessarily follows Club C.
5. Ratio of the students who follow only A and B to those who follow only A and C to those who follow only C and D to those who follow only B and C is 3:4:5:6. Also, it is known that the number of students who follow only A, C and D, the number of students who follow only A, B and C, and the number of students who follow only B, C and D are in the form of N^{2} + 8, (N + 1)^{2 }+ 8 and (N + 3)^{2} + 8 respectively, where N is a natural number and the sum of the number of these students is 190.
6. The number of students who are fans of C but not D is 407.
Based on the information given above, answer the questions that follow.
Q. Find the number of students who follow a minimum of 2 clubs?
This is a 4circle Venn Diagram.
Also, point (4) mentions that anyone who follows D must necessarily follow C.
So, D is a subset of C.
The entire Venn Diagram comes out as,
From point (2), let the number of students who follow only A be 2x, the number of students who follow only B be x and the number of students who follow only C be 3x.
Also, from point (3), the number of people who followed all of A, B, C and D = 2x/20 = x/10
Also from point (5), let the number of students who follow only A and B be 3y, the number of students who follow only A and C be 4y, the number of students who follow only C and D be 5y and the number of students who follow only B and C be 6y. Adding the same in the Venn Diagrams, we get:
From point (5)
N^{2} + 8 + (N + 1)^{2} + 8 + (N + 3)^{2} + 8 = 190
N^{2} + (N + 1)^{2} + (N + 3)^{2 }= 166
We can either expand the expression and solve the quadratic equation, or we can use hit and trial since we know that N is a natural number.
Solving, we get N = 6,
Hence, the number of students who follow only A, C and D = 44
The number of students who follow only A, B and C = 57
The number of students who follow only B, C and D = 89
Applying them in the Venn Diagram, we get,
We know that the total number of students = 900, Hence,
2x + x + 3x + 0.1x + 3y + 4y + 5y + 6y + 44 + 57 + 89 + 45 = 900
6.1x + 18y = 665 ...(1)
Also, the number of students who are fans of C but not D = 407
Therefore, 4y + 3x + 6y + 57 = 407
3x + 10y = 350 ...(ii)
Solving equation 1 and 2 we get, x = 50 and y = 20
Hence the Venn Diagram comes out as,
Number of students who follow a maximum of 2 clubs = Number of students who follow no club + Number of students who follow one club + Number of students who follow 2 clubs = 45 + 100 + 50 + 150 + 60 + 80 + 100 + 120 = 705
Alternate solution using 4set Venn Diagram:
We can denote the 4set Venn Diagram as follows:
Also, point (4) mentions that anyone who follows D must necessarily follow C.
From point (2), let the number of students who follow only A be 2x, the number of students who follow only B be x and the number of students who follow only C be 3x.
Also, from point (3), the number of people who followed all of A, B, C and D =
Also from point (5), let the number of students who follow only A and B be 3y, the number of students who follow only A and C be 4y, the number of students who follow only C and D be 5y and the number of students who follow only B and C be 6y. Adding the same in the Venn Diagrams, we get:
From point (5)
N^{2} + 8 + (N + 1)^{2} + 8 + (N + 3)^{2} + 8 = 190
N^{2 }+ (N + 1)^{2} + (N + 3)^{2} = 166
We can either expand the expression and solve the quadratic equation, or we can use hit and trial since we know that N is a natural number.
Solving, we get N = 6,
Hence, the number of students who follow only A, C and D = 44
The number of students who follow only A, B and C = 57
The number of students who follow only B, C and D = 89
Applying them in the Venn Diagram, we get,
We know that the total number of students = 900, Hence,
2x + x + 3x + 0.1x + 3y+ 4y + 5y + 6y + 44 + 57 + 89 + 45 = 900
6.1x + 18y = 665 .......(i)
Also, the number of students who are fans of C but not D = 407
Therefore, 4y + 3x + 6y + 57 = 407
3x + 10y = 350 .......(ii)
Solving equation 1 and 2 we get, x = 50 and y = 20
Hence the Venn Diagram comes out as,
The number of people who follow a minimum of 2 clubs = Total number of students  Number of students who follow zero club  Number of students who follow one club = 900  45  100  50  150 = 555.
In an academy of 900 students, a poll was conducted as to which cricket clubs the students follow regularly. There was a list of 4 top clubs A, B, C and D. The following points are known regarding the results of the poll:
1. A total of 45 students do not follow any of the abovementioned clubs.
2. Ratio of the students who follow only A to those who follow only B to those who follow only C is 2:1:3.
3. The number of students who follow only A is 20 times the number of students who follow all the 4 clubs.
4. Any student who follows Club D also necessarily follows Club C.
5. Ratio of the students who follow only A and B to those who follow only A and C to those who follow only C and D to those who follow only B and C is 3:4:5:6. Also, it is known that the number of students who follow only A, C and D, the number of students who follow only A, B and C, and the number of students who follow only B, C and D are in the form of N^{2} + 8, (N + 1)^{2 }+ 8 and (N + 3)^{2} + 8 respectively, where N is a natural number and the sum of the number of these students is 190.
6. The number of students who are fans of C but not D is 407.
Based on the information given above, answer the questions that follow.
Q. In the Business Premier League, Club B performed miserably and as a result, all those who were following Club B and some other club(s), stopped following Club B and continued to follow the other club(s), and those who followed only Club B started following all the 3 remaining clubs. How many students now follow a minimum of 2 clubs?
This is a 4circle Venn Diagram.
Also, point (4) mentions that anyone who follows D must necessarily follow C.
So, D is a subset of C.
The entire Venn Diagram comes out as,
From point (2), let the number of students who follow only A be 2x, the number of students who follow only B be x and the number of students who follow only C be 3x.
Also, from point (3), the number of people who followed all of A, B, C and D = 2x/20 = x/10
Also from point (5), let the number of students who follow only A and B be 3y, the number of students who follow only A and C be 4y, the number of students who follow only C and D be 5y and the number of students who follow only B and C be 6y. Adding the same in the Venn Diagrams, we get:
From point (5)
N^{2} + 8 + (N + 1)^{2} + 8 + (N + 3)^{2} + 8 = 190
N^{2} + (N + 1)^{2} + (N + 3)^{2 }= 166
We can either expand the expression and solve the quadratic equation, or we can use hit and trial since we know that N is a natural number.
Solving, we get N = 6,
Hence, the number of students who follow only A, C and D = 44
The number of students who follow only A, B and C = 57
The number of students who follow only B, C and D = 89
Applying them in the Venn Diagram, we get,
We know that the total number of students = 900, Hence,
2x + x + 3x + 0.1x + 3y + 4y + 5y + 6y + 44 + 57 + 89 + 45 = 900
6.1x + 18y = 665 ...(1)
Also, the number of students who are fans of C but not D = 407
Therefore, 4y + 3x + 6y + 57 = 407
3x + 10y = 350 ...(ii)
Solving equation 1 and 2 we get, x = 50 and y = 20
Hence the Venn Diagram comes out as,
Number of students who follow a maximum of 2 clubs = Number of students who follow no club + Number of students who follow one club + Number of students who follow 2 clubs = 45 + 100 + 50 + 150 + 60 + 80 + 100 + 120 = 705
Alternate solution using 4set Venn Diagram:
We can denote the 4set Venn Diagram as follows:
Also, point (4) mentions that anyone who follows D must necessarily follow C.
From point (2), let the number of students who follow only A be 2x, the number of students who follow only B be x and the number of students who follow only C be 3x.
Also, from point (3), the number of people who followed all of A, B, C and D =
Also from point (5), let the number of students who follow only A and B be 3y, the number of students who follow only A and C be 4y, the number of students who follow only C and D be 5y and the number of students who follow only B and C be 6y. Adding the same in the Venn Diagrams, we get:
From point (5)
N^{2} + 8 + (N + 1)^{2} + 8 + (N + 3)^{2} + 8 = 190
N^{2 }+ (N + 1)^{2} + (N + 3)^{2} = 166
We can either expand the expression and solve the quadratic equation, or we can use hit and trial since we know that N is a natural number.
Solving, we get N = 6,
Hence, the number of students who follow only A, C and D = 44
The number of students who follow only A, B and C = 57
The number of students who follow only B, C and D = 89
Applying them in the Venn Diagram, we get,
We know that the total number of students = 900, Hence,
2x + x + 3x + 0.1x + 3y+ 4y + 5y + 6y + 44 + 57 + 89 + 45 = 900
6.1x + 18y = 665 .......(i)
Also, the number of students who are fans of C but not D = 407
Therefore, 4y + 3x + 6y + 57 = 407
3x + 10y = 350 .......(ii)
Solving equation 1 and 2 we get, x = 50 and y = 20
Hence the Venn Diagram comes out as,
Number of students who follow a minimum of 2 clubs = Number of students who follow 2 clubs + Number of students who follow 3 clubs = 137 + 99 + 189 = 425 students.
Sassy Eateries is a wellknown brunch place in BiIlekahalli. Due to COVID19 restrictions, they had to limit the number of tables in their restaurant to be 4 with a maximum of 4 people allowed on a table. Menu card for the restaurant had the following information
On a particular day, 6 groups visited between morning shift (9 am to 12 noon). The following things are known about the groups
1. Group I had 3 people. They reached the restaurant at 9:15 and ordered 3 different food items with an overall bill of Rs. 600
2. Group II consisting of 4 people reached the restaurant at 09:30 am and ordered 2 sodas, 1 noodle, and 1 Pizza
3. Group III consisting of 2 people reached the restaurant at 10:00 and ordered a burger and a Pizza
4. Group IV consisting of 3 people ordered a Burger, a Dosa, and a Soda. They reached the restaurant at 10:10 am
5. Group V consisting of 2 people ordered a noodle and a dosa. They reached the restaurant at 10:25 am
6. Group VI consisting of 2 people reached the restaurant at 10:30 am and they were served food at 11:15 am. They had to pay a bill of Rs. 200.
7. Number of food items ordered by a group is equal to the number of members in that group
The following things are known about the restaurant and the management
(I) There are 2 cooks who are employed by the management named A and B. A is the only chef who knows how to cook Pizza. The rest of the food items can be made by both the chefs
(II) 4 tables are numbered Table 1,2,3 and 4. The lowestnumbered available table has to be occupied first
(III) A Chef starts working on new order only after the there are no pending food items on current order. The group which placed an order earlier is given higher priority
(IV) Chefs work in such a way that the time required to serve the order is minimum.
(V) All the food items belonging to the same table are served together. It takes 25 minutes to finish eating after which the group leaves. After that, the waiter takes 10 minutes to sanitize the table and it is ready for occupying
(VI) There is the negligible time elapsed in entering the restaurant and placing the order.
(VII) If all tables are occupied then the group has to wait outside. As soon as any table is available they'll be allowed inside and can place order at that time
Q. If one more group reaches the restaurant immediately after Group VI has arrived, when is the earliest the new group can be seated in the restaurant?
Let us start with group I. Since it is given that there were 3 members, thus 3 food items were ordered totaling the bill of Rs 600. Thus we know pizza, a burger, and a dosa was ordered. SInce chef A can make pizza he will be making Pizza from 09:15 to 09:35(20 minutes). Burger and Pizza both take 15 minutes each. Chef B will start making any one of these from 09:15 to 09:30. And after this, e'll make the last food of the order from 09:30 to 09:45. Thus the food will be served at 09:45. Group will finish eating by 10:10. After sanitising the table will be again available at 10:20. The following can be represented as :
Thus group 2 coming at 09:30 ordered 2 sodas, 1 noodle, and a pizza. Since table 1 is occupied they will sit on table 2. Chef A will start working on their order at 09:35 whereas chef B will start working on the order from 09:45. To ensure the ordered is delivered in least time A will make 2 sodas and pizza.The remaining food item(noodle) will be made by B from 09:45 to 10:05. Thus the order will be served at 10:05. Group will finish eating by 10:30. Table 2 will be available by 10:40. It can be represented as
Group 3 will come at 10:00 and occupy table 3. The chef will start working on their order at 10:05. A will make Pizza and B will make a burger. Both orders will be served at 10:25. They will finish eating in 25 minutes. After which 10 minutes is taken for sanitization. The table will be available at 11:00
Group 4 comes at 10:10. They order 1 burger,1 dosa, and 1 soda. To minimize time soda will be made by chef B. Burger and Dosa both take 15 minutes each and can be made by either of them. One will make dosa and the r will make a burger. Order will be finished and served at 10:40.
Now group 5 came at 10:25. This time table 1 was available and hence will be occupied by them. Both chefs will get free at 10:40 and start cooking for group 5. One chef has to cook noodles which will take 20 minutes and another one will cook dosa which takes 15 minutes. Let us assume that A cooks noodle and B cooks Dosa( this assumption will not affect the solution as only 1 group is left to serve after group 5 and no further orders of Pizza are made)
Group 6 came at 10:30. But table 2 got free at 10:40 at the earliest. Hence they entered the restaurant at 10:40. There we 2 people hence 2 items were ordered worth 200. A possible combination is (burger and soda) or (Dosa and soda) or ( Sandwich and Noodles).
The 2 combinations (burger and soda) or (Dosa and soda) has a cooking time of 15 minutes+5minutes. In this case B will cook for 15 minutes and A will cook for 5 minutes to ensure that the order is made available at the least possible time. In this case, it will be possible at 11:10 am.
Combination of sandwich and noodle has a cooking time of 10 minute+20 minutes. B has to cook for 20 minutes and finish by 11:15 whereas A will cook for 10 minutes and finish by 11:10. Thus food will be served at 11:15
In question it was given that the food was served to them at 11:15 hence they ordered a sandwich and a noodle.
We can see that after 10:30 when group 6 occupied table 2, the next table to get free was table 3 at 11:00.
Sassy Eateries is a wellknown brunch place in BiIlekahalli. Due to COVID19 restrictions, they had to limit the number of tables in their restaurant to be 4 with a maximum of 4 people allowed on a table. Menu card for the restaurant had the following information
On a particular day, 6 groups visited between morning shift (9 am to 12 noon). The following things are known about the groups
1. Group I had 3 people. They reached the restaurant at 9:15 and ordered 3 different food items with an overall bill of Rs. 600
2. Group II consisting of 4 people reached the restaurant at 09:30 am and ordered 2 sodas, 1 noodle, and 1 Pizza
3. Group III consisting of 2 people reached the restaurant at 10:00 and ordered a burger and a Pizza
4. Group IV consisting of 3 people ordered a Burger, a Dosa, and a Soda. They reached the restaurant at 10:10 am
5. Group V consisting of 2 people ordered a noodle and a dosa. They reached the restaurant at 10:25 am
6. Group VI consisting of 2 people reached the restaurant at 10:30 am and they were served food at 11:15 am. They had to pay a bill of Rs. 200.
7. Number of food items ordered by a group is equal to the number of members in that group
The following things are known about the restaurant and the management
(I) There are 2 cooks who are employed by the management named A and B. A is the only chef who knows how to cook Pizza. The rest of the food items can be made by both the chefs
(II) 4 tables are numbered Table 1,2,3 and 4. The lowestnumbered available table has to be occupied first
(III) A Chef starts working on new order only after the there are no pending food items on current order. The group which placed an order earlier is given higher priority
(IV) Chefs work in such a way that the time required to serve the order is minimum.
(V) All the food items belonging to the same table are served together. It takes 25 minutes to finish eating after which the group leaves. After that, the waiter takes 10 minutes to sanitize the table and it is ready for occupying
(VI) There is the negligible time elapsed in entering the restaurant and placing the order.
(VII) If all tables are occupied then the group has to wait outside. As soon as any table is available they'll be allowed inside and can place order at that time
Q. At what time was group VI allowed to enter the restaurant?
Let us start with group I. Since it is given that there were 3 members, thus 3 food items were ordered totaling the bill of Rs 600. Thus we know pizza, a burger, and a dosa was ordered. SInce chef A can make pizza he will be making Pizza from 09:15 to 09:35(20 minutes). Burger and Pizza both take 15 minutes each. Chef B will start making any one of these from 09:15 to 09:30. And after this, e'll make the last food of the order from 09:30 to 09:45. Thus the food will be served at 09:45. Group will finish eating by 10:10. After sanitising the table will be again available at 10:20. The following can be represented as :
Thus group 2 coming at 09:30 ordered 2 sodas, 1 noodle, and a pizza. Since table 1 is occupied they will sit on table 2. Chef A will start working on their order at 09:35 whereas chef B will start working on the order from 09:45. To ensure the ordered is delivered in least time A will make 2 sodas and pizza.The remaining food item(noodle) will be made by B from 09:45 to 10:05. Thus the order will be served at 10:05. Group will finish eating by 10:30. Table 2 will be available by 10:40. It can be represented as
Group 3 will come at 10:00 and occupy table 3. The chef will start working on their order at 10:05. A will make Pizza and B will make a burger. Both orders will be served at 10:25. They will finish eating in 25 minutes. After which 10 minutes is taken for sanitization. The table will be available at 11:00
Group 4 comes at 10:10. They order 1 burger,1 dosa, and 1 soda. To minimize time soda will be made by chef B. Burger and Dosa both take 15 minutes each and can be made by either of them. One will make dosa and the r will make a burger. Order will be finished and served at 10:40.
Now group 5 came at 10:25. This time table 1 was available and hence will be occupied by them. Both chefs will get free at 10:40 and start cooking for group 5. One chef has to cook noodles which will take 20 minutes and another one will cook dosa which takes 15 minutes. Let us assume that A cooks noodle and B cooks Dosa( this assumption will not affect the solution as only 1 group is left to serve after group 5 and no further orders of Pizza are made)
Group 6 came at 10:30. But table 2 got free at 10:40 at the earliest. Hence they entered the restaurant at 10:40. There we 2 people hence 2 items were ordered worth 200. A possible combination is (burger and soda) or (Dosa and soda) or ( Sandwich and Noodles).
The 2 combinations (burger and soda) or (Dosa and soda) has a cooking time of 15 minutes+5minutes. In this case B will cook for 15 minutes and A will cook for 5 minutes to ensure that the order is made available at the least possible time. In this case, it will be possible at 11:10 am.
Combination of sandwich and noodle has a cooking time of 10 minute+20 minutes. B has to cook for 20 minutes and finish by 11:15 whereas A will cook for 10 minutes and finish by 11:10. Thus food will be served at 11:15
In question it was given that the food was served to them at 11:15 hence they ordered a sandwich and a noodle.
Group 6 was allowed to enter at 10:40
Sassy Eateries is a wellknown brunch place in BiIlekahalli. Due to COVID19 restrictions, they had to limit the number of tables in their restaurant to be 4 with a maximum of 4 people allowed on a table. Menu card for the restaurant had the following information
On a particular day, 6 groups visited between morning shift (9 am to 12 noon). The following things are known about the groups
1. Group I had 3 people. They reached the restaurant at 9:15 and ordered 3 different food items with an overall bill of Rs. 600
2. Group II consisting of 4 people reached the restaurant at 09:30 am and ordered 2 sodas, 1 noodle, and 1 Pizza
3. Group III consisting of 2 people reached the restaurant at 10:00 and ordered a burger and a Pizza
4. Group IV consisting of 3 people ordered a Burger, a Dosa, and a Soda. They reached the restaurant at 10:10 am
5. Group V consisting of 2 people ordered a noodle and a dosa. They reached the restaurant at 10:25 am
6. Group VI consisting of 2 people reached the restaurant at 10:30 am and they were served food at 11:15 am. They had to pay a bill of Rs. 200.
7. Number of food items ordered by a group is equal to the number of members in that group
The following things are known about the restaurant and the management
(I) There are 2 cooks who are employed by the management named A and B. A is the only chef who knows how to cook Pizza. The rest of the food items can be made by both the chefs
(II) 4 tables are numbered Table 1,2,3 and 4. The lowestnumbered available table has to be occupied first
(III) A Chef starts working on new order only after the there are no pending food items on current order. The group which placed an order earlier is given higher priority
(IV) Chefs work in such a way that the time required to serve the order is minimum.
(V) All the food items belonging to the same table are served together. It takes 25 minutes to finish eating after which the group leaves. After that, the waiter takes 10 minutes to sanitize the table and it is ready for occupying
(VI) There is the negligible time elapsed in entering the restaurant and placing the order.
(VII) If all tables are occupied then the group has to wait outside. As soon as any table is available they'll be allowed inside and can place order at that time
Q. Order for Group III was served at what time?
Let us start with group I. Since it is given that there were 3 members, thus 3 food items were ordered totaling the bill of Rs 600. Thus we know pizza, a burger, and a dosa was ordered. SInce chef A can make pizza he will be making Pizza from 09:15 to 09:35(20 minutes). Burger and Pizza both take 15 minutes each. Chef B will start making any one of these from 09:15 to 09:30. And after this, e'll make the last food of the order from 09:30 to 09:45. Thus the food will be served at 09:45. Group will finish eating by 10:10. After sanitising the table will be again available at 10:20. The following can be represented as :
Thus group 2 coming at 09:30 ordered 2 sodas, 1 noodle, and a pizza. Since table 1 is occupied they will sit on table 2. Chef A will start working on their order at 09:35 whereas chef B will start working on the order from 09:45. To ensure the ordered is delivered in least time A will make 2 sodas and pizza.The remaining food item(noodle) will be made by B from 09:45 to 10:05. Thus the order will be served at 10:05. Group will finish eating by 10:30. Table 2 will be available by 10:40. It can be represented as
Group 3 will come at 10:00 and occupy table 3. The chef will start working on their order at 10:05. A will make Pizza and B will make a burger. Both orders will be served at 10:25. They will finish eating in 25 minutes. After which 10 minutes is taken for sanitization. The table will be available at 11:00
Group 4 comes at 10:10. They order 1 burger,1 dosa, and 1 soda. To minimize time soda will be made by chef B. Burger and Dosa both take 15 minutes each and can be made by either of them. One will make dosa and the r will make a burger. Order will be finished and served at 10:40.
Now group 5 came at 10:25. This time table 1 was available and hence will be occupied by them. Both chefs will get free at 10:40 and start cooking for group 5. One chef has to cook noodles which will take 20 minutes and another one will cook dosa which takes 15 minutes. Let us assume that A cooks noodle and B cooks Dosa( this assumption will not affect the solution as only 1 group is left to serve after group 5 and no further orders of Pizza are made)
Group 6 came at 10:30. But table 2 got free at 10:40 at the earliest. Hence they entered the restaurant at 10:40. There we 2 people hence 2 items were ordered worth 200. A possible combination is (burger and soda) or (Dosa and soda) or ( Sandwich and Noodles).
The 2 combinations (burger and soda) or (Dosa and soda) has a cooking time of 15 minutes+5minutes. In this case B will cook for 15 minutes and A will cook for 5 minutes to ensure that the order is made available at the least possible time. In this case, it will be possible at 11:10 am.
Combination of sandwich and noodle has a cooking time of 10 minute+20 minutes. B has to cook for 20 minutes and finish by 11:15 whereas A will cook for 10 minutes and finish by 11:10. Thus food will be served at 11:15
In question it was given that the food was served to them at 11:15 hence they ordered a sandwich and a noodle.
Order for Group III was served at 10:25.
Sassy Eateries is a wellknown brunch place in BiIlekahalli. Due to COVID19 restrictions, they had to limit the number of tables in their restaurant to be 4 with a maximum of 4 people allowed on a table. Menu card for the restaurant had the following information
On a particular day, 6 groups visited between morning shift (9 am to 12 noon). The following things are known about the groups
1. Group I had 3 people. They reached the restaurant at 9:15 and ordered 3 different food items with an overall bill of Rs. 600
2. Group II consisting of 4 people reached the restaurant at 09:30 am and ordered 2 sodas, 1 noodle, and 1 Pizza
3. Group III consisting of 2 people reached the restaurant at 10:00 and ordered a burger and a Pizza
4. Group IV consisting of 3 people ordered a Burger, a Dosa, and a Soda. They reached the restaurant at 10:10 am
5. Group V consisting of 2 people ordered a noodle and a dosa. They reached the restaurant at 10:25 am
6. Group VI consisting of 2 people reached the restaurant at 10:30 am and they were served food at 11:15 am. They had to pay a bill of Rs. 200.
7. Number of food items ordered by a group is equal to the number of members in that group
The following things are known about the restaurant and the management
(I) There are 2 cooks who are employed by the management named A and B. A is the only chef who knows how to cook Pizza. The rest of the food items can be made by both the chefs
(II) 4 tables are numbered Table 1,2,3 and 4. The lowestnumbered available table has to be occupied first
(III) A Chef starts working on new order only after the there are no pending food items on current order. The group which placed an order earlier is given higher priority
(IV) Chefs work in such a way that the time required to serve the order is minimum.
(V) All the food items belonging to the same table are served together. It takes 25 minutes to finish eating after which the group leaves. After that, the waiter takes 10 minutes to sanitize the table and it is ready for occupying
(VI) There is the negligible time elapsed in entering the restaurant and placing the order.
(VII) If all tables are occupied then the group has to wait outside. As soon as any table is available they'll be allowed inside and can place order at that time
Q. What is the number of food items which were cooked by chef B for group II?
Let us start with group I. Since it is given that there were 3 members, thus 3 food items were ordered totaling the bill of Rs 600. Thus we know pizza, a burger, and a dosa was ordered. SInce chef A can make pizza he will be making Pizza from 09:15 to 09:35(20 minutes). Burger and Pizza both take 15 minutes each. Chef B will start making any one of these from 09:15 to 09:30. And after this, e'll make the last food of the order from 09:30 to 09:45. Thus the food will be served at 09:45. Group will finish eating by 10:10. After sanitising the table will be again available at 10:20. The following can be represented as :
Thus group 2 coming at 09:30 ordered 2 sodas, 1 noodle, and a pizza. Since table 1 is occupied they will sit on table 2. Chef A will start working on their order at 09:35 whereas chef B will start working on the order from 09:45. To ensure the ordered is delivered in least time A will make 2 sodas and pizza.The remaining food item(noodle) will be made by B from 09:45 to 10:05. Thus the order will be served at 10:05. Group will finish eating by 10:30. Table 2 will be available by 10:40. It can be represented as
Chef B cooked 1 item for Group 2
The chief scientist of a major vaccine producing company has the responsibility to keep the formula of the vaccine confidential. He stores the formula in his edevice with 3 consecutive locks, all of which need to be unlocked to access the formula. The first of the 3 locks is a pattern lock, the second one is a numeric lock and the third and final one is an alphanumeric lock. The pattern lock is in the form of a regular hexagon with 6 distinct vertices A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, in that order. One needs to connect all the 6 vertices one after the another in any random order connecting each vertex only once and only one order of connecting the 6 vertices exists which will unlock the first lock. The numeric lock has a code of ABC, where A, B and C are single digit natural numbers. A is a multiple of 2. B is a multiple of 3, C is a multiple of 4 but not equal to A.
The alphanumeric lock has a code MNPQRS, where M and N are alphabets and P, Q, R and S are digits. M and N have to be consecutive vowels or consecutive consonants, not necessarily in order. Two alphabets are said to be consecutive vowels if both of them are vowels and they are consecutive when all the 5 vowels are written in alphabetical order. For example, E and I are consecutive vowels, but A and O are not. Two alphabets are said to be consecutive consonants if both of them are consonants and they are consecutive when all the 21 consonants are written in alphabetical order. For example, D and F are consecutive consonants but D and V are not. For example, M and N can be 'A' and 'E' respectively or 'E' and 'A' respectively. P is equal to BaseTenIndex of M. Q is equal to the BaseTenIndex of N. R and S can only take binary values, that is, 0 or 1.
BaseTenIndex of an alphabet = Index of alphabet % 10, where Index of an alphabet is its position when all alphabets from 'A' to 'Z' are arranged alphabetically and a%b is the remainder when a is divided by b.
For example, BaseTenIndex of 'J' = 10%10 = 0 , BaseTenIndex of 'M' = 13%10 = 3.
The chief scientist can only set passwords/patterns which follow all of the conditions mentioned above.
Based on the information given above, answer the questions that follow.
Q. How many alphanumeric codes for the third lock are possible which necessarily have an 'A' as one of the alphabets in the code?
It has been given that in the alphanumeric password MNPQRS, out of M and N, one is 'A'. The other has to be 'E', because A is a vowel, and hence the other alphabet has to be a consecutive vowel. Only possible consecutive vowels with 'A' as one of them are 'A' and 'E'.
So, the possible codes are
AE_ _ _ _ or EA_ _ _ _
The 3rd and 4th blanks depend on the 1st and 2nd alphabets,
AE15 _ _ or EA51 _ _
The last 2 digits can be 00, 01, 10, 11.
Hence total number of possibilities = 2 x 4 = 8
The chief scientist of a major vaccine producing company has the responsibility to keep the formula of the vaccine confidential. He stores the formula in his edevice with 3 consecutive locks, all of which need to be unlocked to access the formula. The first of the 3 locks is a pattern lock, the second one is a numeric lock and the third and final one is an alphanumeric lock. The pattern lock is in the form of a regular hexagon with 6 distinct vertices A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, in that order. One needs to connect all the 6 vertices one after the another in any random order connecting each vertex only once and only one order of connecting the 6 vertices exists which will unlock the first lock. The numeric lock has a code of ABC, where A, B and C are single digit natural numbers. A is a multiple of 2. B is a multiple of 3, C is a multiple of 4 but not equal to A.
The alphanumeric lock has a code MNPQRS, where M and N are alphabets and P, Q, R and S are digits. M and N have to be consecutive vowels or consecutive consonants, not necessarily in order. Two alphabets are said to be consecutive vowels if both of them are vowels and they are consecutive when all the 5 vowels are written in alphabetical order. For example, E and I are consecutive vowels, but A and O are not. Two alphabets are said to be consecutive consonants if both of them are consonants and they are consecutive when all the 21 consonants are written in alphabetical order. For example, D and F are consecutive consonants but D and V are not. For example, M and N can be 'A' and 'E' respectively or 'E' and 'A' respectively. P is equal to BaseTenIndex of M. Q is equal to the BaseTenIndex of N. R and S can only take binary values, that is, 0 or 1.
BaseTenIndex of an alphabet = Index of alphabet % 10, where Index of an alphabet is its position when all alphabets from 'A' to 'Z' are arranged alphabetically and a%b is the remainder when a is divided by b.
For example, BaseTenIndex of 'J' = 10%10 = 0 , BaseTenIndex of 'M' = 13%10 = 3.
The chief scientist can only set passwords/patterns which follow all of the conditions mentioned above.
Based on the information given above, answer the questions that follow.
Q. Given below is a list of patterns/passwords, some of which are in accordance with the rules mentioned and some are not. The chief scientist can use any combination of valid patterns/passwords from the following to lock the edevice. What is the total number of ways in which he can do so?
Pattern:
(1) A1 A2 A5 A6 A5 A2 A4 (2) A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 (3) A6 A5 A4 A3 A2 A1 (4) A1 A6 A5 A2 A4
Numeric password:
(1) 234 (2) 434 (3) 298 (4) 634 (5) 894 (6) 230 (7) 638
Alphanumeric password:
(1) AE1500 (2) CD3410 (3) HJ8000 (4)QP7600 (5) AB1211 (6) YZ4600
First, let us consider the patterns given:
(1) A1 A2 A5 A6 A5 A2 A4  A2 is being connected twice, which is against the rules
(2) A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6  This pattern is valid
(3) A6 A5 A4 A3 A2 A1  This pattern is valid
(4) A1 A6 A5 A2 A4  We are not connecting A3, which is against the rules.
Hence, the count of valid patterns = 2.
Now, let us consider the numeric passwords given:
(1) 234  Valid
(2) 434  This is not valid since the third digit can not be equal to the first digit.
(3) 298  Valid
(4) 634  Valid
(5) 894  Valid
(6) 230  This is not valid since it can not contain zero
(7) 638  Valid
Hence, the count of valid numeric passwords = 5.
Now, let us consider the alphanumeric passwords given:
(1) AE1500  Valid
(2) CD3410  Valid
(3) HJ8000  Valid
(4) QP7600  Valid
(5) AB1211  Not valid because A and B re not consecutive vowels or consecutive consonants
(6) YZ4600  Not valid because the index of Y is 25. 25 % 10 = 5 not 4.
Hence, the count of valid alphanumeric passwords = 4.
Hence, total count = 2 x 5 x 4 = 40
Simon is sent to do research on North Sentinel Islands. From his sources, he knows that there are 4 tribes living on the island. Each tribe has different farm animals among sheep, buffalo, pigs, and cows. Also, the 4 tribes believe in different elements among fire, earth water, and air.
He visited all 4 tribes and the leader of each tribe told him 3 things
Tribe I leader:
(a) Tribe III farms buffalo
(b) We believe in Air Element
(c) Tribe II leader is a liar
Tribe II leader:
(a) Tribe IV leader is a liar
(b) Tribe I farms buffalo
(c) Tribe III believes in Earth element
Tribe III leader :
(a) Truth is always spoken by me
(b) Pigs are farmed by the tribe I
(c) Our tribe believes in Earth element
Tribe IV leader :
(a) Tribe II leader doesn't speak truth all the times
(b) Tribe III farms cows
(c) Tribe I believe in the water element
A truthteller always speaks the truth. A liar always lies and an alternator alternates his statement between a truth and a lie.
It is known that there is at least one leader of each type. Also, each leader is either a truthteller or a liar or an alternator.
Q. Which tribe has cows?
If a person is a truthteller, then all his statements are truth
If a person is a liar, then all his statements are a lie
If a person he an alternator, then he will alternate his statement. In this case his I^{st }and III^{rd} statements are always of the same type (both are true or both are false)
Thus we can conclude that irrespective of the person's type, his first and third statements are always of the same type(both are true or both are false)
It is given that there is at least one each of truthteller, a liar, and an alternator is present. Lets us start by
Assumption 1: That Tribe I leader is a truthteller. His information can be tabulated as below:
Since we tribe II leader is a liar, we can tabulate information given by him as well
" ~" denotes not
Let us then take the statements of the leader of tribe IV.
Statement I of Leader of tribe IV is true. Thus statement III should be true. But it is a contradiction as it is already established that Tribe I believes in the Air element. Thus the assumption that Tribe I leader is a truthteller is wrong.
Assumption II: Tribe 2 leader is a truthteller
Then all 3 statements by him are true. Since the third statement of Tribe 2 leader and the third statement of Tribe 3 leader are the same, statement III of the leader of tribe III is also true, and hence his statement I is also true. This makes truth teller as well. But in this case, statement 2 from both the leaders contradict each other(Tribe 1 can not farm buffalo and pigs at the same time). Thus Tribe 2 leader is not truthteller
Assumption III: Tribe III leader is a truthteller. The conclusion is drawn from their statements as follows:
We observe that statement III of tribe II leader is true. Hence Statement I of tribe 2 leader is also true. Thus Leader of Tribe IV is a liar
Based on that further information can be filled as
Thus tribe II leader is truthteller. But one of his statements state that tribe I has buffalo which is a contradiction
Assumption IV: Tribe IV leader is a truthteller. The conclusion is drawn from their statements as follows:
We observe that the Tribe II leader's first statement is false. Thus the third statement is also false. Therefore Tribe III leader's first and third statement is false
The tribe I leader's first statement was that Tribe III has buffalo which is a lie. Therefore the third statement is a lie. Tribe II leader hence can not be a liar.
The second statement of tribe II leader has to be true thus, the tribe I have buffalo
Leader of tribe III stated in the second statement that Tribe I has pig which is false. Therefore Leader of tribe III is a liar.
Statement of the leader of the tribe I are all false. Therefore Tribe I leader is a liar
Furthermore, the deduction can't be made.
Hence, Tribe III has cows.
Simon is sent to do research on North Sentinel Islands. From his sources, he knows that there are 4 tribes living on the island. Each tribe has different farm animals among sheep, buffalo, pigs, and cows. Also, the 4 tribes believe in different elements among fire, earth water, and air.
He visited all 4 tribes and the leader of each tribe told him 3 things
Tribe I leader:
(a) Tribe III farms buffalo
(b) We believe in Air Element
(c) Tribe II leader is a liar
Tribe II leader:
(a) Tribe IV leader is a liar
(b) Tribe I farms buffalo
(c) Tribe III believes in Earth element
Tribe III leader :
(a) Truth is always spoken by me
(b) Pigs are farmed by the tribe I
(c) Our tribe believes in Earth element
Tribe IV leader :
(a) Tribe II leader doesn't speak truth all the times
(b) Tribe III farms cows
(c) Tribe I believe in the water element
A truthteller always speaks the truth. A liar always lies and an alternator alternates his statement between a truth and a lie.
It is known that there is at least one leader of each type. Also, each leader is either a truthteller or a liar or an alternator.
Q. Which of the tribes is having Buffalo?
If a person is a truthteller, then all his statements are truth
If a person is a liar, then all his statements are a lie
If a person he an alternator, then he will alternate his statement. In this case his I^{st }and III^{rd} statements are always of the same type (both are true or both are false)
Thus we can conclude that irrespective of the person's type, his first and third statements are always of the same type(both are true or both are false)
It is given that there is at least one each of truthteller, a liar, and an alternator is present. Lets us start by
Assumption 1: That Tribe I leader is a truthteller. His information can be tabulated as below:
Since we tribe II leader is a liar, we can tabulate information given by him as well
" ~" denotes not
Let us then take the statements of the leader of tribe IV.
Statement I of Leader of tribe IV is true. Thus statement III should be true. But it is a contradiction as it is already established that Tribe I believes in the Air element. Thus the assumption that Tribe I leader is a truthteller is wrong.
Assumption II: Tribe 2 leader is a truthteller
Then all 3 statements by him are true. Since the third statement of Tribe 2 leader and the third statement of Tribe 3 leader are the same, statement III of the leader of tribe III is also true, and hence his statement I is also true. This makes truth teller as well. But in this case, statement 2 from both the leaders contradict each other(Tribe 1 can not farm buffalo and pigs at the same time). Thus Tribe 2 leader is not truthteller
Assumption III: Tribe III leader is a truthteller. The conclusion is drawn from their statements as follows:
We observe that statement III of tribe II leader is true. Hence Statement I of tribe 2 leader is also true. Thus Leader of Tribe IV is a liar
Based on that further information can be filled as
Thus tribe II leader is truthteller. But one of his statements state that tribe I has buffalo which is a contradiction
Assumption IV: Tribe IV leader is a truthteller. The conclusion is drawn from their statements as follows:
We observe that the Tribe II leader's first statement is false. Thus the third statement is also false. Therefore Tribe III leader's first and third statement is false
The tribe I leader's first statement was that Tribe III has buffalo which is a lie. Therefore the third statement is a lie. Tribe II leader hence can not be a liar.
The second statement of tribe II leader has to be true thus, the tribe I have buffalo
Leader of tribe III stated in the second statement that Tribe I has pig which is false. Therefore Leader of tribe III is a liar.
Statement of the leader of the tribe I are all false. Therefore Tribe I leader is a liar
Furthermore, the deduction can't be made.
Hence Tribe I has buffalo.
Simon is sent to do research on North Sentinel Islands. From his sources, he knows that there are 4 tribes living on the island. Each tribe has different farm animals among sheep, buffalo, pigs, and cows. Also, the 4 tribes believe in different elements among fire, earth water, and air.
He visited all 4 tribes and the leader of each tribe told him 3 things
Tribe I leader:
(a) Tribe III farms buffalo
(b) We believe in Air Element
(c) Tribe II leader is a liar
Tribe II leader:
(a) Tribe IV leader is a liar
(b) Tribe I farms buffalo
(c) Tribe III believes in Earth element
Tribe III leader :
(a) Truth is always spoken by me
(b) Pigs are farmed by the tribe I
(c) Our tribe believes in Earth element
Tribe IV leader :
(a) Tribe II leader doesn't speak truth all the times
(b) Tribe III farms cows
(c) Tribe I believe in the water element
A truthteller always speaks the truth. A liar always lies and an alternator alternates his statement between a truth and a lie.
It is known that there is at least one leader of each type. Also, each leader is either a truthteller or a liar or an alternator.
Q. Out of 12 statements made, how many are true?
If a person is a truthteller, then all his statements are truth
If a person is a liar, then all his statements are a lie
If a person he an alternator, then he will alternate his statement. In this case his I^{st }and III^{rd} statements are always of the same type (both are true or both are false)
Thus we can conclude that irrespective of the person's type, his first and third statements are always of the same type(both are true or both are false)
It is given that there is at least one each of truthteller, a liar, and an alternator is present. Lets us start by
Assumption 1: That Tribe I leader is a truthteller. His information can be tabulated as below:
Since we tribe II leader is a liar, we can tabulate information given by him as well
" ~" denotes not
Let us then take the statements of the leader of tribe IV.
Statement I of Leader of tribe IV is true. Thus statement III should be true. But it is a contradiction as it is already established that Tribe I believes in the Air element. Thus the assumption that Tribe I leader is a truthteller is wrong.
Assumption II: Tribe 2 leader is a truthteller
Then all 3 statements by him are true. Since the third statement of Tribe 2 leader and the third statement of Tribe 3 leader are the same, statement III of the leader of tribe III is also true, and hence his statement I is also true. This makes truth teller as well. But in this case, statement 2 from both the leaders contradict each other(Tribe 1 can not farm buffalo and pigs at the same time). Thus Tribe 2 leader is not truthteller
Assumption III: Tribe III leader is a truthteller. The conclusion is drawn from their statements as follows:
We observe that statement III of tribe II leader is true. Hence Statement I of tribe 2 leader is also true. Thus Leader of Tribe IV is a liar
Based on that further information can be filled as
Thus tribe II leader is truthteller. But one of his statements state that tribe I has buffalo which is a contradiction
Assumption IV: Tribe IV leader is a truthteller. The conclusion is drawn from their statements as follows:
We observe that the Tribe II leader's first statement is false. Thus the third statement is also false. Therefore Tribe III leader's first and third statement is false
The tribe I leader's first statement was that Tribe III has buffalo which is a lie. Therefore the third statement is a lie. Tribe II leader hence can not be a liar.
The second statement of tribe II leader has to be true thus, the tribe I have buffalo
Leader of tribe III stated in the second statement that Tribe I has pig which is false. Therefore Leader of tribe III is a liar.
Statement of the leader of the tribe I are all false. Therefore Tribe I leader is a liar
Furthermore, the deduction can't be made.
Overall 4 statements are true.
The following table represents the records in the last 5 series and fitness statistics of 11 Indian Cricket Team players A to K.
The Speed, Strength and Agility are measured in certain indices, and the values mentioned are out of a 0 to 100 scale. The Fitness Index is calculated as follows
Fitness Index = 0.4 x Speed + 0.3 x Strength + 0.3 x Agility
The following table represents the records in the last IPL season and the fitness index for 8 players, P to W, who have played in the IPL but are yet to debut for the Indian Cricket Team.
Based on the information, given above, answer the questions that follow.
Q. Among the players who have played for the Indian Cricket Team, how many have a minimum fitness index of 85?
Since, the Fitness Index of A to K is calculated as follows,
Fitness Index = 0.4 x Speed + 0.3 x Strength + 0.3 x Agility, we get the fitness index of A = 0.4 x 78 + 0.3 x 89 + 0.3 x 90 = 84.9
Similarly calculating the fitness index of all the players from A to K,
Hence, the fitness index of D, E, F, G, H, and J are greater than or equal to 85.
The following table represents the records in the last 5 series and fitness statistics of 11 Indian Cricket Team players A to K.
The Speed, Strength and Agility are measured in certain indices, and the values mentioned are out of a 0 to 100 scale. The Fitness Index is calculated as follows
Fitness Index = 0.4 x Speed + 0.3 x Strength + 0.3 x Agility
The following table represents the records in the last IPL season and the fitness index for 8 players, P to W, who have played in the IPL but are yet to debut for the Indian Cricket Team.
Based on the information, given above, answer the questions that follow.
Q. If all the 19 players are ranked on the basis of their Fitness Index with the one with the highest Fitness Index being assigned Rank 1 and the one with the lowest Fitness Index being assigned Rank 19, who is ranked 13?
If the rank of 2 players based on their Fitness Index is the same, we rank them in alphabetical order of their names, that is if both A and D have the 4th rank A is ranked 4 and D is ranked 5.
Since, the Fitness Index of A to K is calculated as follows,
Fitness Index = 0.4 x Speed + 0.3 x Strength + 0.3 x Agility, we get the fitness index of A = 0.4 x 78 + 0.3 x 89 + 0.3 x 90 = 84.9
Similarly calculating the fitness index of all the players from A to K,
Now comparing the Fitness Index of A to K with P to W,
P is ranked 13th.
The following table represents the records in the last 5 series and fitness statistics of 11 Indian Cricket Team players A to K.
The Speed, Strength and Agility are measured in certain indices, and the values mentioned are out of a 0 to 100 scale. The Fitness Index is calculated as follows
Fitness Index = 0.4 x Speed + 0.3 x Strength + 0.3 x Agility
The following table represents the records in the last IPL season and the fitness index for 8 players, P to W, who have played in the IPL but are yet to debut for the Indian Cricket Team.
Based on the information, given above, answer the questions that follow.
Q. For the upcoming series vs England, the Squad Selection Committee selects players and assigns them jersey numbers in the following way:
First, it starts with the players who have already played for India. The players are ranked as per their Fitness Index ( highest fitness index is ranked 1). Then the first player's selection process starts, he must meet at least one of the below three criteria: 1) His batting average must be among top 6 batting averages of all players who have played for India 2) The number of wickets taken by him should be among the top 3 of all players who have played for India. 3) His number of catches/runouts should be the highest among all players who have played for India. If a player is selected, he is assigned a jersey number 1. Similarly, it continues for other players, and the nth player to be selected is given a jersey number n.
After the selection round of A to K is done, the selection of P to W begins. The players are ranked as per their Fitness Index ( highest fitness index is ranked 1). Then the first player's selection process starts, he must meet at least one of the below two criteria: 1) His total runs scored must be among top 4 runs scored of all players from P to W 2) The number of wickets taken by him should be among the top 3 of all players from P to W. If after meeting all these criteria, he is selected, he is assigned a jersey number which immediately succeeds the last jersey number from A to K. So, if K is the last person to be picked from A to K, and he is assigned a jersey number of 8, the first one from to be selected from P to W is given a jersey number 9. Also, players successively selected are given successive jersey numbers.
If the rank of 2 players based on their Fitness Index is the same, we rank them in alphabetical order of their names, that is if both A and D have the 4th rank A is ranked 4 and D is ranked 5.
How many players are selected into the squad for the upcoming series?
Since, the Fitness Index of A to K is calculated as follows,
Fitness Index = 0.4 x Speed + 0.3 x Strength + 0.3 x Agility, we get the fitness index of A = 0.4 x 78 + 0.3 x 89 + 0.3 x 90 = 84.9
Similarly calculating the fitness index of all the players from A to K,
Arranging them based on their Fitness Index,
H does not meet any of the 3 criteria, hence he is not selected.
F meets the batting average and the catches/runouts criteria. Hence, he is selected. Jersey number is 1.
G does not meet any of the 3 criteria, hence he is not selected.
E meets the batting average criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 2.
D meets the batting average criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 3.
J meets the number of wickets criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 4.
A meets the batting average criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 5.
B meets the batting average criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 6.
K meets the number of wickets criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 7.
C meets the batting average criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 8.
I meets the number of wickets criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 9.
Arranging P to W based on their Fitness Index:
W meets the wickets criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 10.
V meets the wickets criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 11.
R meets the runs criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 12.
Q meets the runs criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 13.
U meets the wickets criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 14.
T does not meet any criteria, hence not selected.
P meets the runs criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 15.
S meets the runs criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 16.
Hence, total number of players selected = 16.
The following table represents the records in the last 5 series and fitness statistics of 11 Indian Cricket Team players A to K.
The Speed, Strength and Agility are measured in certain indices, and the values mentioned are out of a 0 to 100 scale. The Fitness Index is calculated as follows
Fitness Index = 0.4 x Speed + 0.3 x Strength + 0.3 x Agility
The following table represents the records in the last IPL season and the fitness index for 8 players, P to W, who have played in the IPL but are yet to debut for the Indian Cricket Team.
Based on the information, given above, answer the questions that follow.
Q. For the upcoming series vs England, the Squad Selection Committee selects players and assigns them jersey numbers in the following way:
First, it starts with the players who have already played for India. The players are ranked as per their Fitness Index ( highest fitness index is ranked 1). Then the first player's selection process starts, he must meet at least one of the below three criteria: 1) His batting average must be among top 6 batting averages of all players who have played for India 2) The number of wickets taken by him should be among the top 3 of all players who have played for India. 3) His number of catches/runouts should be the highest among all players who have played for India. If a player is selected, he is assigned a jersey number 1. Similarly, it continues for other players, and the nth player to be selected is given a jersey number n.
After the selection round of A to K is done, the selection of P to W begins. The players are ranked as per their Fitness Index ( highest fitness index is ranked 1). Then the first player's selection process starts, he must meet at least one of the below two criteria: 1) His total runs scored must be among top 4 runs scored of all players from P to W 2) The number of wickets taken by him should be among the top 3 of all players from P to W. If after meeting all these criteria, he is selected, he is assigned a jersey number which immediately succeeds the last jersey number from A to K. So, if K is the last person to be picked from A to K, and he is assigned a jersey number of 8, the first one from to be selected from P to W is given a jersey number 9. Also, players successively selected are given successive jersey numbers.
If the rank of 2 players based on their Fitness Index is the same, we rank them in alphabetical order of their names, that is if both A and D have the 4th rank A is ranked 4 and D is ranked 5.
What is the Jersey Number of P?
Since, the Fitness Index of A to K is calculated as follows,
Fitness Index = 0.4 x Speed + 0.3 x Strength + 0.3 x Agility, we get the fitness index of A = 0.4 x 78 + 0.3 x 89 + 0.3 x 90 = 84.9
Similarly calculating the fitness index of all the players from A to K,
Arranging them based on their Fitness Index,
H does not meet any of the 3 criteria, hence he is not selected.
F meets the batting average and the catches/runouts criteria. Hence, he is selected. Jersey number is 1.
G does not meet any of the 3 criteria, hence he is not selected.
E meets the batting average criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 2.
D meets the batting average criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 3.
J meets the number of wickets criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 4.
A meets the batting average criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 5.
B meets the batting average criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 6.
K meets the number of wickets criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 7.
C meets the batting average criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 8.
I meets the number of wickets criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 9.
Arranging P to W based on their Fitness Index:
W meets the wickets criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 10.
V meets the wickets criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 11.
R meets the runs criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 12.
Q meets the runs criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 13.
U meets the wickets criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 14.
T does not meet any criteria, hence not selected.
P meets the runs criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 15.
S meets the runs criteria. Hence, he gets Jersey number 16.
Hence, the Jersey number of P is 15.
The following graph shows the percentage change in number of employees of two sectors. Refer the graph to answer the questions that follow.
If government employees’ salary is Rs 60 per head and private sector employees’ salary is Rs 75 per head and the total salary of government employees and private sector employees in the year 2010 are Rs 50000 and Rs 70000 respectively, then what is the difference in total salary of government and private employees in the year 2011?
In the year 2010, number of govt. employees
= 50000/60
= 833.33~− 833
Number of private employees
= 70000/75
= 933.33~− 933
In the year 2011, number of govt. employees
= 833 × 1.08
= 899.64~− 900
Number of private employees = 933 × 0.99
= 923.67~− 924
Now total salary of govt. employees
= 900 × 60 = Rs 54000
And total salary of private employees
= 924 × 75 = Rs 69300
Required difference = 69300 − 54000
= Rs 15300
Direction: The table given below shows the aircraft handling capabilities in terms of maximum size of aircraft. It is assumed for all airports that a lesser sized aircraft can also be handled, if it can handle a larger sized aircraft. The figure in brackets in third column shows the number of months required for airports to be implemented.
How many airports will have capabilities to handle all types of aircrafts after four months?
All airports which can handle a B  474 can also handle all other lesser capacity aircrafts. Hence total number of airports which can handle all types of aircrafts in next 4 months is 10.
The following graph shows the percentage change in number of employees of two sectors. Refer the graph to answer the questions that follow.
If the ratio of total salaries of the government employees to the private employees is 3 : 2 in the year 2004, then what will be the ratio of total salaries of the government employees to the private employees in the year 2009?
In the year 2004
In the year 2009
The following table shows data of lipsticks, please refer to the table to answer the questions that follow
Average price per unit of Brand ‘A’ lipstick in March 2009 is
The average price is 1552000/239266 = Rs 6.5
A town had a population of 140000. 1/7th of the people were diagnosed with a disease. The municipality had arranged for 2 variants of medicines A and B to treat all of them. A succeeded in healing 1/14th of patients it was given to, and B succeeded in healing 40% of people it was given to. Finally, a total of 3400 people recovered, with the help of these medicines. Find how many people were given Medicine A.
Total number of people having the disease = (1/7) x 140000 = 20000
Let number of patients given A be x.
Therefore, the number of patients given B = 20000  x
Therefore,
x = 14000
A and B have notes of Rs.500 and Rs.2000 denomination with them. The ratio of Rs. 500 notes with A and B respectively is 2:3, the ratio of Rs. 2000 notes with A and B respectively is 4:5. If the total amount with A is 24000 and the total amount with B is 32000, find the absolute difference between the number of Rs. 500 notes with A and Rs. 2000 notes with B.
Let the number of Rs. 500 notes with A and B be 2x and 3x respectively.
Let the number of Rs. 2000 notes with A and B be 4y and 5y respectively.
Hence, total amount with A = 1000x + 8000y = 24000 or x + 8y = 24...(i)
Total amount with B = 1500x + 10000y = 32000 or 1.5x + 10y = 32...(ii)
Multiplying 1.5 with (i), and then subtracting (ii)
1.5x + 12y = 36
1.5x + 10y = 32
Hence, y = 2.
Solving for x, x = 8.
Hence, difference = 2x  5y = 16  10 = 6
2 friends Joey and Chandler had ordered Pizza from the Pizza House. The pizza was supposed to be sliced into 8 equal pieces as follows:
But, somehow, it got sliced into pieces of different sizes. Each slice subtended an angle at the centre. The angles subtended by the pieces, in order from A to H were in an increasing AP. Joey decided he would have alternate pieces starting from A, and the remaining pieces would be eaten by Chandler. The absolute difference between the angle subtended by the largest piece of Chandler and the smallest piece of Joey is 84 degrees. If the total charge for the pizza was 100 USD, and they divide the amount in the ratio of the total area of pieces they had, what was the cost of Chandler's secondlargest piece?
Let the angles subtended by pieces A to H be a to h respectively.
Let the common difference be d.
Hence, b = a + d, c = a + 2d, d = a + 3d, e = a + 4d, f = a + 5d, g = a + 6d, h = a + 7d
Angle subtended by Joey's smallest piece = a
Angle subtended by Chandler's largest piece = h = a + 7d '
Difference = 7d = 84^{0}
d = 12^{0}
Also, a + b + c + d + e + f + g + h = 360^{0}
Hence, 8a + 28d = 360
8a + 336 = 360
a = 24/8 =3^{0}
Let the total area be A.
Area of Chandler's secondlargest piece =
Cost of this piece = (7/40) x 100 = 7 x 2.5 = 17.5
There is a right circular cylinder which has a base diameter of 16 units and a height of 6π units. An ant is at the circumference of the base of the cylinder and wants to reach the sugar cube which is placed at topmost point of diametrically opposite end from the ant. What is the minimum possible distance that ant has to travel?
It is given that the base has a diameter of 16 units, it implies that the radius is 8 units and hence the circumference is 16π units
If we cut open the cylinder into a 2D paper then, the ant has to travel a horizontal distance of half the circumference = 8π units. and vertical distance will be 6π.
In order to minimise the distance, he has to travel along the hypotenuse formed which is of length =
The following figure consists of a square, inside which there is a second square formed by joining the midpoints of the sides of the outer square. Inside the second square is inscribed a circle, and it continues in a similar manner. Find the ratio of the sum of areas of all the squares combined to the sum of the areas of the circles combined.
Let the length of each side of the outermost square be a.
Hence, the length of each side of the second square =
The radius of circle = length of side of square / 2 =
Let the side of the square inside the circle be b.
Hence, b =a/2
Similarly, the side of the square inner to this square =
Similarly radius of the inner circle =
And it continues.
Hence, the sum of areas of the squares = ...
Hence, ratio =
There is a large plot of land in the form of a trapezium. The owner of the land has planned to convert it into a botanical garden, with a nonuniform walking track along its perimeter as follows (all measurements are in metres):
The portion of the land without the walking track is also in the form of a trapezium and has to be covered with artificial grass. The cost of laying the track is Rs. 35 per square metre and the cost of planting artificial grass is Rs. 400 per square metre. What is the total cost needed to lay the track and plant the artificial grass?
Area of outer trapezium = 1/2 x sum of parallel sides\times x height = 1/2 x (35+45)× 40 =1600
For the inner trapezium, lengths of parallel sides are 35  4  3 = 28 and 45  6  5 = 34
Height = 40  5  4 = 31
Hence, area = 1/2 x (28+34)× 31= 1/2 x 62× 31=31× 31=961
Hence, the area where the artificial grass is to be planted = 961 and the area of the track = 1600  961 = 639.
Hence, the total cost = 961 x 400 + 639 x 35 = 384400 + 22365 = 406765 Rs.
How many ordered pairs (x,y) exist that satisfy the following inequality?
xy + 5x + 6y < 20
It has been given that x is a whole number and y is a natural number.
xy + 5x + 6y < 20
If we add 30 to both sides, we can easily factorize the left side.
xy + 5x + 6y + 30 < 50
x(y+5) + 6(y+5) < 50
(y+5)(x+6) < 50
(x+6)(y+5) < 50
It has been given that x is a whole number and y is a natural number.
Hence, let us assume the above inequality as AB < 50, where A = x+6 and B = y+5
Since, x ≥ 0 and y ≥ 1, the minimum value of A = 6 and the minimum value of B = 6
Hence, possible ordered pairs of A and B satisfying the inequality is,
6 x 6 < 50
6 x 7 < 50
6 x 8 < 50
7 x 6 < 50
7 x 7 < 50
8 x 6 < 50
Hence, (A,B) can be (6,6), (6,7), (6,8), (7,6), (7,7) or (8,6).
Hence, ordered pair (x,y) can be (0,1), (0,2), (0,3), (1,1), (1,2), (2,1).
Hence, count = 6
In a test, there are 34 multiplechoice questions. A correct answer fetches +3, and a wrong answer fetches 1. There is no penalty for unattempted questions. In how many ways can a student achieve 67 marks in this test?
Let us assume that the student answers all the questions.
If he has answered all of the questions correctly, he gets a total of 34 x 3 = 102 marks.
Now, for every wrong answer, there is a subtraction of 4 marks, so for n incorrect answers, marks achieved = 102  4n
Now, we need to equate this to 67, which is the actual marks achieved. But this is not possible, because 67 is odd, and 1024n is even
Similarly, we can assume he had attempted 33 questions, with n wrong answers,
33 x 3  4n = 67
99  4n = 67
4n = 32, n = 8. This is possible.
For 32 attempted questions also,
32 x 3  4n = 67 is not possible because left side is even and right side is odd.
For 31 attempted questions,
31 x 3  4n = 67
93  4n = 67
4n = 26, not possible
Similarly, 30 attempted questions is not possible.
For 29 attempted questions,
29 x 3  4n = 67
87  4n = 67
n = 5. This is possible.
Again for 28, 27, 26 attempted questions, it is not possible.
For 25 questions attempted,
25 x 3  4n = 67
75  4n = 67
n = 2
It is not possible for any other combination.
Hence, it is possible in 3 different ways.
If log_{α} 5 = k, log_{α} 30 = l, log_{α }210 = m, find the value of log_{35} 42 in terms of k, l and m.
log_{α} 5 = k,
log_{α }30 = l ⟶ log_{α} 5× 6 = l ⟶ log_{α} 5 + log_{α}6 = l⟶ log_{α} 6 = l−k,
log_{α} 210 = m ⟶ log_{α} 30 × 7 = m ⟶ log_{α }30 + log_{α }7 = m ⟶ log_{α} 7 = m − l
It is given that
f(a,b) = log_{b} α
g(x) = x^{3 } 2x^{2} + 7x + 11
h(x) = 2x + 1
Find the sum of values of x for which the following equality holds
f(g(x),h(x)) = 2
f(g(x),h(x)) = 2
log_{h(x)} g (x) = 2
log_{2x+1} x^{3} − 2x^{2} + 7x + 11 = 2
(2x+1)^{2 }= x^{3} − 2x^{2 }+ 7x + 11
4x^{2} + 4x + 1 = x^{3 }− 2x^{2} + 7x + 11
x^{3} − 6x^{2} + 3x + 10 = 0
Also, x = 1 satisfies the above equation. Hence, (x+1) is a factor of the expression.
Using algebraic division and further factorization, we get
(x+1) (x2) (x5) = 0
Hence, the roots are 1, 2 and 5.
But if we consider 1, the base of the logarithm, 2x + 1 becomes 1, which is not possible, hence the only possible values are 2 and 5.
Hence, sum = 7.
Find the remainder when 7062^{7062} + 2097^{2096} is divided by 100.
First, we will solve for the first term 7062^{7062}
7062 = 2 x 3531
7062^{7062 }= 2^{7062} × 3531^{7062}
= 2^{7060}.2^{2} × 3531^{7062}
= 1024^{706}.4 × 3531^{7062}
Now, we know that (..24)^{even} =(..76) and (..24)^{odd }= (..24)
Also, (..b1)^{n} = (..(unit′s digit of b × n)1)
Hence,
7062^{7062}
= 1024^{706}.4× 3531^{7062}
= (..76) × 4 × (..61) = (..76) × (..44)
Now, we will solve for the second term 2097^{2096}
2097^{2096 }= 2097^{4} ^{× 524 }= (2097^{4})^{524} =((..97)^{4})^{524}
= (..81)^{524} = (..21)
Hence the total remainder = Remainder1 + Remaider2 = 44 + 21 = 65
A telecom company has decided to come up with new sim cards. It got the permission that it could assign its customers tendigit numbers with the constraint that the numbers should start with 7809 and the remaining 6 digits can be selected from all 10 digits, without repetition such that they appear in the sim card number in ascending order. Find the maximum number of sim card numbers the company can come up with.
Since the first 4 digits are fixed, all the arrangement and selection is to be done for the next 6 digits.
Now, we can select the 6 digits from all 10 digits, without repetition in ^{10}c_{6} ways.
Once, we select any set of 6 numbers, there is only one arrangement in which they appear in ascending order. So, for each possible selection, the number of ways = 1.
Hence, the total number of ways of selecting 10digit numbers = ^{10}C_{6} × 1 = ^{10}C_{6} = ^{10}C_{4} =
A shopkeeper marks up his goods by 100%. One day during the Dussehra Sale, he gave a discount of 40% to all customers who visited his shop in the morning slot and a discount of 20% to all the customers who visited his shop in the evening slot. All the goods in his shop were of the same type and had the same cost price. Let x be the number of goods sold during the morning slot and y be the number of goods sold during the evening slot, which of the following represents possible values of x and y, in order to have at least 50% profit?
Let p be the cost price CP of each item.
Hence, marked price MP = p + p = 2p
Selling price SP of items in the morning slot =
Selling price SP of the items in the evening slot =
Since the minimum profit should be 50% for all items,
Hence, y should be greater than or equal to 3 times x. Only option C satisfies the condition.
A local bank in order to attract customers offers interest at 20% per annum compounded halfyearly. On the other hand, a national bank provides interest at the same rate compounded annually. Ralph had Rs. 200000 with him. Half of it, he invested in the local bank and the other half he invested in the national bank. At the end of 2 years, the local bank defaulted and could only pay back half of what was due to Ralph at the end of 2 years. Ralph, to avoid any further loss, also withdrew the money from the national bank. How much money does he have now as compared to what he had 2 years back?
Amount invested in each bank = 100000.
Amount due in local bank at the end of 2 years = principal
= 100000(1+0.1)^{4} = 100000(1.1)^{4 }= 146410
Amount the local bank returns = 146410/2 = 73205.
Amount due in the national bank = 100000(1+0.2)^{2 }= 100000(1.2)^{2} = 144000
Total amount = 73205 + 144000 = 217205
Hence, difference = 217205  200000 = Rs. 17205
Ram bought oranges from the wholeseller. After buying the oranges from the shop to the whole seller to his shop, he found that 15% of his oranges have been damaged. By what percentage should he markup the cost to make a 10% profit
Let Shopkeeper buy 100 kgs of oranges at the cost Rs P/kg
The total cost incurred by the shopkeeper = 100P
Profit expected by him is 10%, therefore the amount he should get after selling his oranges = (1 + 10%)100P = 110P
However, 15% of the oranges were damaged. So he is left with 85% of 100 kg = 85 kgs of Oranges.
Let him markup the price by x
Then 85 (1+x%) P = 110P
(1 + x%) = 110/85
(1 + x%) = 1.2941
x% = 29.41%
A retailer buys a certain amount of tea at the rate of Rs. 100 per 500gm from a wholesaler. He then distributes the tea into small packets, each containing 20gm of tea, with negligible overhead costs. He marks each packet at Rs. 6. Later, he finds out that 90 packets had packaging issues and he had to reject them. He sells the remaining packets at their marked price and gets a profit of 39.20% in the entire process. What is the amount of tea he had bought initially?
Let the amount of tea he bought be x kg.
Therefore, cost price = x × 2 × 100 = 200x
Number of packets = x × 1000/20 = 50x
Number of packets he could sell = 50x − 90
Total selling price = 6 × (50x−90) = 300x − 540
Hence, profit = 300x − 540 − 200x = 100x − 540
Profit percent = × 100 = 39.20
Hence, amount he had bought initially = 25 kg.
All numbers from 1 to 300 (in decimal system) are written in base 8 and base 11 systems. How many of the numbers will have a nonzero unit digit in both base 8 and base 11 notations?
A number in decimal system will have a zero unit digit in base 8 system only if it is divisible by 8.
A number in decimal system will have a zero unit digit in base 11 system only if it is divisible by 11.
Thus all we need to identify are those numbers which are neither divisible by 8 nor divisible by 11.
For this we first compute all those numbers which are divisible by either 8 or 11.
No. of numbers divisible by 8 = 300/8 = 37.
No. of numbers divisible by 11 = 300/11 = 27.
No. of numbers divisible by 88 = 300/88 = 3.
Thus no. of numbers divisible by either 8 or 11 = 37 + 27  3 = 61.
Thus no. of numbers neither divisible by 8, nor by 11 is = 300  61 = 239.
If we look at the series, we can observe that there are 3 different infinite GP series.
A quadratic equation f(x) = 0 has one positive and one negative root. If the graph of f(x) is shifted left along the xaxis to form f'(x) in such a way that the sum of roots of the quadratic equation f'(x) = 0 is zero, the distance between the minima of f(x) and f'(x) is 5 units. Which of the following is a possible sum of the roots of the equation f(x) = 0?
Let the roots of f'(x) = a,a
The distance between the minima of f(x) and f'(x) = 5. This implies that f(x) has been shifted 5 units towards the left to get f'(x).
Hence, the roots of f(x) = a+5 and a+5.
Hence, sum of roots of f(x) = a+5+a+5 = 10 units.
If N is a 26 digit number, and M= log 10.
Let F(x) = log^{N}/M, what will be the integral part of F(x)?
The integral part of the logarithm (base 10) of a natural number is always 1 less than the no. of digits in it. So the integral part of f(x) is 25.
A cube is painted on five visible faces. Now it is cut in 64 identical smaller cubes by applying three equidistant cuts along each edge. Among 64 identical smaller cubes, how many cubes have no painted face?
After cutting, there 64 identical smaller cubes i.e cube’s dimensions are 4 X 4 X 4
One face is not painted. Therefore, there will be 4 cubes on this face which are not painted.
Similarly, there will be 8 more cubes.
Hence, total number of cubes = 12
A quadratic equation f(x) = 0 exists such that f(x) = 3x^{2} + 9x + 3. A second quadratic expression g(x) is formed by shifting f(x) towards the right along the xaxis by 5 units. What is the sum of the roots of equation g(x) = 0?
g(x) is formed by shifting f(x) towards the right along the xaxis by 5 units,
g(x) = 3(x−5)^{2 }+ 9(x−5) + 3
g(x) = 3(x^{2}−10x+25) + 9(x−5) + 3
g(x) = 3x^{2 }− 30x + 75 + 9x − 45 + 3
g(x) = 3x^{2 }− 21x + 33
Hence g(x) = 0
3x^{2} − 21x + 33 = 0
x^{2} − 7x + 11 = 0
Hence, sum of the roots = (−7)/1 = 7
2 videos24 docs89 tests

Use Code STAYHOME200 and get INR 200 additional OFF

Use Coupon Code 
2 videos24 docs89 tests









