i loveee how you can tell the lil quirks of the tutor's personality irl thru their teaching, with the little cross no no no and it makes me chuckle, thanks for a great lesson!
Correct me if I am wrong please. There are two very important roles in the document review question 1. "anyone not required to review a given document will not review it" 2. "A document is reviewed by one department member and later his direct supervisor." From this, I can infer that a document reviewed by Laszio can never be reviewed by Adiliah. This is because if Laszio is the initial reviewer, Davi will be responsible on rechecking the document, and Adiliah will never review it. This is because the prompt never addressed the document being reviewed by the whole supervisory chain. This makes the answers for Laszio among the reviewers (Yarah, Saleema, and Davi) which are 3 without Laszio and 4 when Laszio included. The same goes for Adiliah among the reviewers (Bao & Davi only) which are 2 without Adiliah and 3 when Laszio included. Thank you!
The question tells us "Each document reviewed by a department member must then be reviewed by that person's supervisor." and "Anyone not required to review a given document will not review it." We can use these two rules to find the maximum number of department members who could have reviewed a document. Let's assume Saleema is the first person to review a document that the department processes. Using the first rule, Saleema's supervisor must also review that document. This means Laszlo must review the document. Now that Laszlo has reviewed the document, the first rule tells us that Laszlo's supervisor must review the document, so Davi must review the document. Following this chain one more time, Adiliah must review the document because Davi reviewed the document. In this scenario, neither Bao nor Yarah have to review the document, so the second rule tells us they will not review it. This means the maximum number of people who review a document is 4 in both cases. It's not the case that a document will only be reviewed by one person and then their direct supervisor and that's it. The way the passage is phrased tells us that any document reviewed by a person must be reviewed by that person's supervisor, so this creates a chain where a document is reviewed by each person moving up the supervisory hierarchy until it reaches Adiliah at the top. I hope that helps!
How is it possible to write and structure the data in the last question and analyzing each question without running out of time? It seems almost impossible to me to manage that within 2.15 min... How can I improve my speed and time management for those kind of questions? Any tips would be very helpful and appreciated. P.S I love your content. Helps a ton.
Really amazing content. And as a fan of GMAT Ninja, who wants these to be the best -- The audio quality is not the best in videos where instructors use Airpods. Audio quality of videos of Dana and Alex are best probably due to their better mic. Thanks.
Thank you so much, Sai! I really appreciate this sort of feedback. Amusingly enough, we already came to the same conclusion on our own, and we just upgraded the video and audio equipment for all of our tutors who are filming the next round of videos. We're all filming in our homes in various parts of the world, but at least we're all doing so with decent equipment now -- nothing super-fancy, but it's a nice upgrade on, say, AirPods. Since we just filmed these Data Insights videos, we probably won't replace them anytime terribly soon. But we're in the process of refreshing the quant videos right now, with more consistent audio and video quality. Once we're done with those, we might tackle verbal and/or DI again at some point, especially if we want to make adjustments to the content itself. Thank you again, Sai. Have fun studying! - Charles
@@GMATNinjaTutoring hey Charles! when are these refreshed quant videos you speak about due to release? is it expected any time soon- is it okay to use the GMAT Classic version which you guys had released before?
@@amanuttam7222 It's 100% fine to use the "old" quant videos for however long they're on our channel. We filmed them before the new GMAT Focus was released, so you'll hear outdated references in them, mostly regarding the score scale or the role of DS (formerly part of quant, now part of DI). But the content is unchanged for those quant videos -- other than the removal of geometry, the content is the same, so those old videos are still fine. That said: new videos are coming, mostly so that we align the language fully with the new GMAT. We'll tweak a bit of the content, but the pedagogical changes won't be radical. The first four of those videos are filmed, and should be on our channel within a week or two, replacing the old videos in our playlist. The other quant videos will be released over the next month or two. I hope that helps a bit, and have fun studying!
In the last question when we are selecting an answer for MM. Since it has strengths in painting as 2 of the permanent artifacts are painting. wouldn't semi rep painting by yuan chin -taa be most suitable ??
The two permanent collections in MM that mention painting are not *just* painting, they are 19th-century European painting and 18th-century US painting and scultpure. Since the next paragraph tells us "MM's next exhibit must be devoted to something other than European or US art," we can ignore both of these strengths and focus on the final one: East Asian printmaking The only answer choice that includes East Asian printmaking is the "Representational woodblock prints by Hashiguchi Goyo (male, Japan, 20th c.)" which is why this is the answer to this part of the question. I hope that helps!
In the first question(CR like), how did you draw the co-relation between phytop blooms and COT? Since COT eats phytop, apart from coral reef, if phytop increases, coral reef should also increase as COT would be more likely to eat COT instead of preying upon coral reef.
If there is a large phytoplankton bloom that provides lots of food for the crown-of-thorns sea star, then its likely the sea star's population will increase. The passage tells us that the sea star's "preferred food source is coral polyps." So, an increased sea star population will likely end up eating more coral polyps, eventually resulting in damage to the coral reef. I hope that helps!
@@GMATNinjaTutoring firstly, thanks for replying. Coming to the analysis, it's basically 'preferred food is coral polyps' vs 'gladly eats phytop'. I think this is where it gets tricky for me, to draw a two step dependency between coral polyps and phytop.
Given the rules stated in the passage, it's not possible for both Bao and Davi to review the document. There are two parts of the opening passage we need to pay attention to. The first tells us that "Each document reviewed by a department member must then be reviewed by that person's supervisor." The second tells us "No other rules require anyone else to review any document. Anyone not required to review a given document will not review it." To illustrate why these rules mean the answer can't be five, consider the situation in which Saleema reviews the document. The first rule tells us that Laszlo will have to review the document after Saleema and in turn, Davi and Adiliah will have to review the document. The second rule tells us no one outside this chain is required to review the document, so Yarah and Bao are not REQUIRED to review the document. We also know that anyone not required to review a document will not review it. This means Yarah and Bao will not review the document and the longest chain we can make is 4. I hope that helps!
@@GMATNinjaTutoring But if talk about another chain where Bao reviews it, then his supervisor Adilah will review it. That is a chain of 2. And since no one outside B and A will review it. Therefore, it is also a possible case.
@@deependrashukla7449 That is also a possible case. However, the question asks us to find "the maximum number of department members that could have reviewed a single document" if Adiliah reviews a document. The fact that we can find a chain of 2 as an alternative to the chain of 4 created by (S or Y) then L then D then A doesn't change the answer to this question. The maximum number of possible reviewers of a single document if Adiliah reviews it is still 4. I hope that helps!
Let me know if I am the only one think the last question : 'Print' is the same as 'Painting'...but just adding -ing.... Open my eyes and read more carefullllyyyy!!!! Omg... Thank you!
For the first question, wouldn't the software save time in the longrun? Difficulty remembering multiple passwords implies wasted time in finding/remembering the correct passwords. Can you give any advice on how to approach these problems even when the logical conclusion isn't always the same as the correct one?
The problem here (and I know this will sound a bit ridiculous) is that you're letting reality get in the way of you answering the question. In a GMAT question like this, if you start thinking beyond the paragraph(s) you’re given, you might be screwed. As soon as you let reality - in the form of outside knowledge or ideas - enter your mind, you’re much more likely to miss the question. This question asks us to indicate "by appropriate selections in the first and second column which of the items in the third column would describe a sacrifice for THIS USER and which would be a gain." To find out what THIS USER would sacrifice and gain in the situation presented, we have to use the information in the text (and ONLY the information in the text). We're told: "...software is available for little or no cost that can store and encrypt a user's passwords...For users willing TO TAKE THE TIME to install the software on a computer and enter all the required data, such software provides one way to comply with security expert's advice..." This part of the passage suggests that the user needs to sacrifice the time involved in setting up the software, and through that sacrifice will gain the security provided by the software. There is no suggestion in the text that the software will provide a time gain (even though it probably will in the long run), so that cannot be the correct answer in the "gain" column. The structure of the question also implies that the thing this user sacrifices will provide them with a gain. These two things need to be linked. If the user was going to gain time, we'd need to know what they sacrificed and there isn't a corresponding option that makes sense. I 100% agree that over time in real life, the user is likely to gain time, but (sadly) that won't help us answer this question. For more on this, check out this article. It's aimed at CR, but the same punchlines apply to this question: www.gmatninja.com/gmat/articles/verbal/dont-let-reality-get-in-the-way-part-2-cr I hope that helps a bit, but please let me know if you have any other questions!
In the last question regaring FA's next exhibit, the first choice has both abstract, 20th Century and also the preference i.e., US Women. Then why it is rejected based of only Sculpture vs the answer provided, which has only jewellery as strength and rest are neutral factors.
The first paragraph of the passage tells us that FA's next exhibit MUST contain art from one of its areas of strength: 20th-century US painting, 20th-century jewelry, and art from 14th-century South America. If a piece of art is not from one of these three areas, it cannot be part of FA's next exhibit. We're later told FA's piece must not be fully representational. The first option in the table is a large abstract sculpture by Louise Nevelson (female, US, 20th c.). While this is from the USA and from the 20th century, it is not contained in one of the three categories listed above. This means it cannot be part of FA's next exhibit. The semiabstract, semirepresentational art nouveau jewelry by René Lalique (male, France, 20th c.) does fit into one of the three categories; it is 20th-century jewelry. Even though it is not a piece by a US woman, it fulfills all the other criteria FA is looking for. This makes this piece the correct answer for FA. I hope that helps!
Did anyone feel the English in the 2nd paragraph of the "Document Review" question is a bit weird, or is it just because English is my second language? "Select Lazslo among reviewers for the maximum number of department members that could have reviewed a single document if Laszlo was among the reviewers." It told me to "Choose Lazslo to become a reviewer" so I can get the "maximum number of department members". Then what? What is the question after I choose him? I felt like there was no question there. I need ChatGPT to paraphrase the question: - If Laszlo was one of the people who reviewed a document, - What is the maximum number of people from the department who could have reviewed that same document? I do understand the question after reading it. Can anyone explain the English from the original question?
i am unable to understand any of the section i dont know why im getting most of my questions wrong no matter if its verbal di or quants. ive watched multiple videos. i always seem to have a different understanding. its very frustrating.
The end of the first paragraph tells us that the strengths of the FA museum are 20th-century US painting, *20th-century jewelry* [with no reference to its geographical origin], and 14th-century South American. The second paragraph also tells us "FA's next exhibit must be devoted to art that is abstract, or at least art that is not representational..." The semiabstract, semirepresentational art nouveau jewelry by Rene Lalique (male, France, 20th c.) is a piece of 20th-century jewelry, so it does represent one of FA museum's strengths. It is also not representational. While it is not a piece of art by a US woman, that was a preference, not a requirement. This answer choice is the only option that satisfies all FA museum's requirements, so this is the correct answer to this question. I hope that helps!
the reviewing question 21:22 felt like anyone can draw any inference . no title was given for the 3 rd column showing nos. starting to feel i have to ditch gmat because of data insights section. May be go the GRE way :(
The second sentence of the second paragraph tells us, "For users will to take the TIME to install the software...such software provides one way to comply with the security experts advice." So someone needs to take the time to get this software set up and installed correctly and if they do that, they could have a much more secure password they could use to access each of their accounts. So they sacrifice the time needed to set up the software, and they gain the security provided by a strong password for each account. We can't necessarily say it's the opposite since a user who sacrifices security by not using the software doesn't necessarily gain any time. They might lose time trying to remember their password and have to go through the time-consuming process of resetting it each time they want to access one of their accounts. From the information provided in the passage, the only combination of sacrifice and gain that makes sense is that the user can sacrifice time to gain security. I hope that helps!
@@GMATNinjaTutoringbut in the second para last line we have experts advice to gain time by sacrificing security if we are working with multiple accounts What about that?
The start of the second paragraph tells us "software is available for little or no cost that can store and encrypt a user's password." Since there is very little to no money required to purchase this software, we cannot say that the user is sacrificing money. Later in this paragraph, we're told that "for users willing to take the time to install the software...and enter all the required data..." The thing the user is sacrificing is the time required to install and configure the software. This is why the answer to this part of the question is the user is sacrificing their time. I hope that helps!
The first paragraph of the passage tells us that FA's next exhibit MUST contain art from one of its areas of strength: 20th-century US painting, 20th-century jewelry, and art from 14th-century South America. If a piece of art is not from one of these three areas, it cannot be part of FA's next exhibit. We're later told FA's piece must not be fully representational. The first option in the table is a large abstract sculpture by Louise Nevelson (female, US, 20th c.). While this is an abstract work, from the USA and from the 20th century, it is not contained in one of the three categories listed above. This means it cannot be part of FA's next exhibit. The semiabstract, semirepresentational art nouveau jewelry by René Lalique (male, France, 20th c.) does fit into one of the three categories; it is 20th-century jewelry. Even though it is not fully abstract and is not a piece by a US woman, it fulfills all the other criteria FA is looking for. This makes this piece the correct answer for FA. I hope that helps!
In the second paragraph of this question, we're told FA would like to find some art, "PREFERABLY including at least some art by US women." From the first paragraph, we also know that any art included in the exhibits MUST be associated with one of the museum's strengths: 20th-century US painting, 20th-century jewelry, and art from 14th-century South America. The only option that matches one of FA's strengths is the semiabstract, semirepresentational art nouveau jewelry by René Lalique. While this is not a piece by a US woman, that was only a preference and not a requirement. This is the only piece that satisfies the museum's requirements, and so this is the only piece that can answer this question. I hope that helps!
May I suggest to use a proper microphone? All the other tutors in the series have done so, and their voice is pretty clear. I love my AirPods too, but unfortunately the voice in this video isn't the best. Otherwise, great video as always!
@@UtkarxChauhan You shouldn't have made that comment for someone who's genuinely trying to help you for FREE! Would you complain if you were in need of some desperate help and Tim was the only help you could get? I'm sure, you wouldn't!
Please also mark the answers once you're done solving it. Thanks for such amazing work :D
by far he is the ninja with the least whiteboard usage which is supposed to be the ninja's signature way
i loveee how you can tell the lil quirks of the tutor's personality irl thru their teaching, with the little cross no no no and it makes me chuckle, thanks for a great lesson!
Thank you! You're spot-on: Tim is a funny dude, and we encourage him to be himself in these videos. Aussie humor is the best. :)
Have fun studying!
Correct me if I am wrong please. There are two very important roles in the document review question 1. "anyone not required to review a given document will not review it" 2. "A document is reviewed by one department member and later his direct supervisor." From this, I can infer that a document reviewed by Laszio can never be reviewed by Adiliah. This is because if Laszio is the initial reviewer, Davi will be responsible on rechecking the document, and Adiliah will never review it. This is because the prompt never addressed the document being reviewed by the whole supervisory chain. This makes the answers for Laszio among the reviewers (Yarah, Saleema, and Davi) which are 3 without Laszio and 4 when Laszio included. The same goes for Adiliah among the reviewers (Bao & Davi only) which are 2 without Adiliah and 3 when Laszio included. Thank you!
The question tells us "Each document reviewed by a department member must then be reviewed by that person's supervisor." and "Anyone not required to review a given document will not review it." We can use these two rules to find the maximum number of department members who could have reviewed a document.
Let's assume Saleema is the first person to review a document that the department processes. Using the first rule, Saleema's supervisor must also review that document. This means Laszlo must review the document. Now that Laszlo has reviewed the document, the first rule tells us that Laszlo's supervisor must review the document, so Davi must review the document. Following this chain one more time, Adiliah must review the document because Davi reviewed the document. In this scenario, neither Bao nor Yarah have to review the document, so the second rule tells us they will not review it. This means the maximum number of people who review a document is 4 in both cases.
It's not the case that a document will only be reviewed by one person and then their direct supervisor and that's it. The way the passage is phrased tells us that any document reviewed by a person must be reviewed by that person's supervisor, so this creates a chain where a document is reviewed by each person moving up the supervisory hierarchy until it reaches Adiliah at the top.
I hope that helps!
That was Little Charles B's wish for Santa? 😳 Kid's going places! I'm thinking Stanford 🤔
I just started this playlist and I thought it stopped at ep6. I just finished ep6 2 minutes ago, and now I realize ep7 uploaded today, lol.
Perfect timing! We hope you found ep7 helpful!
How is it possible to write and structure the data in the last question and analyzing each question without running out of time? It seems almost impossible to me to manage that within 2.15 min... How can I improve my speed and time management for those kind of questions? Any tips would be very helpful and appreciated. P.S I love your content. Helps a ton.
Really amazing content. And as a fan of GMAT Ninja, who wants these to be the best -- The audio quality is not the best in videos where instructors use Airpods. Audio quality of videos of Dana and Alex are best probably due to their better mic. Thanks.
Thank you so much, Sai! I really appreciate this sort of feedback.
Amusingly enough, we already came to the same conclusion on our own, and we just upgraded the video and audio equipment for all of our tutors who are filming the next round of videos. We're all filming in our homes in various parts of the world, but at least we're all doing so with decent equipment now -- nothing super-fancy, but it's a nice upgrade on, say, AirPods.
Since we just filmed these Data Insights videos, we probably won't replace them anytime terribly soon. But we're in the process of refreshing the quant videos right now, with more consistent audio and video quality. Once we're done with those, we might tackle verbal and/or DI again at some point, especially if we want to make adjustments to the content itself.
Thank you again, Sai. Have fun studying!
- Charles
@@GMATNinjaTutoring Thanks Charles.
@@GMATNinjaTutoring hey Charles! when are these refreshed quant videos you speak about due to release? is it expected any time soon- is it okay to use the GMAT Classic version which you guys had released before?
@@amanuttam7222 It's 100% fine to use the "old" quant videos for however long they're on our channel. We filmed them before the new GMAT Focus was released, so you'll hear outdated references in them, mostly regarding the score scale or the role of DS (formerly part of quant, now part of DI). But the content is unchanged for those quant videos -- other than the removal of geometry, the content is the same, so those old videos are still fine.
That said: new videos are coming, mostly so that we align the language fully with the new GMAT. We'll tweak a bit of the content, but the pedagogical changes won't be radical. The first four of those videos are filmed, and should be on our channel within a week or two, replacing the old videos in our playlist. The other quant videos will be released over the next month or two.
I hope that helps a bit, and have fun studying!
Screwed up on the last one, since I chose #1 for FA. Missed the part that the strength is a painting not a sculpture
In the last question when we are selecting an answer for MM. Since it has strengths in painting as 2 of the permanent artifacts are painting. wouldn't semi rep painting by yuan chin -taa be most suitable ??
The two permanent collections in MM that mention painting are not *just* painting, they are 19th-century European painting and 18th-century US painting and scultpure. Since the next paragraph tells us "MM's next exhibit must be devoted to something other than European or US art," we can ignore both of these strengths and focus on the final one: East Asian printmaking
The only answer choice that includes East Asian printmaking is the "Representational woodblock prints by Hashiguchi Goyo (male, Japan, 20th c.)" which is why this is the answer to this part of the question.
I hope that helps!
thank you so much@@GMATNinjaTutoring
In the first question(CR like), how did you draw the co-relation between phytop blooms and COT?
Since COT eats phytop, apart from coral reef, if phytop increases, coral reef should also increase as COT would be more likely to eat COT instead of preying upon coral reef.
If there is a large phytoplankton bloom that provides lots of food for the crown-of-thorns sea star, then its likely the sea star's population will increase. The passage tells us that the sea star's "preferred food source is coral polyps." So, an increased sea star population will likely end up eating more coral polyps, eventually resulting in damage to the coral reef.
I hope that helps!
@@GMATNinjaTutoring firstly, thanks for replying.
Coming to the analysis, it's basically 'preferred food is coral polyps' vs 'gladly eats phytop'. I think this is where it gets tricky for me, to draw a two step dependency between coral polyps and phytop.
@@laragarg I had the same issue. it's not necessary at all that an increase in phytop would "cause" an increase in sea star.
@GMATNinjaTutoring ↑
If Adilah reviews it it is also possible that it came from Bao along with the longest chain. So it makes the answer 5.
Given the rules stated in the passage, it's not possible for both Bao and Davi to review the document.
There are two parts of the opening passage we need to pay attention to. The first tells us that "Each document reviewed by a department member must then be reviewed by that person's supervisor." The second tells us "No other rules require anyone else to review any document. Anyone not required to review a given document will not review it."
To illustrate why these rules mean the answer can't be five, consider the situation in which Saleema reviews the document. The first rule tells us that Laszlo will have to review the document after Saleema and in turn, Davi and Adiliah will have to review the document.
The second rule tells us no one outside this chain is required to review the document, so Yarah and Bao are not REQUIRED to review the document. We also know that anyone not required to review a document will not review it. This means Yarah and Bao will not review the document and the longest chain we can make is 4.
I hope that helps!
@@GMATNinjaTutoring But if talk about another chain where Bao reviews it, then his supervisor Adilah will review it. That is a chain of 2. And since no one outside B and A will review it. Therefore, it is also a possible case.
@@deependrashukla7449 That is also a possible case. However, the question asks us to find "the maximum number of department members that could have reviewed a single document" if Adiliah reviews a document. The fact that we can find a chain of 2 as an alternative to the chain of 4 created by (S or Y) then L then D then A doesn't change the answer to this question. The maximum number of possible reviewers of a single document if Adiliah reviews it is still 4.
I hope that helps!
@@GMATNinjaTutoring yes the single clears it all.
should mark the answers after solving for clarity.
Let me know if I am the only one think the last question : 'Print' is the same as 'Painting'...but just adding -ing.... Open my eyes and read more carefullllyyyy!!!! Omg... Thank you!
For the first question, wouldn't the software save time in the longrun? Difficulty remembering multiple passwords implies wasted time in finding/remembering the correct passwords. Can you give any advice on how to approach these problems even when the logical conclusion isn't always the same as the correct one?
The problem here (and I know this will sound a bit ridiculous) is that you're letting reality get in the way of you answering the question. In a GMAT question like this, if you start thinking beyond the paragraph(s) you’re given, you might be screwed. As soon as you let reality - in the form of outside knowledge or ideas - enter your mind, you’re much more likely to miss the question.
This question asks us to indicate "by appropriate selections in the first and second column which of the items in the third column would describe a sacrifice for THIS USER and which would be a gain." To find out what THIS USER would sacrifice and gain in the situation presented, we have to use the information in the text (and ONLY the information in the text). We're told:
"...software is available for little or no cost that can store and encrypt a user's passwords...For users willing TO TAKE THE TIME to install the software on a computer and enter all the required data, such software provides one way to comply with security expert's advice..."
This part of the passage suggests that the user needs to sacrifice the time involved in setting up the software, and through that sacrifice will gain the security provided by the software. There is no suggestion in the text that the software will provide a time gain (even though it probably will in the long run), so that cannot be the correct answer in the "gain" column.
The structure of the question also implies that the thing this user sacrifices will provide them with a gain. These two things need to be linked. If the user was going to gain time, we'd need to know what they sacrificed and there isn't a corresponding option that makes sense. I 100% agree that over time in real life, the user is likely to gain time, but (sadly) that won't help us answer this question.
For more on this, check out this article. It's aimed at CR, but the same punchlines apply to this question:
www.gmatninja.com/gmat/articles/verbal/dont-let-reality-get-in-the-way-part-2-cr
I hope that helps a bit, but please let me know if you have any other questions!
@@GMATNinjaTutoring Thank you so much! Really appreciate the detailed explanation. Great video as well.
In the last question regaring FA's next exhibit, the first choice has both abstract, 20th Century and also the preference i.e., US Women. Then why it is rejected based of only Sculpture vs the answer provided, which has only jewellery as strength and rest are neutral factors.
The first paragraph of the passage tells us that FA's next exhibit MUST contain art from one of its areas of strength: 20th-century US painting, 20th-century jewelry, and art from 14th-century South America. If a piece of art is not from one of these three areas, it cannot be part of FA's next exhibit. We're later told FA's piece must not be fully representational.
The first option in the table is a large abstract sculpture by Louise Nevelson (female, US, 20th c.). While this is from the USA and from the 20th century, it is not contained in one of the three categories listed above. This means it cannot be part of FA's next exhibit.
The semiabstract, semirepresentational art nouveau jewelry by René Lalique (male, France, 20th c.) does fit into one of the three categories; it is 20th-century jewelry. Even though it is not a piece by a US woman, it fulfills all the other criteria FA is looking for. This makes this piece the correct answer for FA.
I hope that helps!
Did anyone feel the English in the 2nd paragraph of the "Document Review" question is a bit weird, or is it just because English is my second language?
"Select Lazslo among reviewers for the maximum number of department members that could have reviewed a single document if Laszlo was among the reviewers."
It told me to "Choose Lazslo to become a reviewer" so I can get the "maximum number of department members". Then what? What is the question after I choose him? I felt like there was no question there.
I need ChatGPT to paraphrase the question:
- If Laszlo was one of the people who reviewed a document,
- What is the maximum number of people from the department who could have reviewed that same document?
I do understand the question after reading it. Can anyone explain the English from the original question?
i am unable to understand any of the section i dont know why im getting most of my questions wrong no matter if its verbal di or quants. ive watched multiple videos. i always seem to have a different understanding. its very frustrating.
For the last question the answer chosen was the european jewelry but the strenght of the FA museum was US and Southamerican
The end of the first paragraph tells us that the strengths of the FA museum are 20th-century US painting, *20th-century jewelry* [with no reference to its geographical origin], and 14th-century South American. The second paragraph also tells us "FA's next exhibit must be devoted to art that is abstract, or at least art that is not representational..."
The semiabstract, semirepresentational art nouveau jewelry by Rene Lalique (male, France, 20th c.) is a piece of 20th-century jewelry, so it does represent one of FA museum's strengths. It is also not representational. While it is not a piece of art by a US woman, that was a preference, not a requirement. This answer choice is the only option that satisfies all FA museum's requirements, so this is the correct answer to this question.
I hope that helps!
the reviewing question 21:22 felt like anyone can draw any inference . no title was given for the 3 rd column showing nos. starting to feel i have to ditch gmat because of data insights section. May be go the GRE way :(
I didn't understand the approach for last question, though I got the answers right...help?
In question 2 if you sacrifice time won't we get security ? Can you tell me the answer is not the opposite ?
The second sentence of the second paragraph tells us, "For users will to take the TIME to install the software...such software provides one way to comply with the security experts advice." So someone needs to take the time to get this software set up and installed correctly and if they do that, they could have a much more secure password they could use to access each of their accounts. So they sacrifice the time needed to set up the software, and they gain the security provided by a strong password for each account.
We can't necessarily say it's the opposite since a user who sacrifices security by not using the software doesn't necessarily gain any time. They might lose time trying to remember their password and have to go through the time-consuming process of resetting it each time they want to access one of their accounts. From the information provided in the passage, the only combination of sacrifice and gain that makes sense is that the user can sacrifice time to gain security.
I hope that helps!
@@GMATNinjaTutoringbut in the second para last line we have experts advice to gain time by sacrificing security if we are working with multiple accounts
What about that?
For the second question aren't we sacrificing money more, rather than time because money is required to buy both the software and the usb
The start of the second paragraph tells us "software is available for little or no cost that can store and encrypt a user's password." Since there is very little to no money required to purchase this software, we cannot say that the user is sacrificing money.
Later in this paragraph, we're told that "for users willing to take the time to install the software...and enter all the required data..." The thing the user is sacrificing is the time required to install and configure the software. This is why the answer to this part of the question is the user is sacrificing their time.
I hope that helps!
Thx !
Is not 'art that is abstract' equal to 'abstract art sculpture'?
The first paragraph of the passage tells us that FA's next exhibit MUST contain art from one of its areas of strength: 20th-century US painting, 20th-century jewelry, and art from 14th-century South America. If a piece of art is not from one of these three areas, it cannot be part of FA's next exhibit. We're later told FA's piece must not be fully representational.
The first option in the table is a large abstract sculpture by Louise Nevelson (female, US, 20th c.). While this is an abstract work, from the USA and from the 20th century, it is not contained in one of the three categories listed above. This means it cannot be part of FA's next exhibit.
The semiabstract, semirepresentational art nouveau jewelry by René Lalique (male, France, 20th c.) does fit into one of the three categories; it is 20th-century jewelry. Even though it is not fully abstract and is not a piece by a US woman, it fulfills all the other criteria FA is looking for. This makes this piece the correct answer for FA.
I hope that helps!
Thank you much🎉@@GMATNinjaTutoring
What is the final answer for the first question?
The cause is the increase in phytoplankton and the effect is the increase in crown-of-thorns sea stars.
I hope that helps!
In the last question the FA has a condition of atleast including some art by women this condition is not satisfied at all.
Why we didn't include it?
In the second paragraph of this question, we're told FA would like to find some art, "PREFERABLY including at least some art by US women."
From the first paragraph, we also know that any art included in the exhibits MUST be associated with one of the museum's strengths: 20th-century US painting, 20th-century jewelry, and art from 14th-century South America.
The only option that matches one of FA's strengths is the semiabstract, semirepresentational art nouveau jewelry by René Lalique. While this is not a piece by a US woman, that was only a preference and not a requirement. This is the only piece that satisfies the museum's requirements, and so this is the only piece that can answer this question.
I hope that helps!
only constraint here is the time for analysis :(
off topic, but why is Tim kind of cute?
We asked a modeling agency to send us a GMAT tutor. They sent Tim. 🤷🏻♂
May I suggest to use a proper microphone? All the other tutors in the series have done so, and their voice is pretty clear. I love my AirPods too, but unfortunately the voice in this video isn't the best. Otherwise, great video as always!
@@UtkarxChauhan You shouldn't have made that comment for someone who's genuinely trying to help you for FREE! Would you complain if you were in need of some desperate help and Tim was the only help you could get? I'm sure, you wouldn't!