testtaker39

gdb97 is right! Let me show it in a similar way to gdb97's. Area of CDE = 1/2 * CE * DE = 42 (given). Area of ADG = 1/2 * AG * DG Now, let us find the value of AG and DG. As the triangles are similar, we can write: CD / DE = AD / DG AND CD/CE = AD / AG (or CD/AD = DE/DG and CD/AD = CE/AG). We know from the ques that, AB = BC = CD. Therefore, AD = 3CD because AD = AB + BC +CD Now rewrite, CD/DE = 3CD/DG and CD/CE = 3CD/AG => DG = 3DE => AG = 3CE Area of triangle ADG = 1/2 * AG *DG => 1/2 * 3CE * 3DE = 9 * (1/2 * CE * DE) = 9 * 42 = 378

Thanks gbd97. I've figured the problem. The whole time I ridiculously skipped reading a sentence in the ques (how can that be! might be the tension)! As a result the misunderstanding of the problem arose. However, here is the question: There is a chart depicting 2002 airplane inventory for airlines A and B by year of purchase (as a percent of 2002 inventory). question: New regulations go into effect in 2003 that require all planes in inventory to be newer than ten years old. Each year following 2002, both airlines need to sell the planes the regulations force them to eliminate from inventory, and then use the proceeds of those sales to increase their inventory by 10% (rounded down because they are unable to buy fractions of planes). What is the combined number of planes owned by the two companies following their sales and purchases in 2004? I skipped reading the part: "rounded down because they are unable to buy fractions of planes" and was rounding as what I think is appropriate!

Thanks gbd97. I was working on some problems from a book. There I found this solution of a problem: The question asked about the total no. of planes from 2 airlines. It needed some computations. Here is some parts of the solution. Company A has 225 planes. ..."So they add 10%, or 22 new planes". 10% of 225 is 22.5, so I took 23 in my solution, not 22. Again, "Now A has 237 planes, so they add 10% or 23 new planes". 10% of 237 is 23.7, so I took 24 in my solution, not 23. As a result my answer differed from the book's answer and I was confused. That's why I asked about ETS's policy. Do they round in this way in the middle of a long calculation?

Hi all, I am confused about what to do when I need to round values. The confusion arises for fill-in problems. Suppose I am doing a calculation that involves people or other stuff such as cars, planes etc; the type of things which cannot be bought or sold or do other things in fraction. Let, I have got 4.6 or 4.3 cars while I am in a chain of calculation. Should I round it to 4 cars or 5 cars? Since this is not a multiple choice question, I have to calculate it correctly. If I choose the number of cars to be 4, I have (say) 62 as a result. On the other hand, if I take 5, rounded to upper limit, I get 64. So, what to do now? I've seen two scenarios. In a problem (can't remember the book or source right now), I've found that all fractions were rounded to the upper limit irrespective of the value in tenths digit. Following this strategy, I've solved another problem from the book '1014 ques' by Princeton and my answer is wrong! The solution took every number with a fraction part truncated! Not rounded. Now I am confused! Do anyone know what strategy ETS follows for this type of problem?

The writing was timed. It was done in 35 minutes. I should be faster in writing. :( The task: An ailing patient should have easy access to his or her doctor’s record of treating similarly afflicted patients. Through gaining such access, the ailing patient may better determine whether the doctor is competent to treat that medical condition. My response: The author’s claim about allowing an ailing patient access to his or her doctor's record of treating similarly afflicted patients assumes that the treatment record reflects the doctor's competence which might not be true in most cases. As there are both obvious and subtle differences in physical conditions and acceptance of drugs or treatments of different persons for the same disease, the treatment record may also have subtle differences accordingly which the ailing patient may not understand properly, thus failing to assess the doctor's competence correctly. A simple difference in a patient’s case from others' cases may create major differences in a patient’s treatment record from that of others'. If an ailing patient does not have required knowledge to understand the stuff stated in a medical record, he/she might not be able to understand why do certain records differ and what are the reasons behind these differences. As a result, he/she might get puzzled and fail to apprehend the doctor's skill in treating that particular disease correctly. In this scenario, accessing the doctor's medical record is futile for the ailing patient’s part. For example, My mother is regularly seeing a doctor for the treatment of diabetes. Though she has a regular type of diabetes, her treatment is not the same as other diabetes patients since she has a major type of skin disease. If any diabetic patient, who intends to see the same doctor, take a look at my mother’s treatment record, he/she might get confused, make a wrong judgment about the doctor's competence and may decide not to see the doctor. Here, allowing the ailing patient to see previous treatment record of other patients may create an unjustifiable situation for both the doctor and the ailing patient, thus invalidates the authors claim. Again, a patient might not follow the doctor’s prescription correctly and timely. If this was true for a previous case, which is very likely for the patients who are not that cautious, the treatment record would not reflect the usual course of disease diagnosis and treatment. In this case, an ailing patient, allowed to see the doctor's treatment record, might again have a wrong idea about the doctor's competence in treating a certain disease and this is obviously not fair. By not allowing an ailing patient to see the doctor's treatment record, wrong judgment about doctor's competence can be prevented and this is clearly contrary to the authors claim. In medical ethics, a patient’s case history and treatment record is confidential. A patient may have a disease which could be marked with social stigma. For example, patients bearing Aids and sexually transmitted diseases are sometimes treated badly in some societies. People think that they are morally reprehensible in bearing these diseases. Allowing other ailing patients to see the the medical record will reveal this kind of information which may not be acceptable by the particular patient. So, it is vary justifiable to assume that an ailing patient should not be allowed to see a doctor's treatment record. Considering all the explanations stated above, it seems very logical that a doctor's medical record is not representative of his competence. And also, it is often unethical. So it can be concluded that, the authors claim, which advocates allowing a doctor’s medical record, is not justifiable.

Hi YannMK, you have obtained a very good score in quant and also in verbal. Thank you for your insightful description of the preparation procedure. Good luck with your AWA score.

Ques. 1: The paragraph does not provide us with any technique for how to make a movie artistic. It merely states that an artistic movie is composed of many discrete shots. It does not tell us what we should do to make a movie 'artistic'. What it tells is that, there are many options that a director can choose to shoot those discrete shots. So, it goes to director. The paragraph describes us the ways that the director can follow to make those shots. So, to follow an appropriate way for his/her movie, the director should be 'good' in direction. Here comes answer 'C'.

The problem states that the population doubles in 10 years. Here I think, in your reply, you are doubling after 3 years. So, if the population is 80 at the end of 7 years, it should be doubled to 160 after 10 years from the time when it was 80. In total, it takes (7+10) = 17 years to be 160 (as from your calculation). Isn't it?

Thanks samidh.

Hi there! X is less (fewer) than Y means Y is greater. Accordingly, fewer cats than dogs means number of Dogs is greater than number of cats. So, 18 fewer cats than dogs implies there are 18 more in dog group than in cat group.

Hi Mani Raja! Solve the math in steps. First, calculate the amount (no. of ounce) of vinegar in the mixture. Vinegar: 40% of 12 ounce = (40 * 12)/100 = 4.8 ounce According to the question, in the new mixture, Only oil will be added to the mixture, no vinegar. So, amount of Vinegar remains the same: 4.8 ounce. Let, x ounce of more oil will be added. As a result, the new mixture becomes 12+x ounce. 4.8 ounce of vinegar is now 25% of the 12+x ounce of the new mixture. (requirement stated in the question). Therefore, 4.8 = 25% of (12+x) 4.8 = [ 25 * (12+x) ]/100 x = 7.2 Ans: 7.2 ounce of oil must be added.

I have a question regarding an inequality from Manhattan GRE algebra. Question no. 15 from Algebra: Hard Practice Question set. The (exact) percentage of lawyers practicing different types of law: Corporate law: 21%, Administrative law: 16%, Personal Injury law: 22%, Human resource law: 17%, Intellectual Property law: x%, Criminal litigation: (x2)%, Civil litigation: (x+1)%. Quantity A: The number of lawyers practicing all types of litigation Quantity B: The number of lawyers practicing corporate law Solution from the book: 21 + x2 + (x+1) +16 + 22 + 17 + x = 100 x2 + 2x +76 = 100 (Shouldn't it be 77 ? ) (x+6)(x+4) = 0 x = 4 or -6 The percentage of litigation is: 42 + (4 + 1) = 21, which is equal to the percentage in corporate law. The answer is C. Here, if the 76 is corrected to 77 and the value of x is not rounded, then it is slightly less than 4. As a result, the percentage of litigation becomes slightly less than 21. In that case the answer should be B, not C. Am I right or should I round the value of x in such cases? (The question did not suggest to round any value.)

Thanks gr8acky. I have checked the solution again. It was a data interpretation (fill in) question. The ques was like: "Rounded to the nearest percent, what is the greatest percent change in.....?" The solution says: ".......(26.8 – 1.8 = 25.0 and 25.0/26.6 is approximately 93%). Since 93% is a greater change, the answer is 93." Do you think I have missed something?

Many thanksgr8acky! It was a silly question. Felt awkward after creating the thread. Actually I confused it with another problem, was exercising math for a while and suddenly started to mess up on all the ques. Thanks again! :)

I am a bit confused about the solution of an inequality problem. The problem is from Manhattan GRE algebra. Here is the problem: x and y are both positive integers. Quantity A |x+y| Quantity B |x| - |y| What should be the solution you think? Can you give an explanation?

Thanks gr8acky! I thought it would be 94% but the Princeton review test did confuse me. It said in its answer section that the correct answer would be 93%! Now what to do!

Hi samidh! Though I'm novice at writing, I'll give a try. Do not take my observations as perfect analysis. Here is what I think: I think your stand for the argument is not strongly expressed in your essay. You have two paragraphs apart from introduction and conclusion. One seems to agree with the first option and the next para. agrees to the alternate option. I think you should add at least one more paragraph that will clarify/strengthen your stand by taking side of one specific option. I think, you should back up these statements by explanations and examples. Your essay does not cite any example. It is better to add at least one example in each paragraph. You could mention some of such cases. You could have discussed the case of conflict and its effect on relationship (by taking one specific side most of the time) from different perspectives, e.g, conflict between parents and children, teacher and student, husband and wife, colleagues etc. Good luck!

I am a bit confused about a question. If the question is "rounded to the nearest percent what is the greatest percent.........?" and the calculation yields 93.98, what should be the result? 93 ? or 94?

It's a very good score nitesh100! Congratulations! By the way, what was your Quant and AWA score? Just curious!

Is it 2) 210?

I took a practice test and had to write on the following argument. I am writing here the exact response that I made on the test. Could you please analyze my response and rate it? And suggest me how can I do better? The prompt: The following opinion was provided in a letter to the editor of a national aeronautics magazine: “Manned space flight is costly and dangerous. Moreover, the recent success of a series of unmanned space probes and satellites has demonstrated that a great deal of useful information can be gathered without the costs and risks associated with sending men and women into space. Therefore, we should invest our resources in unmanned space flight." Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted. My response: The argument advocating sending unmanned spaceship instead of sending men or women to space is based on some assumptions. These assumptions are not at all axiomatic. some of them can be proved false or unwarranted to some extent which can prove the argument weak and lacking strong base. In supporting his/her stand of sending unmanned space probes, the author mentions the cost and danger of sending manned space probes. But, to make this assumption justifiable about manned space flight, he/she does not give an authentic citation here. The lack of proper citation and a representative statistics makes the assumption that the manned space travel is costly and dangerous totally unconvincing. It is also implied by the argument that the author assumes the cost of unmanned space flight to be lower than that of manned space flight since his/her statement is concerned about the cost of manned space travel. But, we cannot be so sure that the cost of an unmanned space travel would never surpass a manned a space travel. If there is a more costly space unmanned space travel, which is likely, the authors argument lacks a strong base. Even an unmanned space travel can cause danger, not for its objects inside it, but for the environment of space. So, if we consider 'danger' from this perspective, an unmanned space travel could be dangerous too. The authors apparent assumption that an unmanned space travel does not cause any danger to anything does not hold making his/her idea about sending unmanned space probe becomes even weaker. The author also assumes that the information that the unmanned space probe and satellite can give are enough for space exploration. But, this might not be the case. Presence of a human being in a space probe can bring us better results and observations. In a situation, say for example a critical situation when a rational decision is to be made, a human can do better that a machine. A machine cannot do the thinking. It just follow the rules given to it. But a good thinking in a critical situation can be of a great advantage. That is why, the authors assumption that the presence of a machine in space is enough and the information it gives are enough for us when we attempt to uncover the mysteries of space is unwarranted. The assumptions that are implied in this argument are do not stand strong if we consider alternative possibilities. Some of these assumptions and their alternatives are explained above. If we consider these alternatives which make the authors assumptions unwarranted, we can clearly feel that the statement made at the last line of the argument cannot be supported anymore. We can feel that we should cogitate over the decision before we make it a reality forever.

Thanks npatel28 for your suggestions! I know I have problems in sentence structure and it worsens when I write in a timed prompt with a lot of anxiety and tension. It was my second attempt. However I think I need to read a lot of quality essays and practice more.

The writing was timed. I wrote it in 30 min. Could you please evaluate my essay and give me some tips on how to write better? The prompt: Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a "Palean" basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could have crossed it only by boat, and no Palean boats have been found. Thus it follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean. Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument. My response: The claim about the Palean basket that they were not uniquely Palean needs some more substantial evidences to be strongly held. Otherwise, the potentially wrong assumptions will render it a rather superficial and probably, invalid claim. The central point that forms the base of the claim is that the basket was found in Lithos across the Brim river from Palea and that the river is very deep and broad thus making it impossible for Paleans to cross the river without boats. But, no boats have been found till date. Why do the author ignores the possibility of finding a boat in future thus invalidating the implied assumption of no boats existed at the time of Paleans? The deep Brim river may have a vestige of boat at its very core and is waiting to be discovered by someone in the future. This very reasonable possibility weakens the authors claim. Again, a somewhat evident alternative way to Lithos has not been considered by the author when making his/her decision about the Palean basket. Why should we assume that there is no other way to go to Lithos other than by crossing the river? A Palean may easily travel on foot to Lithos following another route avoiding the Brim river and then visiting the Brim river at the Lithos side, thus making the possibility stronger that the basket was carried by a Palean to the Brim river at Lithos side and thereby making the Palean Basket unique to Palea. On the other hand, it can also be the case that the Brim river was not that broad at the time of Palea. It could have been just a narrow canal, or it could have taken the form of a narrow canal during summer making the Paleans happy to cross the river easily. If this was the case, the claim that the basket was not uniquely Palean does not stand strong. Again, we can be that imaginative without being too fictional that one or two or some more baskets drifted along by the mild waves of Brim and carrying the baskets to the other side where the village Lithos was located. You can by no means throw away this imagination which positively weakens the authors claim. The author did not consider some possibilities that could make his/her claim weak and not cogent before settling to the final decision about the Palean baskets. If the author did dig deep to find some more evidence and facts about the Palea, Brim river and Lithos, surely the above mentioned possibilities would arrest his/her attention. As these potential facts, explained above, were not taken care of during making the claim, I am not convinced by the argument of the author.

I have just written an essay on the same issue. And honestly, I like your essay more than mine. It is more compact and has more points and explanations. To be true, after I have completed writing my essay, I thought with regret that if I might agreed with the claim I could have written better!

The essay was timed. I wrote it in 30 minutes. Can you please evaluate the essay and tell me where I made mistakes? The prompt: "A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college." Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation above and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how those examples shape your position. My response: Cogitating over the claim by the author that all the students of a nation should study the same national curriculum, I feel that I am not convinced enough to advocate the stand. It may be the case that some vocations need more concentration on some specialized subjects in their potential workers’ curriculum. Again, some countries have a tradition of supporting more emphasized religious teaching for the future religious preachers and people who will get involved in religious teaching. First, think about some professions such as nursing, or farming in rural areas. A person going to be farming in rural areas early in their life may not need the same degree of learning in mathematics or physics. Rather it would be advantageous for them if they have some additional elementary subjects relating insecticides, plants and soils. Second, in some subcontinental countries, there is a need for people who will call the other people in society for prayers at the right time, conducting religious ceremonies properly, resolving religious disputes and so on. There is no doubt that a relaxation from the national curriculum and concentrating on religious teaching in their curriculum will help the people greatly who wishes to spend their life in dealing with religious matters for their fellow countrymen. Again, there may exist some regional culture, history, language and heritage, to be preserved by infusing their lessons into the children of those regions. The best thing to do in this case is adding some subjects that take care of the cultural and language related tradition. Studying the same national curriculum will not be that helpful in this regard. Despite all these considerations it cannot be denied that studying the same curriculum will be advantageous in comparing students’ talents when they sit for the same nationwide examination for higher studies or a particular job. Considering all the points explained above, I cannot agree with the author fully. In most parts, I support the opposite of the claims. Studying the same curriculum can be of disadvantage to some people. Therefore, I would suggest that a nation should relax in its policy of requiring all its students studying the same curriculum.