Set 8

Explanation

To calculate the percentage increase in sales for flower shop C in year 3, we need to compare the difference in sales between year 3 and year 2, then divide by the sales of year 2 (the previous year).

Based on the chart:

• Sales of flower shop C in year 2 = $280$
• Sales of flower shop C in year 3 = $320$

The calculation is as follows:

The result is approximately $14\%$.

Therefore, the percentage increase in sales for flower shop C in year 3 compared to the previous year is $14\%$.

Explanation

To calculate the percentage increase in sales for flower shop B in year 4, we compare the difference in sales between year 4 and year 3 (the previous year), then divide by the sales of year 3.

Based on the chart:

• Sales of flower shop B in year 3 = $350$
• Sales of flower shop B in year 4 = $385$

The calculation is:

Therefore, the percentage increase in sales for flower shop B in year 4 compared to the previous year is $10\%$.

Explanation

To find the next value, let's analyze the pattern between the terms in the sequence:

We can see that the pattern is a repeating cycle of operations: $+2, +4, -1$.

Based on this pattern, the operation following $-1$ cycles back to $+2$.

Therefore, the next term is:

Thus, the correct value to complete the sequence is $16$.

Explanation

To find the missing value, let's analyze the summation pattern between terms (Fibonacci Pattern):

The pattern formed is that each term is the sum of the two preceding terms ($U_n = U_{n-1} + U_{n-2}$).

Based on this pattern, the value of the 6th term is:

Let's verify this pattern for the subsequent terms:

Since the pattern is consistent through the end of the sequence, the correct value is $23$.

Explanation

Our goal is to find the number of votes obtained by O. Let's analyze each statement related to O:

Analysis of Statement 2:

"O received one-fourth of the total votes."

Mathematically, this can be written as:

This statement gives the relationship between O's votes and the Total Votes, but we do not yet know the value of Total Votes.

Analysis of Statement 4:

"There were $480$ votes cast."

This statement provides the exact value for Total Votes:

Conclusion:

By combining Statement 2 and Statement 4, we can calculate O's votes:

Statements 1 and 3 are not needed as they only provide information about the relationships between other candidates' votes (M, N, P) which do not directly affect the calculation of O's absolute vote count without first knowing the total votes.

Therefore, the information needed is 2 and 4.

Explanation

To determine M's vote count, we must build equations connecting all variables. Let's analyze the dependency logic:

Determining Total Votes

To calculate the absolute value (exact number) of any candidate's votes, we need Statement 4, which gives the total votes:

Calculating O and P's Votes

We know the relationship for the sum of all votes:

We need to know the values of O and P to isolate M and N:

• Statement 2 is needed to calculate O (using Total Votes from Statement 4).
• Statement 3 is needed to calculate P (using the value of O derived from Statement 2).

Without O and P, our equation still has too many unknown variables.

Solving for M

After knowing the values of Total, O, and P, the equation becomes:

We still have two variables (M and N) in one equation. To get a specific value for M, we need the relationship between M and N.

Statement 1 provides this relationship:

By substituting N into the remaining votes equation, we can solve for M.

Conclusion

We need Statement 4 (Total), Statement 2 (for O), Statement 3 (for P), and Statement 1 (for the M and N relation) all together to find the solution.

Therefore, the information needed is 1, 2, 3, and 4.

Explanation

We can analyze the text using a chain of syllogisms (cause-and-effect logic). Let's break down the premises found in the text:

Identifying Premises

Based on the text, we can construct the logical flow as follows:

• Premise 1 ($P \rightarrow Q$): Consuming high-fat food ($P$) causes excess calories ($Q$).
• Premise 2 ($Q \rightarrow R$): Excess calories ($Q$) cause weight gain ($R$).
• Premise 3 ($R \rightarrow S$): Weight gain ($R$) makes the body difficult to move actively ($S$).

Drawing a Conclusion

Using the rule of hypothetical syllogism (chain reasoning), we can connect the initial premises directly to the final conclusion. If we connect Premise 2 and Premise 3:

This means: "Excess calories (Q) result in the body being difficult to move actively (S)."

Analyzing Statements

Let's evaluate each statement based on the logical conclusion above:

• Increase energy during the day: Incorrect. The text explicitly states that high-fat foods cause lethargy, which is the opposite of increased energy.
• Good impact on body health: Incorrect. The text does not mention any positive impact; instead, the narrative focuses on negative effects like lethargy and difficulty moving.
• Lethargy is always caused by high-fat foods: Incorrect. The word "always" is a generalization unsupported by the text. The text only states "can cause," not that it is the sole cause.
• Consuming enough fatty foods: Incorrect. The premises focus on consuming high or excess fat, not enough or sufficient fat.

The statement that excess calories due to fat can result in the body being difficult to move actively is the most accurate because it aligns with the logical flow $Q \rightarrow S$ derived above.

It is important to distinguish between "some" (can cause) and "all" (always causes) when drawing logical conclusions.

Explanation

Let's dissect the information in the text to determine the truth of each statement.

Facts in the Text

Based on the reading, we derive two main cause-and-effect relationships:

1. Vitamin C in pineapples $\rightarrow$ Improves immune system $\rightarrow$ Prevents infection (like flu).
2. Bromelain Enzyme in pineapples $\rightarrow$ Consumed by ulcer sufferers $\rightarrow$ Triggers ulcer symptoms (nausea and bloating).

Statement Analysis

We are asked to find the statement that is DEFINITELY FALSE. Let's examine the claim regarding the cause of ulcer symptoms:

• The statement that "The Vitamin C content in pineapples can trigger ulcer symptoms like nausea and bloating" directly contradicts the text. The text specifically states that the substance triggering those symptoms is the bromelain enzyme, not Vitamin C.
• Other statements, such as the benefits of preventing infection or the adverse effects of bromelain for ulcer sufferers, are consistent with the provided information.

Therefore, blaming Vitamin C as the cause of ulcer symptoms is an erroneous conclusion and is definitely false based on the text.

In general reasoning questions, pay close attention to the subject (cause) of an effect. Swapping the cause (Vitamin C instead of Bromelain) makes the statement invalid.

Explanation

We can solve this problem using syllogistic logic. Let's first define the premises:

• $P$: Students manage their time well.
• $Q$: Students study very hard.
• $R$: Students achieve high exam scores.

Analyzing Premises

Based on the text, we derive the following implications:

1. "Students will achieve high exam scores if they study very hard" can be written as $Q \rightarrow R$.
2. "This condition (studying hard) occurs when students can manage their time well" can be written as $P \rightarrow Q$.

Drawing a Conclusion

By combining these two premises, we get a logical chain:

The initial conclusion is: "If students can manage their time well, then they will achieve high exam scores."

Logical Equivalence (Contrapositive)

In mathematical logic, an implication statement $P \rightarrow R$ is equivalent to its contrapositive, which is $\sim R \rightarrow \sim P$.

This translates to: "If students do NOT achieve high exam scores, then they can NOT manage their time well."

This statement matches the option stating that students who do not achieve high exam scores mean they cannot manage their time well.

Remember the principles of Modus Tollens and Contrapositive: If $A \rightarrow B$ is true, then $\sim B \rightarrow \sim A$ must also be true.

Explanation

To answer this question correctly, we need to dissect the cause-and-effect logical structure in the text. Let's define the premises:

• $P$: Rain intensity in Arabia increases extremely.
• $Q$: Floods occur.
• $R$: Green vegetation appears in the Arabian region.

Analyzing the Logical Flow

Based on the text, the sequence of events is:

1. Extreme rain ($P$) causes floods ($Q$).
2. Floods ($Q$) cause the appearance of green vegetation ($R$).

Mathematically, this can be written as a chain implication:

This means: "If rain intensity increases extremely (P), then green vegetation will appear (R)."

Testing the Question

The question asks what happens if rain intensity does NOT increase extremely ($\sim P$).

In formal logic, if we have the premise $P \rightarrow R$ and the condition $\sim P$ (negation of the antecedent), we CANNOT conclude $\sim R$ (negation of the consequent). This is known as the logical fallacy of Denying the Antecedent.

Why? Because the text only tells us what happens if there is extreme rain. The text does not state that extreme rain is the only cause of green vegetation. It is possible that other factors (like artificial irrigation) could cause vegetation to appear even without extreme rain.

Therefore, if $\sim P$ occurs, the status of $R$ (whether there is vegetation or not) becomes uncertain or unknown based on the available information.

Since we do not have information about what happens if the rain is not extreme, the answer is cannot be concluded.

Explanation

To answer this question, we need to map the cause-and-effect logical flow presented in the text. Let's define the premises:

• $P$: The Jakarta area and its surroundings are experiencing the rainy season.
• $Q$: Rivers cannot accommodate rainwater and floods occur.
• $R$: Residents are forced to evacuate to a safe place.

Logical Analysis

Based on the text, the relationship between premises can be depicted as a chain implication:

This means:

1. If it is the rainy season ($P$), then rivers overflow and flood ($Q$).
2. If it floods ($Q$), then residents evacuate ($R$).

Syllogism Conclusion

Using the principle of hypothetical syllogism, we can draw a direct conclusion from start to finish:

The question states that it is currently the rainy season ($P$ occurs).

Therefore, based on the logic above, the inevitable conclusion is residents are forced to evacuate to a safe place ($R$).

Residents will be forced to evacuate to a safe place.

Explanation

The psychologist's opinion states that millennial workers tend to have high organizational commitment. High organizational commitment is typically characterized by loyalty, good performance, and positive contribution to the company.

To weaken this opinion, we need to find a statement that presents contradictory evidence, specifically signs of low commitment or poor performance.

Statements suggesting that millennial workers have interesting ideas, high work ethic, or work for long periods actually support the psychologist's opinion, as these are traits of high commitment. Similarly, if few companies complain about their performance, it implies that most companies are satisfied, which also strengthens the argument.

In contrast, if many companies complain about the performance and contribution of millennial workers, this indicates dissatisfaction with their work results. Complaints regarding performance and contribution are clear indicators that their organizational commitment may not be as high as claimed. This fact directly contradicts the psychologist's opinion.

Therefore, the statement that weakens the psychologist's opinion is:

Many companies complain about the performance and contribution of millennial workers

Explanation

The doctor's opinion states that consuming vegetables and fruits rich in antioxidants (such as pineapples) can prevent cancer, premature aging, and chronic diseases due to their ability to counteract free radicals. Essentially, consuming fruits and vegetables has a positive impact on health and prevents diseases.

To weaken this argument, we need to find a statement that demonstrates a negative impact or the ineffectiveness of consuming fruits and vegetables in preventing these diseases.

Statements claiming that antioxidants counteract free radicals, pineapples prevent premature aging, or that a healthy diet involves fruits and vegetables, all support or align with the doctor's opinion.

In contrast, the statement that someone who consumes vegetables and fruits has the potential to develop chronic diseases directly contradicts the doctor's claim. The doctor argues that fruits and vegetables prevent chronic diseases, whereas this statement suggests they potentially cause chronic diseases. This undermines the basis of the doctor's recommendation to consume these foods for health.

Therefore, this statement weakens the doctor's opinion.

Someone who consumes vegetables and fruits has the potential to develop chronic diseases

Explanation

To determine the impact of the survey results on statements A and B, we need to analyze the core of each statement first.

Statement A links the habit of performing tasks routinely with student achievement. Meanwhile, Statement B links obtaining the highest exam scores with student achievement.

The survey results show the fact that current high-achieving students are dominated by those who get high exam scores. This data indicates a positive correlation and direct alignment with the claim in Statement B. If the majority of high-achieving students are those with high exam scores, then the argument that high exam scores lead to achievement becomes proven or supported by the field data.

In contrast, the survey results do not provide information regarding the routine of performing tasks, so they do not directly strengthen or weaken Statement A.

Therefore, the survey data clearly strengthens statement B.

Strengthens statement B

Explanation

To evaluate the quality of the conclusion, we must compare its content with the premises available in the text.

The proposed conclusion makes two claims about Armin:

1. Has a very melodious voice: Based on the logic "Melodious voice $\to$ Good at guitar", the fact that Armin is good at playing guitar does not automatically mean he has a melodious voice (he could be good at guitar but have an ordinary voice). So, this part is only possibly true.
2. Good at playing many musical instruments: The text only mentions the ability to play the guitar. There is absolutely no information regarding other musical instruments or the ability to play "many" instruments.

This second claim ("many musical instruments") introduces new information that is not discussed at all in the premises. Since the conclusion contains information that has no basis or connection to the provided text, the conclusion is considered irrelevant.

We cannot evaluate the truth or falsity of Armin's ability to play other instruments because that information is absent from the context (the question text).

Therefore, the statement that best describes the conclusion is that it is irrelevant to the information provided.

The conclusion is irrelevant to the information provided

Explanation

Based on the text, there are requirements for a building to be categorized as a temple, namely it must have a domed roof and be towering high. The text also mentions that some temples have a height exceeding one hundred meters.

Currently, it is known that Andi is inside a building that is one hundred meters high. This information only explains the height aspect of the building, which might fit the "towering high" criterion. However, to confirm that the building is a temple, it must also have a domed roof. Information regarding the shape of the roof of the building where Andi is located is not available in the text.

Without information on whether the building has a domed roof or not, we cannot assess the validity of the conclusion. The building could be a temple, or it could simply be a regular skyscraper. Therefore, the conclusion cannot be assessed because the information is insufficient.

Explanation

To determine the year with the largest percentage profit, we need to calculate the percentage profit for each year using the formula:

Here are the calculations for each year:

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Based on the calculations above, the largest percentage profit was obtained in Year 1, which is $200\%$.

Explanation

To determine the most outstanding student, we need to calculate the final score for each student based on the given weights. The final score is calculated using the formula:

Let's calculate the final score for each student:

Based on the calculations above, Student $\text{D}$ obtained the highest final score of $81$. Therefore, Student $\text{D}$ is the most outstanding student among the five.

Explanation

To determine the number of visitors on the sixth day, we need to analyze the pattern of visitor increases for tourist spot $\text{A}$ and zoo $\text{B}$ separately.

Visitor Pattern Analysis for Tourist Spot A

The visitor data for tourist spot $\text{A}$ over five days is: $41, 44, 49, 52, 57$. Let's observe the difference between terms:

The addition pattern repeats alternately: $+3, +5, +3, +5$. Thus, the next pattern is $+3$.

The number of visitors to tourist spot $\text{A}$ on the sixth day is:

Visitor Pattern Analysis for Zoo B

The visitor data for zoo $\text{B}$ over five days is: $110, 115, 125, 130, 140$. Let's observe the difference between terms:

The addition pattern repeats alternately: $+5, +10, +5, +10$. Thus, the next pattern is $+5$.

The number of visitors to zoo $\text{B}$ on the sixth day is:

Conclusion

Therefore, the number of visitors to tourist spot $\text{A}$ and zoo $\text{B}$ on the sixth day are $60$ and $145$ people, respectively.

Explanation

To determine the number of visitors on the eighth day, we will analyze the pattern of visitor increases for each library.

Visitor Pattern Analysis for Library A

The visitor data for library $\text{A}$ is: $1205, 1208, 1213, 1220, 1229, 1240, 1253$. Let's calculate the difference between terms:

The addition pattern consists of consecutive odd numbers: $+3, +5, +7, +9, +11, +13$. Thus, the next pattern is $+15$.

The number of visitors to library $\text{A}$ on the eighth day is:

Visitor Pattern Analysis for Library B

The visitor data for library $\text{B}$ is: $210, 212, 216, 222, 230, 240, 252$. Let's calculate the difference between terms:

The addition pattern consists of consecutive even numbers: $+2, +4, +6, +8, +10, +12$. Thus, the next pattern is $+14$.

The number of visitors to library $\text{B}$ on the eighth day is:

Conclusion

Therefore, the number of visitors to library $\text{A}$ and library $\text{B}$ on the eighth day are $1268$ and $266$ people, respectively.