prismlearning.academy Logo
NEUR
N

Studies by materials scientists have established that increasing mineral content in archaeological sites correlates with decreased precision in radioc...

GMAT Information and Ideas : (Ideas) Questions

Source: Prism
Information and Ideas
Command of Evidence
HARD
...
...
Notes
Post a Query

Studies by materials scientists have established that increasing mineral content in archaeological sites correlates with decreased precision in radiocarbon dating of artifacts. A research team has therefore proposed that there exists a specific threshold—sites with mineral content above 15%—beyond which radiocarbon dating becomes unreliable for establishing accurate chronologies.

Which finding, if true, would most directly support this research team's proposal?

A

An analysis of ancient pottery fragments revealed that specimens from sites with \(12\%\) mineral content showed reliable age estimates in most samples tested.

B

An analysis of ancient pottery fragments revealed that specimens from sites with mineral content above \(15\%\) consistently produced unreliable chronological data, while those from sites with \(14\%\) mineral content or less yielded accurate results.

C

An analysis of ancient pottery fragments revealed that certain specimens from sites with \(18\%\) mineral content showed reliable age estimates despite the high mineral levels.

D

An analysis of ancient pottery fragments revealed that specimens from sites with various mineral content levels all produced similarly unreliable chronological results.

Solution

Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage

Part A: Create Passage Analysis Table

Text from PassageAnalysis
Studies by materials scientists have established that increasing mineral content in archaeological sites correlates with decreased precision in radiocarbon dating of artifacts.
  • What it says: Studies show: mineral content increases = dating precision decreases.
  • What it does: Introduces established scientific finding about mineral content affecting dating accuracy.
  • What it is: Background evidence/context
A research team has therefore proposed that there exists a specific threshold—sites with mineral content above \(15\%\)—beyond which radiocarbon dating becomes unreliable for establishing accurate chronologies.
  • What it says: Team proposes: \(\gt 15\%\) mineral = unreliable dating.
  • What it does: Presents specific proposal based on the established correlation.
  • What it is: Main claim/hypothesis

Part B: Provide Passage Architecture & Core Elements

Main Point: A research team proposes that archaeological sites with mineral content above \(15\%\) make radiocarbon dating unreliable.

Argument Flow: The passage moves from general scientific knowledge (mineral content affects dating precision) to a specific proposal (\(15\%\) threshold for reliability).


Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely

This is a fill-in-the-blank question asking us to choose the best logical connector. The answer must create the right relationship between what comes before and after the blank.


Step 3: Prethink the Answer

  • The research team's proposal has two parts: sites above \(15\%\) mineral content are unreliable, and (by implication) sites at or below \(15\%\) are reliable
  • So the right answer should show that sites above \(15\%\) mineral content produce unreliable dating results and that sites at or below \(15\%\) produce reliable results
Answer Choices Explained
A

An analysis of ancient pottery fragments revealed that specimens from sites with \(12\%\) mineral content showed reliable age estimates in most samples tested.

✗ Incorrect

  • Shows that 12% mineral content (below the threshold) produces reliable results
  • While this supports one side of the proposal, it doesn't test the crucial 15% threshold or show what happens above it
B

An analysis of ancient pottery fragments revealed that specimens from sites with mineral content above \(15\%\) consistently produced unreliable chronological data, while those from sites with \(14\%\) mineral content or less yielded accurate results.

✓ Correct

  • Shows sites above 15% consistently produce unreliable results while sites at 14% or below produce accurate results
  • This directly tests and confirms the exact 15% threshold proposed by the research team
C

An analysis of ancient pottery fragments revealed that certain specimens from sites with \(18\%\) mineral content showed reliable age estimates despite the high mineral levels.

✗ Incorrect

  • Shows that some sites with 18% mineral content (well above the threshold) still produce reliable dating
  • This directly contradicts the research team's proposal
D

An analysis of ancient pottery fragments revealed that specimens from sites with various mineral content levels all produced similarly unreliable chronological results.

✗ Incorrect

  • Shows all sites produce unreliable results regardless of mineral content
  • This contradicts the proposal by suggesting mineral content doesn't matter for reliability
Rate this Solution
Tell us what you think about this solution
...
...
Forum Discussions
Start a new discussion
Post
Load More
Similar Questions
Finding similar questions...
Previous Attempts
Loading attempts...
Similar Questions
Finding similar questions...
Parallel Question Generator
Create AI-generated questions with similar patterns to master this question type.