#16 - Global Reference, Main Point

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

The correct answer choice is (C).

Answer choice (A):

Answer choice (B):

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E):


This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[powerscoreQasker]

Hi,

I struggled a lot with this question, but I think I've finally cracked it. For me, A, D, and E were easy to eliminate, but I initially chose B, and then C on blind review. Here are my thoughts, in case anyone else is having a tough time with this one.

A: I rejected this one mainly because the passage seems to be cautiously optimistic about the future of Belcher and Hu's research, rather than doubtful.

D: this one felt difficult to understand, but what D claims the passage "suggests" is 1) proven, not merely suggested, and 2) doesn't capture the full significance of the discovery. To elaborate on the second point, it's not just that semiconductor materials might bind to biological compounds - it's that that might help make computer chips smaller.

E: again, this fails to specifically mention the implications for computer chips. In addition, there's no indication in the passage that the research on abalone was "pure scientific research," rather than something that was supposed to produce an application. Regardless, pure scientific research yielding applications is not what the passage was about.

As far as B goes, I puzzled over this one for a long time. Eventually, I found that the best reason to reject B is that its last clause uses the verb "focus," not "focuses," suggesting that there are multiple projects "which focus on using peptides to bind..." As far as the passage suggests, there's only one project using peptides to do transistor miniaturization, and that's Belcher and Hu's project. So B is factually wrong.

Beyond this, though, it's hard to tell. Some other thoughts about B:

• B has the wrong focus - it's framed as about what computer chip tech depends on; the passage, rather, seems to be focused primarily on Belcher and Hu's research, which may find an application in transistors. This difference seems subtle, but maybe somebody could tell me whether I'm onto something here. The passage does say say that miniaturization "will hit a wall" by about 2010, so it's not a big leap to say that future progress will depend on serious innovation like the projects mentioned at the end of paragraph 1. This was the only flaw I noticed initially, so I failed to eliminate B.

• B describes Belcher and Hu's research as being about "[binding] different crystals together," whereas C describes it as "on the abilities of some peptides to bind to semiconductor materials." I think there's a slight difference between binding different crystals together and peptides binding to semiconductor materials; the latter is more specific and more accurate to the passage's focus. About specificity: semiconductors are a type of crystal, but semiconductor materials and crystals are not synonymous; diamonds, for example, are non-conductive crystals. And about accuracy: binding different semiconductor materials together is only discussed in the penultimate sentence of the final paragraph, whereas binding peptides to semiconductors is the entire 2nd paragraph and part of the 3rd.

I don't think these last two points are good enough to eliminate B on their own, but I'd love to hear an expert's thoughts on what makes B wrong.

C: I was hesitant about this one initially, because "might eventually be applied" seemed too hesitant to capture the passage's main point. However, the passage doesn't indicate that Belcher and Hu have actually made any transistors yet, so C is accurate. It also matches my prephrase pretty well.

[Ryan Twomey]

Hey powerscoreQasker,

I agree with your reasoning for eliminating answer choice A. The word unlikely was enough for us to eliminate that answer choice.

I would simplify your reasoning for answer choice D. I would say that answer choice D does not discuss the main point of the passage, which is will the research help us with computer chip issues. I do think this needed to be related back to computer chips.

I would apply the same logic to answer choice E. D and E simply do not discuss the topic of the passage. A has an incorrect element. These 3 are easy to eliminate as you said.

With answer choice B, we only discussed one research project, so that was an issue I found with answer choice B. Also, I agree with your reasoning that "binding different crystals together" does not encapsulate the passage as well as the language in C. This is a tough call between B and C but those were the two reasons I found.

I hope this helps.

Best,
Ryan

[powerscoreQasker]

Thanks for adding your thoughts, Ryan. I think your phrasing of the problems with D and E is pretty concise. As far as B goes, the biggest problem for me was frustratingly simple - I just missed a key letter in the word - the "s."

[esb1244@gmail.com]

I also initially chose B initially, but specifically because it did address multiple research projects. Although Belcher and Hu are the focus of the article, the author does reference other research projects in the first paragraph:

" Much current research is aimed at harnessing DNA to this end, but materials chemist Angela Belcher and physicist Evelyn Hu are investigating a different molecular pattern maker: peptides, amino acid chains that are shorter than proteins."

So this is one project of many that is looking at alternative paths forward with regard to computer chip development.

That being said, on further consideration I do see that C more accurately captures the focus of the article.

I also eliminated A also because I felt it did not accurately capture the author's view about the potential for the project's success.

I eliminated D because it did not reference computer chips and instead discussed Belcher and Hu's research in the context of biological compounds, which is never mentioned in the article and so could not be the main point.

I eliminated E because of the focus on Belcher's work as pure scientific research. While this does seem to capture one inference you could take away from the article, it did not capture the main point.

[Beatrice Brown]

Hi ESB! This is definitely a bit of a tricky question.

Answer choice (B) is not necessarily supported by that line in the passage. Although it is true that, in the first paragraph, the passage addresses multiple projects, the projects referenced are more broad than what answer choice (B) says: the passage says that there are multiple research projects directed at using DNA to overcome issues in advances in computer chip development, but the answer choice says that these research projects are focused on using peptides. The only research mentioned in the passage that focuses on this use of peptides is Belcher and Hu's research. In the sentence you refer to, the author also clarifies that Belcher and Hu are looking at a different mechanism than other researchers.

You're definitely correct that there are multiple projects looking at alternative paths, but the passage only mentions one project that focuses on peptides. Since answer choice (B) discusses multiple research projects focused on peptides and the passage only supports that there are multiple research projects trying to overcome barriers to advances in computer chips more generally, this answer choice is not supported by the passage.

Additionally, since this is a Main Point question, we want to make sure that the answer choice does not just say something that factually occurred in the passage, but that the answer choice also captures the main idea that the author is trying to convey. Since the author focuses on Belcher and Hu's research and answer choice (B) focuses on multiple projects (mentioning Belcher and Hu's research as an aside), answer choice (B) does not necessarily capture the main point.

Great job with your reasoning for why answer choice (A) is wrong! The only thing that I might add is that the answer choice focuses on the obstacles rather than the potential for a breakthrough, whereas the passage's primary focus is how their research can result in a breakthrough.

With regards to your reasoning for answer choice (D), you're pretty much spot on about why it's incorrect, so awesome job there The passage focuses on its applications for computer chip development, not in the context of biological compounds.

Finally, your reasoning for why answer choice (E) is incorrect is also great! As you said, the main point isn't about the possibility for pure scientific research to have unexpected practical ramifications. Instead, the main point is specifically about computer chip development.

Overall, great job with your reasoning on this question, and I hope my explanation of why answer choice (B) is wrong helps clear things up!

[ashpine17]

I'm still confused about B. People keep saying the emphasis is wrong but I don't see why. Doesn't B bring together the problem: making smaller computer chips and the possible solution: the research detailed in the last two paragraphs? I just don't find the reason that was stated above: that this answer choice mentions multiple research projects, as compelling.

[ashpine17]

My point is that I see people on multiple forums just nitpicking at details in B and I just don’t think that is why this answer choice is problematic. I don’t know why this choice is wrong but this is how I feel. I’ve also received confirmation from another company that this choice is factually correct but the emphasis is wrong. Whatever that means.

[ashpine17]

Could someone please confirm my suspicions about B and C? I think both are supported by the stimulus but the difference in correctness lies upon the emphasis in the choices.

[Robert Carroll]

ashpine,

In your first post on this, you claimed that it was good that answer choice (B) tied together smaller chips and the solution. But answer choice (B) doesn't talk about size at all. It talks about "speed and efficiency". How DO you make a chip faster and more efficient? One way is to decrease its size. That's the topic of the passage. Other ways are not discussed. So answer choice (B) is acting as if the passage is about speed and efficiency gains in general, when that's way too broad - it's about decreasing size, with a specific example of how that might be accomplished in the near future.

Robert Carroll