PrepTest 130

[lcid:3617] Prep Test 130 LSAT — Reading Comp — S2 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 8-13 This passage was adapted from articles published in the 1990s.  .        The success that Nigerian–born computer scientist Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Science


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Author on Emeagwali (looked to nature for a breakthrough in parallel computers) and problem Emeagwali solved (predicted oil flow, a difficult computation problem)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view:
      • Emeagwali drew inspiration from nature for designs, which helped him make a breakthrough with parallel computer systems (first and second sentences)
    • Comparison, according to the author:
      • Single computers make one calculation at a time (sequential), while parallel computers can process calculations simultaneously (third sentence)
      • Before Emeagwali, supercomputers working sequentially were used for oil field calculations, so they were too slow and inefficient (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "success" (first sentence); "fueled by his willingness to reach beyond established paradigms and draw inspiration for his designs from nature" (first sentence); "achieved breakthroughs" (second sentence); "pioneered" (fourth sentence); "solve what is considered one of the most computationally difficult problems" (fourth sentence); "too slow and inefficient to accurately predict such extremely complex movements" (last sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • In-depth description of Emeagwali’s solution (modeled network after tree branches to maximize messages sent)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Examples of variables that must be calculated when simulating oil flow:
      • Temperature, direction, viscosity, pressure, geological properties (second sentence)
    • Comparison, according to Emeagwali/the author:
      • The mathematical model that underlies tree branches can be used to set up a massively parallel computer network, allowing the computers to maximize the number of messages sent and preventing the computers from interfering with each other (fourth and last sentences)
    • Author's attitude: "massively" (third sentence); "great difficulties" (fourth sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Another Emeagwali breakthrough (parallel computers, based on honeycombs' geometery, that can predict weather) and prediction (more use of nature)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Comparison, according to Emeagwali/the author:
      • Emeagwali's parallel computer network is similar to the geometry of bees' honeycombs, which use efficient 3D spacing (second sentence)
    • Cause-and-effect relationship, according to Emeagwali:
      • Computer scientists will increasingly turn to nature, which will cause us to better understand natural systems and improve human technology (third and last sentences)
    • Author's attitude: "another breakthrough" (first sentence); "extremely efficient" (second sentence)

Main Point: By designing parallel computer systems modeled after elements of nature, Emeagwali has been able to solve computational problems that couldn’t be addressed by traditional supercomputers running sequentially.

Meta-Structure?

Innovative [Subject]: This passage best fits the "Innovative [Subject]" Meta-Structure.* In these passages, the author describes why the subject was unique, pioneering, or disruptive. So, "[Subject]" is a placeholder for whatever the subject of the passage happens to be. The subject of this passage is the computer scientist Philip Emeagwali, so we can think of this as an Innovative Computer Scientist passage.

In an Innovative [Subject] passage, the main point is generally the author's opinion on the innovative subject. To identify this main point, we look for the sentence or two in which the author summarizes their position on the subject. The author provides their summary in the first sentence of the passage. We used this sentence as the basis of our anticipated main point. But to make sure we had all our bases covered, we added some details from the passage.

*You could also think of this as a Problem/Solution passage since Emeagwali's innovative designs solved problems that couldn't be solved with sequential computer networks. Likewise, we could think of this as an Old Approach/New Approach passage, with those sequential computers representing the old way of doing things and Emeagwali's innovative parallel networks representing the new way. We could even call this a Generalization/Example passage, as the passage gives us two examples of breakthroughs that illustrate Emeagwali's innovative mind and willingness to turn to nature for solutions.

Comparison: Given the passage's main point, it's unsurprising that the author compares Emeagwali's parallel computer networks to nature several times. This makes the comparison the most prominent minor Meta-Structure in this passage. To save us some time on the inevitable questions about these comparisons, we can try to commit these two comparisons to memory:

  • Network that predicted underground oil flow was based on tree branch formations
  • Network that can predict weather patterns was based on the geometry of bees' honeycomb geometry

Last Thoughts?

We can classify this passage's Meta-Structure in several ways, but they all largely align and overlap. In viewing the passage through these lenses, though, we are better able to anticipate answers. For example, we know from them that answers about innovation, new ideas, improving approaches, and solving problems are more likely to be correct than answers that don’t use that language. That’s a pretty good general idea to have going into any set of answer choices!

Question prompt

According to the passage, Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: C

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Science

Strategy Overview

Remind ourselves of the main point of the passage, then head to the answers, focusing on those that line up with the main point and then using our notes/the passage to find the correct answer

Answer Anticipation

This question stem provides no indication as to the topic of the correct answer or where it'll show up in the passage. As such, we'll need to rely on our big-picture understanding of the passage to answer this question. We should start by reminding ourselves of the main point (either by reviewing what we said after reading the passage or by rereading our answer to the main point question). From there, we can head to the answer choices. If something in an answer choice doesn't seem familiar and isn't reflected in our notes on each paragraph, we shouldn't check the passage to see if it was mentioned. Instead, we'll table it and move on to the next answer choice. If something seems inconsistent with the main point, we can eliminate it. If something seems familiar, consistent with the main point, or reflected in our notes, we'll use our notes/highlights/underlines to find the part of the passage that proves the answer choice must be true. If we can find that confirmation, we'll select that answer choice and move on.

Answer choices

  1. A
    Emeagwali's breakthroughs in computer Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Is this consistent with the main point or reflected in our notes?

    No. Neither the main point nor our notes tell us whether sequential computers are becoming obsolete in the wake of Emeagwali's breakthroughs. In fact, they don't tell us anything about the aftermath of those breakthroughs at all. For this reason, we should resist any temptation to check the passage, table or eliminate (A), and move on to the next answer choice.

    But if we had to review the passage, we wouldn't find any support (A). The passage does argue that sequential computers can't solve certain problems that involve "extremely complex movements" (P1, S5), but there's no indication that they're not still relevant for certain problems that do involve sequential calculations. So, this answer is too bold in calling these old systems "obsolete."

  2. B
    Emeagwali's first breakthrough in Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Is this consistent with the main point or reflected in our notes?

    No. Neither the main point nor our notes tell us whether oil companies asked Emeagwali to solve the problem. For that matter, our notes don't say whether Emeagwali had any breakthroughs prior to his work with oil fields. For this reason, we should resist any temptation to check the passage, table or eliminate (B), and move on to the next answer choice.

    But if we had to review the passage, we wouldn't find any support (B). The passage doesn't say whether the oil field problem was where Emeagwali had his first breakthrough. In fact, it suggests he may have had breakthroughs before the oil field system, as he had breakthroughs " in the 1980s" but didn't develop the oil field system until 1989 (P1, S2, S4). That leaves room for his first breakthrough to have been earlier in the decade. Moreover, there's no indication that he built this system at the behest of the oil companies — it might have been something he developed as a researcher since it was viewed as "one of the most computationally difficult problems" (P1, S4) and he wanted a challenge!

  3. C
    Emeagwali was the first Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem

    (C) Is this consistent with the main point or reflected in our notes?

    This answer absolutely lines up with the main point and Meta-Structure, which indicate that Emeagwali is an innovator in parallel computing. However, it uses extremely bold and hard-to-support language ("the first"), which may scare off some experienced test-takers and lead them to table this answer choice. Still, once we can see that the remaining answer choices all use equally bold language, we can circle back to (C) and see if the passage supports this claim.

    Once we review, the passage, we'll see that this claim is directly backed up by the text. The first paragraph says Emeagwali "pioneered" the use of parallel computer systems to predict the flow of oil in oil field, and "[u]ntil" he used these parallel systems, sequential systems were used (P1, S4-S5). Pioneers are the first at something, and if they used sequential computers before he came around, then he must have been the first to use parallel computers for this purpose. These two statements independently support this answer. We can, therefore, select (C) and advance to the following question.

  4. D
    Emeagwali was the first Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Is this consistent with the main point or reflected in our notes?

    Not really. Although we know Emeagwali was an innovator, that doesn't mean he was the first computer scientist to use nature as a model for human technology. That last part makes this answer a little too broad, as the passage says that he applied designs from nature in his computer designs. That leaves open the possibility that other computer scientists appealed to nature in designing other types of technology. Moreover, this answer choice uses extremely bold and hard-to-support language ("the first") — language that's unlikely to appear in the correct answer of a Must Be True question. For this reason, we should resist any temptation to check the passage, table or eliminate (D), and move on to the next answer choice.

    Besides, we wouldn't find support for (D) even if we re-read the entire passage. Although the passage states that Emeagwali was willing to "reach beyond established paradigms" and draw inspiration from nature (P1, S1), that doesn't mean he was the first computer scientist to use nature as a model for some form of technology. In fact, established paradigms are certainly things that most people use, but that also leaves open some possibility that there were a few before Emeagwali who also broke from these paradigms.

  5. E
    Emeagwali was the first Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Is this consistent with the main point or reflected in our notes?

    Not really. We know Emeagwali was an innovator in parallel computer processing, but that doesn't mean he was the first person to use parallel computers to solve real-world problems. Moreover, this answer choice uses extremely bold and hard-to-support language ("the first") — language that's unlikely to appear in the correct answer to a Must Be True question. For this reason, we should resist any temptation to check the passage, table or eliminate (E), and move on to the next answer choice.

    Besides, we wouldn't find support for (E) even if we re-read the entire passage. The passage states that Emeagwali made breakthroughs in the design of parallel computer systems in the ‘80s (P1, S2). While making a breakthrough implies that one made an advancement in a particular area, it doesn't necessarily mean that you created that area. It's possible that others had applied parallel processing to real-world problems, but they couldn't solve any problem or could only solve limited problems. Emeagwali's breakthroughs could have dramatically expanded on earlier work in the area!

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion