Mock Test 5 for CAT: 68 Questions with Solutions & Analysis

Common Description: Instructions [5 - 8]
The passage below is accompanied by a set of questions. Choose the best answer to each question.
When we teach engineering problems now, we ask students to come to a single “best” solution defined by technical ideals like low cost, speed to build, and ability to scale. This way of teaching primes students to believe that their decision-making is purely objective, as it is grounded in math and science. This is known as technical-social dualism, the idea that the technical and social dimensions of engineering problems are readily separable and remain distinct throughout the problem-definition and solution process.
Nontechnical parameters such as access to a technology, cultural relevancy or potential harms are deemed political and invalid in this way of learning. But those technical ideals are at their core social and political choices determined by a dominant culture focused on economic growth for the most privileged segments of society. By choosing to downplay public welfare as a critical parameter for engineering design, we risk creating a culture of disengagement from societal concerns amongst engineers that is antithetical to the ethical code of engineering.
In my field of medical devices, ignoring social dimensions has real consequences. . . . Most FDA-approved drugs are incorrectly dosed for people assigned female at birth, leading to unexpected adverse reactions. This is because they have been inadequately represented in clinical trials.
Beyond physical failings, subjective beliefs treated as facts by those in decision-making roles can encode social inequities. For example, spirometers, routinely used devices that measure lung capacity, still have correction factors that automatically assume smaller lung capacity in Black and Asian individuals. These racially based adjustments are derived from research done by eugenicists who thought these racial differences were biologically determined and who considered nonwhite people as inferior. These machines ignore the influence of social and environmental factors on lung capacity.
Many technologies for systemically marginalized people have not been built because they were not deemed important such as better early diagnostics and treatment for diseases like endometriosis, a disease that afflicts 10 percent of people with uteruses. And we hardly question whether devices are built sustainably, which has led to a crisis of medical waste and health care accounting for 10 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.
Social justice must be made core to the way engineers are trained. Some universities are working on this. . . . Engineers taught this way will be prepared to think critically about what problems we choose to solve, how we do so responsibly and how we build teams that challenge our ways of thinking.
Individual engineering professors are also working to embed societal needs in their pedagogy. Darshan Karwat at the University of Arizona developed activist engineering to challenge engineers to acknowledge their full moral and social responsibility through practical self-reflection. Khalid Kadir at the University of California, Berkeley, created the popular course Engineering, Environment, and Society that teaches engineers how to engage in place-based knowledge, an understanding of the people, context and history, to design better technical approaches in collaboration with communities. When we design and build with equity and justice in mind, we craft better solutions that respond to the complexities of entrenched systemic problems. All of the following are examples of the negative outcomes of focusing on technical ideals in the medical sphere EXCEPT the:

Common Description: Instructions [13 - 16]
The passage below is accompanied by a set of questions. Choose the best answer to each question.
Keeping time accurately comes with a price. The maximum accuracy of a clock is directly related to how much disorder, or entropy, it creates every time it ticks. Natalia Ares at the University of Oxford and her colleagues made this discovery using a tiny clock with an accuracy that can be controlled. The clock consists of a 50-nanometre-thick membrane of silicon nitride, vibrated by an electric current. Each time the membrane moved up and down once and then returned to its original position, the researchers counted a tick, and the regularity of the spacing between the ticks represented the accuracy of the clock. The researchers found that as they increased the clock’s accuracy, the heat produced in the system grew, increasing the entropy of its surroundings by jostling nearby particles . . . “If a clock is more accurate, you are paying for it somehow,” says Ares. In this case, you pay for it by pouring more ordered energy into the clock, which is then converted into entropy. “By measuring time, we are increasing the entropy of the universe,” says Ares. The more entropy there is in the universe, the closer it may be to its eventual demise. “Maybe we should stop measuring time,” says Ares. The scale of the additional entropy is so small, though, that there is no need to worry about its effects, she says.
The increase in entropy in timekeeping may be related to the “arrow of time”, says Marcus Huber at the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, who was part of the research team. It has been suggested that the reason that time only flows forward, not in reverse, is that the total amount of entropy in the universe is constantly increasing, creating disorder that cannot be put in order again.
The relationship that the researchers found is a limit on the accuracy of a clock, so it doesn’t mean that a clock that creates the most possible entropy would be maximally accurate - hence a large, inefficient grandfather clock isn’t more precise than an atomic clock. “It’s a bit like fuel use in a car. Just because I’m using more fuel doesn’t mean that I’m going faster or further,” says Huber.
When the researchers compared their results with theoretical models developed for clocks that rely on quantum effects, they were surprised to find that the relationship between accuracy and entropy seemed to be the same for both. . . . We can’t be sure yet that these results are actually universal, though, because there are many types of clocks for which the relationship between accuracy and entropy haven’t been tested. “It’s still unclear how this principle plays out in real devices such as atomic clocks, which push the ultimate quantum limits of accuracy,” says Mark Mitchison at Trinity College Dublin in Ireland. Understanding this relationship could be helpful for designing clocks in the future, particularly those used in quantum computers and other devices where both accuracy and temperature are crucial, says Ares. This finding could also help us understand more generally how the quantum world and the classical world are similar and different in terms of thermodynamics and the passage of time. None of the following statements can be inferred from the passage EXCEPT that:

Common Description: Seven children, Aarav, Bina, Chirag, Diya, Eshan, Farhan, and Gaurav, are sitting in a circle facing inside (not necessarily in the same order) and playing a game of 'Passing the Buck'.
The game is played over 10 rounds. In each round, the child holding the Buck must pass it directly to a child sitting in one of the following positions:
• Immediately to the left;
• Immediate to the right;
• Second to the left; or
• Second to the right.
The game starts with Bina passing the Buck and ends with Chirag receiving the Buck. The table below provides some information about the pass types and the child receiving the Buck. Some information is missing and labelled as '?'.

Round	Pass Type	Received by
1	Immediately to the left	Aarav
2	Second to the right	?
3	Immediately to the right	Diya
4	?	?
5	?	Aarav
6	Second to the left	?
7	Immediately to the left	Gaurav
8	Immediately to the left	?
9	?	Farhan
10	?	Chirag

For which of the following pass types can the total number of occurrences be uniquely determined?

Common Description: Instructions [35 - 39]
Five restaurants, coded R1, R2, R3, R4 and R5 gave integer ratings to five gig workers - Ullas, Vasu, Waman, Xavier and Yusuf, on a scale of 1 to 5.
The means of the ratings given by R1, R2, R3, R4 and R5 were 3.4, 2.2, 3.8, 2.8 and 3.4 respectively. The summary statistics of these ratings for the five workers is given below.

	Ullas	Vasu	Waman	Xavier	Yusuf
Mean rating	2.2	3.8	3.4	3.6	2.6
Median rating	2	4	4	4	3
Modal rating	2	4	5	5	1 and 4
Range of rating*	3	3	4	4	3

* Range of ratings is defined as the difference between the maximum and minimum ratings awarded to a worker.
The following is partial information about ratings of 1 and 5 awarded by the restaurants to the workers.
(a) R1 awarded a rating of 5 to Waman, as did R2 to Xavier, R3 to Waman and Xavier, and R5 to Vasu.
(b) R1 awarded a rating of 1 to Ullas, as did R2 to Waman and Yusuf, and R3 to Yusuf. What rating did R1 give to Xavier?

Common Description: Instructions [38 - 41]
The two plots below give the following information about six firms A, B, C, D, E, and F for 2019 and 2023.
PAT: The firm’s profits after taxes in Rs. crores,
ES: The firm’s employee strength, that is the number of employees in the firm, and
PRD: The percentage of the firm’s PAT that they spend on Research and Development (R&D).
In the plots, the horizontal and vertical coordinates of point representing each firm gives their ES and PAT values respectively. The PRD values of each firm are proportional to the areas around the points representing each firm. The areas are comparable between the two plots, i.e., equal areas in the two plots represent the same PRD values for the two years.
The ratio of the amount of money spent by Firm C on R&D in 2019 to that in 2023 is closest to

Common Description: Instructions [38 - 42 ]
Two students, Amiya and Ramya are the only candidates in an election for the position of class representative. Students will vote based on the intensity level of Amiya’s and Ramya’s campaigns and the type of campaigns they run. Each campaign is said to have a level of 1 if it is a staid campaign and a level of 2 if it is a vigorous campaign. Campaigns can be of two types, they can either focus on issues, or on attacking the other candidate.
If Amiya and Ramya both run campaigns focusing on issues, then
• The percentage of students voting in the election will be 20 times the sum of the levels of campaigning of the two students. For example, if Amiya and Ramya both run vigorous campaigns, then 20 × (2+2)%, that is, 80% of the students will vote in the election.
• Among voting students, the percentage of votes for each candidate will be proportional to the levels of their campaigns. For example, if Amiya runs a staid (i.e., level 1) campaign while Ramya runs a vigorous (i.e., level 2) campaign, then Amiya will receive 1/3 of the votes cast, and Ramya will receive the other 2/3.
The above-mentioned percentages change as follows if at least one of them runs a campaign attacking their opponent.
• If Amiya runs a campaign attacking Ramya and Ramya runs a campaign focusing on issues, then 10% of the students who would have otherwise voted for Amiya will vote for Ramya, and another 10% who would have otherwise voted for Amiya, will not vote at all.
• If Ramya runs a campaign attacking Amiya and Amiya runs a campaign focusing on issues, then 20% of the students who would have otherwise voted for Ramya will vote for Amiya, and another 5% who would have otherwise voted for Ramya, will not vote at all.
• If both run campaigns attacking each other, then 10% of the students who would have otherwise voted for them had they run campaigns focusing on issues, will not vote at all. If Amiya runs a campaign focusing on issues, then what is the maximum percentage of votes that she can get?

Common Description: Instructions [39 - 44]
Three reviewers Amal, Bimal, and Komal are tasked with selecting questions from a pool of 13 questions (Q01 to Q13). Questions can be created by external “subject matter experts” (SMEs) or by one of the three reviewers. Each of the reviewers either approves or disapproves a question that is shown to them. Their decisions lead to eventual acceptance or rejection of the question in the manner described below.
If a question is created by an SME, it is reviewed first by Amal, and then by Bimal. If both of them approve the question, then the question is accepted and is not reviewed by Komal. If both disapprove the question, it is rejected and is not reviewed by Komal. If one of them approves the question and the other disapproves it, then the question is reviewed by Komal. Then the question is accepted only if she approves it.
A question created by one of the reviewers is decided upon by the other two. If a question is created by Amal, then it is first reviewed by Bimal. If Bimal approves the question, then it is accepted. Otherwise, it is reviewed by Komal. The question is then accepted only if Komal approves it. A similar process is followed for questions created by Bimal, whose questions are first reviewed by Komal, and then by Amal only if Komal disapproves it. Questions created by Komal are first reviewed by Amal, and then, if required, by Bimal.
The following facts are known about the review process after its completion.
1. Q02, Q06, Q09, Q11, and Q12 were rejected and the other questions were accepted.
2. Amal reviewed only Q02, Q03, Q04, Q06, Q08, Q10, Q11, and Q13.
3. Bimal reviewed only Q02, Q04, Q06 through Q09, Q12, and Q13.
4. Komal reviewed only Q01 through Q05, Q07, Q08, Q09, Q11, and Q12. The approval ratio of a reviewer is the ratio of the number of questions (s)he approved to the number of questions (s)he reviewed. Which option best describes Amal’s approval ratio?