A bill before Parliament would require all of government to use only open-source software, i.e., software that is non proprietary,...

GMAT Multi Source Reasoning : (MSR) Questions

Source: Mock

Multi Source Reasoning

MSR - CR

HARD

...

Notes

Post a Query

Software Company

Government Response

A bill before Parliament would require all of government to use only open-source software, i.e., software that is non proprietary, based on code the user is allowed to redistribute and alter in any way. The bill appears to assume that open-source software is free. However, research has shown that the purchase cost of open source software is about 8% of the total cost associated with the use of the software, and that the cost of utilization-the sum of all non-purchase costs including installation, maintenance, administration, and downtime-is much higher than it is in the case of proprietary software.

The bill would require government to undergo an intensive program of software migration, at considerable immediate cost and risk. And because multiple versions of open-source software exist, the bill's measures are likely to increase compatibility problems between the information-technology systems of government agencies, as well as between government systems and private-sector systems.

Ques. 1/3

For each of the following statements, select Undermines if it would, if true, undermine the arguments made in one or the other of the two passages. Otherwise, select Does not undermine.

Undermines

Does not undermine

Migration from proprietary software to open-source software would be significantly more expensive for the government than would migration from proprietary software to other proprietary software.

Undermines

Does not undermine

The measures included in the bill will, if complied with, ensure compatibility among software systems used by all the various relevant stakeholders.

Undermines

Does not undermine

As a software package is used for a longer period of time, it becomes less expensive to migrate from that package to another.

Solution

OWNING THE DATASET

Understanding Source A: Text - Software Company Statement

Information from Dataset	Analysis
""A bill before Parliament would require all of government to use only open-source software, i.e., software that is non proprietary, based on code the user is allowed to redistribute and alter in any way.""	Open-source software is defined as non-proprietary software where users can redistribute and modify the code The bill would mandate that ALL government agencies must use ONLY open-source software Inference: This appears to be a significant policy change affecting all government IT systems
""The bill appears to assume that open-source software is free. However, research has shown that the purchase cost of open source software is about 8% of the total cost associated with the use of the software""	The software company suggests the bill is based on a misconception about costs Purchase price is only 8% of total software costs Inference: The bill's authors may be focusing on purchase price alone, which is misleading
""the cost of utilization—the sum of all non-purchase costs including installation, maintenance, administration, and downtime—is much higher than it is in the case of proprietary software""	Utilization costs (installation, maintenance, administration, downtime) make up 92% of total costs These operational costs are higher for open-source than proprietary software Inference: Open-source software has higher operational costs than proprietary software
""The bill would require government to undergo an intensive program of software migration, at considerable immediate cost and risk""	The transition would be ""intensive"" - not gradual or phased There are significant immediate financial costs There are also operational risks involved Inference: The transition period appears to be a major concern
""because multiple versions of open-source software exist, the bill's measures are likely to increase compatibility problems between the information-technology systems of government agencies, as well as between government systems and private-sector systems""	Open-source software comes in multiple versions (unlike standardized proprietary software) This could create compatibility issues between different government agencies It could also create problems when government systems need to interact with private sector systems Inference: Standardization and compatibility appear to be significant concerns

Summary:

A software company argues against a parliamentary bill requiring exclusive government use of open-source software
Cites higher total costs (especially operational costs which are 92% of total)
Points to migration risks and compatibility problems between agencies

Understanding Source B: Text - Government Response

Information from Dataset	Analysis
""We are aware that open-source software is not always offered free of charge""	The government acknowledges that open-source software has costs This directly addresses the software company's point about the bill assuming free software Linkage to Source A: Both sources agree that open-source software is not free, contradicting any assumption in the bill
""although savings are indeed mentioned in the bill, its primary aim is to protect citizens' free access to information""	Cost savings are mentioned but are NOT the primary goal The main objective is ensuring public access to information Inference: The bill has democratic/transparency objectives beyond financial considerations Linkage to Source A: While Source A focuses entirely on costs, Source B reveals the bill's primary aim is actually citizen information access
""Because the bill requires that encoding of data not be tied to a single software provider, it is able to guarantee this free access""	The bill includes requirements about data encoding standards Avoiding vendor lock-in is the mechanism for ensuring public access Inference: Data portability and avoiding proprietary formats is central to the bill's goals Linkage to Source A: This addresses Source A's compatibility concerns by explaining the purpose of avoiding single-vendor dependency
""The bill would indeed require government to begin an intensive process of software migration that would not otherwise be undertaken""	Government confirms the migration would be ""intensive"" (same word as Source A) They acknowledge this wouldn't happen without the bill mandating it Linkage to Source A: Both sources use the same term ""intensive"" to describe the migration, confirming its significant scope
""However, the high cost of software migration in general is an argument in favor of the bill. The longer a particular information technology system is used, the more expensive migration to a different system becomes""	Migration costs increase the longer you wait Current high costs are actually a reason TO migrate now Inference: Delaying migration makes future changes even more expensive Linkage to Source A: While Source A sees high migration costs as a negative, Source B reframes them as an investment to avoid higher future costs
""Because open-source software allows the encoding of data in standard and adaptable formats, software migration becomes much easier and less expensive once open-source software is installed""	Open-source uses standard, adaptable data formats Future migrations will be easier after adopting open-source Inference: There are long-term flexibility benefits after initial migration Linkage to Source A: Directly counters Source A's compatibility concerns - standardized formats will actually improve future compatibility
""migration from proprietary to open-source software would entail no greater cost than would migration between two different proprietary software systems""	The cost of migrating to open-source is comparable to any other software migration It's not inherently more expensive to switch to open-source Linkage to Source A: Directly addresses Source A's cost concerns by claiming migration costs are similar regardless of destination

Summary:

The government defends the bill by revealing its primary goal is citizen information access (not cost savings)
Argues that while migration is intensive and costly, it prevents vendor lock-in
Claims standardized data formats make all future transitions easier

Overall Summary

The debate reveals fundamental disagreement about priorities
Software company emphasis: Immediate financial and operational costs (with utilization costs being 92% of total software costs)
Government emphasis: Democratic access to information and long-term flexibility
Both parties agree the migration would be intensive and costly
Different interpretations: Software company sees this as a reason to avoid the change, while government frames current migration costs as an investment that prevents even higher future costs and ensures citizens can always access their government's data regardless of software choices

Question Analysis

For each of the three statements, determine if it would undermine (weaken or contradict) any argument made in either Source A (software company) or Source B (government response)
Key constraints:
- Evaluate each statement independently
- Consider arguments from both sources
- Classify each statement as either 'Undermines' or 'Does not undermine'
- Use a binary classification output for each statement
Answer type needed: Array of three binary classifications (one per statement)

Connecting to Our Passage Analysis

The analysis presents key arguments from both sources
Source A claims: Migration to open-source is costly and causes compatibility problems
Source B claims: Migration costs are comparable between systems and that open-source facilitates easier future migrations and compatibility
Can answer from analysis alone: Yes, the analysis contains all necessary argument positions and contradictions to classify each statement

Statement Evaluations

Statement 1 Evaluation

Statement claim: Migrating from proprietary to open-source software is significantly more expensive than migrating between proprietary systems
Source contradiction: This contradicts Source B's argument that migration costs to open-source are comparable (i.e., 'no greater') to those between proprietary systems
Source B explicitly states migration costs will not be greater for open-source
Direct contradiction with Source B's cost comparison argument
UNDERMINES

Statement 2 Evaluation

Statement claim: The bill's measures will ensure compatibility among all relevant stakeholders if complied with
Source contradiction: This contradicts Source A's claim that the bill would increase compatibility problems
Source A warns that bill measures may increase compatibility issues
Direct contradiction with Source A's compatibility concerns
UNDERMINES

Statement 3 Evaluation

Statement claim: As a software package is used longer, the cost to migrate away decreases
Source contradiction: This contradicts Source B's argument that longer usage increases migration costs
Source B states the longer a system is used, the more expensive migration becomes
Direct contradiction with Source B's temporal cost argument
UNDERMINES

Systematic Checking

Statement 1 undermines Source B's cost comparison argument but supports Source A's cost concerns
Statement 2 undermines Source A's compatibility warnings but supports Source B's compatibility assurances
Statement 3 undermines Source B's claim about increasing migration costs over time
All three statements contradict at least one argument in the sources

Final Answer

[""Undermines"", ""Undermines"", ""Undermines""]

Answer Choices Explained

Undermines

Does not undermine

Migration from proprietary software to open-source software would be significantly more expensive for the government than would migration from proprietary software to other proprietary software.

Undermines

Does not undermine

The measures included in the bill will, if complied with, ensure compatibility among software systems used by all the various relevant stakeholders.

Undermines

Does not undermine

As a software package is used for a longer period of time, it becomes less expensive to migrate from that package to another.

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...