Vendor: In Country X, there are several prominent C/N/S fabric manufacturers. Each of these fabric manufacturers develops fabrics in unique...

TPA Solution: Fabric Manufacturer Sourcing

Phase 1: Owning the Dataset

First, Create an Argument Analysis Table

Second, Identify Argument Structure

Main Conclusion: We can cut out the supplier and source directly from the manufacturer

Supporting Evidence:

• Different manufacturers use unique C/N/S combinations
• We can analyze fabric composition

Key Assumptions Being Made:

• The clothing we analyze will contain C/N/S fabrics
• The unique combinations are truly distinctive and consistent
• Compositional analysis is reliable enough for identification

Overall Logical Flow: Unique fabric ratios → Compositional analysis → Manufacturer identification → Direct sourcing

Phase 2: Question Analysis & Prethinking

First, Understand What Each Part Asks

Part 1 (Assumption Required): We need to identify something that MUST be true for the vendor's argument to work. Without this assumption, the argument falls apart.

Part 2 (Possible Fact): We need to find a fact that would strengthen or support the assumption we identified in Part 1.

How they relate: Part 2 should provide evidence that makes Part 1's assumption more reasonable or likely to be true.

Second, Generate Prethinking Based on Question Type

For the assumption, we need something that bridges a gap in the argument. The vendor assumes:

• The next clothing piece will be analyzable using their C/N/S method
• The fabric combinations remain unique to each manufacturer
• The supplier's clothing comes from these Country X manufacturers

Third, Develop Specific Prethinking for Each Part

For Part 1 (Assumption): The vendor must be assuming that the next piece of clothing will actually contain C/N/S fabrics. If it's made of wool or polyester instead, their whole plan fails.

For Part 2 (Supporting Fact): Evidence showing that the supplier's clothing typically contains C/N/S fabrics would support this assumption. Past patterns suggest future likelihood.

Phase 3: Answer Choice Evaluation

Evaluating Each Choice

Choice 1: "Other pieces of clothing have already been purchased from the supplier, all of which were made of the fabrics cotton, nylon, and/or spandex (C/N/S)."

• What it says: Historical pattern - all previous clothing was C/N/S
• For Assumption?: No - this is evidence, not something being assumed
• For Supporting Fact?: YES - strongly supports that future clothing will also be C/N/S

Choice 2: "Some of the pieces of clothing purchased from the supplier were not made of cotton, nylon, or spandex."

• What it says: Some clothing had different materials
• For Assumption?: No - this contradicts what we need
• For Supporting Fact?: No - this weakens any C/N/S assumption

Choice 3: "Fabric manufacturers often tried to enter into each other's markets and experimented in producing batches of fabric in ratios of cotton, nylon, and spandex (C/N/S) that directly competed with the other manufacturers in Country X."

• What it says: Manufacturers copied each other's ratios
• For Assumption?: No - this would make identification impossible
• For Supporting Fact?: No - this undermines the entire plan

Choice 4: "There was considerable overlap in product selection offered by the various fabric manufacturers."

• What it says: Manufacturers had similar products
• For Assumption?: No - contradicts the "unique combinations" premise
• For Supporting Fact?: No - weakens the identification strategy

Choice 5: "The next piece of clothing to be purchased from the supplier will likely be made of only cotton, nylon, and/or spandex (C/N/S)."

• What it says: The next item will be C/N/S fabric
• For Assumption?: YES - this MUST be true for the plan to work
• For Supporting Fact?: No - this is what needs support, not the support itself

Choice 6: "Most fabric in Country X was made at one of the several manufacturers."

• What it says: These manufacturers dominate the market
• For Assumption?: Somewhat, but not as critical as Choice 5
• For Supporting Fact?: Could support various assumptions but not as directly as Choice 1

The Correct Answers

For Assumption Required: Choice 5 - "The next piece of clothing to be purchased from the supplier will likely be made of only cotton, nylon, and/or spandex (C/N/S)."

This is essential because without it, the vendor's compositional analysis plan is useless. You can't match C/N/S ratios if the fabric isn't C/N/S!

For Possible Fact: Choice 1 - "Other pieces of clothing have already been purchased from the supplier, all of which were made of the fabrics cotton, nylon, and/or spandex (C/N/S)."

This historical pattern strongly supports the assumption that the next piece will also be C/N/S, making the vendor's plan reasonable.

Common Traps to Highlight

Choice 3 seems relevant because it mentions manufacturers and C/N/S ratios, but it actually destroys the argument by eliminating the "unique combinations" that make identification possible.

Choice 6 might seem supportive since it suggests these manufacturers are important, but it doesn't directly support the critical assumption about the next clothing piece being C/N/S fabric.

The key insight is recognizing that the vendor's entire plan hinges on being able to analyze C/N/S ratios - which only works if the clothing actually contains C/N/S!