The general availability of high-quality electronic scanners and color printers for computers has made the counterfeiting of checks much easier....
GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions
The general availability of high-quality electronic scanners and color printers for computers has made the counterfeiting of checks much easier. In order to deter such counterfeiting, several banks plan to issue to their corporate customers checks that contain dots too small to be accurately duplicated by any electronic scanner currently available; when such checks are scanned and printed, the dots seem to blend together in such a way that the word "VOID" appears on the check.
A questionable assumption of the plan is that
Passage Analysis:
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| The general availability of high-quality electronic scanners and color printers for computers has made the counterfeiting of checks much easier. |
|
| In order to deter such counterfeiting, several banks plan to issue to their corporate customers checks that contain dots too small to be accurately duplicated by any electronic scanner currently available |
|
| when such checks are scanned and printed, the dots seem to blend together in such a way that the word "VOID" appears on the check. |
|
Argument Flow:
The argument starts by explaining a problem (easy check counterfeiting), then presents a solution (special dots on checks), and finally describes how that solution works (dots create "VOID" when copied).
Main Conclusion:
There isn't actually a main conclusion in this passage - it's just describing the banks' plan to use special dots to prevent check counterfeiting.
Logical Structure:
This passage is purely descriptive rather than argumentative. It explains a problem-solution scenario: Problem (easy counterfeiting) leads to Solution (special anti-copy dots) with Mechanism explanation (how the dots work when scanned).
Prethinking:
Question type:
Assumption - We need to find what the banks are assuming that might not be true. The plan assumes certain things must be true for it to work, and we're looking for questionable assumptions.
Precision of Claims
The argument makes specific claims about technology capabilities (what current scanners can and cannot do) and behavioral predictions (that counterfeiters will be deterred by VOID appearing on copies).
Strategy
For assumption questions, we identify ways the plan could fail while respecting the facts given. We know the technology works as described (dots blend to show VOID when scanned), but we can question whether this will actually deter counterfeiting. We look for gaps between what the banks assume and what might actually happen.
in the territory served by the banks the proportion of counterfeit checks that are made using electronic scanners has remained approximately constant over the past few years
This discusses the proportion of counterfeit checks made using electronic scanners remaining constant. However, the banks' plan doesn't depend on this proportion staying the same - their solution specifically targets electronic scanner counterfeiting regardless of whether it's increasing or decreasing as a percentage of total counterfeiting. The plan works as long as their dots can't be reproduced by scanners, regardless of trends.
most counterfeiters who use electronic scanners counterfeit checks only for relatively large amounts of money
This assumes counterfeiters using electronic scanners focus on large amounts. But the banks' plan doesn't rely on this assumption at all. The anti-counterfeiting dots would work the same way whether counterfeiters target large or small amounts - when scanned, 'VOID' appears regardless of the check amount. This assumption isn't necessary for the plan to succeed.
the smallest dots on the proposed checks cannot be distinguished visually except under strong magnification
This suggests the dots can't be distinguished visually except under strong magnification. While this might be a practical consideration, it's not a questionable assumption that the plan relies on. The plan's core mechanism (dots blending to show 'VOID' when scanned) works regardless of whether people can see the dots with their naked eyes.
most corporations served by these banks will not have to pay more for the new checks than for traditional checks
This assumes corporations won't have to pay significantly more for the new checks. While this might affect adoption rates, it's not an assumption the technical plan itself depends on. The anti-counterfeiting mechanism works regardless of cost considerations - this is more of a business assumption than a technical one.
the size of the smallest dots that generally available electronic scanners are able to reproduce accurately will not decrease significantly in the near future
This assumes scanner technology won't improve to reproduce smaller dots accurately in the near future. This is absolutely questionable and critical to the plan's success. The entire solution depends on current technological limitations. If scanners advance and can accurately reproduce the tiny dots, the whole system fails. Given how rapidly scanner technology evolves, this assumption is highly questionable yet essential for the plan to work long-term.