Number of countries in ROW visited by both Nitesh and Samantha is 3+1=4

Number of countries in EU visited by exactly 1 person is 12.

If both Ramya and Amiya run staid campaigns, the intensity of each staid campaign is 1
So total number of voters that would vote for them if they focused on issues will be 20x(1+1)%=40%
This means if they had both ran regarding issues, then they would get 20% of votes each.
We are told that both of them run attacking campaigns,
And the rule for mutual attacking campaign is 10% of voters who would have voted for each candidate will not
vote.
That means 10% of 20% of each candidate will not vote, now that it is a mutually attacking campaign.
That means, each candidate receives 18% of the votes.
Total votes received is 36%.

We want the minimum vote share, that means both the candidates run staid campaigns.
And, both the campaigns should be attacking, since we see that if one candidate runs an attacking campaign
whereas the other candidate runs an issues campaign, a fair number of voters get transferred to the other
candidate's vote share.
This points to us to a scenario where both the campaigns are staid and attacking, which is nothing but the
scenario described in the previous question.
If both Ramya and Amiya run staid campaigns, the intensity of each staid campaign is 1
So total number of voters that would vote for them if they focused on issues will be 20x(1+1)%=40%
This means if they had both ran regarding issues, then they would get 20% of votes each.
We are told that both of them run attacking campaigns,
And the rule for mutual attacking campaign is 10% of voters who would have voted for each candidate will not
vote.
That means 10% of 20% of each candidate will not vote, now that it is a mutually attacking campaign.
That means, each candidate receives 18% of the votes.
Total votes received is 36%, which is the minimum possible

Amiya runs a campaign on issues, and we need to find the maximum vote share that she can get.
We are trying to maximise the number of voters for Amiya, that means Amiya needs to run a vigorous
campaign.
Since, we are trying to increase the vote share for Amiya, we want as many voters as possible transferred from
Ramya's share to Amiya's votes.
As the number of votes a candidate receives is proportional to the intensity level of the campaign, we want
Ramya also to run a vigorous AND attacking campaign, so that her votes are transferred to Amiya.
In this scenario we have 20x(2+2)% of the people voting, 80% of the people. Of that, if both had ran issues
campaign, they would have each received 40% of the votes.
Now, we want Ramya to run an attacking campaign, where 20% of the people that would have voted for her vote
for Amiya.
So 20% of 40% of the votes are transferred to Amiya. That is 8% of the votes. And we are also told that, 5% that
would have voted for her dont vote, so 5% of 40% dont vote, that is 2% of the voters.
Final Tally is Amiya gets 48% of the votes, and Ramya gets 30% of the votes

We are looking for the minimum possible number of votes that Ramya can get when she runs an attacking
campaign.
To minimise the number of votes, we can have Ramya run a staid campaign to minimise the votes, so minimum
intensity, which will get her 20% of the votes if she ran with issues. Now that she is running with attacking, she
will loose 20% of the votes to Amiya and 5% of the votes will not vote anymore.
That is a total 25% loss. Remaining votes she will get is 75% of the 20% which will leave her with 15% of the
votes.

We are looking for the minimum possible number of votes that Ramya can get and maximise the number of
votes that Amiya can get.
We can borrow the scenario from the previous question where Ramya runs an attacking campaign, and we
minimised the number of votes she can get.
To minimise the number of votes, we can have Ramya run a staid campaign to minimise the votes, so minimum
intensity, which will get her 20% of the votes if she ran with issues. Now that she is running with attacking, she
will loose 20% of the votes to Amiya and 5% of the votes will not vote anymore.
That is a total 25% loss. Remaining votes she will get is 75% of the 20% which will leave her with 15% of the
votes.
And to maximise the number of votes Amiya can get, we will have her run an vigorous issues campaign, which
will give her 2x20% of the votes, that is 40% of the votes. And since Ramya has been running an attacking
campaign, 20% of her votes are transferred to Amiya. 20% of the 20% of the votes which is 4% that were going
to Ramya will now go to Amiya. That will bring up Amiya's tally up to 44% leaving Ramya's tally at 15%.
The difference in the votes will be 44-15=29%.
This is the maximum possible vote difference between the two candidates that is possible.

We are told that there are six teams, that are divided into two groups.
Teams in the same group will play each other only once, and teams in different group will play each other twice.
Calculating the combinations, there is going to be games among teams in the same group among them,
and since there is two groups, total such games will be 6.
Now, teams in different group play each other twice. Calculating the combinations for this,
From the first group, a team can be chosen in three ways, and from the second group, a team can be chosen in
three ways. Total ways two teams from different groups can play each other is 3x3 which is 9. And since they
play each other twice, that is 9+9 games of this combination.
Total number of games is 18+6=24
It is given that each team plays one game in each round, that means there is going to be 3 matchups in each
round. And given, there is 24 games to played in this format, the number of rounds will be 24/3=8
The tournament will have 8 rounds.
Now that we know there are going to be 8 rounds in the tournament, let us identify the teams in a particular
group, that will help us build the matchups.
We are told that Round 8 teams from different groups play each other, and Teams 1 and 5 play only once. This
means, 1 and 5 have to be on the same group. It is also told that 4 and 6 play each other twice, that means 4
and 6 have to be in different groups. Looking at the matches from Round 8 that is given to us, 3 played 6 and 2
played 5. We already know 1 and 5 are in the same group, so 2 must be in the other group. Among 3 and 6, if we
were to place 3 in the group with 1 and 5, 4 and 6 would have to be in the same group, which is not possible,
hence 6 is with 1 and 5, giving us the final combination of groups.
Now, using the given information to build the matchups for the 8 rounds.

Rounds marked with the same colour represent the fact that the matchups are identical. Now we know that
each team plays a game in each round, we know 2 out of the 3 matches for Round 2 and 8, and we can identify
the third matchups as well. Giving us this resulting table.
We are told that Round 4 and 7 are identical, that means they are the matchups between teams from two
different groups,
We look at the matchups that are remaining among the 6 teams where both the games are left to play.
Right away we identify that 6 is yet to play 2 twice and 5 once. We are looking for teams playing twice, so both
Round 4 and 7 has a matchups between 2 and 6. This means 6 will play 5 in Round 3 and using that we can
identify the third matchup in Round 3 as well.
Now, we can identify that 1 is yet to play 3 both the times, 2 once. And we are looking for teams playing each
other twice.

We are told that there are six teams, that are divided into two groups.
Teams in the same group will play each other only once, and teams in different group will play each other twice.
Calculating the combinations, there is going to be games among teams in the same group among them,
and since there is two groups, total such games will be 6.
Now, teams in different group play each other twice. Calculating the combinations for this,
From the first group, a team can be chosen in three ways, and from the second group, a team can be chosen in
three ways. Total ways two teams from different groups can play each other is 3x3 which is 9. And since they
play each other twice, that is 9+9 games of this combination.
Total number of games is 18+6=24
It is given that each team plays one game in each round, that means there is going to be 3 matchups in each
round. And given, there is 24 games to played in this format, the number of rounds will be 24/3=8
The tournament will have 8 rounds.
Now that we know there are going to be 8 rounds in the tournament, let us identify the teams in a particular
group, that will help us build the matchups.
We are told that Round 8 teams from different groups play each other, and Teams 1 and 5 play only once. This
means, 1 and 5 have to be on the same group. It is also told that 4 and 6 play each other twice, that means 4
and 6 have to be in different groups. Looking at the matches from Round 8 that is given to us, 3 played 6 and 2
played 5. We already know 1 and 5 are in the same group, so 2 must be in the other group. Among 3 and 6, if we
were to place 3 in the group with 1 and 5, 4 and 6 would have to be in the same group, which is not possible,
hence 6 is with 1 and 5, giving us the final combination of groups.
Now, using the given information to build the matchups for the 8 rounds.

Rounds marked with the same colour represent the fact that the matchups are identical. Now we know that
each team plays a game in each round, we know 2 out of the 3 matches for Round 2 and 8, and we can identify
the third matchups as well. Giving us this resulting table.
We are told that Round 4 and 7 are identical, that means they are the matchups between teams from two
different groups,
We look at the matchups that are remaining among the 6 teams where both the games are left to play.
Right away we identify that 6 is yet to play 2 twice and 5 once. We are looking for teams playing twice, so both
Round 4 and 7 has a matchups between 2 and 6. This means 6 will play 5 in Round 3 and using that we can
identify the third matchup in Round 3 as well.
Now, we can identify that 1 is yet to play 3 both the times, 2 once. And we are looking for teams playing each
other twice.

2, 3 and 4 were part of the same group. 5 is the answer.

The team that played Team 1 in Round 7 is 3.

Team that played Team 6 in Round 3 was Team 5.

We are told that D receives more stars than C from Y. Considering Y has already given 25 stars, it will give 0
stars to C and 5 stars to D.
The only two surfers who have not given any stars to A or B is O and X, and these are the two surfers to give all
of their stars to a single blogger.
We are also told that M gives different stars to the four bloggers,
Since he has already given 0 and 10, the remaining distinct stars should add up to 20. The only numbers that
are remaining that add up to 20 are 5 and 15.
We know that X rewards one of C or D 30 stars and O rewards one of C or D 30 stars. Given that, M could not
have rewarded D 15 stars, since Y rewarded D 5 stars, and D is also going to rewarded 30 stars by O or X, and
since the total is same for all, which is 45. This is not possible.
This means that, M rewarded C 15 stars and D 5 stars.

We are told that D receives more stars than C from Y. Considering Y has already given 25 stars, it will give 0
stars to C and 5 stars to D.
The only two surfers who have not given any stars to A or B is O and X, and these are the two surfers to give all
of their stars to a single blogger.
We are also told that M gives different stars to the four bloggers,
Since he has already given 0 and 10, the remaining distinct stars should add up to 20. The only numbers that
are remaining that add up to 20 are 5 and 15.
We know that X rewards one of C or D 30 stars and O rewards one of C or D 30 stars. Given that, M could not
have rewarded D 15 stars, since Y rewarded D 5 stars, and D is also going to rewarded 30 stars by O or X, and
since the total is same for all, which is 45. This is not possible.
This means that, M rewarded C 15 stars and D 5 stars.
This gives us two cases

M distributed among 3 bloggers, N among 2 bloggers, O among 1, P among 2, X among 1, Y among 3
Hence 2 surfers distribute their stars among 2 bloggers.

There are two cases formed since we cannot identify for certain two whom did O reward the stars to,
We can identify the number of stars rewarded by M to C.
Hence only statement 1 can be identified uniquely.

We are given that, Daily Share Price Variability (SPV) is defined as (Day’s high price - Day’s low price) / (Average
of the opening and closing prices during the day)
Calculating it for the four options,
Stock F: 800/1700=8/17
Stock A: 1200/2000=3/5
Stock D: 900/750=90/75=6/5
Stock C: 600/1000=3/5
Clearly Stock D has the highest SPV.

We are given that, Daily Share Price Variability (SPV) is defined as (Day’s high price - Day’s low price) / (Average
of the opening and closing prices during the day)
Calculating it for the stocks
Stock A: 1200/2000=3/5
Stock B: 600/1850=60/185
Stock C: 600/1000=3/5
Stock D: 900/750=90/75=6/5
Stock E: 300/1200=1/4
Stock F: 800/1700=8/17
Stock G: 900/1450=90/145
We need to check for stocks greater than 0.5 on that day,
Stock A, Stock C, Stock D, Stock G have SPV greater than 0.5 that day.
Hence, the answer is 4.

Daily loss for a share is defined as (Opening price - Closing price) / (Opening price)

Stock G gained money that day
Hence Stock A has the highest Daily Loss.

There are three bullish shares, C D and G
Lets say a trader buys one share of each of these stocks, and sells them at their day's high
One share of C at opening is 800, sells at 1400
One share of D at opening is 500, 1200
One share of G at opening is 1200, 1900
Total Investment is 2500, and total money after selling is 4500
That is an 80%.

Option B is the correct answer.
The passage argues that, despite the advances in digital distribution and storage of films (via streaming
services or digital purchases), access to art is becoming more fragile. It mentions how content can disappear
from platforms, how digital files deteriorate over time, and how rights agreements can limit access based on
geographical location. The idea that technology and platform control lead to difficulties in maintaining access
captured in Option B
Option A: The passage does not advocate changing the understanding of art as immutable or easily available.
Hence, this is wrong.
Option C: This is an overstatement of the passage’s argument. While the passage briefly touches on the idea of
retroactive changes to works like Stranger Things, it does not present these changes as inherently "dangerous."
Option D: The passage does not argue for the availability of art in the cultural commons in perpetuity. Instead, it
highlights how access is controlled by platforms and technological challenges rather than making a broader
ideological statement about cultural commons.

Option B is the correct answer.
Option B would invalidate the main argument because it directly addresses the issue raised in the passage, i.e.,
the lack of permanent access to digital content. The passage highlights concerns about the temporary and
restricted nature of digital ownership. If studios and streaming services committed to providing perpetual and
platform-independent access, it would resolve the problem of content being removed or restricted, making the
author's argument about the instability of digital media irrelevant.
Option A: This would not invalidate the argument because the passage mentions that Blu-ray discs have a
theoretical shelf life but acknowledges that their durability depends on storage conditions and the availability of
playback equipment.
Option C: This option doesn't directly invalidate the argument either. While VPNs might help users bypass georestrictions, it doesn't address the broader issue of digital ownership and the fragility of digital rights, especially
the fear of losing access to content due to different rights agreements. The passage focuses on the
unreliability and restrictions of digital ownership, not just geographical access.
Option D: While this option touches on the potential for preserving digital content, it doesn't directly address the
problem raised in the passage: the lack of permanent, independent access to content.

Option B is the correct answer.
The passage contrasts the past and present by mentioning that, in the past, films were considered “as good as
gone” once they left the cinema, meaning they were ephemeral and not readily accessible afterwards. Whereas,
today's audience expects ongoing access to films well beyond their initial cinema run, thanks to technological
advancements like streaming services and digital media. This shift in expectations is what the passage implies
when referencing the previous era's ephemerality versus today's more lasting availability.
Option A: This is not the main point. While it may be true that people accepted films as temporary, the passage
emphasizes today's expectations rather than discussing past acceptance.
Option C: The passage does not mention technology improvements. It focuses more on audience expectations
or belief that films should now be available beyond just the cinema.
Option D: While the passage suggests that audiences may expect films to remain accessible, it does not claim
there is no reason for studios to remove access. The passage acknowledges that financial motives may lead to
films being removed from platforms.

Option C is the correct answer.
The passage highlights that the practice of streaming services, like Netflix, editing old episodes of Stranger
Things retroactively raised concerns. Altering a popular show’s content without consent or transparency
supports the concern that such platforms can tamper with or erase parts of culture at their discretion rather
than preserve them as they were originally created.
Option A: This option doesn't fully address the specific concern raised by the Stranger Things editing example.
The example focuses on altering the content, not controlling access.
Option B: The example concerns the possibility and practice of editing content on streaming platforms, not
whether unsubstantiated reports cause distrust.
Option D: The example of Stranger Things is not necessarily about changing films to suit new tastes or
technology. Rather, it’s about the platform’s ability to alter existing content without transparency or input from
the original creators.

Sentence 1 is the odd sentence.
The correct sequence is 4-2-3-5.
Sentence 4 introduces the historical significance of Peter Singer’s Animal Liberation, which set the stage for the
discussion of animal rights in contemporary philosophy.
Sentence 2 expands on Singer’s philosophy, explaining his utilitarian view and how it contrasts with other
indirect moral views on animal rights.
Sentence 3 then explains the core of Singer’s argument, that animals, like humans, have significant interests
and deserve moral consideration.
Sentence 5 concludes Singer's argument by stating that humans should treat animal interests equally to human
interests, leading to moral duties towards animals.
Sentence 1 is the odd one out because it does not focus on Peter Singer's views on animal rights and the moral
obligations humans have towards animals, which is the main theme of the paragraph.