Join WhatsApp Icon CAT WhatsApp Group
Instructions

The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.

Understanding the key properties of complex systems can help us clarify and deal with many new and existing global challenges, from pandemics to poverty . . . A recent study in Nature Physics found transitions to orderly states such as schooling in fish (all fish swimming in the same direction), can be caused, paradoxically, by randomness, or 'noise' feeding back on itself. That is, a misalignment among the fish causes further misalignment, eventually inducing a transition to schooling. Most of us wouldn't guess that noise can produce predictable behaviour. The result invites us to consider how technology such as contact-tracing apps, although informing us locally, might negatively impact our collective movement. If each of us changes our behaviour to avoid the infected, we might generate a collective pattern we had aimed to avoid: higher levels of interaction between the infected and susceptible, or high levels of interaction among the asymptomatic.

Complex systems also suffer from a special vulnerability to events that don't follow a normal distribution or 'bell curve'. When events are distributed normally, most outcomes are familiar and don't seem particularly striking. Height is a good example: it's pretty unusual for a man to be over 7 feet tall; most adults are between 5 and 6 feet, and there is no known person over 9 feet tall. But in collective settings where contagion shapes behaviour - a run on the banks, a scramble to buy toilet paper - the probability distributions for possible events are often heavy-tailed. There is a much higher probability of extreme events, such as a stock market crash or a massive surge in infections. These events are still unlikely, but they occur more frequently and are larger than would be expected under normal distributions.

What's more, once a rare but hugely significant 'tail' event takes place, this raises the probability of further tail events. We might call them second-order tail events; they include stock market gyrations after a big fall and earthquake aftershocks. The initial probability of second-order tail events is so tiny it's almost impossible to calculate - but once a first-order tail event occurs, the rules change, and the probability of a second-order tail event increases.

The dynamics of tail events are complicated by the fact that they result from cascades of other unlikely events. When COVID-19 first struck, the stock market suffered stunning losses followed by an equally stunning recovery. Some of these dynamics are potentially attributable to former sports bettors, with no sports to bet on, entering the market as speculators rather than investors. The arrival of these new players might have increased inefficiencies and allowed savvy long-term investors to gain an edge over bettors with different goals. . . .

One reason a first-order tail event can induce further tail events is that it changes the perceived costs of our actions and changes the rules that we play by. This game-change is an example of another key complex systems concept: nonstationarity. A second, canonical example of nonstationarity is adaptation, as illustrated by the arms race involved in the coevolution of hosts and parasites [in which] each has to 'run' faster, just to keep up with the novel solutions the other one presents as they battle it out in evolutionary time.

Question 9

All of the following inferences are supported by the passage EXCEPT that:

We evaluate each option individually:

Option A is clearly supported by the passage, as we find direct evidence for it. The passage explicitly cites “a run on the banks” and “a scramble to buy toilet paper” as collective settings “where contagion shapes behaviour,” and explains that such systems can generate extreme events beyond normal expectations. This supports the inference that local choices amplify into system-wide cascades.

Option B is also supported. The passage states that once a first-order tail event occurs, “the rules change, and the probability of a second-order tail event increases,” and that such events “change the perceived costs of our actions and changes the rules that we play by.” This aligns with the claim that a rare shock alters payoffs and raises the likelihood of subsequent disturbances.

Option C is supported as well. The author explains that in heavy-tailed settings, “there is a much higher probability of extreme events,” which are “more frequent and larger than would be expected under normal distributions.” This directly supports the inference about extreme outcomes becoming more frequent and complicating risk assessment.

Option D, on the other hand, is not supported by the passage. The passage never attributes the rebounds in financial markets solely to sports bettors, and simply states them as ‘a potential cause’ for ‘some of these dynamics’[... some of these dynamics are potentially attributable to former sports bettors… entering the market as speculators... ] Option D, therefore mis-represents and exaggerates the claims in the passage. Hence, we can conclude that only Option D is not supported by the passage.

Video Solution

video

Create a FREE account and get:

  • All Quant CAT complete Formulas and shortcuts PDF
  • 41+ CAT previous year papers with video solutions PDF
  • 5000+ Topic-wise Previous year CAT Solved Questions for Free