一道逻辑题

池学敏UID: 3600934

来源：机经

A law has been proposed requiring the cargo boxes of trucks carrying gravel to be covered by a tarpaulin, because vehicles driving close behind open-topped gravel trucks can be damaged by gravel flying off these trucks. The law is unlikely to substantially reduce such damage, however: flying gravel is much less likely to come from the cargo box itself than from the grooves of the tires, in which gravel can become wedged during loading.




1. Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for the argument given?
A. The drivers of vehicles behind a gravel truck are more likely to remain close behind the truck if the trucks cargo box is covered than if it is uncovered.
B. Most trucks that carry gravel already carry tarpaulins that their drivers use to cover the cargo box when they are carrying sand, which can blow out of the cargo box in significant quantities.
C. Of all the damage that occurs to vehicles on the highway, debris that flies off trucks is the cause of only a very small fraction.
D. The proposed law allows open-topped trucks on the highway to have uncovered cargo boxes whenever their cargo boxes are empty.
E. Because of the great weight of a load of gravel, the driver of a gravel truck is often driving much more slowly than most of the other vehicles on the road.

我分析不出来具体的premise 和 conclusion . 还有 gap。

我的理解：

premise1:汽车开的靠近没遮盖的卡车，会被飞出砂砾损坏

premise2: 货车必须遮盖
结论：飞出的砂砾相比轮胎飞出，确实少了

我感觉 我的 前提和结论找错了。 那个However, 伤害本质没有减少 是最终结论吗？

池学敏UID: 3600934

我好像懂啦。

ba1a糖儿UID: 3918923

premise： 石头从tire出来》box飞出的机会
conclu：close 布—/→damage减小

方向：
1.有布cover，但是damage不能少的原因
2.布有作用，但是其他原因的effect更大，导致damage依然存在

B.原文没说sand会不会造成damage。选项也没提到
C.讨论了逻辑链上主体的性质（damage的程度和防止damage无关）
D.同C，主体性质，但是没解释对damage的effect是啥
E.slowly对damage的作用是什么？也没有提。错

A.√ 布有作用，但是阻止不了tire的石头带来的damage。原结论成立
综上，strengthen的方向一定要和逻辑链上主体有关系，但是不能只说和一方的关系（如解释性质那几个选项）

个人见解~请批评指教哈