Para Jumbles: every CAT question since 2020

Logic: Topic opener → how power plugs into functions → "In short" recap → formal definition.

Sentence 2 opens the topic by calling the mechanism political, and sentence 1 picks up its "it" to explain how power is fitted into functions such as education or punishment. Sentence 4 begins with "In short", so it recaps 2-1, and sentence 3 closes with the most abstract statement of the idea.

Logic: Women are taught to suppress anger (3) → the coach sees them hold back punches (4) → breaking the taboo is freeing (2) → but managing anger shapes everyone (1).

Sentence 3 sets out the observation, and sentence 4's "many of them" refers back to those women. Sentence 2's "once" picks up the taboo, and sentence 1's "but" widens the point to everyone, which makes it the closing line.

Logic: The hybrid idea (1) → the assumption beneath it (4) → that bias in practice (2) → why it persists (3).

Sentence 1 introduces the phrase and its hybrid sense, and sentence 4's "beneath this" points back to it. Sentence 2 ("even though...") shows the literary bias in practice, and sentence 3's "it" explains why the field keeps it: borrowed prestige.

Logic: The smell (2) → its cause is chemical breakdown (4) → paper releases compounds as it ages (1) → the compounds named (3).

Sentence 2 introduces the familiar smell, and sentence 4's "this" explains its cause. Sentence 1 describes the decay releasing compounds, and sentence 3's "these" names them, giving 2-4-1-3.

Logic: The practice (2) → how the image works (1) → its political effect (4) → the overall verdict (3).

Sentence 2 introduces the concrete practice and raises the question of how photographs persuade. Sentence 1 explains the personal bond the image creates, sentence 4 gives its political consequence, and sentence 3 ("inasmuch as") delivers the general judgement.

Logic: Activists coined Latinx (4) → they changed it despite grammatical vs social gender (3) → one writer rejects it (1) → few people use it (2).

Sentence 4 ("more recently") introduces the new label, and sentence 3's "they" refers to the activists who coined it. Sentence 1 gives a personal rejection, and sentence 2 ends with how rarely the term is used.

Logic: Human bias is local, AI's is wide (4) → algorithms now affect huge populations (1) → the bias is really in the data (2) → which makes it easier to fix (3).

Sentence 4 sets up the contrast, and sentence 1 expands on AI's reach. Sentence 2 locates the source in training data, and sentence 3's "despite" concedes the reach while noting the fix is easier.

Logic: Why are some cases endlessly revisited (4) → what makes a case appealing (1) → cruelty or mystery (2) → unsolved cases offer something ordinary murders lack (3).

Sentence 4 poses the central question and sentence 1 narrows it. Sentence 2's "it" answers with possible features, and sentence 3 generalises to close.

Logic: Western Christian ideas dismiss indigenous tradition (4) → "however", that tradition is rich and visible (3) → a recent novel contrasts the cultures (1) → its author shows the West's condescension (2).

Sentence 4 sets up the conflict, and sentence 3's "however... these beliefs" pushes back on it. Sentence 1 introduces the novel, and sentence 2, naming its author, explains how it handles the conflict.

Logic: Consciousness is called emergent (4) → like an ant colony, no single neuron holds such traits (1) → yet neurons together produce emotions (3) → though the mechanism is unknown, the whole has what parts lack (2).

Sentence 4 opens the topic, and sentence 1's "like" offers the analogy. Sentence 3's "nonetheless" turns to what neurons achieve together, and sentence 2 closes with the general principle.

Logic: E-waste is rich in materials but barely recycled (3) → a scientist thinks there's a new solution (1) → she plans micro-factories (4) → her robots and drones separate and melt parts (2).

Sentence 3 states the problem, and sentence 1 introduces the person the "she" and "her" in 4 and 2 refer to. Sentence 4 gives the plan, and sentence 2 elaborates how it works.

Logic: Printing's first effect: reading replaced listening (2) → private study without teachers (4) → the shift was socially complex, literacy came late (3) → centuries later, schooling still rests on reading (1).

Sentence 2 names the first effect, and sentence 4 develops what it meant for learners. Sentence 3 adds the social complexity, and sentence 1 ("centuries later") brings the story to the present.

Logic: The creative sector outgrows the world economy (3) → "in fact" its share is even larger (2) → creative design keeps firms ahead (1) → hence IP trade disputes (4).

Sentence 3 introduces the topic, and sentence 2's "in fact" amplifies it. Sentence 1 explains why design matters, and sentence 4's "for this reason" draws the trade consequence.

Logic: What collagen is (2) → the disease risk of pig and cow collagen (4) → fish pathogens differ from human ones (3) → fish-skin collagen's useful properties (1).

Sentence 2 defines collagen, and sentence 4 explains why mammal-derived collagen is limited. Sentence 3 shows why fish avoid that problem, and sentence 1 describes the result.

Logic: Shorter commutes boost innovation (2) → some site offices accordingly; inventors lose output on long commutes (1) → some take this as support for remote work (4) → but remote work doesn't guarantee creativity (3).

Sentence 2 introduces the link, and sentence 1 gives evidence. Sentence 4 offers the remote-work reading, and sentence 3's "this" challenges it.

Logic: Food framed as personal choice (2) → that framing satisfies a wish for agency but hides structural barriers (4) → "this" is especially true under neoliberalism (3) → women end up feeling solely responsible (1).

Sentence 2 sets out the framing, and sentence 4 explains its appeal and its blind spot. Sentence 3's "this" intensifies the point, and sentence 1 shows who bears the burden.

Logic: Debate focuses on emissions, but biodiversity loss has many causes (2) → no single technical fix covers them (1) → "evidently" political fixes are needed (4) → "this" requires laws for future generations and nature (3).

Sentence 2 diagnoses the narrow focus, and sentence 1 lists the varied causes. Sentence 4 draws the conclusion, and sentence 3's "this" spells out what it requires.

Logic: Putting on a cheerful face changes the inner self (3) → the word comes from an Old French word for "face" (1) → medieval writers used it for expression and face (4) → Bible translations made it an abstract shared virtue (2).

Sentence 3 opens with the broad claim, and sentence 1 traces the word's root. Sentence 4 gives the medieval usage, and sentence 2 shows the later abstract meaning.

Logic: What beacons are (4) → phones detect their signals and gauge distance (3) → many industries use them (1) → a store example (2).

Sentence 4 defines beacons, and sentence 3 explains how they work. Sentence 1 widens to their use across industries, and sentence 2 gives the concrete retail case.

Logic: Meritocracy is inevitable in free societies (3) → "but" recent books usefully question merit (2) → accepting luck helps us see failure as shared (1) → "and that in turn" builds a kinder society (4).

Sentence 3 sets out the principle, and sentence 2's "but" brings in the counterpoint. Sentence 1 develops what accepting limits does, and sentence 4 draws the final consequence.

Logic: Mum wanted us outdoors (2) → family tales of her idyllic country childhood (3) → I felt guilty preferring to stay in (1) → to a shy child this felt menacing (4).

Sentence 2 introduces the push, and sentence 3 gives the stories behind it. Sentence 1 gives the child's reaction, and sentence 4's "that" sums up how the pressure felt.

Logic: The work has two poles, artistic and aesthetic (4) → "from this polarity" it lies between text and realisation (3) → it comes alive only through the reader (1) → the convergence of text and reader is the work (2).

Sentence 4 introduces the poles, and sentence 3 picks them up. Sentence 1 explains the reader's role, and sentence 2 completes the idea of convergence.

Logic: Warming will pass two degrees (2) → a common response: plant more trees (1) → because trees absorb carbon dioxide (4) → burning them releases it, hence the coverage of forest fires (3).

Sentence 2 states the concern, and sentence 1 gives the typical reaction. Sentence 4's "this is because" justifies it, and sentence 3 ("burning them") follows from that.

Logic: The discovery (2) → "they" studied the escape-response cells once thought unable to regrow (3) → "however", regrowth depends on where the damage is (4) → in other animals, full regrowth is unconfirmed (1).

Sentence 2 introduces the researchers and finding, and sentence 3's "they" picks them up. Sentence 4 adds the qualification, and sentence 1 closes by comparing other species.

Logic: Canada claims sovereignty (2) → the US calls it an international strait (1) → the legal question is unresolved, though an agreement exists (4) → an ice-free Arctic may make the dispute fade (3).

Sentence 2 sets out the claim, and sentence 1 the counter-claim. Sentence 4 gives the unresolved status, and sentence 3 looks ahead.

Logic: The scientific method is the greatest invention (3) → insight needs logic plus experiment and observation (2) → imagine commercial fusion power (1) → "this" depends on the method's insights (4).

Sentences 3 and 2 present the method and how it works. Sentence 1 introduces a future invention, and sentence 4's "this" ties it back to the method.

Logic: We are at a turning point (2) → fifty years ago development promised betterment, since corrupted (4) → "but" it must now be shared duty between rich and poor (1) → "this" requires an ethical way of living (3).

Sentence 2 opens, and sentence 4 gives the history. Sentence 1's "but" turns to the present need, and sentence 3's "this" spells out what it demands.

Logic: Relationships depend on communication and shared knowledge (2) → a Foucauldian view goes further, to regimes of truth (3) → "it is" these regimes that decide what can be said (1) → reconsidering everyday practices reveals power/knowledge (4).

Sentence 2 opens with the basic idea, and sentence 3 moves beyond "these" views. Sentence 1 explains the regimes' role, and sentence 4 closes with the practical implication.

Logic: Museums face their colonial past, returning some pieces (3) → pressure from countries seeking looted objects (2) → many museums are legally barred from giving them up (1) → "legal hurdles notwithstanding", France and Germany back returns (4).

Sentence 3 introduces the topic, and sentence 2 gives the cause. Sentence 1 sets out the obstacle that sentence 4's "notwithstanding" explicitly refers back to.

Logic: Politicians blame trade, offshoring and immigration (3) → research says automation is the bigger threat (4) → firms value automation for efficiency (1) → "but" it increasingly destroys white-collar jobs too (2).

Sentence 3 states the old view, and sentence 4 counters it. Sentences 1 and 2 form a pair, with "but" turning from automation's benefits to its job losses.

Logic: Narrative structure alone can't reveal the tales' meaning (1) → meaning emerges from key words in the original language (4) → selected tales show conflict with harmful shamans (3) → benign shamans resolve conflict (2).

Sentence 1 states the problem, and sentence 4 gives the method. Sentence 3 introduces the shamans, and sentence 2's "their" refers to the good ones.

Logic: Poison has been used to kill since ancient times (1) → microbiology made rational design of biological weapons possible (3) → "these" dangers led to bans in 1874 and 1899 (2) → "though" well meant, the treaties lacked enforcement (4).

Sentence 1 opens the topic, and sentence 3 adds the scientific foundation. Sentence 2's "these" refers to the dangers, and sentence 4 gives the flaw.

Logic: Security has stayed the same yet changed deeply since the 1990s (3) → tensions persist among the eleven states (1) → China's power and claims worry many (2) → "these" worries draw in outside powers (4).

Sentence 3 frames the theme, and sentence 1 gives the continuing tensions. Sentence 2 offers China as a specific concern, and sentence 4's "these" explains outside involvement.

Logic: Its four large mirrors (2) → "it" also has smaller auxiliary telescopes (1) → combined, they mimic a far larger instrument (4) → "this" could pick out an astronaut on the Moon (3).

Sentence 2 introduces the telescope, and sentence 1's "it" adds the auxiliaries. Sentence 4 explains combining them, and sentence 3's "this" states what that achieves.

Logic: Large-scale fission is our most dangerous change to nature (2) → the resulting radiation is the worst pollutant (4) → "but" the public fixates on the bomb (1) → peaceful uses may be even more dangerous (3).

Sentence 2 introduces fission, and sentence 4's "the resultant" refers to it. Sentence 1's "but" turns to the public's focus, and sentence 3 counters it.

Logic: We think we notice every change, but the brain can't process it all (1) → "it" can't register everything around you (3) → sometimes big changes happen unnoticed (4) → psychologists call this change blindness (2).

Sentence 3's "it" refers to the brain in sentence 1. Sentence 2 names the tendency described in sentence 4, so 4 comes before 2.

Logic: Adaptation and exaptation in animals (2) → these ideas apply to the central nervous system (4) → organisms are structured like nested dolls (3) → the CNS's parts are nested and constantly reorganise (1).

Sentence 2 introduces the evolutionary concepts, and sentence 4 extends them to the CNS. Sentence 3 adds the nested-doll picture, and sentence 1 applies it to the CNS.

Logic: Seven deities believed to bring fortune (3) → each represents a kind of luck (1) → although in the Shinto pantheon, only two are native (4) → the others came from other religions (2).

Sentence 3 introduces the group, and sentence 1's "each" refers to it. Sentence 4 notes only two are native, and sentence 2's "the others" covers the rest.

Logic: The consumer-welfare standard (4) → "it" favoured cautious enforcement (1) → industries consolidated and tech giants grew (2) → "that" weak enforcement drives calls for new laws (3).

Sentence 4 introduces the standard, and sentence 1's "it" describes its stance. Sentence 2 gives the outcome, and sentence 3's "that" draws the conclusion.