AI InterviewSearch…Search problems, topics, or pages…Ctrl KGet started
Mediuminference

~90s

What the monsoon passage implies

India's monsoon is often described as a single event, but it is really two. The south-west monsoon arrives in Kerala in early June and works north over six weeks, bringing roughly three-quarters of the country's annual rainfall. The north-east monsoon, far smaller, returns in October and waters the south-eastern coast. Forecasting either has improved markedly since the 1990s, though the models remain better at predicting the total than its distribution — which is unfortunate, because it is the distribution that determines whether a crop survives.

Which statement can be inferred from the passage?

Show the answer and the worked solution

Correct answer: A.

A season with normal total rainfall can still damage crops.

Worked solution

  1. The passage states that distribution, not total, determines whether a crop survives.
  2. So a normal total spread badly could still ruin crops — a direct inference.
  3. The other options contradict the passage or overstate it.

Answer: A season with normal total rainfall can still damage crops.

The idea

A valid inference is one short step from the text. Options containing 'no longer', 'only' or 'the whole' usually overreach.

Shortcut. Combine the last two claims: models predict totals well, but distribution decides crops. So a normal, correctly forecast total can still come with crop damage — only one option says that.

Common trap. "Forecasting models are no longer useful." — overreading the 'unfortunate' limitation; the passage says forecasting has 'improved markedly' and is merely weaker on distribution.

What the monsoon passage implies — Aptitude Question

What the monsoon passage implies: India's monsoon is often described as a single event, but it is really two. Answer and worked solution on CodeKairo.

Question

India's monsoon is often described as a single event, but it is really two. The south-west monsoon arrives in Kerala in early June and works north over six weeks, bringing roughly three-quarters of the country's annual rainfall. The north-east monsoon, far smaller, returns in October and waters the south-eastern coast. Forecasting either has improved markedly since the 1990s, though the models remain better at predicting the total than its distribution — which is unfortunate, because it is the distribution that determines whether a crop survives.

Which statement can be inferred from the passage?

Options

  1. A season with normal total rainfall can still damage crops.
  2. Forecasting models are no longer useful.
  3. The south-west monsoon reaches the whole country on the same day.
  4. Crops depend only on the north-east monsoon.
Show the answer and the worked solution

Correct answer: A. A season with normal total rainfall can still damage crops.

Worked solution

  1. The passage states that distribution, not total, determines whether a crop survives.
  2. So a normal total spread badly could still ruin crops — a direct inference.
  3. The other options contradict the passage or overstate it.

Answer: A season with normal total rainfall can still damage crops.

The idea

A valid inference is one short step from the text. Options containing 'no longer', 'only' or 'the whole' usually overreach.

Shortcut. Combine the last two claims: models predict totals well, but distribution decides crops. So a normal, correctly forecast total can still come with crop damage — only one option says that.

Common trap. "Forecasting models are no longer useful." — overreading the 'unfortunate' limitation; the passage says forecasting has 'improved markedly' and is merely weaker on distribution.

All Reading Comprehension questions · placement mock tests