Read the following statement carefully and identify the conclusion that follows. Statement: The bank has introduced a biometric login system. Conclusions: I. The bank wants to improve security. II. Customers must carry biometric IDs.

Correct — A.
Rule: a conclusion follows if it is the evident reading of the statement; one that adds a new requirement does not.

I: a biometric login is an identity check, so introducing one points to the aim of better security. I follows.

II: the statement says nothing about any ID customers must carry. II adds that duty on its own → option (a).

Why the others are wrong

• (b)
  Only Conclusion II follows — II adds a duty the statement never states. Nothing about a biometric login says customers must carry anything, and II also leaves out the plain aim in I.
• (c)
  Both I and II follow — Both needs II, and II invents a requirement to carry biometric IDs that the statement never mentions. I stands alone.
• (d)
  Neither I nor II follows — Neither throws out I, the evident purpose of the move. A biometric login is an identity check, so wanting better security is the natural reading.

Statement-conclusion items ask what the statement itself supports. A conclusion that names the evident purpose of an action can follow; one that adds a fact, duty or consequence the statement never mentions cannot.

Conclusion II adds a requirement on customers. 'The bank has introduced a biometric login system' says nothing about what customers must carry.

Key facts

• Biometric systems identify a person by a body feature such as a fingerprint, face or iris.
• A conclusion that adds an obligation the statement does not state does not follow.

Common traps

• Reading 'biometric' as a card or document, which pulls in II
• Rejecting I because the statement never uses the word security

No directly related past PYQ was found.