[rogual]

I took the pilot one as an abstract logic type question where you're supposed to assume the premise is true, so I said yes and the page said I was right, because that's a "valid logical deduction" or something.

Then there was another question in the same format that said "if you study hard enough you'll pass the exam. You didn't pass, so you didn't study hard enough." So I thought, oh, another logic one, and said yes to that one too, but the page was like, "not quite! You might fail for other reasons!"

[alwa]

And if, as OP says, it’s necessity and sufficiency we’re testing—whether or not there were also other reasons contributing to your exam failure, wouldn’t failing that one necessary condition be sufficient to fail the outcome?

[samjohnson]

It was the same kind of logic question. You missed a key word in your quote. I think it said “If you study hard enough you _can_ pass the exam”. It was there to make it clear that studying hard is not a guarantee for passing the test, and therefore can’t be used as the certain reason for failure.