Odd Sentence Out: every CAT question since 2020

Logic: 5 → 1 → 2 → 3: freedom is a complex idea → we now have more control over dying → that control should be central → assisted dying extends it.

Sentences 5, 1, 2 and 3 build a philosophical argument step by step. Sentence 4 merely reports what many people support, which adds nothing to the argument's chain, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 3 → 2 → 5 → 4: viewers engaged art bodily → a square layout put them at the centre → hung at eye level → an immersive space.

The four sentences form one argument about display and viewing. Sentence 1 is about why the tapestry suited the Norman conquest story and its "therefore" follows from nothing here, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 4 → 1 → 5 → 2: the show's format → his look → his curious ideas → his relaxed delivery.

Sentences 4, 1, 5 and 2 describe the show's format and the performer's look, mind and style. Sentence 3 brings in an unresolved side-quest and the reviewer's own reaction, which breaks that descriptive run.

Logic: 2 → 1 → 4 → 5: new studies link PFAS to disease → what PFAS are → more diseases may emerge → the findings aid detection and treatment.

The four sentences stay on health research. Sentence 3 switches to why the chemicals persist in the environment, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 2 → 5 → 4 → 3: music is everywhere and brain-wide → among the most demanding activities → part of daily life everywhere → bound up with identity.

The four sentences describe music as universal and cognitively rich. Sentence 1 turns to scientific research on music and emotion, a different focus, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 5 → 2 → 4 → 1: nodules host life → they also make oxygen → that's surprising → because oxygen usually comes from sunlight-driven plankton.

The four sentences present a finding and why it is surprising. Sentence 3 describes the experimental method, which breaks the flow of the argument, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 4 → 2 → 3 → 5: Singer's 1975 book → his direct, utilitarian theory → his argument about animals' interests → the conclusion about duties.

The four sentences follow Singer's book and argument to their conclusion. Sentence 1 is a general claim about animals, not about Singer, and repeats what sentence 3 already says, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 5 → 3 → 4 → 1: an unexpected fall → the usual explanations → a structural squeeze → new alternatives.

The four sentences explain a decline. Sentence 2 makes a general point about how rising ridership improves service, which runs against that theme, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 1 → 5 → 3 → 2: Britain leads and has approved cultivated pet food → this shows innovation can ease livestock harm → human-food applications are under review → realising the benefits needs public funding.

The four sentences move from the current milestone to what's pending and what's needed next. Sentence 4 is a backward-looking aside about what a former government once considered, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 1 → 3 → 5 → 4: researchers reject pure nature or pure nurture → many dislike any biological role → politics prefers a wholly social view → despite the evidence, such researchers face opposition.

The four sentences discuss resistance to biological explanations of gender. Sentence 2 turns to whether we should still fight sexism, a separate concern, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 4 → 2 → 5 → 3: eye–brain circuits form before birth → this matters for later sight → synapses are over-produced → then pruned to sharpen them.

The four sentences trace a developmental process. Sentence 1 zooms in on how a single synapse passes signals, a different level of detail, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 1 → 5 → 4 → 3: forecasting needs no expertise → pooled amateurs beat pooled experts → a study shows forecasters beating intelligence analysts → even with classified data.

The four sentences build the case that non-experts forecast well. Sentence 2 explains why the intelligence community became interested, which breaks that chain, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 1 → 5 → 4 → 2: no consistent system above ten → a learner couldn't work names out → tens follow their own pattern → some names even reverse digit order.

The four sentences describe the patterns (and quirks) of English number words. Sentence 3 shifts to how children learn them, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 5 → 4 → 1 → 3: the remarkable skill → it develops from infancy → why it matters → its uncertain evolutionary origin.

The four sentences explain the capacity itself. Sentence 2 is an aside about what the capacity is called and its role in thinking skills, which interrupts the account, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 4 → 1 → 5 → 3: a fantasy novel banned and contested → what this may foreshadow → record challenges in 2022 → bans at an all-time high.

The four sentences move from one case to the national trend. Sentence 2 is a broad value judgement about silencing brave authors, not part of that factual run, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 2 → 4 → 5 → 1: who latchkey children are → the preferred modern term → parents may think it helps, research suggests not → its links to loneliness and poor outcomes.

The four sentences build a consistent case about documented negative effects. Sentence 3 adds a caveat about unstudied long-term effects that breaks that focus, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 1 → 3 → 4 → 5: hiring less on technical skill alone → job ads seek soft skills → technical know-how still matters for some roles → a recruiter credits the pandemic.

The four sentences track the shift toward soft skills. Sentence 2, about dropping the search for one perfect candidate, is a general point that doesn't connect to that thread.

Logic: 4 → 3 → 1 → 5: a language's last speaker dies → what Bo was → who she was and what she survived → she had no one to speak it with.

The four sentences stay on the language and its last speaker. Sentence 2 widens to the colonial decline of the whole native population, shifting the focus.

Logic: 1 → 4 → 3 → 2: a dark side of academic research → these journals' false claims → they look legitimate → pay and anything gets published.

The four sentences describe predatory journals specifically. Sentence 5 shifts to publishing fraud in general and its global victims, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 2 → 5 → 1 → 3: old state-focused space law fits commercial ventures poorly → the focus is now private firms → mined materials' legal status is unclear → national rules protect only their own firms.

The four sentences describe gaps in law for commercial activity. Sentence 4 is about a diplomatic row over US authority, which doesn't address that inadequacy.

Logic: 3 → 2 → 5 → 4: genetics promises cures but also enhancement → people feel uneasy but can't say why → one objection: perfection as a bid for mastery → such debates need questions philosophers avoid.

The four sentences discuss the ethics of enhancement. Sentence 1 praises a book for teaching moral argument, a shift in focus, so it is the odd one.

Logic: 3 → 1 → 4 → 2: what neuromarketing is → hype in advertising → critics see a bid to make an art a science → scientists remain unconvinced.

The four sentences describe the new field and reactions to it. Sentence 5, on marketers borrowing older social-science methods, shifts away from neuromarketing.

Logic: 3 → 1 → 5 → 2: tech carries its makers' values → a male-edited encyclopedia as example → male-only perspectives serve diverse contexts poorly → a skewed view deepens inequality.

The four sentences are about male-dominated tech shaping its content. Sentence 4 turns to structural reform of workplaces, a different topic.

Logic: 2 → 1 → 4 → 5: how they differ from Western schools → they teach capitalism with Chinese cases → students want access to private-sector leaders → courses serve a booming domestic business sector.

The four sentences describe Chinese schools. Sentence 3 is about Western schools' joint degrees, a shift in focus.

Logic: 1 → 2 → 4 → 5: speech as the main way to bend bondage → it couldn't be suppressed → slavery needed dialogue, so the enslaved weren't silenced → owners feared whispered plots.

The four sentences treat speech as resistance within slavery. Sentence 3 turns to the spiritual value of oaths in home cultures, a tangent.

Logic: 1 → 5 → 4 → 2: how we read is tied to what we read → feminist inquiry starts from the canon's male bias → documenting this was an early task → one critic's study as an example.

The four sentences describe feminist critics' work on the canon. Sentence 3 is a general claim about gender and reading with no link to that work.

Logic: 3 → 1 → 5 → 4: inventions exist to create property rights → data monopolies in e-business → yet information is abundant → a counter-trend treats information as a shared good.

The four sentences discuss owning information. Sentence 2 makes a broad claim about a new form of capitalism, breaking the theme.

Logic: 5 → 2 → 3 → 1: such accounts have become a genre → they give perpetrators futures and victims pasts → victims' later lives lack vocabulary → the focus is on the moment that divides their lives.

The four sentences develop the past-versus-future framing. Sentence 4 is about the questions put to victims, a topic the others don't raise.

Logic: 5 → 1 → 2 → 4: womanhood seen as biological, femininity as a process → looks taken to reveal inner traits → appearance signals conduct, judged by beauty skills → women who fail the norms are disparaged.

The four sentences trace the appearance-based ideal and its consequences. Sentence 3 turns to makeover media's messages, a separate thread.

Logic: Sentence 3, the point that current systems ignore the context in which words are used.

The paragraph runs: the campaign against abusive content online, how software catches it faster than people, the problem that algorithms absorb human bias from training data, and an example of that bias with group-naming words. The point about missing context starts a different thread, so it is the odd one out.