01
Rank S · Outstanding
S
Outstanding reasoning that sees premises through to conclusions with almost no wavering.
Assessment
Verbal Reasoning Test Vol.2
1 sections16 questions
Quantify verbal reasoning across four sub-skills — analogies, word relations, inference, and constraints — in 16 questions. Correctness is graded into an overall score and level, with a per-sub-skill breakdown, per-question results and explanations, strengths and growth areas, and study steps.
[Vol.2] A new 16-question set. A deep-dive verbal-reasoning test measuring four sub-skills — analogies, word relations, inference, and constraints — across 16 questions. It grades your answers into an overall score and level, and shows a sub-skill radar, per-question results with explanations, strengths and growth areas, and a study plan. About 5–8 minutes.
What this assessment measures
Test result
Your level inferred from your score on 16 questions
02
Rank A · Excellent
A
Stable reasoning that traces the grounds from premises to conclusions.
03
Rank B · Good
B
The foundation is there; tightening how you link premises will lift you.
04
Rank C · Fair
C
The basics of reasoning are in place; tidying quantity and negation will lift you.
05
Rank D · Needs review
D
Begin by getting used to the language of logic; diagramming will steady you.
Example result report
S
Rank S
Outstanding
You see the path from premises to conclusions with almost no wavering — your command of logic is at a level you can rely on.
PassOverall score
100/ 100
Correct
16/ 16
Top
95%ile
Accuracy
100%
Overall score and pass line
100
Ability profile
Your score across ability domains (out of 100)
Domain-by-domain analysis
Spotting the relation between two words and choosing the word that fits the same relation. Naming the relation type (part-whole, tool-function, etc.) keeps it steady.
Grasping how words connect — synonym, antonym, part-whole, category. Identifying which kind of relation it is reduces hesitation.
Drawing only what a short text guarantees. Resisting the converse and inverse, and using contrapositive and elimination precisely, keeps it stable.
Organizing several verbal conditions to pin down a seating or ordering. Turning the clues into a diagram or table makes it reliable.
Your strengths
You cleanly separate what is certain from what is merely plausible.
You switch logical forms — negation, converse, contrapositive — accurately.
You keep your accuracy under time pressure and finish without losing focus.
Next challenges
A perfect score — well done. Try a harder problem set next.
Shorten the time limit and aim to keep both speed and accuracy.
Deepen negation, converse, and contrapositive until you can teach them.
Detailed analysis
This test measures logical reasoning across several ability domains. You reached an outstanding level, judging almost exactly what the premises guarantee. Your domain results are shown in the radar and the per-question marks above. From here, test whether you can hold the same accuracy on harder problems or under tighter time limits, and your skill will become even more solid.
What to do next
Take on a harder problem set to widen your range for unfamiliar formats.
Set a shorter time limit and confirm you keep both speed and accuracy.
Put your reasoning into words until you could explain it to someone else.
This test is reference information about logical-reasoning tendencies, not a formal qualification or a guarantee of ability.
A
Rank A
Excellent
You reason from premises to conclusions by tracing the grounds — stable and reliable.
PassOverall score
81/ 100
Correct
13/ 16
Top
78%ile
Accuracy
81%
Overall score and pass line
81
Ability profile
Your score across ability domains (out of 100)
Domain-by-domain analysis
Spotting the relation between two words and choosing the word that fits the same relation. Naming the relation type (part-whole, tool-function, etc.) keeps it steady.
Grasping how words connect — synonym, antonym, part-whole, category. Identifying which kind of relation it is reduces hesitation.
Drawing only what a short text guarantees. Resisting the converse and inverse, and using contrapositive and elimination precisely, keeps it stable.
Organizing several verbal conditions to pin down a seating or ordering. Turning the clues into a diagram or table makes it reliable.
Your strengths
You check the grounds and choose what can be stated with certainty.
You judge the link between premises and conclusion calmly.
You stay focused through to the end within the time.
Growth areas
On harder items, the line between a certain conclusion and a merely plausible one can blur.
Favoring speed, you may decide before weighing every option.
Switching logical forms — negation, converse, contrapositive — gets steadier with a bit more care.
Detailed analysis
This test measures logical reasoning across several ability domains. You reached an excellent level, with a steady grip on judging exactly what the premises guarantee. Your domain strengths and weak spots are shown directly in the radar and the per-question results above. For any item you missed, retrace 'why this option is correct' in its explanation, and a perfect score is within reach. Keep resisting reversal errors and over-generalization.
What to do next
For each item you missed, retrace 'why this option is correct' in its explanation.
Drill distinguishing negation, converse, and contrapositive to stop form-switching slips.
Practice timed sets to raise speed while keeping accuracy.
This test is reference information about logical-reasoning tendencies, not a formal qualification or a guarantee of ability.
B
Rank B
Good
The foundation is there. Tighten how you link premises and the next score band comes into view.
Almost thereOverall score
63/ 100
Correct
10/ 16
Top
61%ile
Accuracy
63%
Overall score and pass line
63
Ability profile
Your score across ability domains (out of 100)
Domain-by-domain analysis
Spotting the relation between two words and choosing the word that fits the same relation. Naming the relation type (part-whole, tool-function, etc.) keeps it steady.
Grasping how words connect — synonym, antonym, part-whole, category. Identifying which kind of relation it is reduces hesitation.
Drawing only what a short text guarantees. Resisting the converse and inverse, and using contrapositive and elimination precisely, keeps it stable.
Organizing several verbal conditions to pin down a seating or ordering. Turning the clues into a diagram or table makes it reliable.
Your strengths
You read the prompts to the end and compare the options.
You find a way in by mapping problems to everyday examples.
On items you grasp, you trace the grounds to the right answer.
Growth areas
Words of quantity and negation — all, some, not — can trip you up.
You sometimes rush, choosing beyond what the premises guarantee.
As conditions stack up, organizing them lags and you drop points.
Detailed analysis
This test measures logical reasoning across several ability domains. You are at a good level, with the foundation in place. The radar and the per-question results above show which domains have the most headroom. For the items you missed, draw the premises as nested diagrams, sort the options into must / might / cannot be true, then reread the explanation — the same type of error will fade.
What to do next
Draw premises as nested circles and check containment by eye before choosing.
Practice sorting options into must / might / cannot be true.
Do five basic items a day, untimed, accuracy first.
This test is reference information about logical-reasoning tendencies, not a formal qualification or a guarantee of ability.
C
Rank C
Fair
You can follow the basic reasoning. Tidy up how you handle quantity and negation, and you'll reach the right answer more consistently.
Almost thereOverall score
38/ 100
Correct
6/ 16
Top
39%ile
Accuracy
38%
Overall score and pass line
38
Ability profile
Your score across ability domains (out of 100)
Domain-by-domain analysis
Spotting the relation between two words and choosing the word that fits the same relation. Naming the relation type (part-whole, tool-function, etc.) keeps it steady.
Grasping how words connect — synonym, antonym, part-whole, category. Identifying which kind of relation it is reduces hesitation.
Drawing only what a short text guarantees. Resisting the converse and inverse, and using contrapositive and elimination precisely, keeps it stable.
Organizing several verbal conditions to pin down a seating or ordering. Turning the clues into a diagram or table makes it reliable.
Your strengths
On easier items, you trace the grounds to the right answer.
You read the prompts to the end and compare the options.
You find a way in by mapping problems to everyday examples.
Growth areas
Words of quantity and negation — all, some, not — make your judgment waver.
As conditions stack up, organizing them lags and you drop points.
You sometimes rush, choosing beyond what the premises guarantee.
Detailed analysis
This test measures logical reasoning across several ability domains. You are at a fair level, with the basic patterns of reasoning in place. The radar and the per-question results above show which domains have the most headroom. For the items you missed, draw the premises as nested diagrams, sort the options into must / might / cannot be true, then reread the explanation — the same type of error will fade.
What to do next
Draw premises as nested circles and check containment by eye before choosing.
Practice sorting options into must / might / cannot be true.
Do five basic items a day, untimed, accuracy first.
This test is reference information about logical-reasoning tendencies, not a formal qualification or a guarantee of ability.
D
Rank D
Needs review
Start from the basics. Turning each premise into a diagram will steady your reasoning fast.
Almost thereOverall score
25/ 100
Correct
4/ 16
Top
28%ile
Accuracy
25%
Overall score and pass line
25
Ability profile
Your score across ability domains (out of 100)
Domain-by-domain analysis
Spotting the relation between two words and choosing the word that fits the same relation. Naming the relation type (part-whole, tool-function, etc.) keeps it steady.
Grasping how words connect — synonym, antonym, part-whole, category. Identifying which kind of relation it is reduces hesitation.
Drawing only what a short text guarantees. Resisting the converse and inverse, and using contrapositive and elimination precisely, keeps it stable.
Organizing several verbal conditions to pin down a seating or ordering. Turning the clues into a diagram or table makes it reliable.
Your strengths
You stay with the task to the end — a base to build on.
On items with familiar wording, you grasp the meaning.
Rereading the explanations helps you regrasp the approach.
Growth areas
Words of quantity and negation — all, some, not — are still shaky.
You tend to stall before finding the rule or the quantity relation.
You can overshoot what the premises actually guarantee.
Detailed analysis
This test measures logical reasoning across several ability domains. You are at the needs-review level — not a ceiling on ability, but a sign the language of logic is still new. The radar and the per-question results above show where to start. Read aloud the explanations of the items you missed, draw the premises as nested circles, and mark only what must be true — start there and your foundation will steady.
What to do next
Start with basics: check 'all / some / not' using pictures and diagrams.
Draw premises as nested circles and mark only what is certain.
Do three easy items a day, pairing each with reading the explanation aloud.
This test is reference information about logical-reasoning tendencies, not a formal qualification or a guarantee of ability.
Who it's for
Anyone who wants a deep read on their verbal reasoning, or to prep for verbal aptitude tests in hiring and admissions.
What the result looks like
Shows an overall score and level, a four-sub-skill profile, per-question results with explanations, strengths and growth areas, and next study steps.
This assessment has 1 sections and 16 questions.
Once you start, you cannot change the language. Switch beforehand if needed.