Symbol placement — Choose a symbol to make both conclusions hold simultaneously: Make “K ≤ H” and “M > J” definitely true given the chain H ≥ I = J ? K ≤ L < M

Introduction / Context:
This is an order-reasoning puzzle with chained relations. A single missing symbol between J and K must be chosen so that two conclusions are guaranteed: K ≤ H and M > J. The key is to propagate inequalities/equalities through the chain without making assumptions not implied by the relations.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• H ≥ I and I = J.
• Between J and K there is an unknown relation to be chosen from {>, ≥, ≤, <, =}. (Answer choices restrict what is being considered.)
• K ≤ L and L < M.
• We must force both: (1) K ≤ H and (2) M > J.

Concept / Approach:
First ensure M > J. Because K ≤ L < M, any relation that keeps J ≤ L (or J < L) will imply J < M, hence M > J. Second ensure K ≤ H. Since H ≥ I = J, if we can guarantee K ≤ J (or K ≤ I), then transitivity gives K ≤ H.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Try the other options to see why they fail: if J < K or J ≤ K, then K could exceed J, and if H is only slightly above J, it is possible that K > H, breaking K ≤ H. Choosing “>” between J and K sets J > K, which does make K ≤ J, but some answer sets do not include that exact option in a way that simultaneously guarantees J ≤ L; moreover, the provided answer choices point to “≥” as the consistent operator that satisfies both constraints cleanly.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• >: Does not appear in the minimal sufficient set presented; depending on values, it can still satisfy the conditions, but the problem’s choices narrow to the unique robust guarantee “≥”.
• ≤ or Either < or ≤: Permit J ≤ K (including J < K), which can violate K ≤ H if K grows above H.

Common Pitfalls:

• Assuming total order information not given (e.g., inferring exact sizes instead of only what the chain enforces).
• Forgetting that “≥” immediately produces K ≤ J, which is the strongest pathway to K ≤ H via H ≥ I = J.

Final Answer:
≥