Read the following statements about peak hour travel in city M and answer the question that follows. During peak hours the local trains of city M are chaotic. Peak hours usually refer to the morning time when people go to work and the evening time when people return home. Some people feel that the state government has not taken any measures in the past two years to deal with this situation. Which of the following statements, if true, would weaken the perception of these people?

Introduction / Context:
This is a critical reasoning question focused on weakening a perception or claim. The perception here is that the state government has not taken any measures in the past two years to address chaos in local trains during peak hours. Your job is to identify which option, if taken as true, weakens this belief by showing that the government has in fact taken some relevant action.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Context statement: During peak hours the local trains of city M are chaotic.
• Additional information: Peak hours are the morning and evening work commute periods.
• Perception: Some people believe that the state government has taken no measures in the past two years to manage this chaos.
• Option A: In the past one year the government has increased train frequency in peak hours and capacity per train.
• Option B: In the past two years the government has received many petitions demanding improvement.
• Option C: First class passengers feel their condition is worse than that of second class passengers.
• Option D: Population is increasing due to migration and better job opportunities, leading to more train users.

Concept / Approach:
To weaken a claim, you look for information that directly contradicts or undermines the basis of that claim. The perception is that no measures have been taken. Therefore, any option that shows the government has taken some reasonable and relevant measures during the specified time period would weaken this perception. Options that merely describe complaints, feelings, or external factors like population growth do not show government action and hence do not weaken the claim.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Examine option A. It explicitly states that in the past one year the state government increased the frequency of trains during peak hours and increased the number of passengers each train can carry. Both actions are directly aimed at managing peak hour chaos by increasing capacity and supply. This directly contradicts the idea that the government took no measures.Step 2: Examine option B. Receiving many petitions only shows that citizens complained and suggested improvements. It does not show that the government acted. In fact, it might support the perception that more needs to be done, but it does not weaken the claim regarding lack of measures.Step 3: Examine option C. The feeling of first class passengers that their plight is worse than that of second class passengers merely comments on the nature of the problem and relative discomfort. It says nothing about government measures and therefore does not weaken the perception.Step 4: Examine option D. This option explains why there is a surge in the number of people travelling by trains by pointing to population growth and migration. This can even support the idea that chaos is natural under these conditions but does not show the government took any steps.

Verification / Alternative check:
If option A is true, then people who claim that the government has taken no measures in the last two years are clearly mistaken, because increasing frequency and capacity are concrete measures. On the other hand, options B, C, and D are compatible with the belief that the government has not actually intervened. Only one option provides direct evidence of action that targets the problem, and that option must therefore weaken the original perception.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option B highlights citizen petitions but not government response. It may even strengthen the idea that the problem continues. Option C focuses on passenger feelings and relative discomfort, which is irrelevant to the question of whether any measures were taken. Option D gives a reason for the chaos, namely increasing population and commuters, but again does not mention any governmental steps. Since the question is specifically asking for an option that weakens the perception about lack of measures, these options are unsuitable.

Common Pitfalls:
Test takers often confuse explaining a problem with weakening a claim about solutions. An explanation of why trains are crowded does not show any action by the authorities. Another pitfall is to choose an option that increases sympathy for passengers, assuming that such an option responds to the issue; however, the question is about measures taken, not about who suffers more. Always align your choice precisely with what the question stem is asking you to do.

Final Answer:
Hence, the statement that weakens the perception that no measures have been taken is that in the past one year the state government has increased the frequency of trains in peak hours and also increased the number of passengers per train, that is, option A.