Ordered relations: Y < J = P ≥ R > I. Which conclusion(s) definitely follow? I) J > I; II) Y < R.

Introduction / Context:
We must see what is compelled about J vs I and Y vs R, given J equals P and P is at least R, which is strictly above I.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Y < J = P
• P ≥ R > I

Concept / Approach:
From R > I and J = P ≥ R, J must be > I. But Y < J tells nothing definitive about Y vs R because R could be below or equal to J while Y might still be above or below R.

Step-by-Step Solution:
I) Since J = P ≥ R > I ⇒ J > I (true). II) From Y < J and R ≤ J, Y could be < R or > R depending on values. Not forced.

Verification / Alternative check:
Counterexample for II: Y=100, R=50, J=P=101, I any <50. Then Y > R, so II fails while premises hold.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only I is certain; II is not determined.

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming “Y < J and R ≤ J” implies Y < R; it does not.

Final Answer:
If only conclusion I follows