Analogies – Choose the pair that best completes the relationship. PEDAL : BICYCLE :: ?

Introduction / Context:A PEDAL is a component or part of a BICYCLE. The required relationship is 'part : whole.' We need a similar mechanical component that belongs to a larger object in the same direction.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Pedal belongs to bicycle as a necessary component.
• We want another physical part that belongs to its vehicle.

Concept / Approach:Check which options are parts of the named whole. Discard unit–measure, action–action, or tool–vehicle relations that do not preserve part–whole structure.

Step-by-Step Solution:1) Identify pattern: part → whole.2) 'tire : automobile' fits, as a tire is a part of a car.3) 'inch : yardstick' is unit vs. measuring device, not a component.4) 'walk : skip' are actions, not part–whole.5) 'buckle : belt' is also part–whole, but introduces ambiguity across apparel rather than machinery; the more precise vehicle-component analogy is superior and conventional for test items.6) 'oar : canoe' is an accessory used with a canoe but not a fixed component of the canoe; it is detachable equipment.

Verification / Alternative check:Sentence test: 'A pedal is part of a bicycle' and 'A tire is part of an automobile' are standard statements of composition in mechanical contexts.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• inch : yardstick – Measurement relation, not composition.
• walk : skip – Action–action, no whole.
• buckle : belt – Part–whole but from apparel; the automotive component analogy more closely mirrors the mechanical context.
• oar : canoe – Tool paired with vehicle, not an inherent part.

Common Pitfalls:Beware of accessory relationships. The correct choice should reflect a built-in component similar to how a pedal belongs to a bicycle.

Final Answer:tire : automobile