Statements:\nI. Only students can participate in the race. (Hence, every participant is a student.)\nII. Some participants in the race are girls.\nIII. All girl participants in the race are invited for coaching.\n\nWhich one of the following conclusions follows from the statements above?

Introduction / Context:
This verbal-reasoning item is a classic syllogism. We are given three set relationships about students, participants, and girls invited for coaching. The task is to deduce what must be true in all models that satisfy the premises.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• I: Only students can participate ⇒ Participants ⊆ Students.
• II: Some participants are girls ⇒ ∃ at least one participant who is a girl (hence also a student by I).
• III: All girl participants are invited for coaching ⇒ (Participants ∩ Girls) ⊆ Invited.

Concept / Approach:
Translate each sentence into a set inclusion. Focus first on what is asserted universally (I and III) before interpreting the existential information (II). The safest conclusion is one that follows from universal containment and does not overreach.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Construct a Venn model with Participants entirely inside Students. Place some participants in the overlap with Girls to be Invited. Non-girl participants need not be invited. The statement “All participants are students” holds in every such model.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing “only if” style constraints and assuming converses; promoting existential facts (“some”) to universals (“all”).

Final Answer:
All participants in the race are students.