Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions Statement: Ten candidates, who were on the waiting list, could finally be admitted to the course. Assumptions to evaluate: I. Wait-listed candidates ordinarily do not get admission. II. A large number of candidates were on the waiting list. III. The number of regular seats available for admission is small.

Introduction / Context:
The sentence reports that ten wait-listed applicants were eventually admitted. We must determine which background beliefs are required for this report to make sense. Be careful not to read more than is stated.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Outcome: ten people from the waiting list got admission.
• I: Typically, wait-listed applicants do not get admission.
• II: There were many names on the waiting list.
• III: The course has only a small number of admission seats.

Concept / Approach:
A factual update (“ten got in”) does not commit to generalizations about usual outcomes (I), total list size (II), or seat counts (III). It only communicates the number admitted from the list.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Replace “ten” with any number; the logic still doesn’t depend on typicality, list size, or seat scarcity—confirming no assumption is necessary.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Any combination option asserts more than is warranted by the simple report.
• All are implicit: overreach.

Common Pitfalls:
Reading typicality or competitiveness into plain numerical outcomes.

Final Answer:
None is implicit