Professor Edwards must have revealed information that was embarrassing to the university. After all, to have been publicly censured by the head of the university, as Edwards was, a professor must either have revealed information that embarrassed the university or have been guilty of gross professional negligence, and Edwards' professional behavior is impeccable. Which one of the following arguments exhibits a pattern of reasoning most similar to that in the argument above? ['Anyone who is either awarded a letter of commendation or who receives a bonus must be recommended by a company officer. Simon has been recommended by a company officer and will receive a bonus, so he must not have been awarded a letter of commendation.', 'To earn a merit salary increase, an employee of TGX must either bring in new clients or develop innovative products. No innovative products were developed at TGX this year, however, so TGX employees must have brought in many new clients.', 'Any employee of Wilkins, Waddel, and Sloan who discusses a client with a member of the press will be either fired or demoted. But since Wilkins employees never discuss their clients at all, no Wilkins employee will ever be demoted.', 'Anyone promoted to supervisor must either have worked on the shop floor for three years or have an influential sponsor. Daniels, ttherefore, clearly has an influential sponsor, since he was promoted to supervisor after only one year on the shop floor.']