阅读理解真题考研英语.pdf

阅读理解真题考研英语阅读理解真题考研英语1Text 3Any fair-minded assessment of the dangers of thedeal between Britains National Health Service(NHS)and DeepMind must start by acknowledging that bothsides mean well.DeepMind is one of the leadingartificial intelligence(AI)panies in the world.Thepotential of this work applied to healthcare is verygreat,but it could also lead to furtherconcentration of power in the tech giants.It Isagainst that background that the informationmissioner,Elizabeth Denham,has issued her damningverdict against the Royal Free hospital trust underthe NHS,which handed over to DeepMind the records of1.6 million patients In 20XX on the basis of a vagueagreement which took far too little account of thepatients rights and their expectations of privacy.DeepMind has almost apologized.The NHS trust hasmended its ways.Further arrangements-and there maybe many-between the NHS and DeepMind will becarefully scrutinised to ensure that all necessarypermissions have been asked of patients and allunnecessary data has been cleaned.There are lessonsabout informed patient consent to learn.But privacyis not the only angle in this case and not even themost important.Ms Denham chose to concentrate theblame on the NHS trust,since under existing law it“controlled“the data and DeepMind merelyaprocessed it.But this distinction misses thepoint that it is processing and aggregation,not themere possession of bits,that gives the data value.The great question is who should benefit from theanalysis of all the data that our lives now generate.Privacy law builds on the concept of damage to anindividual from identifiable knowledge about them.That misses the way the surveillance economy works.The data of an individual there gains its value onlywhen it is pared with the data of countless millionsmore.The use of privacy law to curb the tech giants inthis instance feels slightly maladapted.Thispractice does not address the real worry.It is notenough to say that the algorithms DeepMind developswill benefit patients and save lives.What matters isthat they will belong to a private monopoly whichdeveloped them using public resources.If softwarepromises to save lives on the scale that dugs now can,big data may be expected to behave as a big pharm hasdone.We are still at the beginning of thisrevolution and small choices now may turn out to havegigantic consequences later.A long struggle will beneeded to avoid a future of digital feudalism.MsDenhams report is a wele start.31.Wha is true of the agreement between the NHSand DeepMind?A It caused conflicts among tech giants.B It failed to pay due attention to patient srights.C It fell short of the latters expectationsD It put both sides into a dangerous situation.32.The NHS trust responded to Denham1s verdictwithA empty promises.B tough resistance.C necessary adjustments.D sincere apologies.33.The author argues in Paragraph 2 thatA privacy protection must be secured at allcosts.B leaking patients*data is worse than sellingit.C making profits from patients data is illegal.D the value of data es from the processing of it34.According to the last paragraph,the real worryarising from this deal isA the vicious rivalry among big pharmas.B the ineffective enforcement of privacy law.C the uncontrolled use of new software.D the monopoly of big data by tech giants.35.The author*s attitude toward the application ofAI to healthcare isA ambiguous.B cautious.C appreciative.D contemptuous.阅读理解真题考研英语2Text 3The rough guide to marketing success used to bethat you got what you paid for.No longer.Whiletraditional“paid media-such as televisionmercials and print advertisements-still play amajor role,panies today can exploit manyalternative forms of media.Consumers passionateabout a product may create“owned”media by sendinge-mail alerts about products and sales to customersregistered with its Web site.The way consumers nowapproach the broad range of factors beyondconventional paid media.Paid and owned media are controlled by marketerspromoting their own products.For earned media,such marketers act as the initiator forusers responses.But in some cases,onem arketers owned media bee another marketer s paidmedia-for instance,when an e-merce retailersells ad space on its W eb site.W e define such soldmedia as owned media whose traffic is so strong thatother organizations place their content or e-merceengines within that environment.This trend,whichwe believe is still in its infancy,effectivelybegan with retailers and travel providers such asairlines and hotels and will no doubt go further.Johnson&Johnson,for example,has createdBabyCenter,a stand-alone media property thatpromotes plementary and even petitive products.Besides generating ine,the presence of othermarketers makes the site seem objective,givespanies opportunities to learn valuable informationabout the appeal of other panies marketing,andmay help expand user traffic for all panies concerned.The same dramatic technological changes that haveprovided marketers with more(and more diverse)munications choices have also increased the risk thatpassionate consumers will voice their opinions inquicker,more visible,and much more damaging ways.Such hijacked media are the opposite of earnedmedia：an asset or campaign bees hostage toconsumers,other stakeholders,or activists whomake negative allegations about a brand or product.Members of social networks,for instance,arelearning that they can hijack media to apply pressureon the businesses that originally created them.If that happens,passionate consumers would tryto persuade others to boycott products,putting thereputation of the target pany at risk.In such acase,the pany s response may not be sufficientlyquick or thoughtful,and the learning curve has beensteep.Toyota Motor,for example,alleviated someof the damage from its recall crisis earlier thisyear with a relatively quick and well-orchestratedsocial-media response campaign,which includedefforts to engage with consumers directly on sitessuch as Twitter and the social-news site Digg.31.Consumers may create“earned“media when theyareA obsessed with online shopping at certain Websites.B inspired by product-promoting e-mails sent tothem.C eager to help their friends promote qualityproducts.D enthusiastic about remending their favoriteproducts.32.According to Paragraph 2,sold media featureA a safe business environment.B random petition.C strong user traffic.D flexibility in organization.33.The author indicates in Paragraph 3 thatearned mediaA invite constant conflicts with passionateconsumers.B can be used to produce negative effects inmarketing.C may be responsible for fiercer petition.D deserve all the negative ments about them.34.Toyota Motor s experience is cited as anexample ofA responding effectively to hijacked media.B persuading customers into boycotting products.C cooperating with supportive consumers.D taking advantage of hijacked media.35.Which of the following is the text mainlyabout?A Alternatives to conventional paid media.B Conflict between hijacked and earned media.C Dominance of hijacked media.D Popularity of owned media.阅读理解真题考研英语3Text 3Now utopia has grown unfashionable,as we havegained a deeper appreciation of the range of threatsfacing us,from asteroid strike to pandemic flu toclimate change.You might even be tempted to assumethat humanity has little future to look forward to.But such gloominess is misplaced.The fossilrecord shows that many species have endured formillions of years-so why shouldnt we?Take abroader look at our species place in the universe,and it bees clear that we have an excellent chance ofsurviving for tens,if not hundreds,of thousands ofyears(see 100,000 AD：Living in the deep future).Look up Homo sapiens in the IUCNs Red List ofthreatened species,and you will read：Listed asLeast Concern as the species is very widelydistributed,adaptable,currently increasing,andthere are no major threats resulting in an overallpopulation decline.So what does our deep future hold?A growingnumber of researchers and organisations are nowthinking seriously about that question.For example,the Long Now Foundation,based in San Francisco,hascreated a forum where thinkers and scientists areinvited to project the implications of their ideasover very long timescales.Its flagship project is amechanical clock,buried deep inside a mountain inTexas,that is designed to still be marking timethousands of years hence.Then there are scientists who are giving seriousconsideration to the idea that we should recognise anew geological era：the Anthropocene.They,too,arepulling the camera right back and asking whathumanitys impact will be on the planet-in thecontext of stratigraphic time.Perhaps perversely,it may be easier to thinkabout such lengthy timescales than about the moreimmediate future.The potential evolution of todaystechnology,and its social consequences,isdazzlingly plicated,and its perhaps best left toscience-fiction writers and futurologists to explorethe many possibilities we can envisage.Thats onereason why we have launched Arc,a new publicationdedicated to the near future.But take a longer view and there is a surprisingamount that we can say with considerable assurance.As so often,the past holds the key to the future：wehave now identified enough of the long-term patternsshaping the history of the planet,and our species,to make evidence-based forecasts about the situationsin which our descendants will find themselves.This long perspective makes the pessimistic viewof our prospects seem more likely to be a passing fad.To be sure,the future is not all rosy：while ourspecies may flourish,a great many individuals maynot.But we are now knowledgeable enough to mitigatemany of the risks that threatened the existence ofearlier humans,and to improve the lot of those to e.Thinking about our place in deep time is a good wayto focus on the challenges that confront us today,and to make a future worth living in.31.Our vision of the future used to be inspiredbyA our desire for ares of fulfillmentB our faith in science and techedC our awareness of potential risksD our bdief in equal opportunity32.The IUCN Rod List”suggest that human beingsonA a sustained speciesB the word s deminant powerC a threat to the environmentD a misplaced race33.Which of the following is true according toParagraph 5?A Arc helps limit the scope of futurologicalstudies.B Technology offers solutions to social problem.C The interest in science fiction is on the rise.D Our Immediate future is hard to conceive.34.To ensure the future of mankind,it is crucialtoA explore our planet s abundant resources.B adopt an optimistic view of the world.C draw on our experience from the past.D curb our ambition to reshape history.35.Which of the following would be the best titlefor the text?A Uncertainty about Our FutureB Evolution of the Human SpeciesC The Ever-bright Prospects of Mankind.D Science,Technology and Humanity.阅读理解真题考研英语4Text 3The US$3-million Fundamental physics prize isindeed an interesting experiment,as AlexanderPolyakov said when he accepted this year s award inMarch.And it is far from the only one of its type.As a News Feature article in Nature discusses,astring of lucrative awards for researchers havejoined the Nobel Prizes in recent years.Many,likethe Fundamental Physics Prize,are funded from thetelephone-number-sized bank accounts of Internetentrepreneurs.These benefactors have succeeded intheir chosen fields,they say,and they want to usetheir wealth to draw attention to those who havesucceeded in science.What s not to like?Quite a lot,according to ahandful of scientists quoted in the News Feature.Youcannot buy class,as the old saying goes,and theseupstart entrepreneurs cannot buy their prizes theprestige of the Nobels,The new awards are anexercise in self-promotion for those behind them,sayscientists.They could distort the achievement-basedsystem of peer-review-led research.They could cementthe status quo of peer-reviewed research.They do notfund peer-reviewed research.They perpetuate the mythof the lone genius.The goals of the prize-givers seem as scattered asthe criticism.Some want to shock,others to drawpeople into science,or to better reward those whohave made their careers in research.As Nature has pointed out before,there are somelegitimate concerns about how science prizes-bothnew and old are distributed.The Breakthrough Prizein Life Sciences,launched this year,takes anunrepresentative view of what the life sciencesinclude.But the Nobel Foundation s limit of threerecipients per prize,each of whom must still beliving,has long been outgrown by the collaborativenature of modern research-as will be demonstrated bythe inevitable row over who is ignored when it es toacknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson.TheNobels were,of course,themselves set up by a veryrich individual who had decided what he wanted to dowith his own money.Time,rather than intention,hasgiven them legitimacy.As much as some scientists may plain about the newawards,two things seem clear.First,mostresearchers would accept such a prize if they wereoffered one.Second,it is surely a good thing thatthe money and attention e to science rather than goelsewhere,It is fair to criticize and question themechanism-that is the culture of research,afterall-but it is the prize-giversmoney to do with asthey please.It is wise to take such gifts withgratitude and grace.31.The Fundamental Physical Prize is seen asAa symbol of the entrepreneurs s wealth.Ba possible replacement of the Nobel Prize.Can example of bankers investment.Da handsome reward for researchers.32.The phrase“to sign on”(Line 3,Para.2)mostprobably meansAthe profit-oriented scientists.Bthe founders of the new award.Cthe achievement-based system.Dpeer-review-led research.33.What promoted the chancellor to develop hisscheme?Acontroversies over the recipients status.Bthe joint effort of modern researchers.Clegitimate concerns over the new prize.Dthe demonstration of research findings.34.According to Paragraph 3,being unemployedmakes one one feelATheir endurance has done justice to them.BTheir legitimacy has long been in dispute.CThey are the most representative honor.DHistory has never cast doubt on them.35.To which of the following would the author mostprobably agree?Aacceptable despite the criticism.Bharmful to the culture of research.Csubject to undesirable changes.Dunworthy of public attention.