（2017-12）六級閱讀分析

03-01

Part III Reading Comprehension (40 minutes)

閱讀部分總共包含三個Section:

Section A：選詞填空（15選10）
Section B：
Section C：

Given Time： 40 minutes

Section A

Directions: In this section, there is a passage with ten blanks. You are required to select one word for each blank from a list of choices given in a word bank following the passage. Read the passage through carefully before making your choices. Each choice in the bank is identified by a letter.Please mark the corresponding letter for each item on Answer Sheet 2 with a single line through the center. You may not use any of the words in the bank more than once.

The Pacific island nation of Palau has become home to the sixth largest marine sanctuary in the world. The new marine reserve, now the largest in the Pacific, will ?26（will後接動詞，根據後一句建立了鯊魚避難所，說明此處是要確保不能有採礦和捕魚，查看動詞分組易知答案為secure）no fishing or mining.Palau also established the worlds first shark sanctuary in 2009.

The tiny island nation has set aside 500,000 square kilometres—80 percent—of its maritime 27 （需填名詞， territory）,for full protection. Thats the highest percentage of an 28 （an後面接母音字母開頭的形容詞，修飾economic zone，"devoted to marine conservation by any country in the world"這個小島國投入到海洋保護的領海比例是最高的，獨一無二的economic zone，independent獨立的，exclusive獨家的，僅此一家的，該空填exclusive）economic zone devoted to marine conservation by any country in the world. The remaining 20 percent of the Palau seas will be reserved for local fishing by individuals and small-scale 29 （顯然填commercial）fishing businesses with limited exports.

"Island 30 （代入法選communities）have been among the hardest hit by the threats facing the ocean," said President Tommy Remengesau Jr. in a statement. "Creating this sanctuary is a bold move that the people of Palau recognize as 31 （必要的essential）to our survival. We want to lead the way in restoring the health of the ocean for future generations."

Palau has only been an 32 （代入法，獨立的，independent）nation for twenty years and has a strong history of environmental protection. It is home to one of the worlds finest marine ecosystems, with more than 1,300 species of fish and 700 species of coral.

Senator Hokkons Baules, lead 33 （代入法，發起人，sponsor）of the Palau National Marine Sanctuary Act, said the sanctuary will "help build a? 34 （?spectacle）future for the Palauan people by honoring the conservation traditions of our past". These include the centuries-old custom of "bul", where leaders would call a temporary stop to fishing for key species in order to give fish ?35 （代入法，分配，allocate）an opportunity to replenish (補充).

A) allocate B) celebrities C) commercial D) communities E) essential F) exclusive

G) independent H) indulge I) permit J) secure K) solitary L) spectacle M) sponsor N) stocks O) territory

方法論：

首先將待選辭彙按照詞性進行分類標註，這樣可以縮小每個空格選詞時的搜索範圍：

動詞：A) allocate H) indulge I) permit J) secure

名詞：B) celebrities D) communities L) spectacle M) sponsor N) stocks O) territory

形容詞：C) commercial E) essential F) exclusive G) independent K) solitary

做題時首先判斷blank處的詞性，據此在對應詞性的分組中採用代入法尋找正確答案（如果沒有找到正確答案那麼可能有些詞的詞性存疑，未將詞性分類正確，重新查看全部辭彙，切不可轉牛角尖）
每使用一個單詞就劃掉一個，逐步縮小選擇範圍

四六級選詞填空滿分秘籍_滬江英語學習網www.hjenglish.com

Section B

Directions: In this section, you are going to read a passage with ten statements attached to it.Each statement contains information given in one of the paragraphs. Identify the paragraphfrom which the information is derived. You may choose a paragraph more than once. Eachparagraph is marked with a letter. Answer the questions by marking the corresponding letter onAnswer Sheet 2.

Data sharing: An open mind on open date

[A] It is a movement building steady momentum: a call to make research data, softwarecode and experimental methods publicly available and transparent. A spirit of openness isgaining acceptance in the science community, and is the only way, say advocates, to addressa crisis in science whereby too few findings are successfully reproduced. Furthermore, they say,it is the best way for researchers to gather the range of observations that are necessary tospeed up discoveries or to identify large-scale trends.

[B] The open-data shift poses a confusing problem for junior researchers. On the one hand,the drive to share is gathering official steam. Since 2013, global scientific bodies have begunto back politics that support increased public access to research. On the other hand, scientistsdisagree about how much and when they should share date, and they debate whether sharingit is more likely to accelerate science and make it more robust, or to introduce vulnerabilitiesand problems. As more journals and make it more robust, or to introduce vulnerabilities andproblems. As more journal and funders adopt data-sharing requirements, and as a growingnumber of enthusiasts call for more openness, junior researchers must find their placebetween adopters and those who continue to hold out, even as they strive to launch their owncareers.

[C] One key challenge facing young scientists is how to be open without becoming scientificallyvulnerable. They must determine the risk of jeopardizing a job offer or a collaborationproposal from those who are wary of—or unfamiliar with—open science. And they must learnhow to capitalize on the movements benefits, such as opportunities for more citations and away to build a reputation without the need for conventional metrics, such as publication inhigh-impact journals.

[D] Some fields have embraced open data more than others. Researchers in psychology, a fieldrocked by findings of irreproducibility in the past few years, have been especially vocalsupporters of the drive for more-open science. A few psychology journals have createdincentives to increase interest in reproducible science—for example, by affixing an open-databadge to articles that clearly state where data are available. According to socialpsychologist Brian Nosek, executive director of the Center for Open Science, the averagedata-sharing rate for the journal Psychological Science, which uses the badges, increased tenfoldto 38% from 2013 to 2015.

[E] Funders, too, are increasingly adopting an open-data policy. Several strongly encourage,and some require, a date-management plan that makes data available. The US NationalScience Foundation is among these, some philanthropic (慈善的) funders, including theBill&Melinda Gates Foundation in Seattle, Washington, and the Wellcome Trust in London,also mandate open data from their grant recipients.

[F] But many young researchers, especially those who have not been mentored in open science,are uncertain about whether to share or to stay private. Graduate students and postdocs, whooften are working on their lab heads grant, may have no choice if their supervisor or anothersenior colleague opposes sharing.

[G] Some fear that the potential impact of sharing is too high, especially at the early stages ofa career. "Everybody has a scary story about someone getting scooped (被搶先)," says New YorkUniversity astronomer David Hogg. Those fears may be a factor in a lingering hesitation toshare data even when publishing in journals that mandate it.

[H] Researchers at small labs or at institutions focused on teaching arguably have the most tolose when sharing hard-won data. "With my institution and teaching load, I dont havepostdocs and grad students," says Terry McGlynn, a tropical biologist at California StateUniversity, Dominguez Hills. "The stakes are higher to share data because its a bigger fractionof whats happening in my lab."

[I] Researchers also point to the time sink that is involved in preparing data for others to view.Once the data and associated materials appear in a repository (存儲庫 ), answering questionsand handling complaints can take many hours.

[J] The time investment can present other problems. In some cases, says data scientist KarthikRam, it may be difficult for junior researchers to embrace openness when senior colleagues—many of whom head selection and promotion committees—might ridicule what they mayview as misplaced energies. "Ive heard this recently—that embracing the idea of open data andcode makes traditional academics uncomfortable," says Ram. "The concern seems to be thatopen advocates dont spend their time being as productive as possible."

[K] An open-science stance can also add complexity to a collaboration. Kate Ratliff, whostudies social attitudes at the University of Florida, Gainesville, says that it can seem as if thereare two camps in a field—those who care about open science and those who dont. "Theres anew area to navigate—Are you cool with the fact that Ill want to make the data open?—whentalking with somebody about an interesting research idea," she says.

[L] Despite complications and concerns, the upsides of sharing can be significant. For example,when information is uploaded to a repository, a digital object identifier (DOI) is assigned.Scientists can use a DOI to publish each step of the research life cycle, not just the final http://paper.In so doing, they can potentially get three citations—one each for the data and software, inaddition to the paper itself. And although some say that citations for software or data havelittle currency in academia, they can have other benefits.

[M] Many advocates think that transparent data procedures with a date and time stamp willprotect scientists from being scooped. "This is the sweet spot between sharing and gettingcredit for it, while discouraging plagiarism (剽竊)," says Ivo Grigorov, a project coordinatorat the National Institute of Aquatic Resources Research Secretariat in Charlottenlund, Denmark.Hogg says that scooping is less of a problem than many think. "The two cases Im familiar withdidnt involve open data or code," he says.

[N] Open science also offers junior researchers the chance to level the playing field by gainingbetter access to crucial date. Ross Mounce, a postdoc studying evolutionary biology at theUniversity of Cambridge, UK, is a vocal champion of open science, partly because his fossil-based research depends on access to others data. He says that more openness in science couldhelp to discourage what some perceive as a common practice of shutting out early-careerscientists requests for data.

[O] Communication also helps for those who worry about jeopardizing a collaboration, he says.Concerns about open science should be discussed at the outset of a study. "Whenever you starta project with someone, you have to establish a clear understanding of expectations for whoowns the data, at what point they go public and who can do what with them," he says.

[P] In the end, sharing data, software and materials with colleagues can help an early-careerresearcher to gain recognition—a crucial component of success. "The thing you aresearching for is reputation," says Titus Brown, a genomics (基因組學) researcher at theUniversity of California, Davis. "To get grants and jobs, you have to be relevant and achievesome level of public recognition. Anything you do that advances your presence—especially ina larger sphere, outside the communities you know—is a net win."

36. Astronomer David Hogg doesnt think scooping is as serious a problem as generally thought.

37. Some researchers are hesitant to make their data public for fear that others might publishsomething similar before them.

38. Some psychology journals have offered incentives to encourage authors to share theirdata.

39. There is a growing demand in the science community that research data be open to thepublic.

40. Sharing data offers early-career researchers the chance to build a certain level ofreputation.

41. Data sharing enables scientists to publish each step of their research work, thus leading tomore citations.

42. Scientists hold different opinions about the extent and timing of data sharing.

43. Potential problems related to data sharing should be made known to and discussed by allparticipants at the beginning of a joint research project.

44. Sharing data and handling data-related issues can be time-consuming.

45. Junior researchers may have no say when it comes to sharing data.

Section C

Directions: There are 2 passages in this section. Each passage is followed by some questions orunfinished statements. For each of them there are four choices marked A), B), C) and D). Youshould decide on the best choice and mark the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2 with asingle line through the centre.

Passage One

Questions 46 to 50 are based on the following passage.

In the beginning of the movie I, Robot, a robot has to decide whom to save after two carsplunge into the water—Del Spooner or a child. Even though Spooner screams "Save her! Saveher!" the robot rescues him because it calculates that he has a 45 percent chance of survivalcompared to Sarahs 11 percent. The robots decision and its calculated approach raise animportant question: would humans make the same choice? And which choice would we want ourrobotic counterparts to make?

Isaac Asimov evaded the whole notion of morality in devising his three laws of robotics, whichhold that 1. Robots cannot harm humans or allow humans to come to harm; 2. Robots mustobey humans, except where the order would conflict with law 1; and 3. Robots must act inself-preservation, unless doing so conflicts with laws 1 or 2. These laws are programmed intoAsimovs robots—they dont have to think, judge, or value. They dont have to like humans orbelieve that hurting them is wrong or bad. They simply dont do it.

The robot who rescues Spooners life in I, Robot follows Asimovs zeroth law: robots cannotharm humanity (as opposed to individual humans) or allow humanity to come to harm—anexpansion of the first law that allows robots to determine whats in the greater good. Underthe first law, a robot could not harm a dangerous gunman, but under the zeroth law, a robotcould kill the gunman to save others.

Whether its possible to program a robot with safeguards such as Asimovs laws is debatable. Aword such as "harm" is vague (what about emotional harm? Is replacing a human employeeharm?), and abstract concepts present coding problems. The robots in Asimovs fictionexpose complications and loopholes in the three laws, and even when the laws work, robots stillhave to assess situations.

Assessing situations can be complicated. A robot has to identify the players, conditions, andpossible outcomes for various scenarios. Its doubtful that a computer program can do that—atleast, not without some undesirable results. A roboticist at the Bristol Robotics Laboratoryprogrammed a robot to save human proxies (替身) called "H-bots" from danger. When one H-botheaded for danger, the robot successfully pushed it out of the way. But when two H-botsbecame imperiled, the robot chocked 42 percent of the time, unable to decide which to saveand letting them both "die." The experiment highlights the importance of morality: without it,how can a robot decide whom to save or whats best for humanity, especially if it cantcalculate survival odds?

46. What question does the example in the movie raise?

A) Whether robots can reach better decisions.

B) Whether robots follow Asimovs zeroth law.

C) How robots may make bad judgments.

D) How robots should be programmed.

47. What does the author think of Asimovs three laws of robotics?

A) They are apparently divorced from reality.

B) They did not follow the coding system of robotics.

C) They laid a solid foundation for robotics.

D) They did not take moral issues into consideration.

48. What does the author say about Asimovs robots?

A) They know what is good or bad for human beings.

B) They are programmed not to hurt human beings.

C) They perform duties in their owners best interest.

D) They stop working when a moral issue is involved.

49. What does the author want to say by mentioning the word "harm" in Asimovs laws?

A) Abstract concepts are hard to program.

B) It is hard for robots to make decisions.

C) Robots may do harm in certain situations.

D) Asimovs laws use too many vague terms.

50. What has the roboticist at the Bristol Robotics Laboratory found in his experiment?

A) Robots can be made as intelligent as human beings some day.

B) Robots can have moral issues encoded into their programs.

C) Robots can have trouble making decisions in complex scenarios.

D) Robots can be programmed to perceive potential perils.

Passage Two

Questions 51 to 55 are based on the following passage.

Our world now moves so fast that we seldom stop to see just how far we have come in just afew years. The latest iPhone 6s, for example, has a dual-core processor and fits nicely into yourpocket. By comparison, you would expect to find a technological specification like this onyour standard laptop in an office anywhere in the world.

Its no wonder that new applications for the Internet of Things are moving ahead fast whenalmost every new device we buy has a plug on the end of it or a wireless connection to theinternet. Soon, our current smartphone lifestyle will expand to create our own smart homelifestyle too.

All researches agree that close to 25 billion devices, things and sensors will be connected by2020 which incidentally is also the moment that Millennials (千禧一代) are expected to makeup 75 percent of our overall workforce, and the fully connected home will become a reality forlarge numbers of people worldwide.

However, this is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg as smart buildings and even citiesincreasingly become the norm as leaders and business owners begin to wake up to themassive savings that technology can deliver through connected sensors and new forms ofautomation coupled with intelligent energy and facilities management.

Online security cameras, intelligent lighting and a wealth of sensors that control bothtemperature and air quality are offering an unprecedented level of control, efficiency, andimprovements to what were once classed necessary costs when running a business or managinga large building.

We can expect that the ever-growing list of devices, systems and environments remainconnected, always online and talking to each other. The big benefit will not only be in thehousing of this enormous and rapidly growing amount of data, but will also be in the ability torun real time data analytics to extract actionable and ongoing knowledge.

The biggest and most exciting challenge of this technology is how to creatively leverage thisever-growing amount of data to deliver cost savings, improvements and tangible benefits toboth businesses and citizens of these smart cities.

The good news is that most of this technology is already invented. Lets face it, it wasnt toolong ago that the idea of working from anywhere and at anytime was some form of a distantUtopian (烏托邦式的) dream, and yet now we can perform almost any office-based task fromany location in the world as long as we have access to the internet.

Its time to wake up to the fact that making smart buildings, cities and homes will dramaticallyimprove our quality of life in the years ahead.

51. What does the example of iPhone 6s serve to show?

A) The huge capacity of the smartphones people now use.

B) The widespread use of smartphones all over the world.

C) The huge impact of new technology on peoples everyday life.

D) The rapid technological progress in a very short period of time.

52. What can we expect to see by the year 2020?

A) Apps for the Internet of Things.

B) The popularization of smart homes.

C) The emergence of Millennials.

D) Total globalization of the world.

53. What will business owners do when they become aware of the benefits of the Internet ofThings?

A) Employ fewer workers in their operations.

B) Gain automatic control of their businesses.

C) Invest in more smart buildings and cities.

D) Embrace whatever new technology there is.

54. What is the most exciting challenge when we possess more and more data?

A) How to turn it to profitable use.

B) How to do real time data analysis.

C) How to link the actionable systems.

D) How to devise new ways to store it.

55. What does the author think about working from anywhere and at anytime?

A) It is feasible with a connection to the internet.

B) It will thrive in smart buildings, cities and homes.

C) It is still a distant Utopian dream for ordinary workers.

D) It will deliver tangible benefits to both boss and worker.