1 . “Assume you are wrong.” The advice came from Brian Nosek, a psychology professor, who was offering a strategy for pursuing better science.
To understand the context for Nosek’s advice, we need to take a step back to the nature of science itself. You see despite what many of us learned in elementary school, there is no single scientific method. Just as scientific theories become elaborated and change, so do scientific methods.
But methodological reform hasn’t come without some fretting and friction. Nasty things have been said by and about methodological reformers. Few people like having the value of their life’s work called into question. On the other side, few people are good at voicing criticisms in kind and constructive ways. So, part of the challenge is figuring out how to bake critical self-reflection into the culture of science itself, so it unfolds as a welcome and integrated part of the process, and not an embarrassing sideshow.
What Nosek recommended was a strategy for changing the way we offer and respond to critique. Assuming you are right might be a motivating force, sustaining the enormous effort that conducting scientific work requires. But it also makes it easy to interpret criticisms as personal attacks. Beginning, instead, from the assumption you are wrong, a criticism is easier to interpret as a constructive suggestion for how to be less wrong — a goal that your critic presumably shares.
One worry about this approach is that it could be demoralizing for scientists. Striving to be less wrong might be a less effective motivation than the promise of being right. Another concern is that a strategy that works well within science could backfire when it comes to communicating science with the public. Without an appreciation for how science works, it’s easy to take uncertainty or disagreements as marks against science, when in fact they reflect some of the very features of science that make it our best approach to reaching reliable conclusions about the world. Science is reliable because it responds to evidence: as the quantity and quality of our evidence improves, our theories can and should change, too.
Despite these worries, I like Nosek’s suggestion because it builds in cognitive humility along with a sense that we can do better. It also builds in a sense of community — we’re all in the same boat when it comes to falling short of getting things right.
Unfortunately, this still leaves us with an untested hypothesis (假说): that assuming one is wrong can change community norms for the better, and ultimately support better science and even, perhaps, better decisions in life. I don’t know if that’s true. In fact, I should probably assume that it’s wrong. But with the benefit of the scientific community and our best methodological tools, I hope we can get it less wrong, together.
1. What can we learn from Paragraph 3?| A．Reformers tend to devalue researchers’ work. |
| B．Scientists are unwilling to express kind criticisms. |
| C．People hold wrong assumptions about the culture of science. |
| D．The scientific community should practice critical self-reflection. |
| A．the enormous efforts of scientists at work | B．the reliability of potential research results |
| C．the public’s passion for scientific findings | D．the improvement in the quality of evidence |
| A．discouraging | B．ineffective | C．unfair | D．misleading |
| A．doubtful but sincere | B．disapproving but soft |
| C．authoritative and direct | D．reflective and humorous |
2 . Last week, I sent the same request to ChatGPT, the latest artificial-intelligence chatbot from OpenAI. “Upon the Firth of Forth, a bridge doth stand,” it began. In less than a minute, the program had created in full a rhyming Shakespearean sonnet (莎士比亚十四行诗). Tools like ChatGPT seem poised to change the world of poetry — and so much else — but poets also have a lot to teach us about artificial intelligence. If algorithms (算法) are getting good at writing poetry, it’s partially because poetry was always an algorithmic business.
Even the most rebellious (叛逆的) poets follow more rules than they might like to admit. When schoolchildren are taught to imitate the structure of sonnet, they are effectively learning to follow algorithmic constraints. Should it surprise us that computers can do so, too?
But considering how ChatGPT works, its ability to follow the rules for sonnets seems a little more impressive. No one taught it these rules. It is based on a newer kind of AI known as a large language model (LLM). To put it simply, LLMs analyze large amounts of human writing and learn to predict what the next word in a string of text should be, based on context. One frequent criticism of LLMs is that they do not understand what they write; they just do a great job of guessing the next word.
When a private verse by Dickinson makes us feel like the poet speaks directly to us, we are experiencing the effects of a technology called language. Poems are made of paper and ink — or, these days, electricity and light. There is no one “inside” a Dickinson poem any more than one by ChatGPT. Of course, every Dickinson poem reflects her intention to create meaning. When ChatGPT puts words together, it does not intend anything. Some argue that writings by LLMs therefore have no meaning, only the appearance of it. If I see a cloud in the sky that looks like a giraffe, I recognize it as an accidental similarity. In the same way, this argument goes, we should regard the writings of ChatGPT as merely imitating real language, meaningless and random as cloud shapes.
When I showed my friends the sonnet by ChatGPT, they called it “soulless and barren.” Despite following all the rules for sonnets, the poem is predictable. But is the average sonnet by a human any better? If we now expect computers to write not just poems but good poems, then we have set a much higher bar.
1. What is the main idea of paragraph 1 and paragraph 2?| A．ChatGPT will make a difference to poetry based on algorithms. |
| B．There is no doubt that AI can copy the grammatical rules of poetry. |
| C．Poetry guidelines provide a possibility for AI’s poetry writing. |
| D．There is a similarity between algorithms and poetry. |
| A．ChatGPT is trained to follow the rules by LLMs. |
| B．ChatGPT can analyze and predict human languages. |
| C．ChatGPT is technologically supported by LLMs. |
| D．ChatGPT itself learn to follow the rules. |
| A．He talks about cloud to describe the meaninglessness of AI’s poetry. |
| B．He tells of Dickinson to describe the meaninglessness AI’s poetry. |
| C．He mentions cloud to suggest its close relationship with AI’s poetry. |
| D．He refers to Dickinson to suggest her close relationship with AI’s poetry. |
| A．Acceptable and favorable | B．Amazed and admiring |
| C．Indifferent and uncaring | D．Doubtful and uneasy |
3 . Atomic shapes are so simple that they can’t be broken down any further. Mathematicians are trying to turn to artificial intelligence (AI) for help to build a periodic table of these shapes, hoping it will assist in finding yet-unknown atomic shapes.
Tom Coates at Imperial College London and his colleagues are working to classify atomic shapes known as Fano varieties, which are so simple that they can’t be broken down into smaller components. Just as chemists arranged element s in the periodic table by their atomic weight and group to reveal new insights, the researchers hope that organizing these atomic shapes by their various properties will help in understanding them.
The team has given each atomic shape a sequence of numbers based on its features such as the number of holes it has or the extent to which it bends around itself. This acts as a bar code (条形码) to identify it. Coates and his colleagues have now created an AI that can predict certain properties of these shapes from their bar code numbers alone, with an accuracy of 98 percent.
The team member Alexander Kasprzyk at the University of Nottingham, UK, says that the AI has let the team organize atomic shapes in a way that begins to follow the periodic table, so that when you read from left to right, or up and down, there seem to be general patterns in the geometry (几何) of the shapes.
Graham Nib lo at the University of Southampton, UK, stresses that humans will still need to understand the results provided by AI and create proofs of these ideas. “AI has definitely got unbelievable abilities. But in the same way that telescopes (望远镜) don’t put astronomers out of work, AI doesn’t put mathematicians out of work,” he says. “It just gives us new backing that allows us to explore parts of the mathematical landscape that are out of reach.”
The team hopes to improve the model to the point where missing spaces in its periodic table could point to the existence of unknown shapes.
1. What is the purpose of building a periodic table of shapes?| A．To gain deeper insights into the atomic shapes. |
| B．To create an AI to predict the unknown shapes. |
| C．To break down atomic shapes into smaller parts. |
| D．To arrange chemical elements in the periodic table. |
| A．Its holes. | B．Its bends. |
| C．Its atomic weight. | D．Its properties. |
| A．Design. | B．Help. | C．Duty. | D．Threat. |
| A．Thanks to AI, new atomic shapes have been discovered. |
| B．Mathematicians turn to AI to create more atomic shapes. |
| C．AI helps build a relationship between chemistry and maths. |
| D．A periodic table of shapes can be built with the help of AI. |
4 . Fresh fish should have a mild smell. Strong fishy smells are the first signs to go bad. How do the fishy smells come from?
It can be several days from when the fish are caught to when they reach the supermarket. In that time, bacteria that grow naturally in fish start to consume a substance called trimethylamine N-oxide(TMAO)in fish. These bacteria change TMAO into trimethylamine (TMA), the substance responsible for the fishy smells. Bacteria in fish can also change lysine(赖氨酸)into cadaverine(尸胺), a substance that’s associated with breaking down the fish once they are caught and giving off fishy smell.
Chemical reactions can also lead to fishy smells. This happens through the oxidation(氧化)of fat. Fish are an important source of omega-3 fatty acids. When these fats are exposed to oxygen, they oxidize and break down into the substance that you can smell.
To slow down the fishy smell, what is beyond question is that the less time between when the fish are caught and when they reach the kitchen, the better. But today, fish are often flown across the globe. To keep smell-producing bacteria at bay, the fish must be frozen or kept at the low temperature possible as soon as they are caught and cleaned.
Controlling fat oxidation can function as well, especially for fattier fish species. While freezing slows bacterial growth, it does not stop fat oxidation. This reaction will occur as long as oxygen is present. Fatty fish are usually not frozen because, despite the cold temperature, they’re going to oxidize pretty fast unless they are stored in a low oxygen container. That’s why those species are often canned.
It’s also important to remember that smell is not always an indicator of safety, especially in processed fish products. “What you might consider the fishy smell may be a delicacy in another culture,” said Carl A. Batt, a professor of food science at Cornell University.
1. Which of the following has the fishy smell?| A．Fish fat. | B．TMAO. | C．Cadaverine. | D．Lysine. |
| A．Drying them in the air. | B．Storing them in closed containers. |
| C．Carefully cleaning them. | D．Exposing them to rich oxygen. |
| A．Objective. |
| B．Negative. |
| C．Acceptable. |
| D．Unclear. |
| A．Topic—Example—Conclusion. | B．Topic—Comparison—Opinion. |
| C．Question——Cause——Solution. | D．Question—Effect—Opinion. |
5 . On March 7, 1907, the English statistician Francis Galton published a paper which illustrated what has come to be known as the “wisdom of crowds” effect. The experiment of estimation he conducted showed that in some cases, the average of a large number of independent estimates could be quite accurate.
This effect capitalizes on the fact that when people make errors, those errors aren’t always the same. Some people will tend to overestimate, and some to underestimate. When enough of these errors are averaged together, they cancel each other out, resulting in a more accurate estimate. If people are similar and tend to make the same errors, then their errors won’t cancel each other out. In more technical terms, the wisdom of crowds requires that people’s estimates be independent. If for whatever reasons, people’s errors become correlated or dependent, the accuracy of the estimate will go down.
But a new study led by Joaquin Navajas offered an interesting twist (转折) on this classic phenomenon. The key finding of the study was that when crowds were further divided into smaller groups that were allowed to have a discussion, the averages from these groups were more accurate than those from an equal number of independent individuals. For instance, the average obtained from the estimates of four discussion groups of five was significantly more accurate than the average obtained from 20 independent individuals.
In a follow-up study with 100 university students, the researchers tried to get a better sense of what the group members actually did in their discussion. Did they tend to go with those most confident about their estimates? Did they follow those least willing to change their minds? This happened some of the time, but it wasn’t the dominant response. Most frequently, the groups reported that they “shared arguments and reasoned together”. Somehow, these arguments and reasoning resulted in a global reduction in error. Although the studies led by Navajas have limitations and many questions remain, the potential implications for group discussion and decision-making are enormous.
1. What is paragraph 2 of the text mainly about?| A．The methods of estimation. | B．The underlying logic of the effect. |
| C．The causes of people’s errors. | D．The design of Galton’s experiment. |
| A．the crowds were relatively small | B．there were occasional underestimates |
| C．individuals did not communicate | D．estimates were not fully independent |
| A．The size of the groups. | B．The dominant members. |
| C．The discussion process. | D．The individual estimates. |
| A．Unclear. | B．Dismissive. | C．Doubtful. | D．Approving. |
6 . HANDSTITCHED WORLDS: THE CARTOGRAPHY OF QUILTS
Quilts (床罩) are a narrative art; with themes that are political, spiritual, communal, or commemorative, they are infused with history and memory, mapping out intimate stories and legacies through a handcrafted language of design. Handstitched Worlds: The Cartography of Quilts is an invitation to read quilts as maps, tracing the paths of individual histories that illuminate larger historic events and cultural trends.
Spanning the nineteenth to twenty-first centuries, this insightful and engaging exhibition brings together 18 quilts from the collection of the American Folk Art Museum, New York, representing a range of materials, motifs, and techniques from traditional early-American quilts to more contemporary sculptural assemblages. The quilts in Handstitched Worlds show us how this too-often overlooked medium balances creativity with tradition, individuality with collective zeitgeist. Like a road map, these unique works offer a path to a deeper understanding of the American cultural fabric.
Number of Works:18 quilts
Organized by: American Folk Art Museum, New York
Approximate size:175-200 linear feet
Security: Moderate security
Participation Fee: Please inquire
Shipping: IA&A makes all arrangements; exhibitors pay outgoing shipping costs within the contiguous U.S.
Booking Period:12 weeks
Tour: June 2021—August2024
Contact: TravelingExhibitions@ArtsandArtists.org
Leigh Yawkey Woodson Art Museum, Wausau, WI
June 12, 2021—August 29, 2021
Washington State Historical Society, Tacoma, WA
September 17, 2021—January 23, 2022
Utah Museum of Fine Arts, Salt Lake City, UT
February 19, 2022—May 14, 2022
Fort Wayne Muesum of Art, Fort Wayne, IN
June 18, 2022—September 11, 2022
AVAILABLE
October 2022—January 2023
Dane G. Hansen Memorial Museum, Logan, KS
February 17,2023—May 14, 2023
AVAILABLE
June 2023—December 2023
Lauren Rogers Museum of Art, Laurel, MS
January 30, 2024—April 21, 2024
AVAILABLE
May 2024—August 2024
All tour dates can be customized to meet your scheduling needs. Please contact Traveling Exhibitions @ Artsand Artists.org for more information.
1. What is the purpose of the exhibition of Handstitched Worlds: The Cartography of Quilts?| A．To promote creativity and individuality thorough the engaging exhibition. |
| B．To provide an opportunity for visitors to learn to make quilts stitch by stitch. |
| C．To give visitors an insight into the history and culture of America in specific periods. |
| D．To enrich the understanding of the American culture by a tour visit to museums across America. |
| A．The exhibition is free both for the exhibitors and for the visitors. |
| B．Exhibitors that are interested can choose whatever dates they want. |
| C．The artistic and historic value of handstitched quilts used to be neglected. |
| D．Exhibitors that are interested can book the exhibition 12 weeks in advance. |
| A．exhibitors | B．visitors | C．artists | D．historians |
7 . “You’d be an intermediate (中级学生),” the clever salesgirl at the Apple Store said brightly. She was talking about the free classes one could sign up for. An intermediate, I thought with pride. “I’ve used Macs since they had green text and discs,” I said, eager to strengthen my position. “And I had a Mac Classic for years.” She smiled, or maybe she was thinking, “If it’s been that long, why are you still an intermediate?”
Why does one remain an intermediate? Sometimes it’s a matter of opportunity: Leaving New England was a blow to my cross-country skiing. No longer living on the banks of a river held up kayaking. Horseback riding, too, requires an opportunity. I know, however, a friend I rode with as a child bought herself a retired police horse in her 40s. A devoted kayaker would not have been prevented by the highways lying between her and rivers.
Sometimes, it’s ability. I have taken up piano later in life. I love music, but I can see that I have no particular gift for it. Gardening was another late job. I wasn’t a natural at that, either.
I admit I’m a little ashamed of being an intermediate. It seems to imply a lack of focus, an unwillingness to push myself to go deeper or further. Do I lack the persistence to become an expert? Am I too easily distracted to put in the 10,000 hours reportedly required to achieve mastery?
Maybe I have to accept that, for now at least, intermediate is my sweet spot. I’ve moved past the frustrations of beginnerhood without meeting the demands of expertise. A beginner is a beginner and an expert is just that. But an intermediate can be low, medium, or high. And wherever you are as an intermediate, you can always go forward, try harder, and learn more.
Who of us can claim to be an expert parent, wife, husband, child, or friend? At best, we’re the high intermediate with much to learn.
1. What did the writer want to prove to the salesgirl in the first paragraph?| A．Her position as a lifelong intermediate. |
| B．Her good knowledge about Apple computers. |
| C．Her eagerness to attend free courses. |
| D．Her ability to afford to buy expensive computers. |
| A．They are only excuses. |
| B．They appear just by accident. |
| C．They are waiting in our life. |
| D．They just come and go. |
| A．The writer’s worries. |
| B．The writer’s disappointments. |
| C．The writer’s curiosities. |
| D．The writer’s doubts. |
| A．It means the possibility to make improvement. |
| B．It marks the beginning to achieve mastery. |
| C．It presents the opportunity to become an expert. |
| D．It rids people of the difficulty to move on. |
8 . This forum is the first of its kind since China put forward the goal of “carbon peak” and “carbon neutral”. It will be held
“Hunan province and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) have jointly hosted four Asia-Pacific Green and Low-carbon Development Summits, which have not only yielded outstanding
In recent years, Hunan has always adhered to the path of ecological priority, green and low-carbon
“Hunan will adhere to the green transformation as the driving force, and
| A．past | B．online | C．cooperation | D．share |
| A．speech | B．economics | C．ceremonies | D．communication |
| A．from | B．of | C．to | D．for |
| A．challenges | B．mistakes | C．issues | D．opportunities |
| A．questions | B．results | C．pleasure | D．features |
| A．brought | B．though | C．thought | D．saw |
| A．easy | B．simply | C．hard | D．important |
| A．development | B．public | C．merit | D．dependent |
| A．turned | B．cleared | C．jumped | D．cleaned |
| A．element | B．operate | C．industry | D．corporation |
| A．huge | B．small | C．total | D．little |
| A．air | B．soil | C．headwater | D．light |
| A．stood | B．relate | C．consulted | D．signed |
| A．worthy | B．trust | C．promote | D．try |
| A．software | B．goods | C．part | D．system |
9 . Albert Einstein’s 1915 masterpiece “The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity” is the first and still the best introduction to the subject, and I recommend it as such to students. But it probably wouldn’t be publishable in a scientific journal today.
Why not? After all, it would pass with flying colours the tests of correctness and significance. And while popular belief holds that the paper was incomprehensible to its first readers, in fact many papers in theoretical physics are much more difficult.
As the physicist Richard Feynman wrote, “There was a time when the newspapers said that only 12 men understood the theory of relativity. I do believe there might have been a time when only one man did, because he was the only guy who caught on, before he wrote his paper. But after people read the paper a lot understood the theory of relativity in some way or other, certainly more than 12.”
No, the problem is its style. It starts with a leisurely philosophical discussion of space and time and then continues with an exposition of known mathematics. Those two sections, which would be considered extraneous today, take up half the paper. Worse, there are zero citations of previous scientists’ work, nor are there any graphics. Those features might make a paper not even get past the first editors.
A similar process of professionalization has transformed other parts of the scientific landscape. Requests for research time at major observatories or national laboratories are more rigidly structured. And anything involving work with human subjects, or putting instruments in space, involves piles of paperwork.
We see it also in the Regeneron Science Talent Search, the Nobel Prize of high school science competitions. In the early decades of its 78-year history, the winning projects were usually the sort of clever but naive, amateurish efforts one might expect of talented beginners working on their own. Today, polished work coming out of internships(实习) at established laboratories is the norm.
These professionalizing tendencies are a natural consequence of the explosive growth of modern science. Standardization and system make it easier to manage the rapid flow of papers, applications and people. But there are serious downsides. A lot of unproductive effort goes into jumping through bureaucratic hoops(繁文缛节), and outsiders face entry barriers at every turn.
Of course, Einstein would have found his way to meeting modern standards and publishing his results. Its scientific core wouldn’t have changed, but the paper might not be the same taste to read.
1. According to Richard Feynman, Einstein’s 1915 paper ________.| A．was a classic in theoretical physics |
| B．turned out to be comprehensible |
| C．needed further improvement |
| D．attracted few professionals |
| A．Unrealistic. | B．Irrelevant. |
| C．Unattractive. | D．Imprecise. |
| A．The application of research findings. |
| B．The principle of scientific research. |
| C．The selection of young talents. |
| D．The evaluation of laboratories. |
| A．What makes Einstein great? |
| B．Will science be professionalized? |
| C．Could Einstein get published today? |
| D．How will modern science make advances? |
10 . The vaccine (疫苗) news continues to seem very encouraging. Britain started its mass vaccination effort and the U.S. isn’t far behind.
But there is still one dark cloud hanging over the vaccines that many people don’t yet understand.
The vaccines will be much less effective at preventing death and illness in 2021 if they are introduced into a population where the coronavirus is still severe—as is now the case in the U.S.
A vaccine is like a fire hose (消防龙头). A vaccine that’s 95 percent effective, as Moderna’s and Pfizer’s versions appear to be, is a powerful fire hose. But the size of a fire is still a bigger determinant of how much destruction occurs.
At the current level of infection in the U.S. (about 200,000 confirmed new infections per day), a vaccine that is 95 percent effective—distributed at the expected pace—would still leave a terrible toll (伤亡人数) in the six months after it was introduced. Almost 10 million or so Americans would catch the virus, and more than 160,000 would die.
This is far worse than the toll in a different situation where the vaccine was only 50 percent effective but the U.S. had reduced the infection rate to its level in early September (about 35,000 new daily cases). In that case, the death toll in the next six months would be kept to about 60,000.
It’s worth pausing for a moment on this comparison. If the U.S. had maintained its infection rate from September and Moderna and Pfizer had announced this fall that their vaccines were only 50 percent effective, a lot of people would have panicked.
But the reality we have is actually worse.
How could this be? No vaccine can get rid of a pandemic immediately, just as .no fire hose can put out a forest fire. While the vaccine is being distributed, the virus continues to do damage.
There is one positive way to look at this: Measures that reduce the virus’s spread—like mask-wearing, social distancing and rapid-result testing—can still have great consequences. They can save more than 100,000 lives in coming months.
1. How does the author mainly present his argument?| A．By giving definitions. | B．By categorizing facts. |
| C．By drawing comparisons. | D．By appealing to emotions. |
| A．Improving the effectiveness of the vaccines. |
| B．Producing a greater variety of vaccines. |
| C．Looking at the situation in a positive way. |
| D．Wearing masks and practicing social distancing. |
| A．The vaccines are less effective than expected. |
| B．The US have controlled the spread of the coronavirus. |
| C．The death toll in the next six months will be about 60,000. |
| D．Fewer people will die if the infection rate is lower. |
| A．The vaccine is the hope of wiping out the pandemic. |
| B．The public are optimistic about the effects of the vaccine. |
| C．The public are concerned about the high infection rate. |
| D．The distribution of vaccine will end the pandemic quickly. |
