1 . We recognize our friends’ faces. And we’re not alone. Many social animals can identify individuals of their own species by features of their faces. That's important, because they need to be able to change their behavior depending on who they meet. And a recent research has shown that some species of monkeys, birds, and domesticated (家养的) animals can even tell different faces apart by looking at photographs alone.
Ethologist Léa Lansade of the French National Research Institute for Agriculture, Food and Environment did an experiment to find out how well horses can recognize individual people in photographs.
She and her team first taught the horses how to “choose” between two side-by-side pictures by touching their noses to a computer screen. The horses were then shown photos of their present keeper alongside faces of unfamiliar humans. They had never seen photos of any of the people before. The horses correctly identified their current keeper and ignored (忽视) the stranger’s face about 75%of the time. In fact, even though the horses didn't get it right every single time, they were at least as correct in picking out their earlier keeper as they were at identifying their present one.
The results suggest that not only can horses differentiate between familiar and unfamiliar human faces, they also naturally understand that photographs are two dimensional representations (二维呈现) of real life, without any other intimations such as smell or sound. And they’re even better at this than our oldest animal parter, the domestic dog.
In addition, horses seem to have a strong long-term memory for human faces, like their long lifespan and history of domestication. In future experiments, the researchers would like to test whether looking at photos of people that they have had bad experiences with in the past might cause horses to act anxious or even avoidance. So maybe think twice before doing anything that might give a horse a long face.
1. Why did researchers show the horses both the keeper’s photos and the strangers’?| A．To find out what horses would do in the experiment. |
| B．To see why horses could recognize the keeper in the pictures. |
| C．To test whether horses could recognize the strangers in pictures. |
| D．To study to what degree horses can make out different people in pictures. |
| A．Clues. | B．Differences. |
| C．Photographs. | D．Senses. |
| A．Whether horses can live longer than other animals. |
| B．Whether horses can remember human's faces for a long time. |
| C．Whether horses can show their emotions at the sight of photos. |
| D．Whether horses are better at recognizing photos than other animals. |
| A．To talk about animals’ species. |
| B．To explain animals’ facial features. |
| C．To show animals’ behaviour for adaptation. |
| D．To introduce animals’ ability to identifying faces. |
2 . Communities across the world are starting to ban facial recognition technologies. The efforts are well intentioned, but banning facial recognition is the wrong way to fight against modern surveillance （监 视）.Generally, modern mass surveillance has three broad components: identification, correlation and discrimination.
Facial recognition is a technology that can be used to identify people without their consent. Once we are identified, the data about who we are and what we are doing can be correlated with other data. This might be movement data, which can be used to "follow” us as we move throughout our day. It can be purchasing data, Internet browsing data, or data about who we talk to via email or text. It might be data about our income, ethnicity, lifestyle, profession and interests. There is an entire industry of data brokers who make a living by selling our data without our consent.
It's not just that they know who we are; it's that they correlate what they know about us to create profiles about who we are and what our interests are. The whole purpose of this process is for companies to treat individuals differently. We are shown different ads on the Internet and receive different offers for credit cards. In the future, we might be treated differently when we walk into a store, just as we currently are when we visit websites.
It doesn't matter which technology is used to identify people. What's important is that we can be consistently identified over time. We might be completely anonymous （匿名的）in a system that uses unique cookies to track us as we browse the Internet, but the same process of correlation and discrimination still occurs.
Regulating this system means addressing all three steps of the process. A ban on facial recognition won't make any difference. The problem is that we are being identified without our knowledge or consent, and society needs rules about when that is permissible.
Similarly, we need rules about how our data can be combined with other data, and then bought and sold without our knowledge or consent. The data broker industry is almost entirely unregulated now. Reasonable laws would prevent the worst of their abuses.
Finally, we need better rules about when and how it is permissible for companies to discriminate. Discrimination based on protected characteristics like race and gender is already illegal, but those rules are ineffectual against the current technologies of surveillance and control. When people can be identified and their data correlated at a speed and scale previously unseen, we need new rules.
Today, facial recognition technologies are receiving the force of the tech backlash （抵制），but focusing on them misses the point. We need to have a serious conversation about all the technologies of identification, correlation and discrimination, and decide how much we want to be spied on and what sorts of influence we want them to have over our lives.
1. According to Para. 2, with facial recognition _______.| A．one’s lifestyle changes greatly |
| B．one's email content is disclosed |
| C．one's profiles are updated in time |
| D．one's personal information is released |
| A．discrimination based on new tech surveillance is illegal |
| B．different browsing data bring in different advertisements |
| C．using mobiles anonymously keeps us from being correlated |
| D．data brokers control the current technologies of surveillance |
| A．people's concern over their safety |
| B．the nature of the surveillance society |
| C．proper regulation of mass surveillance |
| D．the importance of identification technology |
| A．call for banning facial recognition technologies |
| B．advocate the urgent need for changes in related laws |
| C．inform readers of the disadvantages of facial recognition |
| D．evaluate three broad components in modem mass surveillance |
3 . For several decades, there has been an organized campaign intended to produce distrust in science, funded by those whose interests are threatened by the findings of modern science. In response, scientists have tended to stress the success of science. After all, scientists have been right about most things, from the structure of the universe to the relativity of time and space.
Stressing successes isn’t wrong, but for many people it’s not persuasive. An alternative answer to the question “Why trust science?” is that scientists use the so-called scientific method. But what is called the scientific method isn’t what scientists actually do. Science is dynamic: new methods get invented; old ones get abandoned; and at any particular point, scientists can be found doing many different things. False theories sometimes lead to true results, so even if an experiment works, it doesn’t prove that the theory it was designed to test is true.
If there is no specific scientific method, then what is the basis for trust in science? The answer is the methods by which those claims are evaluated. A scientific claim is never accepted as true until it has gone through a long process of examination by fellow scientists. Scientists draft the initial version of a paper and then send it to colleagues for suggestions. Until this point, scientific feedback is typically fairly friendly. But the next step is different: the revised paper is submitted to a scientific journal, where things get a whole lot tougher. Editors deliberately send scientific papers to people who are not friends or colleagues of the authors, and the job of the reviewer is to find errors or other faults. We call this process “peer review” because the reviewers are scientific peers—experts in the same field—but they act in the role of a superior who has both the right and the responsibility to find fault. It is only after the reviewers and the editor are satisfied that any problems have been fixed that the paper will be printed in the journal and enters the body of “science.”
Some people argue that we should not trust science because scientists are “always changing their minds.” While examples of truly settled science being overturned are far fewer than is sometimes claimed, they do exist. But the beauty of this scientific process is that science produces both creativity and stability. New observations, ideas, explanations and attempts to combine competing claims introduce creativity; transformative questioning leads to collective decisions and the stability of scientific knowledge. Scientists do change their minds in the face of new evidence, but this is a strength of science, not a weakness.
1. Scientists stress the success of science in order to ________.| A．promote basic knowledge of science |
| B．remind people of scientific achievements |
| C．remove possible doubts about science |
| D．show their attitude towards the campaign |
| A．It’s an easy job to prove its existence. |
| B．It usually agrees with scientists’ ideas. |
| C．It hardly gets mixed with false theories. |
| D．It constantly changes and progresses. |
| A．It seldom gives negative evaluation of a paper. |
| B．It is usually conducted by unfriendly experts. |
| C．It aims to perfect the paper to be published. |
| D．It happens at the beginning of the evaluation process. |
| A．it is not uncommon for science to be overturned |
| B．scientists are very strong in changing their minds |
| C．people lose faith in those changeable scientists |
| D．changes bring creativity and stability to science |
4 . Walmart will soon use 360 robot cleaners across a few hundred of its stores. Using maps input by human employees, the AI-powered cleaners will travel in the store with no difficulty, sweeping the floor--just as human employees used to do.
Perhaps the most striking thing about these robot workers is how not-striking they are. Sci-fi movies suggest a future full of human-like robots who appear with their horrible qualities. Now the future is coming into view, and it looks like a giant lie. It's easy to imagine walking past an Auto-C on a shopping trip without even noticing its presence.
AI has already started to become a part of our everyday life. In New Jersey this week, dozens of workers were hospitalized after a robot at an Amazon fulfillment centre accidentally broke a can and enveloped workers in eye-and-lung-damaging gas. Days earlier in California, an auto-piloted Tesla drove a drunk, sleeping driver down a highway, which no doubt did some potential risk to the other drivers on the road. Highway patrol officers figured out on the spot how to stop the AI car.
Of course, industrial accidents and drunk drivers existed well before AI. Tools with the power to release the burden of physical labor—horses, steam machines, self-driving cars—also come with the power to injure. And the presence of AI-powered machines just steps away from us is, for now, still a rare thing for most people.
But the nature of robots’ coming into our daily life lives will make it harder to recognize—or object to—the bigger changes they bring later. Walmart insists that the robot cleaners give employees more time for customer service and other tasks. Critics point out that they could just as easily become an excuse to reduce staff and wages.
1. What is the difference between sci-fi movies and the reality?| A．Now the human-like robots is hard to recognize. |
| B．Now people don’t go to see the sci-fi movies. |
| C．Now the human-like robots can tell lies. |
| D．Now it is easy to ignore the robots. |
| A．They damaged the robot first. |
| B．The robot caused an accident on purpose. |
| C．The robot made a mistake by chance. |
| D．The robot driving them on the highway had an accident. |
| A．Supportive | B．Objective | C．Doubtful | D．Indifferent |
| A．Artificial intelligence is bringing great effect to our daily life. |
| B．Walmart will soon use 360 robot cleaners across its stores. |
| C．We should say no to artificial intelligence. |
| D．Artificial intelligence is dangerous to our life. |
5 . Snow leopards (豹) are so hard to photograph that scientists aren’t even sure how many of these endangered animals still live in the wild.
The Snow Leopard Conservancy(SLC) set up 20 cameras in Russia in 2010 to learn more about the big cats. After a full six months, they had exactly zero picture! That’s when the organization understood they needed help. And the only people who could help them in finding the leopards were the very people from whom they wanted to protect the animals—local hunters (猎人).
Hunting snow leopards is against the law in Russia, but in the terrible climate of Siberia, the few people living there had to turn to poaching (盗猎) to feed their families.
In 2013, Russian naturalist Sergei Spitsyn approached Mergen Markov, a local hunter, and told him his project. Markov agreed to set up the camera where he knew he would find leopards, and it worked.
Markov, once a poacher, works full time for the conservationists now and has 10 cameras monitoring leopards. “I visit each camera once a month. I have known this whole region since I was a child,” he said proudly.
The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) began working with other local villagers in 2015. The village would be paid 40,000 rubles at the end of the year if the image of a snow leopard is caught. WWF also rents horses from the villagers so that they do not need to make money by poaching anymore. “Today there are far fewer leopard poachers but leopards still get caught in traps set for other animals, so I have to stay watchful,” said Markov.
Changing guns for cameras has made a big difference in the lives of these former poachers, the village, and the Russian snow leopards. The number of snow leopards has been rising and their population is expected to recover to normal levels within 10 years.
1. Why was no picture of snow leopards taken in six months?| A．SLC’s 20 cameras failed to work properly. |
| B．The number of snow leopards in the wild was too small. |
| C．The local poachers destroyed these cameras on purpose. |
| D．The researchers knew little about the animal’s living habits. |
| A．Find the poachers. | B．Repair cameras in the forest. |
| C．Catch more leopards. | D．Work for SLC. |
| A．To get some pictures of snow leopards. |
| B．To help villagers make a living. |
| C．To prevent villagers from hunting animals. |
| D．To rent their horses at a low price. |
| A．Practice makes perfect. | B．Curiosity kills the cat. |
| C．Kill two birds with one stone. | D．Old habits die hard. |
6 . A recent study of ancient and modern elephants has come up with the unexpected conclusion that the African elephant is divided into two distinct (不同的) species.
The discovery was made by researchers at York and Harvard universities when they were examining the genetic relationship between the ancient woolly mammoth and mastodon to modern elephants — the Asian elephant, African forest elephant and African savanna elephant.
Once they obtained DNA sequences (序列) from two fossils (化石), mammoths and mastodons, the team compared them with DNA from modern elephants. They found to their amazement that modern forest and savanna elephants are as distinct from each other as Asian elephants and mammoths.
The scientists used detailed genetic analysis to prove that the African savanna elephant and the African forest elephant have been distinct species for several million years. Thedivergenceof the two species took place around the time of the divergence of Asian elephants and woolly mammoths. This result amazed all the scientists.
There’s long been debate in the scientific community that the two might be separate species but this is the most convincing scientific evidence so far that they are indeed different species.
Previously, many naturalists believed that African savanna elephants and African forest elephants were two populations of the same species despite the elephants’ significant size differences. The savanna elephant has an average shoulder height of 3.5 meters while the forest elephant has an average shoulder height of 2.5 meters. The savanna elephant weighs between six and seven tons, roughly double the weight of the forest elephant. But the fact that they look so different does not necessarily mean they are different species. However, the proof lay in the analysis of the DNA.
Alfred Roca, assistant professor in the department of Animal Sciences at the University of Illinois, said, “We now have to treat the forest and savanna elephants as two different units for conservation purposes. Since 1950 all African elephants have been conserved as one species. Now that we know the forest and savanna elephants are two very distinct animals, the forest elephant should become a bigger priority (优先)for conservation purposes.”
1. The underlined word “divergence” in Paragraph 4 means ________.| A．evolution | B．separation |
| C．exhibition | D．examination |
| A．population | B．height |
| C．weight | D．DNA |
| A．The conversation of African elephants. |
| B．The purpose of studying African elephants. |
| C．The reason for the distinction of African elephants. |
| D．The way to divide African elephants into two units. |
| A．Naturalists’ Belief about Elephants. |
| B．Amazing Experiments about Elephants. |
| C．An Unexpected Finding about Elephants. |
| D．A Long scientific Debate about Elephants. |
Description:
The National Gallery is the British national art museum built on the north side of Trafalgar Square in London. It houses a diverse collection of more than 2,300 examples of European art ranging from 13th-century religious paintings to more modern ones by Renoir and Van Gogh. The older collections of the gallery are reached through the main entrance while the more modern works in the East Wing are most easily reached from Trafalgar Square by a ground floor entrance.
Layout:
The modern Sainsbury Wing on the western side of the building houses 13th-to 15th-century paintings, and artists include Duccio, Uccello, Van Eyck, Lippi, Mantegna, Botticelli and Memling.
The main West Wing houses 16th-century paintings, and artists include Leonardo da Vinci, Cranach, Michelangelo, Raphael, Bruegel, Bronzino, Titian and Veronese.
The North Wing houses 17th-century paintings, and artists include Caravaggio, Rubens, Poussin, Van Dyck, Velaazquez, Claude and Vermeer.
The East Wing houses 18th-to early 20th-century paintings, and artists include Canaletto, Goya, Turner, Constable, Renoir and Van Gogh.
Opening Hours:
The Gallery is open every day from 10am to 6pm (Fridays 10am to 9pm) and is free, but charges apply to some special exhibitions.
Getting There:
Nearest underground stations: Charing Cross (2-minute walk), Leicester (3-minute walk), Embankment (7-minute walk), and Piccadilly Circus (8-minute walk).
1. In which wing can you see religious paintings?| A．In the East Wing. | B．In the main West Wing. |
| C．In the Sainsbury Wing. | D．In the North Wing. |
| A．Van Eyck | B．Cranach |
| C．Van Dyck. | D．Constable. |
| A．The National Gallery is the biggest British national art museum. |
| B．There are four exhibition areas in The National Gallery |
| C．The Gallery is open every day from 10am to 6pm |
| D．The Gallery is completely free |
| A．An artist magazine. | B．A tourist map. |
| C．A news report. | D．A museum guide. |
