1 . Nowadays, the world is slowly becoming a high-tech society and we are now surrounded by technology. Facebook and Twitter are innovative tools; text messaging is still a somewhat existing phenomenon and even e-mail is only a flashing spot on the screen when compared with our long history of snail mail. Now we adopt these tools to the point of essentialness, and only rarely consider how we are more fundamentally affected by them.
Social media, texting and e-mail all make it much easier to communicate, gather and pass information. But they also present some dangers. By removing any real human engagement, they enable us to develop our abnormal self-love without the risk of disapproval or criticism theatrical metaphor (隐喻), these new forms of communication provide a stage on which we create our own characters, hidden behind a fourth wall of tweets, status updates and texts. This unreal state of unconcern can become addictive as we separate ourselves a safe distance from the cruelty of our fleshly lives, where we are imperfect, powerless and insignificant. In essence, we have been provided not only the means to be more free, but also to become new, to create and protect a more perfect self to the world. As we become more reliant on these tools, they become more a part of our daily routine and so we become more restricted in this fantasy.
So it is that we live in a cold era, where names and faces represent two different levels of closeness, where working relationships occur only through the magic of email and where love can start or end by text message. An environment such as this reduces interpersonal relationships to mere digital exchanges.
Would a celebrity have been so daring to do something dishonorable if he had had to do it in person? Doubtful. It seems he might have been lost in a fantasy world that ultimately convinced himself into believing the digital self could obey different rules and regulations, as if he could continually push the limits of what’s acceptable without facing the consequences of “real life.”
1. The author compares e-mail with snail mail to show ________.| A．the influence of high-tech on our life | B．the history of different types of mails |
| C．the value of traditional communications | D．the rapid development of social media |
| A．Destroying our life totally. | B．Posing more dangers than good. |
| C．Helping us to hide our faults. | D．Replacing traditional letters. |
| A．Sheltering us from virtual life. | B．Removing face-to-face interaction. |
| C．Leading to false mental perception. | D．Making us rely more on hi-tech media. |
| A．Technologies have changed our relationships. |
| B．The digital world is a recipe for pushing limits. |
| C．Love can be better conveyed by text message. |
| D．The digital self need not take responsibility. |
2 . If you live on this planet, there’s a decent chance you’ve seen the classic Star TrekEpisode, in which captain Kirk and several members find themselves in what appears to be another universe.
These days, it seems the idea of the multiverse—many worlds—is having its Hollywood moment. Its appeal as a storytelling device is obvious—characters explore a multi-world with varying degrees of similarity to our own, as well as different versions of themselves. Hence, it has been fully established in mainstream pop culture.
While Hollywood can’t seem to get enough of the multiverse, it remains deeply controversial (有争议的) among scientists. Advocates on the two sides show no mercy toward each other in their books, on their blogs. But physicists didn’t pull the idea out of thin air—rather, several distinct lines of reasoning seem to point to the multiverse’s existence. However, critics warn that making the multiverse legal could make it harder for the public to distinguish speculative (推测性的) theories from established fact, making it more difficult to keep pseudo-science (伪科学) at bay. Giving credit to such speculation risks “turning fundamental physics into pseudo-science”.
The multiverse controversy is rooted in the idea of test ability. If we can’t interact with these other universes, or detect them in any way, some experts insist that reduces them to mere philosophical speculation. But Carroll, an advocate for “many worlds”, argues that mathematics is the language describing our physical theories. Since Schrdinger’s equation (方程), on which Quanturr (量子) mechanic rests, predicts the existence of many worlds, so be it.
Could a more expansive view of the universe itself be the next breakthrough? As Siegfried puts it: “Every time in the past that we’ve thought, ‘We’ve got it; this is what the whole universe is’—the people who’ve said, ‘Maybe there’s more than one of those’ have always turned out to be right.”
1. Why is Hollywood so occupied with the multiverse?| A．It makes for engaging plots. |
| B．It is a much-talked-about topic. |
| C．It is helpful to popularize science. |
| D．It dominates the mainstream pop culture. |
| A．Out of date. | B．Out of place. | C．Out of nowhere. | D．Out of question. |
| A．it can be detected somehow |
| B．it can be reasoned logically |
| C．it can be interpreted philosophically |
| D．it can be predicted by mathematics equation |
| A．Doubtful. | B．Dismissive. | C．Unclear. | D．Approving. |
3 . The Age of Information is bulging: if you tried to download all the data available today, you’d need more than 180 million years to do so. But you are wrong to assume that all information would stimulate a boost of innovation to match the output of data. Indeed, the last time we found ourselves in a period of significant innovation was over 120 years ago, called the Age of Insight.
Innovations, big or small, start with a new idea. Often, these ideas occur as a moment of insight — the result of a novel connection in our brains made between existing and new information. Studies show insights involve quiet signals deep in the brain. Anything that helps us notice quiet signals can increase the chance of insights. However, it’s becoming more challenging to find those signals today, every moment filled with an endless supply of content.
Besides, we also want to increase the quality of them to sort through big new ideas and find the really valuable ones that can be hard to measure. Launched in 2015, the Eureka Scale (尤里卡量表) allows us to assess the strength of our insight experiences on a five-point scale, namely, intense emotions, motivation, memory advantage, aftershocks, and following ideas. The Scale combines these five variables into a single value to define the importance of a new idea and has broad applications for measuring and improving individual and organizational performance. Even it can be used to measure the impact of different kinds of work environments and learning approaches on participants’ growth. The level-5 insight, involving the richest emotion, motivation, and lasting impact, holds the greatest significance.
In order for organizations to benefit from another age of insight, it’s not enough to try to access more data or increase the number of insights we generate. Instead, it’s about making space for the biggest ideas to emerge from all the information. Using the Scale as a way to measure how important ideas are will enable better decision-making toward practical and competitive outcomes. If we’re to enter a new age of insight, we must make timely and necessary changes to design our environments for the best insight possible to surface.
1. What does the underlined word “bulging” in Paragraph 1 probably mean?| A．Approaching. | B．Exploding. | C．Shifting. | D．Updating. |
| A．By engaging in ongoing social media interactions. |
| B．By relying on technology to receive regular notices. |
| C．By stepping away from computers between meetings. |
| D．By participating in additional training and coaching sessions. |
| A．The Eureka Scale controls the influence of our insights. |
| B．One with a level-5 insight has minimal emotional responses. |
| C．Both the quantity and quality of insights are essential to innovation. |
| D．A breakthrough has been made in innovation due to a wealth of information. |
| A．Uncertain. | B．Optimistic. | C．Unconcerned. | D．Dissatisfied. |
4 . What comes to mind when you think about chocolate? A candy bar at Halloween? Ice cream on a hot day?
For Ibrahim, a 12-year-old boy from the West African country of Ghana, chocolate is not about sweet treats; it is about bitter work.
To change the harmful practices like this, some farms use an approach called Fairtrade.
Consumers like you can play a role as well. You can buy Fairtrade chocolate if possible, pressure candy companies to change their labour practices, or ask local stores to sell Fairtrade products.
Chocolate has a hidden story that affects children like Ibrahim—children who want a happy future just like you do.
| A．You have the power to change the story. |
| B．The labels on chocolate do not tell his story. |
| C．Fairtrade is a way of doing business that prohibits child labour. |
| D．You can also take action through the Fairtrade Schools network. |
| E．On many farms, children like Ibrahim perform difficult farming tasks. |
| F．Cocoa trees grow in the tropical climates of Africa, Latin America and South-East Asia. |
| G．With more income, farmers can pay adult workers and can send their children to school. |
5 . One by one, prejudices are disappearing in the West. People may harbor private suspicions that other people’s race or sex makes them inferior—but to say so openly is totally taboo. One old prejudice remains respectable, though. Just ask a childless person.
They are not charged to special taxes, as they were in Soviet Russia; nor are they driven from their homes, as they still are in some poor countries. The childless nonetheless come in for a lot of criticism. Some point out that non-parents are failing to produce the future workers who will pay for their pensions. Childless politicians are charged with not having a proper stake in society. “He talks to us about the future, but he doesn’t have children!” complained Jean-Marie Le Pen, co-founder of the National Front party, of Emmanuel Macron, who went on to win the French presidency. Similar attacks on Theresa May and Angela Merkel also failed but researchers find that many voters quietly agree.
The charges against the childless should be thrown out, along with other social prejudice. In many rich countries, between 15% and 20% of women, and a slightly higher proportion of men, will not have children. The share is rising. Some have medical problems; others do not meet the right person in time; still others decide they do not want them. Whatever the cause, the attacks on the childless are baseless.
If non-breeders are selfish, they have a strange way of showing it. They are more likely to set up charitable foundations than people with children, and much more likely to donate money to good causes. According to one American estimate, the mere fact of not having children raises the amount a person leaves to charity by a little over $10,000. The childless are thus a small but useful counterweight to the world’s parents, who stop social immobility by passing on their social and economic advantages to their children.
The fact that so many senior politicians lack offspring ought to put to rest the idea that they do not care for society. Five of the G7 countries are led by childless men and women. Mr. Macron, Mrs. May, Mrs. Merkel, Shinzo Abe and Paolo Gentiloni have their faults, but they are not notably less able than Justin Trudeau (who has three children) let alone Donald Trump (who has five). Their opportunities for nepotism are limited. And they spare their countries dynastic politics.
The charge that childless people fail to pull their weight in population is correct, but is less serious than it appears. Those who do not have children do put pressure on public pension systems. Governments have to do unpopular things like making pensions less generous, as Japan has done, or accepting more immigrants, as some Western countries have done. But to sustain public pensions in the long term, countries do not actually need more parents. What they need instead is more babies. It is possible to combine a high rate of childlessness with a high birth rate, provided people who become parents have more than one or two children. That was the pattern in many Western countries a century ago. Ireland, yet another country with a childless leader, still manages it today.
The childless also do everyone else a favour by creating wonderful works of art. British novelists have been especially likely to have no offspring: think of Hilary Mantel, P.G Wodehouse and the Bronte sisters. In September last year Britain put Jane Austen on its ten-pound note. That decision was controversial, though it was hard to see why. Few people have written as shrewdly about money or about families even though Austen did not marry, and had no children.
1. What is the main idea of Paragraph 2?| A．The childless often get punished in society. | B．The childless often come under sharp criticism. |
| C．Most successful politicians have no children | D．Childlessness affects the result of an election. |
| A．have a strange way to show selfishness | B．set a bad example for young people |
| C．are not as able as those with children | D．are the government’s financial burden |
| A．Accepting more immigrants. | B．Reducing the pensions for the aged. |
| C．Encouraging parents to have more children. | D．Supporting the political leaders with no children. |
| A．Understanding | B．Skeptical | C．Disappointed | D．Reserved |
| A．In defence of the childless. | B．In hope of having a child or not. |
| C．Reasons for not having children. | D．Measures to address aging problems. |
6 . The needs of plus size consumers have long been the elephant in the room of the fashion industry until body positivity and fat acceptance movements promoted the slogan (口号) that large-bodied people are not those who are left behind. This size-inclusive (尺码包容) trend has become so popular that it is influencing mainstream culture. As a result, fashion brands have finally decided to extend their size ranges. In 2022, the plus-size market grew twice as fast as the standard size market in both North America and the UK.
Yet, many consumers say fashion brands broadening their ranges are not truly inclusive. “Inclusive sizing means that all bodies are included in fashion, not just the ones who fit in standard sizes,” says Marie Southard Ospina, a UK-based journalist who covers body-image issues. “However, what many designers do right now is pick a number that they think is big enough to include plus sizes and stop. This is even more disrespectful.”
Researchers also criticize that some brands are just taking advantage of the trend. “Brands that used to promote so-called perfect bodies in their advertisements are now trying to get in on the trend by adding a few sizes. It doesn’t feel like they really care about plus-size people,” says Tom Burgess, analyst in fashion industry. “If brands cared about large-bodied consumers, then it wouldn’t have taken until now to acknowledge that they exist,” he says. “It gives the impression that companies are just trying to gain a share of the market without a real commitment to the community.”
The fashion industry must go beyond merely producing clothing in a range of sizes if they hope to succeed with a body -diverse world. The whole industry has to connect on a personal level with consumers. That involves showing shoppers that they are seen, understood and important to brands. “Consumers care about values, and so they want to buy from brands that reflect the values they believe in. Everyone should enjoy the same range of fashion options,” says Ludovica Cesareo, professor of marketing at the College of Business in the US.
1. What do the underlined words “the elephant in the room” mean in the first paragraph?| A．The hot issue that is valued. |
| B．The obvious truth that is ignored. |
| C．The important principle that is recognized. |
| D．The common phenomenon that is criticized. |
| A．They pick sizes randomly. | B．They offer limited plus sizes. |
| C．They treat designers disrespectfully. | D．They haven’t broadened standard sizes. |
| A．Their designs. | B．Their quality. |
| C．Their motivations. | D．Their advertisements. |
| A．Buyers may deserve fashion that fits their figure. |
| B．Consumers prefer brands with personalized values. |
| C．Brands should catch up with the size-inclusive trend. |
| D．A good brand image is critical in the fashion industry. |
7 . A worldwide shift from fossil fuel-powered cars to electric vehicles (EV) could significantly reduce the amount of carbon dioxide that humans emit to the atmosphere. But the vehicle electrification can also shift some pollution to communities already suffering under higher economic, health and environmental burdens, researchers warn.
California is seeking to reduce its carbon footprint and has made great increases in the promotion of electric vehicle purchases. One tool the state has launched is the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project, or CVRP, which offers consumers money back for the purchase of new EVs.
Now, an analysis of the CVRP’s impact on the state’s air quality from 2010 to 2021 reveals both good and bad news, researchers report May 3 in PLOS Climate.
The good news is that the CVRP is responsible for reducing the amount of the state’s overall CO2 emissions, reducing them by about 560,000 tons per year on average, says environmental scientist Jaye Mejia-Duwan at the University of California. In 2020, transportation in California produced about 160 million tons of CO2, about 40 percent of the total emitted by the state that year.
The bad news is that the most disadvantaged communities in the state didn’t see the same overall improvement in air quality. Those communities didn’t have the same decreases in CO2 — and in fact saw an increase in one type of air pollution, tiny particulates (颗粒) known as PM2.5. “These particulates are small enough to go deep into the lungs, increasing the risk of cancer, heart problems and cognitive decline,” Mejia-Duwan says.
“Electric vehicles are often referred to as ‘zero-emission vehicles,’ but in fact, they’re only as clean as the underlying electric grid (电网) from which the energy is sourced,” Mejia-Duwan says. EVs tend to be relatively heavy due to their batteries. And “heavier vehicles can produce more particulate matter than equally sized fossil fuel-powered cars, due to brake, tire or road wear,” Mejia-Duwan says.
1. California launched CVRP to ________.| A．save money for consumers | B．encourage the purchase of EVs |
| C．promote selling traditional cars | D．add to the profit of car industry |
| A．The seriousness of CO2 emissions. | B．The increasing popularity of EVs. |
| C．The present situation of environment. | D．The positive effect of CVRP. |
| A．Fuel-powered cars are relatively environment friendly. |
| B．There are more EVs in disadvantaged communities. |
| C．Electric vehicles can reduce the amount of emission. |
| D．Heavier vehicles do less damage to the environment. |
| A．Objective. | B．Supportive. | C．Opposed. | D．Indifferent. |
8 . After Alexander Pushkin was shot in a duel (决斗) in 1837, crowds of mourners formed in Saint Petersburg. When the wagon carrying the much loved poet’s body reached Pskov province, where he was to be buried, admirers tried to pull the vehicle themselves.
Today’s celebrity funerals tend to involve the public largely digitally rather than in person. But people are passionate all the same. In the past few months, grief has coursed around the Internet for Milan Kundera, and most recently, Michael Gambon. If you stop to think about it, such expressions of strong feelings for writers and actors are odd, even irrational.
Unlike other kinds of grief, this one is not rooted in personal intimacy (亲密关系). If you ever interacted with a cherished author, it was probably during a book tour when she signed your copy of her novel. Maybe you once locked eyes with a musician during a live concert and he smiled at you, but actually he did not even know you.
Objectively, sorrow makes sense when a star dies young or violently. Had she not died at 27, who knows what music Amy Winehouse would have added to her already impressive collections of work? The death of a long-lived and fulfilled artist, however, is far from the saddest item in an average day’s headlines. And while most ordinary people sink into oblivion, these celebrities live on in their output. Why, then, are these losses felt so widely and keenly?
One interpretation is that departed celebrities are merely the messengers. Part of your past —the years in which the musician was the soundtrack, the writer your ally (盟友) — can seem to fade away with them. The grief can be seen as a form of gratitude for the harmony and joy they supplied.
More importantly, the passing of an artist is an occasion for exchanges of ideas. In an atomized age, in which the default (默认) tone is critical, a beloved figure’s death is a chance to share positive feelings and memories with fellow admirers. These sad occasions are the parting gifts of these artists.
1. Why does the author mention Milan Kundera and Michael Gambon in paragraph 2?| A．To prove that celebrities’ funerals tend to attract wider public attention. |
| B．To illustrate why people express their sadness at the loss of those celebrities. |
| C．To demonstrate that people’s mourning for celebrities seems strange and unreasonable. |
| D．To show that people’s grief over celebrities’ death is ridiculous and impractical. |
| A．are upset | B．are desperate | C．are helpless | D．are forgotten |
| A．People won’t mourn for celebrities unless they have intimate relationships with celebrities. |
| B．It’s natural that people mourn for celebrities dying young but not for those long-lived ones. |
| C．People feel sad for the passing of celebrities because of the mental nourishment received. |
| D．People attend celebrities’ funerals, either in person or on the Internet, to express their loyalty. |
| A．Supportive. | B．Disapproving. | C．Skeptical. | D．Concerned. |
9 . Nowadays, people are increasingly interacting with others in social media environments where algorithms control the flow of social information they see. People’s interactions with online algorithms may affect how they learn from others, with negative consequences including social misperceptions, conflict and the spread of misinformation.
On social media platforms, algorithms are mainly designed to amplify (放大) information that sustains engagement, meaning they keep people clicking on content and coming back to the platforms. There is evidence suggesting that a side effect of this design is that algorithms amplify information people are strongly biased (偏向的) to learn from. We call this information “PRIME”, for prestigious, in-group, moral and emotional information.
In our evolutionary past, biases to learn from PRIME information were very advantageous: Learning from prestigious individuals is efficient because these people are successful and their behavior can be copied. Paying attention to people who violate moral norms is important because punishing them helps the community maintain cooperation. But what happens when PRIME information becomes amplified by algorithms and some people exploit (利用) algorithm amplification to promote themselves? Prestige becomes a poor signal of success because people can fake prestige on social media. News become filled with negative and moral information so that there is conflict rather than cooperation.
The interaction of human psychology and algorithm amplification leads to disfunction because social learning supports cooperation and problem-solving, but social media algorithms are designed to increase engagement. We call it functional mismatch. One of the key outcomes of functional mismatch is that people start to form incorrect perceptions of their social world, which often occurs in the field of politics. Recent research suggests that when algorithms selectively amplify more extreme political views, people begin to think that their political in-group and out-group are more sharply divided than they really are. Such “false polarization” might be an important source of greater political conflict.
So what’s next? A key question is what can be done to make algorithms facilitate accurate human social learning rather than exploit social learning biases. Some research team is working on new algorithm designs that increase engagement while also punishing PRIME information. This may maintain user activity that social media platforms seek, but also make people’s social perceptions more accurate.
1. What are social media algorithms targeted at?| A．Improving social environment. | B．Generating PRIME information. |
| C．Avoiding side effects of social media. | D．Raising the media platform click rate. |
| A．To make an assumption. | B．To illustrate a conclusion. |
| C．To explain a political issue. | D．To present an extreme case. |
| A．boost engagement and regulate amplification |
| B．strengthen social learning and delete biases |
| C．identify biases and punish PRIME information |
| D．monitor media platforms and guarantee users’ privacy |
| A．PRIME information meets with misperceptions |
| B．Algorithms control the flow of social information |
| C．Social media algorithms twist human social learning |
| D．Online algorithm designs face unexpected challenges |
10 . On June 6th Columbia University announced that it will no longer co-operate with US News & World Report’s undergraduate rankings. It is the first top-notch institution to do so. Might its departure be the start of a mass departure?
Columbia’s decision follows a rankings scandal last year. In February 2022 one of Columbia’s own maths professors accused the college of fudging its data in several areas. The university later admitted to having used “outdated and/or incorrect methodologies”.
In the 1980s prospective students started to expand their college search beyond their local area, and it was hard to learn about universities and compare them. Hence, US News began ranking America’s top universities in 1983, and has released its findings annually since 1988.
Colleges have gone to great lengths to move up in the ratings. Richard Freeland, Northeastern University’s former president, capped class sizes and hired faculty to improve its spot; it moved from 127th in 2003 to 44th this year. Others went too far. A dean at Temple University’s business school was sentenced to prison and was ordered to pay a $250,000 fine after being found guilty of fraud in relation to artificially inflating his programme’s rankings.
The ranking system used to seem unstoppable. Universities have tried to ditch it before, only to find that doing so can backfire badly. US News still ranks non-participating universities, using publicly available information, and the data often do not go in their favour. Reed College, a liberal-arts college, stopped taking part in 1995. It tumbled from the top quartile to the bottom. Columbia did not submit data for this year’s analysis, citing concerns about Dr Thaddeus’s claims, and its ranking fell from second in 2021-22 (tied with Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology) to 18th in 2022-23 (tied with the University of Notre Dame).
Recently the mood has begun to change, however, especially among graduate schools. In 2022, of the 15 highest-ranked law schools, only the University of Chicago submitted data. Some undergraduate schools have already opted out this year (Rhode Island School of Design, Colorado College, Stillman College), but none are as prestigious as Columbia.
In May US News announced changes to its ranking methodology. It is moving away from metrics that rely on reputation and towards student outcomes. One way or another, the rankings—and universities more broadly—are in a state of constant change.
1. What is true about the US News undergraduate rankings?| A．It faked the information for the ratings. | B．It filled an information gap at one time. |
| C．It promoted the quality of higher education. | D．It has been released every year for 40 years. |
| A．it will be ordered to pay a fine | B．it will be excluded from the list |
| C．its ranking will suffer consequently | D．its spot in the ranking won’t be affected |
| A．limited | B．increased | C．inflated | D．maintained |
| A．scores given by former students | B．donations from all walks of life |
| C．evaluations from other colleges | D．earnings for college graduates |
