1、考研英语(一)-33 及答案解析(总分：100.00，做题时间：90 分钟)一、Reading Comprehensio(总题数：0，分数：0.00)三、Text 1(总题数：1，分数：20.00)A deal is a dealexcept, apparently, when Entergy is involved. The company, a major energy supplier in New England, provoked justified outrage in Vermont last week when it announced it was reneging on a
2、 longstanding commitment to abide by the state“s strict nuclear regulations. Instead, the company has done precisely what it would not: challenge the constitutionality of Vermont“s rules in the federal court, as part of a desperate effort to keep its Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant running. It“s
3、a stunning move. The conflict has been surfacing since 2002, when the corporation bought Vermont“s only nuclear power plant, an aging reactor in Vernon. As a condition of receiving state approval for the sale, the company agreed to seek permission from state regulators to operate past 2012. In 2006,
4、 the state went a step further, requiring that any extension of the plant“s license be subject to Vermont legislature“s approval. Then, too, the company went along. Either Entergy never really intended to live by those commitments, or it simply didn“t foresee what would happen next. A string of acci
5、dents, including the partial collapse of a cooling tower in 2007 and the discovery of an underground pipe system leakage, raised serious questions about both Vermont Yankee“s safety and Entergy“s managementespecially after the company made misleading statements about the pipe. Enraged by Entergy“s b
6、ehavior, the Vermont Senate voted 26 to 4 last year against allowing an extension. Now the company is suddenly claiming that the 2002 agreement is invalid because of the 2006 legislation, and that only the federal government has regulatory power over nuclear issues. The legal issues in the case are
7、obscure: whereas the Supreme Court has ruled that states do have some regulatory authority over nuclear power, legal scholars say that Vermont case will offer a precedent-setting test of how far those powers extend. Certainly, there are valid concerns about the patchwork regulations that could resul
8、t if every state sets its own rules. But had Entergy kept its word, that debate would be beside the point. The company seems to have concluded that its reputation in Vermont is already so damaged that it has noting left to lose by going to war with the state. But there should be consequences. Permis
9、sion to run a nuclear plant is a public trust. Entergy runs 11 other reactors in the United States, including Pilgrim Nuclear station in Plymouth. Pledging to run Pilgrim safely, the company has applied for federal permission to keep it open for another 20 years. But as the Nuclear Regulatory Commis
10、sion (NRC) reviews the company“s application, it should keep in mind what promises from Entergy are worth.（分数：20.00）(1).The phrase “reneging on“ (Para. 1) is closest in meaning to（分数：4.00）A.condemning.B.reaffirming.C.dishonoring.D.securing.(2).By entering into the 2002 agreement, Entergy intended to
11、（分数：4.00）A.obtain protection from Vermont regulators.B.seek favor from the federal legislature.C.acquire an extension of its business license.D.get permission to purchase a power plant.(3).According to Paragraph 4, Entergy seems to have problems with its（分数：4.00）A.managerial practices.B.technical in
12、novativeness.C.financial goals.D.business vision.(4).In the author“s view, the Vermont case will test（分数：4.00）A.Entergy“s capacity to fulfill all its promises.B.the nature of states“ patchwork regulations.C.the federal authority over nuclear issues.D.the limits of states“ power over nuclear issues.(
13、5).It can be inferred from the last paragraph that（分数：4.00）A.Entergy“s business elsewhere might be affected.B.the authority of the NRC will be defied.C.Entergy will withdraw its Plymouth application.D.Vermont“s reputation might be damaged.四、Text 2(总题数：1，分数：20.00)When prehistoric man arrived in new p
14、arts of the world, something strange happened to the large animals: they suddenly became extinct. Smaller species survived. The large, slow-growing animals were easy game, and were quickly hunted to extinction. Now something similar could be happening in the oceans. That the seas are being overfishe
15、d has been known for years. What researchers such as Ransom Myers and Boris Worm have shown is just how fast things are changing. They have looked at half a century of data from fisheries around the world. Their methods do not attempt to estimate the actual biomass (the amount of living biological m
16、atter) of fish species in particular parts of the ocean, but rather changes in that biomass over time. According to their latest paper published in Nature, the biomass of large predators (animals that kill and eat other animals) in a new fishery is reduced on average by 80% within 15 years of the st
17、art of exploitation. In some long-fished areas, it has halved again since then. Dr. Worm acknowledges that these figures are conservative . One reason for this is that fishing technology has improved. Today“s vessels can find their prey using satellites and sonar, which were not available 50 years a
18、go. That means a higher proportion of what is in the sea is being caught, so the real difference between present and past is likely to be worse than the one recorded by changes in catch sizes. In the early days, too, longlines would have been more saturated with fish. Some individuals would therefor
19、e not have been caught, since no baited hooks would have been available to trap them, leading to an underestimate offish stocks in the past. Furthermore, in the early days of longline fishing, a lot offish were lost to sharks after they had been hooked. That is no longer a problem, because there are
20、 fewer sharks around now. Dr. Myers and Dr. Worm argue that their work gives a correct baseline, which future management efforts must take into account. They believe the data support an idea current among marine biologists, that of the “shifting baseline.“ The notion is that people have failed to de
21、tect the massive changes which have happened in the ocean because they have been looking back only a relatively short time into the past. That matters because theory suggests that the maximum sustainable yield that can be cropped from a fishery comes when the biomass of a target species is about 50%
22、 of its original levels. Most fisheries are well below that, which is a bad way to do business.（分数：20.00）(1).The extinction of large prehistoric animals is noted to suggest that（分数：4.00）A.large animals were vulnerable to the changing environment.B.small species survived as large animals disappeared.
23、C.large sea animals may face the same threat today.D.slow-growing fish outlive fast-growing ones.(2).We can infer from Dr. Myers and Dr. Worm“s paper that（分数：4.00）A.the stock of large predators in some old fisheries has reduced by 90%.B.there are only half as many fisheries as there were 15 years ag
24、o.C.the catch sizes in new fisheries are only 20% of the original amount.D.the number of larger predators dropped faster in new fisheries than in the old.(3).By saying “these figures are conservative“(Para. 3), Dr. Worm means that（分数：4.00）A.fishing technology has improved rapidly.B.the catch-sizes a
25、re actually smaller than recorded.C.the marine biomass has suffered a greater loss.D.the data collected so far are out of date.(4).Dr. Myers and other researchers hold that（分数：4.00）A.people should look for a baseline that can work for a longer time.B.fisheries should keep their yields below 50% of t
26、he biomass.C.the ocean biomass should be restored to its original level.D.people should adjust the fishing baseline to the changing situation.(5).The author seems to be mainly concerned with most fisheries“（分数：4.00）A.management efficiency.B.biomass level.C.catch-size limits.D.technological applicati
27、on.五、Text 3(总题数：1，分数：20.00)The journal Science is adding an extra round of statistical checks to its peer-review process, editor-in-chief Marcia McNutt announced today. The policy follows similar efforts from other journals, after widespread concern that basic mistakes in data analysis are contribut
28、ing to the irreproducibility of many published research findings. “Readers must have confidence in the conclusions published in our journal,“ writes McNutt in an editorial. Working with the American Statistical Association, the journal has appointed seven experts to a statistics board of reviewing e
29、ditors (SBoRE). Manuscript will be flagged up for additional scrutiny by the journal“s internal editors, or by its existing Board of Reviewing Editors or by outside peer reviewers. The SBoRE panel will then find external statisticians to review these manuscripts. Asked whether any particular papers
30、had impelled the change, McNutt said: “The creation of the “ statistics board“ was motivated by concerns broadly with the application of statistics and data analysis in scientific research and is part of Science“s overall drive to increase reproducibility in the research we publish.“ Giovanni Parmig
31、iani, a biostatistician at the Harvard School of Public Health, a member of the SBoRE group, says he expects the board to “play primarily an advisory role.“ He agreed to join because he “found the foresight behind the establishment of the SBoRE to be novel, unique and likely to have a lasting impact
32、. This impact will not only be through the publications in Science itself, but hopefully through a larger group of publishing places that may want to model their approach after Science.“ John Ioannidis, a physician who studies research methodology, says that the policy is “a most welcome step forwar
33、d“ and “long overdue.“ “Most journals are weak in statistical review, and this damages the quality of what they publish. I think that, for the majority of scientific papers nowadays, statistical review is more essential than expert review,“ he says. But he noted that biomedical journals such as Anna
34、ls of Internal Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association and The Lancet pay strong attention to statistical review. Professional scientists are expected to know how to analyze data, but statistical errors are alarmingly common in published research, according to David Vaux, a cell bi
35、ologist. Researchers should improve their standards, he wrote in 2012, but journals should also take a tougher line, “engaging reviewers who are statistically literate and editors who can verify the process“. Vaux says that Science“s idea to pass some papers to statisticians “has some merit, but a w
36、eakness is that it relies on the board of reviewing editors to identify “the papers that need scrutiny“ in the first place.“（分数：20.00）(1).It can be learned from Paragraph 1 that（分数：4.00）A.Science intends to simplify its peer-review process.B.journals are strengthening their statistical checks.C.few
37、journals are blamed for mistakes in data analysis.D.lack of data analysis is common in research projects.(2).The phrase “flagged up“ (Para. 2) is the closest in meaning to（分数：4.00）A.found.B.revised.C.marked.D.stored.(3).Giovanni Parmigiani believes that the establishment of the SBoRE may（分数：4.00）A.p
38、ose a threat to all its peers.B.meet with strong opposition.C.increase Science“s circulation.D.set an example for other journals.(4).David Vaux holds that what Science is doing now（分数：4.00）A.adds to researchers“ workload.B.diminishes the role of reviewers.C.has room for further improvement.D.is to f
39、ail in the foreseeble future.(5).Which of the following is the best titile of the text?（分数：4.00）A.Science Joins Push to Screen Statistics in PapersB.Professional Statisticians Deserve More RespectC.Data Analysis Finds Its Way onto Editor“s DesksD.Statisticians Are Coming Back with Science六、Text 4(总题
40、数：1，分数：20.00)“The ancient Hawaiians are astronomers“, wrote Queen Liliuokalani, Hawaii“s last reigning monarch, in 1897. Star watchers were among the most esteemed members of Hawaiian society. Sadly, all is not well with astronomy in Hawaii today. Protesters have erupted of over construction of the
41、Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT), a giant observatory that promises to revolutionize humanity“s view of cosmos. At issue is the TMT“s planned location on Manna Kea, a dormant volcano worshiped by some Hawaiians as the piko , that connects the Hawaiian Islands to the heavens. But Manna Kea is also home t
42、o some of the world“s most powerful telescopes. Rested in the Pacific Ocean, Manna Kea“s peak rises above the bulk of our planet“s dense atmosphere, where conditions allow telescopes to obtain images of unsurpassed clarity. Oppositions to telescopes on Mauna Kea is nothing new. A small but vocal gro
43、up of Hawaiians and environmentalists have long viewed their presence as disrespect for sacred land and a painful reminder of oc cupation of what was once a sovereign nation. Some blame for the current controversy belongs to astronomers. In their eagerness to build bigger telescopes, they forgot tha
44、t science is not the only way of understanding the world. They did not always prioritize the protection of Mauna Kea“s fragile ecosystems or its holiness to the islands“ inhabitants. Hawaiian culture is not a relic of the past; it is a living culture undergoing a renaissance today. Yet science has a
45、 cultural history, too, with roots going back to the dawn of civilization. The same curiosity to find what lies beyond the horizon that first brought early Polynesians to Hawaii“s shores inspires astronomers today to explore the heavens. Calls to disassemble all telescopes on Mauna Kea or to ban fut
46、ure development there ignore the reality that astronomy and Hawaiin culture both seek to answer big questions about who we are, where we come from and where we are going. Perhaps that is why we explore the starry skies, as if answering a primal calling to know ourselves and our true ancestral homes.
47、 The astronomy community is making compromises to change its use of Manna Kea. The TMT site was chosen to minimize the telescope“s visibility around the island and to avoid archaeological and environmental impact. To limit the number of telescopes on Manna Kea, old ones will be removed at the end of
48、 their lifetimes and their sites retuned to a natural state. There is no reason why everyone cannot be welcomed on Manna Kea to embrace their cultural heritage and to study the stars.（分数：20.00）(1).Queen Liliuokalani“s remark in Paragraph 1 indicates（分数：4.00）A.her conservative view on the historical
49、role of astronomy.B.the importance of astronomy in ancient Hawaiian society.C.the regrettable decline of astronomy in ancient times.D.her appreciation of star watcher“s feats in her time.(2).Mauna Kea is deemed as an ideal astronomical site due to（分数：4.00）A.its geographical features.B.its protective surroundings.C.its religious implications.D.its exciting infrastructure.(3).The construction of the TMT is opposed by some locals partly because（分数：4.00）A.it may risk ruining their intellectual life.B.it reminds them of a humiliating history.C.their culture will lose a chance of revival.D.they fe
