高考英语二轮-阅读理解之议论文（题型专练）（北京高考真题+各区模拟）（教师版）

这是一份高考英语二轮-阅读理解之议论文（题型专练）（北京高考真题+各区模拟）（教师版），共39页。
\l "_Tc220856100" 2025西城期末 PAGEREF _Tc220856100 \h 3
\l "_Tc220856101" 2025朝阳期末 PAGEREF _Tc220856101 \h 4
\l "_Tc220856102" 2025海淀期末 PAGEREF _Tc220856102 \h 6
\l "_Tc220856103" 2025丰台期末 PAGEREF _Tc220856103 \h 7
\l "_Tc220856104" 2025石景山期末 PAGEREF _Tc220856104 \h 9
\l "_Tc220856105" 2025东城一模 PAGEREF _Tc220856105 \h 10
\l "_Tc220856106" 2025西城一模 PAGEREF _Tc220856106 \h 12
\l "_Tc220856107" 2025朝阳一模 PAGEREF _Tc220856107 \h 14
\l "_Tc220856108" 2025海淀一模 PAGEREF _Tc220856108 \h 15
\l "_Tc220856109" 2025丰台一模 PAGEREF _Tc220856109 \h 17
\l "_Tc220856110" 2025石景山一模 PAGEREF _Tc220856110 \h 18
\l "_Tc220856111" 2025东城二模 PAGEREF _Tc220856111 \h 19
\l "_Tc220856112" 2025西城二模 PAGEREF _Tc220856112 \h 21
\l "_Tc220856113" 2025朝阳二模 PAGEREF _Tc220856113 \h 22
\l "_Tc220856114" 2025海淀二模 PAGEREF _Tc220856114 \h 24
\l "_Tc220856115" 2025丰台二模 PAGEREF _Tc220856115 \h 25
2025东城期末
D
The age f artificial intelligence has begun, and it brings plenty f anxieties. Almst all f the cnversatins abut risk have t d with the ptential cnsequences f AI systems pursuing gals that depart frm what they were prgrammed t d and that are nt in the interests f humans. But this is nly ne side f the danger. Imagine what culd unfld if AI des d what humans want.
“What humans want,” f curse, isn’t a mnlith. Different peple have cuntless ideas f what cnstitutes “the greater gd.” Even if we culd get everyne t fcus n the well-being f the entire human species, it’s unlikely we’d be able t agree n what that might lk like.
That seems t be the reasn that DeepMind recently funded an internal rganizatin fcused n AI safety and preventing its manipulatin by bad actrs. But it’s nt ideal that what’s “bad” is ging t be determined by a handful f individuals at this ne particular crpratin — cmplete with their blind spts and persnal and cultural biases (偏见). The ptential prblem ges beynd humans harming ther humans. What’s “gd” fr humanity has, many times thrughut histry, cme at the expense f ther sentient (有知觉力的) beings. Such is the situatin tday.
In the US alne, we have billins f animals kept in cnfinement, subjected t cruel treatment, and denial f their basic psychlgical and physilgical needs at any given time. Entire species are dminated and systemically butchered s that we can have melets, burgers and shes.
If AI des exactly what “we” want it t, that wuld likely mean enacting this mass cruelty mre efficiently, at an even greater scale and with mre autmatin and fewer pprtunities fr sympathetic humans t step in and flag anything particularly hrrifying.
A better gal than aligning AI with humanity’ s immediate interests wuld be what I wuld call “sentient alignment” — AI acting in accrdance with the interests f all sentient beings, including humans, all ther animals and, shuld it exist, sentient AI. This will strike sme as aggressive, because what’s gd fr all sentient life might nt always agree with what’s gd fr humankind. It might smetimes, even ften, be in ppsitin t what humans want r what wuld be best fr the greatest number f us.
Peter Singer, a philspher, argued that an AI system’s ultimate gals and pririties are mre imprtant than it being aligned with humans. “The questin is really whether this super intelligent AI is ging t be benevlent and want t prduce a better wrld,” Singer said, “and even if we dn’t cntrl it, it still will prduce a better wrld in which ur interests will get taken int accunt.”
I’m with Singer n this. Decentering humankind t any extent, and especially t this extreme, is an idea that will challenge peple. But that’s necessary if we’re t prevent ur current belief frm spreading in new and awful ways.
31. The authr mentins the rganizatin funded by DeepMind t __________.
A. questin a slutinB. clarify a belief
C. illustrate an exampleD. explain a practice
32. Which f the fllwing can best present the idea f “sentient alignment”?
A. AI extends the same rights t living beings.B. AI prmtes the interactin amng species.
C. AI benefits frm the develpment f humans.D. AI meets the demands f perceptive creatures.
33. What des the underlined wrd “benevlent” in Paragraph 7 prbably mean?
A. Ambitius.B. Generus.C. Resurceful.D. Cmpetitive.
34. The authr’s majr cncern in develping AI is that __________.
A. AI pses a threat t the wrldB. sciety’s mrals are in decline
C. humans priritize their wn needsD. sentient beings deepen cultural biases
核心主题
AI时代存在双重风险，除了AI偏离人类编程目标，更危险的是AI精准执行人类需求时，因人类利益的排他性对其他有知觉生物造成伤害，进而提出“感知对齐”的解决方案。
段落结构
引出话题：AI焦虑的常见视角是AI偏离目标，转折提出核心风险——AI按人类意愿行事。
铺垫矛盾：“人类需求”并非统一整体，甚至常以牺牲其他有知觉生物为代价。
质疑现有方案：DeepMind成立AI安全组织，但“坏”的定义由少数人决定，存在偏见与局限。
例证危害：美国数十亿动物遭受残忍对待，AI会让这种残忍更高效、大规模地发生。
提出解决方案：“感知对齐”即AI需兼顾人类、其他动物及潜在感知AI等所有有知觉生物的利益。
引用支持：哲学家Peter Singer认为AI的终极善意目标比“对齐人类”更重要。
总结立场：支持“去人类中心主义”，这是避免现有偏见扩散的必要选择。
题目答案及解析
答案：A。解析：作者提到DeepMind的组织，并非肯定其作用，而是指出“由少数人定义‘坏’”的局限性，本质是质疑该解决方案，而非澄清信念、举例说明或解释做法。
答案：D。解析：“感知对齐”的核心是“AI符合所有有知觉生物的利益”，“满足有感知生物的需求”精准对应这一概念，其他选项均与定义无关。
答案：B。解析：结合上下文，Singer强调AI需“benevlent”并“创造更美好世界”，该词应译为“仁慈的、慷慨的”，与Generus含义一致。
答案：C。解析：作者核心担忧是人类优先自身需求，这种自私会被AI放大，伤害其他有知觉生物，其他选项均非核心担忧。
2025西城期末
D
In the early 1900s, an American chemist named Harvey W. Wiley led the famus “Pisn Squad” experiment. His studies revealed the dangers f unregulated (未经监管的) fd additives and raised public awareness abut the imprtance f knwing what was in the fd they cnsumed. Hwever, it wasn’t until nearly 90 years later that cmpanies in the U. S. began disclsing the ingredients inside the bxes, cans, and bags that lined grcery stre shelves.
Fast-frward t tday, and it’s hard t imagine walking thrugh a supermarket withut seeing these labels. Yet, when we surf the Internet — anther essential marketplace in ur lives — we ften absrb vast amunts f digital infrmatin withut any understanding f its emtinal r mental “nutritinal value.” But what if every webpage came with a cntent label?
A study we cnducted, published tday in Nature Human Behavir, revealed that individuals with prer mental health tended t seek ut mre negative and frightening cntent nline. This, in turn, wrsened their symptms, creating a destructive cycle. T break this cycle, we intrduced cntent labels that prvided users with emtinal “nutritin infrmatin” abut the websites they were abut t visit. Wuld this webpage make yu feel better r wrse? Was it full f negativity, r was it likely t brighten yur md? When users were shwn these labels n the search engine results page, they were far less likely t click n negative cntent. As a result, this led t imprved md after brwsing (浏览).
Hwever, it’s imprtant t nte that yu wuldn’t want peple t make decisins slely based n the emtinal tne f a website. Staying infrmed abut the wrld — despite the ptential fr sadness r anxiety — is ften essential. T address this, we develped a plugin that prvides users with nt nly labels abut a website’s emtinal tne but als scres indicating the practicality, helpfulness, and ability f the infrmatin t enhance understanding. These scres, displayed n the search engine results page, are calculated using a machine learning algrithm (运算法则) trained n thusands f human assessments.
Anne-Linda Camerini, a researcher specializing in digital media and mental health, pinted ut that while much f the fcus n mental health and technlgy has been n limiting screen time, the type f cntent we cnsume is just as critical. This shift culd transfrm the cnversatin arund mental health and technlgy. Instead f framing the Internet as inherently harmful, cntent labels ffer a way t create a healthier digital experience. Just as nutritin labels empwer peple t make better fd chices, cntent labels culd enable users t make smarter, healthier decisins nline.
32. What des the authr intend t d by mentining Harvey’s studies?
A. Make a cmparisn.B. Illustrate a pint.
C. Suggest an alternative.D. Challenge an assumptin.
33. Accrding t the passage, hw d cntent labels aim t create a healthier digital experience?
A. By encuraging users t avid the Internet altgether.
B. By shwing emtinal tne and website usefulness.
C. By training users t spend less time nline.
D. By restricting access t negative cntent.
34. What is the purpse f this passage?
A. T stress the necessity f categrizing webpages.
B T suggest new slutins t mental health prblems.
C. T criticize scial media sites fr spreading negativity.
D. T highlight the imprtance f regulating nline cntent.
核心主题
类比食品标签，提出“网络内容情感标签”方案，解决“负面内容→心理健康恶化”的恶性循环，同时兼顾内容的实用性与信息价值。
段落结构
类比铺垫：Harvey的食品添加剂研究推动食品标签普及，转折提出疑问——网络内容为何没有“情感营养标签”？
研究发现：心理健康较差者易沉迷负面内容，形成恶性循环；情感标签能减少负面内容点击，改善浏览情绪。
优化方案：标签需同时包含“情感基调”与“实用性/帮助性/理解度评分”，避免单纯排斥负面信息。
专家观点：数字媒体专家指出，内容类型对心理健康的影响不亚于屏幕时间，标签能打造更健康的数字体验。
总结：内容标签如营养标签，赋能用户做出更明智的网络选择。
题目答案及解析
答案：A。解析：作者提到Harvey的研究，是为了类比“食品标签保障饮食安全→网络内容标签保障心理安全”，核心是建立对比。
答案：B。解析：文章明确标签包含“情感基调”和“实用性/帮助性评分”，其他选项均与原文“不排斥必要负面信息”矛盾。
答案：D。解析：文章核心是通过“内容标签”解决网络内容对心理健康的危害，本质是强调规范网络内容的重要性。
2025朝阳期末
D
Pure mathematics fascinates me, precisely because it is s inaccessible. I envisin it as a remte, chilly, dangerus place, like Antarctica’s Sentinel Range. The hard y suls wh surmunt its peaks seem superhuman.
Perhaps because I rmanticize mathematicians, I’m trubled by the thught that machines might replace them. I stated this pssibility in The Death f Prf, published in the Octber 1993 Scientific American. In respnse t the grwing cmplexity f mathematics, I reprted, mathematicians were becming increasingly reliant n cmputers. I asked, “Will the great mathematicians f the next century be made f silicn (硅)?”
Mathematicians are still annyed abut that article, even as the trends I described have cntinued. Anthny Brdg at Cambridge University wrries that his field culd face a “replicatin crisis” (复制危机) like that trubling scientific research. Mathematicians, Brdg ntes, smetimes accept a prf nt because they have checked it, step by step, but because they trust the prf’s methds and authr. Given the “increasing difficulty in checking the crrectness f mathematical arguments”, ld-fashined peer review may n lnger be sufficient. Outstanding mathematicians have published “prfs” s nvel and elabrate that even specialists in the relevant mathematics can’t validate them. Brdg suggests cmputerized “prf assistants ” will help cnfirm prfs. Researchers have already invented an “interactive therem prver (交互式定理证明程序)” that can check prfs and even prpse imprvements.
Sme mathematicians welcme the digitizatin f mathematics fr accuracy. Others are cnflicted. Michael Harris sees mathematics as “a free, creative activity” pursued fr its wn sake, fr the pure jy f discvery and insight. He wrries such tls will encurage a “limited visin” f mathematics as an ecnmic prduct rather than “a way f being human”. After all, many funders f mathematical research, including technlgy giants, value mathematics primarily fr its applicatins.
We value science fr applicatins, t. Sentimental science writing, including mine, implies that science’s purpse is insight int nature. In the mdern era, hwever, science’s primary gal is pwer. Science helps us cntrl nature fr varius ends: t enrich and entertain, t bst ecnmy, and t defeat enemies. Mdern physics, t mst f us, is incmprehensible, but wh cares when physics gives us smartphnes and hydrgen bmbs?
Physicists ften adpt a utilitarian (实用主义的) mindset, exemplified by the slgan “Shut up and calculate!” That is what prfessrs suppsedly tell students stuck in quantum mechanics. Stephen Hawking and Martin Rees have predicted artificial intelligence will play an increasing rle in physics. Wuldn’t it be funny if a quantum AI finds the lng-sught unified thery f physics, but nt even brilliant therist Edward Witten understands it?
Given the pwerful frces behind autmatizatin if machines can replace mathematicians, they prbably will, just as they are replacing drivers, bank tellers, travel agents, cashiers and ther wrkers. Mathematicians’ wishes, such as their desire t pursue truth purely fr its wn sake, might be unlikely. The charm f math can hardly be preserved in face f the pwerful frces behind autmatizatin.
32. “Replicatin crisis” is mentined t _________.
A. reduce a particular cncernB. justify the use f digital assistants
C. questin the rle f authrity in mathD. highlight the ptential threat f machines
33. Advcates f utilitarianism in science wuld prbably agree that _________.
A. insight int nature is a prirityB. autmatizatin is a majr trend
C. quantum AI remains a fantasyD. pwer is an apprach t digitizatin
34. What can be learned frm this passage?
A. Utilitarian mindset pushes physics frward.
B. Quantum mechanics unifies theries f physics.
C. The humanity f mathematics is hard t maintain.
D. Leading mathematicians’ prfs are beynd understanding.
核心主题
纯数学的数字化趋势引发争议，机器（证明辅助工具）可能取代人类数学家，而数学的“人文性”（创造性、纯粹探索欲）面临实用主义的冲击。
段落结构
个人情感：作者对纯数学的浪漫化想象，视数学家为“超人”。
核心担忧：机器可能取代数学家，呼应1993年《证明的死亡》中的预测。
现实问题：数学证明日益复杂，传统同行评审失效，面临“复制危机”，数字辅助工具应运而生。
数学家分歧：部分人认可数字化的准确性，部分人担忧其将数学简化为“经济产品”，丧失人文性。
延伸对比：科学的实用主义趋势，暗示数学可能重蹈覆辙。
预测结论：自动化力量强大，机器大概率取代数学家，数学的魅力难以维系。
题目答案及解析
答案：B。解析：提到“复制危机”是为了说明“传统评审失效”，进而证明数字辅助工具的必要性。
答案：B。解析：实用主义者认为科学的核心是“控制自然、创造价值”，会认同“自动化是大趋势”，其他选项均无依据。
答案：C。解析：文章反复强调数学的“创造性、纯粹探索欲”是“人文性”的体现，而自动化和实用主义会摧毁这一点。
2025海淀期末
D
Crucial systems acrss the wrld cllapsed n Friday, triggered by ne mistake in a single cmpany. The pwer cut f CrwdStrike, a giant in the cybersecurity industry, hit banks, airlines, and health-care systems. It may end up being the wrst infrmatin technlgy disaster in histry.
This was nt, hwever, an unfreseeable freak accident, nr will it be the last f its kind. Instead, the devastatin was the inevitable utcme f mdern scial systems that have been designed fr hypercnnected ptimizatin (优化), nt decentralized resilience.
There is ften a trade-ff between maximum ptimizatin and resilience. Cnsider a basic prehistrical scial system in which many humans lived in small, islated bands. What any single persn did wuld have little t n effect n thse living elsewhere. It was an inefficient, basic system — but if ne part f the human system failed, few thers were affected.
Thrughut ur advancement as a species, frm building empires t building machines, scial systems have evlved t be mre cnnected and centralized. In the 21st century, the cmbinatin f glbalizatin and digitizatin has created a landscape characterized by the threat f catastrphic, immediate risk. Glbalizatin enables large efficiency gains, where a prduct can be put tgether frm carefully managed links in the glbal supply chain. But thse systems lack resilience. Every link must fit tgether perfectly; the system falls apart if even ne chain breaks.
Centuries ag, the philspher David Hume wrte that we can never be certain that the patterns f the past will remain the patterns f the future. This is especially true in the 21st century as we are betting mre and mre f ur wrld n unstable systems. Can we really trust ur species t flawlessly gvern unimaginably cmplex systems — systems we dn’t always fully understand — that can be brught dwn by a single screw-up?
Mdern scieties have discunted the cst f that risk because ur current reward systems favr ptimizatin ver resilience. CEOs try t deliver shrt-term imprvements, nt lng-term planning. Nbdy gets reelected by investing in a rainy-day fund. Business leaders are hired r fired based n quarterly results.
Even thugh the mdern quest fr ptimizatin has t ften made resilience an afterthught, it is nt inevitable that we cntinue dwn the risky path we’re n. And making ur systems mre resilient desn’t require ging back t a discnnected, primitive wrld, either. Instead, ur cmplex, intercnnected scieties simply demand that we cmprmise a bit f efficiency in rder t allw a little extra cushin (缓冲).
If scial systems rely n a mre diverse digital array f cmpanies, the scieties will be less vulnerable (脆弱的). Fr the brader set f risks facing glbal sciety, better regulatin is essential t ensure fail-safes, backups, and stress testing — s that ne errr desn’t bring dwn entire systems. The CrwdStrike breakdwn is a clear warming that the mdern wrld is fragile by design. S far, we have decided t make urselves vulnerable. That means we can decide differently t.
31. The authr mentins the CrwdStrike mainly t ______.
A. highlight its crucial rle in cybersecurityB. intrduce an infrmatin technlgy cllapse
C. explain why peple are in a cnnected systemD. indicate predictable failures f the mdern system
32. What can be inferred abut a mre glbalized system?
A. It leads t a highly advanced digitalized netwrk.
B. It tends t priritize adaptability ver prductivity.
C. It enlarges the impact f lcal errrs t a glbal scale.
D. It guarantees immediate ecnmic rewards fr participants.
33. As fr the future f scial systems, which wuld the authr agree with?
A. The mre discnnected they are, the mre resilient they will be.
B. Sme efficiency shuld be sacrificed fr mre flexibility.
C. Lng-term planning prevents structural breakdwns.
D. Histry can help peple predict future patterns.
34. Which wuld be the best title fr this passage?
A. Hypercnnectivity: The Price f Perfectin
B. A Wakeful Warning: The Lessn frm CrwdStrike
C. System Cllapse: An Inevitable Technlgy Disaster
D. Resilience vs. Optimizatin: A Debate fr Better Systems
核心主题
现代社会系统追求“超连接优化”，牺牲了“去中心化韧性”，导致局部错误引发全局崩溃（以CrwdStrike事件为例），呼吁在效率与韧性间寻求平衡。
段落结构
事件引入：CrwdStrike的一个错误导致全球关键系统崩溃，暗示这不是偶然。
核心矛盾：优化与韧性的权衡——原始系统低效但韧性强，现代系统高效但脆弱。
趋势分析：全球化+数字化加剧脆弱性，供应链环环相扣，任一环节断裂即引发崩溃。
深层质疑：人类无法完美掌控复杂系统，却将世界赌注于不稳定的优化模式。
根源分析：奖励机制偏爱短期优化，忽视长期韧性。
解决方案：牺牲少量效率换取缓冲，如多元化数字供应商、加强监管。
题目答案及解析
答案：D。解析：作者提到CrwdStrike事件，是用其证明“现代系统因追求优化而脆弱，失败可预见”，而非强调其地位或单纯介绍事件。
答案：C。解析：全球化系统的特点是“高效但缺乏韧性”，局部错误会通过连接放大到全球。
答案：B。解析：作者明确提出“需牺牲一点效率以获得额外缓冲”，即牺牲部分效率换取灵活性（韧性）。
答案：D。解析：文章围绕“优化与韧性的权衡”展开，批判过度优化的危害，呼吁重视韧性。
2025丰台期末
D
The 2024 Nbel Prize in Physics was awarded fr machine learning develpment and the Chemistry Nbel was fr prtein structure predictin via AI. Sme said the physics prize wasn’t really physics. “AI is cming fr science, t,” the New Yrk Times cncluded. With pwerful large language mdels, AIs can generate varius utputs and even make Nbel-winning discveries. But have AIs really taken ver science?
T begin with, the physics prize went t Hintn and Jhn Hpfield, a physicist, wh discvered hw the physical dynamics f a netwrk can encde memry. Hpfield came up with an intuitive analgy: a ball, rlling acrss a bumpy landscape, will ften “remember” t return t the same lwest valley. Hintn’s wrk extended Hpfield’s mdel. In shrt, the Physics Nbel was awarded fr fundamental research abut the physical principles f infrmatin, nt the brad umbrella f “AI” and its applicatins.
Meanwhile the Chemistry Nbel was awarded t bichemist David Baker and DeepMind researchers Demis Hassabis and Jhn Jumper. Baker first develped sftware t design nvel prtein structures frm scratch. Yet by 2018, f the rughly 200 millin prteins catalged in all genetic databases, nly abut 150, 000 had cnfirmed structures. Then Hassabis and Jumper intrduced AlphaFld, which prvided accurate flding structures fr the rest. But even s, the AI has failed t predict defects in prteins. It’s nt a cathlicn fr every prblem in prtein flding, but rather an excellent tl.
Many f these tls have disappeared int their uses. We rarely pause t cnsider the transistr (晶体管) (fr which the 1956 physics prize was awarded) when we use electrnics cntaining them by the billins. Sme pwerful machine-learning features are already n this path. The neural netwrks that prvide accurate language translatin r sng recmmendatins in ppular cnsumer sftware prgrams are simply part f the service. In science, as in s many ther dmains, this trend suggests that when AI tls becme cmmnplace, they will fade int the backgrund, t.
Still a reasnable cncern might be that such autmatin threatens the effrts f human scientists. As AI becmes essential t further scientific prgress, will any prizes recgnize wrk truly free f AI?
AI can revlutinize science. It has already helped us see prteins with previusly unimaginable clarity. Sn AIs may dream up new mlecules fr batteries. In shrt, they may d many things, sme f which previusly seemed impssible. But they have a crucial limitatin tied t smething wnderful abut science: its empirical dependence n the real wrld, which cannt be vercme by cmputatin alne.
Science als needs experimenters — human experts driven t study the universe, and wh will ask questins an AI cannt. Physics — its cre eths is “that the wrld is understandable” in quantitative, predictive terms slely by careful experiment and bservatin. That real wrld still exists fr future scientists t study, whether aided by AI r nt.
31. Regarding the Nbel Prize in Physics, the authr might think ________.
A. it shuld have been awarded t mre physicists
B. it aims t encurage physicists t engage in AI research
C. it is a recgnitin f the brad applicatins f AI in physics
D it is justified fr its fcus n physical principles f infrmatin
32. What des the wrd "cathlicn" underlined in Paragraph 3 prbably mean?
A. A final slutin. B. A big imprvement.
C. A cmplete cure-all. D. A cmmn bstacle.
33. What can we learn frm this passage?
A. AI tls are restricted t specific scientific branches.
B. AI tls will becme less nticeable nce widely used.
C. AI will vercme its dependence n real-wrld experience.
D. AI pses a threat n traditinal methds f scientific inquiry.
34. What wuld be the best title fr this passage?
A. AI and Science: Revlutin r Evlutin?
B. Is AI Cming t End Scientific Explratin?
C. AI and Science: A New Era f Cllabratin?
D. Is AI Dminant in Nbel-Winning Discveries?
核心主题
2024年诺奖引发“AI接管科学”的担忧，作者解析诺奖成果，指出AI是科学工具而非主导，科学的核心仍依赖人类对现实世界的实证探索。
段落结构
引出争议：诺奖授予AI相关研究，引发“AI接管科学”的讨论。
解析物理诺奖：获奖成果是“信息物理原理”的基础研究，而非AI应用。
解析化学诺奖：AlphaFld是优秀工具，但无法解决所有蛋白质折叠问题，并非“万灵药”。
趋势预测：AI工具普及后会融入背景，不再被刻意关注。
回应担忧：AI的局限性在于“依赖计算，无法替代现实世界的实证研究”。
核心立场：科学需要人类实验者，AI是辅助而非主导。
题目答案及解析
答案：D。解析：作者明确说明物理诺奖是“对信息物理原理的基础研究”，因此认为获奖“合理”。
答案：C。解析：结合上下文，AlphaFld“无法预测蛋白质缺陷”，因此“不是解决所有问题的cathlicn”，该词意为“万灵药、万能药”。
答案：B。解析：文章提到“AI工具普及后会融入背景，不再显眼”。
答案：A。解析：文章核心是“AI是否接管科学”，结论是“AI是工具，推动科学进化而非革命”。
2025石景山期末
D
Experts frequently warn abut the ptential dangers f artificial intelligence (AI). Sadly, the rapid advancement f AI technlgy in recent years has nt led t a cmmn understanding f its risks, as it shuld have. Actually, beneath the surface f AI discussins lies cnflict amng divided grups, which may mislead lawmakers and the public and prevent cmpetent regulatry measures. Understanding the mtivatins behind these differing views is crucial t addressing AI’s scietal impact.
The ludest perspective is a frightening visin frm dmsayers (末日论者), wh present AI as a threat t human existence, capable f wiping ut life and cntrlling everything. This dmsaying is heightened by influential tech figures using tls like ChatGPT t shape the cnversatin. Sme in this grup fcus n extreme disastrus risks and emphasize the distant future implicatins f ur actins. While many dmsayers claim they are reasnable, their exaggerated cncerns abut hypthetical (假设的) existential risks amunt t a misguided bet with humanity’s future. Technlgy histrian David Brck calls such fears “wishful wrries” — that is, prblems that it wuld be nice t have, in cntrast t the actual struggles f the present.
While dmsayers fcus n the distant future, refrmers fcus n immediate issues. They view AI refrm as a matter f integrity, urging Big Tech t priritize the public gd ver prfit. These experts advcate fr regulatrs t address current harms caused by AI, such as misinfrmatin, mnitring, and algrithmic (算法的) unfairness. They prpse initiatives like civil educatin fr AI literacy and the design f human-centered systems t fight grwing scietal inequalities.
Warrirs, anther grup, describe AI thrugh the language f natinal security and cmpetitiveness. Their views benefit sme tech giants and gvernment agencies. Tp AI firms seek cstly regulatins that they claim guard against crime and terrrism, which culd secure their market dminance and limit startup cmpetitin. Gvernments, tightly cnnected t these firms, may priritize defense applicatins ver mral cncerns, leading t regulatry blind spts.
In cnclusin, the differing viewpints n AI underline the cmplexity f addressing its scietal impact. T minimize ptential harms and ensure that AI serves the public interest, it is crucial t strengthen legal framewrks that clse existing gaps and hld crpratins accuntable. Expanding regulatry strategies can help restrict crprate verreach and fster transparency in AI develpment. Publicly directed prjects can cunterbalance crprate influence, ensuring that AI benefits sciety as a whle. By priritizing accuntability and cllective welfare, we can shape a future where AI empwers everyne, nt just a select few.
31. What is the cnsequence f diverse pints f view n AI?
A. Enhancing ur ability t tackle AI issues.
B. Advancing the standardizatin f AI guidelines.
C. Delaying the creatin f effective AI regulatins.
D. Breaking the integrity f current AI legal framewrk.
32. The authr qutes David Brck’s wrds in rder t ______.
A. prve that AI has psitive impacts
B. cnfirm that dmsayers’ wrries are justified
C. suggest that the cncerns ver AI are verstated
D shw that current struggles have serius utcmes
33. What can be inferred frm the passage?
A. A publicly directed AI prject will ultimately empwer the select few.
B. Refrmers advcate human-centered AI systems t gain persnal prfits.
C Warrirs pursue dminance in natinal security by imprving AI mrally.
D Lawmakers shuld tughen rules limiting crprate influence fr public gd.
34. Which wuld be the best title fr the passage?
A. The Battle ver AI: Pwer and Benefit
B. Perspectives n AI: Individualism r Cllectivism
C. The Argument abut AI: Refrmers vs. Dmsayers
D. Debates n the Future f AI: Innvatin r Regulatin
核心主题
AI风险的讨论存在三大分歧阵营（末日论者、改革者、战士），观点冲突导致监管滞后，需通过强化法律框架、扩大监管策略、推进公共项目解决。
段落结构
引出问题：AI风险缺乏共识，阵营分歧误导公众与立法者，阻碍有效监管。
阵营1：末日论者——将AI视为人类生存威胁，担忧被夸大。
阵营2：改革者——关注当下危害，呼吁以公共利益为先。
阵营3：战士——从国家安全与竞争力视角看待AI，可能忽视道德问题。
解决方案：强化法律框架、扩大监管、推进公共项目，确保AI服务全体人类。
题目答案及解析
答案：C。解析：原文明确提到“阵营分歧可能误导立法者和公众，阻碍有效监管措施”。
答案：C。解析：引用David Brck的“wishful wrries”，指出末日论者的担忧是“值得拥有的问题”，本质是说明AI担忧被夸大。
答案：D。解析：作者呼吁“强化法律框架、限制企业越界”，可推断“立法者应加强规则限制企业影响，以维护公共利益”。
答案：A。解析：文章围绕AI的三大阵营展开，核心是“不同阵营的权力博弈与利益分配”。
2025东城一模
D
Years after my art histry class, I am insufferable at museums. “That’s definitely a Matisse,” I say. “Yu can tell because f the brushwrk and the use f clur.” Smetimes it is nt a Matisse but ftentimes it is.
It is unsettling t learn, then, that fr all f my carefully wn art appreciatin, I am in danger f being surpassed by an insect. In a recent study, hneybees—whse brains are the size f grass seeds—were shwn Picasss and Mnets paired side by side. Belw the prints were tw small cntainers, ne cntaining sugar water and the ther nthing at all.
Which t enter? Bees culdn’t see r smell whether a given cntainer held the treat until they’d already flwn inside it. But they culd let the masterpieces guide them: fr sme bees, the reward was always under the Picass, while fr the rest it was under the Mnet. Over the curse f many trials, the bees learned t fly straight fr the crrect cntainer. Indeed, they even perfrmed slightly better than chance when faced with pairs f paintings they’d never seen befre. The bees had learned t discriminate, hwever mdestly, between the tw artists’ styles.
T be sure, humans still have the edge. Last year a team f researchers led by Liane Gabra fund that art students were perfectly capable f identifying which well-knwn artist was behind which unknwn painting. Creative writing students were similarly excellent at sptting little-read passages by Hemingway r Dickens—a skill I can nly assume n hneybee has yet demnstrated.
Even mre impressively, thugh, the students culd recgnize as-yet-unseen samples f each ther's wrk, including wrk in entirely different mediums. Creative writers culd identify their fellw writers’ paintings and sketches; painters had a pretty gd idea wh’d brught which pem r clay pt.
It's clear what the bees were ding: picking up and categrizing cmplex visual patterns in the pairs f images. But recgnizing differences acrss mediums is altgether different. Whether we’re writing pems r building sculptures, Gabra argues, we’re ding s with the same mind: ne that structures infrmatin in the same way, has been shaped by the same experiences, and lngs t express the same ideas. Naturally, ur techniques and preccupatins in ne dmain shuld “ut” us in anther.
But still I wnder: Just what abut these techniques and preccupatins did the trick? The researchers did their best t keep subject matter frm ruling the day by instructing, fr instance, artists wh happened t be surfers nt t bring in art that depicted(描绘)surfing. But what f less bvius subject matter—like Western landscapes? And what f the bsessins that cme int ur wrk unawares? A crrelatinal study like this ne will nt answer these questins.
Perhaps my biggest questin has t d with peple wh dn't identify as artists, and haven’t settled—r at least wuld claim s—n a persnal style. Are their creatins als a reflectin f their wrldview? It seems likely that, at least t sme extent, bad art is all alike, while nly gd art is gd in its wn way.
31.Why des the authr mentin bees?
A. T present an example B. T put frward a thery
C. T draw ut an example D. T highlight a research findings
32.Why des the authr think humans still have the edge?
A. Because we can transfer ur experiences
B. Because we can discriminate styles
C. Because we can categrize patterns
D. Because we can learn frm trials
33.What des the underlined wrd “ut”in Paragraph 6 prbably mean?
A. Assist. B. Trick. C. Beat. D. Expse.
34.What might be the best title fr the passage?
A. Will Bees Beat Humans ? B. Hw Will Yur View a View?
C. Why Gd Art Wrks Wnders? D. What Makes Hemingwau Hemingway ?
核心主题
通过蜜蜂与人类的艺术识别对比，揭示人类艺术创造力的核心——跨媒介的“个人风格”，这种风格源于统一的世界观与思维方式，是蜜蜂无法复制的。
段落结构
个人经历：作者自夸能识别艺术风格，为后续蜜蜂实验铺垫。
蜜蜂实验：蜜蜂能通过训练区分毕加索与莫奈的风格，甚至识别未见过的作品。
人类优势1：艺术/写作学生能精准识别知名艺术家的未知作品。
人类优势2（核心）：能跨媒介识别同行作品。
优势本质：人类的创作源于统一的思维方式、经历与表达欲，风格会贯穿不同媒介。
提出疑问：非艺术家是否有“个人风格”？坏艺术是否千篇一律？
题目答案及解析
答案：D。解析：作者提到蜜蜂实验，是为了突出“蜜蜂能区分艺术家风格”这一研究发现，进而对比人类的跨媒介优势。
答案：A。解析：人类的核心优势是“跨媒介识别”，本质是“将一种媒介的风格经验转移到另一种媒介”。
答案：D。解析：上下文提到“一种媒介的技巧和关注点会在另一种媒介中‘ut’我们”，即“暴露我们的身份”，ut意为“暴露”。
答案：D。解析：文章核心是“个人风格”让创作具有辨识度，甚至跨媒介可识别。
2025西城一模
D
Genetic (基因的) variatin is what allws a species t adapt as climate changes, new diseases arise, and nvel enemies cme n the scene. A slightly different genetic makeup can ensure at least sme individuals will still d OK in times f crisis. But just as the number f species is declining wrldwide, s, t, is the genetic diversity within many species.
Until 2022, gvernments fcused primarily n preventing species frm disappearing. That year, hwever, when updating the United Natins’s Cnventin n Bilgical Diversity treaty (条约), participating cuntries agreed t start t lk at genetic diversity as well.
The first step tward slwing the trend is understanding it. Cnservatin bilgist Catherine Grueber frm the University f Sydney and many clleagues gathered 882 papers written between 1985 and 2019 that tracked diversity changes within 628 individual species by analyzing their DNA at at least tw time pints. The team used cmplex statistical analyses t make the data cmparable, enabling them t identify trends and crrelate lss f genetic diversity with flds, habitat destructin, r ther disturbances. They als tracked what happened in the face f varius cnservatin measures, such as legally prtecting a species r setting aside and prtecting habitat.
Tw-thirds f the ppulatins analyzed exhibited a decline in diversity, Grueber and her clleagues reprt. That included species already knwn t be at risk, but it als included mre cmmn species. The implicatin is that thse species may be less able t bunce back than expected during envirnmental change, says Alicia Mastretta-Yanes, a cnservatin geneticist.
Sme cnservatin effrts, such as eclgical restratin r reducing pests (害虫), didn’t help much, the analysis fund. But certain actins did seem t help, such as effrts t expand and prtect habitat, intrduce new individuals t declining ppulatins, r cnnect tw islated ppulatins.
“It was pretty impressive that they were able t track what human disturbances and cnservatin actins had dne,” says Misés Alns, an evlutinary geneticist wh authred a preprint last year indicating that prtecting existing habitat wn’t be enugh t prevent genetic diversity lsses fr many species. “We needed smething like this,” he says.
Cnservatin scientists emphasize the imprtance f cntinuing t mnitr ppulatins. But DNA methds aren’t always practical, sme nte. “It is relatively hard and expensive t measure genetic diversity directly,” Mastretta-Yanes says.
T get arund that, Mastretta-Yanes and thers published a paper in Eclgy Letters last year that used prxy (代替物) measures, such as ppulatin size, t evaluate genetic diversity in 919 species. The methd, which nly required abut 3 hurs f wrk per species, indicated that 58% f the species have ppulatins that are t small t maintain their genetic diversity. The fact that these different appraches fund declining diversity “makes bth results mre cnvincing,” Mastretta-Yanes says. “Finally, genetic diversity is getting the attentin it deserves.”
31 What is Paragraph 3 mainly abut?
A. Challenges f cllecting DNA data fr diversity research.
B. Findings n genetic diversity changes ver the past 30 years.
C. Research methds applied t track genetic diversity changes.
D. Impacts f human disturbances n diversity f different species.
32. What can be learned frm Grueber’s study?
A. Habitat extensin and ppulatin management preserve diversity.
B. The diversity f cmmn species tends t decline mre severely.
C. At-risk species better resist the impact f envirnmental changes.
D. Ecsystem recvery and pest cntrl drive ppulatin rise.
33. Mastretta-Yanes hlds that DNA methds _______.
A. will sn be replaced by prxy measures
B. lack practicality due t their csts and cmplexity
C. may get in the way f mnitring species ppulatins
D. require a large ppulatin size t achieve high accuracy
34. What is the purpse f this passage?
A. T identify mre effective methds applied in gene research.
B. T advcate fr using DNA methds exclusively in cnservatin effrts.
C. T warn peple f the threat psed by envirnmental changes n species.
D. T draw peple’s attentin t effective measures against lss f diversity.
核心主题
全球物种遗传多样性持续减少（包括常见物种），传统保护措施效果有限，需通过“扩大栖息地、种群管理、替代评估方法”等有效措施应对。
段落结构
重要性：遗传多样性是物种适应环境变化的关键，但目前持续减少。
政策转变：2022年《生物多样性公约》开始关注遗传多样性。
研究方法：Grueber团队整合论文，分析物种DNA变化，关联干扰因素与保护措施。
研究发现：三分之二的种群遗传多样性下降，包括常见物种。
措施效果：生态修复、害虫控制效果有限；扩大栖息地等措施有效。
替代方法：Mastretta-Yanes提出“代理指标”评估遗传多样性，高效且成本低。
题目答案及解析
答案：C。解析：第三段详细说明研究团队的“收集论文、分析DNA、关联因素”等研究方法。
答案：A。解析：原文明确提到“扩大并保护栖息地、引入新个体、连接孤立种群”等措施有效。
答案：B。解析：Mastretta-Yanes指出“直接测量遗传多样性难度大、成本高”，即DNA方法“因成本和复杂性缺乏实用性”。
答案：D。解析：文章核心是“遗传多样性减少的现状”与“有效保护措施”，目的是吸引人们关注这些有效措施。
2025朝阳一模
D
In the field where philsphy and neurscience verlap, few questins have fascinated and cnfused humanity as deeply as the cncept f free will. At first glance, the idea that we have the pwer t make chices that are nt predetermined seems intuitive (直觉的). Hwever, a clser examinatin reveals a cmplex web f philsphical arguments and scientific findings that challenge this seemingly straightfrward cncept.
Frm a philsphical standpint, the debate arund free will has cntinued intensely fr centuries. Cmpatibilists argue free will can cexist with determinism, as lng as ur actins are a result f ur wn desires and mtivatins. Fr example, chsing a music career ut f passin is cnsidered as a free chice within this framewrk. In cntrast, incmpatibilists maintain free will and determinism are mutually exclusive. Hard determinists view the universe as a clsed system gverned by strict laws f nature, where every event, including human actins, is predetermined. In this view, the idea f free will is an illusin (幻觉).
Neurscience has advanced markedly in decding the brain, revealing that many actins are preceded (先于) by neural activity. Studies n the brain’s reward system and neurtransmitters, particularly dpamine (多巴胺), further challenge the nature f free will. Addictive behavirs, fr instance, can be strngly influenced by the brain’s respnse t dpamine. A persn struggling with addictin may feel they lack the free will t resist it, as their brain chemistry has been altered in a way that frces them int acting.
The scientific evidence is nt cnclusive, thugh. Sme argue that the neural activity bserved befre cnscius decisins may nt be the cause f the actin but rather part f the preparatry prcess fr a decisin that is still freely made. Additinally, the cmplexity f the human brain and the fact that much f its functining is still nt fully understd leave rm fr the pssibility f free will.
If free will is an illusin, it challenges ur fundamental ntins f mral respnsibility. We praise and blame peple fr their actins because we believe they culd have acted differently. Hw can we hld individuals accuntable fr their actins if they were never truly free t chse therwise? Withut free will, the essential mral framewrk f ur scieties wuld cllapse int chatic indifference. Free will is nly an illusin if yu are, t.
31. Which f the fllwing situatins reflects the cmpatibilists’ view?
A. Driven by dpamine, Tim keeps checking his scial media.
B. Lucy speaks first after being randmly selected by sftware.
C. Expsed t a sudden blinding light, Lily quickly shuts her eyes.
D. Jerry shifts between cmpanies f shared bikes based n discunts.
32. What can we learn frm the passage?
A. The altered brain chemistry enhances free will.
B. Cnscius decisins are independent f neural activities.
C. Hard determinists see free will vital t mral accuntability.
D. Neurscientists’ views n the causes f human actins differ.
33. As fr the existence f free will, the authr is ______.
A. neutralB. disapprvingC. psitiveD. dubtful
34. Which wuld be the best title fr the passage?
A. Des Neurscience Threaten Free Will?
B. Why the Arguments Against Free Will Fail
C. Explratin int the Cmplexity f Free Will
D. Free Will: Bridging Neurscience and Philsphy
自由意志是哲学与神经科学的交叉难题，探讨“自由意志是否存在”——哲学上有兼容论与不兼容论之争，神经科学提供部分证据但未定论，而自由意志是人类道德责任的基础。
段落结构
引出话题：自由意志看似直觉上存在，但哲学与科学研究挑战这一认知。
哲学视角：兼容论者认为自由意志与决定论共存；不兼容论者认为二者互斥。
神经科学视角：大脑神经活动先于有意识决策，多巴胺等影响行为，挑战自由意志。
科学争议：部分观点认为神经活动是决策的准备过程，大脑复杂性为自由意志留有余地。
核心意义：若自由意志是幻觉，人类道德责任框架将崩溃。
题目答案及解析
答案：D。解析：兼容论的核心是“行动源于自身欲望与动机”，“Jerry根据折扣选择共享单车”是基于自身需求的选择，符合定义。
答案：D。解析：神经科学界存在分歧：部分认为神经活动决定行为，部分认为是准备过程。
答案：C。解析：作者最后指出“自由意志是幻觉，除非你也是幻觉”，隐含“自由意志存在”的肯定态度。
答案：C。解析：文章围绕自由意志的哲学争议、神经科学证据、道德意义展开，核心是“探索自由意志的复杂性”。
2025海淀一模
D
If yu find yurself with several millin dllars mre than yu need, hw shuld yu spend the mney? One answer might be t d whatever yu want, within the bunds f the law. Anther is t dnate it t a charity. Yu may als supprt an rganizatin that is wrking t reduce existential risks.
The histry f philsphy cnsists f attempts t shed light n such questins. Hwever, philsphy’s pen secret is that these attempts dn’t add up t anything decisive. When it cmes t what we ught t d in any given situatin, different ethical systems ffer different guidance. Cnflict is baked int questins like, “What ught I t d?”
Or is it? An awareness f difference is certainly crucial t such an inquiry. But this needn’t becme a cnflict until yu're frced t pick a side. Sme philsphers have sught t eliminate the cnflict between ethical systems. Derek Parfit, ne f the mst respected philsphers f the past fifty years, devted the secnd half f his life t precisely this task.
Unfrtunately, the psitin that different ethical psitins can be recnciled(和解) is itself a psitin thers may nt accept. Parfit believed peple culd have a gd reasn t act mrally, independent f their knwledge r beliefs. If yu find yurself in a psitin t alleviate(减轻)thers’ suffering withut significantly incnveniencing yurself, then yu shuld act. It is just a mral fact that there is a right thing that yu ught t d. By cntrast, Bernard Williams argued it made n sense t talk abut peple's reasns independently frm their mtivatins. Smene cannt have a reasn t d smething that they have n desire t d—because hwever wrng-headed their preferences may be, subjectivity is the grund truth fr “having a reasn”.
As in Peter Singer’s parable(寓言)f a child drwning in a shallw pnd, it self-evidently seems immral nt t save this child if the nly cst fr yu is a pair f new trainers. This is as clear as a philsphical argument can get. Hwever, as with all mral reasning, yu are free t reject the lgic r assumptins behind Singer’s argument, regardless f its clarity.
Parfit was a philspher’s philspher. Yet he suffered frm the fact that irrecncilable ethical systems exist. Why? Because ne cnclusin that fllws frm this is that, if the differences between such systems cannt be reslved by philsphical means, cnflict f a literal kind will always exist beneath their differences.
As Karl Ppper puts it, “If we extend unlimited tlerance even t thse wh are intlerant, then the tlerant will be destryed, and tlerance with them. “This is the rub. Philsphy is f the wrld as well as f the page—and even the gentlest wrds may, sner r later, need an army t defend them. “We shuld therefre claim,” Ppper cntinued, “ in the name f the tlerance, the right nt t tlerate the intlerant.”
I'm nt surprised that Parfit felt despair at the limits f his persuasiveness. What's amazing is that mre philsphers dn't feel the same way
31.What can we learn frm the first three paragraphs?
A. Philsphy can help reslve ethical cnflicts.
B. Ethical inquiries aid in serving the public gd.
C. Cnflicting views exist between ethical systems.
D. Accepting cnflicts is the basis f philsphical inquiry.
32.What can be inferred frm the passage?
A. Philsphers stress lgic ver subjectivity.
B. Williams hlds mral reasning frces acceptance.
C. Parfit believes mral acts require persnal sacrifice.
D. Recnciling ethical systems has real-wrld implicatins.
33.Accrding t Karl Ppper, we can learn that .
A. intlerance riginates in abslute tlerance
B. unlimited tlerance invites self-destructin
C. tlerance is fr peple wh share the same values
D. philsphical ideals smetimes require military defense
34.Hw des the authr feel twards Parfit’s pursuit?
A. Sympathetic. B. Hpeless. C. Skeptical. D. Astnished.
核心主题
哲学无法解决不同伦理系统的冲突，Parfit试图调和但失败，Ppper指出“无限宽容会毁灭宽容”，揭示伦理冲突的现实意义——需警惕不可调和的分歧引发的实际冲突。
段落结构
引出问题：财富分配等伦理问题，不同伦理系统给出不同答案，冲突与生俱来。
哲学尝试：Parfit毕生试图调和伦理系统的冲突，认为存在“独立于个人动机的道德事实”。
对立观点：Bernard Williams认为道德理由离不开个人动机。
例证说明：Singer的“溺水儿童”寓言看似证明道德义务的绝对性，但仍可被拒绝。
核心矛盾：伦理系统的不可调和性，可能引发实际冲突。
引用支持：Ppper提出“无限宽容会毁灭宽容”，需拒绝宽容不宽容者。
题目答案及解析
答案：C。解析：前三段明确提到“不同伦理系统提供不同指导，冲突与生俱来”。
答案：D。解析：原文提到“伦理系统的不可调和性可能引发实际冲突”，可推断“调和伦理系统具有现实意义”。
答案：B。解析：Ppper的核心观点是“无限宽容会让宽容者被毁灭”，即“无限宽容招致自我毁灭”。
答案：A。解析：作者提到“Parfit因说服力有限而绝望，我不惊讶”，体现“同情”态度。
2025丰台一模
D
Recent findings frm the Dark Energy Spectrscpic Instrument (DESI) in Arizna, which prduced the largest 3D map f the universe, suggest that dark energy—the mysterius frce driving the universe’s accelerated(加速的) expansin— might change ver time. This challenges the standard mdel f csmlgy(宇宙学), which assumes a steady acceleratin.
Dark energy is thught t make up nearly 70% f the csms, s if its behaviur really is changing as time passes, it culd have significant implicatins fr ur understanding f the universe.
Since the DESI data came ut, researchers have been wrking n ways t explain the apparent changes in the universe’s expansin rate. Dark energy isn’t directly bservable, s there are several ptins that culd fit. One slutin suggested by Michael Garda at the Federal University in Brazil and his clleagues invlves letting dark energy interact with dark matter, an invisible and abundant frm f matter that utweighs rdinary matter. This interactin is frbidden in the standard mdel, but if energy culd flw frm the universe’s dark matter t its dark energy—essentially changing the frmer t the latter—the researchers’ simulatins (模拟) shwed that this wuld match the DESI measurements. Yet, the mechanism fr such an energy transfer isn’t clear.
This slutin might als help reslve the Hubble tensin, a difference in the ways we measure the expansin rate f the csms. Measurements f this made by analyzing nearby galaxies (knwn as “lcal” measurements) give an expansin rate, r Hubble cnstant, which is slightly higher than the ne btained frm the csmic micrwave backgrund (CMB)—the remaining radiatin frm the early universe. CMB measurements rely n a theretical mdel f csmic evlutin, which may need adjustment if Garda’s prpsal is crrect. By allwing energy transfer between dark matter and dark energy, the adjusted mdel culd bring CMB-based estimates mre clsely int line with lcal measurements, ptentially reslving the tensin.
Anther prpsed slutin invlves dark radiatin, an invisible frm f radiatin similar t light but cmpsed f dark phtns(光子). Tamar Allali at Brwn University and his team suggest that dark radiatin culd explain the DESI data and lessened the Hubble tensin by increasing the universe’s expansin rate in its early stages. “If yu have mre radiatin, the expansin is faster in the early universe,” says Allali. Unlike adjustments t dark energy, dark radiatin intrduces a new cmpnent withut changing existing physical laws, making it a mre cnservative apprach. Allali ntes that the DESI data des nt rule ut dark radiatin and even shws a slight preference fr it.
Bth mdels—interacting dark energy and dark radiatin—fit the DESI data, but neither has been cnfirmed. Shawn Smith at the University f Edinburgh, UK. pints ut that while many uncnventinal mdels culd explain the bservatins, nne currently cmpete with the standard csmlgical mdel frm a fundamental physics perspective. Nevertheless, these mdels serve as catalysts fr prgress, ensuring that csmlgy remains a dynamic and evlving field.
32. What des this passage mainly talk abut?
A. The develpment f scientific mdels t study the universe.
B. The discvery f dark energy and its impact n the universe.
C. The imprtance f DESI in studying the universe’s behavir.
D. The attempts t explain the universe’s unexpected expansin.
33. Which f the fllwing might the authr agree with?
A. Garda’s prpsal utperfrms Allali’s in its simplicity.
B. Recent research has fund ways fr dark energy transfer.
C. The DESI data has cnfirmed the existence f dark radiatin.
D. The tw mdels share similarities in reducing Hubble tensin.
34. The passage is rganized in the pattern f .
A. cause—effect—slutin
B. prblem—slutin—evaluatin
C. example—analysis—cnclusin
D. intrductin—cmparisn—result
核心主题
DESI的3D宇宙地图发现“暗能量可能随时间变化”，挑战标准宇宙学模型，研究者提出“暗物质-暗能量相互作用”和“暗辐射”两种模型解释，均未被证实但推动宇宙学发展。
段落结构
重大发现：DESI的3D宇宙地图显示暗能量可能随时间变化，挑战“稳态加速”的标准模型。
重要性：暗能量占宇宙70%，其变化将重构人类对宇宙的理解。
模型1：Garda团队提出“暗物质与暗能量相互作用”，可解释DESI数据，缓解哈勃张力，但机制不明。
模型2：Allali团队提出“暗辐射”，通过加快早期宇宙膨胀解释数据，缓解哈勃张力，且不改变现有物理定律。
模型评价：两种模型均符合DESI数据，但未被证实，是宇宙学进步的催化剂。
题目答案及解析
答案：D。解析：文章核心是“DESI发现宇宙膨胀异常后，研究者提出两种模型解释”。
答案：D。解析：原文提到两种模型均“能缓解哈勃张力”，即“在减少哈勃张力上有相似性”。
答案：B。解析：文章结构为“提出问题（宇宙膨胀异常）→给出两种解决方案（模型）→评价方案（未证实但有价值）”。
2025石景山一模
D
The mn stands alne. Unique in the universe, it is a lifeless and sunbaked wasteland that harburs little except what we bring t it. But that is abut t change.
Half a century after the Apll prgramme, a private spacecraft Nva-C made the first tuchdwn n the mn successfully, bearing scientific instruments, micrfiche (微缩胶片) stry disks, cameras, and sculptures t stay n the mn frever. Its success wuld prmise many mre. Thugh it may seem like an exciting utlk fr humanity’s space explratin ambitins, it als signals a future where the mn becmes a htbed f ungverned business peratins that will irreversibly (不可逆地) transfrm it.
Fr the first time, private capital has reached the mn, expanding beynd scientific gals. This allws private landers, even when carrying gvernment science experiments, t include additinal nn-scientific paylads (有酬负载) fr ther custmers. Items bund t raise varius bjectins, such as human cremains (骨灰) and dehydrated water bears frm past missins, have caused cncerns abut bilgical materials n the mn. There’re a lt mre planned fr future launches, likely sparking further debate.
Befre this decade is ut, with a pwerful enugh telescpe, yu may be able t see evidence f human cnstructin r even habitatin n the mn. In 2023, the glbal space industry was valued at $469 billin, expected t exceed $1 trillin by 2030, driven by grwing satellite use in manufacturing, pwer, and data. “We are nw at a tipping pint, where ideas previusly limited t science fictin represent attractive investment prjects,” a reprt read.
A vluntary agreement has been used since 2020 t fster lunar cperatin. It prmtes internatinal standards, emergency assistance and data sharing. Hwever, it als allws fr expliting (开采) lunar resurces like dust, water, rare earth elements and ther materials.
Explring the mn has value fr science and ptential benefits fr Earth, but humans ften turn explratin int explitatin, and the mn may face the same fate. The mn wn’t be alne fr lng. But it is and will frever be quiet. It plays hst t n thunderstrms, n crashing waves, n bird sngs and n anthems (国歌). We must be its vice. We will sn change its surface, and ur relatinship t it, frever. At the very least, we we the mn a cnsidered discussin f why and hw we will d s.
31. What is the authr’s cncern abut the mn’s future?
A. Unregulated cmmercial activities. B. Illegal human cnstructin.
C. Limited paylad carried t the mn. D. A lack f scientific missins.
32. The “tipping pint” in Paragraph 4 indicates the change __________.
A. frm cperatin t cmpetitin B. frm science t trade
C. frm lunar landing t settlement D. frm fantasy t adventure
33. What can we infer frm this passage?
A. Lunar resurce explratin hlds great prmise.
B. Massive investment is beneficial t lunar develpment.
C. Nn-scientific activities can test lunar envirnmental limits.
D. The existing agreement is insufficient in cntrlling ver-explitatin.
34.What wuld be the best title fr this passage?
A. The Prmising Mn: Playgrund fr All
B. The Mn’s Edge: Ambitin Meets Reality
C. The Mn’s Future: Uncver the Unknwn
D. The Silent Mn: Humanity’s Respnsibility
私人资本进入月球开发，推动月球从科学探索转向商业活动，但缺乏有效监管，可能导致过度开发与不可逆破坏，人类需为月球的未来负责。
段落结构
背景铺垫：月球原本是无生命的荒原，即将因人类活动改变。
商业转折：Nva-C航天器成功登月，标志私人资本进入月球，非科学载荷引发争议。
产业趋势：全球太空产业价值巨大，月球成为投资热点。
现有协议：2020年自愿协议促进合作，但允许开采月球资源，缺乏约束。
核心担忧：人类常将探索变为剥削，月球可能重蹈覆辙。
呼吁责任：人类即将改变月球表面，需先认真讨论开发的原因与方式。
题目答案及解析
答案：A。解析：作者明确担忧“月球成为不受监管的商业活动温床，发生不可逆转变”。
答案：B。解析：“tipping pint”指“从科幻想法变为有吸引力的投资项目”，即月球开发从“科学探索”转向“商业贸易”。
答案：D。解析：现有协议是“自愿的”，且“允许开采资源”，可推断“不足以控制过度开发”。
答案：D。解析：文章核心是“月球的寂静与脆弱，人类开发需承担责任”。
2025东城二模
D
Yu might nt think that an AI capable f making music wuld stimulate yur emtin, but thers think differently, particularly thse wh gathered at Mexic City’s Symphny Hall in 2019 fr Schubert’s Unfinished Symphny, which I finished using meldies generated by an AI.
As the rchestra (管弦乐团) finished Schubert’s riginal wrk and began the music the AI and I had written, I culd feel the crwd’s energy shift frm astnishment t indignatin and fear. They seemed afraid that an AI might be able t make emtinal symphnic music. Yu can see their pint: an AI that makes emtinal music culd affect the emtinal lives f thusands r even millins f peple in a small, but prfund way, just like a human musician des.
Psitive and negative, peple reacted very strngly t AI’s symphnic debut (首秀). Even thugh mst peple dn’t believe that AI can create smething enjyable, they, at least partly, did enjy the Unfinished Symphny.
Enjyment in music implies that there’s smething in the music that the listener cnnects t, a perceptin f shared emtin. But, in the case f AI music, an emtin shared with wh? AI, as f yet, has n emtins. S what is the meaning f music made withut an emtinal cmpser? The unsatisfying answer is that music has n bjective meaning. A cmpser can decide hw a piece f music sunds, but it’s the listener that decides what it means.
N matter hw it’s created, music desn’t exist in a vacuum (真空) t the listener. The meaning we assign t music depends n its cntext — hw the piece cnnects t ther elements in ur lives. Withut cntext, music is like the results f a game whse rules have been lst. The cntext fr a music is part f wh yu are. The music is emtinal t yu because yu have the cntext t appreciate it. As it cntinues t evlve, AI music will develp its wn cntext. Certainly, it’ll be different frm human-made music. It’ll mix existing genres t create new nes; it’ll cmbine instruments that we wuldn’t think f cmbining. Its rules will be different.
I’m nw always asked the same questin: “Wh put the emtin in that music: yu, the cmpser, r the AI?” But that’s nt the questin they really want t ask, thugh. There’s a deeper questin that mst peple are t afraid t ask right nw: “Are my emtins s simple that they can be maneuvered by a machine?”
In my experience, this culd be pssible ne day. If a mdestly capable music AI in 2019 culd stir up emtins f an audience, maybe AI can have a mre pwerful effect n ur emtinal lives than we’d like t admit.
31. The audience reacted strngly t the symphny mainly due t ______.
A. their dubts abut AI’s capabilitiesB. their uneasiness abut AI’s influence
C. the rchestra’s brilliant presentatin f AI musicD. the likeness between AI music and the riginal wrk
32. What might the authr agree with?
A AI pses little impact n peple’s emtins.
B. Music bears n intended emtinal meaning.
C. AI music will utperfrm human-made music.
D. The cntext reflects peple’s interpretatin f music.
33. What des the wrd “maneuvered” underlined in Paragraph 6 mst prbably mean?
A. Refreshed.B. Challenged.C. Revealed.D. Directed.
34. Which wuld be the best title fr the passage?
A. Are Cmpsers T Be Replaced?B. Wuld AI Music Be a Rising Trend?
C. Culd AI Make Music That Mves Yu?D. Was the Unfinished Symphny Successful?
核心主题
AI能创作引发人类情感的音乐，但AI本身无情感，音乐的意义由听众的“背景语境”决定，核心探讨“AI音乐是否能真正打动人类”及背后的人类焦虑。
段落结构
事件引入：2019年作者用AI完成舒伯特交响曲，引发观众强烈反应。
反应本质：观众害怕AI能创作情感音乐，进而影响人类情感生活。
矛盾现象：多数人否认AI能创作优秀音乐，但仍享受了这首交响曲。
核心疑问：AI无情感，其音乐的情感意义何在？答案是“音乐无客观意义，意义由听众决定”。
意义来源：音乐的意义依赖“背景语境”，AI音乐将形成自身独特语境。
深层焦虑：听众真正担忧的是“自身情感是否简单到可被机器操控”。
题目答案及解析
答案：B。解析：观众反应强烈的核心是“害怕AI能创作情感音乐，进而影响人类情感生活”，即“对AI影响的不安”。
答案：D。解析：作者明确提出“音乐的意义依赖背景语境，背景语境反映听众对音乐的解读”。
答案：D。解析：上下文提到“AI是否能操控人类情感”，maneuvered意为“操控、引导”。
答案：C。解析：文章围绕“AI音乐是否能引发人类情感共鸣”展开。
2025西城二模
D
Can yu imagine getting a majr dental prcedure withut nvcaine (一种麻醉药)? A scientist clleague f mine recently tld me, rather than use it, he used a “fcus in” meditatin (冥想) technique t direct all f his attentin t his muth with as much calming equanimity as he culd gather. Ding s transfrmed the pain fr a few minutes.
A stream f scientific articles suggests that there are benefits in turning tward discmfrt r negative emtins with acceptance. In additin, all f us can gain frm finding ways t cpe with stress and suffering — particularly when larger circumstances are beynd ur cntrl. As a researcher wh has studied meditatin fr mre than 20 years, I believe that the cultivatin f equanimity can help.
It’s imprtant t first define the idea f turning tward discmfrt. I’m nt advcating fr peple t put themselves in dangerus psitins. But when we push urselves int challenging r embarrassing situatins, much like trainers wh push athletes just past their cmfrt zne t make gains, learning ften happens.
My wn research indicates that meditatin prvides an ideal way t practice turning tward discmfrt — particularly when it trains up ne’s equanimity. In my labratry at Carnegie Melln University, we cnducted several clinical trials n develping equanimity during mindfulness meditatin training. This apprach includes guided meditatin exercises such as using a matter-f-fact vice t label uncmfrtable feelings in the bdy r welcming uncmfrtable feelings by saying “yes” alud each time a feeling is detected.
We hired 153 stressed adults and ffered them a mindfulness meditatin training prgram with r withut training in equanimity. Our equanimity skills training grup had significantly better utcmes n several measures. After just 14 days f training, fr example, the participants wh learned equanimity skills had significantly lwer bilgical stress respnses when asked t deliver a difficult speech and slve math prblems in frnt f experts in white lab cats. This grup als had significantly lwer bld pressure and stress levels. In the days after training, peple intrduced t equanimity exercises als reprted significantly higher psitive emtins and well-being thrughut the day and mre meaningful scial interactins than participants wh received mindfulness training withut the equanimity cmpnent. It was as thugh develping equanimity had transfrmed their emtinal reactivity t stress, helping them better appreciate and enjy daily life’s many little psitive experiences and making them mre curius and pen t cnnecting with thers.
We are expanding n this wrk in several ways—including thrugh the develpment f an app that ffers equanimity training n demand and with trials invlving participants with stress-related gastrintestinal (胃肠的) disrders. Meanwhile ther scientists are further explring equanimity’s pwer. We are cnvinced we can each build ur resilience (恢复力) n a persnal level by cultivating greater acceptance f ur experience — gd r bad, painful r pleasant — in the present mment.
31. What can be learned abut equanimity?
A. It is a state f mental calmness.
B. It is a frm f negative emtins.
C. It is a replacement fr nvcaine.
D. It is the result f mindfulness meditatin.
32. Which f the fllwing is a gd example f equanimity training?
A. Ignring discmfrt ttally.B. Detecting unusual behavir.
C. Keeping emtins t neself.D. Seeing negative feelings bjectively.
33. Paragraph 5 is written t shw ______.
A. the benefits f develping equanimity
B. the prcedure f mindfulness meditatin
C. the perfrmances f tw meditatin training grups
D. the relatinship between equanimity and well-being
34. What can be inferred frm the last paragraph?
A. Stress cntributes t physical disrders.
B. Pleasant experiences result in greater equanimity.
C. Peple are likely t have easy access t equanimity training.
D. Resilience can help peple gain mre acceptance f hardship.
核心主题
“平静心（equanimity）”的培养能帮助人类应对不适与压力，通过正念冥想训练（客观看待负面情绪、主动接纳），可降低生理压力、提升幸福感与社交质量。
段落结构
引入案例：同事用“专注冥想”代替麻醉药完成牙科手术，引出“接纳不适”的价值。
核心概念：平静心能帮助应对压力与痛苦，“转向不适”是突破舒适区以获得成长。
训练方式：正念冥想是培养平静心的理想方式，如“客观标注身体不适”“主动接纳不适”。
实验验证：153名压力大的成年人参与实验，“平静心训练组”的生理压力、血压更低，积极情绪、社交质量更高。
研究扩展：开发平静心训练APP，针对压力相关胃肠疾病开展试验。
题目答案及解析
答案：A。解析：原文提到冥想训练“以尽可能平静的心态专注于口腔”，平静心是“心理平静的状态”。
答案：D。解析：平静心训练的核心是“客观看待、主动接纳不适”，“客观看待负面情绪”符合定义。
答案：A。解析：第五段详细列举了平静心训练的效果，核心是展示培养平静心的好处。
答案：C。解析：最后一段提到“开发按需提供平静心训练的APP”，可推断“人们可能容易获得平静心训练”。
2025朝阳二模
D
It is perhaps easy t accept the statement that the universe is expanding. It is just sme strange physics indicating that, as time ges n, galaxies (星系) get further away frm each ther just like tw cars racing away frm each ther.
I persnally dn’t like it and prefer the balln analgy. In this situatin, there are dts all ver a balln. When we blw it up in real life, the dts wuld increase in size. In this analgy, let’s assume they dn’t. What we are interested in is hw the distance between the dts n the surface f the balln grws as we put mre air int it.
The balln analgy relies smewhat n ur gemetric sensibilities which refer t ur sense f shapes and hw they change ver time. At its cre, what we are trying t develp a sense fr is hw we measure distances. This cncept is als the fundamental gal f general relativity, Einstein’s thery f gravity. In general relativity, the mst imprtant piece f infrmatin is what we call the metric, an equatin that describes hw distances are measured, and therefre als tells us abut the shape space-time is taking.
The whle idea that space-time is expanding was first nticed as a mathematical cnsequence f general relativity by Gerges Lemaitre in 1927, when he slved Einstein’s equatin and fund a slutin fr the metric shwing that distances grw with time. His wrk prvided a theretical explanatin：the standard fr measuring csmic (宇宙的) distance was itself changing with time.
What is delightful is that it means we can quite reasnably say that universe’s expansin is a gravitatinal effect. I enjy this because it is s deeply cunterintuitive t ur usual understanding f gravity, which teaches us that it is a frce that always draws things tgether. But in this case where gravity is a gemetric effect, we are ffered a brader range f gravitatinal pssibilities.
It is wrth nting that the gemetric explanatin f general relativity hasn’t been universally ppular. The late physicist Steven Weinberg wrte that the gemetric explanatin f the thery f gravitatin has been reduced t a mere analgy, but is therwise nt very useful. Anther challenge with the balln analgy and ur reliance n gemetric explanatin is t explain why gravity seems t pull things tgether in many situatins, while universe is expanding. This difference is reslved by acknwledging that lcal gravitatinal effects due t massive bjects dminate ver large-scale expansin effects, leading t the frmatin f structures like stars, galaxies and, eventually us.
In fact, the analgy where universe is nly expanding and this is the nly gravitatinal effect at play is a very idealized situatin where matter was initially spread ut perfectly evenly acrss the universe.
31. The authr presents the balln analgy in Paragraph 2 mainly t .
A. intrduce a tpicB. draw a cmparisn
C. cnfirm a theryD. evaluate a statement
32. What des the underlined wrd “cunterintuitive” in Paragraph 5 prbably mean?
A. Unchallenging.B. Cntradictry.C. Satisfying.D. Relevant.
33. What can be inferred frm the passage?
A. Universe’s expansin results in the creatin f structures like galaxies.
B. Lemaitre’s wrk suggests the standard fr csmic distance is cnsistent.
C. A unifrm distributin f matter can vercme the universe’s expansin.
D. The metric is key t sensing the shape f space-time in general relativity.
34. Which wuld be the best title fr the passage?
A. Studying Galaxies — Has the Balln Analgy Been Outdated?
B. Rethinking Gravity — Is it a Way t Make Sense f the Balln Analgy?
C. Arguing against the Car Analgy — Des the Balln Analgy Win Over?
D. Understanding Universe Expansin — Is the Balln Analgy Acceptable?
核心主题
用“气球类比”解释宇宙膨胀，结合广义相对论的“度量（metric）”概念，说明宇宙膨胀是引力的几何效应，回应类比的争议与宇宙局部收缩（如星系形成）的矛盾。
段落结构
常见理解：宇宙膨胀像两辆车相互远离，作者更倾向气球类比。
气球类比：气球表面的点（星系）不扩大，距离随气球膨胀而增加，聚焦“距离测量”的变化。
理论关联：类比依赖几何感知，与广义相对论的核心“度量”一致。
理论起源：Lemaitre通过求解爱因斯坦方程，首次提出时空膨胀的理论解释。
核心观点：宇宙膨胀是引力的几何效应，与“引力使物体相互吸引”的直觉相反。
争议与解释：部分物理学家质疑几何解释的实用性；局部引力主导，形成恒星、星系等结构。
题目答案及解析
答案：B。解析：作者提出气球类比，是为了对比“车辆远离”的常见理解，更直观地解释“距离测量随宇宙膨胀而变化”。
答案：B。解析：上下文提到“引力使物体相互吸引”与“宇宙膨胀是引力效应”的直觉相反，cunterintuitive意为“违反直觉的、矛盾的”。
答案：D。解析：原文明确提到“广义相对论中最重要的信息是度量，它描述距离测量，进而告诉我们时空形状”。
答案：D。解析：文章围绕“气球类比是否能帮助理解宇宙膨胀”展开，结合广义相对论解释其合理性与争议。
2025海淀二模
D
We are a scial animal. Indeed, it is ur sciality — such as the ability t make sense f each ther, t cmmunicate, t wrk cperatively and, finally, t create culture — that marks us ff frm ther animal species.
But then why are we everywhere striving t increase ur islatin and limit ur cntact with thers? As musician David Byrn e argues in an essay published last mnth, it is a striking fact abut the new technlgies that have s cme t shape ur lives, that they have precisely this effect: they limit ur need fr human cntact. Online shpping? Check. Autmated checkut? Check. Ride hail apps? Check.
Efficiency is the key. We purchase efficiency by limiting the human aspect, knwn as “autnmus peratin”. This is perhaps even mre prnunced with new technlgies n the hrizn. Take the MOOC, the teacher-less virtual classrm. As Byrn e ntes, this is meant t deliver the values f a learning envirnment withut, well, withut the envirnment — yu get t stay at hme — n teacher, but als, n fellw students.
Byrne isn’t claiming we are cnsciusly chsing t islate urselves. We shp nline because it is cnvenient. The absence f cntact with thers is a side-effect. Maybe even an unavidable ne, as ne f the things that makes nline shpping s easy is precisely the absence f cntact with ther peple.
But Bryne’s thught is that whatever ur intentin, the tendency f ur tech t islate us may be a feature, nt a bug. His hypthesis is that we actually, at sme level, crave (渴望) the increased islatin and we are actually making technlgies t satisfy impulses that, in sme way, g beynd r against ur scial nature. But I wnder, is this really new?
Even if we are scial by nature, and d everything we can t embed urselves scially, the need t find ways t be alne is, well, nthing new. It’s als striking that the very activities that risk separating us — in the ld days, bks, newspapers, TV; nwadays, the latest apps als cnnect us. We read abut each ther. What we read gives us infrmatin t share with each ther.
I am well aware f the data that shws the mre time yu spend n scial media, the sadder and mre islated and envius yu feel f thers. But hw nvel is the islating effect f scial media? Being there reminds me a lt f what it was like t be scial in high schl — yu have a vivid sense f yur status and yur standing in relatin t thers, and yu have t deal with that.
This may be islating, sure. But it’s the islating face f the scial lives we’ve always had. It is islating because f the ways technlgy brings us int real cntact with thers, nt because it remves that cntact.
I wnder whether mre islatin is a real ptin, after all.
32. Which f the fllwing best reflects “autnmus peratin”?
A. Getting a tthbrush via a htel delivery rbt.
B. Teaching mm hw t establish a smart hme.
C. Seeking help by calling human custmer services.
D. Having an nline meeting at hme with clleagues.
33. Which f the fllwing might the authr agree?
A. Technlgy ffers fresh insights int ur scial status.
B. Actins seemingly islating can bnd peple.
C. Scial platfrms help bring peple clser.
D. Scial media has cme t define ur life.
34. What wuld be the best title fr the passage?
A. What Technlgies D t Human NatureB. D Technlgies Shape Our Lives?
C. Hw Islatin Changes with CnnectinD. Can We Erase Human Element?
核心主题
人类是社会性动物，但新技术（网购、自动驾驶、MOOC）导致隔离，这种隔离是“效率优先”的副作用，且并非新现象——看似隔离的行为实则仍在连接人类，是社会生活的一面。
段落结构
核心前提：人类是社会性动物，社会性是区别于其他动物的标志。
矛盾现象：新技术限制人类接触，加剧隔离。
核心原因：效率优先，“自主操作”（减少人类参与）是技术设计的核心。
副作用本质：隔离是技术便利的副作用，并非刻意选择。
Byrne的观点：隔离可能是技术的“特征而非漏洞”，人类潜意识渴望隔离。
作者反驳：隔离需求并非新现象，看似隔离的行为同时连接人类。
题目答案及解析
答案：A。解析：“自主操作”的核心是“减少人类接触，提升效率”，“通过酒店配送机器人获取牙刷”无人类接触，符合定义。
答案：B。解析：作者提到“看似隔离的行为（读书、刷APP）能获取信息，进而分享给他人，实则连接人类”。
答案：A。解析：文章围绕“新技术导致隔离”与“人类社会性”的矛盾展开，探讨技术对人类本性（社会性）的影响。
2025丰台二模
D
In an era f big research, having cnfidence in scientists, individually r cllectively, invlves trade-ffs. Science is ideally built n evidence, but in reality, fr mst peple, it is based n trust. Scientific evidence is hard t access. Jurnals are difficult t get and their articles, written in specialised language, are nly understandable t a few field experts. S, we trust experts’ results withut being able t questin them urselves, believing that if needed, smene knwledgeable will. Histrically, the reputatin f individual scientists has been imprtant in facilitating the spread f scientific theries and discveries. If a scientist is, r can appear t be, trustwrthy, s might that scientist’s ideas.
This can lead t dd cnsequences. Recgnisable scientists receive mre credit and trust, while unrecgnisable scientists ften have their wrk verlked. The histry f science is filled with cases where basic papers written by relatively unknwn scientists were neglected fr years. Cnsider the case f Jseph Furier, whse classic paper n the prpagatin f heat had t wait 13 years t be published. Since recgnisable scientists receive disprprtinate (不成比例的) credit, their names becme disprprtinately assciated with discveries. Statistics prfessr Stephen Stigler frmulated “Stigler’s law f epnymy” (斯蒂格勒命名法则), stating n scientific discvery is named after its riginal discverer. Fr instance, Pythagras wasn’t the first t discver the Pythagrean therem, nr was Edwin Hubble the first t frmulate Hubble’s law.
Hwever, mdern science perates differently. Large cllabrative (合作的) prjects ften prduce papers with hundreds f authrs. The recrd fr the number f authrs n a single scientific paper is currently 5,154. Furthermre, an editrial bard cmpsed f prject grup members actually wrte the papers. The papers were then placed n an electrnic bulletin bard fr criticism and cmment by all. Sme massive cllabrative prjects cnstantly maintain authr lists f hundreds f names, which are autmatically submitted n every publicatin.
If we can’t identify the thusands in big science prjects r knw their actual authrs, wh d we trust? I’d say we trust “science” itself, regardless f the individual scientists’ integrity. We trust the rganisatins that are cnsidered scientific. Any clickbait news articles with “Science Says” in the title shw this shift frm trusting individuals t trusting the scientific enterprise.
This shift t trusting “science” itself has risks. Misidentifying experts r trusting dishnest nes can abuse scientific credibility. A striking example is Merchants f Dubt, where experts hid truths abut acid rain and glbal warming. Authrship, then, serves ne last functin, which in sme cases nly benefits the histrian like me: accuntability.
31. What is the passage mainly abut?
A. The mral issues in scientific authrship and accuntability.
B. The rle f individual scientists in mdern scientific research.
C. The evlutin f trust in science frm individuals t enterprises.
D. The challenges f cnfirming scientific evidence in the digital age.
32. Why is “Stigler’s law f epnymy” mentined?
A. T justify an argument.B. T intrduce an apprach.
C. T challenge a cnventin.D. T evaluate an assumptin.
33. Accrding t the passage, the authr may agree that ______.
A. mdern science cllabratin challenges the trust in individual scientists
B. the current trend f trusting science verlks scientists’ sacrifices
C. authrship ught t be funded upn intellectual cntributins
D. it is vital t identify the authrs f large-scale science prjects
34. What is the authr’s attitude twards the shift t trusting science itself?
A. Sympathetic.B. Cautius.C. Disapprving.D. Puzzled.
核心主题
科学信任的对象从“个体科学家”演变为“科学机构”：过去依赖科学家的声誉传播成果，现在大型合作项目让“作者身份”模糊，人们转而信任“科学本身”，但这种转变存在滥用公信力的风险。
段落结构
核心前提：科学证据难以获取，普通人对科学的信任基于“信任”而非直接验证。
过去的信任模式：个体科学家的声誉至关重要，知名科学家的成果更易被接受。
例证支撑：Stigler命名法则——科学发现很少以原始发现者命名。
现在的信任模式：大型合作项目让“个体作者”模糊，人们转而信任“科学机构/科学本身”。
潜在风险：信任“科学本身”可能导致公信力被滥用。
题目答案及解析
答案：C。解析：文章核心是“科学信任从‘个体科学家’演变到‘科学机构/科学本身’”。
答案：A。解析：提到Stigler法则是为了证明“知名科学家获不成比例的荣誉，不知名科学家的成果被忽视”这一论点。
答案：A。解析：现代科学的大型合作项目让“个体作者”难以识别，人们不再信任个体科学家，转而信任科学机构。
答案：B。解析：作者指出信任“科学本身”存在“滥用公信力”的风险，体现“谨慎”态度。