OG 203

[briandragon]

203.Journalist: In physics journals, the number of articles reporting the results of experiments involving particle accelerators was lower last year than it had been in previous years. Several of the particle accelerators at major research institutions were out of service the year before last for repairs, so it is likely that the low number of articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the journalist’s argument?

(A) Every article based on experiments with particle accelerators that was submitted for publication last year actually was published.

(B) The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last several years.
(C) The number of physics journals was the same last year as in previous years.

(D) Particle accelerators can be used for more than one group of experiments in any given year.

(E) Recent changes in the editorial policies of several physics journals have decreased the likelihood that articles concerning particle-accelerator research will be accepted for publication.

正確答案為E

這題我題目其實就看不大懂
好像跟物理加速度有關

我選的是A，果然錯了


可以請高手幫我解答題目及選項的意思嗎??

謝謝

[Calvin]

http://www.formosamba.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=7137

謝謝你的支持配合

[briandragon]

不好意思

我已經有更正了

[吳]

想請問 (B) The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last several years. OG上說:有等待時間=>加速器fully used=>support(加速器變少=>文章 變少);可是我想的是:等待時間變短=>加速器變多(表示有添購加速器)=>weaken(加速器變少=>文章變少)

[Pudding]

想請問 (B) The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last several years.

OG上說:有等待時間=>加速器fully used=>support(加速器變少=>文章 變少);可是我想的是:等待時間變短=>加速器變多(表示有添購加速器)=>
weaken(加速器變少=>文章變少)

吳妹妹的解說實在是太過精簡了... Orz
我試著解讀一下妳的意思...
要選擇weaken的選項可以從兩個角度出發來weaken, 一是證明原題無法解釋該現象; 二是舉出其它導致該現象的理由 (就是所謂的 "尋找它因")

選項B雖然是說等候accelerators的時間縮短, 然而這正說明了accelerators的重要性, 也就是它還是被持續的使用著, 某種程度上, 證明了缺乏accelerators確實會導致article數量的減少

與此同時, 選項E非常明確的找出了實際導致articles減少的原因, 是因為editorial policies的改變, 而非關accelerators, 因此weaken了原論證.

妳的看法中, 等待時間變短=>加速器變多(表示有添購加速器), 我不是很理解這個 "添購加速器" 是如何推導出來的...

open to discuss...

[ariesmilla]

請問一下C選項，既然文章數目不減，說有排除另一個假設的可能性(整體文章數目減少也導致這類文章減少)，但為何說是支持呢? OG上的解釋看得不是很懂，一頭霧水，請高手開0示.....
---------------
反芻了一下....就是因為它排除了這個可能性，所以有可能支持了原題目所說是因為加速器減少導致文章減少....希望思路沒錯，有錯也請指點

[dibert8]

加速器減少 => 文章減少
弱化:另有他因 => 文章減少 i.e. (E) : 加速器文章的接受度降低所致

(A) 該發表的都發表了,仍然文章減少,可見"加速器減少 => 文章減少" (support)
(B) 等待時間減少,文章仍然不增反減,可見"加速器減少 => 文章減少" (support)
(C) 期刊數不變,文章減少,可見所言不虛:"加速器減少 => 文章減少" (support)
(D) 加速器不止一個團隊使用,仍然文章減少(因能使用的次數減少),"加速器減少 => 文章減少"正是此意 (support)