考研英一阅读真题
    语法和词汇是阅读的基础，但是并不是说你语法特别好，词汇量特别大，阅读英文文章就没有问题。所以我们在复习的时候要有意识地提升阅读力量，尤其要令你的阅读力量契合于考研英语要求。下文是我为你细心编辑整理的考研英一阅读真题，盼望对你有所关心，更多内容，请点击相关栏目查看，感谢!
    考研英一阅读真题1
    Any fair-minded assessment of the dangers of the deal between Britains National Health Service (NHS) and DeepMind must start by acknowledging that both sides mean well. DeepMind is one of the leading artificial intelligence (AI) companies in the world. The potential of this work applied to healthcare is very great, but it could also lead to further concentration of power in the tech giants. It Is against that background that the information commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, has issued her damning verdict against the Royal Free hospital trust under the NHS, which handed over to DeepMind the records of 1.6 million patients In 2022 on the basis of a vague agreement which took far too little account of the pat
ients rights and their expectations of privacy.
    DeepMind has almost apologized. The NHS trust has mended its ways. Further arrangements- and there may be many-between the NHS and DeepMind will be carefully scrutinised to ensure that all necessary permissions have been asked of patients and all unnecessary data has been cleaned. There are lessons about informed patient consent to learn. But privacy is not the only angle in this case and not even the most important. Ms Denham chose to concentrate the blame on the NHS trust, since under existing law it “controlled” the data and DeepMind merely “processed it. But this distinction misses the point that it is processing and aggregation, not the mere possession of bits, that gives the data value.
    The great question is who should benefit from the analysis of all the data that our lives now generate. Privacy law builds on the concept of damage to an individual from identifiable knowledge about them. That misses the way the surveillance economy works. The data of an individual there gains its value only when it is compared with the data of countless millions more.
    The use of privacy law to curb the tech giants in this instance feels slightly maladapted. This practice does not address the real worry. It is not enough to say that the algorithms DeepMind develops will benefit patients and save lives. What matters is that they will belong to a private monopoly which developed them using public resources. If software promises to save lives on the scale that dugs now can, big data may be expected to behave as a big pharm has done. We are still at the beginning of this revolution and small choices now may turn out to have gigantic consequences later. A long struggle will be needed to avoid a future of digital feudalism. Ms Denhams report is a welcome start.
    31.Wha is true of the agreement between the NHS and DeepMind ?
    [A] It caused conflicts among tech giants.
    [B] It failed to pay due attention to patient’s rights.
    [C] It fell short of the latters expectations
    [D] It put both sides into a dangerous situation.
    32. The NHS trust responded to Denhams verdict with
    [A] empty promises.
    [B] tough resistance.
    [C] necessary adjustments.
    [D] sincere apologies.
    33.The author argues in Paragraph 2 that
    [A] privacy protection must be secured at all costs.
    [B] leaking patients data is worse than selling it.
    [C] making profits from patients data is illegal.
editorial英文    [D] the value of data comes from the processing of it
    34.According to the last paragraph, the real worry arising from this deal is
    [A] the vicious rivalry among big pharmas.
    [B] the ineffective enforcement of privacy law.
    [C] the uncontrolled use of new software.
    [D] the monopoly of big data by tech giants.
    35.The authors attitude toward the application of AI to healthcare is
    [A] ambiguous.
    [B] cautious.
    [C] appreciative.
    [D] contemptuous.
    考研英一阅读真题2
    The journal Science is adding an extra source at Peer-review process, editor-in-chief Marcia McNott announced today. The Follows similar efforts from other journals, after widespread concern that Mistakes in data analysis are contributing to the 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 Manuscript will be flagged up for additional scrutiny by the Journals editors, or by its existing Board of Reviewing Editors or by outside peer The SBoRE panel will then find external statisticians to review these