失约贰拾柒..北京一战.一点狗+吐槽...顺便..awa悲剧4.5..求助..

kking

q50v37.看到这个成绩相当的失望了一下.数学没有满分也就罢了.v在最后几次模考中都是39-41.这个不上不下的分呢,让我既没有勇气再战,也没有信心就拿这个去竞争申请dream school。。。因为其他背景也不牛啊。。。
不管怎么说先放狗。
作文：ai：Everywhere, it seems, there are clear and positive signs that people are becoming more respectful of one another’s differences.
         aa：没看过原题，是一个生产machine的工厂，某factory生产Drill bits 的成本低，所以要把所有的drill bits 生产都挪到这个Factroy里来。大概这意思。
数学：我基本没有遇到难的题。。就是做模考的时候有时候还会遇到题感到无从下手，实考的时候好像连比较难的狗狗都没遇到。也不知道哪儿错了。。
         1。一道之前的狗A0=50,An=0.2An-1+200,求A40的范围
         2。ds xy><=0? 条件1 xy^2>0, 条件2 x^2y^3>0 . 大概是这样地。
         3。一道比较难的，定义了mod是a/b的余数。 问amod6。条件1 amod3=amod12. 条件2 amod4=2. 数不一定对，参考其它版本。
         4。 一道图形题，把一个9*9的正方形分成9块。。。回来画个图解释吧。。图在附件里，就是黑色面积=白色面积，求x
         5。10^n is a factor of 1*2*3...*24, 问n的最大值
数学记得不多。。想起来再补充吧

阅读：有一篇广告题，说有两种广告模式的理论，一种说广告必须直接影响sales，另一种说把影响渠道分成了好多级，可以影响其中的任意一级。
         然后说第二种理论传统上有一些缺陷，然后有一个人，提出了不同的解释。这里会有考题，问新理论与传统的有什么不同。
         有一片说check的过度使用，这篇更长。不知道现在是不是有原题了。
         还有一片说考古学家鉴定古生物的DNA但是有可能受到现代生物的污染那篇。
         我考的第一篇忘记了。。。

逻辑：能想起来的不多。。哦，有一道说基因工程改变了crop的基因，但是大家很担心基因的改变会transfer到野生植物上，但是实际上这种crop被移出的两年以后，还没有发现有野生植物发生了基因的改变，问解释。

先这样吧。想起来再补充。。

粉红一台灯

沙发 来沾喜气 很好了 lz要求不要太高哦

chinamerica

多谢lz分享～
顺便问一下check 那道题目 文章是不是跟下面这段类似～  

Despite the growing availability and acceptance of electronic payment instruments—such as credit cards, debit cards, and automated clearinghouse (ACH) payments—by far the most popular noncash payment instrument used in the United States is the paper check. In 1995, approximately 80 percent of all noncash transactions were made by check (Bank for International Settlements, forthcoming). Furthermore, although use of electronic instruments has grown in the past several years, check use has grown as well: between 1987 and 1993, the average annual number of payments per capita increased by 26 payments for electronic instruments, but by 31 payments for checks (Humphrey, Pulley, and Vesala, forthcoming). Clearly, individuals and businesses are not rapidly shifting away from checks to electronic instruments.

The popularity of checks persists even though checks cost society more to produce and process than do electronic instruments. According to standard economic theory, that may be a sign that the market for payment instruments is not working properly. In general, in an efficient market, when competing goods are available and one costs societymore, the prices of the goods will re?ect the relative costs of the resources used to produce them, and the cheaper good will be substituted for the more expensive. In this way, society uses its resources to produce only the particular goods it wants in the particular amounts it wants. In other words, resources are used efficiently. When use does not shift to the cheaper good, either the goods are not close substitutes or the market has failed, and there is a potential role for a public authority to attempt to correct the failure.

Market failure is a commonly accepted view of what’s happened in the market for payment instruments. According to this view, the users of checks are the check writers. And for those individuals and businesses, the private cost, or price, of using checks has been distorted by the value of check ?oat, or the time between the writing and clearing of a check. During that time, of course, the funds can earn interest for the check writer rather than for the check receiver. The size of this bene?t is thought to have reduced the price of check use below the cost to society of producing and processing checks. Since individuals and businesses
don’t face that higher social cost, they continue to use checks despite the existence of other means of payment that are less costly to society. In short, checks are overused.

kking

回2L:

是这个原文没错,前三段一样,如果我没记错的话,后面还有,应该是讲质疑第三段传统观点的.

chinamerica

多谢 lz确认！
这个貌似托福也考过 http://www.helanbbs.com/thread-34164-1-1.html
偶google了原文在
http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/QR/QR2041.pdf

windypig123

霍霍。。。LZ NN。。。CONG

zgy32041

感谢楼主~~这个要顶上去！！

kking

lz悲伤的看到了作文分...同学们说要不要重考啊啊啊啊啊

peiyabbfbl

楼主你好，请问check 文章的第四段是以下文字吗？能否帮忙确认下~~

That view is suspect even if the data still supported it,
though. The view seems to assume that only the agent on
one side of a transaction—the check writer—recognizes
and takes advantage of the value of float. That assumption
doesn’t correspond with expected rational behavior. Since
float is a transfer payment from the check receiver to the
check writer, with no allocative effects overall, rational
agents are likely to negotiate a mutually beneficial distribution
of any significant value of float.7 And, in fact, this
type of negotiation is common for large payments between
businesses, for which the value of float is potentially large.
In practice, many business-to-business payments contractually
stipulate payment transaction terms that internalize the
effects of float.