ChaseDream

标题: 11.7 710放小狗 [打印本页]

作者: aptxjec 时间: 2018-11-7 18:38
标题: 11.7 710放小狗
三战630-660-710，Q50V36，十分蛋疼的V，IR还翻车了，但至少有保底了，随缘再刷。放小狗，几乎失忆。

数学
78补充，退休的题我仔细看了，的确是员工现在的年龄+工龄到70岁即可退休，现在的年龄要用入职年龄加工龄，jj好像是按照入职年龄到70算的。
92补充，一个公司的product市场份额从6.6%到8.8%，市场容量不变，问增加了百分之多少。
假设市场容量就100，卖6.6个到8.8个，增加了2.2个，33%
93补充，9元买东西，发现实际价格比自己预想的要高1/5元，买的东西比预想的少了1/2磅。问的是实际的价格。
我的最后一题，9+8÷4×几+几，很正经的四则运算，加减乘除写得明明白白，算就完了。但当时看到这题心都凉了···幸好最后还是有50分.

阅读
最后一篇讲森林火灾的，火灾后seedling怎么怎么样，是否要将烧完的地方清除掉啊什么的，求考古。两段很短，句子不是特别好理解，题不难。但是我前面一篇4段一篇5段爆炸了，这里时间不够就随便浏览了下，做完后就掉库了。V的分数寒碜估计都是它的锅···

作文：行业领先的Beta Medical医药公司的director致sales team的一封公开信，大概是去年我们利润实现7%的增长，都是各位的功劳。最近我们的in-house research发现我们厂entertainment expenses比行业平均高25%，我准备砍一部分在dining和entertainment上的预算，砍到行业平均水平，减少这部分cost后，明年我们一定能实现比7%还多的增长，进而确保我们的领先地位不动摇。

作者: 弗雷泽631 时间: 2018-11-7 19:21
感谢分享！

作者: 不是猪兔子 时间: 2018-11-7 19:33
谢谢楼主，求问作文都构筑了哪些攻击点？谢谢！

作者: aptxjec 时间: 2018-11-7 20:30

不是猪兔子发表于 2018-11-7 19:33
谢谢楼主，求问作文都构筑了哪些攻击点？谢谢！

1.survey不行：in-house research
2.因果：减少dining和entertainment支出降低员工满意度，销售team又很依靠员工能力，员工不满业绩不行profit更是无从谈起。
3.assumption：一定能涨超过7%，维持领先。哪怕这个措施有用，也未必能够维持高增长率

不是我考过最好写的··找点找得有点尬但愿能混4.5

作者: 不是猪兔子 时间: 2018-11-7 20:46

aptxjec 发表于 2018-11-7 20:30
1.survey不行：in-house research
2.因果：减少dining和entertainment支出降低员工满意度，销售team又很 ...

谢谢，我觉得这几个点很受用，谢谢楼主！也祝楼主成功！

作者: billyisfragile! 时间: 2018-11-7 20:53
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/311/5759/352

是原文吗？

Abstract
We present data from a study of early conifer regeneration and fuel loads after the 2002 Biscuit Fire, Oregon, USA, with and without postfire logging. Natural conifer regeneration was abundant after the high-severity fire. Postfire logging reduced median regeneration density by 71%, significantly increased downed woody fuels, and thus increased short-term fire risk. Additional reduction of fuels is necessary for effective mitigation of fire risk. Postfire logging can be counterproductive to the goals of forest regenration and fuel reduction.

Recent increases in wildfire activity in the United States have intensified controversies surrounding the management of public forests after large fires (1). The view that postfire (salvage) logging diminishes fire risk via fuel reduction and that forests will not adequately regenerate without intervention, including logging and planting, is widely held and commonly cited (2). An alternate view maintains that postfire logging is detrimental to long-term forest development, wildlife habitat, and other ecosystem functions (1). Scientific data directly informing this debate are lacking.

Here we present data from a study of early conifer regeneration and fuel loads after the 2002 Biscuit Fire, Oregon, USA, with and without postfire logging. Because of the fire's size (∼200,000 ha), historic reforestation difficulties in the region (3), and an ambitious postfire logging proposal, the Biscuit Fire has become a national icon of postfire management issues. We used a spatially nested design of logged and unlogged plots replicated across the fire area and sampled before (2004) and after (2005) logging (4).

Natural conifer regeneration on sites that experienced high-severity fire was variable but generally abundant, with a median stocking density of 767 seedlings per hectare, primarily of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) (Fig. 1A). Such density exceeds the regional standards for fully stocked sites, suggesting that active reforestation efforts may be unnecessary. Postfire logging subsequently reduced regeneration by 71% to 224 seedlings per hectare (Fig. 1A) due to soil disturbance and physical burial by woody material during logging operations. Thus, if postfire logging is conducted in part to facilitate reforestation, replanting could result in no net gain in early conifer establishment.

P2: 研究内容发现的第二个观点——短期内增加火灾危险。主要是因为砍伐树木会导致很多的branches掉落在地上，然后比不砍伐掉落的多。所以会增加火灾危险。然后科学家说如果想降低火灾危险，就不要砍伐树木，让其自然生长。

Postfire logging significantly increased both fine and coarse downed woody fuel loads (Fig. 1B). This wood was composed of unmerchantable material (e.g., branches), and far exceeded expectations for fuel loads generated by postfire logging (4, 5). In terms of short-term fire risk, a reburn in logged stands would likely exhibit elevated rates of fire spread, fireline intensity, and soil heating impacts (6).

P2继续讲lag怎么怎么不好，然后最后一句提出，另一种减少火灾的办法是keep the dead tree待在他们挂掉的地方，能呆多久呆多久，这样能balabala一堆好处（有问最后一句的作用）

Postfire logging alone was notably incongruent with fuel reduction goals. Fuel reduction treatments (prescribed burning or mechanical removal) are frequently intended after postfire logging, including in the Biscuit plan, but resources to complete them are often limited (7). Our study underscores that, after logging, the mitigation of short-term fire risk is not possible without subsequent fuel reduction treatments. However, implementing these treatments is also problematic. Mechanical removal is generally precluded by its expense, leaving prescribed burning as the most feasible method. This will result in additional seedling mortality and potentially severe soil impacts caused by long-duration combustion of logging-generated fuel loads. Therefore, the lowest fire risk strategy may be to leave dead trees standing as long as possible (where they are less available to surface flames), allowing for aerial decay and slow, episodic input to surface fuel loads over decades.

Our data show that postfire logging, by removing naturally seeded conifers and increasing surface fuel loads, can be counterproductive to goals of forest regeneration and fuel reduction. In addition, forest regeneration is not necessarily in crisis across all burned forest landscapes.

作者: aptxjec 时间: 2018-11-7 21:25

bzy! 发表于 2018-11-7 20:53
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/311/5759/352

是原文吗？

嗯至少讲的事情是这个内容不好说我这篇爆炸了

作者: aptxjec 时间: 2018-11-7 21:33

不是猪兔子发表于 2018-11-7 20:46
谢谢，我觉得这几个点很受用，谢谢楼主！也祝楼主成功！

谢谢！祝考试顺利成功分手

作者: 丸子君 时间: 2018-11-7 21:39
LZ我和你同样今天考同样分手同样分数同样IR翻车哈哈哈

作者: aptxjec 时间: 2018-11-7 21:42

丸子君发表于 2018-11-7 21:39
LZ我和你同样今天考同样分手同样分数同样IR翻车哈哈哈

兄弟还刷一下吗？有点犹豫啊说高不高低不低的分数

作者: 土司儿 时间: 2018-11-7 21:47
我最后一题也是那道！！！我做到那也心态炸了。。。最后V49，也确实不太好。。。

作者: 丸子君 时间: 2018-11-7 22:41

aptxjec 发表于 2018-11-7 21:42
兄弟还刷一下吗？有点犹豫啊说高不高低不低的分数

我是姐妹哈哈，我不刷了我的目标本来是680的...我感觉710不会被踢出去就够了哈哈哈

作者: aptxjec 时间: 2018-11-7 22:47

丸子君发表于 2018-11-7 22:41
我是姐妹哈哈，我不刷了我的目标本来是680的...我感觉710不会被踢出去就够了哈哈哈 ...

不好意思我的锅。恭喜分手，680的话710稳的，祝申请顺利！

作者: aptxjec 时间: 2018-11-7 22:48

土司儿发表于 2018-11-7 21:47
我最后一题也是那道！！！我做到那也心态炸了。。。最后V49，也确实不太好。。。 ...

V39还行吧！总分可还好

作者: toack 时间: 2018-11-8 09:49
楼主二战和三战隔了多久

作者: llllllaaaaaa 时间: 2018-11-8 11:16
感谢分享！

作者: aptxjec 时间: 2018-11-8 11:30

toack 发表于 2018-11-8 09:49
楼主二战和三战隔了多久

1个月但这个月我水过去了···考前不到两周才重新开始复习的··我数学之前才47来着所以主要刷数学

作者: 土司儿 时间: 2018-11-8 14:38

aptxjec 发表于 2018-11-7 22:48
V39还行吧！总分可还好

啊我说错了。。。是Q49
我一战，对pace把控太差，V写不完。。。分数太低了，还得再战，唉

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)