1.16 放狗 北美下午场

CrystalZa

狗不是很多 低空分手 回馈cd

• 正方体 7/12
• 72题 mean 选d
• 补充23 题条件是

  都是positive integers，x, y, z是constant，n p r 是不同的prime numbers， 问n^xp^yr^z<100？ 条件一：x+y+z=5 条件二：npr=30

• 55题 一样的条件 选x< 9/7
• 发奖学金的总额=940,000 美元。
  
  

  三种不同额度的奖学金，95000 美元/人，35000 美元/人和10000 美元/人。

  奖学金获得者最少多少人？ 构筑 ：15

  剩下没出现的题我写在纸上了 见最后～

悦读： 考到boater 有一题问以下哪个因素least影响对拥挤程度的感觉 选项：acceptance of encounters; rise level of number in travelers; preference of travelers

           考到伽利略水泵 题pump的效果与哪个无关？ width of well； 伽利略 亚里士多德和 ET 的关系： 亚提出generalization 伽利略和et 研究（investigate 确定有这个单词）还有一个比较干扰选项：伽利略和et 完善 or 完成实验

           还有一个是 对service productivity的解释和建议 很长且没有分段  提出两个解释但被k否定 k提出建议 第二个建议好像是将不同的分析方法 discrete 举了美国的例子（有考题）

愈发：考到了 abide with（可能是with或者别的 一脸懵所以留下印象了）／ adhere to  

           among xxx 倒装（我选了倒装）注意前后主谓一致 因为主谓一致排除了两三个选项

洛基：真的考了好多 prep的原题 印象有两三个假设原题 建议都过一遍 但我实在想不起来了 我努力回想一下找找之前的题

作文: S amusement park去的人少了 虽然是针对小孩和年轻人的 但因为都是家长买票 而家长注重安全性 所以决定效仿汽车产业 汽车产业更改campaign之后销量提升了 公园也要同样更改 变成更符合家长的点- 安全 击破点挺多的 错误类比 忽略他因 and 这样做可能会失去顾客

如果洛基能想起来我会再更新！ 祝大家顺利出分 offer多多 我相信努力一定会有回报 雨后见彩虹。

更新： 洛基：建筑- 说现在的建筑质量跟 100年前的比差很多 结论之前的技术比现在的好 削弱：以前不好的建筑被淘汰了 留下来的都是最好的 有原题

           树穴 条件二 应该是 |x|> 1/3 不好意思 我给记反了

UUMMAA

感谢！！

CrystalZa

Qqyx 发表于 2019-1-17 16:45
楼主， 可以解释一下图中第一题您为啥选b吗？谢谢！！

我记反了 是 |x|> 1/3

CrystalZa

zxx1995 发表于 2019-1-17 13:13
3x^2 > x^2为什么是B啊

我记反了 应该是 |x|> 1/3..

GMAT我的天敌

zxx1995 发表于 2019-1-17 13:13
3x^2 > x^2为什么是B啊

不是>X嘛

CrystalZa

发表于 2019-01-16 22:00:21
狗不是很多 低空分手 回馈cd
正方体 7/1272题 mean 选d补充23 题条件是 都是po...

Mark一下

Qqyx

楼主， 可以解释一下图中第一题您为啥选b吗？谢谢！！

Qqyx

zxx1995 发表于 2019-1-17 13:13
3x^2 > x^2为什么是B啊

我也不懂 求解释啊！

90210

应该是boater那题相关的文献 《观光景点拥挤研究 》

    His study incorporates time into an analysis of crowding and carrying capacity to investigate how change affects visitor evaluations and experiences. The analysis employed three cross-sectional surveys of boaters to the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore in Wisconsin over a 22-year period, beginning in 1975 and each administered approximately 10 years apart.
     This framework assumed that perceived crowding is an expression of individual judgment and socially shared norms about “appropriate” density at a given site and at a given time. How crowded people feel depends, in part, on the expectations and preferences they bring to a recreation site. People may feel more crowded if they expect a low number of encounters but see more people than they expected. Moreover, based on these evaluative criteria, the individual may not feel crowded or evaluate the experience negatively until visitor encounters reach some threshold number.

    This normative approach, however, is problematic in cross-sectional crowding frameworks because visitors may change over time. Time related issues of change were recognized in the early 1970s during the planning stages of early carrying capacity studies (Shelby & Heberlein, 1986). At the Grand Canyon, there were concerns that the study of current visitors could not truly assess carrying capacity because past visitors, who might be more sensitive, would have been displaced. It is possible that they could have left the Canyon because use levels had increased from 500 visitors a year in the mid 1960s to over 16,000 in 1972. The “last settler syndrome” (Nielson & Endo, 1977) or “uninitiated newcomer” phenomenon (West, 1981) suggests that some new comers to an area may have weakly defined normative expectations and preferences about an area (Roggenbuck, Williams, Bange, & Dean, 1991) and therefore will define current conditions as normal. Thus, aggregate measures of norms may change because of shifts in visitor composition over time.
Norms may also change independently of visitor composition. Cole and Stewart (2002) used a diary sampling method among Grand Canyon backpackers, and found substantial variation in individual responses to normative evaluations when measured at different backcountry zones and at different times during their trip. The product shift phenomenon suggests that people can also change their minds about standards of appropriate use given changing personal and social contexts (Shelby et al, 1988; Shindler &Shelby, 1995). The norms that they hold may change over time, and hence a relationship between encounters and perceived crowding that holds at one point in time may not hold at a second point. So, collective evaluations may also change, even while visitor characteristics remain roughly the same over time. Even though use level may be increasing, aggregate crowding levels may shift depending on a variety of broad social factors that may change the way people define appropriate uses of a recreation site. The only way to observe the potential for change, either in visitor composition or in the normative standards of visitors, is to measure social conditions and visitor evaluations at a single site over time

supery414

感谢分享！