ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2409|回复: 8
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[原始] 二战分手,放狗

[精华] [复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2018-7-11 14:44:46 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式

Q51 V37 总分730
【阅读】
前三篇都是JJ里的,依次是简爱,黑人女性从政,支票,后两篇JJ都有参考原文,80%相似度。简爱和支票的题目比较简单清晰,但是黑人女性从政那篇,即使看过原文,题目也很不好做,很多选项特别长,又很绕,做的时候要细心。
第四篇是没有JJ的,但狗主感觉好像在og还是哪做过差不多的一篇,做这篇阅读的时候狗主还有六七道题,只剩了十分钟,所以慌乱的情况下完全没看懂文章,只记得几个关键词,等考古:一共两段,大半瓶,第一段是说雄性的某种鸟会soft sing,然后说这种sing 有的是有效的,有的是无效的(考试的时候没看清逻辑,说的可能有点奇怪/捂脸)。 第二段好像是在找这种soft sing 的解释,首先提出了一个energy cost(这个词记得很清楚),后来好像否定了这个观点。然后又提出了一个attack cost(好像是叫这个),说这种sing能帮助雄鸟吸引还是躲避天敌来着(忘了)。最后作者的态度,emmmm,狗主实在没时间去琢磨了,抱歉。
【逻辑+语法】
狗主上次就是跪在逻辑上的,但逻辑这种东西又不好看JJ,所以只能靠自己了。狗主考了两次,最大的感受就是实战中的逻辑+语法真的和平时很不一样,难度加大了很多,具体体现在:词汇量要求变高(有的题不认识词真心做不了);句子变长变复杂了,真的考验心理素质;然后逻辑题的逻辑越发复杂了(好像在说废话...)。
【数学】
数学JJ狗主没有特意看,只是在大家的放狗帖里瞄了两下,感觉遇到了五六道原题,记得最清楚的是那道算影子速度的题,答案是1/2.
还有一道数学题狗主竟然没看懂,印象中其他狗主好像说过:一个汽车经销商从生产商那里买了5 lots的车,然后把最旧的以 3lots 卖给另一个人(大概是这个意思吧,狗主琢磨半天没明白lots还是啥的是什么意思),然后说经销商今年多了14辆车,如果买一个lot和(或?)卖一个lot算一个交易的话,经销商今年做了几次交易?(题目大概是这意思吧,狗主真心没懂)
【作文】
作文说某一个城市的环保人员要制定一个严格的环境保护政策,然后有人不同意,说这个政策会影响该城市的经济发展,然后举了另一个城市做类比,还蛮简单的。

最后结合狗主自身的体验,给大家一点备考的Tips:
1.阅读JJ一定一定要看(狗主第一次考Q21,完全没看JJ,然后考场上pace乱了以后心态就崩了。实战中的逻辑和语法会比平时更费时,所以尽量利用JJ在阅读方面省时间。话说这次如果不是碰上三篇JJ,估计狗主的V还是20+)
2.做逻辑和语法一定一定要认真和冷静,不要看了两行觉得没看懂就瞎猜,不然猜了四五题心态崩了就完全放弃V了(狗主第一次就是这样)。
   但也尽量不要在一道题上花太多时间,狗主做那种题目很长很复杂看不懂的逻辑题的经验是,提取题中的关键词,然后在答案里找和题目内容最相关的选项。(仅适用于实在不会的情况)
3.狗主的数学基础比较好,没什么值得说的经验。但是个人觉得数学JJ适量食用,因为各个狗主的回忆都有偏差,导致题目表述的不准确,这个时候在JJ上纠结是没有用的,尽量只看一下那些比较特殊的题型的解题思路。
对了,狗主这次做数学是的感受是,数学题好像比以前难了,题目会更加绕。以前狗主都是尽量把每道题都控制在1.5分钟,但这次发现,有的题需要的时间会比较多,因此简单的确定的题目不要纠结,尽快过(狗主这次数学用尽了最后一分钟的时间,就是因为在前面简单的题上故意控制1.5min的pace,后面难题有点捉急了)

狗主这次考试真的是惊心动魄,数学和verbal都差点做不完,尽管最后的分数不是特别高,但总算能分手了,感谢论坛上各位伟大的狗主。
另外祝其他小伙伴早日分手。
加油!

收藏收藏1 收藏收藏1
沙发
发表于 2018-7-11 17:10:45 | 只看该作者
谢谢楼主!
数学变难了好紧张
板凳
发表于 2018-7-11 17:37:14 | 只看该作者
小白求这次裤的rc和awa 的jj 不知道楼主能不能给我扔个文档或者链接 跪谢
地板
发表于 2018-7-11 18:59:46 | 只看该作者
是原文吗?

参考文献2* 疑式原文
The Cost of Singing Softly
Given that soft song is indeed the display that most reliably predicts attack in song sparrows, what is to keep males from cheating in order to appear more aggressive? Again, to answer this question one must take another look at the handicap hypothesis, in which the costs of signals are crucial to enforcing their honesty. Scientists have proposed different types of expenses that could be incurred for aggressive signals, but most seem unlikely to apply to soft song. Energy costs, for one, are still unlikely because songs in general, and those of low intensity in particular, take very little energy to produce. The kind of developmental cost discussed earlier for song repertoire size also seems unlikely, because these costs are more likely to apply to signals established over the long term, rather than signals that change over the short term at will. A third possibility is what is called a “vulnerability cost,” where the manner
in which a signal is produced inherently makes the individual giving it more vulnerable to attack. A vulnerability cost might seem plausible for soft song if, because of its low amplitude, it can only be perceived by a receiver when the singer is close by, making it an unambiguous signal of proximity and thus vulnerability. However, because of the way that sound attenuates with distance, a signal that is soft when it reaches the receiver could be either a low-intensity signal produced near the signaler or a high-intensity signal produced farther away. By contrast, a signal that is loud when it reaches the receiver is actually less ambiguous in conveying that the signaler is close by.

We have argued that soft song is a reliable aggressive signal because it is an unambiguous and costly signal of attention, not of proximity or vulnerability. Soft song is usually produced quite close to the intended receiver, so that the receiver can both see and hear the singer. The listener then should be able to discern the volume at which the song is produced, and because of its low volume, soft song is unlikely to be audible to any other individuals. Thus by singing at low intensity near a rival, the singer is indicating that its attention is focused solely on that particular bird. Soft songs are also costly to the singer because they are unlikely to reach other targets. In the case of female receivers, the cost could be a diminished proclivity to mate, as we have shown that female song sparrows find soft song less attractive than songs sung at a normal broadcast amplitude. The more-significant cost of soft song, however, is probably that other male receivers fail to hear a response from the male being challenged, leading neighbors or other potential usurpers to be more likely to intrude on the softsinger’s territory.

A recent study of ours supports the idea that soft song is costly because it limits reception to a single intended receiver. In this experiment, we simulated singing interactions between an intruder and a territory owner, in which the latter sang softly or at a normal level. First we recorded the territory owner and mapped his territory; then we captured and held him temporarily.

While the owner was held, we placed two loudspeakers on his territory, and staged a virtual interaction by playing an intruder’s song through one speaker and the owner’s song from the other. The intruder song was recorded from a male holding a distant territory, and was always played at normal level. In half the trials, the owner’s song was also played at normal level, and in the other half the owner’s song was played at a level typical of soft song. The result was that intrusions by other male song sparrows were more common and more serious when the simulated owner sang soft songs than when he used loud song. Presumably, other males listening to the interaction from off the territory cannot hear the owner when he uses soft song, and thus cannot tell that he is countering the intruder. Thus by using soft song to signal his focused attention to one intruder, the territory owner sacrifices his ability to ward off other potential intruders.
5#
 楼主| 发表于 2018-7-11 22:04:07 | 只看该作者
Elsie1214 发表于 2018-7-11 17:37
小白求这次裤的rc和awa 的jj 不知道楼主能不能给我扔个文档或者链接 跪谢

阅读:https://forum.chasedream.com/thread-1325665-1-1.html
awa: https://forum.chasedream.com/thread-1325651-1-1.html
6#
 楼主| 发表于 2018-7-11 22:05:52 | 只看该作者
bzy! 发表于 2018-7-11 18:59
是原文吗?

参考文献2* 疑式原文

差不多是的,大概85%的相似度吧
7#
发表于 2018-7-11 23:24:31 | 只看该作者
感谢楼楼,明天考试,瑟瑟发抖,希望不要换库。
8#
发表于 2018-7-11 23:31:43 | 只看该作者
bzy! 发表于 2018-7-11 18:59
是原文吗?

参考文献2* 疑式原文

这个同学为大家贡献太多了,人太好了。必须赞一个。
9#
发表于 2018-7-12 13:18:29 | 只看该作者
感谢楼主~~~
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-12-25 21:58
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部