再提OG11th--86

frankman

Journalist: In physics journals, the number of articles reporting the results of experiments involving particle accelerators was lower last year than it had been in previous years. Several of the particle accelerators at major research institutions were out of service the year before last for repairs, so it is likely that the low number of articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the journalist’s argument?

(A) Every article based on experiments with particle accelerators that was submitted for publication last year actually was published.

(B) The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last several years.

(C) The number of physics journals was the same last year as in previous years.

(D) Particle accelerators can be used for more than one group of experiments in any given year.

(E) Recent changes in the editorial policies of several physics journals have decreased the likelihood that articles concerning particle-accelerator research will be accepted for publication.

曾经问过这道题目,但是今天重新看的时候,发现好像还没有理解

结论A可获性的下降导致了与PA相关的文章数量很少

E.应该是他因削弱,不是因为PA可获性的下降,而是最近期刊编辑政策的改变导致了与PA相关的文章数量下降,这样分析有问题吗?

另外ABCD怎么排除,恳请NN再指点下,谢谢了!

chhldeng

A.中立性观点，对以前和现在一视同仁，没有加强和削弱

B.使用粒子加速器的等待时间减少了，因此使用得更频繁了；但实际结果是文章反而少了，所以原因是粒子加速器报废的太多了，所以此选项有点加强

C.中立性观点，对以前和现在一视同仁，没有加强和削弱

D.中立性观点，对以前和现在一视同仁，没有加强和削弱

E.给出他因：由于期刊发行政策的改变导致文章数量的减少，因此有点削弱

frankman

请问下楼上什么叫对以前和现在一视同仁? 谢谢!

chhldeng

ACD3个选项提出的内容都与时间先后没有关系,对以前和现在都没有影响

fogwind

以下是引用frankman在2009-2-20 12:24:00的发言：

Journalist: In physics journals, the number of articles reporting the results of experiments involving particle accelerators was lower last year than it had been in previous years. Several of the particle accelerators at major research institutions were out of service the year before last for repairs, so it is likely that the low number of articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the journalist’s argument?

(A) Every article based on experiments with particle accelerators that was submitted for publication last year actually was published.

(B) The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last several years.

(C) The number of physics journals was the same last year as in previous years.

(D) Particle accelerators can be used for more than one group of experiments in any given year.

(E) Recent changes in the editorial policies of several physics journals have decreased the likelihood that articles concerning particle-accelerator research will be accepted for publication.

曾经问过这道题目,但是今天重新看的时候,发现好像还没有理解

结论A可获性的下降导致了与PA相关的文章数量很少

E.应该是他因削弱,不是因为PA可获性的下降,而是最近期刊编辑政策的改变导致了与PA相关的文章数量下降,这样分析有问题吗?

另外ABCD怎么排除,恳请NN再指点下,谢谢了!

正如你说，E是用提出他因来削弱的。

A是排除了一个他因，相当于加强。
B/D下，那么论文的数量应该增加或者不变，这和题目提出的信息相反。
C嘛，和学术期刊的数量没有什么关系的。无关选项。