OG 12 - 83 加速器和文章那题, 求指教. 谢谢

龍之哀伤

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.

答案是E, 可以理解, 但是我对B&E选项有点疑惑:

题目中结论是: 因为accelerator少了, 所以 number of articles 少了. 要求削弱
B, 平均等待时间少了, 那么就算有些在维修, 那么需要用的人还是可能能用到, 也不一定会造成文章减少啊
D, 几个组可以一起做, 那么就算有些在维修, 那么需要用的人可以参加到别的组里面, 也能用得到, 所以也许可以弥补那几台不能用的机器, 也就是所以文章也不一定会减少啊.

不知道说清楚了没, 求指教

sdcar2010

This is a weaken question.

Main conclusion:
it is likely that the low number of articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators.

Causation vs. correlation
(B) The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last several years.
If this is true, there is no signs of decline in the availability of partical accelerators. So B) destroy the "correlation" betwieen the publication number and the availability of machines.

(D) Particle accelerators can be used for more than one group of experiments in any given year.
Again, if this is true, there is no shortage of the machine.

poyollll

This is a weaken question.

Main conclusion:
it is likely that the low number of articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators.

Causation vs. correlation
(B) The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last several years.
If this is true, there is no signs of decline in the availability of partical accelerators. So B) destroy the "correlation" betwieen the publication number and the availability of machines.

(D) Particle accelerators can be used for more than one group of experiments in any given year.
Again, if this is true, there is no shortage of the machine.

-- by 会员 sdcar2010 (2011/6/23 10:58:36)

我是这么理解的，请指教。


只能这么说，B/D是小削弱。作者的reasoning——因为accelerators少了所以论文发表少了，削弱的策略应该是提供其它explanation。确实如果accelerators更高效可以一定程度削弱论文发表少这个premise前提，但如果跟E比较则是E更好，E是大削弱——因为论文发表的概率小了，所以论文发表少了，削弱的是argument的reasoning，而不是质疑其前提。

sdcar2010

This is a weaken question.

Main conclusion:
it is likely that the low number of articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators.

Causation vs. correlation
(B) The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last several years.
If this is true, there is no signs of decline in the availability of partical accelerators. So B) destroy the "correlation" betwieen the publication number and the availability of machines.

(D) Particle accelerators can be used for more than one group of experiments in any given year.
Again, if this is true, there is no shortage of the machine.

-- by 会员 sdcar2010 (2011/6/23 10:58:36)

我是这么理解的，请指教。


只能这么说，B/D是小削弱。作者的reasoning——因为accelerators少了所以论文发表少了，削弱的策略应该是提供其它explanation。确实如果accelerators更高效可以一定程度削弱论文发表少这个premise前提，但如果跟E比较则是E更好，E是大削弱——因为论文发表的概率小了，所以论文发表少了，削弱的是argument的reasoning，而不是质疑其前提。

-- by 会员 poyollll (2011/12/30 16:11:48)

I think your reasoning is BETTER than mine. My explanation for B) puts B) as a weakener on the surface. It is confusing.

poyollll

谢谢sdcar2010的回复！