【文章內(nèi)容簡(jiǎn)介】 a positive influence on our future lives, but whether that is true will be partly up to us. Scientist B: I have to admit that the potential consequences of creating something that can match or go beyond human intelligence frighten me. Even now, scientists are teaching puters how to learn on their own. At some point in the near future, their intelligence may well take off and develop at an everincreasing speed. Human beings evolve biologically very slowly and we would be quickly substituted. In the short term, there is the danger that robots will take over millions of human jobs, creating a large underclass of unemployed people. This could mean largescale poverty and social unrest. In the long term machines might decide the world would be better without humans. Scientist C: I39。m a member of the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots. Forget the movie image of a terrifying Terminator stamping on human skulls and think of what39。s happening right now: military machines like drones, gun turrets and sentry robots are already being used to kill with very little human input. The next step will be autonomous “murderbots” following orders but finally deciding who to kill on their own. It seems clear to me that this would be extremely dangerous for humans. We need to be very cautious indeed about what we ask machines to do.（1）What is Scientist B worried about? A.AI technology will destroy the earth.B.Computers can39。t think by themselves.C.Robots will take the place of humans.D.Humans will be unhappy without machines.（2）What does the underlined word “this” in the last paragraph refer to? A.I launched the campaign to Stop Killer Robots.B.We forget the movie image of a terrifying Terminator.C.“Murderbots” can39。t decide by themselves.D.“Murderbots” will be against humans39。 orders.（3）Which statement is CORRECT according to the record? A.Scientist A thinks AI technology will never develop.B.The employment will be affected by AI technology in the future.C.“Murderbots” will follow the orders of their manufacturers in the wars.D.All the three scientists agree that AI technology will benefit human beings.（4）Who agree(s) AI has more negative aspects than positive aspects? A.Scientist AB.Scientist BC.Scientists B amp。 CD.Scientists B amp。 A【答案】（1）C（2）D（3）B（4）C 【解析】【分析】本文是一篇議論文，列出了三位科學(xué)家對(duì)于人工智能的評(píng)價(jià)。(1)考查推理判斷。根據(jù)第三段中的“In the short term, there is the danger that robots will take over millions of human jobs, creating a large underclass of unemployed people. This could mean largescale poverty and social unrest.”可知，科學(xué)家B擔(dān)心機(jī)器人會(huì)代替人類(lèi)，造成人類(lèi)失業(yè)、貧窮和社會(huì)動(dòng)蕩。故選C。(2)考查代詞指代。由畫(huà)線(xiàn)句上文內(nèi)容可知，自主的“殺人機(jī)器人”是否服從人類(lèi)的命令，這將決定誰(shuí)殺死誰(shuí)，因此推斷此處的this指殺人機(jī)器人不服從人類(lèi)命令，這將是非常不道德的，非常危險(xiǎn)的。故選D。(3)考查細(xì)節(jié)理解。根據(jù)第三段中的的“In the short term, there is the danger that robots will take over millions of human jobs, creating a large underclass of unemployed people.”可知，機(jī)器人的發(fā)展會(huì)代替人類(lèi)工作，造成人類(lèi)失業(yè)。故選B。(4)考查推理判斷。根據(jù)第二段中的“I tend to believe AI will have a positive influence on our future lives”可知，科學(xué)家A認(rèn)為人工智能積極因素比消極因素多；根據(jù)第三段中的“there is the danger that robots will take over millions of human jobs, creating a large underclass of unemployed people. This could mean largescale poverty and social unrest.”和第四段中的“It seems clear to me that this would be extremely dangerous for humans. We need to be very cautious indeed about what we ask machines to do.”可知，科學(xué)家B和科學(xué)家C認(rèn)為人工智能消極因素比積極因素多。故選C?！军c(diǎn)評(píng)】本題考點(diǎn)涉及細(xì)節(jié)理解，代詞指代和推理判斷三個(gè)題型的考查，是一篇生活類(lèi)閱讀，要求考生在捕捉細(xì)節(jié)信息的基礎(chǔ)上，進(jìn)一步根據(jù)上下文的邏輯關(guān)系，進(jìn)行分析，推理，從而選出正確答案。5．閱讀理解 Scientists have been studying how people use money for long. Now they39。re finding some theories may apply to one group of monkeys. Researchers recently taught six monkeys how to use money. They gave the monkeys small metal disks(圓片) that could be used like cash and showed them some yummy apple pieces. The monkeys soon figured out that if they gave one of the disks to a scientist, they39。d receive a piece of apple in return. If you think that is all the monkeys can figure out, you are wrong. Two researchers, Jake and Allison, acted as apple sellers in the experiments. The monkeys were tested one at a time and had 12 disks to spend in each experiment. Jake always showed the monkeys one apple piece, while Allison always showed two pieces. But that39。s not necessarily what they gave the monkeys. The number of apple pieces given for a disk was determined at random. Experiment One: Allison showed two pieces of apples but gave both pieces only half the time. The other half, she took one piece away and gave the monkey just the remaining piece. Jake, on the other hand, always gave exactly what he showed: one piece for each disk. The monkeys chose to trade more with Allison. Experiment Two: Allison continued to sometimes gave two pieces and sometimes one piece. But now, half the time, Jake gave the one apple piece he was showing, and half the time he added a bonus. Guess what? The monkeys chose to trade more with Jake. In the first experiment, the monkeys correctly figured out that if they traded with Allison, they39。d end up with more treats. In the second one, when a monkey received two pieces from Jake, it seemed like again. When Allison gave the monkey only one piece instead of the two she showed, it seemed like a loss. The monkeys preferred trading with Jake because they39。d rather take a chance of seeming to win than seeming to lose. We also sometimes make silly business decisions just to avoid the feeling that we39。re getting less, even when were not. Would you have made the same choices?（1）What conclusion might experts draw from the first experiment? A.The monkeys show certain business sense.B.Business theories can apply to all monkeys.C.People are smarter in terms of finance.D.It39。s easy to teach monkeys how to trade.（2）What does a bonus in paragraph 5 refer to? A.A metal disk.160