Section C: Reading Comprehension
Directions: There are 2 passages in this section. Each passage is followed by some questions or unfinished statements. For each of them there are four choices marked A), B), C) and D). You should decide on the best choice and mark the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2 with a single line through the centre.
Passage One
Research in human-vehicle interaction has shown even systems designed to automate driving are far from being errorproof. Recent evidence points to drivers' limited understanding of what these systems can and cannot do as a contributing factor to system misuse. A recent study tackles the issue of over-trusting drivers and the resulting system misuse from a legal viewpoint. It looks at what the manufacturers of self-driving cars should legally do to ensure that drivers understand how to use the vehicles appropriately.
One solution suggested in the study involves requiring buyers to sign end-user license agreements (EULAs), similar to the terms and conditions that require agreement when using new software products. But this is far from ideal. The agreement may not provide enough information to the driver, leading to confusion about the nature of the requests for agreement and their implications. Further, most end users don't read EULAs. A 2017 study shows 91 percent of people agree to them without reading. Among young people, 97 percent agree without reviewing the terms.
The issue is that, unlike using a smartphone app, operating a car has serious safety risks, whether the driver is human or software. And human drivers need to consent to take responsibility for the outcomes of the software and hardware.
“Warning fatigue” and distracted driving are also causes for concern. For example, a driver, annoyed after receiving continuous warnings, could decide to just ignore the message. Or, if the message is presented while the vehicle is in motion, it could represent a distraction. Given these limitations and concerns, even if this mode of obtaining consent is to move forward, it likely won't fully protect automakers from their legal liability should the system malfunction or an accident occur.
Driver training for self-driving vehicles can help ensure that drivers fully understand system capabilities and limitations. This needs to occur beyond the vehicle purchase. Recent evidence shows even relying on the information provided by the seller is not going to answer many questions. All of this considered, the road forward for self-driving cars is not going to be a smooth ride after all.
46. What do we learn from research in human-vehicle interaction?
47. What is the problem with requiring buyers to sign end-user license agreements?
48. What would drivers do when they suffer from “warning fatigue”?
49. What does the author think of continuing to ask buyers to sign end-user license agreements?
50. What should be done to help drivers fully understand system capabilities and limitations?
Passage Two
Do you ever blend up a protein drink for breakfast or grab a protein bar following an afternoon workout? If so, you are likely among the millions of people in search of more protein-rich diets.
Protein-enriched products are found everywhere. But contrary to all the publicity that everyone needs more protein, most Americans get twice as much as they need.
Many of us living in the most developed countries are buying into a myth of protein deficiency created by food companies and self-identified health experts. Global retail sales of protein supplement products reached an astonishing US$18.9 billion in 2020.
But are we really in need of more protein? Physicians in the U.S. have never actually examined a patient with protein deficiency because simply by eating an adequate number of daily calories we are also most likely getting enough protein.
In fact, Americans currently consume almost twice the National Academy of Medicine's recommended daily intake of protein although the most desirable protein intake may vary depending on age and activity level.
For example, if you're a dedicated athlete you might need to consume higher quantities of protein. Generally, though, a 140-pound person should not exceed 120 grams of protein per day, particularly because a high protein diet can strain kidney and liver function and increase risks of developing heart disease and cancer.
While fats and sugar have taken the beating in turns since over a century ago, protein has managed to remain our red-hot favorite.
In the 1970s through the 1990s, protein products remained visible but moved back somewhat with the dietary spotlight firmly fixed on low-calorie, low-fat, sugar-free snack foods and beverages following the publication of studies linking sugar and saturated fat consumption to heart disease.
Later research in 2003, however, suggested high-protein diets could aid in weight loss, and protein quickly regained its former nutrient-superstar status.
Now most people living in high-income nations are consuming enough protein. When we replace meals with a protein bar or drink, we also risk missing out on the rich sources of antioxidants, vitamins and many other benefits of real food.
51. What do we learn about publicity over protein in America?
52. Why have physicians in the U.S. never actually examined a patient with protein deficiency?
53. What should people take into consideration in deciding on the most preferable protein intake?
54. What foods have been largely out of favor for more than a century?
55. What does the author imply people in developed countries should do to keep healthy?
Answers & Explanations
Passage One: Autonomous Driving
46. A。解析：题干问从人车交互的研究中我们能了解到什么。定位首段：Research in human-vehicle interaction has shown even systems designed to automate driving are far from being errorproof.（人车交互的研究表明，即使是设计为自动驾驶的系统也远非不会出错）。far from being errorproof（远非防错）即意味着它们仍会犯错。对应选项 A (Automatic driving systems are by no means immune to errors 自动驾驶系统绝不能免于出错，immune to 意为免受...影响)。
47. B。解析：题干问要求买家签署终端用户许可协议存在什么问题。定位第二段最后两句：Further, most end users don't read EULAs... 91 percent of people agree to them without reading... 97 percent agree without reviewing the terms.（此外，大多数终端用户不读协议... 91%的人不看就同意了...）。这表明绝大多数人根本不看。对应选项 B (Most end users sign them without bothering to read the terms 大多数终端用户懒得阅读条款就签了名)。
48. C。解析：题干问司机在遇到“警告疲劳”时会怎么做。定位第四段第二句：For example, a driver, annoyed after receiving continuous warnings, could decide to just ignore the message.（例如，在收到持续警告后感到恼火的司机，可能会决定直接忽略信息）。ignore the message 即不采取行动。对应选项 C (Take no action despite repeated warnings 尽管有反复警告也不采取任何行动)。
49. D。解析：题干问作者认为继续要求买家签署终端用户许可协议会怎样。定位第四段最后一句：...it likely won't fully protect automakers from their legal liability should the system malfunction or an accident occur.（...如果系统出现故障或发生事故，这可能无法完全保护汽车制造商免受法律责任）。对应选项 D (It will probably not provide manufacturers adequate protection from legal responsibilities 它可能无法为制造商提供免避法律责任的足够保护)。
50. B。解析：题干问应该做什么来帮助司机充分了解系统的能力和局限性。定位最后一段第一句：Driver training for self-driving vehicles can help ensure that drivers fully understand system capabilities and limitations.（针对自动驾驶车辆的司机培训有助于确保司机充分理解系统的能力和局限）。对应选项 B (Familiarizing them with the systems through training 通过培训让他们熟悉系统)。
全文翻译
人车交互研究表明，即使是设计用于自动化驾驶的系统也远非万无一失。最近有证据指出，驾驶员对这些系统能和不能做什么的理解有限，是导致系统误用的一个因素。最近的一项研究从法律角度探讨了过度信任驾驶员以及由此导致的系统误用问题。它审视了自动驾驶汽车制造商在法律上应该做什么，以确保驾驶员理解如何适当使用车辆。研究中建议的一个解决方案涉及要求买家签署最终用户许可协议，类似于使用新软件产品时需要同意的条款和条件。但这远非理想。该协议可能没有向驾驶员提供足够的信息，导致对同意请求的性质及其影响产生混淆。此外，大多数最终用户并不阅读最终用户许可协议。一项2017年的研究显示，91%的人在不阅读的情况下同意这些协议。在年轻人中，97%的人不审查条款就同意。问题在于，与使用智能手机应用不同，操作汽车具有严重的安全风险，无论驾驶员是人还是软件。而人类驾驶员需要同意为软件和硬件的后果负责。「警告疲劳」和分心驾驶也令人担忧。例如，一个驾驶员在连续收到警告后感到恼怒，可能决定直接忽略该消息。或者，如果消息在车辆行驶时呈现，可能构成分心。考虑到这些限制和担忧，即使这种获得同意的方式能够推进，它可能也无法完全保护汽车制造商免于系统故障或事故发生时的法律责任。针对自动驾驶车辆的驾驶员培训可以帮助确保驾驶员完全理解系统的能力和局限性。这需要在车辆购买之后继续进行。最近的证据表明，即使依靠卖方提供的信息也无法回答许多问题。综合考虑所有这些，自动驾驶汽车的前路终究不会一帆风顺。
Passage Two: Protein Myth
51. A。解析：题干问关于美国关于蛋白质的宣传我们能了解到什么。定位第三段：Many of us living in the most developed countries are buying into a myth of protein deficiency created by food companies and self-identified health experts.（由于食品公司和自封的健康专家的宣传，许多生活在最发达国家的人陷入了缺乏蛋白质的迷思）。对应选项 A (It has helped to create the myth of protein deficiency 它帮助制造了蛋白质缺乏的迷思)。
52. C。解析：题干问为什么美国医生从未真正检查过缺乏蛋白质的病人。定位第四段：...because simply by eating an adequate number of daily calories we are also most likely getting enough protein.（...因为只要每天摄入足够数量的卡路里，我们也很可能获得了足够的蛋白质）。意思是吃够日常所需的食物就不会缺蛋白质。对应选项 C (Americans can get sufficient protein just by eating adequate foods daily 美国人只要每天吃足够的食物就能获得充足的蛋白质)。
53. B。解析：题干问人们在决定最合适的蛋白质摄入量时应该考虑什么。定位第五段：...although the most desirable protein intake may vary depending on age and activity level.（...尽管最理想的蛋白质摄入量可能因年龄和活动水平而异）。对应选项 B (How old they are and what activities they do 他们多大了以及做什么活动)。
54. D。解析：题干问哪些食物一个多世纪以来在很大程度上失宠了。定位第七段：While fats and sugar have taken the beating in turns since over a century ago...（尽管一个多世纪以来，脂肪和糖轮流遭受抨击...）。这说明高糖和高脂食物不再受欢迎。对应选项 D (Sugary and fatty foods 甜食和高脂肪食物)。
55. A。解析：题干问作者暗示发达国家的人们应该怎么做才能保持健康。定位最后一段：When we replace meals with a protein bar or drink, we also risk missing out on the rich sources of antioxidants, vitamins and many other benefits of real food.（当我们用蛋白质棒或饮料代替正餐时，我们也面临着错过抗氧化剂、维生素和许多其他真正食物的好处的风险）。作者的观点是真正的食物（天然食物）能提供更多好处。对应选项 A (Enjoy natural food 享受天然食物)。
全文翻译
你会在早餐时调一杯蛋白质饮料，还是下午锻炼后抓一根蛋白棒？如果是这样，你可能是数百万追求更多富含蛋白质饮食的人之一。富含蛋白质的产品随处可见。但与所有人需要更多蛋白质的宣传相反，大多数美国人摄入的蛋白质是所需的两倍。我们许多生活在最发达国家的人正在被食品公司和自封的健康专家灌输一种蛋白质缺乏的神话。2020年，全球蛋白质补充产品的零售销售额达到了惊人的189亿美元。但我们真的需要更多蛋白质吗？美国的医生实际上从未接诊过蛋白质缺乏的患者，因为仅仅通过摄入足够数量的每日热量，我们很可能也获得了足够的蛋白质。事实上，美国人目前的蛋白质摄入量几乎是美国国家医学院推荐的每日摄入量的两倍，尽管最理想的蛋白质摄入量可能因年龄和活动水平而异。例如，如果你是一名专业运动员，你可能需要摄入更高量的蛋白质。不过，一般来说，一个140磅的人每天不应超过120克蛋白质，特别是因为高蛋白饮食可能会给肾脏和肝脏功能带来压力，并增加患心脏病和癌症的风险。虽然自一个多世纪以前以来，脂肪和糖轮流受到批评，蛋白质却成功保持了我们最爱的地位。在1970年代到1990年代，蛋白质产品仍然可见，但随着研究的发表将糖和饱和脂肪的摄入与心脏病联系起来，饮食焦点牢牢锁定在低热量、低脂、无糖的零食和饮料上，蛋白质产品有所退后。然而，2003年后来的研究表明，高蛋白饮食有助于减肥，蛋白质迅速重新获得了其以前的营养超级巨星地位。现在，大多数生活在高收入国家的人都摄入了足够的蛋白质。当我们用蛋白棒或蛋白饮料替代正餐时，我们也冒着错失真正食物中丰富的抗氧化剂、维生素和许多其他好处的风险。
核心搭配与高分句型
【核心搭配与高频短语】
- far from：远非，一点也不（far from being errorproof / far from ideal）
- buy into：相信，接受（某观点）（buying into a myth of protein deficiency）
- in search of：寻找，寻求（in search of more protein-rich diets）
- miss out on：错过，错失（risk missing out on the rich sources）
- take the beating：遭受打击，挨批评（have taken the beating in turns）
- red-hot：炙手可热的，非常受欢迎的（remain our red-hot favorite）
- out of favor：失宠，不受欢迎（largely out of favor for more than a century）
【亮点句型解析】
- Should 引起的虚拟语气倒装：
"...it likely won't fully protect automakers from their legal liability should the system malfunction or an accident occur."
（...如果系统发生故障或发生事故，它可能无法完全保护汽车制造商免受法律责任。）`should the system malfunction` 等同于 `if the system should malfunction`。在表示与将来事实可能相反的虚拟条件句中，若有助动词 `should`, `had`, `were`，可将其提至主语前，省略 `if`。这在学术和法律文献中是非常高级的正式用法。 - Depending on 引导的状语：
"...although the most desirable protein intake may vary depending on age and activity level."
（...尽管最理想的蛋白质摄入量可能会根据年龄和活动水平而有所不同。）`depending on` 作为分词短语作状语，解释了变化的具体条件，是四六级阐述观点的万能句式。