READ TEXT II AND ANSWER QUESTIONS 21 TO 25:
TEXT II
The backlash against big data
[…]
Big data refers to the idea that society can do things with a large
body of data that weren't possible when working with smaller
amounts. The term was originally applied a decade ago to
massive datasets from astrophysics, genomics and internet
search engines, and to machine-learning systems (for voicerecognition
and translation, for example) that work
well only when given lots of data to chew on. Now it refers to the
application of data-analysis and statistics in new areas, from
retailing to human resources. The backlash began in mid-March,
prompted by an article in Science by David Lazer and others at
Harvard and Northeastern University. It showed that a big-data
poster-child—Google Flu Trends, a 2009 project which identified
flu outbreaks from search queries alone—had overestimated the
number of cases for four years running, compared with reported
data from the Centres for Disease Control (CDC). This led to a
wider attack on the idea of big data.
The criticisms fall into three areas that are not intrinsic to big
data per se, but endemic to data analysis, and have some merit.
First, there are biases inherent to data that must not be ignored.
That is undeniably the case. Second, some proponents of big data
have claimed that theory (ie, generalisable models about how the
world works) is obsolete. In fact, subject-area knowledge remains
necessary even when dealing with large data sets. Third, the risk
of spurious correlations—associations that are statistically robust
but happen only by chance—increases with more data. Although
there are new statistical techniques to identify and banish
spurious correlations, such as running many tests against subsets
of the data, this will always be a problem.
There is some merit to the naysayers' case, in other words. But
these criticisms do not mean that big-data analysis has no merit
whatsoever. Even the Harvard researchers who decried big data
"hubris" admitted in Science that melding Google Flu Trends
analysis with CDC's data improved the overall forecast—showing
that big data can in fact be a useful tool. And research published
in PLOS Computational Biology on April 17th shows it is possible
to estimate the prevalence of the flu based on visits to Wikipedia
articles related to the illness. Behind the big data backlash is the
classic hype cycle, in which a technology's early proponents make
overly grandiose claims, people sling arrows when those
promises fall flat, but the technology eventually transforms the
world, though not necessarily in ways the pundits expected. It
happened with the web, and television, radio, motion pictures
and the telegraph before it. Now it is simply big data's turn to
face the grumblers.
(From http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist explains/201
4/04/economist-explains-10)
The phrase “lots of data to chew on” in Text II makes use of figurative language and shares some common characteristics with:
The word “so” in “perhaps more so than the words and signals” is used to refer to something already stated in Text I. In this context, it refers to:
Read the text and answer question.
The underlined word in line 1 can be replaced by only one of the words below. Choose the right alternative.
Read the dialogue and mark the right expression to complete it correctly.
A: _____________ have you been working as a sergeant?
B: For about 2 years.
Read the article and answer question.
Choose the correct alternative to complete the article (line 1).
Read the cartoon and answer question.
In the cartoon, “hovering” is
The sentence “If young people don’t control the hours they spend on-line, they won’t stay out of trouble.” can be correctly replaced by:
Paragraph 2 indicates that aircraft manufacturers would be wise to expect
The expression " that’s no small thing" in Paragraph 3, last line could be replaced by
It is forbidden to smoke inside this building.
When asking a question in English, it is CORRECT to say:
Choose the INCORRECT option when talking about descriptive writing.
When talking about the parts of a text, it is INCORRECT to say that:
