영어 모의고사 (자동 편성)

Consider a large heap containing ten thousand grains of sand. Nearly everyone agrees that removing a single grain from such a heap ①leave another heap behind; surely one grain could never make the difference between a heap and a non-heap. Yet if this principle is applied repeatedly, grain by grain, the heap eventually shrinks to a single lonely grain, or even to no grains at all, and logic alone seems to ②force us to accept that this final result still counts as a heap. Something has clearly gone wrong along the way, since no reasonable person would ③call one grain of sand a heap, but pinpointing exactly which single removal transformed a heap into a non-heap seems ④impossible. The puzzle exposes a deep discomfort with vague terms like "heap," "tall," or "bald," concepts that seem to admit no sharp boundary yet are ⑤used confidently in everyday language.

A cluster of neurons smaller than a pea can now spontaneously ①organizing itself into layered structures that mimic, in miniature, the architecture of a developing human brain. Grown from stem cells coaxed to follow the same developmental cues that guide an embryo, these brain organoids have begun ②firing electrical signals in patterns that faintly resemble the activity recorded in an infant's brain. For researchers studying disorders such as autism or schizophrenia, this offers something long unavailable: a living model of human brain development that can be ③observed and manipulated directly, without ever touching an actual patient. Because organoids lack sensory organs, a body, or any connection to the outside world, most neuroscientists argue that the structures cannot generate anything ④resembling subjective experience, however brain-like their electrical activity may appear. Even so, the pace at which these organoids are growing more complex has convinced some ethicists that the field would benefit from ⑤establishing clear boundaries now, before the science outruns the conversation about what it means.

Many large companies now rely on artificial intelligence to screen job applications before a human ever sees them. These systems promise efficiency, scanning thousands of resumes in seconds and ranking candidates according to patterns drawn from previous hiring decisions. However, this reliance on historical data creates a troubling risk. If a company's past hiring favored a particular group, the algorithm may learn to treat that pattern as a marker of success and quietly reproduce it, even when no one intended discrimination. Unlike a human interviewer, the system offers no explanation for its choices, which means that _______________. Some researchers argue that fairness cannot be added afterward; it must be built into the system's design from the very beginning.

Two patients diagnosed with the same disease and prescribed the same medication can respond in strikingly different ways, one recovering quickly while the other experiences little benefit or even harmful side effects. Precision medicine starts from the observation that this variation often traces back to differences buried in each patient's genome, differences that determine how efficiently a body absorbs, breaks down, or responds to a given drug. _______________. This approach has proven especially valuable in cancer treatment, where tumors from two patients with the same diagnosis may carry entirely different genetic mutations that respond to entirely different drugs. Widespread adoption still faces real obstacles, since genetic sequencing remains expensive in many regions and few doctors have been trained to interpret the flood of genetic data such tests now produce.

The rejection of unfair offers in the ultimatum game raises an intriguing evolutionary question. (A) One explanation suggests that a willingness to punish unfairness, even at a personal cost, may have conferred long-term advantages within small communities where reputation and repeated interaction mattered greatly. (B) If punishing unfairness is costly in the short term, why would such a tendency have persisted across generations rather than being eliminated by more narrowly self-interested behavior? (C) An individual known to reject unfair offers discourages others from proposing unfair terms in future interactions, ultimately securing fairer treatment over the course of a lifetime.

A liver no longer has to sit inside a human body to be studied closely. (A) Unlike flat cultures grown on a plastic dish, which lose many of the cues that guide normal development, organoids let cells interact in three dimensions much as they would inside the body, yielding tissue that behaves in strikingly realistic ways. (B) This fidelity has made organoids invaluable for testing how a drug affects human tissue before any patient is exposed, and some laboratories have even grown organoids from a single patient's own cells, raising the possibility of trialing a treatment on a miniature copy of that patient's organ. (C) By coaxing stem cells to organize themselves within a nutrient-rich gel, scientists can now grow miniature three-dimensional structures called organoids, which reproduce much of the architecture and function of a real organ.

Sensors buried in the soil now report moisture levels in real time, and automated systems adjust irrigation without a farmer ever walking the rows. (A) Smaller family farms, however, often cannot afford the upfront cost of this equipment, and some worry that the gap between high-tech and traditional operations will only widen. (B) For large operations with the capital to invest, these tools have measurably increased yields while reducing water waste. (C) There is also a quieter cultural cost: generations of farming knowledge risk being replaced by dashboards and automated alerts that few young farmers are taught to question.

주어진 문장: Psychologists first documented this delay nearly a century ago, and it has since become one of the most frequently replicated findings in cognitive science. Anyone who has tried to name the ink color of a word like red printed in blue letters knows how surprisingly difficult the task can feel. ( ① ) This everyday struggle, known as the Stroop effect, deserves more attention than casual curiosity grants it, because it reveals something fundamental about how the mind allocates its limited resources. ( ② ) Reading a familiar word is an automatic process practiced so extensively since childhood that it proceeds almost involuntarily, whereas naming a color requires deliberate, controlled attention. ( ③ ) When these two processes point toward conflicting answers, the automatic pathway tends to intrude upon the controlled one, slowing responses and increasing errors. ( ④ ) Educators should not dismiss this delay as a trivial curiosity confined to laboratories, since the same competition between habit and intention underlies far more consequential situations, such as a driver's struggle to resist checking a phone despite knowing the danger. ( ⑤ ) Recognizing how automatic responses can hijack conscious intentions is essential for designing environments, from classrooms to highways, that support rather than undermine our efforts at self-control.

This is precisely because probability estimates, however precise, fail to address the emotional discomfort that uncertainty itself produces. Financial advisors frequently observe that detailed statistical evidence fails to ease anxious clients' urge to sell during a market downturn, even when the evidence is presented clearly and repeatedly. ( ① ) Clients may intellectually accept the statistics while still feeling a strong urge to sell immediately in order to escape the discomfort of continued uncertainty. ( ② ) Advisors who instead acknowledge the client's fear directly, validating it as a normal response before presenting the data, tend to achieve better outcomes. ( ③ ) This approach treats the emotional response as a legitimate factor to be addressed rather than an irrational obstacle to be argued away. ( ④ ) The most effective financial guidance, in other words, engages both the emotional and analytical dimensions of a decision simultaneously. ( ⑤ ) Ignoring either dimension, evidence suggests, leaves clients more likely to make impulsive decisions they later regret.

Journalists now face the burden of verifying footage that once would have been accepted as self-evident proof. A few years ago, spotting a manipulated video required a trained eye and specialized software. ( ① ) Today, freely available applications allow almost anyone to swap a face or fabricate a voice convincingly enough to fool casual viewers within minutes. ( ② ) This shift has quietly undermined one of the oldest assumptions in human communication: that seeing and hearing something is a reasonably reliable way to confirm it happened. ( ③ ) Perhaps more troubling than any single fake video is the broader effect on public trust, sometimes called the liar's dividend, in which genuine footage can be dismissed as fabricated simply because deepfakes exist. ( ④ ) In this environment, the mere possibility of manipulation can be almost as damaging as manipulation itself. ( ⑤ )