高考文章分析（10)
Vocabulary Learning:
1.initial最初的reading[ɪ'nɪʃəl]
2.follow-up investigation后续的调查
3.replicate复制['replɪkeɪt]
off the wall
4.properly合适地，恰当地
5.arrive at firm conclusions得到有力的结论
6.animal model动物模型
7.reproduce promising drug targets完成有前途的药物指标生产
8.academic 学术机构
9.laboratory实验室stables [ləˈbɒrətrɪ]
10.calls for要求
11.attempt to尝试做
12.peer-reviewed studies同行评审研究
13.valid有效的
14.take a concerted effort齐心协力
15.stakeholder利益相关者 [ˈsteɪkhəʊldə(r)]
16.fix this problem解决这个问题
17.reliable可靠的
18.efficient效率高的
19.collaborative合作的 [kə'læbəretɪv]
20.registration注册，登记 [redʒɪ'streɪʃ(ə)n]
21.statistical tool数据工具
22.along with和
23.replicate experiment复制实验
24.replicate their result复制结果
25.look down on轻视，看不起
26.waste resource浪费资源
27.fal lead错误的引导
28.obstacle障碍['ɒbstək(ə)l]
29.the inaccessibility of data数据的可用性
30.extremely difficult非常困难
31.Investigator调查者
32.computer crash电脑死机
33.online links malfunction网络连接失灵
34.be confronted about面对
35.journals日报，杂志['dʒɜːn(ə)l]
36.adopt measure采取措施
37.checklists清单
38.funding agency基金机构
39.outline their plan概述他们的计划
歌舞青春3在线观看40.receive a government grant得到政府授权
41.revi the prent incentive(激励) structure修改目前的激励结构 [ɪn'ntɪv]
42.put into u投入使用
43.be devoted to致力于
44.mankind人类
45.target population目标人群
46.unoriginal非原先的，非原创的教堂唱诗班
47.nonreplicable findings不可复制的发现
48.highlight强调，突出
长难句分析：
The growing recognition（ that something has gone wrong in the laboratory） has led to calls for,
主语 同位语 谓语 宾语
（as one might guess）, more rearch on rearch — attempts to find rules to ensure t
hat experience的用法
插入语
peer-reviewed studies are,（ in fact）, valid.
插入语
句子主干：The growing recognition has led to calls for more rearch on rearch
Reproducing other scientists’ analys or replicating their results 化妆培训学校has（ too often in the past ）been
主语 谓语（has been looked down on)
looked down on (with a kind of “me-too” derision嘲笑) that would waste resources — but often they may help avoid fal leads( that would have been even more wasteful).
定语修饰leads
(1)Earlier this year a ries of papers in The Lancet reported that 85 percent of the $265 billion spent each year on medical rearch is wasted becau too often absolutely nothing happens after initial results of a study are published. No follow-up investigations to replicate(复制) or expand on a discovery. No one us the findings to build new technologies.
(2)The problem is not just what happens after publication — scientists often have trouble choosing the right questions and properly designing studies to answer them. Too many studies test too few subjects to arrive at firm conclusions. Rearchers publish reports on hundreds of treatments for dias that work in sotonganimal models but not in humans. Drug companies find themlves unable to reproduce promising drug targets published by the best academic institutions. The growing recognition that something has gone wrong in the 打电话 英文laboratory has led to calls for, as one might guess, more rearch on rearch — attempts to find rules to ensure that peer-reviewed studies are, in fact, valid.
(3)It will take a concerted effort by scientists and other stakeholders to fix this problem. W
e can do so by exploring ways to make scientific investigation more reliable and efficient. The may include collaborative team science, study registration, stronger study designs and statistical tools, and better peer review, 51voaalong with making scientific data widely available so that others can replicate experiments, therefore building trust in the conclusions of tho studies.
(4)Reproducing other scientists’ analys or replicating their results has too often in the past been looked down on with a kind of “me-too” derision(嘲笑) that would waste resources — but often they may help avoid fal leads that would have been even more wasteful. Perhaps the biggest obstacle to replication is the inaccessibility of data and results necessary to rerun the analys that went into the original experiments. Searching for such information can be extremely difficult. Investigators die, move and change jobs; computers crash; online links malfunction. Data are sometimes lost — even, as one rearcher claimed when confronted about spurious(伪造的) results, eaten by termites(白蚁).
(5)There has definitely been some recent progress. An increasing number of journals, including Nature and Science, have adopted measures such as checklists for study design and reporting while improving statistical review and encouraging access to data. Several funding agencies, meanwhile, have asked that rearchers outline their plans for sharing data before they can receive a government grant.
(6)But it will take much more to achieve a lasting culture change. Investigators should be rewarded for performing good science rather than just getting statistically significant (“positive”) but nonreplicable results. Revising the prent incentive(激励) structure may require changes on the part of journals, funders, universities and other rearch institutions.
Reparagraph the whole passage and summarize each paragraph
