2. 考研
  3. Conventional traffic engineering assumes that given no increase in vehicles, more roads mean less congestion. So when planners i

Conventional traffic engineering assumes that given no increase in vehicles, more roads mean less congestion. So when planners i

admin2015-02-12  5
问题     Conventional traffic engineering assumes that given no increase in vehicles, more roads mean less congestion. So when planners in Seoul tore down a six-lane highway a few years ago and replaced it with a five-mile-long park, many transportation professionals were surprised to learn that the city’s traffic flow had actually improved, instead of worsening. It was like an inverse of Braess’s paradox.
    Mathematician Dietrich Braess of Ruhr University Bochum in Germany states that in a network in which all the moving entities rationally seek the most efficient route, adding extra capacity can actually reduce the network’s overall efficiency. The Seoul project inverts this dynamic: closing a highway—that is, reducing network capacity—improves the system’s effectiveness.
    Although Braess’s paradox was first identified in the 1960s and is rooted in 1920s economic theory, the concept never gained enough attention in the automobile-oriented U.S. But in the 21st century, economic and environmental problems are bringing new scrutiny to the idea that limiting spaces for cars may move more people more efficiently. A key to this counterintuitive approach to traffic design lies in manipulating the inherent self-interest of all drivers.
    A case in point is "The Price of Anarchy in Transportation Networks," published last September in Physical Review Letters by Michael Gastner, a computer scientist at the Santa Fe Institute, and his colleagues. Using hypothetical and real-world road networks, they explain that drivers seeking the shortest route to a given destination eventually reach what is known as the Nash equilibrium, in which no single driver can do any better by changing his or her strategy unilaterally. The problem is that the Nash equilibrium is less efficient than the equilibrium reached when drivers act unselfishly—that is, when they coordinate their movements to benefit the entire group.
    The "price of anarchy" is a measure of the inefficiency caused by selfish drivers. Analyzing a commute from Harvard Square to Boston Common, the researchers found that the price can be high—selfish drivers typically waste 30 percent more time than they would under "socially optimal" conditions.
    The solution hinges on Braess’s paradox, Gastner says. "Selfish drivers can be led to a better solution if you remove some of the network links, in part because closing roads makes it more difficult for individual drivers to choose the best(and most selfish)route."
It can be inferred from Paragraph 1 that______.
选项 A、traditional traffic engineering believes more roads lead to less traffic jams
B、Seoul replaced a park with a highway to raise road capacity
C、all transportation experts felt surprised facing the case of Seoul
D、Seoul’s case is not exactly like the Braess’s paradox
答案D
解析 属信息归纳题。选项A犯了断章取义的错误，对于选项A的说法，文章第一句有一个附加条件：汽车数量不增多，因此选项A错误。选项B犯了偷梁换柱的错误，将原文的replace的两个对象顺序调换，因此选项B错误。选项C犯了夸大其词的错误，文章提到许多专家对于首尔的例子感到吃惊，而非所有都是如此，故错误。第一段最后一句讲到首尔的案例是逆向的柏拉斯悖论，而非一模一样，故选项D正确。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.kaotiyun.com/show/ts74777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)