Questões: Ensino Einstein — com gabarito

Leia o texto a seguir, que é o trecho inicial de um artigo publicado na internet.

O texto

    In my research recently published in an open access journal, I used a popular language model, GPT-4 by OpenAI, to create simple summaries of scientific papers. These summaries generated by artificial intelligence (AI) used simpler language and more common words, like “job” instead of “occupation”, than summaries written by the researchers who had done the work.

    In one experiment, I found that readers of the AI-generated summaries had a better understanding of the science than readers of the human-written summaries. A second experiment investigated what effects the simpler summaries might have on people’s perceptions of the scientists who performed the research. In this experiment, participants rated the scientists whose work was described in the simpler texts as more credible than the scientists whose work was described in the more complex texts.

    Have you ever read about a scientific discovery and felt like it was written in a foreign language? New scientific information is probably hard to understand — especially if you try to read a science article in a research journal. In an era where understanding science is crucial for informed decision--making, the abilities to comprehend and communicate complex ideas are more important than ever. Trust in science has been declining for years, and one contributing factor may be the challenge of understanding scientific jargon.

    As AI continues to evolve, its role in science communication may expand, especially if using generative AI becomes more commonplace. Simple science descriptions are preferable to and more beneficial than complex ones, and AI tools can help. But scientists could also achieve the same goals by working harder to minimize jargon and communicate clearly — no AI necessary.

(David Markowitz. https://theconversation.com, 30.10.2024. Adaptado.)

    In my research recently published in an open access journal, I used a popular language model, GPT-4 by OpenAI, to create simple summaries of scientific papers. These summaries generated by artificial intelligence (AI) used simpler language and more common words, like “job” instead of “occupation”, than summaries written by the researchers who had done the work.

    In one experiment, I found that readers of the AI-generated summaries had a better understanding of the science than readers of the human-written summaries. A second experiment investigated what effects the simpler summaries might have on people’s perceptions of the scientists who performed the research. In this experiment, participants rated the scientists whose work was described in the simpler texts as more credible than the scientists whose work was described in the more complex texts.

    Have you ever read about a scientific discovery and felt like it was written in a foreign language? New scientific information is probably hard to understand — especially if you try to read a science article in a research journal. In an era where understanding science is crucial for informed decision--making, the abilities to comprehend and communicate complex ideas are more important than ever. Trust in science has been declining for years, and one contributing factor may be the challenge of understanding scientific jargon.

    As AI continues to evolve, its role in science communication may expand, especially if using generative AI becomes more commonplace. Simple science descriptions are preferable to and more beneficial than complex ones, and AI tools can help. But scientists could also achieve the same goals by working harder to minimize jargon and communicate clearly — no AI necessary.

(David Markowitz. https://theconversation.com, 30.10.2024. Adaptado.)

    In my research recently published in an open access journal, I used a popular language model, GPT-4 by OpenAI, to create simple summaries of scientific papers. These summaries generated by artificial intelligence (AI) used simpler language and more common words, like “job” instead of “occupation”, than summaries written by the researchers who had done the work.

    In one experiment, I found that readers of the AI-generated summaries had a better understanding of the science than readers of the human-written summaries. A second experiment investigated what effects the simpler summaries might have on people’s perceptions of the scientists who performed the research. In this experiment, participants rated the scientists whose work was described in the simpler texts as more credible than the scientists whose work was described in the more complex texts.

    Have you ever read about a scientific discovery and felt like it was written in a foreign language? New scientific information is probably hard to understand — especially if you try to read a science article in a research journal. In an era where understanding science is crucial for informed decision--making, the abilities to comprehend and communicate complex ideas are more important than ever. Trust in science has been declining for years, and one contributing factor may be the challenge of understanding scientific jargon.

    As AI continues to evolve, its role in science communication may expand, especially if using generative AI becomes more commonplace. Simple science descriptions are preferable to and more beneficial than complex ones, and AI tools can help. But scientists could also achieve the same goals by working harder to minimize jargon and communicate clearly — no AI necessary.

(David Markowitz. https://theconversation.com, 30.10.2024. Adaptado.)

    In my research recently published in an open access journal, I used a popular language model, GPT-4 by OpenAI, to create simple summaries of scientific papers. These summaries generated by artificial intelligence (AI) used simpler language and more common words, like “job” instead of “occupation”, than summaries written by the researchers who had done the work.

    In one experiment, I found that readers of the AI-generated summaries had a better understanding of the science than readers of the human-written summaries. A second experiment investigated what effects the simpler summaries might have on people’s perceptions of the scientists who performed the research. In this experiment, participants rated the scientists whose work was described in the simpler texts as more credible than the scientists whose work was described in the more complex texts.

    Have you ever read about a scientific discovery and felt like it was written in a foreign language? New scientific information is probably hard to understand — especially if you try to read a science article in a research journal. In an era where understanding science is crucial for informed decision--making, the abilities to comprehend and communicate complex ideas are more important than ever. Trust in science has been declining for years, and one contributing factor may be the challenge of understanding scientific jargon.

    As AI continues to evolve, its role in science communication may expand, especially if using generative AI becomes more commonplace. Simple science descriptions are preferable to and more beneficial than complex ones, and AI tools can help. But scientists could also achieve the same goals by working harder to minimize jargon and communicate clearly — no AI necessary.

(David Markowitz. https://theconversation.com, 30.10.2024. Adaptado.)

Leia o soneto de Luís de Camões para responder à questões.

Quem diz que Amor é falso ou enganoso,

ligeiro, ingrato, vão, desconhecido,

sem falta1 lhe terá bem merecido

que lhe seja cruel ou rigoroso.

Amor é brando2, é doce e é piadoso3.

Quem o contrário diz não seja crido;

seja por cego e apaixonado tido,

e aos homens, e inda4 aos deuses, odioso.

Se males faz Amor, em mim se veem;

em mim mostrando todo o seu rigor,

ao mundo quis mostrar quanto podia.

Mas todas suas iras são de amor;

todos estes seus males são um bem,

que eu por todo outro bem não trocaria.

(Luís de Camões. Sonetos: antologia comentada, 2012.)

¹ sem falta: sem dúvida.

² brando: manso, meigo.

³ piadoso: piedoso.

⁴ inda: ainda.

Leia o soneto de Luís de Camões para responder à questões.

Quem diz que Amor é falso ou enganoso,

ligeiro, ingrato, vão, desconhecido,

sem falta1 lhe terá bem merecido

que lhe seja cruel ou rigoroso.

Amor é brando2, é doce e é piadoso3.

Quem o contrário diz não seja crido;

seja por cego e apaixonado tido,

e aos homens, e inda4 aos deuses, odioso.

Se males faz Amor, em mim se veem;

em mim mostrando todo o seu rigor,

ao mundo quis mostrar quanto podia.

Mas todas suas iras são de amor;

todos estes seus males são um bem,

que eu por todo outro bem não trocaria.

(Luís de Camões. Sonetos: antologia comentada, 2012.)

¹ sem falta: sem dúvida.

² brando: manso, meigo.

³ piadoso: piedoso.

⁴ inda: ainda.

Leia o trecho do romance Os ratos, de Dyonelio Machado, para responder às questões.

1    Havia momentos a conversa tinha esfriado. Alcides, à sua frente, olha, longe, a rua. Naziazeno acompanha, meio furtivamente, os gestos do Carvalho, que se prepara para sair. Já tirou o porte-monnaie1 do bolso de trás das calças, torcendo--se um pouco; tornou a colocá-lo onde estava, depois de o examinar com o olho bem metido dentro dele, e puxou uma cédula dum dos bolsos do lado da calça, torcendo-se ainda mais. O garçom, a seu lado, sereno, mas com um certo grau de impaciência latente, faz rapidamente o troco, mal lhe cai o dinheiro nas mãos. Vai tirando as moedas de vários bolsos e depondo-as no mármore da mesa. Carvalho, a cabeça baixa, confere, separando-as com um dedo, como uma cozinheira “escolhendo” feijão na tábua da mesa. Destaca uma moedinha, que põe de parte, com dedo moroso. Recolhe o resto. Pega da bengala e dos jornais que colocara numa cadeira ao lado e levanta-se, relanceando um olhar pelo café, olhar que vem “ferir” o rosto de Naziazeno, que estremece, como se um jato de holofote subitamente o iluminasse. Desvia precipitadamente a cara; põe-se a olhar para o Alcides. A figura porém do Carvalho avança pouco a pouco na franja do seu campo visual; é apenas um vulto negro e alto, avançando cadenciadamente. Seus passos soam já... Naziazeno mantém o pescoço duro... Qualquer relaxamento de músculos põe-no cara a cara com o outro... Está começando a sentir um calor no rosto... Os passos são mais sonoros... Alcides volta-se lentamente para trás, na direção deles...

 2   — Bom dia.

3    — Bom dia!

4   — Bom dia, Carvalho!...

5    ... E os passos agora cada vez ressoam menos... menos... extinguem-se...

6    A onda de calor foge progressivamente do seu rosto. Naziazeno tem a impressão de haver mergulhado a face na água fria. Acha-se um pouco trêmulo.

7    Alcides ali à sua frente, ele não se sente tão só. A cara deslavada e ausente do outro bem podia passar por ingênua. Ele curvava um pouco o tórax para diante, olhava em frente, as feições iguais, como de quem dorme. Quando tirava o olhar dum foco para colocá-lo num outro, fechava habitual mente os olhos, como quem faz um “entreato” entre as duas visadas. Isto repetido várias vezes dava-lhe um ar de sono, que o tornava mais ausente e ingênuo.

(Os ratos, 2022.)

1 porte-monnaie: porta-moedas.

“O garçom, a seu lado, sereno, mas com um certo grau de impaciência latente, faz rapidamente o troco, mal lhe cai o dinheiro nas mãos.” (1o parágrafo)

Em relação à oração que a precede, a oração sublinhada expressa uma circunstância de

Examine a tirinha de Rafa Figueiredo, publicada em 27.01.2023, para responder à questão.

Examine a tirinha de Rafa Figueiredo, publicada em 27.01.2023, para responder à questão.

Read the advertisement.

The advertisement uses text and the image of two women astronauts in spacesuits to suggest that both the bath oil “Skin-So-Soft” and the suit