The text has eleven paragraphs, A - F.
Which paragraph contains the following information?
Only humans allowed
A. On the internet, goes the old joke, nobody knows you’re a dog. This is untrue, of course. There are many situations where internet users are required to prove that they are human-not because they might be dogs, but because they might be nefarious pieces of software trying to gain access to things. That is why, when you try to post a message on a blog, sign up with a new website or make a purchase online, you will often be asked to examine an image of mangled text and type the letters into a box. Because humans are much better at pattern recognition than software, these online puzzles-called CAPTCHAs-can help prevent spammers from using software to automate the creation of large numbers of bogus e-mail accounts, for example.
B. Unlike a user login, which proves a specific identity, CAPTCHAs merely show that “there’s really a human on the other end”, says Luis von Ahn, a computer scientist at Carnegie Mellon University and one of the people responsible for the ubiquity of these puzzles. Together with Manuel Blum, Nicholas J. Hopper and John Langford, Dr von Ahn coined the term CAPTCHA (which stands for “completely automated public Turing test to tell computers and humans apart”) in a paper published in 2000.
C. But how secure are CAPTCHAs? Spammers stepped up their efforts to automate the solving of CAPTCHAs last year, and in recent months a series of cracks have prompted both Microsoft and Google to tweak the CAPTCHA systems that protect their web-based mail services. “We modify our CAPTCHAs when we detect new abuse trends,” says Macduff Hughes, engineering director at Google. Jeff Yan, a computer scientist at Newcastle University, is one of many researchers interested in cracking CAPTCHAs. Since the bad guys are already doing it, he told a spam-fighting conference in Amsterdam in June, the good guys should do it too, in order to develop more secure designs.
D. That CAPTCHAs work at all illuminates a failing in artificial-intelligence research, says Henry Baird, a computer scientist at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania and an expert in the design of text-recognition systems. Reading mangled text is an everyday skill for most people, yet machines still find it difficult.
E. The human ability to recognise text as it becomes more and more distorted is remarkably resilient, says Gordon Legge at the University of Minnesota. He is a researcher in the field of psychophysics-the study of the perception of stimuli. But there is a limit. Just try reading small text in poor light, or flicking through an early issue of Wired. “You hit a point quite close to your acuity limit and suddenly your performance crashes,” says Dr Legge. This means designers of CAPTCHAs cannot simply increase the amount of distortion to foil attackers. Instead they must mangle text in new ways when attackers figure out how to cope with existing distortions.
F. Mr Hughes, along with many others in the field, thinks the lifespan of text-based CAPTCHAs is limited. Dr von Ahn thinks it will be possible for software to break text CAPTCHAs most of the time within five years. A new way to verify that internet users are indeed human will then be needed. But if CAPTCHAs are broken it might not be a bad thing, because it would signal a breakthrough in machine vision that would, for example, make automated book-scanners far more accurate.
| A | B | C | D | E | F | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Why developers need to copy spammers | ||||||
| 2 | When the term ‘CAPTCHA’ first appeared | ||||||
| 3 | Reasons why CAPTCHAs are required | ||||||
| 4 | Why simply changing the text shape more doesn’t work | ||||||
| 5 | An upside to CAPTCHAs failing |
AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.
Question Focus: Causation logic - developers copy attackers to improve security
Why this is correct: The answer is Paragraph C. It explains that researchers should crack CAPTCHAs themselves because attackers are already doing it, so developers can build more secure designs.
Passage Reference: Jeff Yan, a computer scientist at Newcastle University, is one of many researchers interested in cracking CAPTCHAs. Since the bad guys are already doing it, he told a spam-fighting conference in Amsterdam in June, the good guys should do it too, in order to develop more secure designs. D.
Common Mistake: Paragraph F is tempting because it talks about the future of CAPTCHAs, but it does not explain why developers need to copy spammers. This is a Context shift trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'the good guys should do it too' = Statement: 'developers need to copy spammers'
Tips: Look for cause and purpose language like 'in order to' to answer 'why' questions.
Key Vocabulary:
- crack = break
- secure = safe
Question Focus: Time reference - first appearance of a term
Passage Reference: Together with Manuel Blum, Nicholas J. Hopper and John Langford, Dr von Ahn coined the term CAPTCHA (which stands for 'completely automated public Turing test to tell computers and humans apart') in a paper published in 2000. C.
Why this is correct: The answer is Paragraph B. It clearly states when the term was coined and gives the exact year 2000.
Common Mistake: Paragraph A mentions CAPTCHAs in general, so students pick it by topic. But it does not say when the term first appeared. This is a Wrong section trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'coined the term CAPTCHA' = Statement: 'when the term CAPTCHA first appeared'
Tips: For 'when' questions, scan for dates and phrases like 'first', 'coined', or 'published'.
Key Vocabulary:
- coin (a term) = create a new word
- published = officially released
Question Focus: Explanation of purpose - why something is needed
Passage Reference: There are many situations where internet users are required to prove that they are human-not because they might be dogs, but because they might be nefarious pieces of software trying to gain access to things. That is why, when you try to post a message on a blog, sign up with a new website or make a purchase online, you will often be asked to examine an image of mangled text and type the letters into a box. Because humans are much better at pattern recognition than software, these online puzzles-called CAPTCHAs-can help prevent spammers from using software to automate the creation of large numbers of bogus e-mail accounts, for example. B.
Why this is correct: The answer is Paragraph A. It explains that CAPTCHAs are needed to prove users are human and to stop spammers using software.
Common Mistake: Paragraph C talks about attacks on CAPTCHAs, not why they exist. Choosing it is a Context shift trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'prevent spammers from using software' = Statement: 'reasons why CAPTCHAs are required'
Tips: Questions asking for 'reasons' are usually answered in introductory paragraphs.
Key Vocabulary:
- bogus = fake
- automate = do by machine
Question Focus: Limitation explanation - why a simple solution fails
Passage Reference: But there is a limit. Just try reading small text in poor light, or flicking through an early issue of Wired. 'You hit a point quite close to your acuity limit and suddenly your performance crashes,' says Dr Legge. This means designers of CAPTCHAs cannot simply increase the amount of distortion to foil attackers. Instead they must mangle text in new ways when attackers figure out how to cope with existing distortions. F.
Why this is correct: The answer is Paragraph E. It explains that humans have limits, so making text more distorted will also stop humans, not just attackers.
Common Mistake: Paragraph D mentions machines struggling with text, but it does not explain why increasing distortion fails. This is a Partial truth trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'cannot simply increase the amount of distortion' = Statement: 'changing the text shape more doesn't work'
Tips: When you see 'why something does not work', scan for limits or problems described.
Key Vocabulary:
- distortion = change in shape
- acuity = sharpness of vision
Question Focus: Positive consequence - benefit of failure
Passage Reference: But if CAPTCHAs are broken it might not be a bad thing, because it would signal a breakthrough in machine vision that would, for example, make automated book-scanners far more accurate.
Why this is correct: The answer is Paragraph F. It says that CAPTCHAs failing could be a good thing because it would show progress in machine vision.
Common Mistake: Paragraph C focuses on security problems, not benefits. Picking it is a Reverse meaning trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'it might not be a bad thing' = Statement: 'an upside to CAPTCHAs failing'
Tips: Words like 'benefit', 'upside', or 'not a bad thing' signal a positive outcome.
Key Vocabulary:
- upside = benefit
- breakthrough = major progress
General Tips:
- Matching Features questions can jump around the passage - do not expect answers in order.
- Scan paragraph by paragraph and match the main idea, not just the topic word.
- Look for clear signals like dates, reasons, limits, or opinions to match statements.
- Paragraph labels A-F are helpful - always check the whole paragraph, not one sentence.
The rest of this explanation is for members. Sign in free to read why the other options are wrong, key words and tips.
Sign in to read the full explanation