Word of the Day Writing Competition

    Days are getting colder, and everyone is slowly backing to the warm comfort of their homes. It's the best opportunity to make good use of the quietness and peace of the season by taking pen and paper(or a computer) out to write.

OxfordWords of Oxford University Press(OUP) is calling all aspiring(有抱负的) authors out there to take part in our writing competition. What we're looking for are imaginative(富有想象力的) short stories—not more than 500 words—that include every Word of the Day (WOTD) from November.

    Each entry will be carefully considered by the OxfordWords team before deciding on a winner. The best storyteller will be given a year's fee to OxfordDictionaries.com, as well as ￡50 worth of OUP books, and have his or her piece published on that website.

    Before you get started, please make sure you're read our terms and conditions. Entries can be submitted(递交) through the entry form, or posted into the comment section. Closing date for the competition is 5th January 2015.

    And finally, for inspiration, have a look at the charming short story that gives us the idea for this competition, written by a fellow Oxford Dictionaries team member, and including all thirty one Words of the Day from October.

    Find out more about our Word of the Day service and sign up to receive the words via email, or on Facebook, Google, and Twitter.

根据短文内容，选择最佳答案，并将选定答案的字母标号填在题前括号内。

    After years of heated debate, gray wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park. Fourteen wolves were caught in Canada and transported to the park. By last year, the Yellowstone wolf population had grown to more than 170 wolves.

    Gray wolves once were seen here and there in the Yellowstone area and much of the continental United States, but they were gradually displaced by human development. By the 1920s, wolves had practically disappeared from the Yellowstone area. They went farther north into the deep forests of Canada, where there were fewer humans around.

    The disappearance of the wolves had many unexpected results. Deer and elk populations — major food sources (来源) for the wolf – grew rapidly. These animals consumed large amounts of vegetation (植被), which reduced plant diversity in the park. In the absence of wolves, coyote populations also grew quickly. The coyotes killed a large percentage of the park's red foxes, and completely drove away the park's beavers.

    As early as 1966, biologists asked the government to consider reintroducing wolves to Yellowstone Park. They hoped that wolves would be able to control the elk and coyote problems. Many farmers opposed the plan because they feared that wolves would kill their farm animals or pets.

    The government spent nearly 30 years coming up with a plan to reintroduce the wolvers. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service carefully monitors and manages the wolf packs in Yellowstone. Today, the debate continues over how well the gray wolf is fitting in at Yellowstone .Elk, deer, and coyote populations are down, while beavers and red fores have made a comeback. The Yellowstone wolf project has been a valuable experiment to help biologists decide whether to reintroduce wolves to other parts of the country as well.

    Crown shyness (树冠羞避) is a mysterious natural phenomenon in which the crowns of some tree species do not touch each other, but get separated by a gap clearly seen from ground level. The effect usually occurs between trees of the same species, but has also been observed between trees of different species.

    There are many theories going around, most of which make sense, but no one has been able to prove without the shadow of a doubt why some trees avoid touching each other.

    In his 1955 book Growth Habits of the Eucalypts, Australian forester M. R. Jacobs writes that the growing tips of the trees are sensitive to abrasion (擦伤), which results in crown shyness phenomenon. This theory was also supported by Dr. Miguel Franco. Some experiments have shown that if trees displaying crown shyness are artificially prevented from swaying (摇摆)in the wind and touching each other, they gradually fill up the gaps between them.

    But while the above theory is arguably the most widespread, it's certainly not the only one. Some scientists have suggested that crown shyness is a mechanism to stop the spreading of leaf-eating insects. The gaps mean pests wouldn't be able to reach other trees, so they are the tree's natural defense method.

    One Malaysian scholar studied many trees, but found no traces of abrasions, despite their clear crown shyness. Instead, he suggests that the growing tips of the trees were sensitive to light levels and stopped growing when they got too close to other trees. Plants are able to sense how close they are to other plants and in order to get more light, they give off some chemical to stop other trees from growing too close.

    Whatever the reason, one thing is for sure, plants are more intelligent than people.

    What's more exciting than having a fresh hot pizza delivered to your door?  How about having it brought to you by a robot?  Thanks to Domino's Robotic Unit or DRU, that just became a reality! On March 8, the three-foot tall robot delivered its first pizza to some lucky residents in Brisbane, Australia.

    The fully autonomous DRU is the result of cooperation between Domino's Pizza Australia and Marathon Robotics. The 450-pound machine that travels at a maximum speed of 12. 4 miles an hour can traverse a distance of up to 12 miles and back, before requiring to recharge the battery. LIDAR, a laser-based sensor technology similar to the one used in self-driving cars, enables DRU to detect and avoid obstacles, while traditional sensors, much like those used in vacuum robots ensure its path is safe as it heads to its destination.

    The robot can fit up to ten pizzas and even has a separate cold area to accommodate drink orders. To access their food, customers have to enter the unique code provided for them by the company. This not only ensures that they pick up the right pizza, but also prevents the pies from getting stolen.

    Scientists expect additional DRU's to be ready for service in their various Queensland locations within the next six months. But don't expect these super cute robots to replace humans anytime soon. According to Domino's the DRU still needs extensive testing, which the company believes could take up to two years.

    And then there is also the issue of regulations. The public use of autonomous vehicles is still banned in most countries. But Don Meij, the CEO and Managing Director of Domino's Pizza Australia New Zealand Ltd, is not worried. He is“confident that one day DRU will become an integral part of the Domino's family. ”

When I teach research methods, a major focus is peer review. As a process, peer review evaluates academic papers for their quality, integrity and impact on a field, largely shaping what scientists accept as "knowledge"- By instinct, any academic follows up a new idea with the question, "Was that peer reviewed?"

Although I believe in the importance of peer review and I help do peer reviews for several academic journals-I know how vulnerable the process can be. 

I had my first encounter with peer review during my first year as a Ph. D student. One day, my adviser handed me an essay and told me to have my -written review back to him in a week. But at the time, I certainly was not a "peer"--I was too new in my field. Manipulated data （不实的数据） or substandard methods could easily have gone undetected. Knowledge is not self-evident. Only experts would be able to notice them, and even then, experts do not always agree on what they notice. 

Let's say in my life I only see white swans. Maybe I write an essay, concluding that all swans are white. And a "peer" says, "Wait a minute, I've seen black swans. "I would have to refine my knowledge. 

The peer plays a key role evaluating observations with the overall goal of advancing knowledge. For example, if the above story were reversed, and peer reviewers who all believed that all swans were white came across the first study observing a black swan, the study would receive a lot of attention. 

So why was a first-year graduate student getting to stand in for an expert? Why would my review count the same as an expert's review? One answer: The process relies almost entirely on unpaid labor. 

Despite the fact that peers are professionals, peer review is not a profession. As a result, the same over-worked scholars often receive masses of the peer review requests. Besides the labor inequity, a small pool of experts can lead to a narrowed process of what is publishable or what counts as knowledge, directly threatening diversity of perspectives and scholars. Without a large enough reviewer pool, the process can easily fall victim to biases, arising from a small community recognizing each other's work and compromising conflicts of interest. 

Despite these challenges. I still tell my students that peer review offers the best method for evaluating studies aird advancing knowledge. As a process, peer review theoretically works. The question is whether the issues with peer review can be addressed by professionalizing the field. 

The concept of a space elevator, while once confined to the realm of science fiction, is gaining traction as a potential reality within the next few decades. This belief is not unfounded, but rather stems from the ongoing advancements in aerospace engineering and materials science.

As an aerospace engineer and a physics professor, the allure of a space elevator—a colossal cable extending from Earth's surface into space, facilitating the transportation of both people and cargo—remains a compelling subject of study. In recent years, innovative approaches to design and engineering have surfaced, providing new insights into the feasibility and functionality of space elevators.

The rationale for constructing a space elevator is multifaceted. Firstly, it presents a significant opportunity for energy and cost efficiency, offering a more practical alternative to traditional rocket-based space travel. 

The economic and environmental benefits are substantial, as the space elevator would reduce the need for fuel-intensive rocket launches.

Secondly, the space elevator would revolutionize accessibility to space. The term "space mission" could evolve into "transit," reflecting the routine and weather-independent nature of space travel. This shift would not only make space travel safer for astronauts, mitigating the risks associated with rocket launches, but also open up the cosmos to a broader range of individuals and purposes.

Moreover, the space elevator acts as a gateway to the solar system. By releasing a payload at different points along the elevator, one could achieve orbit around Earth or the sun, depending on the release point, all without the need for propulsion.

While it may seem that I am an advocate for the space elevator, my true passion lies in the study of its mechanics and the potential it holds for our future. In a world facing numerous challenges, the pursuit of such ambitious projects allows us to dream of a time when humanity becomes responsible stewards of our planet, reaching for the stars while preserving our home.