Artificial Intelligence (Al) is rapidly entering health care and serving major roles. These include automating routine tasks in medical practice and managing medical resources. As developers create Al systems to take on these tasks, several risks and challenges emerge.

The most obvious risk is that Al systems will sometimes be wrong. This can result in patient injury or other health-care problems An Al system possibly recommends the wrong drug for a patient or fails to notice a tumor on a radiological scan. Of course, many injuries occur due to medical error in the health care system today, even without the involvement of Al. Al errors potentially different for at least two reasons. First, patients and providers may react differently to injuries resulting from software than from human error. Second, if Al systems become widespread, an underlying problem in one Al system might result in injuries to thousands of patients.

Moreover, training Al systems requires large amount of data from sources. However, health data are often problematic. Data are typically fragmented across many different systems. Even aside from the variety just mentioned, patients typically see different providers and switch insurance companies. This would lead to data split in multiple systems and multiple formats.

Another set of risks arise around privacy. The requirement of large datasets creates incentives for developers to collect such data from many patients. Some patients may be concerned that this collection may violate their privacy. In fact, lawsuits have been filled based on data-sharing between large health care systems and Al developers.

The integration of Al into the health system will undoubtedly change the role of health care providers.
A hopeful vision is that providers will be enabled to provide more-personalized and better care, freed to spend more time interacting with patients as humans. A less hopeful vision would see providers struggling to weather monsoon of uninterpretable predictions and recommendations from competing algorithms In either case, medical education will need to prepare providers to evaluate and interpret the Al systems they will encounter in the evolving health care environment.

Adapted from https/www.brooking edu/
How are ideas in paragraph 4 and paragraph 5 in the passage related?

Artificial Intelligence (Al) is rapidly entering health care and serving major roles. These include automating routine tasks in medical practice and managing medical resources. As developers create Al systems to take on these tasks, several risks and challenges emerge.

The most obvious risk is that Al systems will sometimes be wrong. This can result in patient injury or other health-care problems An Al system possibly recommends the wrong drug for a patient or fails to notice a tumor on a radiological scan. Of course, many injuries occur due to medical error in the health care system today, even without the involvement of Al. Al errors potentially different for at least two reasons. First, patients and providers may react differently to injuries resulting from software than from human error. Second, if Al systems become widespread, an underlying problem in one Al system might result in injuries to thousands of patients.

Moreover, training Al systems requires large amount of data from sources. However, health data are often problematic. Data are typically fragmented across many different systems. Even aside from the variety just mentioned, patients typically see different providers and switch insurance companies. This would lead to data split in multiple systems and multiple formats.

Another set of risks arise around privacy. The requirement of large datasets creates incentives for developers to collect such data from many patients. Some patients may be concerned that this collection may violate their privacy. In fact, lawsuits have been filled based on data-sharing between large health care systems and Al developers.

The integration of Al into the health system will undoubtedly change the role of health care providers.
A hopeful vision is that providers will be enabled to provide more-personalized and better care, freed to spend more time interacting with patients as humans. A less hopeful vision would see providers struggling to weather monsoon of uninterpretable predictions and recommendations from competing algorithms In either case, medical education will need to prepare providers to evaluate and interpret the Al systems they will encounter in the evolving health care environment.

Adapted from https/www.brooking edu/
The author holds the assumption about Al developers that….

Researchers have debunked the myth that extreme sportsmen and women are adrenalin junkies with a death wish. According to Professor Brymer from Leeds Becket University, there had been a gross misunderstanding of what motivates people to take part in extreme sports. Many write it off as an activity for adrenalin junkies

His research has shown that people who engage in extreme sports are anything but irresponsible risk-takers with a death wish. They are highly trained individuals with a deep knowledge of themselves, the activity, and the environment. They usually do the activity to have a life-enhancing experience. The experience is very hard to describe in the same way that love is hard to describe. For example, Base jumpers talk about being able to see all the colours and nooks and crannies of the rock as they zoom past at 300km/h. Meanwhile, extreme climbers feel like they are floating and dancing with the rock.

Professor Schweitzer said understanding motivations for extreme sports was important to understand human. In fact, extreme sports participation facilitates more positive. psychological experiences and expresses human values. These include humility, harmony, creativity, spirituality, and a vital sense of self.
He added that extreme sports participants. found it hard to put their experiences into words. Thus, the research project had taken a new approach to understanding the data. His research team did not employ a theory-based approach which may make judgements that do not reflect the lived experience of extreme sports participants. Instead, they took a phenomenological approach. By doing so they were able to conceptualize such experiences. They could also investigate the choices to engage in activity which may lead to death. However, such experiences have been shown to be affirmative of life and the potential for transformation. Extreme sports have the potential to induce powerful states of consciousness and provide a further glimpse into what it means to be human.

Adapted from https://www.sciencedaily.com/
The paragraph preceding the passage most likely discusses…

Researchers have debunked the myth that extreme sportsmen and women are adrenalin junkies with a death wish. According to Professor Brymer from Leeds Becket University, there had been a gross misunderstanding of what motivates people to take part in extreme sports. Many write it off as an activity for adrenalin junkies

His research has shown that people who engage in extreme sports are anything but irresponsible risk-takers with a death wish. They are highly trained individuals with a deep knowledge of themselves, the activity, and the environment. They usually do the activity to have a life-enhancing experience. The experience is very hard to describe in the same way that love is hard to describe. For example, Base jumpers talk about being able to see all the colours and nooks and crannies of the rock as they zoom past at 300km/h. Meanwhile, extreme climbers feel like they are floating and dancing with the rock.

Professor Schweitzer said understanding motivations for extreme sports was important to understand human. In fact, extreme sports participation facilitates more positive. psychological experiences and expresses human values. These include humility, harmony, creativity, spirituality, and a vital sense of self.
He added that extreme sports participants. found it hard to put their experiences into words. Thus, the research project had taken a new approach to understanding the data. His research team did not employ a theory-based approach which may make judgements that do not reflect the lived experience of extreme sports participants. Instead, they took a phenomenological approach. By doing so they were able to conceptualize such experiences. They could also investigate the choices to engage in activity which may lead to death. However, such experiences have been shown to be affirmative of life and the potential for transformation. Extreme sports have the potential to induce powerful states of consciousness and provide a further glimpse into what it means to be human.

Adapted from https://www.sciencedaily.com/
The word ‘debunked in paragraph 1 in the passage is closest in meaning to…

Researchers have debunked the myth that extreme sportsmen and women are adrenalin junkies with a death wish. According to Professor Brymer from Leeds Becket University, there had been a gross misunderstanding of what motivates people to take part in extreme sports. Many write it off as an activity for adrenalin junkies

His research has shown that people who engage in extreme sports are anything but irresponsible risk-takers with a death wish. They are highly trained individuals with a deep knowledge of themselves, the activity, and the environment. They usually do the activity to have a life-enhancing experience. The experience is very hard to describe in the same way that love is hard to describe. For example, Base jumpers talk about being able to see all the colours and nooks and crannies of the rock as they zoom past at 300km/h. Meanwhile, extreme climbers feel like they are floating and dancing with the rock.

Professor Schweitzer said understanding motivations for extreme sports was important to understand human. In fact, extreme sports participation facilitates more positive. psychological experiences and expresses human values. These include humility, harmony, creativity, spirituality, and a vital sense of self.
He added that extreme sports participants. found it hard to put their experiences into words. Thus, the research project had taken a new approach to understanding the data. His research team did not employ a theory-based approach which may make judgements that do not reflect the lived experience of extreme sports participants. Instead, they took a phenomenological approach. By doing so they were able to conceptualize such experiences. They could also investigate the choices to engage in activity which may lead to death. However, such experiences have been shown to be affirmative of life and the potential for transformation. Extreme sports have the potential to induce powerful states of consciousness and provide a further glimpse into what it means to be human.

Adapted from https://www.sciencedaily.com/
From paragraph 1, the author of the passage is trying to convey that….

Researchers have debunked the myth that extreme sportsmen and women are adrenalin junkies with a death wish. According to Professor Brymer from Leeds Becket University, there had been a gross misunderstanding of what motivates people to take part in extreme sports. Many write it off as an activity for adrenalin junkies

His research has shown that people who engage in extreme sports are anything but irresponsible risk-takers with a death wish. They are highly trained individuals with a deep knowledge of themselves, the activity, and the environment. They usually do the activity to have a life-enhancing experience. The experience is very hard to describe in the same way that love is hard to describe. For example, Base jumpers talk about being able to see all the colours and nooks and crannies of the rock as they zoom past at 300km/h. Meanwhile, extreme climbers feel like they are floating and dancing with the rock.

Professor Schweitzer said understanding motivations for extreme sports was important to understand human. In fact, extreme sports participation facilitates more positive. psychological experiences and expresses human values. These include humility, harmony, creativity, spirituality, and a vital sense of self.
He added that extreme sports participants. found it hard to put their experiences into words. Thus, the research project had taken a new approach to understanding the data. His research team did not employ a theory-based approach which may make judgements that do not reflect the lived experience of extreme sports participants. Instead, they took a phenomenological approach. By doing so they were able to conceptualize such experiences. They could also investigate the choices to engage in activity which may lead to death. However, such experiences have been shown to be affirmative of life and the potential for transformation. Extreme sports have the potential to induce powerful states of consciousness and provide a further glimpse into what it means to be human.

Adapted from https://www.sciencedaily.com/
The author describes the intentions behind people’s participation in extreme sports most effectively in paragraph (s)…

Researchers have debunked the myth that extreme sportsmen and women are adrenalin junkies with a death wish. According to Professor Brymer from Leeds Becket University, there had been a gross misunderstanding of what motivates people to take part in extreme sports. Many write it off as an activity for adrenalin junkies

His research has shown that people who engage in extreme sports are anything but irresponsible risk-takers with a death wish. They are highly trained individuals with a deep knowledge of themselves, the activity, and the environment. They usually do the activity to have a life-enhancing experience. The experience is very hard to describe in the same way that love is hard to describe. For example, Base jumpers talk about being able to see all the colours and nooks and crannies of the rock as they zoom past at 300km/h. Meanwhile, extreme climbers feel like they are floating and dancing with the rock.

Professor Schweitzer said understanding motivations for extreme sports was important to understand human. In fact, extreme sports participation facilitates more positive. psychological experiences and expresses human values. These include humility, harmony, creativity, spirituality, and a vital sense of self.
He added that extreme sports participants. found it hard to put their experiences into words. Thus, the research project had taken a new approach to understanding the data. His research team did not employ a theory-based approach which may make judgements that do not reflect the lived experience of extreme sports participants. Instead, they took a phenomenological approach. By doing so they were able to conceptualize such experiences. They could also investigate the choices to engage in activity which may lead to death. However, such experiences have been shown to be affirmative of life and the potential for transformation. Extreme sports have the potential to induce powerful states of consciousness and provide a further glimpse into what it means to be human.

Adapted from https://www.sciencedaily.com/
According to Proffesor Schweitzer, examining people’s ….. behind doing extreme sports can aid us in making sense of humans.

Researchers have debunked the myth that extreme sportsmen and women are adrenalin junkies with a death wish. According to Professor Brymer from Leeds Becket University, there had been a gross misunderstanding of what motivates people to take part in extreme sports. Many write it off as an activity for adrenalin junkies

His research has shown that people who engage in extreme sports are anything but irresponsible risk-takers with a death wish. They are highly trained individuals with a deep knowledge of themselves, the activity, and the environment. They usually do the activity to have a life-enhancing experience. The experience is very hard to describe in the same way that love is hard to describe. For example, Base jumpers talk about being able to see all the colours and nooks and crannies of the rock as they zoom past at 300km/h. Meanwhile, extreme climbers feel like they are floating and dancing with the rock.

Professor Schweitzer said understanding motivations for extreme sports was important to understand human. In fact, extreme sports participation facilitates more positive. psychological experiences and expresses human values. These include humility, harmony, creativity, spirituality, and a vital sense of self.
He added that extreme sports participants. found it hard to put their experiences into words. Thus, the research project had taken a new approach to understanding the data. His research team did not employ a theory-based approach which may make judgements that do not reflect the lived experience of extreme sports participants. Instead, they took a phenomenological approach. By doing so they were able to conceptualize such experiences. They could also investigate the choices to engage in activity which may lead to death. However, such experiences have been shown to be affirmative of life and the potential for transformation. Extreme sports have the potential to induce powerful states of consciousness and provide a further glimpse into what it means to be human.

Adapted from https://www.sciencedaily.com/
Extreme sports ….. allow their participants to achieve a positive state of mind and demonstrate virtues.

Researchers have debunked the myth that extreme sportsmen and women are adrenalin junkies with a death wish. According to Professor Brymer from Leeds Becket University, there had been a gross misunderstanding of what motivates people to take part in extreme sports. Many write it off as an activity for adrenalin junkies

His research has shown that people who engage in extreme sports are anything but irresponsible risk-takers with a death wish. They are highly trained individuals with a deep knowledge of themselves, the activity, and the environment. They usually do the activity to have a life-enhancing experience. The experience is very hard to describe in the same way that love is hard to describe. For example, Base jumpers talk about being able to see all the colours and nooks and crannies of the rock as they zoom past at 300km/h. Meanwhile, extreme climbers feel like they are floating and dancing with the rock.

Professor Schweitzer said understanding motivations for extreme sports was important to understand human. In fact, extreme sports participation facilitates more positive. psychological experiences and expresses human values. These include humility, harmony, creativity, spirituality, and a vital sense of self.
He added that extreme sports participants. found it hard to put their experiences into words. Thus, the research project had taken a new approach to understanding the data. His research team did not employ a theory-based approach which may make judgements that do not reflect the lived experience of extreme sports participants. Instead, they took a phenomenological approach. By doing so they were able to conceptualize such experiences. They could also investigate the choices to engage in activity which may lead to death. However, such experiences have been shown to be affirmative of life and the potential for transformation. Extreme sports have the potential to induce powerful states of consciousness and provide a further glimpse into what it means to be human.

Adapted from https://www.sciencedaily.com/
In the passage there are statements like these: His research team did not employ a theory-based approach which may make judgements that do not reflect the lived experience of extreme sports participants. Instead, they took a phenomenological approach. By doing so, they were able to conceptualize such experiences. Based on the statements above, if the research team had taken a theory-based approach, they……sheer details in the extreme sports participants’ experiences.

Researchers have debunked the myth that extreme sportsmen and women are adrenalin junkies with a death wish. According to Professor Brymer from Leeds Becket University, there had been a gross misunderstanding of what motivates people to take part in extreme sports. Many write it off as an activity for adrenalin junkies

His research has shown that people who engage in extreme sports are anything but irresponsible risk-takers with a death wish. They are highly trained individuals with a deep knowledge of themselves, the activity, and the environment. They usually do the activity to have a life-enhancing experience. The experience is very hard to describe in the same way that love is hard to describe. For example, Base jumpers talk about being able to see all the colours and nooks and crannies of the rock as they zoom past at 300km/h. Meanwhile, extreme climbers feel like they are floating and dancing with the rock.

Professor Schweitzer said understanding motivations for extreme sports was important to understand human. In fact, extreme sports participation facilitates more positive. psychological experiences and expresses human values. These include humility, harmony, creativity, spirituality, and a vital sense of self.
He added that extreme sports participants. found it hard to put their experiences into words. Thus, the research project had taken a new approach to understanding the data. His research team did not employ a theory-based approach which may make judgements that do not reflect the lived experience of extreme sports participants. Instead, they took a phenomenological approach. By doing so they were able to conceptualize such experiences. They could also investigate the choices to engage in activity which may lead to death. However, such experiences have been shown to be affirmative of life and the potential for transformation. Extreme sports have the potential to induce powerful states of consciousness and provide a further glimpse into what it means to be human.

Adapted from https://www.sciencedaily.com/
According to the passage, it can be hypothesized that the more…..the more……

Researchers have debunked the myth that extreme sportsmen and women are adrenalin junkies with a death wish. According to Professor Brymer from Leeds Becket University, there had been a gross misunderstanding of what motivates people to take part in extreme sports. Many write it off as an activity for adrenalin junkies

His research has shown that people who engage in extreme sports are anything but irresponsible risk-takers with a death wish. They are highly trained individuals with a deep knowledge of themselves, the activity, and the environment. They usually do the activity to have a life-enhancing experience. The experience is very hard to describe in the same way that love is hard to describe. For example, Base jumpers talk about being able to see all the colours and nooks and crannies of the rock as they zoom past at 300km/h. Meanwhile, extreme climbers feel like they are floating and dancing with the rock.

Professor Schweitzer said understanding motivations for extreme sports was important to understand human. In fact, extreme sports participation facilitates more positive. psychological experiences and expresses human values. These include humility, harmony, creativity, spirituality, and a vital sense of self.
He added that extreme sports participants. found it hard to put their experiences into words. Thus, the research project had taken a new approach to understanding the data. His research team did not employ a theory-based approach which may make judgements that do not reflect the lived experience of extreme sports participants. Instead, they took a phenomenological approach. By doing so they were able to conceptualize such experiences. They could also investigate the choices to engage in activity which may lead to death. However, such experiences have been shown to be affirmative of life and the potential for transformation. Extreme sports have the potential to induce powerful states of consciousness and provide a further glimpse into what it means to be human.

Adapted from https://www.sciencedaily.com/
The author would apparently agree that the phenomenon of extreme sports and their participants discussed in the passage is similar to the phenomenon between…..

Researchers have debunked the myth that extreme sportsmen and women are adrenalin junkies with a death wish. According to Professor Brymer from Leeds Becket University, there had been a gross misunderstanding of what motivates people to take part in extreme sports. Many write it off as an activity for adrenalin junkies

His research has shown that people who engage in extreme sports are anything but irresponsible risk-takers with a death wish. They are highly trained individuals with a deep knowledge of themselves, the activity, and the environment. They usually do the activity to have a life-enhancing experience. The experience is very hard to describe in the same way that love is hard to describe. For example, Base jumpers talk about being able to see all the colours and nooks and crannies of the rock as they zoom past at 300km/h. Meanwhile, extreme climbers feel like they are floating and dancing with the rock.

Professor Schweitzer said understanding motivations for extreme sports was important to understand human. In fact, extreme sports participation facilitates more positive. psychological experiences and expresses human values. These include humility, harmony, creativity, spirituality, and a vital sense of self.
He added that extreme sports participants. found it hard to put their experiences into words. Thus, the research project had taken a new approach to understanding the data. His research team did not employ a theory-based approach which may make judgements that do not reflect the lived experience of extreme sports participants. Instead, they took a phenomenological approach. By doing so they were able to conceptualize such experiences. They could also investigate the choices to engage in activity which may lead to death. However, such experiences have been shown to be affirmative of life and the potential for transformation. Extreme sports have the potential to induce powerful states of consciousness and provide a further glimpse into what it means to be human.

Adapted from https://www.sciencedaily.com/
The option that best completes the last sentence of the passage is……

From small committees to national elections, group decision making can be complicated. Unfortunately, it may not always settle on the best choice. That’s partly because some members of the group do research on their own, and others take their cues from the people around them.

That distinction is readily observed around election time. “Many voters couldn’t tell you the policy platforms for the candidates they’re voting for,” says applied mathematician Vicky Chuqiao Yang at the Santa Fe Institute. “Many individuals are uninformed, and they’re most likely to rely on information they get from others.”

Social scientists have long sought ways to study the phenomenon of group decision-making, but that’s a tricky undertaking. Researchers in a range of disciplines have tried to tackle the problem, with parallel efforts often leading to conflicting conclusions. Most existing models examine the effect of a single variable, which means they don’t capture the whole picture.

“The outcome of collective decision making is the result of complex interactions of many variables,” says Yang, “And those interactions are rarely taken into account” in previous work. To overcome that challenge, Yang recently developed a mathematical framework that captures the influence of multiple interactions among members of a group. “You can plug in multiple effects and see their behavior and how they manifest in the group at the same time,” she explains.

Those effects include the influence of social learners. The model predicted, for example, that decision-making groups have a critical threshold of people who get their information from others. Below that threshold, the group chooses the high-quality outcome. Above it, the group can end up choosing the better or worse option.

The mathematical model is both simple and general. It can accurately reflect the multitude of moving parts within a system.
The model also predicted a significant role for “committed minorities” or people who refuse to change their minds, no matter the evidence.

These committed minorities can be bolstered. Yang says, by social leamers, though every group is different. Yang says she hopes the model will help bring together parallel work from different disciplines. ……”but we don’t yet have a holistic understanding that gives a recipe for good collective decision making she said. “Our work brings us one step closer to it.”

Adipted from httpwww.scienodaily.com
The phenomenon of group decision-making has…by researchers for a long time.

From small committees to national elections, group decision making can be complicated. Unfortunately, it may not always settle on the best choice. That’s partly because some members of the group do research on their own, and others take their cues from the people around them.

That distinction is readily observed around election time. “Many voters couldn’t tell you the policy platforms for the candidates they’re voting for,” says applied mathematician Vicky Chuqiao Yang at the Santa Fe Institute. “Many individuals are uninformed, and they’re most likely to rely on information they get from others.”

Social scientists have long sought ways to study the phenomenon of group decision-making, but that’s a tricky undertaking. Researchers in a range of disciplines have tried to tackle the problem, with parallel efforts often leading to conflicting conclusions. Most existing models examine the effect of a single variable, which means they don’t capture the whole picture.

“The outcome of collective decision making is the result of complex interactions of many variables,” says Yang, “And those interactions are rarely taken into account” in previous work. To overcome that challenge, Yang recently developed a mathematical framework that captures the influence of multiple interactions among members of a group. “You can plug in multiple effects and see their behavior and how they manifest in the group at the same time,” she explains.

Those effects include the influence of social learners. The model predicted, for example, that decision-making groups have a critical threshold of people who get their information from others. Below that threshold, the group chooses the high-quality outcome. Above it, the group can end up choosing the better or worse option.

The mathematical model is both simple and general. It can accurately reflect the multitude of moving parts within a system.
The model also predicted a significant role for “committed minorities” or people who refuse to change their minds, no matter the evidence.

These committed minorities can be bolstered. Yang says, by social leamers, though every group is different. Yang says she hopes the model will help bring together parallel work from different disciplines. ……”but we don’t yet have a holistic understanding that gives a recipe for good collective decision making she said. “Our work brings us one step closer to it.”

Adipted from httpwww.scienodaily.com
The word ‘tackle’ in paragraph 3 is closest in meaning to…

From small committees to national elections, group decision making can be complicated. Unfortunately, it may not always settle on the best choice. That’s partly because some members of the group do research on their own, and others take their cues from the people around them.

That distinction is readily observed around election time. “Many voters couldn’t tell you the policy platforms for the candidates they’re voting for,” says applied mathematician Vicky Chuqiao Yang at the Santa Fe Institute. “Many individuals are uninformed, and they’re most likely to rely on information they get from others.”

Social scientists have long sought ways to study the phenomenon of group decision-making, but that’s a tricky undertaking. Researchers in a range of disciplines have tried to tackle the problem, with parallel efforts often leading to conflicting conclusions. Most existing models examine the effect of a single variable, which means they don’t capture the whole picture.

“The outcome of collective decision making is the result of complex interactions of many variables,” says Yang, “And those interactions are rarely taken into account” in previous work. To overcome that challenge, Yang recently developed a mathematical framework that captures the influence of multiple interactions among members of a group. “You can plug in multiple effects and see their behavior and how they manifest in the group at the same time,” she explains.

Those effects include the influence of social learners. The model predicted, for example, that decision-making groups have a critical threshold of people who get their information from others. Below that threshold, the group chooses the high-quality outcome. Above it, the group can end up choosing the better or worse option.

The mathematical model is both simple and general. It can accurately reflect the multitude of moving parts within a system.
The model also predicted a significant role for “committed minorities” or people who refuse to change their minds, no matter the evidence.

These committed minorities can be bolstered. Yang says, by social leamers, though every group is different. Yang says she hopes the model will help bring together parallel work from different disciplines. ……”but we don’t yet have a holistic understanding that gives a recipe for good collective decision making she said. “Our work brings us one step closer to it.”

Adipted from httpwww.scienodaily.com
The author mentions the fact that numerous variables influence the result of group decision-making in paragraph…

From small committees to national elections, group decision making can be complicated. Unfortunately, it may not always settle on the best choice. That’s partly because some members of the group do research on their own, and others take their cues from the people around them.

That distinction is readily observed around election time. “Many voters couldn’t tell you the policy platforms for the candidates they’re voting for,” says applied mathematician Vicky Chuqiao Yang at the Santa Fe Institute. “Many individuals are uninformed, and they’re most likely to rely on information they get from others.”

Social scientists have long sought ways to study the phenomenon of group decision-making, but that’s a tricky undertaking. Researchers in a range of disciplines have tried to tackle the problem, with parallel efforts often leading to conflicting conclusions. Most existing models examine the effect of a single variable, which means they don’t capture the whole picture.

“The outcome of collective decision making is the result of complex interactions of many variables,” says Yang, “And those interactions are rarely taken into account” in previous work. To overcome that challenge, Yang recently developed a mathematical framework that captures the influence of multiple interactions among members of a group. “You can plug in multiple effects and see their behavior and how they manifest in the group at the same time,” she explains.

Those effects include the influence of social learners. The model predicted, for example, that decision-making groups have a critical threshold of people who get their information from others. Below that threshold, the group chooses the high-quality outcome. Above it, the group can end up choosing the better or worse option.

The mathematical model is both simple and general. It can accurately reflect the multitude of moving parts within a system.
The model also predicted a significant role for “committed minorities” or people who refuse to change their minds, no matter the evidence.

These committed minorities can be bolstered. Yang says, by social leamers, though every group is different. Yang says she hopes the model will help bring together parallel work from different disciplines. ……”but we don’t yet have a holistic understanding that gives a recipe for good collective decision making she said. “Our work brings us one step closer to it.”

Adipted from httpwww.scienodaily.com
The passage implies that although it is a collective endeavor, a group ….. make poor decisions.

From small committees to national elections, group decision making can be complicated. Unfortunately, it may not always settle on the best choice. That’s partly because some members of the group do research on their own, and others take their cues from the people around them.

That distinction is readily observed around election time. “Many voters couldn’t tell you the policy platforms for the candidates they’re voting for,” says applied mathematician Vicky Chuqiao Yang at the Santa Fe Institute. “Many individuals are uninformed, and they’re most likely to rely on information they get from others.”

Social scientists have long sought ways to study the phenomenon of group decision-making, but that’s a tricky undertaking. Researchers in a range of disciplines have tried to tackle the problem, with parallel efforts often leading to conflicting conclusions. Most existing models examine the effect of a single variable, which means they don’t capture the whole picture.

“The outcome of collective decision making is the result of complex interactions of many variables,” says Yang, “And those interactions are rarely taken into account” in previous work. To overcome that challenge, Yang recently developed a mathematical framework that captures the influence of multiple interactions among members of a group. “You can plug in multiple effects and see their behavior and how they manifest in the group at the same time,” she explains.

Those effects include the influence of social learners. The model predicted, for example, that decision-making groups have a critical threshold of people who get their information from others. Below that threshold, the group chooses the high-quality outcome. Above it, the group can end up choosing the better or worse option.

The mathematical model is both simple and general. It can accurately reflect the multitude of moving parts within a system.
The model also predicted a significant role for “committed minorities” or people who refuse to change their minds, no matter the evidence.

These committed minorities can be bolstered. Yang says, by social leamers, though every group is different. Yang says she hopes the model will help bring together parallel work from different disciplines. ……”but we don’t yet have a holistic understanding that gives a recipe for good collective decision making she said. “Our work brings us one step closer to it.”

Adipted from httpwww.scienodaily.com
Based on the passage……

From small committees to national elections, group decision making can be complicated. Unfortunately, it may not always settle on the best choice. That’s partly because some members of the group do research on their own, and others take their cues from the people around them.

That distinction is readily observed around election time. “Many voters couldn’t tell you the policy platforms for the candidates they’re voting for,” says applied mathematician Vicky Chuqiao Yang at the Santa Fe Institute. “Many individuals are uninformed, and they’re most likely to rely on information they get from others.”

Social scientists have long sought ways to study the phenomenon of group decision-making, but that’s a tricky undertaking. Researchers in a range of disciplines have tried to tackle the problem, with parallel efforts often leading to conflicting conclusions. Most existing models examine the effect of a single variable, which means they don’t capture the whole picture.

“The outcome of collective decision making is the result of complex interactions of many variables,” says Yang, “And those interactions are rarely taken into account” in previous work. To overcome that challenge, Yang recently developed a mathematical framework that captures the influence of multiple interactions among members of a group. “You can plug in multiple effects and see their behavior and how they manifest in the group at the same time,” she explains.

Those effects include the influence of social learners. The model predicted, for example, that decision-making groups have a critical threshold of people who get their information from others. Below that threshold, the group chooses the high-quality outcome. Above it, the group can end up choosing the better or worse option.

The mathematical model is both simple and general. It can accurately reflect the multitude of moving parts within a system.
The model also predicted a significant role for “committed minorities” or people who refuse to change their minds, no matter the evidence.

These committed minorities can be bolstered. Yang says, by social leamers, though every group is different. Yang says she hopes the model will help bring together parallel work from different disciplines. ……”but we don’t yet have a holistic understanding that gives a recipe for good collective decision making she said. “Our work brings us one step closer to it.”

Adipted from httpwww.scienodaily.com
According to Vicky Chuqlao Yang, when it comes to getting information, many people ….. others

From small committees to national elections, group decision making can be complicated. Unfortunately, it may not always settle on the best choice. That’s partly because some members of the group do research on their own, and others take their cues from the people around them.

That distinction is readily observed around election time. “Many voters couldn’t tell you the policy platforms for the candidates they’re voting for,” says applied mathematician Vicky Chuqiao Yang at the Santa Fe Institute. “Many individuals are uninformed, and they’re most likely to rely on information they get from others.”

Social scientists have long sought ways to study the phenomenon of group decision-making, but that’s a tricky undertaking. Researchers in a range of disciplines have tried to tackle the problem, with parallel efforts often leading to conflicting conclusions. Most existing models examine the effect of a single variable, which means they don’t capture the whole picture.

“The outcome of collective decision making is the result of complex interactions of many variables,” says Yang, “And those interactions are rarely taken into account” in previous work. To overcome that challenge, Yang recently developed a mathematical framework that captures the influence of multiple interactions among members of a group. “You can plug in multiple effects and see their behavior and how they manifest in the group at the same time,” she explains.

Those effects include the influence of social learners. The model predicted, for example, that decision-making groups have a critical threshold of people who get their information from others. Below that threshold, the group chooses the high-quality outcome. Above it, the group can end up choosing the better or worse option.

The mathematical model is both simple and general. It can accurately reflect the multitude of moving parts within a system.
The model also predicted a significant role for “committed minorities” or people who refuse to change their minds, no matter the evidence.

These committed minorities can be bolstered. Yang says, by social leamers, though every group is different. Yang says she hopes the model will help bring together parallel work from different disciplines. ……”but we don’t yet have a holistic understanding that gives a recipe for good collective decision making she said. “Our work brings us one step closer to it.”

Adipted from httpwww.scienodaily.com
The options that best completes the missing part of the sentence in the last paragraph is…..

From small committees to national elections, group decision making can be complicated. Unfortunately, it may not always settle on the best choice. That’s partly because some members of the group do research on their own, and others take their cues from the people around them.

That distinction is readily observed around election time. “Many voters couldn’t tell you the policy platforms for the candidates they’re voting for,” says applied mathematician Vicky Chuqiao Yang at the Santa Fe Institute. “Many individuals are uninformed, and they’re most likely to rely on information they get from others.”

Social scientists have long sought ways to study the phenomenon of group decision-making, but that’s a tricky undertaking. Researchers in a range of disciplines have tried to tackle the problem, with parallel efforts often leading to conflicting conclusions. Most existing models examine the effect of a single variable, which means they don’t capture the whole picture.

“The outcome of collective decision making is the result of complex interactions of many variables,” says Yang, “And those interactions are rarely taken into account” in previous work. To overcome that challenge, Yang recently developed a mathematical framework that captures the influence of multiple interactions among members of a group. “You can plug in multiple effects and see their behavior and how they manifest in the group at the same time,” she explains.

Those effects include the influence of social learners. The model predicted, for example, that decision-making groups have a critical threshold of people who get their information from others. Below that threshold, the group chooses the high-quality outcome. Above it, the group can end up choosing the better or worse option.

The mathematical model is both simple and general. It can accurately reflect the multitude of moving parts within a system.
The model also predicted a significant role for “committed minorities” or people who refuse to change their minds, no matter the evidence.

These committed minorities can be bolstered. Yang says, by social leamers, though every group is different. Yang says she hopes the model will help bring together parallel work from different disciplines. ……”but we don’t yet have a holistic understanding that gives a recipe for good collective decision making she said. “Our work brings us one step closer to it.”

Adipted from httpwww.scienodaily.com
The paragraph following the passage most likely discusses…