代写A2: Critical Analysis Task代做Python程序

日期：2025-02-20 09:22

A2: Critical Analysis Task

Part 1: Write a 900 word reflection

The development of AI has provided a powerful impetus for academic research, especially in summarizing complex academic articles. As an example, this article (Murali et al. 2021), which centers around the responsibility that different national media should have for climate change, conducts an AI simulation of a summary that critically explores the use of AI in generating scholarly summaries, and Kate Crawford's Maps of Artificial Intelligence and other scholarly writings further critically reflect on the use of AI for scholarly research potential advantages and problems (Crawford 2021, 1-21).

AI-generated summaries can significantly reduce the time it takes for readers to understand the central arguments and evidence of an article, enabling students and researchers to quickly grasp the main arguments and evidence of complex articles. For students and researchers, this technology can serve as an initial step in understanding the article and provide them with a broad understanding of the content before diving into the text.AI-generated summaries as a method not only increase efficiency, but also simplify complex terminology, making it easier for readers to access the core knowledge of the article, and making the knowledge accessible to the general public.The application of AI can reduce human errors, such as miscalculations and omissions of information, in addition to increasing the efficiency of acquiring knowledge. At the same time, AI-generated article summaries will not be easily influenced by emotions and surroundings, so they may be more objective overall than articles summarized by people themselves.

However, this time-efficient convenience that AI brings comes with obvious drawbacks. The primary drawback is whether AI is accurate in the summaries it generates. AI's current capabilities do not always accurately explain and summarize subtle academic arguments and theoretical frameworks. Considering that AI writing relies on training data, if the data is biased or inaccurate, the generated text may also be problematic, which can lead to distorted and misleading information (Jones 2023,503). In addition, due to the convenience and intelligence of AI, many students will choose to turn to AI to solve the problems they should have thought and studied independently, and over time, students will be too lazy to think two not to learn, which will lead to academic wastage. At the same time, excessive use of AI will also involve academic integrity issues. Therefore, over-reliance on artificial intelligence will most likely weaken students' critical thinking and reading skills and seriously affect the quality of their degrees.

According to Crawford's article, it is extremely clear that the application of AI in academia may not only be a technological issue, but also closely related to the ethical, political, and academic environment (Crawford 2021, 1-21). In layman’s terms, the development of AI may also bring ethical and moral issues. For example, AI may directly use other people's articles when generating academic summaries, which involves important issues related to intellectual property rights, ethics and fair access, and violates authors' intellectual property rights. As a result, the application of AI may lead to an increased likelihood of plagiarism in scholarship and devaluation of original scholarship (Ayodele et al. 2023, 1-21).The development and application of AI technology consumes a great deal of human, material, and financial resources and breaks down the traditional form. of academic research, which triggers the questioning of the continued development of AI in academia and the fairness of academic research.

Therefore, one should view AI as an aid to academic research, a tool that needs to be utilized appropriately. While its efficiency and convenience are undeniable, vigilance must be maintained to prevent information bias and errors, and to avoid creating a dependence on AI that weakens students' critical thinking and reading skills. Interacting with AI to generate abstracts should be a starting point for academic research, rather than viewing AI-generated abstracts as a substitute for in-depth reading and critical analysis. In addition, the low level of interpretability, data bias, and ethical issues of AI technologies pose significant risks to users, developers, humans, and society. Crawford and others therefore emphasize the responsible integration of AI technologies at an ethical level and the careful consideration of their wider implications.

The experiment with AI in generating abstracts of academic articles highlights the potential of this technology to aid student learning and promote the development of academic research. At the same time, this experiment highlights the potential risks of AI: inaccurate access to information, impeded development of students' critical thinking, and questionable academic integrity and devaluation of academic value.To sum up,AI can be used as a tool of efficiency to assist students and researchers, AI cannot completely replace humans in academic research, AI may not be a substitute for laziness and lack of thought.As AI continues to evolve, people need to find a balance between using AI wisely. In conclusion, it is important for humans to properly control, critically assess, and guide its collaboration with academic practice to ensure that it remains a powerful aid to academic research and not a stumbling block on the path to academic development.

Part 2: Write a 600 word summary

This article summarizes how the media in four countries - the United States, Australia, India, and Nigeria - portray the existence of climate change and the distribution of responsibility for global climate change by examining media coverage of climate change in these countries. The central thesis of this article is that different media narratives about climate change affect public perceptions of climate change and their views on the allocation of responsibility, as well as the development and implementation of climate-related policies. While the media in the four countries consistently recognize that climate change is a real and urgent environmental problem caused by human activity, they vary in their narratives of responsibility for climate change. The Australian media mainly deflected responsibility from their own country to countries such as India and China, while the media in the United States focused on their own country; the Indian media emphasized that the northern hemisphere was to blame for climate change, while the Nigerian media emphasized that the globe was globally responsible for climate change.

The article argues this central thesis through an analysis of media coverage in the four countries, emphasizing that media coverage is nearly unanimous in its scientific consensus on why climate change is occurring, but divergent in its attribution of responsibility for climate change, reflecting uneven political and economic development between countries. The study emphasizes the significant influence of political narratives on media narratives, which sometimes overshadow scientific evidence in shaping public perceptions and policy responses. For example, the Australian media's denial of its responsibility for climate change under the theme of "differential responsibility" contrasts with the self-reflexive and critical stance of the United States media, reflecting the influence of national political contexts on media coverage.

This article provides a unique perspective to answer the research readiness question by providing an in-depth analysis of media coverage of climate change in different countries. The article's analysis contributes to our understanding of how the media influences public perceptions of responsibility for climate change and points to the complexity of equitably distributing responsibility in global climate action.This paper expresses insights into the politicization of responsibility for climate change through an examination of media coverage and suggests that a deeper understanding of the complexity of global climate action is essential. It emphasizes the critical importance of communicating the facts of climate change based on existing scientific knowledge and nuanced media narratives, unencumbered by political discourse, to shape public perceptions of climate action and thus drive effective policy implementation. In confronting the research-ready question of the distribution of responsibility for global climate change, this paper illustrates that the media plays a crucial role in constructing public positions of responsibility. It suggests that if the media wants the public to have a fair and objective view of responsibility for climate change, then it needs to confront and move beyond politically tainted narratives to report objectively and clearly on the more scientifically grounded attribution of responsibility for climate change emissions.

The narratives of the media in these four countries exemplify the need for the media to adopt a narrative approach that balances political discourse with scientific facts, recognizing historical emissions and per capita differences as a way of fostering a sense of public responsibility for global climate change. Such a change in the media is critical to advocating for fair and effective climate policies, and for countries to take responsibility for mitigating global climate change. This article advocates that media discourse and media coverage should better reflect the complex interplay between historical emissions, stage of economic development, and the distribution of responsibility for global climate change in order to provide a fairer, more equitable, and rational framework of responsibility for international climate negotiations and action planning.

In summary, this article not only dissects the current state of media coverage on climate responsibility, but also emphasizes the role and responsibility of media narratives in actions to address global climate change, as well as the centrality of scientific knowledge in shaping public perceptions and policy responses, and provides important recommendations on how to equitably allocate responsibility for climate action, more successfully address climate change, and the impact of the current media landscape on climate action . This leads to the conclusion that the media should accurately and comprehensively report on the shared responsibilities of different countries and groups of people, and use their influence to promote a fairer, objective and scientific understanding of climate change, thereby contributing to the effective implementation of global climate change action.

Bibliography

Ranjini, Murali, Aishwarya, Kuwar, Harini, Nagendra. “Who’s responsible for climate change? Untangling threads of media discussion in India, Nigeria, Australia, and the USA,”Climate Change, (2021), Vol. 164: 51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03031-1

Crawford, Kate. 2021. Atlas of AI : Power, Politics, and the Planetary Costs of Artificial Intelligence.New Haven,CT: Yale University Press. https://doi.org/10.12987/9780300252392.

Jones, Nicola.“AI Visionary.”Nature (London) 624, no. 7992 (2023): 503–503. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-03925-3.

Morocco-Clarke, Ayodele, Fadila Abubakar Sodangi, and Fatima Momodu. “The Implications and Effects of ChatGPT on Academic Scholarship and Authorship: A Death Knell for Original Academic Publications?” Information & Communications Technology Law ahead-of-print, no. ahead-of-print (2023): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2023.2239623.