IELTS / TOEFL Test

1. Had the authorities acted on the preliminary warning, the disruption ______ considerably less severe.

would be

would have been

had been

will have been

2. Rarely ______ such a marked discrepancy between projected and observed outcomes.

researchers have documented

have researchers documented

researchers documented

did researchers have documented

3. The committee recommended that the findings ______ independently before publication.

are verified

were verified

be verified

have verified

4. ______ the methodology been more transparent, the conclusions might have attracted less criticism.

If

Were

Had

Unless

5. The apparent decline in emissions, ______ to changes in measurement procedures, may not reflect a genuine improvement.

attributing

attributed

having attributed

to attribute

6. No sooner ______ the revised figures than several analysts questioned their reliability.

the agency released

had the agency released

did the agency released

has the agency release

7. The evidence remains equivocal; the most defensible conclusion is that the intervention’s effect is ______.

unequivocal

inconclusive

irreversible

negligible

8. The researchers attempted to ______ the influence of income when comparing educational outcomes.

control for

account to

derive from

comply with

9. A policy described as “counterproductive” is one that ______.

requires substantial funding

achieves its objectives gradually

produces effects contrary to its aims

is unpopular despite its success

10. The initial estimate was subsequently ______ after additional data became available.

corroborated

revised

extrapolated

prescribed

11. The author argues that the proposed explanation rests on a ______ assumption rather than direct observation.

tacit

tangible

conclusive

redundant

12. Which expression best completes the sentence? “The study establishes an association but does not ______ a causal relationship.”

amount to

substantiate

conform to

give rise

Read the advanced passage carefully and answer questions 13–20. Allow approximately 17 minutes for this section.

When Efficiency Makes Cities More Vulnerable
For much of the twentieth century, urban infrastructure was designed around a deceptively simple objective: to deliver essential services at the lowest possible cost. Water networks, transport systems and electricity grids were progressively centralised, allowing operators to exploit economies of scale. Yet the same interconnectedness that made these systems efficient also created opportunities for disruption to spread. A failure that would once have remained local could, under certain circumstances, cascade across an entire metropolitan region.

The distinction between efficiency and resilience is particularly evident in electricity supply. An efficient grid may operate with little spare capacity because unused equipment represents an expense. A resilient grid, by contrast, may require redundant connections, geographically dispersed generation and the ability to isolate damaged components. Such provisions are costly and, in ordinary circumstances, may appear unnecessary. Their value becomes apparent only when an exceptional event occurs. This creates a political difficulty: expenditure on resilience is visible immediately, whereas the losses it prevents are uncertain and may never materialise during an elected official's term.

Digital technologies have complicated the picture. Sensors can detect faults before they become critical, and predictive software can help operators distribute resources more precisely. Advocates argue that these tools reduce waste while improving responsiveness. Critics, however, caution that optimisation based on historical data may underestimate events for which there is little precedent. Furthermore, as physical infrastructure becomes dependent on communications networks and software, it acquires new points of failure. A system that is robust against mechanical breakdown may still be vulnerable to a prolonged telecommunications outage. The implication is not that digital monitoring should be abandoned, but that its limitations should be acknowledged.

A related debate concerns the scale at which resilience should be pursued. Some planners favour decentralised solutions, such as neighbourhood energy storage and local water reuse. These can allow communities to continue operating when a larger network fails. Nevertheless, decentralisation is not a universal remedy. Small systems may lack specialist maintenance, and their performance can vary substantially between affluent and disadvantaged districts. Without deliberate coordination, a strategy intended to protect vulnerable residents could inadvertently widen existing inequalities.

Researchers increasingly recommend evaluating infrastructure through a wider lens than its day-to-day operating costs. One approach is to assess the consequences of failure as well as its probability, including indirect effects on hospitals, businesses and public confidence. Even this method has limitations: the social cost of a prolonged interruption is difficult to express in monetary terms, and estimates depend heavily on assumptions about how people respond. It is therefore misleading to present any single numerical model as an objective answer to a fundamentally political question.

The central challenge is not to choose resilience instead of efficiency. Cities have finite budgets, and resources devoted to backup capacity cannot simultaneously be spent on other public priorities. Rather, decision-makers must determine which services are indispensable, whose needs are most easily overlooked, and what degree of disruption society is prepared to tolerate. Infrastructure planning, in this view, is as much a debate about collective values as it is an exercise in engineering.

13. What is the main function of the first paragraph?

To claim centralisation should always be reversed

To introduce a trade-off created by interconnected infrastructure

To compare the costs of electricity and transport

To show that local failures are now impossible

14. According to the author, resilience spending can be politically difficult because its benefits are ______.

guaranteed but delayed

immediately measurable

uncertain and potentially invisible within an electoral term

restricted to wealthy districts

15. Predictive software can eliminate the risk posed by unprecedented events.

True

False

Not Given

16. Neighbourhood energy storage is less expensive to install than centralised electricity generation.

True

False

Not Given

17. What does the author suggest about decentralised infrastructure?

It always distributes benefits equally.

It may increase inequality if coordination is inadequate.

It should replace all large-scale networks.

It cannot function without predictive software.

18. In paragraph five, “this method” refers to ______.

measuring only operating expenditure

comparing the cost of digital sensors

evaluating both the probability and consequences of failure

replacing monetary estimates with public opinion surveys

19. Why does the author question the authority of a single numerical model?

Models cannot calculate infrastructure costs.

Social impacts are difficult to monetise and assumptions affect estimates.

Engineering has no role in planning.

All models deliberately exclude hospitals.

20. Which statement best reflects the author’s overall position?

Maximum redundancy should be mandated regardless of cost.

Efficiency and resilience require choices informed by social priorities.

Digital infrastructure is inherently less reliable than analogue systems.

Local governments should leave infrastructure decisions entirely to engineers.

Opši Engleski

IELTS /TOEFS TEST

Başarılar.

DJECA & TINEJDŽERI

Kursevi za odrasle

Akademski kursevi