READING COMPREHENSION · AUTHOR ANALYSIS

Read the claim.
Hear the restraint.

Infer purpose and stance from sustained action, then keep every answer inside the boundary the author actually defends.

3original passages
9author moves
4claim audits
50source-form items

THE AUTHOR LOOP

Action. Pattern. Boundary.

  1. 01

    Name the action

    Use a verb for what the author repeatedly does—explains, contrasts, qualifies, evaluates, or argues—not merely the topic discussed.

  2. 02

    Trace the pattern

    Build stance from repeated wording, concessions, structure, and evidence use. One vivid adjective cannot carry the whole answer.

  3. 03

    Test the boundary

    Ask what the author accepts, what is deliberately withheld, and whether an option turns a bounded claim into certainty or motive.

THE SIXTH READING OBJECTIVE

Purpose is a pattern.
Stance has a limit.

This route depends on explicit evidence and the reasoning chain. It adds RC-SCI-AUT-01 without inventing an author's emotion, motive, or certainty from topic alone.

01

PURPOSE

Find the sustained verb

Topic

Cyanobacterial circadian clocks

What the passage discusses
Purpose

Evaluate what layered reconstitution can establish

What the author does with the topic
Not supported

Prove that simplified models replace living systems

A motive the structure rejects
02

STANCE + EMPHASIS

Audit the pattern, not one adjective

  1. P01
    Frame the test

    Recasts reconstitution as a question about which clock layer has been rebuilt.

    Interested in reduction, wary of the miniature-organism metaphor.
  2. P02
    Establish the genetic layer

    Uses kaiABC genetics to establish cellular necessity and the earlier feedback model.

    Treats the model as reasonable evidence, not a final mechanism.
  3. P03
    Isolate sufficiency

    Presents the three-protein experiment as a change in level from cell to biochemical core.

    Regards the result as decisive for one autonomous rhythm.
  4. P04
    Open the mechanism

    Shows how reduction reveals an ordered sequence hidden by a total measurement.

    Prefers state-resolved explanation over a vague interaction claim.
  5. P05
    Locate the rate setter

    Connects ATPase rate with period while distinguishing a pacemaker from the whole oscillator.

    Supports the ATPase proposal with explicit caution.
  6. P06
    Expose the edge

    Names the input and output functions omitted by the minimal reaction.

    Uses block labels as questions rather than sealed compartments.
  7. P07
    Restore a pathway

    Introduces the intact in vitro clock as a test of interactions hidden from the smaller mixture.

    Treats added complexity as explanatory when it restores a defined function.
  8. P08
    Test reciprocal influence

    Uses phase-resetting results to revise a strictly one-way input–oscillator–output diagram.

    Finds the cross-model agreement strengthening but not exhaustive.
  9. P09
    Integrate the layers

    Defines nested models as complementary tests whose conclusions must be transferred carefully.

    Neither reductionist triumphalism nor dismissal of simplified models.
03

CLAIM BOUNDARIES

Keep the result. Refuse the leap.

01
Supported

KaiABC and ATP are sufficient for an autonomous KaiC phosphorylation rhythm.

Cannot claim

KaiABC alone performs every input, output, metabolic, and cellular clock function.

02
Supported

kaiABC genes are necessary for the measured cellular circadian rhythm in the tested cyanobacterium.

Cannot claim

A loss-of-function phenotype by itself identifies the biochemical reaction that keeps time.

03
Supported

KaiC ATPase activity is associated with and helps set circadian period.

Cannot claim

The average ATPase rate is the entire oscillator, independent of molecular state and partners.

04
Supported

SasA and CikA shape output robustness and phase resetting in reconstituted systems.

Cannot claim

Every environmental cue or genome-wide response has been recreated in a purified reaction.

THIRD PASSAGE · FROZEN TRAIL

Original prose.
Six primary studies.

The passage is original DAT TRAIN writing. Its 20 scientific claims map by paragraph to six primary studies spanning cellular genetics, minimal reconstitution, molecular timing, expanded output, and entrainment.

RIGHTS RECORD
Basis
original
Rights holder
DAT TRAIN
Status
draft · human review open
Simulation-ready
no

Original DAT TRAIN passage independently synthesized from the frozen primary-research source trail. No source wording, official examination content, memorized test material, or proprietary practice content was reproduced.

  1. 01
  2. 02
  3. 03
  4. 04
  5. 05
  6. 06

ONE PASSAGE · SIXTEEN AUTHOR AUDITS

Infer the voice beside its proof.

The passage and author-move map remain beside every question. After checking, each option exposes its classification, rationale, exact quotation, paragraph anchor, and frozen offsets.

16 PRACTICE QUESTIONS

Retrieve before you review.

Question order and all five answer options are shuffled when you begin. The correct answer stays attached to the same underlying choice.

SOURCE-FORM BOUNDARY

Three source sets now total exactly fifty.

The frozen source form preserves the three passage sets atomically at 16 + 18 + 16 questions. The allocation and author-lens mix are DAT TRAIN construction choices, not published ADA item-type weights.

The source form remains draft and uncalibrated. It does not claim representative-device results, human approval, or official score conversion.

The mixed-retrieval route adds strategy switching, passage-aware navigation, and transparent open-clock pacing without changing these source sets. The completion form provides delayed-feedback delivery and recovery.

Continue to the mixed-retrieval circuit →