Researchers are attempting to create the computer equivalent of human cognitive abilities, and they have had considerable success ............. But as little as 50 years ago, how would people have reacted to a machine that corrected errors in spelling and grammar!

A) The research community, underestimating the incredibte abilities of the human brain, seriously misjudged how difficult the task
would be.

B) In the field of intelligence, how does man compare with machines?

C) Man was certainly reluctant to admit that machines could be physically stronger than man.

D) The chess machine is an interesting example in theory since all one had to do was create a computer chip that could analyze several million chess positions per second.

E) For instance, we now have computerized spelling and grammar checkers; they are standard components of all word processors
today.


Why E, why not d?

I think because of the phrase 'in theory,' which suggests that there is not a concrete chess machine, but only a theoretical one.

The blank space calls for a concrete example of a success.

But...is there not a chess machine? I would have thought that one had been invented. Still, even if that is true, the words 'in theory' make this sentence a poor choice.

Sorry Rachel, it would have been why D, why not E.I think E is the correct answer, but key is D.

We agree on E. I'd be interested in learning from the test maker exactly why D is supposed to be correct.