AP · thinka 原创模拟试题

2025 AP AP World History: Modern 模拟试题及答案详解

Thinka May 2025 AP-Style Mock — AP World History: Modern

22 分140 分钟2025

An original Thinka practice paper modelled on the structure and difficulty of the May 2025 AP AP World History: Modern paper. Not affiliated with or reproduced from AP.

部分 I Part B: Short-Answer Questions

Answer Question 1 and Question 2, and choose EITHER Question 3 OR Question 4. Use complete sentences. Suggested time: ~13 minutes per question (40 minutes total).

3 题目 · 9 分

题目 1 · free-response

3 分

“The disruption caused by the American Civil War precipitated an unprecedented crisis in the British textile industry, commonly referred to as the ‘Cotton Famine.’ To alleviate their acute vulnerability to supply shocks, British manufacturers and colonial administrators actively restructured the agricultural economies of India and Egypt to cultivate raw cotton on a commercial scale. Within a few decades, traditional subsistence agriculture in regions like the Nile Delta and the Deccan Plateau was drastically displaced by cash-crop export systems integrated directly into British industrial networks. While this reorganization secured the raw material flow to factories in Lancashire, it severely exposed local peasant populations to global market volatility and worsened the severity of late nineteenth-century famines.”

Source: Marcus Vance, historian, Weaving the Empire: Textiles, Trade, and Global Realignments, academic book published in 2012.

Respond to parts A, B, and C.

A. Identify one argument the author makes regarding British responses to the cotton shortage in the nineteenth century.

B. Describe one way the shift to commercial agriculture mentioned in the passage impacted societies in India or Egypt in the nineteenth century.

C. Explain how one piece of historical evidence, not mentioned in the passage, illustrates the broader pattern of raw material extraction in European colonial empires during the period circa 1750 to 1900.

查看答案详解

解题

Part A: Acceptable answers identify an argument directly from the passage, such as:
- The British restructured the agricultural economies of colonial and semi-colonial territories (India and Egypt) to secure an alternative supply of raw cotton.
- British imperial intervention aimed to reduce industrial reliance and vulnerability to external American supply disruptions.
- The economic reorganization benefited British domestic textile manufacturing (in Lancashire) at the direct expense and instability of peasant populations.

Part B: Acceptable answers describe an impact on Indian or Egyptian society mentioned or implied by the passage, such as:
- Peasant farmers were forced to abandon diversified subsistence farming in favor of mono-crop cash agriculture (cotton), reducing food crop availability.
- Local populations became deeply vulnerable to global commodity price fluctuations, resulting in debt and land loss.
- The conversion of arable land to cash crops contributed to vulnerability to devastating droughts and famines (such as the Great Famine of 1876–1878 in India).

Part C: Acceptable answers provide outside evidence showing imperialist extraction of raw materials in the 1750–1900 era, such as:
- King Leopold II and the Belgian administration extracted natural rubber and ivory from the Congo Free State using forced labor to supply European industrial demands for tires and machinery.
- The British developed extensive rubber plantations in Malaya and palm oil plantations in Nigeria to fuel industrial lubricants, soap production, and manufacturing.
- The Dutch Cultivation System in the Dutch East Indies (Indonesia) forced peasant farmers to set aside land for export crops like sugar and coffee instead of food crops.
- British and French demand for mineral resources led to large-scale copper and tin extraction in southern Africa and Southeast Asia.

评分标准

Part A (1 point): 1 point for correctly identifying an argument made by the author regarding the British response to the nineteenth-century cotton shortage.

Part B (1 point): 1 point for accurately describing how the expansion of commercial agriculture affected societies in India or Egypt during the nineteenth century.

Part C (1 point): 1 point for explaining with specific historical evidence (not in the passage) how raw material extraction functioned in the broader context of nineteenth-century European imperialism.

题目 2 · free-response

3 分

“The question before us is whether the current system of British governance in India tends toward our enduring prosperity or our material and moral impoverishment. Millions of our hardworking countrymen are reduced to surviving on a single meal a day, while vast shipments of raw cotton, grain, and wealth are continuously drained from our ports across the sea to enrich the manufacturing towns and investors of Great Britain. Scarcely any capital is left behind to foster indigenous manufacturing or establish domestic industries that could protect our people against recurrent famines. We demand not the overthrow of order, but an end to this economic depletion and the right of Indians to participate in the management of their own revenues.”

Source: Adapted from a speech by Dadabhai Naoroji, Indian political leader and economist, delivered to the Indian National Congress, Calcutta, 1886.

Respond to parts A, B, and C.

A. Identify one claim made by the author in the passage regarding the economic effects of British rule in India.

B. Describe one historical development in the nineteenth century that contributed to the economic relationship between Britain and India described in the passage.

C. Explain one way in which anti-colonial movements in Asia or Africa responded to European economic imperialism in the late nineteenth or early twentieth centuries.

查看答案详解

解题

Part A: The author argues that British colonial governance creates an economic drain on India by extracting raw commodities (cotton, grain, wealth) to enrich British industrial centers while undermining indigenous manufacturing, causing widespread poverty and vulnerability to famines.

Part B: During the nineteenth century, the Industrial Revolution led Britain to transform India's economy to serve British industrial needs. British factories required vast quantities of raw materials (such as cotton and indigo) and sought overseas markets to sell machine-made textiles. British colonial policies, including unequal tariffs and infrastructure projects like railways directed toward ports, reorganized India into a supplier of raw materials and a consumer of British finished goods.

Part C: In response to imperial economic exploitation, anti-colonial movements organized resistance through economic boycotts and political activism. In India, the Swadeshi movement encouraged the boycott of British goods and the purchase of domestically produced items (khadi). Similarly, in Africa and other parts of Asia, nationalist organizations and labor unions formed to petition for fiscal autonomy, stage strikes against foreign-owned mining and plantation operations, and demand political self-rule.

评分标准

Part A (1 point):
• 1 point for identifying an argument/claim made by the author regarding the economic effects of British rule.
• Acceptable responses include:
- British rule led to the 'drain of wealth' or resources from India to Great Britain.
- Colonial policies impoverished the Indian population and increased vulnerability to famines.
- British rule prevented the development/growth of domestic Indian industries.

Part B (1 point):
• 1 point for describing a 19th-century historical development that contributed to this economic relationship.
• Acceptable responses include:
- The Industrial Revolution in Britain increased demand for raw materials (e.g., cotton, cash crops) from colonies.
- British factory production of machine-made textiles undercut and deindustrialized India's traditional handloom cotton sector.
- The construction of railroads and port infrastructure in India designed to export raw materials to Britain rather than support internal trade.
- British imposition of free trade policies and tariffs that favored British manufactures over Indian goods.

Part C (1 point):
• 1 point for explaining how anti-colonial movements in Asia or Africa responded to European economic imperialism.
• Acceptable responses include:
- Establishing nationalist organizations (such as the Indian National Congress) to demand political representation and financial self-governance.
- Organizing economic boycotts of foreign goods (e.g., the Swadeshi movement promoting domestic textiles/goods).
- Armed resistance or rebellions against colonial taxation, resource exploitation, and forced labor systems.
- Formation of labor organizations and strikes targeting colonial extraction enterprises like mines or plantations.

题目 3 · free_response

3 分

Respond to parts A, B, and C.

A. Identify one technological innovation that facilitated European transoceanic voyages in the period circa 1450 to 1750.

B. Explain one way that European maritime expansion affected societies in West Africa in the period circa 1450 to 1750.

C. Explain one way that the global flow of American silver affected Asian economies in the period circa 1450 to 1750.

查看答案详解

解题

Part A (1 point): The response must accurately identify a specific technological innovation that facilitated European transoceanic voyages between 1450 and 1750 (e.g., caravel, fluyt, lateen sail, astrolabe, magnetic compass, or improved cartography).

Part B (1 point): The response must explain a specific effect of European maritime expansion on West African societies, such as the demographic shifts caused by the transatlantic trade in enslaved people, changes in family structures/gender roles, or the political rise of militarized coastal states trading captives for European firearms and manufactured goods.

Part C (1 point): The response must explain how the movement of American silver impacted Asian economies, such as commercializing the Chinese economy under the Ming Single Whip tax law requiring silver payments, or causing price inflation and economic volatility in East or South Asian imperial markets.

评分标准

General Scoring Notes:
- Each point is earned independently.
- Accuracy: Responses must demonstrate historically defensible content knowledge.
- Clarity: Exam responses are considered first drafts and may contain minor errors if they do not obscure meaning.

Part A (1 point):
Acceptable responses include:
- Development of new ship designs suitable for deep-sea navigation (e.g., the caravel, carrack, or Dutch fluyt).
- Adoption and refinement of navigational tools (e.g., astrolabe, magnetic compass, sextant).
- Use of triangular lateen sails that allowed ships to sail into the wind.
- Improved cartographic techniques and astronomical charts.

Part B (1 point):
Acceptable responses include:
- Explaining how the demand for enslaved labor on Atlantic plantations led to severe demographic imbalances in West Africa, such as a predominance of women in certain communities.
- Explaining how coastal kingdoms (e.g., Dahomey, Asante, Oyo) acquired European firearms in exchange for captives, consolidating centralized military power at the expense of interior societies.
- Explaining the shift of regional trade networks away from trans-Saharan routes toward Atlantic coastal ports.

Part C (1 point):
Acceptable responses include:
- Explaining how Ming and Qing dynasty tax reforms requiring silver payments increased Chinese demand for Spanish American silver, spurring commercial production of silk, porcelain, and tea.
- Explaining how influxes of silver into Asian markets caused monetary inflation and economic disruption in empires such as the Ming Dynasty or the Ottoman Empire.
- Explaining how European merchants used silver as a medium of exchange to gain direct access to luxury goods in South and East Asian ports.

准备好测试自己了吗？

将这些笔记转化为考试练习。获取此课题的无限AI题目，即时批改及详细解析。

练习此课题

部分 II Part A: Document-Based Question

Mandatory DBQ essay utilizing 7 provided documents. Suggested time: 15 minutes reading/planning, 45 minutes writing (60 minutes total).

1 题目 · 7 分

题目 1 · Document-Based Essay

7 分

Evaluate the extent to which imperial rulers in Eurasia utilized administrative centralization and religious policies to consolidate state authority during the period circa 1450 to 1750.

### Document 1
Source: Imperial Decree of Sultan Süleyman I (the Lawgiver), Ottoman Empire, issued to provincial judges (kadis), 1541.
> "Let it be known to all judges throughout our realm that justice must be administered strictly according to the Sharia and our imperial kanun (secular administrative law). No local governor or tax collector shall impose levies unauthorized by our sublime court. The Janissary garrisons stationed in your districts are commanded to enforce obedience to these decrees. Those officials who extort money from our Muslim and non-Muslim subjects alike shall face severe punishment, for the Sultan is the Shadow of God on Earth and the protector of all peoples entrusted to his care."

### Document 2
Source: Iskandar Beg Munshi, court historian to Shah Abbas I, History of Shah Abbas the Great, Safavid Empire, 1616.
> "His Majesty, may God perpetuate his reign, recognized that the unruly Qizilbash tribal chieftains posed a persistent threat to central stability. To counter this, the Shah established a standing royal army composed of ghulams (converted military slaves of Georgian and Armenian origins), armed with muskets and cannon, completely devoted to the crown. Furthermore, His Majesty revitalized the royal pilgrimage shrines in Ardabil and Mashhad, asserting his descent from the Seventh Imam, and required all state officials to reaffirm their unshakeable loyalty to Twelver Shi'a jurisprudence."

### Document 3
Source: Abu'l-Fazl ibn Mubarak, chief advisor and court historian to Emperor Akbar, Akbarnama / Ain-i-Akbari, Mughal Empire, circa 1595.
> "The Emperor, recognizing the vast diversity of our realm, established the principle of Sulh-i-Kul (universal peace). He realized that a monarch who favors only one religious faction cannot truly be the shepherd of his people. Therefore, the jizya tax upon non-Muslims was abolished, and learned scholars of Hindu, Muslim, Zoroastrian, and Christian traditions were invited to debate in the Hall of Worship (Ibadat Khana). Furthermore, the imperial administration reorganized the tax system through the mansabdari ranks, ensuring military commanders and revenue collectors (zamindars) served at the sovereign's discretion rather than hereditary right."

### Document 4
Source: Imperial Edict of Emperor Kangxi, Qing Dynasty, issued to provincial administrators across China, 1670.
> "To cultivate public morality and preserve order among all subjects: Let filial piety and brotherly submission be esteemed; let local clans settle disputes peacefully; let agricultural work and the weaving of silk be promoted; and let false teachings and heterodox religious sects be rigorously suppressed. In governance, our Manchu and Han civil officials must work jointly within the Grand Secretariat and provincial offices, adhering strictly to the examinations based on the Neo-Confucian classics. By honoring the Mandate of Heaven and benevolent rule, internal peace is secured."

### Document 5
Source: Peter I (the Great), Tsar and Emperor of Russia, Decree on the Table of Ranks, 1722.
> "All civil, military, and naval servants of the Russian Empire shall henceforth be divided into fourteen distinct hierarchical ranks. Noble birth alone shall no longer entitle an individual to high imperial office or military command; every servant of the state must advance rank by rank through demonstrated merit, specialized education, and loyal service to the Crown. Commoners who attain the eighth rank in civil or military service shall be granted hereditary nobility, ensuring that our state is governed by capable men bound directly to the sovereign."

### Document 6
Source: Tokugawa Hidetada, second Tokugawa Shogun, Laws for the Military Houses (Buke Shohatto), Japan, 1615.
> "The Daimyo (feudal lords) of all provinces shall strictly maintain their castle fortresses in repair, but no new fortifications may be erected without the explicit permission of the Shogunate. Inter-provincial marriages among daimyo families must be approved by the central authorities in Edo. Each lord must spend every second year in alternate residence (sankin-kotai) attending the Shogun's court, leaving their principal wives and heirs as hostages in Edo. Any lord who harbors outlaws or spreads Christianity, which undermines filial duty and state harmony, will have his domain confiscated."

### Document 7
Source: Bishop Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet, French court preacher and political theorist, Politics Drawn from the Very Words of Holy Scripture, dedicated to King Louis XIV, 1679.
> "Royal authority is sacred, paternal, and absolute. Kings are ministers of God and his lieutenants on earth. The royal throne is not the throne of a man, but the throne of God Himself. It appears from all this that the person of the King is sacred, and that to attack him in any way is sacrilege. To maintain unity of faith and order within the state, subjects must yield unquestioning obedience to the sovereign, who answers only to the Divine for his governance. Religious schism and internal rebellion are an abomination against both God and the stability of the kingdom."

查看答案详解

解题

### High-Scoring Response Outline & Analysis

1. Thesis / Line of Reasoning:
- Sample Thesis: "Between 1450 and 1750, Eurasian imperial rulers heavily relied on administrative centralization—through standing military forces, meritocratic bureaucracies, and systematic surveillance—and used religious policies, whether enforcing religious orthodoxy or implementing tactical tolerance, as essential instruments to suppress regional noble autonomy and legitimize supreme political authority."

2. Contextualization:
- Situate the prompt within the broader Early Modern era (1450–1750): the rise of "Gunpowder Empires," maritime expansion, the decline of decentralized feudalism, the transition from fragmented feudal/tribal authority to bureaucratized land-based states, and the use of monumental architecture and imperial ideologies across Eurasia.

3. Evidence from the Documents:
- Doc 1 (Ottoman Empire / Süleyman): Shows administrative law (kanun) alongside Sharia to regulate tax extraction and maintain imperial control over provincial governors via Janissary garrisons.
- Doc 2 (Safavid Empire / Shah Abbas): Demonstrates administrative reliance on slave-soldier corps (ghulams) to check tribal elites (Qizilbash) coupled with the enforcement of Twelver Shi'ism to build theological legitimacy.
- Doc 3 (Mughal Empire / Akbar): Illustrates religious tolerance (Sulh-i-Kul, abolition of jizya) and administrative restructuring (mansabdari system) to govern a Hindu-majority population under a Muslim ruling minority.
- Doc 4 (Qing Dynasty / Kangxi): Explains the use of Confucian moral/ideological appeals and the civil service examination system combined with joint Manchu-Han governance to secure the Mandate of Heaven and legitimacy.
- Doc 5 (Russian Empire / Peter the Great): Exemplifies administrative modernization and bureaucratic centralization through the Table of Ranks to subordinate boyar nobility to state service.
- Doc 6 (Tokugawa Japan / Shogunate): Highlights institutional surveillance and fiscal control (sankin-kotai / alternate attendance) and religious restriction (expulsion of Christianity) to prevent regional daimyo rebellion.
- Doc 7 (France / Bossuet / Louis XIV): Shows the deployment of Divine Right of Kings to justify royal absolutism and enforce religious conformity against potential internal dissent.

4. Evidence Beyond the Documents (Outside Information):
- Examples: The Ottoman devshirme system of recruiting Christian youths into elite administrative and military roles; Louis XIV's revocation of the Edict of Nantes (Edict of Fontainebleau, 1685) to enforce religious unity; the construction of the Palace of Versailles to monitor French nobility; Akbar's syncretic philosophy (Din-i Ilahi); the establishment of the Russian Holy Synod by Peter the Great to control the Orthodox Church.

5. Sourcing (POV, Purpose, Situation, Audience):
- Doc 1 (Süleyman I): Royal decree intending to standardize taxation and project royal authority across disparate provinces.
- Doc 2 (Iskandar Beg Munshi): Court historian seeking to glorify Shah Abbas's centralization reforms and emphasize his legitimate Shi'a lineage.
- Doc 3 (Abu'l-Fazl): Imperial advisor writing to justify Akbar's controversial non-sectarian policies to orthodox Muslim critics.
- Doc 6 (Tokugawa Hidetada): Legal code directly aiming to restrict military build-up and alliances among regional daimyo after decades of Sengoku civil war.
- Doc 7 (Bossuet): Catholic bishop writing for the education of the French royal heir to reinforce monarchy as divinely mandated and unquestionable.

6. Complex Understanding:
- Synthesizing how imperial strategies varied based on demographics (e.g., Qing adopting Confucianism to appease Han majorities and Mughals using tolerance, while Safavids and Bourbon France demanded strict religious conformity).
- Comparing how European and Asian land-based empires independently developed bureaucratic mechanisms (Table of Ranks, mansabdari, sankin-kotai) to break the power of traditional hereditary landed aristocracies.

评分标准

Scoring Guidelines (7 points total):

- Row A: Thesis/Claim (0–1 pt):
- 1 pt: Responds to the prompt with a historically defensible thesis/claim that establishes a line of reasoning regarding the extent to which imperial rulers used administrative centralization and/or religious policies.
- 0 pt: Merely restates the prompt, makes an unsupported claim, or lacks a specific line of reasoning.

- Row B: Contextualization (0–1 pt):
- 1 pt: Accurately describes a broader historical context relevant to early modern state consolidation, the Gunpowder Revolution, or ideological/religious shifts (1450–1750).
- 0 pt: Offers only a passing phrase or irrelevant context.

- Row C: Evidence from Documents (0–2 pts):
- 1 pt: Accurately uses the content of at least 3 documents to address the prompt.
- 2 pts: Supports an argument in response to the prompt using content from at least 4 documents.

- Row C: Evidence Beyond the Documents (0–1 pt):
- 1 pt: Uses at least one additional piece of specific, relevant historical evidence (not found in the documents) that supports an argument (e.g., devshirme, Palace of Versailles, Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, Holy Synod, Din-i-Ilahi).

- Row D: Sourcing (0–1 pt):
- 1 pt: Explains how or why the document's point of view, purpose, historical situation, and/or audience is relevant to an argument for at least 2 documents.

- Row D: Complex Understanding (0–1 pt):
- 1 pt: Demonstrates a complex understanding of the historical development through nuanced argumentation (e.g., comparing divergent religious strategies of conformity vs. tolerance; analyzing how different empires handled aristocratic resistance; evaluating the intersection of military innovation and ideological control; or using all 7 documents effectively).

部分 II Part B: Long Essay Question

Choose ONE essay prompt from three options (Option 2: Units 1-2, Option 3: Units 3-4, Option 4: Units 5-9). Suggested time: 40 minutes.

1 题目 · 6 分

题目 1 · long_essay_question

6 分

In the period circa 1450 to 1750, rulers of land-based empires across Afro-Eurasia utilized a variety of methods to consolidate and legitimize their political authority.

Develop an argument that evaluates the extent to which religious traditions and ideologies were the primary means used by rulers to legitimize their authority in land-based empires during this period.

查看答案详解

解题

### Model Response Outline

1. Thesis / Claim (1 point):
Example: "Although monumental architecture and military force played vital roles in maintaining political control, rulers of land-based empires in the period 1450–1750 relied primarily on religious traditions and ideologies to legitimize their authority, as shown by the Ottoman defense of Sunni orthodoxy, European claims of divine right, and the Safavid enforcement of Twelver Shi'ism to sanctify imperial power."

2. Contextualization (1 point):
Broader context: In the wake of the Mongol collapses and the rapid adoption of gunpowder weapons, powerful centralized land-based empires (such as the Ottoman, Safavid, Mughal, Qing, and Russian empires, as well as European monarchies) expanded over culturally and ethnically diverse populations. To govern effectively without relying solely on continuous coercive military force, monarchs required robust ideological foundations to validate their sovereignty and demand obedience from subjects and regional elites.

3. Evidence and Support (2 points):
Evidence 1: Safavid Shahs claimed descent from early Shi'ite Imams and declared Twelver Shi'ism as the mandatory state religion, using religious sectarianism to unite their empire and sharply distinguish themselves from neighboring Sunni rivals like the Ottomans.
Evidence 2: Ottoman sultans integrated Islamic law (Sharia) into administrative decrees (kanun) and assumed the title of Caliph after conquering the Mamluk Sultanate in 1517, portraying themselves as the supreme protectors of the holy cities (Mecca and Medina) and universal defenders of Sunni Islam.
Evidence 3: In Western Europe, absolutist monarchs like Louis XIV of France utilized the doctrine of the "Divine Right of Kings" (articulated by theorists such as Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet) to argue that royal authority derived directly from God, placing the monarch beyond accountability to earthly assemblies or aristocrats.
Evidence 4: Qing emperors adopted traditional Confucian court ceremonies, sponsored the civil service examinations based on the Neo-Confucian classics, and performed ancestral rites to claim the Mandate of Heaven and establish legitimate dynastic rule over the Han Chinese majority.

4. Historical Reasoning (1 point):
Causation / Comparison: The response demonstrates that while military conquest initially acquired vast lands, religious legitimation was essential for long-term stability and internal integration by transforming raw coercive power into moral and spiritual duty across multiethnic realms.

5. Complex Understanding (1 point):
Nuance / Counter-argument: Explaining that while religious legitimation was powerful, it was often tempered or combined with non-religious mechanisms such as monumental architecture (e.g., Versailles, Taj Mahal, Saint Petersburg) to visually project royal splendor, or economic reforms (tax farming, imperial monopolies) and elite administrative recruitments (such as the Ottoman devshirme or Mughal zamindars) that secured material control independent of religious authority.

评分标准

Row A: Thesis/Claim (0–1 pt)
- 1 pt: Responds to the prompt with a historically defensible thesis/claim that establishes a clear line of reasoning regarding the extent to which religious traditions were the primary means used to legitimize authority in land-based empires (circa 1450–1750).
- 0 pt: Simply restates/rephrases the prompt, makes an overly vague claim, or provides no line of reasoning.

Row B: Contextualization (0–1 pt)
- 1 pt: Accurately describes a broader historical context relevant to imperial expansion, gunpowder consolidation, state-building, or religious fragmentation across Afro-Eurasia (circa 1450–1750).
- 0 pt: Merely mentions a passing fact or refers to context outside the relevant period/topic without elaboration.

Row C: Evidence (0–2 pts)
- 1 pt: Provides at least two specific, relevant historical examples related to methods used by rulers to legitimize authority (e.g., Divine Right of Kings, Ottoman Caliphate claims, Safavid Twelver Shi'ism, Akbar's syncretic policies, Kangxi's Confucian patronages).
- 2 pts: Uses at least two specific, relevant historical examples to actively support an argument in response to the prompt.

Row D: Analysis and Reasoning (0–2 pts)
- 1 pt (Historical Reasoning): Uses historical reasoning (e.g., causation, comparison, continuity and change) to structure an argument addressing the prompt.
- 1 pt (Complexity): Demonstrates a complex historical understanding through sophisticated argumentation, such as:
- Explaining nuance by evaluating multiple methods of rule (e.g., balancing religious ideology against military recruitment and bureaucratic tax systems);
- Comparing the divergent applications of religious legitimation in different regions (e.g., tolerance in the Mughal Empire under Akbar vs. strict sectarian enforcement in Safavid Persia);
- Analyzing both continuities and shifts in how traditional belief systems were adapted for imperial governance.

想知道自己有几分把握？

thinka 是 DSE 学生在用的 AI 练习应用，提供无限量练习题、即时自动批改和详细解题步骤。超过 100,000 名学生用它确认自己是真的会，而不只是「以为会」。

免费开始练习查看方案

想练更多同类题型？在 thinka 无限量刷题，即时知道答案。

免费开始练习