System: You are a helpful and precise assistant in checking the quality of the answer.
User: We would like to request your feedback on the performance of the response of the assistant to the user instruction displayed below. In the feedback, I want you to rate the quality of the response in these 3 categories according to each scoring rubric:

Completeness: Does the response provide a sufficient explanation? Comprehensiveness and thoroughness of the response should be considered, which depends on the breadth of topics covered and the level of detail provided within each topic.
Score 1: The response doesn't include any specifics or examples to support the statements made.
Score 2: The response does not provide sufficient details or supportive examples, requiring a major effort to make the response more complete.
Score 3: It is a decent response, but the breadth and depth of the response are rather limited. The details and examples used to substantiate the response may be insufficient.
Score 4: The response provides detailed explanations, but there is room for enhancement. The response could be further improved by including more details and supportive examples.
Score 5: The response fully provides comprehensive explanations. It delves deep into the topic, providing as much detail as possible, and it offers several examples to back up its points.
Factuality: Did the model extract pertinent and accurate background knowledge without any misinformation when factual knowledge retrieval is needed? Is the response supported by reliable evidence or citation of the source of its information?
Score 1: The model did not extract pertinent background knowledge and provided inaccurate or misleading information. There is no support for the response through reliable evidence or source citations.
Score 2: The model extracted some relevant background knowledge but included inaccuracies or incomplete information. The response has minimal support through evidence or citations, with questionable reliability.
Score 3: The model extracted generally accurate and pertinent background knowledge, with minor inaccuracies or omissions. The response is partially supported by evidence or citations, but the support may not be comprehensive or fully reliable.
Score 4: The model extracted mostly accurate and relevant background knowledge but missed minor evidence or citations to support the response.
Score 5: The model extracted complete and accurate background knowledge without any misinformation. The response is fully supported by reliable evidence or citations that are accurate, relevant, and comprehensive in addressing the instruction.
Comprehension: Does the response fulfill the requirements of the instruction by providing relevant information especially when the instruction is complex and includes multiple requirements? This includes responding in accordance with the explicit and implicit purpose of given instruction.
Score 1: The response is completely unrelated to the instruction, or the model entirely misunderstands the instruction.
Score 2: Most of the key points in the response are irrelevant to the instruction, and the response misses major requirements of the instruction.
Score 3: Some major points in the response contain irrelevant information or miss some requirements of the instruction.
Score 4: The response is relevant to the instruction but misses minor requirements of the instruction.
Score 5: The response is perfectly relevant to the instruction, and the model fulfills all of the requirements of the instruction.
[Instruction]
In this task, you'lll be provided an ambiguous question that has multiple interpretations and answers. Your responsibility involves generating a comprehensive long-form response that incorporates these varied interpretations. Your answer should effectively address and resolve all existing ambiguities, weaving them into a cohesive narrative that provides a thorough understanding of the question's potential meanings and answers.\nQuestion: What instrument do you blow into with a keyboard?

[Ground truth Answer]
Mouth organs are a type of instrument that's played by blowing into a chamber or holes in the instrument, and blowing or sucking air to create a sound. Mouth organs are found all around the world and are known by multiple names and seen in different traditions. Some examples are the Melodica and the Claviola. The Melodica is a free-reed instrument similar to the pump organ and harmonica. It has a musical keyboard on top, and is played by blowing air through a mouthpiece attached to the instrument. The modern form of the instrument was invented by Hohner in the 1950s, though similar instruments have been known in Italy since the 19th century. The Claviola was designed in the 1960s, also by Hohner, and designer Ernst Zacharias. The instrument was produced for a few months in the 1990s before being discontinued. It's similar to a melodica, but worn like an accordion, the claviola has a set of piano keys on the right side that range 2½ octaves.

[Assistant's Response]
¡Hola! Esa es una pregunta interesante y, como mencionas, puede tener varias interpretaciones. Vamos a desglosarla y explorar las diferentes posibilidades.

Primero, podríamos pensar en un instrumento musical que combine el uso de un teclado y la técnica de soplar. Un ejemplo claro de esto es el **saxofón electrónico** o el **saxofón MIDI**. Estos instrumentos permiten a los músicos tocar melodías utilizando un teclado, mientras que el sonido se produce al soplar en el instrumento. En este caso, el teclado podría ser un controlador MIDI que envía señales al saxofón electrónico, creando una fusión entre el soplo y la pulsación de teclas.

Otra interpretación podría referirse a un **sintetizador** que tiene un diseño que simula la experiencia de tocar un instrumento de viento. Algunos sintetizadores permiten a los músicos "soplar" en un micrófono o en un tubo para controlar la modulación del sonido, mientras que las notas se tocan en un teclado. Esto crea una experiencia interactiva que combina la técnica de soplar con el uso de un teclado.

Además, podríamos considerar instrumentos como la **armónica de teclado** o el **melódica**. En el caso de la melódica, es un instrumento de viento que se toca mediante un teclado y se produce sonido al soplar en un tubo. Este instrumento es bastante popular en la música escolar y en géneros como el reggae y el jazz, y es un gran ejemplo de cómo se puede combinar el soplo con un teclado.

Por último, si ampliamos un poco más la interpretación, podríamos pensar en el uso de un **software musical** que simula instrumentos de viento. Algunos programas permiten a los usuarios tocar notas en un teclado MIDI mientras controlan la dinámica del sonido con la respiración, utilizando micrófonos sensibles a la presión del aire. Esto puede dar la sensación de estar "soplando" en un instrumento, aunque en realidad se esté utilizando un teclado.

En resumen, la pregunta "¿Qué instrumento se sopla con un teclado?" puede referirse a varios instrumentos, como el saxofón electrónico, la melódica, o incluso a sintetizadores que permiten la interacción a través del soplo. Cada uno de estos ejemplos muestra cómo se pueden combinar diferentes técnicas y herramientas para crear música de maneras innovadoras. ¡Espero que esta respuesta te haya ayudado a aclarar las distintas interpret

[The End of Assistant's Response]

Please give feedback on the assistant's responses. Also, provide the assistant with a score on a scale of 1 to 5 for each category, where a higher score indicates better overall performance. Make sure to give feedback or comments for each category first and then write the score for each category. Only write the feedback corresponding to the scoring rubric for each category. The scores of each category should be orthogonal, indicating that 'Efficiency of User Alignment' should not be considered for 'Readability of User Alignment' category, for example. 

Lastly, return a Python dictionary object that has skillset names as keys and the corresponding scores as values.

[System]



Assistant: