You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to biomedical devices, and more particularly relates to a polyurethane of high stability to body fluids which are suitable for long term implants.
2. Background of the Invention
Extensive investigations have been undertaken over many years to find materials that will be biologically and chemically stable toward body fluids. This area of research has become increasingly important with the development of various objects and articles which can be in contact with blood or other body fluids, such as artificial organs, vascular grafts, probes, cannulas, catheters and the like. Biostability is particularly important for articles intended for long term contact with the body environment.
Synthetic plastics are preferred materials for such articles. Polyurethanes in particular possess an outstanding balance of physical and mechanical properties and superior blood compatibility compared to other polymers such as silicone rubber, polyethylene, polyvinyl chloride and perfluorinated polymers. As a result, they have come to the fore as the preferred polymeric biomaterials for fabrication of various medical device components. Some important device applications for polyurethanes include peripheral and central venous catheters, coatings for heart pacemaker leads and the Jarvik heart.
Polyurethanes are synthesized from three basic components, a polyisocyanate, a polyglycol and an extender, usually a low molecular weight diol, diamine, aminoalcohol or water. If the extender is a diol, the polyurethane consists entirely of urethane linkages. If the extender is water, aminoalcohol or a diamine, both urethane and urea linkages are present and the polyurethane is more accurately and conventionally termed a polyurethaneurea. In the present disclosure, polyurethanes and polyurethaneureas are generically referred to as polyurethanes.
Polyurethanes are known to develop microdomains conventionally termed hard segments and soft segments, and as a result are often referred to as segmented polyurethanes. The hard segments form by localization of the portions of the polymer molecules which include the isocyanate and extender components and are generally of high crystallinity. The soft segments form from the polyglycol portions of the polymer chains and generally are either noncrystalline or of low crystallinity. Crystallinity and hard segment content are important contributing factors to polymer properties. A discussion of the effect of structure on the stability of polyurethanes has been presented by Lemm in Polyurethanes in Biomedical Engineering, H. Planck et al., ed., Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1984, p 103.
The usual polyglycols for polyurethane synthesis are polyetherglycols and polyester lycols. It is, however, well-known that both of these classes of polyglycol soft segment components are subject to degradation in the body environment and may not be suitable for biomedical applications. On one hand, segmented polyurethanes produced from polyester diol soft segments may be subject to rapid hydrolysis of the ester functional group. On the other hand, polyurethanes produced with polyether diol soft segment have been reported to undergo extensive oxidative degradation. It is therefore desirable to eliminate these functional groups during the initial design of a potentially biostable polyurethane, and various disclosures have been directed to polyurethanes having other soft segments. Thus, Coury et al., in U.S. Pat. No. 4,873,308 discloses polyurethanes in which the soft segment is a hydrocarbon diol. Likewise, Murai et al., in U.S. Pat. No. 4,978,691 discloses polyurethanes in which the soft segment is a polycarbonate diol.
A second problem with respect to use of polymers for biomedical devices is the thrombogenic potential of polymeric surfaces in contact with blood. Thrombogenicity has conventionally been counteracted by the use of anticoagulents such as heparin. Various procedures for attachment of heparin to otherwise thrombogenic surfaces have been disclosed. Eriksson et al., in U.S. Pat. No. 3,634,123 discloses steeping a plastic surface sequentially in a solution of a cationic surface active agent and an aqueous solution of heparin to ionically bond the heparin. Improvements in the surface active agent method have been disclosed by Eriksson in U.S. Pat. No. 3,810,781, by Williams et al. in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,349,467 and 4,613,517 and by Hu et al. in U.S. Pat. No. 4,865,870.
Ferruti et al. disclose the heparin binding capacity of crosslinked polyamidoamines prepared by reacting diamines with bis acryloylpiperazines (Biomaterials, 218 (1983). Azzuoli et al., in Biomaterials 8,61 (1987) coats a polyurethane with a diisocyanate, and reacts the diisocyanate with the polyamidoamine of Ferruti et al. supra. The grafted polyamidoamine is then protonated and treated with a heparin salt.
Covalent bonding of aldehyde-actuated heparin to an amine rich polyurethane surface is disclosed by Solomon et al. in U.S. Pat. No. 4,521,564.
While the above disclosures have improved materials for biomedical devices, further improvements, in particular long term stability are needed. The present invention is directed to fulfilling this need.