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
The present invention relates to a vehicle body assembly which is commonly used for a four-wheel-steering vehicle and a two-wheel-steering vehicle. More specifically, the present invention pertains to a suspension system and/or a steering system which are incorporated in such a commonly used vehicle body assembly.
2. Description of the Prior Art
It has been known that there are two types vehicles in terms of steering system provided therewith. One is provided with a two-wheel steering system for front wheels, which is usually referred to as a 2-WS vehicle, whereas the other is provided with a four-wheel steering system for rear wheels as well as front wheels and is referred to as a 4-WS vehicle. The 4-WS vehicle has improved turning ability and a driving stability compared to a 2-WS vehicle especially in high-speed turning conditions. An example of a 4-WS vehicle is disclosed in Japanese Publication No. 62-9076, wherein a vehicle has a four-wheel steering apparatus for steering rear wheels in response to the steering of the front wheels. In a typical 4-WS vehicle th rear wheels are steered in the same direction as the front wheels at a relatively high vehicle speed, so that the lateral forces are applied to the rear wheels as well as the front wheels when cornering, which allows the vehicle attitude to be maintained along a tangential line of a turning circle in good response to the operation of the steering wheel. Thus, lane changes at high speed and the like can be carried out smoothly. Where the vehicle speed is low, the rear wheels are steered in the opposite direction to the front wheels so that the vehicle can be turned in a small radius, which is useful when making U-turns and parking.
As described above, when a 4-MS vehicle turns at high speed, both the front wheels and the rear wheels are steered in the same phase, so lateral forces are applied to the rear wheels as well as the front wheels which causes the lateral forces applied to the front wheels to be greater than those applied to the front wheels of a 2-WS vehicle at the same running condition. Furthermore, since the rear wheels are steered in the same phase as the front wheels at a high vehicle speed it is required to turn the steering wheel further in a 4-WS vehicle than in a 2-WS vehicle in order to negotiate the same curve at high speed. This also causes an increase in the lateral forces applied on the front wheels of a 4-WS vehicle when the vehicle turns at high speed. Considering the fact that a 4-WS vehicle has more driving stability and tends to be driven at a higher speed when cornering, the front wheels are subjected to much larger lateral forces than the front wheels of a 2-WS vehicle. Accordingly, a 4-WS vehicle should have a front-wheel suspension system which is stronger than that of a 2-WS vehicle so as to withstand the larger lateral forces applied on the front wheels.
In terms of rolling of a vehicle body, it is smaller in a 4-WS vehicle than in a 2-WS vehicle under the same turning condition. The reason is that a four-wheel steering system allows a vehicle to maintain its attitude with four wheels during turning, so the amount of slip of the vehicle body away from its line of movement is smaller in a 4-WS vehicle than it is in a 2-WS vehicle. Therefore, lateral acceleration on a 4-WS vehicle body when turning tends to be lower than that on a 2-WS vehicle body, so the 4-WS vehicle body rolls less than a 2-WS vehicle body. This means that the degree of rigidity against rolling of the suspension system in a 4-WS vehicle can be lower than that of the suspension system in a 2-WS vehicle.
It has also been known for the two types of vehicles to be marketed under the same brand name. In such cases, the vehicles have almost the same vehicle structures in terms of size and members of the body, suspension system, and front steering system. This commonly-used vehicle structure has been proposed mainly for saving on manufacturing costs. Usually this type of body structure is designed for a 2-WS vehicle. However, where the commonly-used vehicle structure is directly adapted for a 4-WS vehicle, there arises a risk that the front suspension system thereof will not have enough strength to bear the lateral forces on the front wheels, these lateral forces being much larger than in the case of a 2-WS vehicle, as mentioned above. Hence, undesirable deformation may be produced in suspension members and undesirable vibration in the front suspension system. On the contrary, when the commonly-used vehicle body is adapted for a 4-WS vehicle, the front suspension system thereof exhibits too high a rigidity against rolling of the vehicle body, which adversely effects riding comfort. Further, where a front steering system is adopted to a 4-WS vehicle so that rear wheels are steered in the same phase as front wheels, during high-speed turning the driver has to operate a steering wheel more than in a 2-WS vehicle. Therefore, a driver cannot expect to handle 4-WS and 2-WS vehicles in the same manner at a high-speed turning.