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]


New York City water tank inspection results 2015-2017

Map by Ben Jay and Frank G. Runyeon

This interactive map is part of a City & State investigation that reported widespread neglect in the thousands of weathered wooden tanks that supply drinking water to millions of New York City residents. A review of city records indicates that most building owners still do not inspect and clean their tanks as the law has required for years, even after revisions to the health and administrative codes that now mandate annual filings.

The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, which is responsible for overseeing the water tanks, said the wood tanks are not a cause for concern. But scientists at the federal Environmental Protection Agency and public health experts consulted by City & State warned that animals can easily get into New York City’s water tanks, that mucky sediments inside the tanks may contain pathogens and that poorly maintained water tanks could be the source of disease outbreaks.

There are still many thousands of water tanks across the city for which there is no information at all. The city can’t even say with certainty how many there are or where they are located, much less their condition – even well-maintained water tanks accumulate layers of muck and bacterial slime.

About this map

As far as we know, this is the first-ever map of water tanks in New York City. We mapped over 13,000 water tank inspection reports that the city Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) provided to City & State in March 2018 via a Freedom of Information Law request. The inspection data mapped above covers reporting years 2015, 2016 and 2017. Every year, building owners and water tank cleaning companies are required to submit this information to the city as proof that they inspect their tanks annually and test them for bacteria – rules designed to keep water tanks safe for New Yorkers to drink from. Owners must submit a report as proof before Jan. 15 of the following year. If no report is filed, the city considers that evidence that the tank was not checked for sanitary or structural defects.

Disclaimer: This map is based on government data current as of March 27, 2018. City & State cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information presented here beyond the data we used to create it. The map should be used for informational purposes only and you should request the inspection records from buildings you are interested in. The latest data is available through this city portal: Rooftop Drinking Water Tank Inspection Results.

Displays:

Where Are The Tanks?

Blue: all the buildings that reported to DOHMH that they definitely have a drinking water tank. Since the 19th century, the vast majority of these tanks have been made of wood – mostly yellow cedar, some redwood – the rest are metal.

Yellow: buildings that the city estimates likely have a drinking water tank, though they don’t know for sure. This highlights every New York City building seven stories and taller without a tank inspection report.

Uninspected tank likely

These buildings have not reported a water tank inspection to the city, so we do not know for certain that they have a tank. That said, the city assumes that every building taller than six stories requires a tank to provide adequate water pressure. This is how DOHMH has estimated the total number of buildings with water tanks in the city. These buildings are marked in yellow to give a fuller picture of the city’s estimated universe of water tanks. Using the satellite view, perhaps you can visually confirm whether the building has a water tank on the roof. Remember, many buildings choose to hide their tanks behind tall walls or inside decorative enclosures.

Water Tanks Inspected

You have four options to view which tanks filed inspection reports: 2015, 2016, 2017, or All. Selecting an individual year will display all buildings who filed an inspection that year in green; and all buildings who did not file an inspection that year in red. Selecting “All” will display buildings who filed every year in green; and buildings who failed to file in at least one year in red.

It’s normal for tanks to accumulate sediment and biofilm between annual cleanings, but most water tank inspections describe suspiciously spotless water tanks. This is likely because many inspectors record tank conditions after they clean and disinfect the tank. We mapped the few results that show sanitary defects in city records. Even elite addresses find issues in their tanks, including evidence of insects, birds or rodents. These reports likely tell us more about the inspector’s honesty and interpretation of the city rules than the tanks’ condition relative to reportedly pristine tanks.

Bacteria:Coliform / E. coli

This shows the results of bacteriological testing of the building’s water. Many buildings don’t test their water tanks for bacteria until after they clean and disinfect them. Because of this, few reports find the two types of bacteria that the city requires building owners to test for: coliform and E. coli. Positive results display red, meaning they found bacteria, and negative results display white, meaning they did not find bacteria. Finding either of these bacteria in your water is bad news. They are indicators that there may be dangerous microbes in the water supply. E. coli is of particular concern because it is a sure sign that fecal matter is present.

Satellite View / Roadmap View & Clear Overlays:

You have two options for viewing the map by clicking the “Roadmap View” / “Satellite View” button. When you zoom all the way in on Satellite View, you see an aerial photograph of buildings. You’ll notice that the color overlays continue to show the building “footprint.” If this is distracting, you can remove the overlays by selecting the “Clear Overlays” button. Remember to click it again so you can view the overlays as you move around the map.

Government Links and Resources:

You can check a building’s most recent inspection filings through the Health Department’s portal.

For a primer on how NYC laws governing water tanks have evolved, see here.

If you want to complain to the city about your water quality or a water tank, you can call 311 or file a complaint online.

Your Right to Know

You have a right to request drinking water tank records from any building owner in New York City. Within 5 business days, the building owner must provide copies of records for the last five years of water tank inspections and water quality tests. (§141.07 Building Drinking Water Storage Tanks)

Add to Calender

As founder and research director of the Empire Center for Public Policy, E.J. McMahon is a go-to expert on budget plans and policy proposals. His organization promotes greater transparency, accountability and fiscal responsibility in state government, which often puts him at odds with lawmakers and the governor. McMahon previously worked as a journalist in Albany, as an Assembly Republican staffer and a budget adviser for almost 30 years, giving him great insight into the goings-on in the Capitol.