Given a document, an entity and its sentiment towards the entity, verify if it is the correct sentiment towards the entity. Answer should be yes or no. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].

[EX Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Pope Francis is Negative . How To Make The World A Better Place In 2018  According To Pope  Francis
 Pope Francis  has some surprising things to say about the state of the world.
On Monday   Pope Francis  delivered  his  annual address to  his  diplomatic corps  ambassadors from 183 nations to the Holy See. The speech outlined a bold vision for a peaceful  free and just world. The pontiff touched on themes that have been in the headlines  like the Syrian war and the Rohingya refugee crisis.
But  he  also drilled down on development topics like child labor  global inequality and the threat of technological advances that may put millions of people  especially the poorest  out of work.
Here are a few highlights from  his  speech  delivered at the Vatican Apostolic Palace in Vatican City:
[EX A]: no

[EX Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Charles Taylor is Neutral . Sirleaf  70  acknowledged before the commission in February that she gave up to $10 000 to a rebel group headed by Charles Taylor. Sirleaf said the money she sent while an expatriate was meant for humanitarian services and that she was never a member of the group  the National Patriotic Front.
 Information Minister Laurence Bropleh said Monday evening if the public had had any dissatisfaction with Sirleaf's involvement with Taylor at the time  they would have voted against her in 2005.
 In 2005 the Liberian people knew that President Sirleaf had contributed $10 000 to Taylor's movement  Bropleh said.
 An AP correspondent and others who covered the Liberian war can recall no humanitarian works by Taylor and his fighters  especially in the first months of the war when tens of thousands of refugees were fleeing across the borders to Ivory Coast and Guinea  where they were helped by international and government agencies.
 Then  most atrocities were committed by Doe's forces and Taylor was welcomed as a liberator fighting a barbaric dictatorship.
 "In defense of Ellen Johnson Sirleaf  she never hid the fact that she was curious about Taylor and what he was all about " said Huband  who drove with Johnson Sirleaf on her first trip to meet Taylor in May 1990. "A lot of people supported the idea of Doe being ousted and there had been so many attempts  and they all were foiled  at least one with the help of the American government  which continued to support Doe despite his brutality."
 "I never had the impression that Sirleaf supported Taylor  certainly not after it became clear his troops were out of control " Huband said. "Certainly there was no way she could predict the kind of atrocities that would be committed (by Taylor's fighters) ..."
[EX A]: no

[EX Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Daniel O'Neill is Negative . Daniel O'Neill â an economist at the University of Leeds in the United Kingdom â and several collaborators came up with 11 indicators that a country has met the needs of its citizens. They range from boosting life expectancy above age 65 to ensuring that at least 95 percent of its adult population has graduated from high school  has access to sanitation and earns more than the extreme poverty line of $1.90 a day.
From that  "we can calculate a carbon budget for the rest of the century " notes  O'Neill . And then dividing that by the number of people on the planet  "we can say  'OK  this is the carbon budget per person.' "
Unfortunately  "we really didn't find that " says  O'Neill .
"It's a worrying finding " says  O'Neill . But  he  cautions against concluding that there is simply no way for everyone to enjoy a decent life without destroying the planet. After all  these findings are based on how we are doing things now   he  says.
And  he  adds that this study actually points to one way to do that. Specifically   O'Neill  and  his  fellow researchers ran statistical tests to determine for each environmental measure how much damage it takes to produce a corresponding improvement on each of the social well-being indicators.
"And what we find is that it follows a curve of diminishing returns â as you use more resources you get less social bang for your buck " says  O'Neill . "So there's a turning point after which additional resource use contributes very little to social performance." Wealthy industrialized nations such as the United States  the United Kingdom and Canada have reached that point  says  O'Neill . "As we increase our resource use  we get almost no increase in human well-being from that."
And this means for these countries the strategy of growing the economy â basically trying to create new wealth â to boost the well-being of their underprivileged citizens is ineffective. A much better approach  argues  O'Neill   would be to focus on redistributing their existing wealth more equitably.
And if high-income countries were to adopt such an approach  says  O'Neill   they could reduce their use of resources. And that   he  says  would "free up the ecological space" for poor nations  where using resources still does make a big impact in improving people's lives.
[EX A]:
no