Given a question and a context passage, generate the answer having the word or phrase from the context passage. Here, the answer should be a shortest continous span from the passage.

[Q]: Context: How quickly is the human population growing? If we look at worldwide human population growth from 10,000 BCE through today, our growth looks like exponential growth. It increased very slowly at first, but later grew faster and faster as the population increased in size ( Figure 1.1). And recently, the human population has increased at a faster pace than ever before. It has taken only 12 years for the worlds population to increase from six billion to seven billion. Considering that in the year 1804, there were just one billion people, and in 1927, there were just two billion people (thats 123 years to increase from 1 to 2 billion), the recent increase in the human population growth rate is characteristic of exponential growth. Does this mean there are unlimited resources? Worldwide human population growth from 10,000 BCE through today. On the other hand, if you look at human population growth in specific countries, you may see a different pattern. On the level of a country, the history of human population growth can be divided into five stages, as described in Table 1.1. Some countries have very high birth rates, in some countries the growth rate has stabilized, and in some countries the growth rate is in decline. Stage 1 2 3 4 5 Description Birth and death rates are high and population growth is stable. This occurred in early human history. Significant drop in death rate, resulting in exponential growth. This occurred in 18th- and 19th-century Eu- rope. Population size continues to grow. Birth rates equal death rates and populations become stable. Total population size may level off. The United Nations and the U.S. Census Bureau predict that by 2050, the Earth will be populated by 9.4 billion people. Other estimates predict 10 to 11 billion. There are two different beliefs about what type of growth the human population will undergo in the future: 1. Neo-Malthusians believe that human population growth cannot continue without destroying the environment, and maybe humans themselves. 2. Cornucopians believe that the Earth can give humans a limitless amount of resources. They also believe that technology can solve problems caused by limited resources, such as lack of food. The Cornucopians believe that a larger population is good for technology and innovation. The 5-stage model above predicts that when all countries are industrialized, the human population will eventually level out. But many scientists and other Neo-Malthusians believe that humans have already gone over the Earths carrying capacity. That means, we may have already reached the maximum population size that can be supported, without destroying our resources and habitat. If this is true, then human overpopulation will lead to a lack of food and other resources. Overpopulation may also lead to increased disease, and/or war. These problems may cause the population of humans to crash. If these issues are not controlled, could the human population go extinct? Which of the above theories makes sense to you? Why? 
 Question: which is the last stage of human population growth?
[A]: total population size may level off.


[Q]: Context: The human NEDD4 gene is located on chromosome 15q21.3, and consists of 30 exons that transcribe five protein variants of NEDD4, all of which vary in the C2 domain but share 100% identity from the first WW domain through to the end of the protein. 
 Question: What species is NEDD4 specific to?
[A]: human


[Q]: Context: Gene expression signatures can provide an unbiased view into the molecular changes underlying biologically and medically interesting phenotypes. We therefore initiated this study to identify signatures that would be of utility in studying rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We used microarray profiling of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) in 30 RA patients to assess the effect of different biologic agent (biologics) treatments and to quantify the degree of a type-I interferon (IFN) signature in these patients. A numeric score was derived for the quantification step and applied to patients with RA. To further characterize the IFN response in our cohort, we employed type-I IFN treatment of PBMCs in vitro and in reporter assays. Profiling identified a subset of RA patients with upregulation of type-I IFN-regulated transcripts, thereby corroborating previous reports showing RA to be heterogeneous for an IFN component. A comparison of individuals currently untreated with a biologic with those treated with infliximab, tocilizumab, or abatacept suggested that each biologic induces a specific gene signature in PBMCs. It is possible to observe signs of type-I IFN pathway activation in a subset of clinically active RA patients without C-reactive protein elevation. Furthermore, biologics-specific gene signatures in patients with RA indicate that looking for a biologic-specific response pattern may be a potential future tool for predicting individual patient response. 
 Question: Which is the most common gene signature in Rheumatoid Arthritis patients?
[A]:
ifn signature