You are given a background paragraph that describes one or more causal or qualitative relationships such as a relationship in economics or a scientific law and a story that makes use of the concepts or the relationship described in the provided paragraph. You are also given a question about the story that requires an understanding of the relationship described in the background paragraph and the story. You need to come up with an answer to the given question; the answer will be a span from either the question or the story. In order to correctly answer the given question, you need to understand the relationship mentioned in the background paragraph and should be able to use it to understand that in the story. Your answer can not consist of any word that is not mentioned in any of these: the background paragraph, the story, or the question. You can directly copy and paste a span from the story or the question while answering the given question.

Input: Consider Input: Background Paragraph: A dilution effect is seen when animals living in a group "dilute" their risk of attack, each individual being just one of many in the group. George C. Williams and W.D. Hamilton proposed that group living evolved because it provides benefits to the individual rather than to the group as a whole, which becomes more conspicuous as it becomes larger. One common example is the shoaling of fish. Experiments provide direct evidence for the decrease in individual attack rate seen with group living, for example in Camargue horses in Southern France. The horse-fly often attacks these horses, sucking blood and carrying diseases. When the flies are most numerous, the horses gather in large groups, and individuals are indeed attacked less frequently. Water striders are insects that live on the surface of fresh water, and are attacked from beneath by predatory fish. Experiments varying the group size of the water striders showed that the attack rate per individual water strider decreases as group size increases. 
Story: Kenya's Masai Mara wildebeest migration is one of the greatest spectacles in the natural world. Every year thousands of wildebeests cross the Mara river. John went to see the migration last year. He noticed that the wildebeests crossed the the river in a very large group. He noted that as case A. His guide told him that is not the case in other times of the year. The wildebeests cross the river in smaller groups in other times. John noted that as case B. The guide added that in both cases on thing is constant, they are attacked by the lions. 
Question: Which case would see the dilution effect working better, case A or case B?

Output: case A.


Input: Consider Input: Background Paragraph: More than 170 million years ago, Antarctica was part of the supercontinent Gondwana. Over time, Gondwana gradually broke apart, and Antarctica as we know it today was formed around 25 million years ago. Antarctica was not always cold, dry, and covered in ice sheets. At a number of points in its long history, it was farther north, experienced a tropical or temperate climate, was covered in forests, and inhabited by various ancient life forms. 
Story: John was reading about a fascinating story of a scientist in a science fiction book. In that novel the scientist met with a mysterious wormhole while visiting Antarctica. First, the wormhole started the time travel in present day, which was designated as point A. Then it sent the scientist to 170 million years in the past, which was designated as point B. The scientist had the rare experience of visiting Antarctica in two different time periods, 170 million years apart. 
Question: Which point would see less ice sheets, point A or point B?

Output: point B.


Input: Consider Input: Background Paragraph: As a young man, Bohr worked in Rutherford’s lab in England. Because Rutherford’s model was weak on the position of the electrons, Bohr focused on them. He hypothesized that electrons can move around the nucleus only at fixed distances from the nucleus based on the amount of energy they have. He called these fixed distances energy levels, or electron shells. He thought of them as concentric spheres, with the nucleus at the center of each sphere. In other words, the shells consisted of sphere within sphere within sphere. Furthermore, electrons with less energy would be found at lower energy levels, closer to the nucleus. Those with more energy would be found at higher energy levels, farther from the nucleus. Bohr also hypothesized that if an electron absorbed just the right amount of energy, it would jump to the next higher energy level. Conversely, if it lost the same amount of energy, it would jump back to its original energy level. However, an electron could never exist in between two energy levels. These ideas are illustrated in the Figure below . 
Story: Greg was studying Bohr's model. He found it helpful to categorize different scenarios in the model. First, he labeled electron with higher energy as cat A, and electron with lower energy as cat B. Then he labeled electron that gained energy as cat C, and election that lost energy as cat D. 
Question: Would cat C Jump to higher level or go to lower level?


Output: Jump to higher level.