In this task, you are given a paragraph (from a research paper) and your task is to classify each sentence of the paragraph (assume n sentence) into the following categories: Background, Purpose, Method, Finding/Contribution, or Other. Return the output in this format: 1 - category of sentence 1, 2 - category of sentence 2, ..., n - category of sentence n; where each number indicates the order of the sentence. The categories can be identified using the following questions: 
 Background: - Why is this problem important? - What relevant works have been done before? - What did the previous works miss? - What are the high-level research questions? - How might this help other researchers?
 Purpose: - What specific things do the researchers want to do? - What specific knowledge do the researchers want to know? - What specific hypothesis do the researchers want to test?
 Method: - How did the researchers do it or find it out? - What are the procedures and steps of this research?
 Finding/Contribution: - What did the researchers find out? Did the proposed methods work? - Did things behave as the researchers expected?
Other: put every text fragment that does not fit into any of the categories above here. Put a sentence here if its not in English, is not part of the article, contains numbers and dates, is a caption of a figure or a table, is a formatting error, or you are not sure about it.

Ex Input:
As expected, cats from endemic areas produce IFN-γ after ex vivo blood stimulation with LSA and therefore are able to activate a cell-mediated adaptive immune response against the parasite that is variably associated with antibody or blood PCR positivity. The association of this assay to serological and molecular tests provides a better estimate of cat exposure to L. infantum.

Ex Output:
1 - finding, 2 - finding


Ex Input:
A series of etacrynic acid derivatives was synthesized and screened for their in vitro activity against Plasmodium falciparum, as well as their activity against recombinantly expressed falcipain-2 and -3. The two most active compounds of the series displayed IC 50 values of 9.0 and 18.8 μM against Plasmodia.

Ex Output:
1 - method, 2 - method, 3 - finding


Ex Input:
Objectives: Many patients with influenza have more than one viral agent with co-infection frequencies reported as high as 20%. The impact of respiratory virus copathogens on influenza disease is unclear. We sought to determine if respiratory virus co-infection with pandemic H1N1 altered clinical disease. Methods: Respiratory samples from 229 and 267 patients identified with and without H1N1 influenza respectively were screened for the presence of 13 seasonal respiratory viruses by multiplex RT-PCR. Disease severity between coinfected and monoinfected H1N1 patients were quantified using a standardized clinical severity scale. Influenza viral load was calculated by quantitative RT-PCR. Results: Thirty (13.1%) influenza samples screened positive for the presence of 31 viral copathogens. The most prominent copathogens included rhinovirus (61.3%), and coronaviruses (16.1%). Median clinical severity of both monoinfected and coinfected groups were 1. Patients coinfected with rhinovirus tended to have lower clinical severity (median 0), whereas non-rhinovirus co-infections had substantially higher clinical severity (median 2). No difference in H1N1 viral load was observed between coinfected and monoinfected groups. Conclusions: Respiratory viruses co-infect patients with influenza disease. Patients coinfected with rhinovirus had less severe disease while non-rhinovirus co-infections were associated with substantially higher severity without changes in influenza viral titer.

Ex Output:

1 - purpose, 2 - purpose, 3 - purpose, 4 - method, 5 - method, 6 - method, 7 - finding, 8 - finding, 9 - finding, 10 - finding, 11 - finding, 12 - finding, 13 - finding, 14 - finding, 15 - finding