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.

Q: Background Paragraph: No doubt you already have a good idea of what temperature is. You might say that it’s how warm or cool something feels. In physics, temperature is defined as the average kinetic energy of the particles of matter. When particles of matter move more quickly, they have more kinetic energy, so their temperature is higher. With a higher temperature, matter feels warmer. When particles move more slowly, they have less kinetic energy on average, so their temperature is lower. With a lower temperature, matter feels cooler. 
Story: David is a physicist. He teaches school children how matters and energy work. One day he was teaching them about two particles of matter, particle A and particle B. Particle A moves faster, but particle B moves slower. He was showing the children about different characteristics of moving particles. 
Question: Would particle A have higher or lower temperature than particle B?

A: higher.
****
Q: Background Paragraph: The trade-off theory of capital structure is the idea that a company chooses how much debt finance and how much equity finance to use by balancing the costs and benefits. The classical version of the hypothesis goes back to Kraus and Litzenberger[1] who considered a balance between the dead-weight costs of bankruptcy and the tax saving benefits of debt. Often agency costs are also included in the balance. This theory is often set up as a competitor theory to the pecking order theory of capital structure. A review of the literature is provided by Frank and Goyal.[2]

An important purpose of the theory is to explain the fact that corporations usually are financed partly with debt and partly with equity. It states that there is an advantage to financing with debt, the tax benefits of debt and there is a cost of financing with debt, the costs of financial distress including bankruptcy costs of debt and non-bankruptcy costs (e.g. staff leaving, suppliers demanding disadvantageous payment terms, bondholder/stockholder infighting, etc.). The marginal benefit of further increases in debt declines as debt increases, while the marginal cost increases, so that a firm that is optimizing its overall value will focus on this trade-off when choosing how much debt and equity to use for financing. 
Story: Company X stopped taking on more debt, and decided to file for bankruptcy, while company Y, kept benefiting from the tax benefits of debt, having a lower debt level. 
Question: Which company discharged more debt, company X or company Y?

A: company X.
****
Q: Background Paragraph: Many different chemical substances cause cancer. Dozens of chemicals in tobacco smoke, including nicotine, have been shown to cause cancer ( Figure below ). In fact, tobacco smoke is one of the main sources of chemical carcinogens. Smoking tobacco increases the risk of cancer of the lung, mouth, throat, and bladder. Using smokeless tobacco can also cause cancer. Other chemicals that cause cancer include asbestos, formaldehyde, benzene, cadmium, and nickel. 
Story: Jim and Robert are identical twins both getting their yearly physical check ups at the doctor's office.  They are trying to figure out if they are at risk for any future health problems. Both of them consume the same diet and exercise the same amount, and were both raised in the exact same environment. But, Jim has smoked tobacco frequently for several years and Robert has never smoked tobacco in his life. 
Question: Who is at a lower risk for getting throat cancer the future?

A:
Robert.
****