In this task, you're given passages that contain mentions of names of people, places, or things. Some of these mentions refer to the same person, place, or thing. Your job is to write questions that evaluate one's understanding of such references. Good questions are expected to link pronouns (she, her, him, his, their, etc.) or other mentions to people, places, or things to which they may refer. Do not ask questions that can be answered correctly without understanding the paragraph or having multiple answers. Avoid questions that do not link phrases referring to the same entity. For each of your questions, the answer should be one or more phrases in the paragraph, and it should be unambiguous.

Passage: Enter Nowhere opens with Jody and her boyfriend Kevin robbing a convenience store. Jody holds a gun to the cashier demanding he open the safe.  Cryptically, he tells her that he will do so but doesn't believe she can handle what's inside.  Clearly not amused, she shoots and kills him.
With money in her vest, she jumps in her car and drives only to end up at the cabin which is in the middle of nowhere. She doesn't know how she got there but it is there she meets two other people who arrived in a similar fashion.  Samantha is a quiet reserved woman who is quite unnerved about being lost.
Tom is more vocal and more sarcastic about the situation. Soon, however he like the women becomes frantic over their inability to leave.  They even venture into the woods to escape only to return to the cabin.  Jody makes the observation that it's like Pac-Man. You go out one door only to arrive on the same board. Tom then questions how to get to the next level.
Things become stranger when the three are convinced they are in different states. Odder still they each believe the year is different. When Samantha tells Jody that it is 1962, she has to catch her breath before stating its 1985. Tom comes in and they both run over to ask him what year it is, he answers 2011.
Who drives to a cabin?

Passage: At the turn of the 17th century, Monteverdi found himself the target of musical controversy. The influential Bolognese theorist Giovanni Maria Artusi attacked Monteverdi's music (without naming the composer) in his work L'Artusi, overo Delle imperfettioni della moderna musica (Artusi, or On the imperfections of modern music) of 1600, followed by a sequel in 1603. Artusi cited extracts from Monteverdi's works not yet published (they later formed parts of his fourth and fifth books of madrigals of 1603 and 1605), condemning their use of harmony and their innovations in use of musical modes, compared to orthodox polyphonic practice of the sixteenth century. Artusi attempted to correspond with Monteverdi on these issues; the composer refused to respond, but found a champion in a pseudonymous supporter, "L'Ottuso Academico" ("The Obtuse Academic"). Eventually Monteverdi replied in the preface to the fifth book of madrigals that his duties at court prevented him from a detailed reply; but in a note to "the studious reader", he claimed that he would shortly publish a response, Seconda Pratica, overo Perfettione della Moderna Musica (The Second Style, or Perfection of Modern Music). This work never appeared, but a later publication by Claudio's brother Giulio Cesare made it clear that the seconda pratica which Monteverdi defended was not seen by him as radical change or his own invention, but was an evolution from previous styles (prima pratica) which was complementary to them.This debate seems in any case to have raised the composer's profile, leading to reprints of his earlier books of madrigals. Some of his madrigals were published in Copenhagen in 1605 and 1606, and the poet Tommaso Stigliani published a eulogy of him in his 1605 poem "O sirene de' fiumi". The composer of madrigal comedies and theorist Adriano Banchieri wrote in 1609: "I must not neglect to mention the most noble of composers, Monteverdi ... his expressive qualities are truly deserving of the highest commendation, and we find in them countless examples of matchless declamation ... enhanced by comparable harmonies." The modern music historian Massimo Ossi has placed the Artusi issue in the context of Monteverdi's artistic development: "If the controversy seems to define Monteverdi's historical position, it also seems to have been about stylistic developments that by 1600 Monteverdi had already outgrown".The non-appearance of Monteverdi's promised explanatory treatise may have been a deliberate ploy, since by 1608, by Monteverdi's reckoning, Artusi had become fully reconciled to modern trends in music, and the seconda pratica was by then well established; Monteverdi had no need to revisit the issue. On the other hand, letters to Giovanni Battista Doni of 1632 show that Monteverdi was still preparing a defence of the seconda practica, in a treatise entitled Melodia; he may still have been working on this at the time of his death ten years later.
What is the name of the person that never published a response, Seconda Pratica?

Passage: The Western Chalukya dynastic rule ended in the late 12th century, but its architectural legacy was inherited by the temple builders in
southern Karnataka, a region then under the control of the Hoysala empire. Broadly speaking, Hoysala architecture is derived from a variant of Western Chalukya architecture
that emerged from the Lakshmeshwar workshops. The construction of the Chennakesava Temple at Belur was the first major project commissioned by Hoysala King Vishnuvardhana in 1117 CE. This temple best exemplifies the Chalukyan taste the Hoysala artisans inherited.
Avoiding overdecoration, these artists left uncarved spaces where required, although their elaborate doorjambs are exhibitionistic. Here, on the outer walls, the sculptures are not overdone, yet they are articulate and discreetly aesthetic. The Hoysala builders used soapstone almost universally as building material, a trend that started in the middle of the 11th century with Chalukyan temples. Other common artistic features between the two Kanarese dynasties are the ornate Salabhanjika (pillar bracket figures), the lathe-turned pillars and the makara torana (lintel with mythical beastly figure). The tower over the shrine in a Hoysala temple is a closely moulded form of the Chalukya style tower.When the Vijayanagara Empire was in power in the 15th and 16th centuries, its workshops preferred granite over soapstone as the building material for temples. However, an archaeological discovery within the royal center at Vijayanagara has revealed the use of soapstone for stepped wells. These stepped wells are fashioned entirely of finely finished soapstone arranged symmetrically, with steps and landings descending to the water on four sides. This design shows strong affinities to the temple tanks of the Western Chalukya–Hoysala period.

At what location was there an archaelogical discovery of a royal center that showed affinities to the temple tanks of the Western Chalukya–Hoysala?