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.

Profiles of antibodies to the nucleocapsid protein of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-associated coronavirus in 445 probable SARS patients and 3,749 healthy people or non-SARS patients were analyzed by antigen-capturing enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Antinucleocapsid antibodies were elucidated in 17.5% of the probable SARS patients 1 to 7 days after the onset of symptoms and in 80% of the patients 8 to 14 days after the onset. About 90% of the probable SARS patients were positive 15 or more days after illness. Antibody titers increased up to 70 days, and high antibody titers were maintained at least for another 3 months. Of the healthy people and non-SARS patients, only seven (0.187%) were weakly positive. FIG. 1. Development of anti-N protein antibody titers over time in 445 patients who probably had SARS. 228 NOTES CLIN. DIAGN. LAB. IMMUNOL.
1 - background, 2 - background, 3 - finding, 4 - finding, 5 - finding, 6 - finding, 7 - finding, 8 - other, 9 - finding, 10 - other, 11 - other, 12 - other, 13 - other

www.nature.com/reviews/molcellbio
1 - other

hemorrhagic fever in humans. The geographic range of human CCHF cases largely reflects the presence of ticks. However, highly similar CCHFV lineages occur in geographically distant regions. Tick-infested migratory birds have been suggested, but not confirmed, to contribute to the dispersal. Bats have recently been shown to carry nairoviruses distinct from CCHFV. In order to assess the presence of CCHFV in a wide range of bat species over a wide geographic range, we analyzed 1,135 sera from 16 different bat species collected in Congo, Gabon, Ghana, Germany, and Panama. Using a CCHFV glycoproteinbased indirect immunofluorescence test (IIFT), we identified reactive antibodies in 10.0% (114/1,135) of tested bats, pertaining to 12/16 tested species. Depending on the species, 3.6%-42.9% of cave-dwelling bats and 0.6%-7.1% of foliage-living bats were seropositive (two-tailed t-test, p = 0.0447 cave versus foliage). 11/30 IIFT-reactive sera from 10 different African bat species had neutralizing activity in a viruslike particle assay. Neutralization of full CCHFV was confirmed in 5 of 7 sera. Widespread infection of cave-dwelling bats may indicate a role for bats in the life cycle and geographic dispersal of CCHFV.

1 - background, 2 - background, 3 - background, 4 - background, 5 - background, 6 - background, 7 - purpose, 8 - method, 9 - method, 10 - method, 11 - method, 12 - method, 13 - finding, 14 - finding, 15 - finding, 16 - finding