Given a paragraph about movies and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix `Q:` followed by the answer prefix `A:`, and the follow-up question has a prefix `FOLLOWUP_Q:`.

Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: This is explained a little more in the Novel, and is easier to understand with the hindsight of knowing Plutarch Heavensbee was subversively finding ways to assist the tributes who were complicit in the revolution... It doesn't explicitly state 'Plutarch did this because of this and this...' because that would be terrible clunky writing, and Collins is a much better writer than most people will give her credit for... it just takes a little logic and deduction. The 'Lightning Tree' is in the section of the Arena which endures a lightning storm within its hour. The lightning tree introduces (naturally, without raising the suspicions of anyone else) the element of controlled, predictable burst of electricity in a pre-designated location, which obviously is of benefit to Beetee. Furthermore, it is a clear and concise way for the tributes to keep track of what time it is, even if they aren't anywhere near the section that is enduring it's 'hour'. It's the equivalent of Big Ben striking 12. It's never pro-filmically shown that Beetee had discussed a plan with Heavensbee beforehand, but it's interesting that Beetee is insistent on carrying around that spool of electrical wire throughout most of the film. It's quite an encumbrance to keep hold of, 'just in-case', so it could be inferred that Beetee had the plan all along.  <sep>  Q: Was there a purpose for the lightning tree in Catching Fire? A: The lightning tree introduces (naturally, without raising the suspicions of anyone else) the element of controlled, predictable burst of electricity in a pre-designated location  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Can the lightning tree kill someone if they aren't on it?

Output: No


Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: My Thoughts: Throughout the episode, Bing strives to find something real in his artificial world: Natural food (fruit), Abi's honesty and genuine talent, a real connection with someone. Folding a 'worthless' wrapper into an origami penguin gives it meaning: it's a simple, hand-crafted token, and later comes to represent Bing and Abi's relationship. It's something artful blossoming from humble origins (which is what Bing hopes Abi becomes, through the show, with his help) and a touch of humanity in a hi-tech existence. His speech near the end demonstrates how he yearns for the truth and how sick he is of fakery. The penguin he has in the end, though, is a more realistic, less crude sculpture that seems expensive. In my opinion, it's on one hand a symbol of Bing succumbing to the inescapable artifice of his world after choosing to harness his 'truth' just to sell more products, and on the other a reminder of the love and authenticity he lost in Abi - or perhaps his attempt to preserve them in his upgraded, wealthier life.  <sep>  Q: What is the significance of the penguin in Fifteen Million Merits? A: it's on one hand a symbol of Bing succumbing to the inescapable artifice of his world after choosing to harness his 'truth' just to sell more products  Q: what is the meaning of its transition from paper penguin to a real looking one? A: Folding a 'worthless' wrapper into an origami penguin gives it meaning: it's a simple, hand-crafted token, and later comes to represent Bing and Abi's relationship  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: why does he weirdly stare at the statue penguin?

Output: No


Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: He had visited the cafe as Harold Finch previously and made the same order with Grace. He then repeated the visit in his Professor Whistler identity and was recognised by the waitress. Samaritan could hear what the waitress said to him as well. Enough was the same for Samaritan to draw a line between the two identities. Bear in mind, in an early episode that Finch mentions how a series of almost totally unrelated facts are linked together by the Machine to determine the perpetrator of a crime. It doesn't take much if you can see and hear everything (and process it quick enough) to spot the connections. Perhaps it wasn't entirely conclusive, but nobody ever said that Samaritan insists on absolute proof before choosing an action. Once that connection was made, Samaritan could have analysed facial markers, his gait while walking, his voice records etc to achieve whatever level of proof it determined necessary to define Harold as a threat and to send its assets after him.  <sep>  Q: How did Finch's cover identity get blown? A: He had visited the cafe as Harold Finch previously and made the same order with Grace. He then repeated the visit in his Professor Whistler identity and was recognised by the waitress  Q: What other information besides the order did they use to determine it was the same person? A: Perhaps it wasn't entirely conclusive, but nobody ever said that Samaritan insists on absolute proof before choosing an action  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What Samaritan do after figuring it out?


Output: Yes