TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you're given a question, along with a context passage. The passage will not have a direct answer to the question, but can include some information and a clue for the answer. Assuming you can only obtain information about one entity in the passage, your job is to determine whether information from the passage can be used to answer the question. Indicate your choice as `a` for Yes or `b` for No.
PROBLEM: Question: When did the Sassanids replace the Parthians? Passage:In 270 the Roman emperor Aurelian engaged the Sassanids, who had now replaced the Parthians, on the eastern front and he was able to drive them back. Tiridates, as the true heir to the now Persian-occupied Armenian throne, came to Armenia and quickly raised an army and drove the enemy out in 287. When Tiridates returned to Armenia, he made the city of Vagharshapat his capital, as it had been the capital of his late father. For a while, fortune appeared to favour Tiridates. He not only expelled his enemies, but he carried his arms into Assyria. At the time the Persian Empire was in a distracted state. The throne was disputed by the ambition of two contending brothers, Hormuz and Narses. The civil war was, however, soon terminated and Narses was universally acknowledged as King of Persia. Narses then directed his whole force against the foreign enemy. The contest then became too unequal. Tiridates once more took refuge with the Romans. The Roman-Armenian alliance grew stronger, especially while Diocletian ruled the empire. This can be attributed to the upbringing of Tiridates, the consistent Persian aggressions and the murder of his father by Anak. With Diocletian's help, Tiridates pushed the Persians out of Armenia. In 299, Diocletian left the Armenian state in a quasi-independent and protectorate status possibly to use it as a buffer in case of a Persian attack. Tiridates married an Alani Princess called Ashkhen in 297 by whom he had three children: a son called Khosrov III, a daughter called Salome and an unnamed daughter who married St. Husik I, one of the earlier Catholicoi of the Armenian Apostolic Church.


SOLUTION: b

PROBLEM: Question: Where was the founder of the Quakers born? Passage:The design of the meeting house is unusual, having swayed away from the designs of traditional Quaker meeting houses. It was a result of the reunification of the two groups of Quakers that had initially separated from a schism in 1827, where two thirds of Quakers abandoned the philosophies of their founder, George Fox, and instead turned to the ideals taught by Long Island preacher, Elias Hicks. By 1926, when it was time to construct a new meeting house in Poughkeepsie, the number of local “Hicksite” Quakers was diminishing, so many had joined the Orthodox Quakers. Alfred Bussel, a New York City architect, was chosen to design a meeting house that appealed to all members. Since he had studied at Haverford College, a Quaker school, Bussell was very familiar with the Society of Friends traditions. One branch had suggested a church-like structure with steeple, organ, and stained-glass windows, while the other wanted a more traditional style meeting house, i.e. evoking simplicity, equality, community, and peace. The design therefore was a unity between the two branches, a sign of what was to come with the official reunification in the 1950s. The result is a simple, colonial revival building without stained-glass or any sort of liturgical ornamentation or symbols, as per Quaker tradition, but had a single front door (Quaker meeting houses had separate entrances for men and women) and an interior layout akin to a church; a central aisle with rows of pews on either side all facing the front of the building.


SOLUTION: b

PROBLEM: Question: When did Michael die? Passage:The fact that Byzantium in its dealings with the barbarians generally preferred diplomacy to war is not surprising. For the East Romans, faced with the ever-present necessity of having to battle on two fronts — in the east against Persians, Arabs and Turks, in the north against the Slavs and the steppe nomads — knew from personal experience how expensive war is both in money and manpower. The Byzantines were skilled at using diplomacy as a weapon of war. If the Bulgars threatened, subsidies could be given to the Kiev Rus. A Rus threat could be countered by subsidies to the Patzinaks. If the Patzinaks proved troublesome, the Cumans or Uzès could be contacted. There was always someone to the enemy’s rear in a position to appreciate the emperor's largesse. Another innovative principle of Byzantine diplomacy was effective interference in the internal affairs of other states. In 1282, Michael VIII sponsored a revolt in Sicily against Charles of Anjou called the Sicilian Vespers. Emperor Heraclius once intercepted a message from Persian rival Khosrau II which ordered the execution of a general. Heraclius added 400 names to the message and diverted the messenger, provoking a rebellion by those on the list. The emperor maintained a stable of pretenders to almost every foreign throne. These could be given funds and released to wreak havoc if their homeland threatened attack.


SOLUTION:
b