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.

Ex Input:
Background Paragraph: Storing large volumes of data – When storing XML to either file or database, the volume of data a system produces can often exceed reasonable limits, with a number of detriments: the access times go up as more data is read, CPU load goes up as XML data takes more power to process, and storage costs go up. By storing XML data in Fast Infoset format, data volume may be reduced by as much as 80 percent. 
Story: Antwan had a busy day storing XML. In the morning, he filled up a hard drive with XML. In the afternoon, he filled up a few hard drives with XML. At night, he filled up many hard drives with XML. 
Question: What time did the access times go up the most: afternoon or night?

Ex Output:
night.


Ex Input:
Background Paragraph: Farsightedness, or hyperopia, is the condition in which distant objects are seen clearly, but nearby objects appear blurry. It occurs when the eyeball is shorter than normal (see Figure below ). This causes images to be focused in a spot that would fall behind the retina (if light could pass through the retina). Hyperopia can be corrected with convex lenses. The lenses focus images farther forward in the eye, so they fall on the retina instead of behind it. 
Story: Kathy and Jacob are two coworkers out having a drink at a bar after a day at the office. They both wear glasses and Kathy comments that she hates that she is so farsighted and wishes there was a surgery to fix it. Jacob says that he finds it amusing she is farsighted because he himself is nearsighted. They both laugh at the opposite nature of their eye condition, and then both look at the menu on the other side of the room to decide what drinks to order next. 
Question: Who will have a harder time reading the menu?

Ex Output:
Kathy.


Ex Input:
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 had less problems with stockholders fighting, company X or company Y?

Ex Output:

company Y.