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.

Example Input: Background Paragraph: The primary advantage held by a player in late position is that he will have more information with which to make better decisions than players in early position, who will have to act first, without the benefit of this extra information. This advantage has led to many players in heads-up play raising on the button with an extremely wide range of hands because of this positional advantage.[3] Also, as earlier opponents fold, the probability of a hand being the best goes up as the number of opponents goes down. 
Story: Bill is in a poker tournament this week, and is very much wants to win. He has been placed randomly in certain positions for each day he is playing. On Monday and Tuesday he will be in an early position at the table. On Thursday and Friday he has been placed in a late position. 
Question: Does Bill have a better or worse advantage on Monday than Thursday?
Example Output: worse.

Example 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 discharged more debt, company X or company Y?
Example Output: company X.

Example Input: Background Paragraph: Catalytic converters in cars increase the rates of several important reactions. Unburned hydrocarbons can more easily be converted to carbon dioxide and water in the presence of a catalyst. Additionally, carbon monoxide (a harmful gas produced by incomplete combustion of fuel) is further oxidized to carbon dioxide, and nitrous oxide compounds (which contribute to smog and acid rain) are transformed back into nitrogen and oxygen gases. By passing car exhaust over these catalysts before their release into the air, the emissions from a combustion engine are made into much less harmful substances, resulting in a much cleaner atmosphere. 
Story: Daniel drives a new car that uses catalytic converters. His best friend Kelvin however driving an older car. His car does not use any type of catalytic converter. They decide they want to go on a road trip together but dont know who's car they should take. 
Question: Will Kelvin buying a car like Daniel's increase or decrease the amount of pollution he creates while driving?
Example Output:
decrease.