In this task, you're given a paragraph and title from the research paper. Your task is to classify whether the given title is suitable or not for the research paper based on the given paragraph. Return "True" if title is proper according to paragraph else "False".

Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: Newton's Principia introduces four rules of reasoning for natural philosophy. Although useful, there is a concern about whether Newton's rules guarantee truth. After redirecting the discussion from truth to validity, I show that these rules are valid insofar as they fulfill Goodman's criteria for inductive rules and Newton's own methodological program of experimental philosophy; provided that cross-checks are used prior to applications of rule 4 and immediately after applications of rule 2 the following activities are pursued: (1) research addressing observations that systematically deviate from theoretical idealizations and (2) applications of theory that safeguard ongoing research from proceeding down a garden path. # 
 Title: Do Newton's rules of reasoning guarantee truth . . . must they?

Output: False


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: The apical and basolateral surfaces of airway epithelial cells demonstrate directional responses to pathogen exposure in vivo. Thus, ideal in vitro models for examining cellular responses to respiratory pathogens polarize, forming apical and basolateral surfaces. One such model is differentiated normal human bronchial epithelial cells (NHBE). However, this system requires lung tissue samples, expertise isolating and culturing epithelial cells from tissue, and time to generate an air-liquid interface culture. Calu-3 cells, derived from a human bronchial adenocarcinoma, are an alternative model for examining the response of proximal airway epithelial cells to respiratory insult Safety Measures: Perform all procedures in a biosafety cabinet using sterile culture technique. 
 Title: Establishing a Liquid-covered Culture of Polarized Human Airway Epithelial Calu-3 Cells to Study Host Cell Response to Respiratory Pathogens In vitro

Output: False


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: There are a number of antivirals as well as antiviral strategies that could be envisaged to prevent or treat severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) (or similar) coronavirus (CoV) infections. Targets for the prophylactic or therapeutic interventions include interaction of the spike (S) glycoprotein (S1 domain) with the host cell receptor, fusion of the S2 domain with the host cell membrane, processing of the replicase polyproteins by the virus-encoded proteases (3C-like cysteine protease [3CLpro] and papain-like cysteine protease) and other virus-encoded enzymes such as the NTPase/helicase and RNA-dependent RNA polymerase. Human monoclonal antibody blocking S1 may play an important role in the immunoprophylaxis of SARS. Fusion inhibitors reminiscent of enfuvirtide in the case of HIV may also be developed for SARS-CoV. Various peptidomimetic and nonpeptidic inhibitors of 3CLpro have been described, the best ones inhibiting SARS-CoV replication with a selectivity index greater than 1000. Human interferons, in particular αand β-interferon, as well as short interfering RNAs could further be pursued for the control of SARS. Various other compounds, often with an ill-defined mode of action but selectivity indexes up to 100, have been reported to exhibit in vitro activity against SARS-CoV: valinomycin, glycopeptide antibiotics, plant lectins, hesperetin, glycyrrhizin, aurintricarboxylic acid, chloroquine, niclosamide, nelfinavir and calpain inhibitors. 
 Title: Potential antivirals and antiviral strategies against SARS coronavirus infections


Output: True