niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
Passage: Travel agency clerk Tommy Bradford delivers tickets to wealthy J. Westley Piermont at the lavish wedding of his daughter. Piermont introduces him to model June Evans, but neglects to mention neither one is a guest. June is there to help the daughter with her wedding dress. Both pretend to be rich. Tommy gives June his telephone number, but neither expects anything to come of their momentary attraction to each other.
That night, after she tells her family about her adventure, her obnoxious, younger, musician brother Chick phones Tommy, pretending to be June's servant, and forces his sister to continue the charade. Tommy is pressured to maintain the masquerade as well by his roommate Al, an insurance salesman who dreams of making contacts in New York high society.
They begin seeing each other. Their first date is at the Westminster Dog Show, where they run into Piermont again. He has two dogs entered in the competition. Piermont insists his Pomeranian will win, but Tommy champions his other entry, a St. Bernard. Sure of himself, the millionaire promises to give the St. Bernard to Tommy if it wins. It does, and he does. With no place to keep it, Tommy makes a present of it to June.
Their second date is at a movie theater where another of June's brothers works. By this point, June's family is anxious to meet her boyfriend. Her aunt Lucy is the housekeeper for a wealthy family, so while her employers are away, she borrows their home to host a dinner. Afterward, Tommy tries to confess to June, but she misunderstands and thinks he has found her out instead. Outraged by what she thinks are insults aimed at her family, she breaks up with him.
Output: What is the full name of the person who promises to give Tommy the St. Bernard if it wins?
Passage: Travel agency clerk Tommy Bradford delivers tickets to wealthy J. Westley Piermont at the lavish wedding of his daughter. Piermont introduces him to model June Evans, but neglects to mention neither one is a guest. June is there to help the daughter with her wedding dress. Both pretend to be rich. Tommy gives June his telephone number, but neither expects anything to come of their momentary attraction to each other.
That night, after she tells her family about her adventure, her obnoxious, younger, musician brother Chick phones Tommy, pretending to be June's servant, and forces his sister to continue the charade. Tommy is pressured to maintain the masquerade as well by his roommate Al, an insurance salesman who dreams of making contacts in New York high society.
They begin seeing each other. Their first date is at the Westminster Dog Show, where they run into Piermont again. He has two dogs entered in the competition. Piermont insists his Pomeranian will win, but Tommy champions his other entry, a St. Bernard. Sure of himself, the millionaire promises to give the St. Bernard to Tommy if it wins. It does, and he does. With no place to keep it, Tommy makes a present of it to June.
Their second date is at a movie theater where another of June's brothers works. By this point, June's family is anxious to meet her boyfriend. Her aunt Lucy is the housekeeper for a wealthy family, so while her employers are away, she borrows their home to host a dinner. Afterward, Tommy tries to confess to June, but she misunderstands and thinks he has found her out instead. Outraged by what she thinks are insults aimed at her family, she breaks up with him.
Output: What two types of dogs does Piermont enter into the Westminster Dog Show?
Passage: Mauna Kea is one of five volcanoes  that form the island of Hawaii, the largest and youngest island of the Hawaiian–Emperor seamount chain. Of these five hotspot volcanoes, Mauna Kea is the fourth oldest and fourth most active. It began as a preshield volcano driven by the Hawaii hotspot around one million years ago, and became exceptionally active during its shield stage until 500,000 years ago. Mauna Kea entered its quieter post-shield stage 250,000 to 200,000 years ago, and is currently dormant. Mauna Kea does not have a visible summit caldera, but contains a number of small cinder and pumice cones near its summit. A former summit caldera may have been filled and buried by later summit eruption deposits.
Mauna Kea is over 32,000 km3 (7,680 cu mi) in volume, so massive that it and its neighbor, Mauna Loa, depress the ocean crust beneath it by 6 km (4 mi).
Mauna Kea is the only Hawaiian volcano with distinct evidence of glaciation. Similar deposits probably existed on Mauna Loa, but have been covered by later lava flows. Despite Hawaii's tropical location, during several past ice ages a drop of a degree in temperature allowed snow to remain at the volcano's summit through summer, triggering the formation of an ice cap. There are three episodes of glaciation that have been recorded from the last 180,000 years: the Pōhakuloa (180–130 ka), Wāihu (80–60 ka) and Mākanaka (40–13 ka) series. These have extensively sculpted the summit, depositing moraines and a circular ring of till and gravel along the volcano's upper flanks. Subglacial eruptions built cinder cones during the Mākanaka glaciation, most of which were heavily gouged by glacial action. The most recent cones were built between 9000 and 4500 years ago, atop the glacial deposits, although one study indicates that the last eruption may have been around 3600 years ago.At their maximum extent, the glaciers extended from the summit down to between 3,200 and 3,800 m (10,500 and 12,500 ft) of elevation. A small body of permafrost, less than 25 m (80 ft) across, was found at the summit of Mauna Kea before 1974, and may still be present. Small gullies etch the summit, formed by rain- and snow-fed streams that flow only during winter melt and rain showers.
Output: What was likely covered by later lava flows on Mauna Loa?
Passage: Mauna Kea is one of five volcanoes  that form the island of Hawaii, the largest and youngest island of the Hawaiian–Emperor seamount chain. Of these five hotspot volcanoes, Mauna Kea is the fourth oldest and fourth most active. It began as a preshield volcano driven by the Hawaii hotspot around one million years ago, and became exceptionally active during its shield stage until 500,000 years ago. Mauna Kea entered its quieter post-shield stage 250,000 to 200,000 years ago, and is currently dormant. Mauna Kea does not have a visible summit caldera, but contains a number of small cinder and pumice cones near its summit. A former summit caldera may have been filled and buried by later summit eruption deposits.
Mauna Kea is over 32,000 km3 (7,680 cu mi) in volume, so massive that it and its neighbor, Mauna Loa, depress the ocean crust beneath it by 6 km (4 mi).
Mauna Kea is the only Hawaiian volcano with distinct evidence of glaciation. Similar deposits probably existed on Mauna Loa, but have been covered by later lava flows. Despite Hawaii's tropical location, during several past ice ages a drop of a degree in temperature allowed snow to remain at the volcano's summit through summer, triggering the formation of an ice cap. There are three episodes of glaciation that have been recorded from the last 180,000 years: the Pōhakuloa (180–130 ka), Wāihu (80–60 ka) and Mākanaka (40–13 ka) series. These have extensively sculpted the summit, depositing moraines and a circular ring of till and gravel along the volcano's upper flanks. Subglacial eruptions built cinder cones during the Mākanaka glaciation, most of which were heavily gouged by glacial action. The most recent cones were built between 9000 and 4500 years ago, atop the glacial deposits, although one study indicates that the last eruption may have been around 3600 years ago.At their maximum extent, the glaciers extended from the summit down to between 3,200 and 3,800 m (10,500 and 12,500 ft) of elevation. A small body of permafrost, less than 25 m (80 ft) across, was found at the summit of Mauna Kea before 1974, and may still be present. Small gullies etch the summit, formed by rain- and snow-fed streams that flow only during winter melt and rain showers.
Output: What volcano's summit has snow on it in the Summer?
Passage: The vast majority of workers in Ratanakiri are employed in agriculture.  Most of the indigenous residents of Ratanakiri are subsistence farmers, practicing slash and burn shifting cultivation. (See Culture below for more information on traditional subsistence practices.) Many families are beginning to shift production to cash crops such as cashews, mangoes, and tobacco, a trend that has accelerated in recent years. Ratanakiri villagers have traditionally had little contact with the cash economy. Barter exchange remains widespread, and Khmer Loeu villagers tended to visit markets only once per year until quite recently. As of 2005, monetary income in the province averaged US$5 per month per person; purchased possessions such as motorcycles, televisions, and karaoke sets have become extremely desirable.Larger-scale agriculture occurs on rubber and cashew plantations. Other economic activities in the province include gem mining and commercial logging. The most abundant gem in Ratanakiri is blue zircon. Small quantities of amethyst, peridot, and black opal are also produced. Gems are generally mined using traditional methods, with individuals digging holes and tunnels and manually removing the gems; recently, however, commercial mining operations have been moving into the province. Logging, particularly illegal logging, has been a problem both for environmental reasons and because of land alienation. This illegal logging has been undertaken by the Cambodian military and by Vietnamese loggers. In 1997, an estimated 300,000 cubic meters of logs were exported illegally from Ratanakiri to Vietnam, compared to a legal limit of 36,000 cubic meters. John Dennis, a researcher for the Asian Development Bank, described the logging in Ratanakiri as a "human rights emergency".
Ratanakiri's tourist industry has rapidly expanded in recent years: visits to the province increased from 6,000 in 2002 to 105,000 in 2008 and 118,000 in 2011. The region's tourism development strategy focuses on encouraging ecotourism. Increasing tourism in Ratanakiri has been problematic because local communities receive very little income from tourism and because guides sometimes bring tourists to villages without residents' consent, disrupting traditional ways of life. A few initiatives have sought to address these issues: a provincial tourism steering committee aims to ensure that tourism is non-destructive, and some programs provide English and tourism skills to indigenous people.Ox-cart and motorcycle are common means of transportation in Ratanakiri. The provincial road system is better than in some parts of the country, but remains in somewhat bad condition. National Road 78 between Banlung and the Vietnam border was built between 2007 and 2010; the road was expected to increase trade between Cambodia and Vietnam. There is a small airport in Banlung, but commercial flights to Ratanakiri have long been discontinued.
Output: What road was expected to increase trade between Cambodia and Vietnam?
Passage: The rulers of the princely states were not uniformly enthusiastic about integrating their domains into independent India. Some, such as the rulers of Bikaner and Jawhar, were motivated to join India out of ideological and patriotic considerations, but others insisted that they had the right to join either India or Pakistan, to remain independent, or form a union of their own. Bhopal, Travancore and Hyderabad announced that they did not intend to join either dominion. Hyderabad went as far as to appoint trade representatives in European countries and commencing negotiations with the Portuguese to lease or buy Goa to give it access to the sea, and Travancore pointed to the strategic importance to western countries of its thorium reserves while asking for recognition. Some states proposed a subcontinent-wide confederation of princely states, as a third entity in addition to India and Pakistan. Bhopal attempted to build an alliance between the princely states and the Muslim League to counter the pressure being put on rulers by the Congress.A number of factors contributed to the collapse of this initial resistance and to nearly all non-Muslim majority princely states agreeing to accede to India. An important factor was the lack of unity among the princes. The smaller states did not trust the larger states to protect their interests, and many Hindu rulers did not trust Muslim princes, in particular Hamidullah Khan, the Nawab of Bhopal and a leading proponent of independence, whom they viewed as an agent for Pakistan. Others, believing integration to be inevitable, sought to build bridges with the Congress, hoping thereby to gain a say in shaping the final settlement. The resultant inability to present a united front or agree on a common position significantly reduced their bargaining power in negotiations with the Congress. The decision by the Muslim League to stay out of the Constituent Assembly was also fatal to the princes' plan to build an alliance with it to counter the Congress, and attempts to boycott the Constituent Assembly altogether failed on 28 April 1947, when the states of Baroda, Bikaner, Cochin, Gwalior, Jaipur, Jodhpur, Patiala and Rewa took their seats in the Assembly.Many princes were also pressured by popular sentiment favouring integration with India, which meant their plans for independence had little support from their subjects. The Maharaja of Travancore, for example, definitively abandoned his plans for independence after the attempted assassination of his dewan, Sir C. P. Ramaswami Iyer. In a few states, the chief ministers or dewans played a significant role in convincing the princes to accede to India. The key factors that led the states to accept integration into India were, however, the efforts of Lord Mountbatten, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and V. P. Menon. The latter two were respectively the political and administrative heads of the States Department, which was in charge of relations with the princely states.
Output: What are the last names of the two individuals who were respectively the political and administrative heads of the States Department, which was in charge of relations with the princely states?
Passage: The rulers of the princely states were not uniformly enthusiastic about integrating their domains into independent India. Some, such as the rulers of Bikaner and Jawhar, were motivated to join India out of ideological and patriotic considerations, but others insisted that they had the right to join either India or Pakistan, to remain independent, or form a union of their own. Bhopal, Travancore and Hyderabad announced that they did not intend to join either dominion. Hyderabad went as far as to appoint trade representatives in European countries and commencing negotiations with the Portuguese to lease or buy Goa to give it access to the sea, and Travancore pointed to the strategic importance to western countries of its thorium reserves while asking for recognition. Some states proposed a subcontinent-wide confederation of princely states, as a third entity in addition to India and Pakistan. Bhopal attempted to build an alliance between the princely states and the Muslim League to counter the pressure being put on rulers by the Congress.A number of factors contributed to the collapse of this initial resistance and to nearly all non-Muslim majority princely states agreeing to accede to India. An important factor was the lack of unity among the princes. The smaller states did not trust the larger states to protect their interests, and many Hindu rulers did not trust Muslim princes, in particular Hamidullah Khan, the Nawab of Bhopal and a leading proponent of independence, whom they viewed as an agent for Pakistan. Others, believing integration to be inevitable, sought to build bridges with the Congress, hoping thereby to gain a say in shaping the final settlement. The resultant inability to present a united front or agree on a common position significantly reduced their bargaining power in negotiations with the Congress. The decision by the Muslim League to stay out of the Constituent Assembly was also fatal to the princes' plan to build an alliance with it to counter the Congress, and attempts to boycott the Constituent Assembly altogether failed on 28 April 1947, when the states of Baroda, Bikaner, Cochin, Gwalior, Jaipur, Jodhpur, Patiala and Rewa took their seats in the Assembly.Many princes were also pressured by popular sentiment favouring integration with India, which meant their plans for independence had little support from their subjects. The Maharaja of Travancore, for example, definitively abandoned his plans for independence after the attempted assassination of his dewan, Sir C. P. Ramaswami Iyer. In a few states, the chief ministers or dewans played a significant role in convincing the princes to accede to India. The key factors that led the states to accept integration into India were, however, the efforts of Lord Mountbatten, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and V. P. Menon. The latter two were respectively the political and administrative heads of the States Department, which was in charge of relations with the princely states.
Output: Who viewed Hamidulla Khan as an agent for Pakistan?
Passage: The rulers of the princely states were not uniformly enthusiastic about integrating their domains into independent India. Some, such as the rulers of Bikaner and Jawhar, were motivated to join India out of ideological and patriotic considerations, but others insisted that they had the right to join either India or Pakistan, to remain independent, or form a union of their own. Bhopal, Travancore and Hyderabad announced that they did not intend to join either dominion. Hyderabad went as far as to appoint trade representatives in European countries and commencing negotiations with the Portuguese to lease or buy Goa to give it access to the sea, and Travancore pointed to the strategic importance to western countries of its thorium reserves while asking for recognition. Some states proposed a subcontinent-wide confederation of princely states, as a third entity in addition to India and Pakistan. Bhopal attempted to build an alliance between the princely states and the Muslim League to counter the pressure being put on rulers by the Congress.A number of factors contributed to the collapse of this initial resistance and to nearly all non-Muslim majority princely states agreeing to accede to India. An important factor was the lack of unity among the princes. The smaller states did not trust the larger states to protect their interests, and many Hindu rulers did not trust Muslim princes, in particular Hamidullah Khan, the Nawab of Bhopal and a leading proponent of independence, whom they viewed as an agent for Pakistan. Others, believing integration to be inevitable, sought to build bridges with the Congress, hoping thereby to gain a say in shaping the final settlement. The resultant inability to present a united front or agree on a common position significantly reduced their bargaining power in negotiations with the Congress. The decision by the Muslim League to stay out of the Constituent Assembly was also fatal to the princes' plan to build an alliance with it to counter the Congress, and attempts to boycott the Constituent Assembly altogether failed on 28 April 1947, when the states of Baroda, Bikaner, Cochin, Gwalior, Jaipur, Jodhpur, Patiala and Rewa took their seats in the Assembly.Many princes were also pressured by popular sentiment favouring integration with India, which meant their plans for independence had little support from their subjects. The Maharaja of Travancore, for example, definitively abandoned his plans for independence after the attempted assassination of his dewan, Sir C. P. Ramaswami Iyer. In a few states, the chief ministers or dewans played a significant role in convincing the princes to accede to India. The key factors that led the states to accept integration into India were, however, the efforts of Lord Mountbatten, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and V. P. Menon. The latter two were respectively the political and administrative heads of the States Department, which was in charge of relations with the princely states.
Output: Whose dewan was Sir C.P. Ramaswami Iyer?
Passage: Karluk had been chosen by Pedersen and bought by Stefansson for the bargain price of US$10,000. Stefansson was advised by Pedersen that, of four ships that were available, Karluk was "the soundest and best adapted for our purpose", but Bartlett had deep reservations about her fitness for prolonged Arctic service. The ship, a 29-year-old brigantine, was 129 feet (39 m) in length with a beam of 23 feet (7.0 m). She had been built for the Aleutian fishing industry (karluk is the Aleut word for "fish") and later converted for whaling, when her bows and sides had been sheathed with 2-inch (51 mm) Australian ironwood. Despite 14 arctic whaling voyages, including six overwinterings, she had not been built to withstand sustained ice pressure, and lacked the engine power to force a passage through the ice. She did not match the expectations of Bartlett, or of many of the more experienced crew.The ship spent most of April and May 1913 undergoing repairs and refitting at the dockyard in Esquimalt. When Bartlett arrived in early June he immediately ordered further repair work. In addition to Karluk, Stefansson had purchased sight unseen a small gasoline-driven schooner, Alaska, to act as a supply ship for the Southern Party. He later added a second schooner, Mary Sachs, when the hold space in Alaska proved inadequate. In the confusion surrounding the expedition's departure, McKinlay notes, no attempt was made to align men or equipment to their appropriate ships. Thus anthropologists Henri Beuchat and Diamond Jenness, both designated for the Southern Party, found themselves sailing with Karluk, while their equipment was on board Alaska. McKinlay himself, aboard Karluk as magnetic observer, discovered that most of his equipment was with Alaska. Stefansson insisted that all would be sorted out when the ships reached their Herschel Island rendezvous. "Heaven help us all if we failed to reach Herschel Island", McKinlay wrote.
Output: What was the name of the person that advised that Karluk was the soundest and best adapted for our purpose?
Passage: Karluk had been chosen by Pedersen and bought by Stefansson for the bargain price of US$10,000. Stefansson was advised by Pedersen that, of four ships that were available, Karluk was "the soundest and best adapted for our purpose", but Bartlett had deep reservations about her fitness for prolonged Arctic service. The ship, a 29-year-old brigantine, was 129 feet (39 m) in length with a beam of 23 feet (7.0 m). She had been built for the Aleutian fishing industry (karluk is the Aleut word for "fish") and later converted for whaling, when her bows and sides had been sheathed with 2-inch (51 mm) Australian ironwood. Despite 14 arctic whaling voyages, including six overwinterings, she had not been built to withstand sustained ice pressure, and lacked the engine power to force a passage through the ice. She did not match the expectations of Bartlett, or of many of the more experienced crew.The ship spent most of April and May 1913 undergoing repairs and refitting at the dockyard in Esquimalt. When Bartlett arrived in early June he immediately ordered further repair work. In addition to Karluk, Stefansson had purchased sight unseen a small gasoline-driven schooner, Alaska, to act as a supply ship for the Southern Party. He later added a second schooner, Mary Sachs, when the hold space in Alaska proved inadequate. In the confusion surrounding the expedition's departure, McKinlay notes, no attempt was made to align men or equipment to their appropriate ships. Thus anthropologists Henri Beuchat and Diamond Jenness, both designated for the Southern Party, found themselves sailing with Karluk, while their equipment was on board Alaska. McKinlay himself, aboard Karluk as magnetic observer, discovered that most of his equipment was with Alaska. Stefansson insisted that all would be sorted out when the ships reached their Herschel Island rendezvous. "Heaven help us all if we failed to reach Herschel Island", McKinlay wrote.
Output: What is the translation of karluk?
Passage: Karluk had been chosen by Pedersen and bought by Stefansson for the bargain price of US$10,000. Stefansson was advised by Pedersen that, of four ships that were available, Karluk was "the soundest and best adapted for our purpose", but Bartlett had deep reservations about her fitness for prolonged Arctic service. The ship, a 29-year-old brigantine, was 129 feet (39 m) in length with a beam of 23 feet (7.0 m). She had been built for the Aleutian fishing industry (karluk is the Aleut word for "fish") and later converted for whaling, when her bows and sides had been sheathed with 2-inch (51 mm) Australian ironwood. Despite 14 arctic whaling voyages, including six overwinterings, she had not been built to withstand sustained ice pressure, and lacked the engine power to force a passage through the ice. She did not match the expectations of Bartlett, or of many of the more experienced crew.The ship spent most of April and May 1913 undergoing repairs and refitting at the dockyard in Esquimalt. When Bartlett arrived in early June he immediately ordered further repair work. In addition to Karluk, Stefansson had purchased sight unseen a small gasoline-driven schooner, Alaska, to act as a supply ship for the Southern Party. He later added a second schooner, Mary Sachs, when the hold space in Alaska proved inadequate. In the confusion surrounding the expedition's departure, McKinlay notes, no attempt was made to align men or equipment to their appropriate ships. Thus anthropologists Henri Beuchat and Diamond Jenness, both designated for the Southern Party, found themselves sailing with Karluk, while their equipment was on board Alaska. McKinlay himself, aboard Karluk as magnetic observer, discovered that most of his equipment was with Alaska. Stefansson insisted that all would be sorted out when the ships reached their Herschel Island rendezvous. "Heaven help us all if we failed to reach Herschel Island", McKinlay wrote.
Output: What did not match the expectations of Bartlett?
Passage: Karluk had been chosen by Pedersen and bought by Stefansson for the bargain price of US$10,000. Stefansson was advised by Pedersen that, of four ships that were available, Karluk was "the soundest and best adapted for our purpose", but Bartlett had deep reservations about her fitness for prolonged Arctic service. The ship, a 29-year-old brigantine, was 129 feet (39 m) in length with a beam of 23 feet (7.0 m). She had been built for the Aleutian fishing industry (karluk is the Aleut word for "fish") and later converted for whaling, when her bows and sides had been sheathed with 2-inch (51 mm) Australian ironwood. Despite 14 arctic whaling voyages, including six overwinterings, she had not been built to withstand sustained ice pressure, and lacked the engine power to force a passage through the ice. She did not match the expectations of Bartlett, or of many of the more experienced crew.The ship spent most of April and May 1913 undergoing repairs and refitting at the dockyard in Esquimalt. When Bartlett arrived in early June he immediately ordered further repair work. In addition to Karluk, Stefansson had purchased sight unseen a small gasoline-driven schooner, Alaska, to act as a supply ship for the Southern Party. He later added a second schooner, Mary Sachs, when the hold space in Alaska proved inadequate. In the confusion surrounding the expedition's departure, McKinlay notes, no attempt was made to align men or equipment to their appropriate ships. Thus anthropologists Henri Beuchat and Diamond Jenness, both designated for the Southern Party, found themselves sailing with Karluk, while their equipment was on board Alaska. McKinlay himself, aboard Karluk as magnetic observer, discovered that most of his equipment was with Alaska. Stefansson insisted that all would be sorted out when the ships reached their Herschel Island rendezvous. "Heaven help us all if we failed to reach Herschel Island", McKinlay wrote.
Output: What were the names of the three ships bought by Stefansson?
Passage: Karluk had been chosen by Pedersen and bought by Stefansson for the bargain price of US$10,000. Stefansson was advised by Pedersen that, of four ships that were available, Karluk was "the soundest and best adapted for our purpose", but Bartlett had deep reservations about her fitness for prolonged Arctic service. The ship, a 29-year-old brigantine, was 129 feet (39 m) in length with a beam of 23 feet (7.0 m). She had been built for the Aleutian fishing industry (karluk is the Aleut word for "fish") and later converted for whaling, when her bows and sides had been sheathed with 2-inch (51 mm) Australian ironwood. Despite 14 arctic whaling voyages, including six overwinterings, she had not been built to withstand sustained ice pressure, and lacked the engine power to force a passage through the ice. She did not match the expectations of Bartlett, or of many of the more experienced crew.The ship spent most of April and May 1913 undergoing repairs and refitting at the dockyard in Esquimalt. When Bartlett arrived in early June he immediately ordered further repair work. In addition to Karluk, Stefansson had purchased sight unseen a small gasoline-driven schooner, Alaska, to act as a supply ship for the Southern Party. He later added a second schooner, Mary Sachs, when the hold space in Alaska proved inadequate. In the confusion surrounding the expedition's departure, McKinlay notes, no attempt was made to align men or equipment to their appropriate ships. Thus anthropologists Henri Beuchat and Diamond Jenness, both designated for the Southern Party, found themselves sailing with Karluk, while their equipment was on board Alaska. McKinlay himself, aboard Karluk as magnetic observer, discovered that most of his equipment was with Alaska. Stefansson insisted that all would be sorted out when the ships reached their Herschel Island rendezvous. "Heaven help us all if we failed to reach Herschel Island", McKinlay wrote.
Output: What were the full names of the two people who found themselves sailing with Karluk?
Passage: Karluk had been chosen by Pedersen and bought by Stefansson for the bargain price of US$10,000. Stefansson was advised by Pedersen that, of four ships that were available, Karluk was "the soundest and best adapted for our purpose", but Bartlett had deep reservations about her fitness for prolonged Arctic service. The ship, a 29-year-old brigantine, was 129 feet (39 m) in length with a beam of 23 feet (7.0 m). She had been built for the Aleutian fishing industry (karluk is the Aleut word for "fish") and later converted for whaling, when her bows and sides had been sheathed with 2-inch (51 mm) Australian ironwood. Despite 14 arctic whaling voyages, including six overwinterings, she had not been built to withstand sustained ice pressure, and lacked the engine power to force a passage through the ice. She did not match the expectations of Bartlett, or of many of the more experienced crew.The ship spent most of April and May 1913 undergoing repairs and refitting at the dockyard in Esquimalt. When Bartlett arrived in early June he immediately ordered further repair work. In addition to Karluk, Stefansson had purchased sight unseen a small gasoline-driven schooner, Alaska, to act as a supply ship for the Southern Party. He later added a second schooner, Mary Sachs, when the hold space in Alaska proved inadequate. In the confusion surrounding the expedition's departure, McKinlay notes, no attempt was made to align men or equipment to their appropriate ships. Thus anthropologists Henri Beuchat and Diamond Jenness, both designated for the Southern Party, found themselves sailing with Karluk, while their equipment was on board Alaska. McKinlay himself, aboard Karluk as magnetic observer, discovered that most of his equipment was with Alaska. Stefansson insisted that all would be sorted out when the ships reached their Herschel Island rendezvous. "Heaven help us all if we failed to reach Herschel Island", McKinlay wrote.
Output: What were the last names of the three people whose equipment was aboard the Alaska?
Passage: Karluk had been chosen by Pedersen and bought by Stefansson for the bargain price of US$10,000. Stefansson was advised by Pedersen that, of four ships that were available, Karluk was "the soundest and best adapted for our purpose", but Bartlett had deep reservations about her fitness for prolonged Arctic service. The ship, a 29-year-old brigantine, was 129 feet (39 m) in length with a beam of 23 feet (7.0 m). She had been built for the Aleutian fishing industry (karluk is the Aleut word for "fish") and later converted for whaling, when her bows and sides had been sheathed with 2-inch (51 mm) Australian ironwood. Despite 14 arctic whaling voyages, including six overwinterings, she had not been built to withstand sustained ice pressure, and lacked the engine power to force a passage through the ice. She did not match the expectations of Bartlett, or of many of the more experienced crew.The ship spent most of April and May 1913 undergoing repairs and refitting at the dockyard in Esquimalt. When Bartlett arrived in early June he immediately ordered further repair work. In addition to Karluk, Stefansson had purchased sight unseen a small gasoline-driven schooner, Alaska, to act as a supply ship for the Southern Party. He later added a second schooner, Mary Sachs, when the hold space in Alaska proved inadequate. In the confusion surrounding the expedition's departure, McKinlay notes, no attempt was made to align men or equipment to their appropriate ships. Thus anthropologists Henri Beuchat and Diamond Jenness, both designated for the Southern Party, found themselves sailing with Karluk, while their equipment was on board Alaska. McKinlay himself, aboard Karluk as magnetic observer, discovered that most of his equipment was with Alaska. Stefansson insisted that all would be sorted out when the ships reached their Herschel Island rendezvous. "Heaven help us all if we failed to reach Herschel Island", McKinlay wrote.
Output: What was the ship whose name means "fish" not built to withstand?
Passage: The attribution of the panel reflects the progression and trends of 19th and 20th-century scholarship on Early Netherlandish art. It is now thought to have been completed c. 1438–40, but there are still arguments for dates as early as 1424–29. As with the pages ascribed to Hand G in the Turin-Milan Hours manuscript, the panel was attributed to Jan's brother Hubert van Eyck in the 1875 Gemäldegalerie catalogue, and by a 1911 claim by art historian Georges Hulin de Loo. This is no longer considered credible and Hubert, today, is credited with very few works. By 1912 the painting had been definitively attributed to Jan in the museum catalogue.Attempts to date it have undergone similar shifts of opinion. In the 19th century the panel was believed to be an early work by Jan completed as early as c. 1410, although this view changed as scholarship progressed. In the early 20th century, Ludwig von Baldass placed it around 1424–29, then for a long period it was seen as originating from the early 1430s. Erwin Panofsky provided the first detailed treatise on the work and placed it around 1432–34. However, following research from Meyer Schapiro, he revised his opinion to the late 1430s in the 1953 edition of his Early Netherlandish Painting. A 1970s comparative study of van Eyck's 1437 Saint Barbara concluded that Madonna in the Church was completed after c. 1437. In the 1990s, Otto Pächt judged the work as probably a late van Eyck, given the similar treatment of an interior in the 1434 Arnolfini Portrait. In the early 21st century, Jeffrey Chipps Smith and John Oliver Hand placed it between 1426 and 1428, claiming it as perhaps the earliest extant signed work confirmed as by Jan.
Output: What is the full name of the person who is credited with very few works?
Passage: Following the Seven Years' War (1756–63) and the forced migration of Native American tribes westward, German, Scots-Irish, and other European immigrants settled in the central Susquehanna Valley, including in the area that would become Northumberland, Pennsylvania. Northumberland was laid out around a central village green in 1772, on land originally purchased from the Iroquois by the Province of Pennsylvania in 1768, as part of the first Treaty of Fort Stanwix. During the American Revolution, the village was evacuated as part of the Big Runaway in 1778, and only finally resettled in 1784. In 1794, when the Priestleys moved there, it included Quaker and Wesleyan meeting houses, a brewery, two potteries, a potash manufacturer, a clock maker, a printer (who issued a weekly newspaper), several stores, and approximately one hundred houses.
The Priestley property, purchased in 1794 at a total cost of £500 (£ 56,400 in 2019) from Reuben Haines, who had secured the patent to the land for Northumberland, comprised four lots of the original village plan (numbers 29–32). Currently, the house and grounds occupy 1 acre (4,000 m²) at 472 Priestley Avenue. (The address of the house was originally "North Way", but the street was later renamed in honor of Joseph Priestley.) This street forms the northwest boundary of the property; the other boundaries are Hanover Avenue to the northeast, Wallis Street to the southwest, and the North Shore Railroad to the southeast. Beyond the railroad line is a baseball field, and beyond that lies the Susquehanna River, which was the original southeastern boundary of the property. The confluence of the West Branch Susquehanna River with the main (or North) branch of the Susquehanna is a short distance southwest of the property, which is at an elevation of 456 feet (139 m).The property's original area was 2 acres (8,000 m²), but this was reduced by about half around 1830 when the Pennsylvania Canal (North Branch Division) was dug through the house's front yard, between the house and river. On May 31, 1860, the Lackawanna and Bloomsburg Railroad opened with a train from Danville. This was the second railroad track in Northumberland, and ran behind the house. The canal closed in 1902 and was later filled in. The modern railroad line approximates the canal's course through the front yard; the track behind the house no longer exists.
Output: What village did the Priestleys move to?
Passage: Following the Seven Years' War (1756–63) and the forced migration of Native American tribes westward, German, Scots-Irish, and other European immigrants settled in the central Susquehanna Valley, including in the area that would become Northumberland, Pennsylvania. Northumberland was laid out around a central village green in 1772, on land originally purchased from the Iroquois by the Province of Pennsylvania in 1768, as part of the first Treaty of Fort Stanwix. During the American Revolution, the village was evacuated as part of the Big Runaway in 1778, and only finally resettled in 1784. In 1794, when the Priestleys moved there, it included Quaker and Wesleyan meeting houses, a brewery, two potteries, a potash manufacturer, a clock maker, a printer (who issued a weekly newspaper), several stores, and approximately one hundred houses.
The Priestley property, purchased in 1794 at a total cost of £500 (£ 56,400 in 2019) from Reuben Haines, who had secured the patent to the land for Northumberland, comprised four lots of the original village plan (numbers 29–32). Currently, the house and grounds occupy 1 acre (4,000 m²) at 472 Priestley Avenue. (The address of the house was originally "North Way", but the street was later renamed in honor of Joseph Priestley.) This street forms the northwest boundary of the property; the other boundaries are Hanover Avenue to the northeast, Wallis Street to the southwest, and the North Shore Railroad to the southeast. Beyond the railroad line is a baseball field, and beyond that lies the Susquehanna River, which was the original southeastern boundary of the property. The confluence of the West Branch Susquehanna River with the main (or North) branch of the Susquehanna is a short distance southwest of the property, which is at an elevation of 456 feet (139 m).The property's original area was 2 acres (8,000 m²), but this was reduced by about half around 1830 when the Pennsylvania Canal (North Branch Division) was dug through the house's front yard, between the house and river. On May 31, 1860, the Lackawanna and Bloomsburg Railroad opened with a train from Danville. This was the second railroad track in Northumberland, and ran behind the house. The canal closed in 1902 and was later filled in. The modern railroad line approximates the canal's course through the front yard; the track behind the house no longer exists.
Output: What is the current address of the Priestley's property?
Passage: Following the Seven Years' War (1756–63) and the forced migration of Native American tribes westward, German, Scots-Irish, and other European immigrants settled in the central Susquehanna Valley, including in the area that would become Northumberland, Pennsylvania. Northumberland was laid out around a central village green in 1772, on land originally purchased from the Iroquois by the Province of Pennsylvania in 1768, as part of the first Treaty of Fort Stanwix. During the American Revolution, the village was evacuated as part of the Big Runaway in 1778, and only finally resettled in 1784. In 1794, when the Priestleys moved there, it included Quaker and Wesleyan meeting houses, a brewery, two potteries, a potash manufacturer, a clock maker, a printer (who issued a weekly newspaper), several stores, and approximately one hundred houses.
The Priestley property, purchased in 1794 at a total cost of £500 (£ 56,400 in 2019) from Reuben Haines, who had secured the patent to the land for Northumberland, comprised four lots of the original village plan (numbers 29–32). Currently, the house and grounds occupy 1 acre (4,000 m²) at 472 Priestley Avenue. (The address of the house was originally "North Way", but the street was later renamed in honor of Joseph Priestley.) This street forms the northwest boundary of the property; the other boundaries are Hanover Avenue to the northeast, Wallis Street to the southwest, and the North Shore Railroad to the southeast. Beyond the railroad line is a baseball field, and beyond that lies the Susquehanna River, which was the original southeastern boundary of the property. The confluence of the West Branch Susquehanna River with the main (or North) branch of the Susquehanna is a short distance southwest of the property, which is at an elevation of 456 feet (139 m).The property's original area was 2 acres (8,000 m²), but this was reduced by about half around 1830 when the Pennsylvania Canal (North Branch Division) was dug through the house's front yard, between the house and river. On May 31, 1860, the Lackawanna and Bloomsburg Railroad opened with a train from Danville. This was the second railroad track in Northumberland, and ran behind the house. The canal closed in 1902 and was later filled in. The modern railroad line approximates the canal's course through the front yard; the track behind the house no longer exists.
Output: What street was the Priestley property originally located on?
Passage: Following the Seven Years' War (1756–63) and the forced migration of Native American tribes westward, German, Scots-Irish, and other European immigrants settled in the central Susquehanna Valley, including in the area that would become Northumberland, Pennsylvania. Northumberland was laid out around a central village green in 1772, on land originally purchased from the Iroquois by the Province of Pennsylvania in 1768, as part of the first Treaty of Fort Stanwix. During the American Revolution, the village was evacuated as part of the Big Runaway in 1778, and only finally resettled in 1784. In 1794, when the Priestleys moved there, it included Quaker and Wesleyan meeting houses, a brewery, two potteries, a potash manufacturer, a clock maker, a printer (who issued a weekly newspaper), several stores, and approximately one hundred houses.
The Priestley property, purchased in 1794 at a total cost of £500 (£ 56,400 in 2019) from Reuben Haines, who had secured the patent to the land for Northumberland, comprised four lots of the original village plan (numbers 29–32). Currently, the house and grounds occupy 1 acre (4,000 m²) at 472 Priestley Avenue. (The address of the house was originally "North Way", but the street was later renamed in honor of Joseph Priestley.) This street forms the northwest boundary of the property; the other boundaries are Hanover Avenue to the northeast, Wallis Street to the southwest, and the North Shore Railroad to the southeast. Beyond the railroad line is a baseball field, and beyond that lies the Susquehanna River, which was the original southeastern boundary of the property. The confluence of the West Branch Susquehanna River with the main (or North) branch of the Susquehanna is a short distance southwest of the property, which is at an elevation of 456 feet (139 m).The property's original area was 2 acres (8,000 m²), but this was reduced by about half around 1830 when the Pennsylvania Canal (North Branch Division) was dug through the house's front yard, between the house and river. On May 31, 1860, the Lackawanna and Bloomsburg Railroad opened with a train from Danville. This was the second railroad track in Northumberland, and ran behind the house. The canal closed in 1902 and was later filled in. The modern railroad line approximates the canal's course through the front yard; the track behind the house no longer exists.
Output: What was reduced from 2 acres to 1 when the Pennsylvania Canal was dug?
Passage: Following the Seven Years' War (1756–63) and the forced migration of Native American tribes westward, German, Scots-Irish, and other European immigrants settled in the central Susquehanna Valley, including in the area that would become Northumberland, Pennsylvania. Northumberland was laid out around a central village green in 1772, on land originally purchased from the Iroquois by the Province of Pennsylvania in 1768, as part of the first Treaty of Fort Stanwix. During the American Revolution, the village was evacuated as part of the Big Runaway in 1778, and only finally resettled in 1784. In 1794, when the Priestleys moved there, it included Quaker and Wesleyan meeting houses, a brewery, two potteries, a potash manufacturer, a clock maker, a printer (who issued a weekly newspaper), several stores, and approximately one hundred houses.
The Priestley property, purchased in 1794 at a total cost of £500 (£ 56,400 in 2019) from Reuben Haines, who had secured the patent to the land for Northumberland, comprised four lots of the original village plan (numbers 29–32). Currently, the house and grounds occupy 1 acre (4,000 m²) at 472 Priestley Avenue. (The address of the house was originally "North Way", but the street was later renamed in honor of Joseph Priestley.) This street forms the northwest boundary of the property; the other boundaries are Hanover Avenue to the northeast, Wallis Street to the southwest, and the North Shore Railroad to the southeast. Beyond the railroad line is a baseball field, and beyond that lies the Susquehanna River, which was the original southeastern boundary of the property. The confluence of the West Branch Susquehanna River with the main (or North) branch of the Susquehanna is a short distance southwest of the property, which is at an elevation of 456 feet (139 m).The property's original area was 2 acres (8,000 m²), but this was reduced by about half around 1830 when the Pennsylvania Canal (North Branch Division) was dug through the house's front yard, between the house and river. On May 31, 1860, the Lackawanna and Bloomsburg Railroad opened with a train from Danville. This was the second railroad track in Northumberland, and ran behind the house. The canal closed in 1902 and was later filled in. The modern railroad line approximates the canal's course through the front yard; the track behind the house no longer exists.
Output: What railway owned the track behind the house that no longer exists?