niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
Passage: Coming off their win over the Cardinals the Chargers flew to Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum for an AFC West division rivalry match against the Raiders. In the first quarter the Chargers' offense had problems when after a three-and-out Mike Scifres' punt was blocked by RB Rock Cartwright out of bounds in the end zone for a safety. Then kicker Sebastian Janikowski made a 50-yard field goal. Then Scifres' punt was blocked again and returned by FS Hiram Eugene 5&#160;yards to the endzone for a touchdown. The Chargers then fought back and took the lead with QB Philip Rivers completing a 19-yard TD pass to TE Antonio Gates. Then RB Mike Tolbert got a 4-yard TD run. Then the Chargers trailed with Janikowski making a 30-yard field goal. But they responded and got the lead back with kicker Nate Kaeding making a 43-yard field goal, followed in the third quarter by Rivers making a 41-yard TD pass to WR Malcolm Floyd. The Raiders replied with QB Jason Campbell completing a 1-yard TD pass to TE Zach Miller. Followed in the 4th quarter by Kaeding making a 34-yard field goal. The Chargers fell behind when RB Michael Bush got a 3-yard touchdown run (with a failed 2-point conversion), followed by SS Tyvon Branch recovering a fumble and running 64&#160;yards to the endzone for a touchdown to give the Chargers a loss, for the first time against the Raiders since 2003. With the loss, San Diego fell to 2-3 for the 4th straight season.
Output: Which running back scored first in the game?
Passage: Coming off their win over the Cardinals the Chargers flew to Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum for an AFC West division rivalry match against the Raiders. In the first quarter the Chargers' offense had problems when after a three-and-out Mike Scifres' punt was blocked by RB Rock Cartwright out of bounds in the end zone for a safety. Then kicker Sebastian Janikowski made a 50-yard field goal. Then Scifres' punt was blocked again and returned by FS Hiram Eugene 5&#160;yards to the endzone for a touchdown. The Chargers then fought back and took the lead with QB Philip Rivers completing a 19-yard TD pass to TE Antonio Gates. Then RB Mike Tolbert got a 4-yard TD run. Then the Chargers trailed with Janikowski making a 30-yard field goal. But they responded and got the lead back with kicker Nate Kaeding making a 43-yard field goal, followed in the third quarter by Rivers making a 41-yard TD pass to WR Malcolm Floyd. The Raiders replied with QB Jason Campbell completing a 1-yard TD pass to TE Zach Miller. Followed in the 4th quarter by Kaeding making a 34-yard field goal. The Chargers fell behind when RB Michael Bush got a 3-yard touchdown run (with a failed 2-point conversion), followed by SS Tyvon Branch recovering a fumble and running 64&#160;yards to the endzone for a touchdown to give the Chargers a loss, for the first time against the Raiders since 2003. With the loss, San Diego fell to 2-3 for the 4th straight season.
Output: Who caught the longest touchdown pass?
Passage: Coming off their win over the Cardinals the Chargers flew to Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum for an AFC West division rivalry match against the Raiders. In the first quarter the Chargers' offense had problems when after a three-and-out Mike Scifres' punt was blocked by RB Rock Cartwright out of bounds in the end zone for a safety. Then kicker Sebastian Janikowski made a 50-yard field goal. Then Scifres' punt was blocked again and returned by FS Hiram Eugene 5&#160;yards to the endzone for a touchdown. The Chargers then fought back and took the lead with QB Philip Rivers completing a 19-yard TD pass to TE Antonio Gates. Then RB Mike Tolbert got a 4-yard TD run. Then the Chargers trailed with Janikowski making a 30-yard field goal. But they responded and got the lead back with kicker Nate Kaeding making a 43-yard field goal, followed in the third quarter by Rivers making a 41-yard TD pass to WR Malcolm Floyd. The Raiders replied with QB Jason Campbell completing a 1-yard TD pass to TE Zach Miller. Followed in the 4th quarter by Kaeding making a 34-yard field goal. The Chargers fell behind when RB Michael Bush got a 3-yard touchdown run (with a failed 2-point conversion), followed by SS Tyvon Branch recovering a fumble and running 64&#160;yards to the endzone for a touchdown to give the Chargers a loss, for the first time against the Raiders since 2003. With the loss, San Diego fell to 2-3 for the 4th straight season.
Output: Who had the longest touchdown reception of the game?
Passage: Coming off their win over the Cardinals the Chargers flew to Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum for an AFC West division rivalry match against the Raiders. In the first quarter the Chargers' offense had problems when after a three-and-out Mike Scifres' punt was blocked by RB Rock Cartwright out of bounds in the end zone for a safety. Then kicker Sebastian Janikowski made a 50-yard field goal. Then Scifres' punt was blocked again and returned by FS Hiram Eugene 5&#160;yards to the endzone for a touchdown. The Chargers then fought back and took the lead with QB Philip Rivers completing a 19-yard TD pass to TE Antonio Gates. Then RB Mike Tolbert got a 4-yard TD run. Then the Chargers trailed with Janikowski making a 30-yard field goal. But they responded and got the lead back with kicker Nate Kaeding making a 43-yard field goal, followed in the third quarter by Rivers making a 41-yard TD pass to WR Malcolm Floyd. The Raiders replied with QB Jason Campbell completing a 1-yard TD pass to TE Zach Miller. Followed in the 4th quarter by Kaeding making a 34-yard field goal. The Chargers fell behind when RB Michael Bush got a 3-yard touchdown run (with a failed 2-point conversion), followed by SS Tyvon Branch recovering a fumble and running 64&#160;yards to the endzone for a touchdown to give the Chargers a loss, for the first time against the Raiders since 2003. With the loss, San Diego fell to 2-3 for the 4th straight season.
Output: Who kicked the longest field goal of the fourth quarter?
Passage: Coming off their win over the Cardinals the Chargers flew to Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum for an AFC West division rivalry match against the Raiders. In the first quarter the Chargers' offense had problems when after a three-and-out Mike Scifres' punt was blocked by RB Rock Cartwright out of bounds in the end zone for a safety. Then kicker Sebastian Janikowski made a 50-yard field goal. Then Scifres' punt was blocked again and returned by FS Hiram Eugene 5&#160;yards to the endzone for a touchdown. The Chargers then fought back and took the lead with QB Philip Rivers completing a 19-yard TD pass to TE Antonio Gates. Then RB Mike Tolbert got a 4-yard TD run. Then the Chargers trailed with Janikowski making a 30-yard field goal. But they responded and got the lead back with kicker Nate Kaeding making a 43-yard field goal, followed in the third quarter by Rivers making a 41-yard TD pass to WR Malcolm Floyd. The Raiders replied with QB Jason Campbell completing a 1-yard TD pass to TE Zach Miller. Followed in the 4th quarter by Kaeding making a 34-yard field goal. The Chargers fell behind when RB Michael Bush got a 3-yard touchdown run (with a failed 2-point conversion), followed by SS Tyvon Branch recovering a fumble and running 64&#160;yards to the endzone for a touchdown to give the Chargers a loss, for the first time against the Raiders since 2003. With the loss, San Diego fell to 2-3 for the 4th straight season.
Output: Who threw the longest touchdown pass?
Passage: On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98-0 in the U.S. Senate. He was sworn in the same day. In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters." In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees. A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR". In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.
Output: How many Senators voted against confirming Michael Chertoff?
Passage: On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98-0 in the U.S. Senate. He was sworn in the same day. In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters." In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees. A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR". In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.
Output: How many days after President Bush nominated Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge as federal judge was he confirmed?
Passage: On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98-0 in the U.S. Senate. He was sworn in the same day. In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters." In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees. A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR". In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.
Output: How many days from nomination to confirmation for Chertoff?
Passage: On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98-0 in the U.S. Senate. He was sworn in the same day. In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters." In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees. A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR". In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.
Output: How many groups  issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR?
Passage: On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98-0 in the U.S. Senate. He was sworn in the same day. In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters." In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees. A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR". In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.
Output: How many months after the DHS issued a new personnel system named MaxHR did District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer block the plan?
Passage: On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98-0 in the U.S. Senate. He was sworn in the same day. In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters." In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees. A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR". In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.
Output: How many months from issuing the new rules until they were blocked by a judge?
Passage: On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98-0 in the U.S. Senate. He was sworn in the same day. In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters." In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees. A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR". In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.
Output: How many people did not vote for Chertoff was confirmed?
Passage: On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98-0 in the U.S. Senate. He was sworn in the same day. In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters." In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees. A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR". In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.
Output: How many people in the U.S. Senate voted against the confirmation of federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge.?
Passage: On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98-0 in the U.S. Senate. He was sworn in the same day. In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters." In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees. A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR". In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.
Output: How many reasons did Collyer give for blocking the plan?
Passage: On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98-0 in the U.S. Senate. He was sworn in the same day. In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters." In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees. A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR". In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.
Output: How many things were made almost impossible, for unions to negotiate over?
Passage: On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98-0 in the U.S. Senate. He was sworn in the same day. In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters." In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees. A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR". In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.
Output: How many years after the DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR did DSH state in a court filing that they would no longer pursue the new rules?
Passage: On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98-0 in the U.S. Senate. He was sworn in the same day. In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters." In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees. A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR". In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.
Output: How many years after the DHS issued a new personnel system named MaxHR did they retire the name "MaxHR"?
Passage: On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98-0 in the U.S. Senate. He was sworn in the same day. In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters." In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees. A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR". In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.
Output: How many years did it take from when DHS adopted new rules to when they stopped?
Passage: On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98-0 in the U.S. Senate. He was sworn in the same day. In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters." In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees. A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR". In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.
Output: Who ruled against the DHS?
Passage: John Graunt noted that in London over a 35-year period in the 17th century (1628–62), the birth sex ratio was 1.07; while Koreas historical records suggest a birth sex ratio of 1.13, based on 5 million births, in 1920s over a 10-year period. Other historical records from Asia too support James hypothesis. For example, Jiang et al. claim that the birth sex ratio in China was 116–121 over a 100-year period in the late 18th and early 19th centuries; in the 120–123 range in the early 20th century; falling to 112 in the 1930s.
Output: Did the birth sex ratio in China have a wider range in the 18th and 19th centuries or the early 20th century?
Passage: John Graunt noted that in London over a 35-year period in the 17th century (1628–62), the birth sex ratio was 1.07; while Koreas historical records suggest a birth sex ratio of 1.13, based on 5 million births, in 1920s over a 10-year period. Other historical records from Asia too support James hypothesis. For example, Jiang et al. claim that the birth sex ratio in China was 116–121 over a 100-year period in the late 18th and early 19th centuries; in the 120–123 range in the early 20th century; falling to 112 in the 1930s.
Output: During which century was the birth sex ratio the highest in China?
Passage: John Graunt noted that in London over a 35-year period in the 17th century (1628–62), the birth sex ratio was 1.07; while Koreas historical records suggest a birth sex ratio of 1.13, based on 5 million births, in 1920s over a 10-year period. Other historical records from Asia too support James hypothesis. For example, Jiang et al. claim that the birth sex ratio in China was 116–121 over a 100-year period in the late 18th and early 19th centuries; in the 120–123 range in the early 20th century; falling to 112 in the 1930s.
Output: How many points did London's birth sex ratio differ from Korea's?
Passage: John Graunt noted that in London over a 35-year period in the 17th century (1628–62), the birth sex ratio was 1.07; while Koreas historical records suggest a birth sex ratio of 1.13, based on 5 million births, in 1920s over a 10-year period. Other historical records from Asia too support James hypothesis. For example, Jiang et al. claim that the birth sex ratio in China was 116–121 over a 100-year period in the late 18th and early 19th centuries; in the 120–123 range in the early 20th century; falling to 112 in the 1930s.
Output: Was the birth sex rate for China higher in the 18th century or the 1930s?
Passage: John Graunt noted that in London over a 35-year period in the 17th century (1628–62), the birth sex ratio was 1.07; while Koreas historical records suggest a birth sex ratio of 1.13, based on 5 million births, in 1920s over a 10-year period. Other historical records from Asia too support James hypothesis. For example, Jiang et al. claim that the birth sex ratio in China was 116–121 over a 100-year period in the late 18th and early 19th centuries; in the 120–123 range in the early 20th century; falling to 112 in the 1930s.
Output: Was the birth sex ratio higher in 1628 or the 1920s?
Passage: John Graunt noted that in London over a 35-year period in the 17th century (1628–62), the birth sex ratio was 1.07; while Koreas historical records suggest a birth sex ratio of 1.13, based on 5 million births, in 1920s over a 10-year period. Other historical records from Asia too support James hypothesis. For example, Jiang et al. claim that the birth sex ratio in China was 116–121 over a 100-year period in the late 18th and early 19th centuries; in the 120–123 range in the early 20th century; falling to 112 in the 1930s.
Output: Which researchers are named that studied the Asian birth sex ratio in either Korea or China?
Passage: In 1665, the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb decided to take action on the Arakanese marauders and launched the Mughal conquest of Chittagong. He also wanted to avenge for his brother Shah Shuja who was killed in exile by the Arakanese king. The Mughal viceroy of Bengal first lured the Portuguese mercenaries in the service of King Sanda Thudhamma guarding the Chittagong region to defect by giving them fiefs. Then the Mughal fleet took Sandwip in late 1665. In January 1666, a Mughal force of 6500 men and 288 boats took Chittagong after a 36-hours' siege. They subsequently took as far south as Ramu. Arakan had lost the Chittagong province which it had held since 1459. Arakan would not recover from the loss of Chittagong, and went into rapid decline. Central authority collapsed in the late 17th century. Sanda Wizaya  briefly revived the kingdom. He went to war with Tripura, and raided Sandwip, Prome and Malun. But after his death, Arakan reverted to chaos where king after king was murdered and central authority barely existed. It was easily overrun by the Konbaung armies in 1784-1785.
Output: By 1665, how many years had Arakan held the Chittagong province?
Passage: In 1665, the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb decided to take action on the Arakanese marauders and launched the Mughal conquest of Chittagong. He also wanted to avenge for his brother Shah Shuja who was killed in exile by the Arakanese king. The Mughal viceroy of Bengal first lured the Portuguese mercenaries in the service of King Sanda Thudhamma guarding the Chittagong region to defect by giving them fiefs. Then the Mughal fleet took Sandwip in late 1665. In January 1666, a Mughal force of 6500 men and 288 boats took Chittagong after a 36-hours' siege. They subsequently took as far south as Ramu. Arakan had lost the Chittagong province which it had held since 1459. Arakan would not recover from the loss of Chittagong, and went into rapid decline. Central authority collapsed in the late 17th century. Sanda Wizaya  briefly revived the kingdom. He went to war with Tripura, and raided Sandwip, Prome and Malun. But after his death, Arakan reverted to chaos where king after king was murdered and central authority barely existed. It was easily overrun by the Konbaung armies in 1784-1785.
Output: How many cities did Sanda Wizaya when he went to war with Tripura?
Passage: In 1665, the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb decided to take action on the Arakanese marauders and launched the Mughal conquest of Chittagong. He also wanted to avenge for his brother Shah Shuja who was killed in exile by the Arakanese king. The Mughal viceroy of Bengal first lured the Portuguese mercenaries in the service of King Sanda Thudhamma guarding the Chittagong region to defect by giving them fiefs. Then the Mughal fleet took Sandwip in late 1665. In January 1666, a Mughal force of 6500 men and 288 boats took Chittagong after a 36-hours' siege. They subsequently took as far south as Ramu. Arakan had lost the Chittagong province which it had held since 1459. Arakan would not recover from the loss of Chittagong, and went into rapid decline. Central authority collapsed in the late 17th century. Sanda Wizaya  briefly revived the kingdom. He went to war with Tripura, and raided Sandwip, Prome and Malun. But after his death, Arakan reverted to chaos where king after king was murdered and central authority barely existed. It was easily overrun by the Konbaung armies in 1784-1785.
Output: How many men and boats did the Mughal force have when they took Chittagong?
Passage: In 1665, the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb decided to take action on the Arakanese marauders and launched the Mughal conquest of Chittagong. He also wanted to avenge for his brother Shah Shuja who was killed in exile by the Arakanese king. The Mughal viceroy of Bengal first lured the Portuguese mercenaries in the service of King Sanda Thudhamma guarding the Chittagong region to defect by giving them fiefs. Then the Mughal fleet took Sandwip in late 1665. In January 1666, a Mughal force of 6500 men and 288 boats took Chittagong after a 36-hours' siege. They subsequently took as far south as Ramu. Arakan had lost the Chittagong province which it had held since 1459. Arakan would not recover from the loss of Chittagong, and went into rapid decline. Central authority collapsed in the late 17th century. Sanda Wizaya  briefly revived the kingdom. He went to war with Tripura, and raided Sandwip, Prome and Malun. But after his death, Arakan reverted to chaos where king after king was murdered and central authority barely existed. It was easily overrun by the Konbaung armies in 1784-1785.
Output: How many more Mughal men were there than boats?
Passage: In 1665, the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb decided to take action on the Arakanese marauders and launched the Mughal conquest of Chittagong. He also wanted to avenge for his brother Shah Shuja who was killed in exile by the Arakanese king. The Mughal viceroy of Bengal first lured the Portuguese mercenaries in the service of King Sanda Thudhamma guarding the Chittagong region to defect by giving them fiefs. Then the Mughal fleet took Sandwip in late 1665. In January 1666, a Mughal force of 6500 men and 288 boats took Chittagong after a 36-hours' siege. They subsequently took as far south as Ramu. Arakan had lost the Chittagong province which it had held since 1459. Arakan would not recover from the loss of Chittagong, and went into rapid decline. Central authority collapsed in the late 17th century. Sanda Wizaya  briefly revived the kingdom. He went to war with Tripura, and raided Sandwip, Prome and Malun. But after his death, Arakan reverted to chaos where king after king was murdered and central authority barely existed. It was easily overrun by the Konbaung armies in 1784-1785.
Output: How many more men than boats did the Mughal force have when they took Chittagong?
Passage: In 1665, the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb decided to take action on the Arakanese marauders and launched the Mughal conquest of Chittagong. He also wanted to avenge for his brother Shah Shuja who was killed in exile by the Arakanese king. The Mughal viceroy of Bengal first lured the Portuguese mercenaries in the service of King Sanda Thudhamma guarding the Chittagong region to defect by giving them fiefs. Then the Mughal fleet took Sandwip in late 1665. In January 1666, a Mughal force of 6500 men and 288 boats took Chittagong after a 36-hours' siege. They subsequently took as far south as Ramu. Arakan had lost the Chittagong province which it had held since 1459. Arakan would not recover from the loss of Chittagong, and went into rapid decline. Central authority collapsed in the late 17th century. Sanda Wizaya  briefly revived the kingdom. He went to war with Tripura, and raided Sandwip, Prome and Malun. But after his death, Arakan reverted to chaos where king after king was murdered and central authority barely existed. It was easily overrun by the Konbaung armies in 1784-1785.
Output: How many more men than boats did the Mughal force have?
Passage: In 1665, the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb decided to take action on the Arakanese marauders and launched the Mughal conquest of Chittagong. He also wanted to avenge for his brother Shah Shuja who was killed in exile by the Arakanese king. The Mughal viceroy of Bengal first lured the Portuguese mercenaries in the service of King Sanda Thudhamma guarding the Chittagong region to defect by giving them fiefs. Then the Mughal fleet took Sandwip in late 1665. In January 1666, a Mughal force of 6500 men and 288 boats took Chittagong after a 36-hours' siege. They subsequently took as far south as Ramu. Arakan had lost the Chittagong province which it had held since 1459. Arakan would not recover from the loss of Chittagong, and went into rapid decline. Central authority collapsed in the late 17th century. Sanda Wizaya  briefly revived the kingdom. He went to war with Tripura, and raided Sandwip, Prome and Malun. But after his death, Arakan reverted to chaos where king after king was murdered and central authority barely existed. It was easily overrun by the Konbaung armies in 1784-1785.
Output: How many total men and boats invaded Chittagong?
Passage: In 1665, the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb decided to take action on the Arakanese marauders and launched the Mughal conquest of Chittagong. He also wanted to avenge for his brother Shah Shuja who was killed in exile by the Arakanese king. The Mughal viceroy of Bengal first lured the Portuguese mercenaries in the service of King Sanda Thudhamma guarding the Chittagong region to defect by giving them fiefs. Then the Mughal fleet took Sandwip in late 1665. In January 1666, a Mughal force of 6500 men and 288 boats took Chittagong after a 36-hours' siege. They subsequently took as far south as Ramu. Arakan had lost the Chittagong province which it had held since 1459. Arakan would not recover from the loss of Chittagong, and went into rapid decline. Central authority collapsed in the late 17th century. Sanda Wizaya  briefly revived the kingdom. He went to war with Tripura, and raided Sandwip, Prome and Malun. But after his death, Arakan reverted to chaos where king after king was murdered and central authority barely existed. It was easily overrun by the Konbaung armies in 1784-1785.
Output: How many years did Arakan hold the Chittagong province before losing it?
Passage: In 1665, the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb decided to take action on the Arakanese marauders and launched the Mughal conquest of Chittagong. He also wanted to avenge for his brother Shah Shuja who was killed in exile by the Arakanese king. The Mughal viceroy of Bengal first lured the Portuguese mercenaries in the service of King Sanda Thudhamma guarding the Chittagong region to defect by giving them fiefs. Then the Mughal fleet took Sandwip in late 1665. In January 1666, a Mughal force of 6500 men and 288 boats took Chittagong after a 36-hours' siege. They subsequently took as far south as Ramu. Arakan had lost the Chittagong province which it had held since 1459. Arakan would not recover from the loss of Chittagong, and went into rapid decline. Central authority collapsed in the late 17th century. Sanda Wizaya  briefly revived the kingdom. He went to war with Tripura, and raided Sandwip, Prome and Malun. But after his death, Arakan reverted to chaos where king after king was murdered and central authority barely existed. It was easily overrun by the Konbaung armies in 1784-1785.
Output: How many years did Arakan hold the Chittagong province?
Passage: In 1665, the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb decided to take action on the Arakanese marauders and launched the Mughal conquest of Chittagong. He also wanted to avenge for his brother Shah Shuja who was killed in exile by the Arakanese king. The Mughal viceroy of Bengal first lured the Portuguese mercenaries in the service of King Sanda Thudhamma guarding the Chittagong region to defect by giving them fiefs. Then the Mughal fleet took Sandwip in late 1665. In January 1666, a Mughal force of 6500 men and 288 boats took Chittagong after a 36-hours' siege. They subsequently took as far south as Ramu. Arakan had lost the Chittagong province which it had held since 1459. Arakan would not recover from the loss of Chittagong, and went into rapid decline. Central authority collapsed in the late 17th century. Sanda Wizaya  briefly revived the kingdom. He went to war with Tripura, and raided Sandwip, Prome and Malun. But after his death, Arakan reverted to chaos where king after king was murdered and central authority barely existed. It was easily overrun by the Konbaung armies in 1784-1785.
Output: What happened second: Mughal fleet took Sandwip or took Chittagong?
Passage: In 1665, the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb decided to take action on the Arakanese marauders and launched the Mughal conquest of Chittagong. He also wanted to avenge for his brother Shah Shuja who was killed in exile by the Arakanese king. The Mughal viceroy of Bengal first lured the Portuguese mercenaries in the service of King Sanda Thudhamma guarding the Chittagong region to defect by giving them fiefs. Then the Mughal fleet took Sandwip in late 1665. In January 1666, a Mughal force of 6500 men and 288 boats took Chittagong after a 36-hours' siege. They subsequently took as far south as Ramu. Arakan had lost the Chittagong province which it had held since 1459. Arakan would not recover from the loss of Chittagong, and went into rapid decline. Central authority collapsed in the late 17th century. Sanda Wizaya  briefly revived the kingdom. He went to war with Tripura, and raided Sandwip, Prome and Malun. But after his death, Arakan reverted to chaos where king after king was murdered and central authority barely existed. It was easily overrun by the Konbaung armies in 1784-1785.
Output: What started first: Mughal conquest of Chittagong or Mughal fleet took Sandwip?
Passage: In 1665, the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb decided to take action on the Arakanese marauders and launched the Mughal conquest of Chittagong. He also wanted to avenge for his brother Shah Shuja who was killed in exile by the Arakanese king. The Mughal viceroy of Bengal first lured the Portuguese mercenaries in the service of King Sanda Thudhamma guarding the Chittagong region to defect by giving them fiefs. Then the Mughal fleet took Sandwip in late 1665. In January 1666, a Mughal force of 6500 men and 288 boats took Chittagong after a 36-hours' siege. They subsequently took as far south as Ramu. Arakan had lost the Chittagong province which it had held since 1459. Arakan would not recover from the loss of Chittagong, and went into rapid decline. Central authority collapsed in the late 17th century. Sanda Wizaya  briefly revived the kingdom. He went to war with Tripura, and raided Sandwip, Prome and Malun. But after his death, Arakan reverted to chaos where king after king was murdered and central authority barely existed. It was easily overrun by the Konbaung armies in 1784-1785.
Output: What started second: Mughal conquest of Chittagong or Mughal fleet took Sandwip?
Passage: In 1665, the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb decided to take action on the Arakanese marauders and launched the Mughal conquest of Chittagong. He also wanted to avenge for his brother Shah Shuja who was killed in exile by the Arakanese king. The Mughal viceroy of Bengal first lured the Portuguese mercenaries in the service of King Sanda Thudhamma guarding the Chittagong region to defect by giving them fiefs. Then the Mughal fleet took Sandwip in late 1665. In January 1666, a Mughal force of 6500 men and 288 boats took Chittagong after a 36-hours' siege. They subsequently took as far south as Ramu. Arakan had lost the Chittagong province which it had held since 1459. Arakan would not recover from the loss of Chittagong, and went into rapid decline. Central authority collapsed in the late 17th century. Sanda Wizaya  briefly revived the kingdom. He went to war with Tripura, and raided Sandwip, Prome and Malun. But after his death, Arakan reverted to chaos where king after king was murdered and central authority barely existed. It was easily overrun by the Konbaung armies in 1784-1785.
Output: Which happened first, the taking of Sandwip or the taking of Chittagong?
Passage: In 1665, the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb decided to take action on the Arakanese marauders and launched the Mughal conquest of Chittagong. He also wanted to avenge for his brother Shah Shuja who was killed in exile by the Arakanese king. The Mughal viceroy of Bengal first lured the Portuguese mercenaries in the service of King Sanda Thudhamma guarding the Chittagong region to defect by giving them fiefs. Then the Mughal fleet took Sandwip in late 1665. In January 1666, a Mughal force of 6500 men and 288 boats took Chittagong after a 36-hours' siege. They subsequently took as far south as Ramu. Arakan had lost the Chittagong province which it had held since 1459. Arakan would not recover from the loss of Chittagong, and went into rapid decline. Central authority collapsed in the late 17th century. Sanda Wizaya  briefly revived the kingdom. He went to war with Tripura, and raided Sandwip, Prome and Malun. But after his death, Arakan reverted to chaos where king after king was murdered and central authority barely existed. It was easily overrun by the Konbaung armies in 1784-1785.
Output: Which were there more of in the Mughal force, men or boats?