niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
Passage: He was however forced to fall back across the Danube, and the Ottomans in turn led a massive counter-offensive  which aimed to not only take back their recently captured possessions but also conquer Wallachia once and for all. The push was initially successful, managing to capture not only Giurgiu but also Bucharest and Târgovişte, in spite of meeting fierce opposition at Călugăreni . At this point the Ottoman command grew complacent and stopped pursuing the retreating Wallachian army, focusing instead on fortifying Târgovişte and Bucharest and considering their task all but done. Michael had to wait almost two months for aid from his allies to arrive, but when it did his counter-offensive took the Ottomans by surprise, managing to sweep through the Ottoman defences on three successive battlefields, at Târgovişte , Bucharest , and Giurgiu . The Battle of Giurgiu in particular was devastating for the Ottoman forces, which had to retreat across the Danube in disarray. The war between Wallachia and the Ottomans continued until late 1599, when Michael was unable to continue the war due to poor support from his allies. The turning point of the war was the Battle of Mezőkeresztes, which took place in the territory of Hungary on October 24-26, 1596. The combined Habsburg-Transylvanian force of 45-50,000 troops was defeated by the Ottoman army. The battle turned when Christian soldiers, thinking they had won the battle, stopped fighting in order to plunder the Ottoman camp. Despite this victory, the Ottomans realized for the first time the superiority of Western military equipment over Ottoman weapons. This battle was the first significant military encounter in Central-Europe between a large Christian army and the Ottoman Turkish Army after the Battle of Mohács. Nevertheless, Austrians recaptured Győr and Komarom in 1598.
Output: What was the time period for the turning point of the war?
Passage: He was however forced to fall back across the Danube, and the Ottomans in turn led a massive counter-offensive  which aimed to not only take back their recently captured possessions but also conquer Wallachia once and for all. The push was initially successful, managing to capture not only Giurgiu but also Bucharest and Târgovişte, in spite of meeting fierce opposition at Călugăreni . At this point the Ottoman command grew complacent and stopped pursuing the retreating Wallachian army, focusing instead on fortifying Târgovişte and Bucharest and considering their task all but done. Michael had to wait almost two months for aid from his allies to arrive, but when it did his counter-offensive took the Ottomans by surprise, managing to sweep through the Ottoman defences on three successive battlefields, at Târgovişte , Bucharest , and Giurgiu . The Battle of Giurgiu in particular was devastating for the Ottoman forces, which had to retreat across the Danube in disarray. The war between Wallachia and the Ottomans continued until late 1599, when Michael was unable to continue the war due to poor support from his allies. The turning point of the war was the Battle of Mezőkeresztes, which took place in the territory of Hungary on October 24-26, 1596. The combined Habsburg-Transylvanian force of 45-50,000 troops was defeated by the Ottoman army. The battle turned when Christian soldiers, thinking they had won the battle, stopped fighting in order to plunder the Ottoman camp. Despite this victory, the Ottomans realized for the first time the superiority of Western military equipment over Ottoman weapons. This battle was the first significant military encounter in Central-Europe between a large Christian army and the Ottoman Turkish Army after the Battle of Mohács. Nevertheless, Austrians recaptured Győr and Komarom in 1598.
Output: Which happened earlier, the Battle of Mezőkeresztes or the recapture of Győr and Komarom by the Austrians?
Passage: He was however forced to fall back across the Danube, and the Ottomans in turn led a massive counter-offensive  which aimed to not only take back their recently captured possessions but also conquer Wallachia once and for all. The push was initially successful, managing to capture not only Giurgiu but also Bucharest and Târgovişte, in spite of meeting fierce opposition at Călugăreni . At this point the Ottoman command grew complacent and stopped pursuing the retreating Wallachian army, focusing instead on fortifying Târgovişte and Bucharest and considering their task all but done. Michael had to wait almost two months for aid from his allies to arrive, but when it did his counter-offensive took the Ottomans by surprise, managing to sweep through the Ottoman defences on three successive battlefields, at Târgovişte , Bucharest , and Giurgiu . The Battle of Giurgiu in particular was devastating for the Ottoman forces, which had to retreat across the Danube in disarray. The war between Wallachia and the Ottomans continued until late 1599, when Michael was unable to continue the war due to poor support from his allies. The turning point of the war was the Battle of Mezőkeresztes, which took place in the territory of Hungary on October 24-26, 1596. The combined Habsburg-Transylvanian force of 45-50,000 troops was defeated by the Ottoman army. The battle turned when Christian soldiers, thinking they had won the battle, stopped fighting in order to plunder the Ottoman camp. Despite this victory, the Ottomans realized for the first time the superiority of Western military equipment over Ottoman weapons. This battle was the first significant military encounter in Central-Europe between a large Christian army and the Ottoman Turkish Army after the Battle of Mohács. Nevertheless, Austrians recaptured Győr and Komarom in 1598.
Output: Which happened earlier, the Battle of Mohács or the Battle of Mezőkeresztes?
Passage: He was however forced to fall back across the Danube, and the Ottomans in turn led a massive counter-offensive  which aimed to not only take back their recently captured possessions but also conquer Wallachia once and for all. The push was initially successful, managing to capture not only Giurgiu but also Bucharest and Târgovişte, in spite of meeting fierce opposition at Călugăreni . At this point the Ottoman command grew complacent and stopped pursuing the retreating Wallachian army, focusing instead on fortifying Târgovişte and Bucharest and considering their task all but done. Michael had to wait almost two months for aid from his allies to arrive, but when it did his counter-offensive took the Ottomans by surprise, managing to sweep through the Ottoman defences on three successive battlefields, at Târgovişte , Bucharest , and Giurgiu . The Battle of Giurgiu in particular was devastating for the Ottoman forces, which had to retreat across the Danube in disarray. The war between Wallachia and the Ottomans continued until late 1599, when Michael was unable to continue the war due to poor support from his allies. The turning point of the war was the Battle of Mezőkeresztes, which took place in the territory of Hungary on October 24-26, 1596. The combined Habsburg-Transylvanian force of 45-50,000 troops was defeated by the Ottoman army. The battle turned when Christian soldiers, thinking they had won the battle, stopped fighting in order to plunder the Ottoman camp. Despite this victory, the Ottomans realized for the first time the superiority of Western military equipment over Ottoman weapons. This battle was the first significant military encounter in Central-Europe between a large Christian army and the Ottoman Turkish Army after the Battle of Mohács. Nevertheless, Austrians recaptured Győr and Komarom in 1598.
Output: Which happened first, the Battle of Giurgiu or the Battle of Mezőkeresztes?
Passage: He was however forced to fall back across the Danube, and the Ottomans in turn led a massive counter-offensive  which aimed to not only take back their recently captured possessions but also conquer Wallachia once and for all. The push was initially successful, managing to capture not only Giurgiu but also Bucharest and Târgovişte, in spite of meeting fierce opposition at Călugăreni . At this point the Ottoman command grew complacent and stopped pursuing the retreating Wallachian army, focusing instead on fortifying Târgovişte and Bucharest and considering their task all but done. Michael had to wait almost two months for aid from his allies to arrive, but when it did his counter-offensive took the Ottomans by surprise, managing to sweep through the Ottoman defences on three successive battlefields, at Târgovişte , Bucharest , and Giurgiu . The Battle of Giurgiu in particular was devastating for the Ottoman forces, which had to retreat across the Danube in disarray. The war between Wallachia and the Ottomans continued until late 1599, when Michael was unable to continue the war due to poor support from his allies. The turning point of the war was the Battle of Mezőkeresztes, which took place in the territory of Hungary on October 24-26, 1596. The combined Habsburg-Transylvanian force of 45-50,000 troops was defeated by the Ottoman army. The battle turned when Christian soldiers, thinking they had won the battle, stopped fighting in order to plunder the Ottoman camp. Despite this victory, the Ottomans realized for the first time the superiority of Western military equipment over Ottoman weapons. This battle was the first significant military encounter in Central-Europe between a large Christian army and the Ottoman Turkish Army after the Battle of Mohács. Nevertheless, Austrians recaptured Győr and Komarom in 1598.
Output: Which happened first, the Battle of Mezokeresztes or the war between Wallachia and the Ottomans?
Passage: He was however forced to fall back across the Danube, and the Ottomans in turn led a massive counter-offensive  which aimed to not only take back their recently captured possessions but also conquer Wallachia once and for all. The push was initially successful, managing to capture not only Giurgiu but also Bucharest and Târgovişte, in spite of meeting fierce opposition at Călugăreni . At this point the Ottoman command grew complacent and stopped pursuing the retreating Wallachian army, focusing instead on fortifying Târgovişte and Bucharest and considering their task all but done. Michael had to wait almost two months for aid from his allies to arrive, but when it did his counter-offensive took the Ottomans by surprise, managing to sweep through the Ottoman defences on three successive battlefields, at Târgovişte , Bucharest , and Giurgiu . The Battle of Giurgiu in particular was devastating for the Ottoman forces, which had to retreat across the Danube in disarray. The war between Wallachia and the Ottomans continued until late 1599, when Michael was unable to continue the war due to poor support from his allies. The turning point of the war was the Battle of Mezőkeresztes, which took place in the territory of Hungary on October 24-26, 1596. The combined Habsburg-Transylvanian force of 45-50,000 troops was defeated by the Ottoman army. The battle turned when Christian soldiers, thinking they had won the battle, stopped fighting in order to plunder the Ottoman camp. Despite this victory, the Ottomans realized for the first time the superiority of Western military equipment over Ottoman weapons. This battle was the first significant military encounter in Central-Europe between a large Christian army and the Ottoman Turkish Army after the Battle of Mohács. Nevertheless, Austrians recaptured Győr and Komarom in 1598.
Output: Which side lost the Battle of Mezőkeresztes?
Passage: He was however forced to fall back across the Danube, and the Ottomans in turn led a massive counter-offensive  which aimed to not only take back their recently captured possessions but also conquer Wallachia once and for all. The push was initially successful, managing to capture not only Giurgiu but also Bucharest and Târgovişte, in spite of meeting fierce opposition at Călugăreni . At this point the Ottoman command grew complacent and stopped pursuing the retreating Wallachian army, focusing instead on fortifying Târgovişte and Bucharest and considering their task all but done. Michael had to wait almost two months for aid from his allies to arrive, but when it did his counter-offensive took the Ottomans by surprise, managing to sweep through the Ottoman defences on three successive battlefields, at Târgovişte , Bucharest , and Giurgiu . The Battle of Giurgiu in particular was devastating for the Ottoman forces, which had to retreat across the Danube in disarray. The war between Wallachia and the Ottomans continued until late 1599, when Michael was unable to continue the war due to poor support from his allies. The turning point of the war was the Battle of Mezőkeresztes, which took place in the territory of Hungary on October 24-26, 1596. The combined Habsburg-Transylvanian force of 45-50,000 troops was defeated by the Ottoman army. The battle turned when Christian soldiers, thinking they had won the battle, stopped fighting in order to plunder the Ottoman camp. Despite this victory, the Ottomans realized for the first time the superiority of Western military equipment over Ottoman weapons. This battle was the first significant military encounter in Central-Europe between a large Christian army and the Ottoman Turkish Army after the Battle of Mohács. Nevertheless, Austrians recaptured Győr and Komarom in 1598.
Output: Which side won the Battle of Giurgiu?
Passage: He was however forced to fall back across the Danube, and the Ottomans in turn led a massive counter-offensive  which aimed to not only take back their recently captured possessions but also conquer Wallachia once and for all. The push was initially successful, managing to capture not only Giurgiu but also Bucharest and Târgovişte, in spite of meeting fierce opposition at Călugăreni . At this point the Ottoman command grew complacent and stopped pursuing the retreating Wallachian army, focusing instead on fortifying Târgovişte and Bucharest and considering their task all but done. Michael had to wait almost two months for aid from his allies to arrive, but when it did his counter-offensive took the Ottomans by surprise, managing to sweep through the Ottoman defences on three successive battlefields, at Târgovişte , Bucharest , and Giurgiu . The Battle of Giurgiu in particular was devastating for the Ottoman forces, which had to retreat across the Danube in disarray. The war between Wallachia and the Ottomans continued until late 1599, when Michael was unable to continue the war due to poor support from his allies. The turning point of the war was the Battle of Mezőkeresztes, which took place in the territory of Hungary on October 24-26, 1596. The combined Habsburg-Transylvanian force of 45-50,000 troops was defeated by the Ottoman army. The battle turned when Christian soldiers, thinking they had won the battle, stopped fighting in order to plunder the Ottoman camp. Despite this victory, the Ottomans realized for the first time the superiority of Western military equipment over Ottoman weapons. This battle was the first significant military encounter in Central-Europe between a large Christian army and the Ottoman Turkish Army after the Battle of Mohács. Nevertheless, Austrians recaptured Győr and Komarom in 1598.
Output: Which side won the battles at Târgovişte and Bucharest after Michael received aid from his allies?
Passage: In October 2002, bilateral and multilateral lenders led by the World Bank agreed to give Yemen a four-year economic support package worth US$2.3 billion, 20 percent in grants and 80 percent in concessional loans. This funding is almost eight times the amount of financial support Yemen received under the IMFs PRGF. However, in December 2005 the World Bank announced that because of the governments continued inability to effect significant economic reforms and stem corruption, funding would be reduced by more than one-third, from US$420 million to US$240 million for the period July 2005 – July 2008. In May 2006, the World Bank adopted a new Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for Yemen for the period FY 2006 to FY 2009, providing a blueprint for fostering the countrys fiscal and human development improvement. The bank pledged to contribute approximately US$400 million in International Development Association (IDA) credits over the CAS time frame. At present, Yemen owes approximately US$264 million to Japan, one of its largest donors. In December 2005, the Government of Japan pledged to write off US$17 million of the debt. That same month, Germany pledged to increase its annual aid to Yemen to US$83.6 million over the next two years; funding will go primarily to education and water improvement projects. In November 2006, the United Kingdom announced that aid to Yemen would increase 400 percent, to US$222 million through 2011.
Output: How many millions of dollars did Yeman owe Japan after they wrote off some of the debt in 2005?
Passage: In October 2002, bilateral and multilateral lenders led by the World Bank agreed to give Yemen a four-year economic support package worth US$2.3 billion, 20 percent in grants and 80 percent in concessional loans. This funding is almost eight times the amount of financial support Yemen received under the IMFs PRGF. However, in December 2005 the World Bank announced that because of the governments continued inability to effect significant economic reforms and stem corruption, funding would be reduced by more than one-third, from US$420 million to US$240 million for the period July 2005 – July 2008. In May 2006, the World Bank adopted a new Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for Yemen for the period FY 2006 to FY 2009, providing a blueprint for fostering the countrys fiscal and human development improvement. The bank pledged to contribute approximately US$400 million in International Development Association (IDA) credits over the CAS time frame. At present, Yemen owes approximately US$264 million to Japan, one of its largest donors. In December 2005, the Government of Japan pledged to write off US$17 million of the debt. That same month, Germany pledged to increase its annual aid to Yemen to US$83.6 million over the next two years; funding will go primarily to education and water improvement projects. In November 2006, the United Kingdom announced that aid to Yemen would increase 400 percent, to US$222 million through 2011.
Output: How many millions of dollars did Yemen still owe Japan after Japan pledged to write off US$17 million of the debt?
Passage: In October 2002, bilateral and multilateral lenders led by the World Bank agreed to give Yemen a four-year economic support package worth US$2.3 billion, 20 percent in grants and 80 percent in concessional loans. This funding is almost eight times the amount of financial support Yemen received under the IMFs PRGF. However, in December 2005 the World Bank announced that because of the governments continued inability to effect significant economic reforms and stem corruption, funding would be reduced by more than one-third, from US$420 million to US$240 million for the period July 2005 – July 2008. In May 2006, the World Bank adopted a new Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for Yemen for the period FY 2006 to FY 2009, providing a blueprint for fostering the countrys fiscal and human development improvement. The bank pledged to contribute approximately US$400 million in International Development Association (IDA) credits over the CAS time frame. At present, Yemen owes approximately US$264 million to Japan, one of its largest donors. In December 2005, the Government of Japan pledged to write off US$17 million of the debt. That same month, Germany pledged to increase its annual aid to Yemen to US$83.6 million over the next two years; funding will go primarily to education and water improvement projects. In November 2006, the United Kingdom announced that aid to Yemen would increase 400 percent, to US$222 million through 2011.
Output: How many millions of dollars did the World Bank reduce the funding to Yeman for the period July 2005 – July 2008?
Passage: In October 2002, bilateral and multilateral lenders led by the World Bank agreed to give Yemen a four-year economic support package worth US$2.3 billion, 20 percent in grants and 80 percent in concessional loans. This funding is almost eight times the amount of financial support Yemen received under the IMFs PRGF. However, in December 2005 the World Bank announced that because of the governments continued inability to effect significant economic reforms and stem corruption, funding would be reduced by more than one-third, from US$420 million to US$240 million for the period July 2005 – July 2008. In May 2006, the World Bank adopted a new Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for Yemen for the period FY 2006 to FY 2009, providing a blueprint for fostering the countrys fiscal and human development improvement. The bank pledged to contribute approximately US$400 million in International Development Association (IDA) credits over the CAS time frame. At present, Yemen owes approximately US$264 million to Japan, one of its largest donors. In December 2005, the Government of Japan pledged to write off US$17 million of the debt. That same month, Germany pledged to increase its annual aid to Yemen to US$83.6 million over the next two years; funding will go primarily to education and water improvement projects. In November 2006, the United Kingdom announced that aid to Yemen would increase 400 percent, to US$222 million through 2011.
Output: How many months after the World Bank announced it would reduce funding to Yemen by more than one-third did the World Bank adopt a new Country Assistance Strategy?
Passage: In October 2002, bilateral and multilateral lenders led by the World Bank agreed to give Yemen a four-year economic support package worth US$2.3 billion, 20 percent in grants and 80 percent in concessional loans. This funding is almost eight times the amount of financial support Yemen received under the IMFs PRGF. However, in December 2005 the World Bank announced that because of the governments continued inability to effect significant economic reforms and stem corruption, funding would be reduced by more than one-third, from US$420 million to US$240 million for the period July 2005 – July 2008. In May 2006, the World Bank adopted a new Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for Yemen for the period FY 2006 to FY 2009, providing a blueprint for fostering the countrys fiscal and human development improvement. The bank pledged to contribute approximately US$400 million in International Development Association (IDA) credits over the CAS time frame. At present, Yemen owes approximately US$264 million to Japan, one of its largest donors. In December 2005, the Government of Japan pledged to write off US$17 million of the debt. That same month, Germany pledged to increase its annual aid to Yemen to US$83.6 million over the next two years; funding will go primarily to education and water improvement projects. In November 2006, the United Kingdom announced that aid to Yemen would increase 400 percent, to US$222 million through 2011.
Output: How many years was the period where the World Bank would reduce funding by more than one-third?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: How many Protestantism denomination did not have more than 1% of people?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: How many in percent weren't Anglican?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: How many in percent weren't Methodist?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: How many in percent weren't Protestant?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: How many in percent weren't Roman Catholic?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: How many in percent weren't Seventh-day Adventist?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: How many more people were part of Roman Catholicism than Islam, in percentage?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: How many more, in percent, were Assembly of God than Anglicanism?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: How many more, in percent, were Protestantism than Hinduism?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: How many more, in percent, were Protestantism than Islam?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: How many more, in percent, were Roman Catholicism than Sikhism?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: How many of Protestantism, in percent, weren't  Seventh-day Adventist?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: How many of Protestantism, in percent, weren't Assembly of God?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: How many of Protestantism, in percent, weren't Methodism?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: Which group in percent is bigger: Protestantism or Hinduism?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: Which group in percent is bigger: Roman Catholicism or Islam?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: Which group in percent is larger: Methodism or Seventh-day Adventist?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: Which group in percent is smaller: Methodism or Seventh-day Adventist?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: Which group in percent is smaller: Protestantism or Hinduism?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: Which group in percent is smaller: Roman Catholicism or Islam?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: Which religious group had less people, Hinduism or other Christianity?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: Which religious groups had a population of 5% or more?
Passage: Protestantism 45% (Methodism 34.6%, Assembly of God 5.7%, Seventh-day Adventist 3.9%, and Anglicanism 0.8%), Hinduism 27.9%, other Christianity 10.4%, Roman Catholicism 9.1%, Islam 6.3%, Sikhism 0.3%, other 0.3%, none 0.8% (2007 est.).
Output: Which two religions had a 0.3% of people in them?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: How many household groups each made up more than 30% of the population?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: How many more households were there that were Married living together compared to those that had a female household with no husband present?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: How many more per people were in the average family size compared to the average household size?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: How many percent are not  female householder with no husband present?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: How many percent are not Marriage couples living together?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: How many percent are not households made up of individuals?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: How many percent are not non-families?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: How many percent are not someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: How many percent do not have children under the age of 18 living with them?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: How many percent larger is the average family size than household size?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: How many percent of households did not have children under the age of 18 living with them as of the 2010 data?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: How many percent of the households did not have someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: Was the number of households more or less than 29,000?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: Which household groups each made up more than 20% of the population but less than 30% of the population?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: Which type of households were there more of, those Marriage living together or non-families?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: Which was larger, the average household size or the average family size?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: which household was fourth most common?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: which household was least common?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: which household was most common?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: which household was second most common?
Passage: Using 2010 data, there were 28,264 households out of which 31.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.0% were Marriage living together, 24.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 45.5% were non-families. 38.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.23 and the average family size was 2.98.
Output: which household was third most common?
Passage: With a population of 1.88 million in 2013, The Gambia List of countries by population. Its population density is 176.1 inhabitants per square kilometer (456.1 inhabitants per square mile). The overall List of countries by life expectancy is 64.1 years. The total fertility rate of 3.98 is one of the highest in the world. Since 1950, the United Nations (UN) estimated the birth rate exceeds the death rate. The Gambia Bureau of Statistics (GBOS) estimates the population of The Gambia is expected to reach 3.6 million in 20 years. The population of The Gambia has increased each census, starting with 315 thousand in 1963 to 1.8 million in 2013. The GBOS predicted the reason for the increase from 2003 to 2013 was more coverage in the latter census compared to the formers.
Output: Buy how many people did the population of The Gambia increase from 1963 to 2013?
Passage: With a population of 1.88 million in 2013, The Gambia List of countries by population. Its population density is 176.1 inhabitants per square kilometer (456.1 inhabitants per square mile). The overall List of countries by life expectancy is 64.1 years. The total fertility rate of 3.98 is one of the highest in the world. Since 1950, the United Nations (UN) estimated the birth rate exceeds the death rate. The Gambia Bureau of Statistics (GBOS) estimates the population of The Gambia is expected to reach 3.6 million in 20 years. The population of The Gambia has increased each census, starting with 315 thousand in 1963 to 1.8 million in 2013. The GBOS predicted the reason for the increase from 2003 to 2013 was more coverage in the latter census compared to the formers.
Output: How many people was the population increased by in 2013 from 1963?
Passage: With a population of 1.88 million in 2013, The Gambia List of countries by population. Its population density is 176.1 inhabitants per square kilometer (456.1 inhabitants per square mile). The overall List of countries by life expectancy is 64.1 years. The total fertility rate of 3.98 is one of the highest in the world. Since 1950, the United Nations (UN) estimated the birth rate exceeds the death rate. The Gambia Bureau of Statistics (GBOS) estimates the population of The Gambia is expected to reach 3.6 million in 20 years. The population of The Gambia has increased each census, starting with 315 thousand in 1963 to 1.8 million in 2013. The GBOS predicted the reason for the increase from 2003 to 2013 was more coverage in the latter census compared to the formers.
Output: Which was higher in Gambia, the birth rate or the death rate?
Passage: The Raiders entered Week 13 looking to keep their first place lead in the AFC West following wins by both the Broncos and Chiefs earlier in the day. However, the Buffalo Bills scored first on the second possession of the game as Dan Carpenter hit a 27-yard field goal to give the Bills a 3-0 lead. A Sebastian Janikowski field goal from 47 yards out, tied the game on the next possession. The Bills offense struck next as Mike Gillislee scored from one yard out to give the Bills a 10-3 lead early in the second quarter. The Raider offense managed two more Janikowski field goals, including one as the half ended to pull within one point, 10-9. To open the second half, the Bills extended their lead on a two-play drive, a 54-yard run by LeSean McCoy and a 12-yard touchdown run by Tyrod Taylor. The Raiders offense managed little on its next possession and the Bills took a 15-point lead with a Gillislee two-yard touchdown run, increasing the lead to 24-9. The Raiders five-game win streak appeared to be over, but the Raiders fought back as they had all year. On their next possession, Derek Carr, taking all snaps from the shotgun due to the injured finger he suffered in the prior game, hit Michael Crabtree on a three-yard touchdown pass to reduce the lead to 24-16. The Raiders defense forced a punt which gave the Raiders good field position at the Buffalo 38-yard line. Five plays later, Latavius Murray plunged over the goal line from a yard out to reduce the lead to one, 24-23. The Bills were again forced to punt and the Raiders offense went right down the field. Carr hit Amari Cooper on a 37-yard pitch and catch to give the Raiders the lead, 30-24. Following punts by both teams that left Buffalo at its own four-yard line early in the fourth quarter, Khalil Mack hit Taylor's arm on a pass and the ball was intercepted by Nate Allen at the Buffalo 16-yard line. Four plays later, Murray again plunged over the goal line for a three-yard touchdown run which pushed the Raider lead to 36-24. A two-point conversion pass from Carr to Seth Roberts put the lead at 14, 38-24. The Bills, however, drove the ball to the Raider 17-yard line before Mack sacked and stripped Taylor of the ball. Mack also recovered the fumble to put the game away. The 29 unanswered points to overcome the 15-point deficit was the Raiders best comeback since 1963. Carr finished with 260 yards and two touchdown passes. The win was the Raiders sixth in a row and kept the Raiders one game up on the Chiefs heading into their showdown on Thursday night. The win also put the Raiders back as the number one seed in the playoffs.
Output: How many more yards did LeSean McCoy gain compared to Tyrod Taylor on the opening drive of the third quarter?