user: Problem:OPTIONS:
- she had one boy and one girl
- she had two girls
- she had two boys
- not enough information

Read the following context and answer the question. Context: I lost sight in one eye when in college, I had two preschool children at the time. I was walking through the house one morning and suddenly I could see NOTHING out of one eye. When I told my husband,who was right there when it happened, he assumed my eye was just blurry or something had gotten in the eye. He took me to the ophthalmologist who verified that I could not see out of the eye. Then we subsequently got the worse news that it was a neurological condition with a long name I do not remember that there was nothing he could do about. He said that I would either get my sight back or I you and all we could do was wait and see if it came back. This was right before finals that semester but he told me I absolutely could not be studying or using my good eye for reading or basically anything that would strain it or I could end up losing sight in that eye also. Needless to say, as a mom of two children ages 2 1/2 and 6 months,I could not afford to lose ALL of my sight! So, I had to wait. I could not drive like that either which made matters worse. Both my husband and I were in school fulltime (until then), fortunately it was the end of the semester, unfortunately it was BEFORE finals. My sight did come back but not for about 5 months. When it first started to come back I still couldn't drive because although I could see I did not have my peripheral vision, that did not fully come back for quite a while. I cannot imagine it a person who goes totally blind goes through, I just know for me it was not an easy to to go through. Question: What were the sexes of the author's two children? Answer:
****
A: not enough information


Problem:OPTIONS:
- regarding tariffs
- not enough information
- regarding President Macron
- regarding the drug problem

Read the following context and answer the question. Context: QUEBEC CITY — Emotions were on display when U.S. President Donald Trump met other G-7 leaders at their annual summit in Canada on Friday, but the discussions were civilized and diplomatic, according to sources. Trump held firm on asserting the United States is disadvantaged when it comes to trade with its European allies. “The other leaders presented their numbers and Trump presented his,” a G-7 official who spoke on condition of anonymity told the Reuters news agency. “As expected he did not budge. This is probably not because he does not understand, but because of domestic reasons.” At a bilateral meeting later with the summit's host, Justin Trudeau, the U.S. president joked that the Canadian prime minister had agreed to “cut all tariffs.” Despite the two leaders exchanging criticism of each other’s trade policies the previous day, Trump described the cross-border relationship as very good, stating “we’re actually working on cutting tariffs and making it all very fair for both countries. And we’ve made a lot of progress today. We’ll see how it all works out.” In a subsequent sit-down meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron, Trump said “the United States has had a very big trade deficit for many years with the European Union and we are working it out. And Emmanuel’s been very helpful in that regard.” Macron responded that he had a “very direct and open discussion” with Trump and "there is a critical path that is a way to progress all together.” Canada’s foreign minister, Chrystia Freeland, confirms she met on Friday with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to discuss the tariffs and the fate of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). She said Canada, however, will not change its mind about the U.S. steel and aluminum tariffs which she termed “illegal.” Trump imposed the tariffs on the grounds that weak domestic industries could affect U.S. national security. America’s closest allies, Canada, Mexico and the European Union, are introducing retaliatory tariffs. Question: Why did the President meet with Trudeau? Answer:
****
A: regarding tariffs


Problem:OPTIONS:
- They will win re-election
- They need a holiday
- They are making progress towards a deal
- not enough information

Read the following context and answer the question. Context: Two signatures. That's all that's needed to force a wide-ranging House debate — and votes — on border security and the immigration status of 700,000 undocumented young people brought to the U.S. as children. Since moderate Republicans opposed House leadership two weeks ago with a rare discharge petition to force a so-called "queen of the hill" debate (House rule based on the most votes) on immigration, the measure has steadily accumulated support within their own party. The petition needs 218 signatures to start that debate and — with the assumption that all 193 House Democrats will sign on — Republicans need just two more signatures. But that effort now goes on hold as Congress leaves town for an 11-day holiday recess, giving all sides breathing room to figure out what comes next. Many of the 23 Republican signers of the petition face tough re-election races in their districts this November. The debate over Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients has challenged lawmakers since last September, when U.S. President Donald Trump ended the program, calling on Congress to find a permanent legislative solution. Lawmakers will return to Washington facing an immediate deadline. Representative Jeff Denham, a California Republican who is one of the leaders of the petition effort, told reporters that June 7 would be the absolute last moment to allow the petition to mature before lawmakers run up against a seven-week summer recess. Denham said talks with House leadership and the House Freedom Caucus, a conservative voting bloc seeking significant security concessions in return for a citizenship path for DACA recipients, have been productive. "We've had an agreement in principle," Denham said of a deal that would provide a 12-year path to citizenship for DACA recipients, known colloquially as Dreamers. "Now it's trying to put that information on paper. So, assuming we can continue to move forward, that is something we would bring to our conference on the 7th when we have our two-hour immigration meeting,... Question: The leaders of the petition probably think that Answer:
****
A:

assistant: They are making progress towards a deal