Write the right answer to the question based on the context passage.

Ex Input:
In 1981, when I was nine years old, my father took me to see Raiders of the Lost Ark. Although I had to squint my eyes during some of the scary scenes, I loved it in particular because I was fairly sure that Harrison Ford's character was based on my dad. My father was a palaeontologist at the University of Chicago, and I'd gone on several field trips with him to the Rocky Mountains, where he seemed to transform into a rock-hammer-wielding superhero.
That illusion was shattered some years later when I figured out what he actually did: far from spending his time climbing dangerous cliffs and digging up dinosaurs, Jack Sepkoski spent most of his career in front of a computer, building what would become the first comprehensive database on the fossil record of life. The analysis that he and his colleagues performed revealed new understandings of phenomena such as diversification and extinction, and changed the way that palaeontologists work. But he was about as different from Indiana Jones as you can get. The intertwining tales of my father and his discipline contain lessons for the current era of algorithmic analysis and artificial intelligence (AI), and points to the value-laden way in which we "see" data.
My dad was part of a group of innovators in palaeontology who identified as "palaeobiologists" meaning that they approached their science not as a branch of geology, but rather as the study of the biology and evolution of past life. Since Charles Darwin's time, palaeontology especially the study of the marine invertebrates that make up most of the record involved descriptive tasks such as classifying or correlating fossils with layers of the Earth (known as stratigraphy). Some invertebrate palaeontologists studied evolution, too, but often these studies were regarded by evolutionary biologists and geneticists as little more than "stamp collecting". Question: Who took the writer to see Raiders of the Lost Ark?

Ex Output:
his father

Ex Input:
As U.S. political candidates make their final appeals, voters in 35 states will decide policy issues Tuesday that include legalizing recreational use of marijuana and restricting access to guns and ammunition, voting yes or no on nearly 160 state ballot initiatives.
California's Proposition 64, which is leading in the polls, could create a multibillion-dollar marijuana industry by legalizing the recreational use the drug for adults in the state. Similar measures are on the ballot in Arizona, Nevada, Maine and Massachusetts.
Marijuana could be legalized for medical use in Florida and three other states. Medical marijuana is already permitted in half the 50 U.S. states, and recreational use is allowed in Alaska, Colorado, Washington state, Oregon and the District of Columbia.
Marijuana is banned under federal law, but U.S. officials have taken a hands-off approach on the issue.
Voters in Maine and Nevada are considering measures that would expand background checks for gun purchases, which is already required for buying guns from dealers, by extending the provision to private sales.
Californians will consider measures requiring background checks for buyers of ammunition and banning high-capacity ammunition magazines.
Washington state has a measure that would allow the courts to bar the sale of guns to individuals deemed an extreme risk to themselves or others.
Californians are considering whether to eliminate the death penalty with Proposition 62, or to maintain capital punishment and make the process more efficient with Proposition 66, which supporters say makes it more fair to victims of violent crimes.
Twenty states and the District of Columbia have abolished or overturned capital punishment on the grounds that it is unequally applied to minority populations and that innocent people are sometimes convicted.
South Dakotans will decide whether to make statewide offices nonpartisan and create a citizens commission to redraw voting districts after each 10-year national census, removing the task from legislators, said by critics to be self-interested. Question: Who will be finishing appeals?

Ex Output:
political candidates

Ex Input:
Yes; I have a rare form of cluster/ice pick headaches that can affect any part of my body. It's quite uncommon, but essentially I can get an excruciating migraine in my arm, leg, etc., on top of getting them in my head/temples.
For years my family and I had no idea what was happening, and with no vocabulary to properly explain what was happening, I described it for about fifteen years as "beeping." Doctors told us it was anything from growth spurts to a grab for attention, and for a while I gave up trying to figure out what they were.
When they got worse and I couldn't ignore them anymore, I was finally sent to a neurologist, who diagnosed me with ice pick headaches. I let out a sigh of relief that I didn't even know I was holding in; I felt like I could finally breathe. Years of stress and confusion washed off of me, and I started taking a beta blocker to prevent them.
I've been on them for a few years now, and it's changed my life for the better. I used to be terrified of learning to drive, for many reasons, but a large one being that if I got an ice pick headache on the road, I couldn't guarantee the safety of those around me if I was at the wheel. Now I'm considering finally getting my license (considering - I still don't like being behind the wheel), I don't double over in white hot pain randomly anymore, and when I do get a cluster headache, I can still function. It almost sounds a little silly, but really, they were crippling, and being able to work through them on my own? It's the greatest gift I've given to myself.
You know yourself better than anyone, even if you feel like you don't know yourself. If something feels wrong, don't just live with it - keep pushing for a correct diagnosis! Question: Who said that the headaches were growth spurts?

Ex Output:
Doctors.