input question: I can use this background: Regions on the Earth's surface (or in its atmosphere) that are high above mean sea level are referred to as high altitude. High altitude is sometimes defined to begin at 2,400 meters (8,000 ft) above sea level.[5][6][7] At high altitude, atmospheric pressure is lower than that at sea level. This is due to two competing physical effects: gravity, which causes the air to be as close as possible to the ground; and the heat content of the air, which causes the molecules to bounce off each other and expand.[8] Now, I have a new situation: Ken is an avid mountain climber. This year he reached the summits of two mountains, mountain A and mountain B. Mountain A is only 5000 ft tall while mountain B is 15000 ft tall. He has also learned a fun fact that water boils faster and at lower temperature at low atmospheric pressure. Answer this question please: Would mountain B summit be considered high altitude or low altitude????
output answer: high altitude

input question: I can use this background: Anemophilous pollen grains are light and non-sticky, so that they can be transported by air currents. They are typically 2060 micrometres (0.00080.0024 in) in diameter, although the pollen grains of Pinus species can be much larger and much less dense. Anemophilous plants possess well-exposed stamens so that the pollens are exposed to wind currents and also have large and feathery stigma to easily trap airborne pollen grains. Pollen from anemophilous plants tends to be smaller and lighter than pollen from entomophilous ones, with very low nutritional value to insects. However, insects sometimes gather pollen from staminate anemophilous flowers at times when higher-protein pollens from entomophilous flowers are scarce. Anemophilous pollens may also be inadvertently captured by bees' electrostatic field. This may explain why, though bees are not observed to visit ragweed flowers, its pollen is often found in honey made during the ragweed floral bloom. Other flowers that are generally anemophilous are observed to be actively worked by bees, with solitary bees often visiting grass flowers, and the larger honeybees and bumblebees frequently gathering pollen from corn tassels and other grains. Now, I have a new situation: Two botanists studied different types of plants. Barb studied Anemophilous plants, while her friend Faye learned about entomophilous plants. Answer this question please: Which botanist learned less about non-sticky pollen????
output answer: Faye

input question: I can use this background: When peer feedback is established it allows students to interact with their peers and creates high social skills while learning material more effectively. Interaction with other students allows students to have better social approaches when interacting. Learning by peer feedback gives students more of an opportunity to work as a unit instead of individuals working alone. Working in groups gives students more useful life skill that well help prepare them for the future. Peer feedback gives more control to the student, the student can decide if they want to use the criticism their peers are giving them or not. When given options more students are more likely to give and absorb more feedback. Peer feedback has confirmed an increase in affect; students that have increasing responsibilities have more drive towards their work and a spike in confidence.[6] Furthermore, Kristanto (2018) found that peer feedback is an essential element of peer assessment. In peer assessment, feedback from peers can provide suggestions or correction for students' future works as companion of the received grade.[7] Now, I have a new situation: Two college groups did a one year experiment on each other. One group called Group Alpha spend more time and worked together. Group Beta let it's members study on their own and be less dependent on the group. Group Alpha had better results. Answer this question please: Which group experienced less peer assessment????
output answer: Beta

input question: I can use this background: In the U.S., the majority of electricity is produced by burning coal or other fossil fuels. This causes air pollution, acid rain, and global warming. Fossil fuels are also limited and may eventually run out. Like fossil fuels, radioactive elements are limited. In fact, they are relatively rare, so they could run out sooner rather than later. On the other hand, nuclear fission does not release air pollution or cause the other environmental problems associated with burning fossil fuels. This is the major advantage of using nuclear fission as a source of energy. Now, I have a new situation: Seattle produces a large amount of their electricity by burning fossil fuels due to the large presence of natural coal in the state. Montreal, on the other hand, produces a large percentage of their electricity through the use of nuclear fission thanks to the large number of nuclear power pants in that state. Answer this question please: Which city, Seattle or Montreal, will produce less air pollution????
output answer:
Montreal