In this task, you're given an article, a question which often contains a blank, four options (associated with "A", "B", "C", "D") and the answer to that question. Your task is to classify whether the given answer is correct or not by providing "Yes" or "No", based on the article.

[EX Q]: Article: One day a student was taking a walk with his teacher. As they went along, they saw a pair of old shoes lying in the path. They were a poor farmer's, who was working in the nearby field. The student turned to the teacher, saying: "we will hide his shoes, and hide ourselves behind those trees, and wait to see what he will do." "My young friend," answered the teacher, "we should never make fun of the poor. Why not put a coin in each shoe, and then we will hide ourselves and watch?" The student did so and they both hid themselves behind the trees. The poor man soon finished his work, and came across the field to the path where he had left his coat and shoes. After putting on his coat, he put his foot into one of his shoes, and felt something hard. Then he bent down to feel what it was, and found the coin. Surprised, he looked at the coin, turned it around and looked at it again. He then looked around, but no person was seen. He put the money into his pocket, and continued to put on the other shoe. His surprise was doubled on finding the other coin. He couldn't control his feelings and fell to his knees, looked up to the sky and expressed his thanks. Then he spoke of his wife, sick and helpless, and his children without bread. He said the help would save them from dying. The student stood there deeply moved, and his eyes filled with tears. "Now," said the teacher, "are you not much happier than if you had hidden the shoes?"
Question: When the student saw the shoes, he wanted to _ .
Options: (A) steal them (B) find their owner (C) play a joke on the owner (D) give the owner some money
Asnwer: D
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: Article: The concept of health holds different meanings for different people and groups. These meanings have also changed over time. This change is no more evident than in Western society today, when notions of health and health promotion are being challenged and expanded in new ways. For much of recent Western history, health has been viewed in the physical sense only. That is, good health has been connected to the smooth mechanical operation of the body, while ill health has been attributed to a breakdown in this machine. Health in this sense has been defined as the absence of disease or illness and is seen in medical terms. In the late 1940s the World Health Organization challenged this physically and medically oriented view of health. They stated that health is a complete state of physical, mental and social well-being and is not merely the absence of disease (WHO, 1946). Health and the person were seen more holistically (mind / body / spirit) and not just in physical terms. The 1970s was a time of focusing on the prevention of disease and illness by emphasizing the importance of the lifestyle and behaviour of the individual. Specific behaviours which were seen to increase risk of disease, such as smoking, lack of fitness and unhealthy eating habits, were targeted. Creating health meant providing not only medical health care, but also health promotion programs and policies which would help people maintain healthy behaviours and lifestyles. While this individualistic healthy lifestyle approach to health worked for some (the wealthy members of society), it was of little benefit to people experiencing poverty, unemployment, underemployment or who had little control over the conditions of their daily life. During the 1980s and 1990s there has been a growing swing away from seeing lifestyle risks as the root cause of poor health. While lifestyle factors still remain important, health is being viewed also in terms of the social, economic and environmental contexts in which people live. This broad approach to health is called the socio-ecological view of health. At the Ottawa Conference in 1986, a charter was developed which outlined new directions for health promotion based on the socio-ecological view of health. This charter, known as the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion, remains as the backbone of health action today. In exploring the scope of health promotion it states that: Good health is a major resource for social, economic and personal development and an important dimension of the quality of life. Political, economic, social, cultural, environmental, behavioural and biological factors can all favour health or be harmful to it. (WHO, 1986)
Question: From the passage, we can infer that _ .
Options: (A) good health means not having any illness (B) health has different meanings for different people in different periods (C) health has always been viewed in terms of the social, economic and environmental contexts in which people live (D) health has always been considered a major resource for social, economic and personal development and an important dimension of quality of life
Asnwer: D
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: Article: Cyberspace, the connections between computers in different places, considered as a real place where information, messages and pictures exist, mirrors the real world in many ways. People ask for information, play games, and share hobbies. Others buy and sell products. Still others look for friendship, or even love. Unlike the real world, however, your knowledge about a person is limited to words on a computer screen. Identity and appearance mean very little in cyberspace. Rather, a person's thoughts--or at least the thoughts they type--are what really count. So even the shyest person can become a chat room star. Usually, this "faceless" communication doesn't create problems. Identity doesn't really matter when you're in a chat room discussing politics or hobbies. In fact, this emphasis(,) on the ideas themselves makes the Internet a great place for exciting conversation. Where else can so many people come together to chat? But some Internet users want more than just someone to chat with. They're looking for serious love relationships. Is cyberspace a good place to find love? That answer depends on whom you ask. Some of these relationships actually succeed. Others fail miserably. Supporters of online relationships state that the Internet allows couples to get to know each other intellectually first. Personal appearance doesn't get in the way. But critics of online relationships argue that no one can truly know another person in cyberspace. Why? Because the Internet gives users a lot of control over how others view them. Internet users can carefully craft their words to fit whatever image they want to give. And they don't have to worry about what their "nonverbal" communication is doing for their image. In a sense, they're not really themselves. All of this may be fine if the relationship stays in cyberspace. But not knowing a person is a big problem in a love relationship. With so many unknowns, it's easy to let one's imagination "fill in the blanks." This inevitably leads to disappointment when couples meet in person. How someone imagines an online friend is often quite more different than the real person. So, before looking for love in cyberspace, remember the advice of Internet pioneer Clifford Stoll: "Life in the real world is far richer than anything you'll find on a computer screen."
Question: According to the passage, chatting in the cyberspace _ .
Options: (A) puts emphasis on people's thoughts (B) needs people to be rich in knowledge (C) stresses more about people's identity (D) allows people to discuss politics secretly
Asnwer: B
[EX A]:
No