[Q]: Given the below context: Nathan Ellis, a 9-year-old maths prodigy, has just lost his father in a car accident. Nathan is diagnosed with autism early in the film, and his father was the only one who was able to connect normally with him. Although Nathan values his mother, Julie, he shuns any physical contact with her and treats her as more of a caretaker than a parent. Wanting to make sure Nathan isn't distracted from his studies, Julie enrolls him in advanced classes at a new school. There, he comes under the tutelage of teacher Martin, also a math genius, who now suffers from multiple sclerosis. Martin sees himself in Nathan, once a promising young mind in the field of mathematics, who gave it all up once he was diagnosed with his illness. Seven years later, Martin is preparing Nathan to compete for a place in the International Mathematical Olympiad, a prestigious high school competition consisting of the world's best young mathematicians. This year, it is to be held at Cambridge, after a two-week math camp in Taiwan where the students will study for the test that determines the winners. Nathan fears he's not good enough to qualify but ends up doing well enough to accompany 15 other British teenagers to Taiwan. Suddenly thrust out of his comfort zone, Nathan finds himself no longer the smartest math whiz in the room, and his social anxieties nearly paralyze his performance. He has trouble reading the social cues of others and flinches at the slightest physical contact with another person. Nathan is paired with a female Chinese student, Zhang Mei, who slowly helps him adjust to his new surroundings and helps him fight through his fears. By the skin of their teeth, Nathan and Zhang make the cut to compete in Cambridge. Guess a valid title for it!
****
[A]: X+Y

[Q]: Given the below context: In the years following the Ancestral Puebloan's departure from Chaco Canyon, several migrations to the region occurred. During the 15th century, Navajo people emigrated to the area from northwestern Canada, and in the 18th century Spanish explorers and settlers came from the south. The Spanish investigated parts of the San Juan Basin, but there is no record of them ever finding Chaco Canyon. When cartographer Bernardo de Miera y Pacheco drew a map in 1774 of Spanish land holdings in the region, he labeled Chaco Canyon with the word Chaca, but it is unlikely he ever visited the area. In 1823 the governor of New Mexico, Jose Antonio Vizcarra, discovered ancient ruins in the canyon during a military campaign against the Navajo. Vizcarra's account is the first historical record of the Chacoan great houses that were "of such antiquity that their inhabitants were not known to Europeans". In 1844, Josiah Gregg made the first published reference to Chaco Canyon in his popular book, Commerce of the Prairies. The United States started exploring the region following the MexicanAmerican War of 184648 and the acquisition of the New Mexico Territory. During a military campaign against the Navajo in 1849, Lieutenant James Simpson of the United States Army Corps of Engineers became interested in the canyon's ruins. A group led by the governor of Jemez Pueblo, Francisco Hosta, explored the canyon; its members included Simpson and the brothers Richard and Edward Kern, who were respectively an artist and a cartographer. Simpson was impressed by Chetro Ketl's masonry, which he described as "a combination of science and art which can only be referred to a higher stage of civilization and refinement than is discoverable in the works of Mexicans or Pueblos of the present day." Simpson and company documented their findings, noting the location and style of the great houses, taking measurements, and sketching the canyon's major ruins. They described the kivas as "circular apartments sunk in the ground". Simpson briefly explored... Guess a valid title for it!
****
[A]: Chetro Ketl

[Q]: Given the below context: Van Eyck gives Mary three roles: Mother of Christ, the personification of the "Ecclesia Triumphans" and Queen of Heaven, the latter apparent from her jewel-studded crown. The painting's near miniature size contrasts with Mary's unrealistically large stature compared with her setting. She physically dominates the cathedral; her head is almost level with the approximately sixty feet high gallery. This distortion of scale is found in a number of other van Eyck's Madonna paintings, where the arches of the mostly gothic interior do not allow headroom for the virgin. Pacht describes the interior as a "throne room", which envelopes her as if a "carrying case". Her monumental stature reflects a tradition reaching back to an Italo-Byzantine type perhaps best known through Giotto's Ognissanti Madonna (c. 1310) and emphasises her identification with the cathedral itself. Till-Holger Borchert says that van Eyck did not paint her as "the Madonna in a church", but instead as metaphor, presenting Mary "as the Church". This idea that her size represents her embodiment as the church was first suggested by Erwin Panofsky in 1941. Art historians in the 19th century, who thought the work was executed early in van Eyck's career, attributed her scale as the mistake of a relatively immature painter.The composition is today seen as deliberate, and opposite to both his Madonna of Chancellor Rolin and Arnolfini Portrait. These works show interiors seemingly too small to contain the figures, a device van Eyck used to create and emphasise an intimate space shared by donor and saint. The Virgin's height recalls his Annunciation of 143436, although in that composition there are no architectural fittings to give a clear scale to the building. Perhaps reflecting the view of a "relatively immature painter", a copy of the Annunciation by Joos van Cleve shows Mary at a more realistic proportion scale to her surroundings.Mary is presented as a Marian apparition; in this case she probably appears before a donor, who would have been kneeling... Guess a valid title for it!
****
[A]:
Madonna in the Church