Problem: Given the question: I can use this background: Following the utilitarian principle of seeking the greatest good for the greatest number economic inequality is problematic. A house that provides less utility to a millionaire as a summer home than it would to a homeless family of five, is an example of reduced "distributive efficiency" within society, that decreases marginal utility of wealth and thus the sum total of personal utility. An additional dollar spent by a poor person will go to things providing a great deal of utility to that person, such as basic necessities like food, water, and healthcare; while, an additional dollar spent by a much richer person will very likely go to luxury items providing relatively less utility to that person. Thus, the marginal utility of wealth per person ("the additional dollar") decreases as a person becomes richer. From this standpoint, for any given amount of wealth in society, a society with more equality will have higher aggregate utility. Some studies[2][32] have found evidence for this theory, noting that in societies where inequality is lower, population-wide satisfaction and happiness tend to be higher. Now, I have a new situation: Finland has one of the lowest economic inequality in the world. Finland's neighbor Russia has a different story. After the collapse of Soviet Union, Russia's economic inequality soared to the point that it has now one of the highest economic inequality in the world. John and Keith are residents of Finland. While John is rich, Keith is not so fortunate - he is poor. Similarly, David and Greg are residents of Russia. While David is rich, Greg is in poverty. Answer this question please: Would people in Russia most likely be more happy or less happy than people in Finland?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
less happy
input question: I can use this background: Acromyrmex heyeri is a species of leaf-cutter ant, a New World ant of the subfamily Myrmicinae of the genus Acromyrmex. Acromyrmex heyeri workers construct the colonies nest by thatching together cut grass. At temperatures ranging from 2030 C, workers created more openings in the nest thatch as the internal nest temperature goes up as a method of temperature regulation for the colony. The workers will close openings in the nest thatch as the air humidity surrounding the nest decreases to reduce water loss for the colony. Now, I have a new situation: Ants are one of the most interesting creatures on earth. David wants to study ants for his biology project. He is specifically interested in ant species Acromyrmex heyeri. This semester he studied this ant in Americas. First day when he studied the ants the temperature was 10 degree Centigrade. In the second day of his study the temperature rose to 25 degree Centigrade. In the third day of his study the air humidity was high. But in the fourth day of his study air humidity dropped. David wants to continue his study of this same ant species in Asia next semester. Answer this question please: In the second day of his study would David see more or less openings in the nest thatch????
output answer: more
I can use this background: In nature, when the population size is small, there is usually plenty of food and other resources for each individual. When there is plenty of food and other resources, organisms can easily reproduce, so the birth rate is high. As the population increases, the food supply, or the supply of another necessary resource, may decrease. When necessary resources, such as food, decrease, some individuals will die. Overall, the population cannot reproduce at the same rate, so the birth rates drop. This will cause the population growth rate to decrease. Now, I have a new situation: A team of biologists has been monitoring the deer population in the state of Wisconsin. They use past data and current conditions to predict if the population will grow quickly or slowly and recommend how many hunting licenses the state should issue during hunting season to keep the population stable. Answer this question please: If the deer birth rates went down this year when compared to last year does that mean that resource availability went up or down?
----
Answer: down
Q: I can use this background: While people have been able to prevent certain viral diseases by vaccinations for many hundreds of years, the development of antiviral drugs to treat viral diseases is a relatively recent development. Antiviral drugs are medications used specifically for treating the symptoms of viral infections. The first antiviral drug was interferon , a substance that is naturally produced by certain immune cells when an infection is detected. Over the past twenty years the development of antiretroviral drugs (also known as antiretroviral therapy, or ART) has increased rapidly. This has been driven by the AIDS epidemic. Now, I have a new situation: Two brothers went on vacation. Tom partied heavily, and found out that he was infected with the HIV virus. Tim was more moderate, he went to the beach to get a sun tan, but he got an infection as well. Tim found out he got a bacterial infection and had to take antibiotics. Answer this question please: Which brother had a greater chance of developing AIDS?
A: Tom
Question: I can use this background: The Keystone XL Pipeline would transport oil from the oil sands in Alberta, Canada. The oil would travel into the United States. In the U.S. it would be refined. The pipeline is controversial. A leak could cause damage to wildlife habitat. A leak could also release enough oil to contaminate the Ogallala Aquifer. The Aquifer is crucial to agriculture and urban development in the Midwestern U.S. When burned, the fuel from the oil sands would increase pollutants. Greenhouse gases into the atmosphere would increase. The future of the pipeline is currently on hold. Now, I have a new situation: Lawmakers were debating the pros and cons of Keystone XL Pipeline. One group of lawmakers proposed that the pipeline be constructed. They put their proposal in proposal A. The rival group of lawmakers proposed that the pipeline should not be build. They put their proposal in proposal B. Lawmakers would now have to choose one of the proposals. Answer this question please: Which proposal would result in less pollutants, proposal A or proposal B?
Answer: proposal B
Please answer this: I can use this background: As the thermal expansion is the key factor to the sea level variability, decreased heat content should result in a reduction in global mean sea levelon a decadal time scale.[2] However, Grinsted [2007] argued that a significant sea level rise is the first direct response to the volcanic eruption, and after that sea level becomes to drop. One possible explanation for this phenomenon is the imbalance of ocean mass fluxes. After the volcano eruption, evaporation over ocean becomes lower, because it is largely determined by the ocean skin temperature change. The quick response of evaporation to the surface cooling and the delayed response of river runoff to the associated lower precipitation lead to an increased sea level. About 1~2 years later, river discharge becomes less due to the reduced precipitation and less sea ice melting, which cause sea level to drop.[9] Now, I have a new situation: In the beginning of year 1000 mount Etna had a huge volcanic eruption. To test the effect of volcanic eruption on sea level scientists measured geological data through carbon dating. They measured the data for four different time point - for year 998, year 1000, year 1002, and year 1010. Scientists now need to compare and analyze these data. Answer this question please: According to Grinsted, would the sea level increase or decrease few years after year 1000?
++++++++
Answer:
decrease