Input: To make certain the U.S. was aware of the danger, in July 1939, a few months before the beginning of World War II in Europe, Szilard and Wigner visited Einstein to explain the possibility of atomic bombs, which Einstein, a pacifist, said he had never considered. He was asked to lend his support by writing a letter, with Szilard, to President Roosevelt, recommending the U.S. pay attention and engage in its own nuclear weapons research. A secret German facility, apparently the largest of the Third Reich, covering 75 acres in an underground complex, was being re-excavated in Austria in December 2014 and may have been planned for use in nuclear research and development. The letter is believed to be "arguably the key stimulus for the U.S. adoption of serious investigations into nuclear weapons on the eve of the U.S. entry into World War II". In addition to the letter, Einstein used his connections with the Belgian Royal Family and the Belgian queen mother to get access with a personal envoy to the White House's Oval Office. President Roosevelt could not take the risk of allowing Hitler to possess atomic bombs first. As a result of Einstein's letter and his meetings with Roosevelt, the U.S. entered the "race" to develop the bomb, drawing on its "immense material, financial, and scientific resources" to initiate the Manhattan Project. It became the only country to successfully develop an atomic bomb during World War II. For Einstein, "war was a disease ... [and] he called for resistance to war." By signing the letter to Roosevelt he went against his pacifist principles. In 1954, a year before his death, Einstein said to his old friend, Linus Pauling, "I made one great mistake in my life--when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made; but there was some justification--the danger that the Germans would make them ..."

Does the response "The discovery of a secret German facility" correctly answer the question "What was arguably the key stimulus for the U.S. adoption of serious investigations into nuclear weapons on the eve of the U.S. entry into World War II?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output: no

Input: IBM opened a sprawling and sophisticated semiconductor factory here on Wednesday that cost more than $2.5 billion to build and equip, the largest single capital investment the company has ever made. The factory, which opens as the computer chip business is in a slump, is a costly and risky move for IBM. But it is also an expression of confidence by the company that it can remain a technology leader in the highly competitive global semiconductor industry, and a commitment that the best place to execute that strategy is in upstate New York. IBM is an exception among computer makers in that it still invests heavily in research to advance the design, manufacture and materials used in semiconductor chips. It is spending more than $500 million a year on semiconductor research and development. The factory will produce a wide range of specialized semiconductors used in everything from the largest mainframe computers to cell phones and video-game consoles. The new plant is part of IBM's push to gain a strong lead in chip-making beyond the personal computer business, where Intel and East Asian chip producers hold the advantage. "The core of our strategy is to lead in technology and attack the high-performance segments of the market," said John Kelly, senior vice president in charge of IBM's technology group. An advantage to having the semiconductor fabricating factory here, Kelly explained, was that it was very close to its research laboratories in nearby Westchester County, N.Y. To stay ahead in advanced chip technology, he said, moving innovations out of the labs and into the factory as fast as possible is crucial. "What we call the lab-to-fab time should be as close to zero as possible," Kelly said. "If our strategy were anything but to be on the leading edge, we'd have put the plant in Asia." The new factory, which will begin normal production early next year, will employ about 1,000 people.

Does the response "Apple" correctly answer the question "Who does IBM see as their technological competition?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output: no

Input: When 74-year-old Penny Sweat was evicted from the HUD-subsidized Glendale Senior Housing in Salt Lake City last month, she moved to a nonsubsidized apartment at five times her previous rent because she was unaware of her rights. It turns out the manager of the seniors complex, its attorneys and government overseers were unaware, too. Lee Kemp, a hearing-impaired World War II disabled vet, also was evicted, but he contacted Utah Legal Services and was told to stay put. Attorney Marty Blaustein then notified Utah Nonprofit Housing Corp., the building's owner, that Kemp's eviction was not legal and that he had a right to a hearing. That didn't stop Utah Nonprofit Housing's attorneys from then sending Kemp a summons to show cause why he had not moved out. Meanwhile, Sweat's granddaughter called Salt Lake City housing officials, federal housing officials, state officials and several agents of Utah Nonprofit Housing to find out about her grandmother's rights. Nobody knew. Blaustein then took Sweat's case along with Kemp's and demanded her ousting be rectified. Utah Nonprofit Housing President Marion Willey returned from an out-of-town trip and learned HUD procedures were not followed. The eviction was activated because of ongoing personality conflicts among seniors in the complex, he said, and the new building manager decided the problems were with Sweat and Kemp. Several tenants blame other neighbors as perpetrators of the rift, however. Willey said when his building manager called attorneys retained by the company, they erroneously told her she could go ahead and kick out the tenants. When she called HUD to make sure, the inquiry got bogged down in bureaucracy and nobody called her back. Willey says he has offered Sweat and Kemp apartments in another complex operated by his company at their old rates. He also is retaining new attorneys.

Does the response "Attorneys" correctly answer the question "Who was unaware of the tenants rights?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output: yes

Input: Coleco Industries Inc., a once high-flying toy maker whose stock peaked at $65 a share in the early 1980s, filed a Chapter 11 reorganization plan that provides just 1.125 cents a share for common stockholders. Under the plan, unsecured creditors, who are owed about $430 million, would receive about $92 million, or 21 cents for each dollar they are owed. In addition, they will receive stock in the reorganized company, which will be named Ranger Industries Inc. After these payments, about $225,000 will be available for the 20 million common shares outstanding. The Avon, Conn., company's stock hit a high in 1983 after it unveiled its Adam home computer, but the product was plagued with glitches and the company's fortunes plunged. But Coleco bounced back with the introduction of the Cabbage Patch dolls, whose sales hit $600 million in 1985. But as the craze died, Coleco failed to come up with another winner and filed for bankruptcy-law protection in July 1988. The plan was filed jointly with unsecured creditors in federal bankruptcy court in New York and must be approved by the court.

Does the response "92 million" correctly answer the question "What will unsecured creditors receive as a result of Coleco's Chapter 11 reorganization plan?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output:
yes