input: Please answer the following: I read this background article the other day: Machines make work easier by increasing the amount of force that is applied, increasing the distance over which the force is applied, or changing the direction in which the force is applied. Contrary to popular belief, machines do not increase the amount of work that is done. They just change how the work is done. So if a machine increases the force applied, it must apply the force over a shorter distance. Similarly, if a machine increases the distance over which the force is applied, it must apply less force. I am facing a new situation today: John wanted to invent a machine. To that end, he devised an experiment in which he used three components, comp A, comp B, and comp C. Comp A was a machine that applied force over a shorter distance. Comp B was also a machine, but it applied force over a longer distance. Comp C was not a machine. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which component would more likely change the direction of force, comp A or comp C?
++++++++++
output: comp A
Please answer this: I read this background article the other day: Unfortunately, the layer of good ozone is being destroyed by air pollution. The chief culprits are chlorine and bromine gases. They are released in aerosol sprays, coolants, and other products. Loss of ozone has created an ozone hole over Antarctica. Ozone depletion results in higher levels of UV radiation reaching Earth. In humans, this increases skin cancers and eye cataracts. It also disturbs the nitrogen cycle, kills plankton, and disrupts ocean food webs. The total loss of the ozone layer would be devastating to most life. Its rate of loss has slowed with restrictions on pollutants, but it is still at risk. I am facing a new situation today: Russian research spent most of their time in Antarctica to study the loss of ozone in the atmosphere. The Canadian team went north of the Polar Circle, close to the North Pole to do the same thing. They spent several months there. The Canadian team didn't find any ozone holes at the North Pole. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which team didn't observe higher levels of UV radiation reaching Earth?
++++++++
Answer: Canadian
Problem: I read this background article the other day: The general trend in electronegativity is that the value increases from left to right across a row in the periodic table and decreases down a column. The most electronegative element is fluorine, which has a value of 4.0. As discussed in the lesson "Trends in the Periodic Table," electronegativity increases across a row as the number of protons in the nucleus increases and therefore has a stronger pull. Electronegativity decreases down a column due to an increased effect of electron shielding in larger atoms. I am facing a new situation today: A high school student, Timmy, is reading about elements of a periodic table. He is studying the periodic table when he decides to compare two random elements within the same column. He chooses Mardine and Sampline to compare and contrast and gets to work. The first thing he notices is that Sampline is further down the periodic table than Mardine. It's not much information to go on, but it's a good starting point for Timmy. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which element has more electronegativity?

A: Mardine
Problem: Given the question: I read this background article the other day: Many people enjoy riding in hot air balloons. Some use them for romantic picnics and marriage proposals. Others race in competitions. Being above the earth gives a whole new perspective on the world around us. As the beginning of a hot air balloon ride, the balloon is flat because the pressure inside the balloon equals the pressure outside. When the air inside the balloon is heated, the speed of movement of those air molecules increases and the pressure goes up. After a while the balloon is completely expanded and the flight is ready to take off. I am facing a new situation today: Bob just came from a hot air balloon ride. On his way home he saw two balloons, balloon A and balloon B. Balloon A was flat, but balloon B was inflated. He was wondering how balloons go up so effortlessly. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which balloon is less likely to take off, balloon A or balloon B?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
balloon A
input question: I read this background article the other day: Sand mining is a direct cause of erosion, and impacts the local wildlife.[2] Various animals depend on sandy beaches for nesting clutches, and mining has led to the near extinction of gharials (a species of crocodile) in India. Disturbance of underwater and coastal sand causes turbidity in the water, which is harmful for organisms like coral that need sunlight. It can also destroy fisheries, financially harming their operators. Removal of physical coastal barriers, such as dunes, sometimes leads to flooding of beachside communities, and the destruction of picturesque beaches causes tourism to dissipate. Sand mining is regulated by law in many places, but is often done illegally.[3] Globally, it is a $70 billion industry, with sand selling at up to $90 per cubic yard.[4] I am facing a new situation today: Sand mining in the north coastal region was stopped 20 years ago, but it still continues to this day in the south region. Both fishing communities there are still prosperous, but the southern one had a couple of bad years, with fish and other marine wildlife becoming more scarce. The southern beach had erosion problems as well. The northern beach recovered, and is suitable for tourism. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which region has a less coral riffs????
output answer: southern
input question: I read this background article the other day: Huge amounts of chemicals, such as fertilizers and pesticides, are applied to farm fields (see Figure below ). Some of the chemicals are picked up by rainwater. Runoff then carries the chemicals to nearby rivers or lakes. Dissolved fertilizer causes too much growth of water plants and algae. This can lead to dead zones where nothing can live in lakes and at the mouths of rivers. Some of the chemicals can infiltrate into groundwater. The contaminated water comes up in water wells. If people drink the polluted water, they may get sick. I am facing a new situation today: Two farms were selling on Seattle markets. Berry farm, which used organic methods, no fertilizers and pesticides, and Rose farm, which used conventional agricultural methods, including fertilizers and pesticides. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which farm contributes less to the excessive growth of water plants????
output answer:
Berry