Given a paragraph about movies and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix 'Q:' followed by the answer prefix 'A:', and the follow-up question has a prefix 'FOLLOWUP_Q:'.

Example Input: CONTEXT: Ada buys back the piano one key at a time by playing for him. Making love to him counts for ten times playing for him. At this point the relation between Ada and Baine is highly asymmetric: Baine desires Ada, Ada desires her piano. Only later does Ada fall in love with Baine. <sep> Q: What is the meaning of this conversation before making love? A: Baine desires Ada, Ada desires her piano. Only later does Ada fall in love with Baine Q: What is The Piano? A: Ada buys back the piano one key at a time by playing for him Q: What is making love? A: Making love to him counts for ten times playing for him <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What happens when two people make love?
Example Output: No

Example Input: CONTEXT: The movie has altered the plot of One Shot in many significant ways. The setting, for example, is a large city not a medium sized town, which makes it more cinematic but less coherent or credible (though this is a common trade-off in movies). The plot is simpler with fewer characters. The overall tone is not too far from the books, but the opportunity for cinematic additions has been taken. The slapstick scene is pure cinema invention (I'm not even sure you can do slapstick like that in prose writing). Some of the humorous dialogue, though, is true to Reacher's character in the book. I recall some inventive insults in the bar scene, for example, which are the sort of things he does say in the books as a result of his unshakeable confidence in dealing with people he has to fight. He really doesn't mind getting physical as he know he will win, so insulting his adversaries and goading them is a typical strategy. Overall the movie captures the spirit of the books reasonably well, but the slapstick scene sticks out as an anomaly. <sep> Q: Are the comedic elements in the film Jack Reacher evident in the novels on which it was based? A: The movie has altered the plot of One Shot in many significant ways Q: How has the movie altered the plot? A: The setting, for example, is a large city not a medium sized town, which makes it more cinematic but less coherent or credible Q: Why was this done if it makes the movie less credible? A: this is a common trade-off in movies Q: Why does the film have so much humour? A: The slapstick scene is pure cinema invention (I'm not even sure you can do slapstick like that in prose writing <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why do films feel like they need to add humorous elements that are not true to the book?
Example Output: Yes

Example Input: CONTEXT: She was a fighter, giving in and commiting suicide was not in her nature. Have a look at her in Aliens, insisting on being taught how to use the grenade launcher, returning the loader to fight the queen etc. The alien moved around the ship and although it was blocking her way out at the moment it would probably move, it was just a matter of her not getting caught. If nothing else she might be able to hold it off with the flame thrower until she got out, there were several options other than just giving up. I am guessing that at that point she was going to turn off the self destruct, get in the pod and blast off and then just broadcast a warning about the ship's contents. <sep> Q: Why did Ripley try to deactivate the self-destruct sequence at the end of Alien? A: I am guessing that at that point she was going to turn off the self destruct, get in the pod and blast off and then just broadcast a warning about the ship's contents Q: Wouldn't the best option to just let the ship destruct and detroy the alien? A: The alien moved around the ship and although it was blocking her way out at the moment it would probably move, it was just a matter of her not getting caught Q: Okay, is there anything else you can help me understand about the movie? A: She was a fighter, giving in and commiting suicide was not in her nature <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Okay, so that explains why should would deactivate the self destruct sequence.
Example Output:
No