Problem: Write a multi-choice question for the following article: Article: New experiments discover rats showing sympathy and helping other rodents .It is a characteristic some scientists thought was reserved only for humans and higher animals. In repeated tests, rats freed another trapped rat in their cage, even when yummy chocolate served as an attraction.24 of the 30 rats opened the trap by pushing in a door.The rats could have eaten the chocolate before freeing their partners, but often didn't, choosing to help and share the goodies. "Basically they told us freeing another rat is as important as eating chocolate," said study author Peggy Mason of the University of Chicago."That's a very striking thing." In some cases, the rats first took the chocolate chips out of a container, but didn't eat them, then freed the other rat and shared "almost as if they were serving them chocolate," Mason said.The research is reported in Thursday's journal Science. Also, females showed more consistent care and help than males, Mason said.All six females freed their trapped partner while three quarters of the 24 males did so.This confirms other studies that show females showing more pro-social behavior than males.There were time when the male rats took the day off from helping their trapped partner, but the females never did, she said. Jeff Mogil at McGill University in Canada, who wasn't part of the study, said it was a little surprising but even more convincing. Both scientists said social understanding is probably a characteristic that is important in the evolution of animals. Mason joked that if rats can be so caring and helpful, "there's a sense of optimism.It's something we could be."

A: Question: What's the difference between the behavior of male and female rats?Options:A Female rats showed more concern about their trapped partners.B Male rats cared more about their trapped partners than females.C Female rats behaved less pro-socially than male rats on the whole.D Male rats didn't go away from their trapped partners for even a day.Answer:A

Problem: Given the question: Write a multi-choice question for the following article: Article: It could happen just about any time you step out in public. You get onto an almost-empty bus, but the next passenger in decides to ignore dozens of empty seats to sit right next to you. While you're waiting in line at a supermarket, the next customer insists on standing only two inches behind you and shouting into his cell-phone. You go into a public restroom, and the next person to enter decides to use the next stall. Transgressions like these don't just make us feel uncomfortable; we often feel anxious, alarmed; and violated . It is the attack of the personal-space invaders. In any society, shared definitions of personal space govern how we interact with other people. People living in densely populated cities like Mumbai, Beijing, or Mexico City tend to require less personal space than people living in sparsely populated places within the country. In America, New Yorkers often have smaller requirements than residents of western states, like Montana, Shenandoah and Wyoming. Because everyone has different standards, gestures that are innocent in one place can be interpreted as opposite in another, especially in Britain. As the British etiquette website Debrett puts it, as a British person, somebody standing too close may make you "focus less on what somebody is saying than on how close they are to you". Simple acts like putting an arm around someone you don't know may seem friendly in China, but they can make us very uncomfortable. People from many European countries such as France and Spain kiss each other on the cheek when they meet, yet to British person, this seems too friendly and "touch-freely". The website explains! "The British are not backslappers and generally do not show affection in public". Are British people unfriendly? Far from it. The website adds that they are not as " _ ' as they may seem, but very friendly and helpful to foreigners. However, remember not to be too close. If you are going to come closer than an arm's length, please let them know.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
Question: According to the passage, who tend to require more personal space?Options:A People living in Beijing and people living in Mexico City.B People living in Mumbai and people living in Shenandoah.C People living in Wyoming and people living in New York.D People living in Wyoming and people living in Montana.Answer:D

input question: Write a multi-choice question for the following article: Article: John wanted to buy some new clothes, so he went to a shop. First he asked for some trousers and put them on, but then he took them off and gave them back to the shopkeeper and said, "No, give me a coat instead of these trousers." The man gave him a coat and said "This one costs the same as the trousers." John took the coat and walked out of the shop. The shopkeeper ran after him and said, "You have not paid for the coat!" "But I gave you the trousers for the coat," said John. "They cost the same as the coat, aren't they?" "Yes," said the shopkeeper, "But you didn't pay for the trousers!" "Of course I didn't!" answered John, "I didn't take them, I am not stupid! Nobody gives things back and then pays for them."???
output answer: Question: John went to a shop _Options:A getting some new trousersB for some new shirt.C To buy some new shoesD For some new clothes.Answer:D

[Q]: Write a multi-choice question for the following article: Article: Is it possible to persuade mankind to live without war? War is an ancient practice which has existed for at least six thousand years. It was always bad and usually foolish, but in the past, the human race managed to live with it. Modern cleverness has changed this. Either man will end the existence of war, or war will end the existence of man. For the present, it is nuclear weapons that cause the most serious danger, but bacteriological or chemical weapons may, before long, offer an even greater threat. If we succeeded in ending the existence of nuclear weapons, our work will not be done. It will never be done until we have succeeded in ending war. To do this, we need to persuade mankind to look up on international problems in a new way not as contests of force, in which the victory goes to the side which is most skillful in killing people, but by settling in accordance with(, , , ) agreed rules of law. It is not easy to change very old mental habits, but this is what must be attempted. There are those who say that the acceptance of this or that ideology would prevent war. I believe this to be a big mistake. All ideologies are based upon dogmatic statements ,which are, at best, doubtful, and at worst, totally false. Their supporters believe in them so deeply that they are willing to go to war in support of them. The movement of world opinion during the past few years has been very largely such as we can welcome. It has become a common place that nuclear war must be avoided. Of course very difficult problems remain in the world, but the spirit in which they are coming nearer to is a better one than it was some years ago. It has begun to be thought, even by the powerful men who decide whether we shall live or die, that negotiations should reach agreements even if both sides do not find these agreements wholly satisfactory. It has begun to be understood that the important struggle nowadays is not between different countries but between man and the atom bomb .
****
[A]:
Question: This passage implies that war is now _ .Options:A worse than in the pastB as bad as in the pastC not as dangerous as in the pastD as necessary as in the pastAnswer:A