Q: Chloe's house reminded Paul of a cross between a used bookstore, a computer repair shop, and a college dorm. A wall of bookcases dominated the living room, each shelf crammed with two, sometimes three layers of books, videotapes, CD's and DVD's. More stacks of books and magazines stood in every corner. Paul was certain they would have taken over all the other flat spaces as well, were it not for the half-assembled computers and three dusty old monitors occupying the coffee table, end tables, and everything in between. The only semi-open spaces were the two couches that faced each other from across the room. A large red and black checkered blanket covered one of them, while the other was cracked but still serviceable brown leather. Thrift store purchases both, Paul thought. "The computer stuff belongs to one of my roommates," Chloe said. "She's always fiddling with those things to get better performance or whatever. The books are mostly mine or my other roommate, Kurt's. Come on into the kitchen and we'll rustle up a sandwich." Paul followed her back into the open kitchen area, which (given that he was ostensibly here to have lunch) he was relieved to see was clean. There was clutter in there certainly, but no dirty dishes or leftover foodstuffs appeared in evidence. Along the left wall was a cheap, plastic patio table with long wooden benches on each side and miss-matched chairs at either end. Newspapers, books, and a laptop occupied most of its surface area, but the end closest to Paul seemed clear enough to see actual use as a place for dining. "Is peanut butter ok?" she asked, motioning him towards one of the chairs. "Sure," he said and sat down at the table. As she started to prepare a couple of peanut butter sandwiches on white bread she said, "So, tell me Paul, why are you getting fired tomorrow?" Question: Who owned the laptop? === The answer to the above question is

OPTIONS:
- Chloe
- Paul
- not enough information
- a roommate

A: not enough information

input: OPTIONS:
- After it took place.
- Prior to it taking place.
- While it was taking place.
- not enough information Now, answer this question: U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis on Saturday slammed China's militarization of disputed South China Sea islands, insisting that weapons systems recently deployed in the area were meant to intimidate and coerce Beijing's neighbors. The comments came during a speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue, an annual Asian defense forum in Singapore. In the speech, Mattis laid out the broader U.S. strategy for a "free and open" Indo-Pacific region. "China's policy in the South China Sea stands in stark contrast to the openness our strategy promotes. It calls into question China's broader goals," Mattis said. Specifically, the Pentagon chief mentioned China's deployment of anti-ship and surface-to-air missiles, electronic jammers, and the landing of a bomber aircraft at the Paracel Islands off the coast of Vietnam. "Despite China's claim to the contrary, the placement of these weapon systems is tied directly to military use for the purposes of intimidation and coercion," Mattis added. Though much of the world is focused on an upcoming summit between North Korea and the United States, this year's Shangri-La Dialogue has focused primarily on the region's long-term future and how to deal with a more assertive China. Beijing has begun projecting power beyond its borders, most notably through the construction and militarization of islands in disputed areas of the South China Sea. China claims nearly the entire South China Sea, despite overlapping claims by countries including Vietnam, the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia and Taiwan. Last week, the United States disinvited China from the Rim of the Pacific exercise (RIMPAC), a major international maritime exercise to be held later this year, citing Beijing's behavior in the South China Sea. Mattis on Saturday referred to that disinvitation as an "initial response" to China, but he did not outline any additional steps that might be taken. "The U.S. will continue to pursue a constructive, results-oriented relationship with China, cooperating when possible and competing vigorously where... Question: When did the US dis-invite China from RIMPAC? === The answer to the above question is
A:
output: Prior to it taking place.

Problem:OPTIONS:
- before Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited Pyongyang
- when Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited Pyongyang
- after Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited Pyongyang
- not enough information

North Korea's release of three U.S. citizens may help pave the way for talks between Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un, but questions remain as to whether those talks will succeed. At the White House on Wednesday, Trump continued to speak cautiously about the coming summit, even while praising the North Korean leader for the prisoner release. "Everything can be scuttled," Trump told reporters. "A lot of things can happen a lot of good things can happen, [and] a lot of bad things can happen." North Korea on Wednesday granted amnesty to three Americans of Korean descent. They had been accused of espionage or trying to overthrow the government, charges widely seen as bogus. Pyongyang has detained at least 16 Americans over the past two decades, often attempting to use them as bargaining chips. All were eventually released, although Otto Warmbier, a 22-year-old college student, died shortly after returning to the United States last year. A White House statement Wednesday praised North Korea's latest prisoner release as a "positive gesture of goodwill" ahead of the Trump-Kim summit, which is expected to take place as soon as next month. South Korea's presidential office said Pyongyang's decision was a "very positive" sign for a successful North Korea-U.S. meeting. The freeing of the prisoners coincided with a visit to Pyongyang by U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who declined to say whether the release was a U.S. precondition for holding talks with the North. "I don't know the answer to that," Pompeo told reporters on the flight home. "It would have been more difficult [had the prisoners not been released]. ... I'm glad that we don't have to confront that." It's not clear what, if anything, the U.S. gave up in exchange for the prisoners. It's not even clear a concession was needed, since North Korea has for decades sought the presumed legitimacy provided by a summit with a sitting U.S. president. Question: When did North Korea release three prisoners? === The answer to the above question is
****
A:
when Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited Pyongyang