Read the following context and answer the question. Context: Personally I enjoy doing things outside. You know, the good ol' nature. One time, me and my buddy Alex and some friends decided we were going to go camping. (I know, basic camping story. Well not exactly.) We planned on going for the weekend. Got to the spot and put up our tents like normal campers. But knowing myself and my friends we wanted to drink a couple beers and do some fishing. We did just that. Later that night we had started out camp fire and cooked up some links before bed time. My drunk self wanted to keep the fire going all night to prevent wild animals from coming t our sight. Well at least I thought that'd help. So I needed a bunch of wood to do so. Everyone was asleep by this point but me. So I took myself out into the woods a little deeper to grab a full broken down tree. I thought to myself, "Well if I want to utilize all of this wood I'm going to need to break it into smaller prices right?" Wrong. Well at least it was wrongful of how I planned on doing it. I attempted to break the tree in half by throwing it against another tree, as if I were as strong as the hulk or something. Once I chunked the tree at this tree I messed the entire vacation up. The tree came down on my knee and crushed it. I was in so much pain. I realized that I messed it up pretty bad so I laid there for a second trying to get back to my feet. The next day I couldn't apply any pressure and couldn't walk at all. I was dirty and smelly and needed some serious help on my leg but I was too far from any civilization. Worst nature experience ever! Question: What was wrong with the writer's knee? Answer:

OPTIONS:
- It was bruised
- It was fine
- not enough information
- It was broken

Answer: It was broken

Problem: OPTIONS:
- Singapore.
- not enough information
- North Korea.
- Ukraine.
Q: Read the following context and answer the question. Context: SEOUL Arms control experts estimate that the dismantlement of North Korea's nuclear program could take a decade to complete, and cost $20 billion, if a nuclear agreement is reached between U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un when they meet in Singapore on June 12. "The hard work has not yet begun, and it is gong to take sustained energy on the part of the United States, South Korea, Japan, China and North Korea. It's going to be a multiyear long process," said Daryl Kimball, the executive director of the Arms Control Association in Washington. President Trump has said he expects a "very positive result" from the North Korea nuclear summit, but he also said it will likely be the beginning of a process to resolve differences over the extent of the North's denuclearization, and the specifics regarding what sanctions relief, economic aid and security guarantees would be offered in return. U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said on Sunday that North Korea would only receive sanctions relief after it takes "verifiable and irreversible steps to denuclearization." This position aligns closer to the Kim government's stance that denuclearization measures and concessions be matched action for action. And it backs away from demands made by some in the president's national security team that Pyongyang quickly and unilaterally dismantle all its weapons of mass destruction before any concessions would be offered. North Korea is estimated to have 20 to 80 nuclear warheads, both known and covert nuclear research and processing sites, and thousands of ballistic missiles that can be launched from mobile vehicles, and submarine based launchers have been tested in recent years. With such an extensive nuclear arsenal it could cost $20 billion to achieve the U.S. goal of complete, irreversible, and verifiable nuclear dismantlement (CVID), according to a recent study conducted by Kwon Hyuk-chul, a Kookmin University professor of security strategy. Kwon based his assessment in part on past nuclear deals... Question: Where will the summit on June 12 be held. Answer:
Answer: Singapore.

input with options: Read the following context and answer the question. Context: Regular readers of Beauty Best Friend blog will know that I suffer from an extremely sensitive scalp which can be really itchy, and I have to be very careful what shampoo I use. I know that I'm sensitive to shampoos containing sodium laureth sulfate (also known as SLS, it's the ingredient that makes shampoos, shower gels and soaps lather) but I'm also sensitive to some other ingredients in shampoos too mainly fragrances. I had previously been using Rainforest Balance Shampoo and Conditioner from The Body Shop®️, but I found the conditioner a bit too rich and my hair didn't always feel totally clean after using it. So I started doing a bit of research into recommended natural shampoos and this Sensitive Shampoo from Lavera kept coming up again and again! Several of the reviews I read said that this was the best shampoo for sensitive scalps and that it left hair feeling really clean and soft, so I decided to try it. The shampoo is a translucent peach-coloured gel that contains organic witch hazel and organic almond milk. It has quite a strong scent, but it's a nice one so it doesn't put me off. The shampoo feels creamy when you rub it together in your hands, but I did need quite a lot of it to get a good lather on my first application the second application lathers a lot more easily. I definitely agree that this makes hair feel a lot cleaner than a lot of the other SLS-free shampoos that I've tried, my hair feels clean and full and soft when I've used it the same way it would do if I were using a regular shampoo. I think it also helps my hair to dry more quickly and makes it easier to straighten too. But where this shampoo is outstanding is the way it makes my scalp feel my scalp feels soothed and calm and there's no hint of itching. I've been using Lavera Sensitive Shampoo for over a year now and I wouldn't change it for the world, it's definitely one of the best shampoos for a sensitive itchy scalp. Question: Where did the author find out about Lavera? Answer:
OPTIONS:
- from the author's co-workers
- not enough information
- in a review
- from the author's sister
output:
in a review