Question: I read this background article the other day: The earliest members of the human species evolved around 200,000 years ago in Africa. Early humans lived in small populations of nomadic hunters and gatherers. Human beings remained in Africa until about 40,000 years ago. After that, they spread throughout Europe, Asia, and Australia. By 10,000 years ago, the first human beings colonized the Americas. During this long period of time, the total number of human beings increased very slowly. Birth rates were fairly high but so were death rates, producing low rates of population growth. I am facing a new situation today: Research team Alpha learned about early human activities, from 200000 years ago, while team Gamma learned about late human activities, 40000 years ago to present times. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which team learned about humans that lived in small populations of nomadic hunters?
Answer: team Alpha
[Q]: I read this background article the other day: Gene activation leads to other effects, since the protein products of many of the responding genes include enzymes and factors that increase gene expression. Gene expression factors produced as a result of a cascade can turn on even more genes. Therefore one stimulus can trigger the expression of many genes, and this in turn can lead to the activation of many complex events. In a multicellular organism these events include the increased uptake of glucose from the blood stream (stimulated by insulin), and the movement of neutrophils to sites of infection (stimulated by bacterial products). The set of genes and the order in which they are activated in response to stimuli are often called a genetic program. I am facing a new situation today: Tony decided to cook a large amount of pasta for dinner, a meal that contains a high amount of glucose and will stimulate the release of insulin. Tony eats his meal on the couch, while sitting next to his sister Justine. Justine is not eating a meal, and is just quietly watching television. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Who will more likely be expressing a lower amount of genes at that time?
****
[A]: Justine
input: Please answer the following: I read this background article the other day: No doubt you already have a good idea of what temperature is. You might say that it's how warm or cool something feels. In physics, temperature is defined as the average kinetic energy of the particles of matter. When particles of matter move more quickly, they have more kinetic energy, so their temperature is higher. With a higher temperature, matter feels warmer. When particles move more slowly, they have less kinetic energy on average, so their temperature is lower. With a lower temperature, matter feels cooler. I am facing a new situation today: David is a physicist. He teaches school children how matters and energy work. One day he was teaching them about two particles of matter, particle A and particle B. Particle A moves faster, but particle B moves slower. He was showing the children about different characteristics of moving particles. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which particle would have higher temperature, particle A or particle B?
++++++++++
output: particle A
Please answer this: I read this background article the other day: Marine pollution is a generic term for the entry into the ocean of potentially hazardous chemicals or particles. The biggest culprits are rivers and with them many agriculture fertilizer chemicals as well as livestock and human waste. The excess of oxygen-depleting chemicals leads to hypoxia and the creation of a dead zone.Marine debris, which is also known as marine litter, describes human-created waste floating in a body of water. Oceanic debris tends to accumulate at the center of gyres and coastlines, frequently washing aground where it is known as beach litter. I am facing a new situation today: The Malegese Ocean is primarily connected to one river. This river is next to Hilda's farm that she has lived on for decades. Ever since she was a child, she was taught that it's important to dump excess fertilizer into the river. So, that's what she does whenever she has leftover fertilizer she isn't going to use. The Dundrin Ocean is connected to many rivers. However, these rivers are located primarily in uninhabited and natural areas of the world. There is one farm near the Dundrin, though, which is owned by Luke. Luke never disposes of any of his garbage in the ocean or rivers near his farm, and he chooses instead to store excess fertilizer for the future or properly dispose of his trash. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which ocean will have more dead zones?
++++++++
Answer: The Malegese
Problem: I read this background article the other day: The trade-off theory of capital structure is the idea that a company chooses how much debt finance and how much equity finance to use by balancing the costs and benefits. The classical version of the hypothesis goes back to Kraus and Litzenberger[1] who considered a balance between the dead-weight costs of bankruptcy and the tax saving benefits of debt. Often agency costs are also included in the balance. This theory is often set up as a competitor theory to the pecking order theory of capital structure. A review of the literature is provided by Frank and Goyal.[2] An important purpose of the theory is to explain the fact that corporations usually are financed partly with debt and partly with equity. It states that there is an advantage to financing with debt, the tax benefits of debt and there is a cost of financing with debt, the costs of financial distress including bankruptcy costs of debt and non-bankruptcy costs (e.g. staff leaving, suppliers demanding disadvantageous payment terms, bondholder/stockholder infighting, etc.). The marginal benefit of further increases in debt declines as debt increases, while the marginal cost increases, so that a firm that is optimizing its overall value will focus on this trade-off when choosing how much debt and equity to use for financing. I am facing a new situation today: Company X stopped taking on more debt, and decided to file for bankruptcy, while company Y, kept benefiting from the tax benefits of debt, having a lower debt level. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which company had fewer costs than benefits related to debt, company X or company Y?

A: company Y
input: Please answer the following: I read this background article the other day: The benefits provided by no-tillage to predators may lead to larger predator populations, which is a good way to control pests (biological control), but also can facilitate predation of the crop itself. In corn crops, for instance, predation by caterpillars can be higher in no-till than in conventional tillage fields.In places with rigorous winter, untilled soil can take longer to warm and dry in spring, which may delay planting to less ideal dates. Another factor to be considered is that organic residue from the prior year's crops lying on the surface of untilled fields can provide a favorable environment to pathogens, helping to increase the risk of transmitting diseases to the future crop. And because no-till farming provides good environment for pathogens, insects and weeds, it can lead farmers to a more intensive use of chemicals for pest control. Other disadvantages of no-till include underground rot, low soil temperatures and high moisture.Based on the balance of these factors, and because each farm has different problems, agroecologists will not attest that only no-till or complete tillage is the right way of farming. Yet, these are not the only possible choices regarding soil preparation, since there are intermediate practices such as strip-till, mulch-till and ridge-till, all of them just as no-till categorized as conservation tillage. Agroecologists, then, will evaluate the need of different practices for the contexts in which each farm is inserted. I am facing a new situation today: Two farmers, Tom and Brad, applied different farming methods. Tom tilled his land, while Brad applied the no-till gardening method. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which farmer had a soil that took less to dry in spring?
++++++++++
output:
Tom