Article: A "talking kitchen" teaches students how to cook French dishes and speak French. Researchers at New Castle University have developed the French Digital Kitchen. Professors Paul Seedhouse and Patrick Olivier led the project. Professor Seedhouse says that it works like a satellite navigation system in a car. The kitchen equipment and tools use motion sensor technology similar to the Nintendo Wii game system. The sensors help a computer guide the students through instructions in French. The system can tell whether you've done what you were asked to do or not. For example, the system tells you to take some butter and cut it with a knife. There's a sensor on the package containing the butter so it can tell where the butter's being moved. The sensor in the knife not only knows that the knife is moving, but it also knows what motion the knife is making. So it can tell whether the knife is being used. And so it doesn't go on to the next stage of the program unless you've done what it tells you to do. Students can ask the computer to repeat the instructions or translate them into English. There are vocabulary lessons before and after the cooking. Professor Seedhouse became interested in the idea after he visited a talking kitchen designed for a different purpose. "It was actually for communicating with people who suffer from dementia " .And so, for example, it can speak to those people and tell them that they've left the cooker on and they should turn it off." Question: The original purpose of the talking kitchen is to _ . Yes or no, is the answer "help particular persons with cooking"?
No

Article: One evening in February 2007, a student named Paula Ceely brought her car to a stop on a remote road in Wales. She got out to open a metal gate that blocked her path. That's when she heard the whistle sounded by the driver of a train. Her Renault Clio was parked across a railway line. Seconds later, she watched the train drag her car almost a kilometre down the railway tracks. Ceely's near miss made the news because she blamed it on her GPS . She had never driven the route before. It was dark and raining heavily. Ceely was relying on her GPS, but it made no mention of the crossing. "I put my complete trust in the device and it led me right into the path of a speeding train." she told the BBC. Who is to blame here? Rick Stevenson, who tells Ceely's story in his book When Machines Fail Us, points the finger at the limitations of technology. We put our faith in digital devices, he says, but our digital helpers are too often not up to the job. They are filled with small problems. And it's not just GPS devices: Stevenson takes us on a tour of digital disasters involving everything from mobile phones to wireless keyboards. The problem with his argument in the book is that it's not clear why he only focuses on digital technology, while there may be a number of other possible causes. A map-maker might have left the crossing off a paper map. Maybe we should blame Ceely for not paying attention. Perhaps the railway authorities are at fault for poor signalling system. Or maybe someone has studied the relative dangers and worked out that there really is something specific wrong with the GPS equipment. But Stevenson doesn't say. It's a problem that runs through the book. In a section on cars, Stevenson gives an account of the advanced techniques that criminals use to defeat computer-based locking systems for cars. He offers two independent sets of figures on car theft; both show a small rise in some parts of the country. He says that once again not all new locks have proved reliable. Perhaps, but maybe it's also due to... Question: Which of the following would Rick Stevenson most probably agree with? Yes or no, is the answer "Digital technology often falls short of our expectation."?
No

Q: Article: Every day I go into the same coffee shop on the way to work. It's part of a large chain here in the UK. I am new to the anonymous act of kindness concept. I came across it recently. A few weeks ago I worked up the courage to ask the barista if I could pay for a coffee for someone later that day. He looked at me kind of strangely and said "okay" and then put the money into the drawer where some change was put. I walked out feeling doubtful whether this would happen and privately thinking he might just add the money to his tips. This chain stamps a card every time you buy a coffee and when you get 9 stamps, the 10th coffee is free. I had just completed my card today and was due a free cup of coffee next time, so I cheered up as I headed out of the coffee shop. I believe that giving the card to people on the street is better than giving them cash so I forgot about the barista and passed the card on to a homeless guy I met later. A week later I was in the same store and I ordered my usual coffee and a new barista said to me, "Your coffee is on us." I was surprised and asked why he would give me a free coffee. He said that the staff were allowed to give out one free coffee a day to anyone they chose. And that today I was the lucky one. He said they knew that I was a regular and that I was always so cheerful with the staff. By the way, I was not sure I had been the first lucky person in the morning! This put a big smile on my face but I decided to ask if I could choose to pay it forward to someone else instead. Finally, he gave me the power to make a decision. Question: Why did the author give the card to the homeless guy on the street? Yes or no, is the answer "Because he wanted the guy to have a free coffee rather than some money."?
A: No

(Question)
Article: Children who grow up in households where books are plentiful go further in school than those without books, a new study finds. This book benefit was seen across countries, and held regardless of the parent's educational back-ground, father's occupation or the political system of the country, the researchers say. The results, based on data from 73,249 people living in 27 countries, including the United States, show that having a 500-book library boosted a child's education by 3.2 years on average. "You get a great effect for your books," said study researcher Mariah Evans, a sociologist at the University of Nevada, Reno. "It's quite a good return-on-investment in a time of scarce resources." For years, educators have thought the strongest predictor of attaining high levels of education was having parents who were highly educated. But according to the findings, a good-sized book library is just as good as university-educated parents in terms of increasing education level. "Even a little bit goes a long way," in terms of the number of books in a home, Evans said. Having as few as 20 books in the home still has a significant impact on propelling a child to a higher level of education, and the more books are added, the greater the benefit. In some countries, such as China, having 500 or more books in the home propels children 6. 6 years further in their education. In the United States, the effect is less, 2.4 years. But, Evans points out that 2.4 years is still a significant advantage in terms of educational achievement. For example, Americans who have some college or an associate's degree, but not a bachelor's degree, earn an average of $ 7,213 more annually than those with just a high school education. Those who attain a bachelor's degree earn $ 21,185 more each year, on average, than those with just high school diplomas. Having books in the home is twice as important as the father's education level, and more important than whether a child was educated in China or the United States. Question: What was the author's purpose of writing the passage? Yes or no, is the answer "To show the importance of books in the home."?
(Answer)
Yes