input question: I can use this background: Hydrogen bonds cause water to have a relatively high boiling point of 100C (212F). Because of its high boiling point, most water on Earth is in a liquid state rather than in a gaseous state. Water in its liquid state is needed by all living things. Hydrogen bonds also cause water to expand when it freezes. This, in turn, causes ice to have a lower density (mass/volume) than liquid water. The lower density of ice means that it floats on water. For example, in cold climates, ice floats on top of the water in lakes. This allows lake animals such as fish to survive the winter by staying in the water under the ice. Now, I have a new situation: Marcy is in her kitchen and fills one blue cup with water and then sticks that cup in the freezer. She then takes a green cup and fills that one with water but sets that one out on the kitchen counter. Three hours later, Marcy returns and takes the cup out of the freezer and dumps the now frozen water out onto a plate to look at it and compare it to the water that has been sitting on the kitchen counter. Answer this question please: Has the water in the green cup expanded more or less than the water in the blue cup????
output answer: less

input question: I can use this background: The Fink effect, also known as "diffusion anoxia",[1] "diffusion hypoxia",[2] or the "third gas effect",[3] is a factor that influences the pO2 (partial pressure of oxygen) within the alveolus. When water-insoluble gases such as anesthetic agent N2O (nitrous oxide) are breathed in large quantities they can be dissolved in body fluids rapidly. This leads to a temporary increase in both the concentrations and partial pressures of oxygen and carbon dioxide in the alveolus. Now, I have a new situation: An accident occurred in a local chemical factory. Consequently, large amount of various gases been released to the atmosphere. Local hospital is evaluating all the patients who have been affected by this accident. John, a doctor at the hospital, is seeing two patients, patient A and patient B. He concluded that patient A was having Fink effect. But he didn't see any sign of Fink effect in patient B. Answer this question please: Which patient would have normal partial pressure of oxygen in the alveolus????
output answer: patient B

input question: I can use this background: Following the utilitarian principle of seeking the greatest good for the greatest number economic inequality is problematic. A house that provides less utility to a millionaire as a summer home than it would to a homeless family of five, is an example of reduced "distributive efficiency" within society, that decreases marginal utility of wealth and thus the sum total of personal utility. An additional dollar spent by a poor person will go to things providing a great deal of utility to that person, such as basic necessities like food, water, and healthcare; while, an additional dollar spent by a much richer person will very likely go to luxury items providing relatively less utility to that person. Thus, the marginal utility of wealth per person ("the additional dollar") decreases as a person becomes richer. From this standpoint, for any given amount of wealth in society, a society with more equality will have higher aggregate utility. Some studies[2][32] have found evidence for this theory, noting that in societies where inequality is lower, population-wide satisfaction and happiness tend to be higher. Now, I have a new situation: Finland has one of the lowest economic inequality in the world. Finland's neighbor Russia has a different story. After the collapse of Soviet Union, Russia's economic inequality soared to the point that it has now one of the highest economic inequality in the world. John and Keith are residents of Finland. While John is rich, Keith is not so fortunate - he is poor. Similarly, David and Greg are residents of Russia. While David is rich, Greg is in poverty. Answer this question please: Would Greg have larger or smaller marginal utility than David????
output answer: larger

input question: I can use this background: Biodiversity is determined by many things, and one of them is abiotic stress. If an environment is highly stressful, biodiversity tends to be low. If abiotic stress does not have a strong presence in an area, the biodiversity will be much higher.This idea leads into the understanding of how abiotic stress and endangered species are related. It has been observed through a variety of environments that as the level of abiotic stress increases, the number of species decreases. This means that species are more likely to become population threatened, endangered, and even extinct, when and where abiotic stress is especially harsh. Now, I have a new situation: Henry is currently writing a research paper for his biology class. The subject of the paper is abiotic stress. For his paper, he is analyzing two different forests of differing stress levels and writing about the differences seen in the environments. For the area with a low level of stress Henry chose the Narshe Forest, located near the mountains of Harkal. The area of high stress that Henry will be looking at is the Midgar forest. After choosing the two areas, Henry feels he deserves a break from his paper and goes to watch a baseball game. Answer this question please: Will the animal population be higher or lower in the Midgar forest????
output answer:
lower