sentence-transformers/squad huggingface dataset:
Passage: Newly electrified lines often show a "sparks effect", whereby electrification in passenger rail systems leads to significant jumps in patronage / revenue. The reasons may include electric trains being seen as more modern and attractive to ride, faster and smoother service, and the fact that electrification often goes hand in hand with a general infrastructure and rolling stock overhaul / replacement, which leads to better service quality (in a way that theoretically could also be achieved by doing similar upgrades yet without electrification). Whatever the causes of the sparks effect, it is well established for numerous routes that have electrified over decades.

Question: What can be seen in the newly electrified lines?

Question: What can electrification of modern trains effect?

Question: How can better service quality be achieved?
Passage: Network effects are a large factor with electrification. When converting lines to electric, the connections with other lines must be considered. Some electrifications have subsequently been removed because of the through traffic to non-electrified lines. If through traffic is to have any benefit, time consuming engine switches must occur to make such connections or expensive dual mode engines must be used. This is mostly an issue for long distance trips, but many lines come to be dominated by through traffic from long-haul freight trains (usually running coal, ore, or containers to or from ports). In theory, these trains could enjoy dramatic savings through electrification, but it can be too costly to extend electrification to isolated areas, and unless an entire network is electrified, companies often find that they need to continue use of diesel trains even if sections are electrified. The increasing demand for container traffic which is more efficient when utilizing the double-stack car also has network effect issues with existing electrifications due to insufficient clearance of overhead electrical lines for these trains, but electrification can be built or modified to have sufficient clearance, at additional cost.

Question: What is a major factor whn it comes to electrification?

Question: What was the reason some electrifications were removed after a while?

Question: What can be a drawback of electrification of long distance freight trains?

Question: Where can the issue of through traffic benefits occur?

Question: What does the increasing demand for container traffic make companies use more often?
Passage: Additionally, there are issues of connections between different electrical services, particularly connecting intercity lines with sections electrified for commuter traffic, but also between commuter lines built to different standards. This can cause electrification of certain connections to be very expensive simply because of the implications on the sections it is connecting. Many lines have come to be overlaid with multiple electrification standards for different trains to avoid having to replace the existing rolling stock on those lines. Obviously, this requires that the economics of a particular connection must be more compelling and this has prevented complete electrification of many lines. In a few cases, there are diesel trains running along completely electrified routes and this can be due to incompatibility of electrification standards along the route.

Question: What is the other issue that comes to sight when using electrification system?

Question: Why the commuter lines built to different standards can cause be complicated?

Question: What is the solution many lines came up with in order to avoid replacing present rolling stock?

Question: Why are disel trains still used on electrified routes?
Passage: Central station electricity can often be generated with higher efficiency than a mobile engine/generator. While the efficiency of power plant generation and diesel locomotive generation are roughly the same in the nominal regime, diesel motors decrease in efficiency in non-nominal regimes at low power while if an electric power plant needs to generate less power it will shut down its least efficient generators, thereby increasing efficiency. The electric train can save energy (as compared to diesel) by regenerative braking and by not needing to consume energy by idling as diesel locomotives do when stopped or coasting. However, electric rolling stock may run cooling blowers when stopped or coasting, thus consuming energy.

Question: Which of two can be more efficiently electricified?

Question: How can electric power plant become more power efficient?

Question: How can electric train be more energy efficient?

Question: Which type of train continues to use energy while coasting or being stopped?

Question: What causes electric trains to waste energy?
Passage: Energy sources unsuitable for mobile power plants, such as nuclear power, renewable hydroelectricity, or wind power can be used. According to widely accepted global energy reserve statistics, the reserves of liquid fuel are much less than gas and coal (at 42, 167 and 416 years respectively). Most countries with large rail networks do not have significant oil reserves and those that did, like the United States and Britain, have exhausted much of their reserves and have suffered declining oil output for decades. Therefore, there is also a strong economic incentive to substitute other fuels for oil. Rail electrification is often considered an important route towards consumption pattern reform. However, there are no reliable, peer-reviewed studies available to assist in rational public debate on this critical issue, although there are untranslated Soviet studies from the 1980s.

Question: Can renewable source of electricity be used in mobile power plants?

Question: What is the recent incentive in order to overcome oil scarcity?

Question: What type of natural resources is more scarce?

Question: What research can be used in the future if translated?
Passage: In the former Soviet Union, electric traction eventually became somewhat more energy-efficient than diesel. Partly due to inefficient generation of electricity in the USSR (only 20.8% thermal efficiency in 1950 vs. 36.2% in 1975), in 1950 diesel traction was about twice as energy efficient as electric traction (in terms of net tonne-km of freight per kg of fuel). But as efficiency of electricity generation (and thus of electric traction) improved, by about 1965 electric railways became more efficient than diesel. After the mid 1970s electrics used about 25% less fuel per ton-km. However diesels were mainly used on single track lines with a fair amount of traffic so that the lower fuel consumption of electrics may be in part due to better operating conditions on electrified lines (such as double tracking) rather than inherent energy efficiency. Nevertheless, the cost of diesel fuel was about 1.5 times more (per unit of heat energy content) than that of the fuel used in electric power plants (that generated electricity), thus making electric railways even more energy-cost effective.

Question: What type of trains became more energy-efficient in the former Soviet Union?

Question: What year could be marked as year when electric railways more efficient than diesel ones?

Question: How much fuel did electric train used less than diesel in the middle of 1970 in USSR?

Question: What could be a factor of lower energy consumption for electric trains?

Question: How much more expensive was diesel compare to electricity per unit?
Passage: Besides increased efficiency of power plants, there was an increase in efficiency (between 1950 and 1973) of the railway utilization of this electricity with energy-intensity dropping from 218 to 124 kwh/10,000 gross tonne-km (of both passenger and freight trains) or a 43% drop. Since energy-intensity is the inverse of energy-efficiency it drops as efficiency goes up. But most of this 43% decrease in energy-intensity also benefited diesel traction. The conversion of wheel bearings from plain to roller, increase of train weight, converting single track lines to double track (or partially double track), and the elimination of obsolete 2-axle freight cars increased the energy-efficiency of all types of traction: electric, diesel, and steam. However, there remained a 12–15% reduction of energy-intensity that only benefited electric traction (and not diesel). This was due to improvements in locomotives, more widespread use of regenerative braking (which in 1989 recycled 2.65% of the electric energy used for traction,) remote control of substations, better handling of the locomotive by the locomotive crew, and improvements in automation. Thus the overall efficiency of electric traction as compared to diesel more than doubled between 1950 and the mid-1970s in the Soviet Union. But after 1974 (thru 1980) there was no improvement in energy-intensity (wh/tonne-km) in part due to increasing speeds of passenger and freight trains.

Question: What caused the energy efficiency to go up?

Question: What type of locomotives got improved during 1950-1973 in Soviet Union?

Question: How much of energy was saved and re-used due to regenerative braking in 1989?

Question: Was there an energy efficiency improvement in the period 1974 through 1980?

Question: Elimination of what helped the efficiency of diesel traction to go up?
Passage: The Spanish language is the second most spoken language in the United States. There are 45 million Hispanophones who speak Spanish as a first or second language in the United States, as well as six million Spanish language students. Together, this makes the United States of America the second largest Hispanophone country in the world after Mexico, and with the United States having more Spanish-speakers than Colombia and Spain (but fewer first language speakers). Spanish is the Romance language and the Indo-European language with the largest number of native speakers in the world. Roughly half of all American Spanish-speakers also speak English "very well," based on their self-assessment in the U.S. Census.

Question: How many people speak Spanish as a first or second language in the United States?

Question: How many Hispanics speak English too?

Question: What type of language id Spanish?

Question: What other language is often spoken in the United states?

Question: How many Spanish speaking students are there in the United States?
Passage: The Spanish language has been present in what is now the United States since the 16th and 17th centuries, with the arrival of Spanish colonization in North America that would later become the states of Florida, Texas, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, and California. The Spanish explorers explored areas of 42 future U.S. states leaving behind a varying range of Hispanic legacy in the North American continent. Additionally, western regions of the Louisiana Territory were under Spanish rule between 1763 to 1800, after the French and Indian War, further extending the Spanish influence throughout modern-day United States of America.

Question: How old is the Spanish language in the United States?

Question: Where in the United States did the Spanish explore?

Question: Were there states ruled by the Spanish?

Question: Did the Spanish conquer land in the United States?

Question: Do the Spanish have a legacy in America from their forefathers?
Passage: Spanish was the language spoken by the first permanent European settlers in North America. Spanish arrived in the territory of the modern United States with Ponce de León in 1513. In 1565, the Spaniards, by way of Juan Ponce de León, founded St. Augustine, Florida, and as of the early 1800s, it became the oldest continuously occupied European settlement in the continental United States. The oldest city in all of the U.S. territory, as of 1898, is San Juan, capital of Puerto Rico, where Juan Ponce De León was its first governor

Question: When did the Spanish arrive to America?

Question: Did Europeans speak Spanish in America?

Question: How was St. Augustine founded?

Question: Where is the oldest settlement in America?

Question: What is the oldest city of the United States territory?
Passage: In 1821, after Mexico's War of Independence from Spain, Texas was part of the United Mexican States as the state of Coahuila y Tejas. A large influx of Americans soon followed, originally with the approval of Mexico's president. In 1836, the now largely "American" Texans, fought a war of independence from the central government of Mexico and established the Republic of Texas. In 1846, the Republic dissolved when Texas entered the United States of America as a state. Per the 1850 U.S. census, fewer than 16,000 Texans were of Mexican descent, and nearly all were Spanish-speaking people (both Mexicans and non-Spanish European settlers who include German Texan) who were outnumbered (six-to-one) by English-speaking settlers (both Americans and other immigrant Europeans).[citation needed]

Question: Was Texas a part of Mexico?

Question: When did the Americans come to Texas?

Question: Was there a war between the Mexicans and the Texans?

Question: When did Texas become a state?

Question: Was Texas a primarily a Spanish speaking state?
Passage: After the Mexican War of Independence from Spain also, California, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, western Colorado and southwestern Wyoming became part of the Mexican territory of Alta California and most of New Mexico, western Texas, southern Colorado, southwestern Kansas, and Oklahoma panhandle were part of the territory of Santa Fe de Nuevo México. The geographical isolation and unique political history of this territory led to New Mexican Spanish differing notably from both Spanish spoken in other parts of the United States of America and Spanish spoken in the present-day United Mexican States.

Question: What states made up of Alta California

Question: When did other states become part of Mexico?

Question: What states were part of Santa Fe de Nuevo

Question: Why is there still Bilingual spoken in these states?
Passage: Through the force of sheer numbers, the English-speaking American settlers entering the Southwest established their language, culture, and law as dominant, to the extent it fully displaced Spanish in the public sphere; this is why the United States never developed bilingualism as Canada did. For example, the California constitutional convention of 1849 had eight Californio participants; the resulting state constitution was produced in English and Spanish, and it contained a clause requiring all published laws and regulations to be published in both languages. The constitutional convention of 1872 had no Spanish-speaking participants; the convention's English-speaking participants felt that the state's remaining minority of Spanish-speakers should simply learn English; and the convention ultimately voted 46-39 to revise the earlier clause so that all official proceedings would henceforth be published only in English.

Question: Why isn't the southwest Spanish speaking?

Question: Is Canada bilingual?

Question: Was California a bilingual state?

Question: Why didn't California officially become bilingual?

Question: Was there a court ruling?
Passage: For decades, the U.S. federal government strenuously tried to force Puerto Ricans to adopt English, to the extent of making them use English as the primary language of instruction in their high schools. It was completely unsuccessful, and retreated from that policy in 1948. Puerto Rico was able to maintain its Spanish language, culture, and identity because the relatively small, densely populated island was already home to nearly a million people at the time of the U.S. takeover, all of those spoke Spanish, and the territory was never hit with a massive influx of millions of English speakers like the vast territory acquired from Mexico 50 years earlier.

Question: Did America try to make Puerto Rico an English speaking territory?

Question: How did America try to make Puerto Rico's language English?

Question: Was English in Puerto Rico successful?

Question: Does Puerto Rico have many English speaking residents?

Question: How did Puerto Rico stay a Spanish speaking territory?
Passage: At over 5 million, Puerto Ricans are easily the 2nd largest Hispanic group. Of all major Hispanic groups, Puerto Ricans are the least likely to be proficient in Spanish, but millions of Puerto Rican Americans living in the U.S. mainland nonetheless are fluent in Spanish. Puerto Ricans are natural-born U.S. citizens, and many Puerto Ricans have migrated to New York City, Orlando, Philadelphia, and other areas of the Eastern United States, increasing the Spanish-speaking populations and in some areas being the majority of the Hispanophone population, especially in Central Florida. In Hawaii, where Puerto Rican farm laborers and Mexican ranchers have settled since the late 19th century, 7.0 per cent of the islands' people are either Hispanic or Hispanophone or both.

Question: How many Puerto Ricans are there?

Question: Does Florida have a high Hispanic population?

Question: Do they speak Spanish fluently?

Question: Are Hispanics in Hawaii?

Question: Where are the biggest population of Puerto Ricans on the mainland?
Passage: Immigration to the United States of Spanish-speaking Cubans began because of Cuba's political instability upon achieving independence. The deposition of Fulgencio Batista's dictatorship and the ascension of Fidel Castro's government in 1959 increased Cuban immigration to the United States, hence there are some one million Cubans in the United States, most settled in southern and central Florida, while other Cubans live in the Northeastern United States; most are fluent in Spanish. In the city of Miami today Spanish is the first language mostly due to Cuban immigration.

Question: Why did Cubans come to the United States?

Question: What year did most Cubans start coming to America?

Question: Do Cubans speak Spanish in America?

Question: Where do most Cuban Americans live?

Question: Is there a particular place where Cubans live and speak Spanish in the U.S.?
Passage: Likewise the migration of Spanish-speaking Nicaraguans also began as a result of political instability during the end of the 1970s and the 1980s. The uprising of the Sandinista revolution which toppled the Somoza dictatorship in 1979 caused many Nicaraguans to migrate particularly from those opposing the Sandinistas. Throughout the 1980s with the United States supported Contra War (or Contra-revolutionary war) which continued up until 1988, and the economic collapse of the country many more Nicaraguans migrated to the United States amongst other countries. The states of the United States where most Nicaraguans migrated to include Florida, California and Texas.

Question: What other Spanish Speaking people come to America?

Question: Why did the Nicaraguans come to America?

Question: When did the Nicaraguans arrive?

Question: Where did Nicaraguans settle in America?

Question: Was there a specific reason many Nicaraguans fled to the U.S.?
Passage: The exodus of Salvadorans was a result of both economic and political problems. The largest immigration wave occurred as a result of the Salvadoran Civil War in the 1980s, in which 20–30% of El Salvador's population emigrated. About 50%, or up to 500,000 of those who escaped headed to the United States, which was already home to over 10,000 Salvadorans, making Salvadorans Americans the fourth-largest Hispanic and Latino American group, after the Mexican-American majority, stateside Puerto Ricans, and Cubans.

Question: Why did Salvadorans come to America?

Question: When did Salvadorans come to America?

Question: How many Salvadorans immigrated?

Question: What is the population of Salvadorans living in America?

Question: Where do Salvadorans fall on the scale for Hispanic living in America?
Passage: As civil wars engulfed several Central American countries in the 1980s, hundreds of thousands of Salvadorans fled their country and came to the United States. Between 1980 and 1990, the Salvadoran immigrant population in the United States increased nearly fivefold from 94,000 to 465,000. The number of Salvadoran immigrants in the United States continued to grow in the 1990s and 2000s as a result of family reunification and new arrivals fleeing a series of natural disasters that hit El Salvador, including earthquakes and hurricanes. By 2008, there were about 1.1 million Salvadoran immigrants in the United States.

Question: Why did Central Americans flee to the U.S.?

Question: When did Salvadorans flee

Question: Are the Salvadorans a large population in the U.S.?

Question: Is the Salvadoran population still growing?

Question: How many Salvadorans are in America now?
Passage: Until the 20th century, there was no clear record of the number of Venezuelans who emigrated to the United States. Between the 18th and early 19th centuries, there were many European immigrants who went to Venezuela, only to later migrate to the United States along with their children and grandchildren who born and/or grew up in Venezuela speaking Spanish. From 1910 to 1930, it is estimated that over 4,000 South Americans each year emigrated to the United States; however, there are few specific figures indicating these statistics. Many Venezuelans settled in the United States with hopes of receiving a better education, only to remain in there following graduation. They are frequently joined by relatives. However, since the early 1980s, the reasons for Venezuelan emigration have changed to include hopes of earning a higher salary and due to the economic fluctuations in Venezuela which also promoted an important migration of Venezuelan professionals to the US.

Question: When did the Venezuelans emigrate to the united states?

Question: Does Venezuela have immigrates from other countries?

Question: Why did Venezuelans come to America?

Question: Do Venezuelans still come to America for the same reasons as they did before?
Passage: In the 2000s, more Venezuelans opposing the economic and political policies of president Hugo Chávez migrated to the United States (mostly to Florida, but New York City and Houston are other destinations). The largest concentration of Venezuelans in the United States is in South Florida, especially the suburbs of Doral and Weston. Other main states with Venezuelan American populations are, according to the 1990 census, New York, California, Texas (adding their existing Hispanic populations), New Jersey, Massachusetts and Maryland. Some of the urban areas with a high Venezuelan community include Miami, New York City, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C.

Question: How did Chavez affect the Venezuelans?

Question: What areas of America did the Venezuelans settle in?

Question: Are there any other areas of America Venezuelans settled in?

Question: Where are the most populated city's Venezuelan live in?
Passage: Although the United States has no de jure official language, English is the dominant language of business, education, government, religion, media, culture, civil society, and the public sphere. Virtually all state and federal government agencies and large corporations use English as their internal working language, especially at the management level. Some states, such as New Mexico, provide bilingual legislated notices and official documents, in Spanish and English, and other commonly used languages. By 2015, there was a trend that most Americans and American residents who are of Hispanic descent speak only English in the home.

Question: Is there such a thing as bilingual state?

Question: Do American Hispanics speak English in the home?

Question: What language is spoken in the U.S.A?

Question: Is there an official language of the United States?