wanyu/IteraTeR_full_sent huggingface dataset:
Original: Quarter  Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course)  Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98  51 50 2 38 92  26 24 3 55 83  18 15 4 71 71  14 10 5 83 55  12 6 6 92 38  11 4 7 98 20  10 2 8 100 0  10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the third column of the toleta is for.
Revised: Quarter Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course) Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98 51 50 2 38 92 26 24 3 55 83 18 15 4 71 71 4 14 10 5 83 55 12 6 6 92 38 11 4 7 98 20 10 2 8 100 0 10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the third column of the toleta is for.
Edit intent: fluency
Original: Quarter  Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course)  Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98  51 50 2 38 92  26 24 3 55 83  18 15 4 71 71  14 10 5 83 55  12 6 6 92 38  11 4 7 98 20  10 2 8 100 0  10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the third column of the toleta is for.
Revised: Quarter Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course) Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98 51 50 2 38 92 26 24 3 55 83 18 15 4 71 71 14 10 5 83 55 5 12 6 6 92 38 11 4 7 98 20 10 2 8 100 0 10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the third column of the toleta is for.
Edit intent: clarity
Original: Quarter  Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course)  Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98  51 50 2 38 92  26 24 3 55 83  18 15 4 71 71  14 10 5 83 55  12 6 6 92 38  11 4 7 98 20  10 2 8 100 0  10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the third column of the toleta is for.
Revised: Quarter Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course) Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98 51 50 2 38 92 26 24 3 55 83 18 15 4 71 71 14 10 5 83 55 12 6 6 92 38 6 11 4 7 98 20 10 2 8 100 0 10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the third column of the toleta is for.
Edit intent: fluency
Original: Quarter  Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course)  Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98  51 50 2 38 92  26 24 3 55 83  18 15 4 71 71  14 10 5 83 55  12 6 6 92 38  11 4 7 98 20  10 2 8 100 0  10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the third column of the toleta is for.
Revised: Quarter Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course) Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98 51 50 2 38 92 26 24 3 55 83 18 15 4 71 71 14 10 5 83 55 12 6 6 92 38 11 4 7 98 20 7 10 2 8 100 0 10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the third column of the toleta is for.
Edit intent: fluency
Original: Quarter  Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course)  Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98  51 50 2 38 92  26 24 3 55 83  18 15 4 71 71  14 10 5 83 55  12 6 6 92 38  11 4 7 98 20  10 2 8 100 0  10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the third column of the toleta is for.
Revised: Quarter Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course) Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98 51 50 2 38 92 26 24 3 55 83 18 15 4 71 71 14 10 5 83 55 12 6 6 92 38 11 4 7 98 20 10 2 8 100 0 8 10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the third column of the toleta is for.
Edit intent: fluency
Original: Quarter  Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course)  Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98  51 50 2 38 92  26 24 3 55 83  18 15 4 71 71  14 10 5 83 55  12 6 6 92 38  11 4 7 98 20  10 2 8 100 0  10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the third column of the toleta is for.
Revised: Quarter Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course) Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98 51 50 2 38 92 26 24 3 55 83 18 15 4 71 71 14 10 5 83 55 12 6 6 92 38 11 4 7 98 20 10 2 8 100 0 10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoCalculating the return course is what the third column of the toleta is for.
Edit intent: fluency
Original: Quarter  Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course)  Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98  51 50 2 38 92  26 24 3 55 83  18 15 4 71 71  14 10 5 83 55  12 6 6 92 38  11 4 7 98 20  10 2 8 100 0  10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the third column of the toleta is for.
Revised: Quarter Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course) Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98 51 50 2 38 92 26 24 3 55 83 18 15 4 71 71 14 10 5 83 55 12 6 6 92 38 11 4 7 98 20 10 2 8 100 0 10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the last three columns of the toleta is for.
Edit intent: clarity
Original: Quarter  Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course)  Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98  51 50 2 38 92  26 24 3 55 83  18 15 4 71 71  14 10 5 83 55  12 6 6 92 38  11 4 7 98 20  10 2 8 100 0  10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the third column of the toleta is for. The return angles are expressed as quarters from the intended course bearing (not the current course bearing).
Revised: Quarter Alargar (Distance from course) Avanzar (Advance on true course) Ritorno (Return to course) Avanzo di ritorno (Advance during return) 1 20 98 51 50 2 38 92 26 24 3 55 83 18 15 4 71 71 14 10 5 83 55 12 6 6 92 38 11 4 7 98 20 10 2 8 100 0 10 0 For every 100 miles For every 10 miles alargar 400px|Calculating the ritorno and avanzo di ritornoThis is what the third column of the toleta are for. In the fourth column, the return angles are expressed as quarters from the intended course bearing (not the current course bearing).
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  ENE is two quarter-winds above the intended bearing, East, so now he looks at second row ("quarters = 2") on the table. In the third column , the ritorno,  shows the number 26.
Revised:  ENE is two quarter-winds above the intended bearing, East, so now he looks at second row ("quarters = 2") on the fourth column of the table. shows the number 26.
Edit intent: meaning-changed
Original:  Finally, the total avanzo on the eastward bearing is the avanzar during the deviation (83 miles) plus the avanzo di ritorno (132 miles) , thus on the whole, he has covered 83 + 132 = 215 miles on the intended course.
Revised:  Finally, to calculate the total distance made good (total avanzo) on the eastward bearing is the avanzar during the deviation (83 miles) plus the avanzo di ritorno (132 miles) , thus on the whole, he has covered 83 + 132 = 215 miles on the intended course.
Edit intent: meaning-changed
Original:  Finally, the total avanzo on the eastward bearing is the avanzar during the deviation (83 miles) plus the avanzo di ritorno (132 miles) , thus on the whole, he has covered 83 + 132 = 215 miles on the intended course.
Revised:  Finally, the total avanzo on the eastward bearing by his whole adventure, he must add the avanzar during the deviation (83 miles) plus the avanzo di ritorno (132 miles) , thus on the whole, he has covered 83 + 132 = 215 miles on the intended course.
Edit intent: meaning-changed
Original:  Finally, the total avanzo on the eastward bearing is the avanzar during the deviation (83 miles) plus the avanzo di ritorno (132 miles) , thus on the whole, he has covered 83 + 132 = 215 miles on the intended course.
Revised:  Finally, the total avanzo on the eastward bearing is the avanzar during the deviation (83 miles) plus the avanzo di ritorno (132 miles) . Thus on the whole, he has covered 83 + 132 = 215 miles on the intended course.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  The Gleason System separates architectural features into 1 of 5 histological patterns. These are in decreasing differentiation order but increasing in number: Pattern 1 is the most differentiated and pattern 5 is the least differentiated.
Revised:  The Gleason System separates architectural features into 1 of 5 grades, numbered 1 is the most differentiated and pattern 5 is the least differentiated.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  So less resemblance is typically a worse prognosis.) 2: The second feature of Gleason grading is that the grade is not based on the highest (least differentiated) pattern within the tumor , instead it is a combination of the most often and second most often patterns seen.
Revised:  Greater resemblance (lower grade) is typically associated with a better prognosis.) 2: The second feature of Gleason grading is that the grade is not based on the highest (least differentiated) pattern within the tumor , instead it is a combination of the most often and second most often patterns seen.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  So less resemblance is typically a worse prognosis.) 2: The second feature of Gleason grading is that the grade is not based on the highest (least differentiated) pattern within the tumor , instead it is a combination of the most often and second most often patterns seen.
Revised:  So less resemblance is typically a worse prognosis.) However, the Gleason score is not simply the highest grade (least differentiated) pattern within the tumor , instead it is a combination of the most often and second most often patterns seen.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  So less resemblance is typically a worse prognosis.) 2: The second feature of Gleason grading is that the grade is not based on the highest (least differentiated) pattern within the tumor , instead it is a combination of the most often and second most often patterns seen.
Revised:  So less resemblance is typically a worse prognosis.) 2: The second feature of Gleason grading is that the grade is not based on the highest (least differentiated) pattern within the tumor . Rather, it is a combination of the most often and second most often patterns seen.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  So less resemblance is typically a worse prognosis.) 2: The second feature of Gleason grading is that the grade is not based on the highest (least differentiated) pattern within the tumor , instead it is a combination of the most often and second most often patterns seen.
Revised:  So less resemblance is typically a worse prognosis.) 2: The second feature of Gleason grading is that the grade is not based on the highest (least differentiated) pattern within the tumor , instead it is a combination of the most two most frequent patterns seen.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  Gleason realized that prostatic carcinomas have multiple patterns and that the prognosis of prostatic carcinoma was split between the most prevalent and the second most prevalent neoplasm pattern. So using the Gleason system, the  most prevalent and second most prevalent pattern, if at least 5\% of the neoplasm , are added together equaling the overall Gleason score.
Revised:  Gleason realized that prostatic carcinomas have multiple patterns and that prognosis is more accurately determined by adding the scores of the two most prevalent patterns. Using this system, the most prevalent and second most prevalent pattern, if at least 5\% of the neoplasm , are added together equaling the overall Gleason score.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  So using the Gleason system, the  most prevalent and second most prevalent pattern, if at least 5\% of the neoplasm , are added together equaling the overall Gleason score.
Revised:  So using the Gleason system, the grades of the most prevalent and second most prevalent pattern, if at least 5\% of the neoplasm , are added together equaling the overall Gleason score.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  The most differentiated tumor will have , at highest, a Gleason score of 2 (1+1 being all of type 1 architecture it just gets doubled ), while the worst differentiated neoplasm (not resembling the native prostate tissue at all) will have a score of 10 (5+5 also being all type 5 tissue).
Revised:  The most differentiated tumor would have the lowest score, Gleason 2 (1+1 being all of type 1 architecture it just gets doubled ), while the worst differentiated neoplasm (not resembling the native prostate tissue at all) will have a score of 10 (5+5 also being all type 5 tissue).
Edit intent: meaning-changed
Original:  The most differentiated tumor will have , at highest, a Gleason score of 2 (1+1 being all of type 1 architecture it just gets doubled ), while the worst differentiated neoplasm (not resembling the native prostate tissue at all) will have a score of 10 (5+5 also being all type 5 tissue).
Revised:  The most differentiated tumor will have , at highest, a Gleason score of 2 (1+1 ), while the worst differentiated neoplasm (not resembling the native prostate tissue at all) will have a score of 10 (5+5 also being all type 5 tissue).
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  The most differentiated tumor will have , at highest, a Gleason score of 2 (1+1 being all of type 1 architecture it just gets doubled ), while the worst differentiated neoplasm (not resembling the native prostate tissue at all) will have a score of 10 (5+5 also being all type 5 tissue).
Revised:  The most differentiated tumor will have , at highest, a Gleason score of 2 (1+1 being all of type 1 architecture it just gets doubled ), while the most differentiated neoplasm (not resembling the native prostate tissue at all) will have a score of 10 (5+5 also being all type 5 tissue).
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  The most differentiated tumor will have , at highest, a Gleason score of 2 (1+1 being all of type 1 architecture it just gets doubled ), while the worst differentiated neoplasm (not resembling the native prostate tissue at all) will have a score of 10 (5+5 also being all type 5 tissue).
Revised:  The most differentiated tumor will have , at highest, a Gleason score of 2 (1+1 being all of type 1 architecture it just gets doubled ), while the worst differentiated neoplasm (not resembling native prostate tissue at all) will have a score of 10 (5+5 also being all type 5 tissue).
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  The most differentiated tumor will have , at highest, a Gleason score of 2 (1+1 being all of type 1 architecture it just gets doubled ), while the worst differentiated neoplasm (not resembling the native prostate tissue at all) will have a score of 10 (5+5 also being all type 5 tissue).
Revised:  The most differentiated tumor will have , at highest, a Gleason score of 2 (1+1 being all of type 1 architecture it just gets doubled ), while the worst differentiated neoplasm (not resembling the native prostate tissue ) would have a the higest score, Gleason 10 (5+5 also being all type 5 tissue).
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  The most differentiated tumor will have , at highest, a Gleason score of 2 (1+1 being all of type 1 architecture it just gets doubled ), while the worst differentiated neoplasm (not resembling the native prostate tissue at all) will have a score of 10 (5+5 also being all type 5 tissue). So a Gleason Score/Grade can only be between 2 and 10, there is no 0 or 1 by definition.
Revised:  The most differentiated tumor will have , at highest, a Gleason score of 2 (1+1 being all of type 1 architecture it just gets doubled ), while the worst differentiated neoplasm (not resembling the native prostate tissue at all) will have a score of 10 (5+5 ). Gleason scores range from 2 and 10, there is no 0 or 1 by definition.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  The main way to tell the difference between a normal prostate gland and neoplastic glands is that prostatic glands normally have two cell layers in the glands, in adenocarcinoma(adeno- being that it is glandular cancer, carcinoma- being that its ectoderm derived because only ectodermal tissue makes glands)
Revised:  Cytological differences between normal prostate to neoplastic glands are evident in changes to the typical two cell layers in the glands, in adenocarcinoma(adeno- being that it is glandular cancer, carcinoma- being that its ectoderm derived because only ectodermal tissue makes glands)
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  The main way to tell the difference between a normal prostate gland and neoplastic glands is that prostatic glands normally have two cell layers in the glands, in adenocarcinoma(adeno- being that it is glandular cancer, carcinoma- being that its ectoderm derived because only ectodermal tissue makes glands)
Revised:  The main way to tell the difference between a normal prostate gland and neoplastic glands is that prostatic glands normally have two cell layers of the gland. In prostatic adenocarcinoma,
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  the basal ( bottom-usually cuboidal ) cell layer is lost so that you only have one top layer of cellular tissue usually ranging from columnar- pseudostratifiedin appearance . Score descriptions Using this system the most well-differentiated tumors have a Gleason score/grade of 2, and the least-differentiated tumors a score of 10. Range by definition is from 2-10, with architectural type being from 1-5 and always doubled or added together accordingly as described above.
Revised:  the basal ( bottom, usually cuboidal type ) cell layer is lost so that you only have one top layer of cellular tissue usually ranging from columnar- pseudostratifiedin appearance . Score descriptions Using this system the most well-differentiated tumors have a Gleason score/grade of 2, and the least-differentiated tumors a score of 10. Range by definition is from 2-10, with architectural type being from 1-5 and always doubled or added together accordingly as described above.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  the basal ( bottom-usually cuboidal ) cell layer is lost so that you only have one top layer of cellular tissue usually ranging from columnar- pseudostratifiedin appearance . Score descriptions Using this system the most well-differentiated tumors have a Gleason score/grade of 2, and the least-differentiated tumors a score of 10. Range by definition is from 2-10, with architectural type being from 1-5 and always doubled or added together accordingly as described above.
Revised:  the basal ( bottom-usually cuboidal ) cell layer is lost , with only the top layer (usally columnar to pseudostratified) remaining . Score descriptions Using this system the most well-differentiated tumors have a Gleason score/grade of 2, and the least-differentiated tumors a score of 10. Range by definition is from 2-10, with architectural type being from 1-5 and always doubled or added together accordingly as described above.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  Gleason scores are often grouped  based on similar behaviour: Grade 2-4 being well-differentiated neoplasm, Grade 5-6 intermediate-grade neoplasm, Grade 7 moderately - poorly differentiated grade neoplasm, Grade 8-10 high-grade neoplasm.
Revised:  Gleason scores are often grouped together, based on similar behaviour: Grade 2-4 being well-differentiated neoplasm, Grade 5-6 intermediate-grade neoplasm, Grade 7 moderately - poorly differentiated grade neoplasm, Grade 8-10 high-grade neoplasm.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  A Gleason score of 7 can be 3+4= 7, where the majority is pattern 3, or it can be 4+3=7  which pattern 4 dominates  resulting in a more advanced cancer .
Revised:  A Gleason score of 7 can be 3+4= 7, where the majority is pattern 3, or it can be 4+3=7 in which pattern 4 dominates resulting in a more advanced cancer .
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  A Gleason score of 7 can be 3+4= 7, where the majority is pattern 3, or it can be 4+3=7  which pattern 4 dominates  resulting in a more advanced cancer .
Revised:  A Gleason score of 7 can be 3+4= 7, where the majority is pattern 3, or it can be 4+3=7 which pattern 4 dominates , resulting in a more advanced cancer .
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  A Gleason score of 7 can be 3+4= 7, where the majority is pattern 3, or it can be 4+3=7  which pattern 4 dominates  resulting in a more advanced cancer .
Revised:  A Gleason score of 7 can be 3+4= 7, where the majority is pattern 3, or it can be 4+3=7 which pattern 4 dominates resulting in a more advanced stage .
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  The language had a brief dormant period in the late 15th to early 16th century, after the Delhi Sultanate was sacked by Timur.
Revised: Apart from courtly influence, Persian also spread through religion, particularly the Islamic faith of Sufism. Many Sufi missionaries to the subcontinent had Persian roots, and although they used local Indic languages to reach their followers, they used Persian to converse amongst each other and write literature. This resulted in a diffusion process into the local followers of the faith. Sufi centres (Khanqah) served as focal points for this cultural interaction. Sufism also interacted with Hinduism through the Bhakti movement; Abidi and Gargesh speculate that this could have further introduced Persian to locals. The language had a brief dormant period in the late 15th to early 16th century, after the Delhi Sultanate was sacked by Timur.
Edit intent: meaning-changed
Original:  Apart from courtly influence, Persian also spread through religion, particularly the Islamic faith of Sufism. Many Sufi missionaries to the subcontinent had Persian roots, and although they used local Indic languages to reach their followers, they used Persian to converse amongst each other and write literature. This resulted in a diffusion process into the local followers of the faith. Sufi centres (Khanqah) served as focal points for this cultural interaction. Sufism also interacted with Hinduism through the Bhakti movement; Abidi and Gargesh speculate that this could have further introduced Persian to locals.
Edit intent: coherence
Original:   Following the defeat of the Hindu Shahi dynasty, classical Persian was established as a courtly language in the region during the late 10th century under Ghaznavid rule.
Revised:  The name of the region is itself a Persian coinage (panj-āb, ). Following the defeat of the Hindu Shahi dynasty, classical Persian was established as a courtly language in the region during the late 10th century under Ghaznavid rule.
Edit intent: meaning-changed
Original:  The first Indian-born Persian poet was from Lahore  . Employed by Punjabis in literature, Persian achieved prominence in the region during the following centuries, as the region came under the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughals.
Revised:  The first Indian-born Persian poet was from Lahore , as were the earliest notable figures in Indo-Persian literature, Masud Sa'd Salman and Abu-al-Faraj Runi . Employed by Punjabis in literature, Persian achieved prominence in the region during the following centuries, as the region came under the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughals.
Edit intent: meaning-changed