You are a helpful assistant in evaluating the quality of the outputs for a given instruction. Your goal is to select the best output for the given instruction.

Select the Output (a) or Output (b) that is better for the given instruction. The two outputs are generated by two different AI chatbots respectively.

Here are some rules of the evaluation:
(1) You should prioritize evaluating whether the output honestly/precisely/closely executes the instruction, then consider its helpfulness, accuracy, level of detail, harmlessness, etc.
(2) Outputs should NOT contain more/less than what the instruction asks for, as such outputs do NOT precisely execute the instruction.
(3) You should avoid any potential bias and your judgment should be as objective as possible. For example, the order in which the outputs were presented should NOT affect your judgment, as Output (a) and Output (b) are **equally likely** to be the better.

Do NOT provide any explanation for your choice.
Do NOT say both / neither are good.
You should answer using ONLY "Output (a)" or "Output (b)". Do NOT output any other words.

# Instruction:
Here is an article:
Sipping a very cold beer on Rio de Janeiro's famous Copacabana beach, it is immediately obvious that Brazil has huge potential as a tourist destination. By Will SmaleBusiness reporter, BBC News, Soccerex, Rio de Janeiro As the city's young and beautiful strut their stuff under the azure sky, the sea in front of you, and mountains towering behind you, Rio is a picturesque spot. Add weather seemingly sent direct from heaven by Christ the Redeemer himself, who in statue form towers above the city, and Rio should be packed full of gringos (foreigners). Instead Brazil in general remains relatively untapped as a holiday destination. In 2010, the number of overseas visitors to the country totalled 5.2 million, according to the United Nations World Tourism Organisation. This meant that Brazil did not even feature in the global top 10, and it was dwarfed by world number one France, 76.8 million, and number two, the US, 60 million. There are numerous reasons why Brazil remains off the main holiday map, but perhaps the biggest two are the fact it is rather a long way from Europe and the US, and a perception of high crime levels. Flavio Dino, the president of Embratur, the Brazilian Tourist Board, told the BBC Business website that running a successful 2014 World Cup, and 2016 summer Olympics in Rio, will help to more than double the number of people visiting the country by 2020. Legacy Helped by its booming economy, Brazil is ploughing money into its infrastructure ahead of 2014. It is spending 6.5bn Brazilian real ($3.4bn; £2.3bn) on improving airports at the 12 host World Cup cities, and a further 16bn real on everything from better public transport and roads, to new and renovated hotels, and training for tourism staff. For Mr Dino this is money very well spent. "The investments into the country's infrastructure and tourism are a legacy that we cannot begin to measure, as it will establish Brazil as an even greater tourist destination in the years to follow," he says. And with 600,000 overseas visitors expected to come for the World Cup alone, Mr Dino says he is sure most will wish to go back to Brazil. "A recent survey of 39,000 international visitors to Brazil showed that 96% intend to return to the country... after they have had a taste of what Brazil has to offer. "Ultimately, the World Cup and the 2016 Olympics provide a unique opportunity for Brazil to showcase all it has to offer, and we are working very hard to make the most of this opportunity to transform and reinforce the country's image for years to come." Brazil hopes that showcasing the country in a successful light will mean more awareness of the country as a tourist destination for visitors from the US and Europe, much as happened after the 2010 South Africa World Cup and 2000 Sydney Olympics. Organisational skills Yet for a country so synonymous with football, beaches and carnivals, the Brazilian Tourist Board also hopes the World Cup and Olympics will highlight the country's other skills and attractions. Marcelo Pedros, Embratur's director of international markets, says: "Everyone knows that Brazil can play football and throw a party, but we want to show just how well we can organise international events. "When Germany held the World Cup in 2006 it was the other way around. Everyone knew they would be well organised, but could they hold a party? "They did, and it was very successful. We are going to prove the same success with Brazil's organisational skills." With 12 cities across Brazil hosting World Cup matches, the tourist board is also keen to show that there is more to the country than just Rio and the country's beaches. To do this, it is launching an advertising drive to highlight the country's numerous other attractions, such as the Iguassu Falls in the southern state of Parana, eco-holidays in the Amazon, the historic city of Salvador, and Brasilia, the capital, a planned city with a wealth of unique modern architecture. Brazil, which this week is holding the Soccerex football business global convention, is also putting particularly focus on attracting more global conferences. In the past seven years it has risen to ninth place in the International Congress and Convention Association global rankings, from 19th back in 2003. Tackling crime Regarding crime levels, the Brazilian authorities have this year dramatically increased their efforts to control or "pacify" the slums or favelas scattered across Rio. Backed by navy marines, and even tanks, armed police have moved in to control the favelas, and for the first time are establishing a permanent presence in the areas, thereby driving out drug gangs. Although exact statistics are hard to come by, most Brazilian commentators agree that crime levels have fallen sharply. Mr Dino says it shows that the federal government has been doing "everything possible", and has "achieved positive results". Mr Pedros adds that the issue of crime in Brazil is very much overplayed by the media in Europe, saying that this gives people an incorrect perception. 'Very exotic' Tourism industry analysts agree that Brazil is making great strides ahead of 2014 and 2016. Independent travel writer Alison Rice says: "For holidaymakers from Europe in particular, Brazil has traditionally been a bit of an unknown place. It was considered very exotic, and very far away, and this put off many people from visiting. "But world travel is now continuing to shrink, and people are prepared to travel longer distances. There is no reason, for example, that Brazil could not be as popular a long-haul destination as Thailand. "Particularly if the World Cup and Olympics are successful. It is a wonderful opportunity for Brazil to really promote itself." Travel industry analyst Mike Bugsgang, of London-based Bugsgang & Associates agrees. "Media coverage of crime levels in Brazil may have deterred European visitors in the past, but they are likely to have been reassured by the recent work to pacify Rio's favelas," he says. "European football fans will hardly need convincing that following their national team in Brazil is a must - providing they qualify. Many will doubtless already be saving up for such a once in a lifetime trip."

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the current state of Brazil's tourism industry in two sentences.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (a):
Brazil's tourism industry has huge potential, but remains relatively untapped with only 5.2 million overseas visitors in 2010. However, with investments in infrastructure ahead of the 2014 World Cup and 2016 summer Olympics, Brazil hopes to more than double the number of visitors by 2020.

# Output (b):
Brazil's tourism industry remains relatively untapped, with the country not featuring in the global top 10 for overseas visitors. Factors such as distance from Europe and the US, and a perception of high crime levels have contributed to this situation.

# Which is better, Output (a) or Output (b)? Your response should be either "Output (a)" or "Output (b)":

Output (a)

Instruction:
Here is an article:
Sipping a very cold beer on Rio de Janeiro's famous Copacabana beach, it is immediately obvious that Brazil has huge potential as a tourist destination. By Will SmaleBusiness reporter, BBC News, Soccerex, Rio de Janeiro As the city's young and beautiful strut their stuff under the azure sky, the sea in front of you, and mountains towering behind you, Rio is a picturesque spot. Add weather seemingly sent direct from heaven by Christ the Redeemer himself, who in statue form towers above the city, and Rio should be packed full of gringos (foreigners). Instead Brazil in general remains relatively untapped as a holiday destination. In 2010, the number of overseas visitors to the country totalled 5.2 million, according to the United Nations World Tourism Organisation. This meant that Brazil did not even feature in the global top 10, and it was dwarfed by world number one France, 76.8 million, and number two, the US, 60 million. There are numerous reasons why Brazil remains off the main holiday map, but perhaps the biggest two are the fact it is rather a long way from Europe and the US, and a perception of high crime levels. Flavio Dino, the president of Embratur, the Brazilian Tourist Board, told the BBC Business website that running a successful 2014 World Cup, and 2016 summer Olympics in Rio, will help to more than double the number of people visiting the country by 2020. Legacy Helped by its booming economy, Brazil is ploughing money into its infrastructure ahead of 2014. It is spending 6.5bn Brazilian real ($3.4bn; £2.3bn) on improving airports at the 12 host World Cup cities, and a further 16bn real on everything from better public transport and roads, to new and renovated hotels, and training for tourism staff. For Mr Dino this is money very well spent. "The investments into the country's infrastructure and tourism are a legacy that we cannot begin to measure, as it will establish Brazil as an even greater tourist destination in the years to follow," he says. And with 600,000 overseas visitors expected to come for the World Cup alone, Mr Dino says he is sure most will wish to go back to Brazil. "A recent survey of 39,000 international visitors to Brazil showed that 96% intend to return to the country... after they have had a taste of what Brazil has to offer. "Ultimately, the World Cup and the 2016 Olympics provide a unique opportunity for Brazil to showcase all it has to offer, and we are working very hard to make the most of this opportunity to transform and reinforce the country's image for years to come." Brazil hopes that showcasing the country in a successful light will mean more awareness of the country as a tourist destination for visitors from the US and Europe, much as happened after the 2010 South Africa World Cup and 2000 Sydney Olympics. Organisational skills Yet for a country so synonymous with football, beaches and carnivals, the Brazilian Tourist Board also hopes the World Cup and Olympics will highlight the country's other skills and attractions. Marcelo Pedros, Embratur's director of international markets, says: "Everyone knows that Brazil can play football and throw a party, but we want to show just how well we can organise international events. "When Germany held the World Cup in 2006 it was the other way around. Everyone knew they would be well organised, but could they hold a party? "They did, and it was very successful. We are going to prove the same success with Brazil's organisational skills." With 12 cities across Brazil hosting World Cup matches, the tourist board is also keen to show that there is more to the country than just Rio and the country's beaches. To do this, it is launching an advertising drive to highlight the country's numerous other attractions, such as the Iguassu Falls in the southern state of Parana, eco-holidays in the Amazon, the historic city of Salvador, and Brasilia, the capital, a planned city with a wealth of unique modern architecture. Brazil, which this week is holding the Soccerex football business global convention, is also putting particularly focus on attracting more global conferences. In the past seven years it has risen to ninth place in the International Congress and Convention Association global rankings, from 19th back in 2003. Tackling crime Regarding crime levels, the Brazilian authorities have this year dramatically increased their efforts to control or "pacify" the slums or favelas scattered across Rio. Backed by navy marines, and even tanks, armed police have moved in to control the favelas, and for the first time are establishing a permanent presence in the areas, thereby driving out drug gangs. Although exact statistics are hard to come by, most Brazilian commentators agree that crime levels have fallen sharply. Mr Dino says it shows that the federal government has been doing "everything possible", and has "achieved positive results". Mr Pedros adds that the issue of crime in Brazil is very much overplayed by the media in Europe, saying that this gives people an incorrect perception. 'Very exotic' Tourism industry analysts agree that Brazil is making great strides ahead of 2014 and 2016. Independent travel writer Alison Rice says: "For holidaymakers from Europe in particular, Brazil has traditionally been a bit of an unknown place. It was considered very exotic, and very far away, and this put off many people from visiting. "But world travel is now continuing to shrink, and people are prepared to travel longer distances. There is no reason, for example, that Brazil could not be as popular a long-haul destination as Thailand. "Particularly if the World Cup and Olympics are successful. It is a wonderful opportunity for Brazil to really promote itself." Travel industry analyst Mike Bugsgang, of London-based Bugsgang & Associates agrees. "Media coverage of crime levels in Brazil may have deterred European visitors in the past, but they are likely to have been reassured by the recent work to pacify Rio's favelas," he says. "European football fans will hardly need convincing that following their national team in Brazil is a must - providing they qualify. Many will doubtless already be saving up for such a once in a lifetime trip."

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the current state of Brazil's tourism industry in two sentences.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Brazil's tourism industry has huge potential, but remains relatively untapped with only 5.2 million overseas visitors in 2010. However, with investments in infrastructure ahead of the 2014 World Cup and 2016 summer Olympics, Brazil hopes to more than double the number of visitors by 2020.

Brazil's tourism industry remains relatively untapped, with the country not featuring in the global top 10 for overseas visitors. Factors such as distance from Europe and the US, and a perception of high crime levels have contributed to this situation.


You are a helpful assistant in evaluating the quality of the outputs for a given instruction. Your goal is to select the best output for the given instruction.

Select the Output (a) or Output (b) that is better for the given instruction. The two outputs are generated by two different AI chatbots respectively.

Here are some rules of the evaluation:
(1) You should prioritize evaluating whether the output honestly/precisely/closely executes the instruction, then consider its helpfulness, accuracy, level of detail, harmlessness, etc.
(2) Outputs should NOT contain more/less than what the instruction asks for, as such outputs do NOT precisely execute the instruction.
(3) You should avoid any potential bias and your judgment should be as objective as possible. For example, the order in which the outputs were presented should NOT affect your judgment, as Output (a) and Output (b) are **equally likely** to be the better.

Do NOT provide any explanation for your choice.
Do NOT say both / neither are good.
You should answer using ONLY "Output (a)" or "Output (b)". Do NOT output any other words.

# Instruction:
Here is an article:
Sipping a very cold beer on Rio de Janeiro's famous Copacabana beach, it is immediately obvious that Brazil has huge potential as a tourist destination. By Will SmaleBusiness reporter, BBC News, Soccerex, Rio de Janeiro As the city's young and beautiful strut their stuff under the azure sky, the sea in front of you, and mountains towering behind you, Rio is a picturesque spot. Add weather seemingly sent direct from heaven by Christ the Redeemer himself, who in statue form towers above the city, and Rio should be packed full of gringos (foreigners). Instead Brazil in general remains relatively untapped as a holiday destination. In 2010, the number of overseas visitors to the country totalled 5.2 million, according to the United Nations World Tourism Organisation. This meant that Brazil did not even feature in the global top 10, and it was dwarfed by world number one France, 76.8 million, and number two, the US, 60 million. There are numerous reasons why Brazil remains off the main holiday map, but perhaps the biggest two are the fact it is rather a long way from Europe and the US, and a perception of high crime levels. Flavio Dino, the president of Embratur, the Brazilian Tourist Board, told the BBC Business website that running a successful 2014 World Cup, and 2016 summer Olympics in Rio, will help to more than double the number of people visiting the country by 2020. Legacy Helped by its booming economy, Brazil is ploughing money into its infrastructure ahead of 2014. It is spending 6.5bn Brazilian real ($3.4bn; £2.3bn) on improving airports at the 12 host World Cup cities, and a further 16bn real on everything from better public transport and roads, to new and renovated hotels, and training for tourism staff. For Mr Dino this is money very well spent. "The investments into the country's infrastructure and tourism are a legacy that we cannot begin to measure, as it will establish Brazil as an even greater tourist destination in the years to follow," he says. And with 600,000 overseas visitors expected to come for the World Cup alone, Mr Dino says he is sure most will wish to go back to Brazil. "A recent survey of 39,000 international visitors to Brazil showed that 96% intend to return to the country... after they have had a taste of what Brazil has to offer. "Ultimately, the World Cup and the 2016 Olympics provide a unique opportunity for Brazil to showcase all it has to offer, and we are working very hard to make the most of this opportunity to transform and reinforce the country's image for years to come." Brazil hopes that showcasing the country in a successful light will mean more awareness of the country as a tourist destination for visitors from the US and Europe, much as happened after the 2010 South Africa World Cup and 2000 Sydney Olympics. Organisational skills Yet for a country so synonymous with football, beaches and carnivals, the Brazilian Tourist Board also hopes the World Cup and Olympics will highlight the country's other skills and attractions. Marcelo Pedros, Embratur's director of international markets, says: "Everyone knows that Brazil can play football and throw a party, but we want to show just how well we can organise international events. "When Germany held the World Cup in 2006 it was the other way around. Everyone knew they would be well organised, but could they hold a party? "They did, and it was very successful. We are going to prove the same success with Brazil's organisational skills." With 12 cities across Brazil hosting World Cup matches, the tourist board is also keen to show that there is more to the country than just Rio and the country's beaches. To do this, it is launching an advertising drive to highlight the country's numerous other attractions, such as the Iguassu Falls in the southern state of Parana, eco-holidays in the Amazon, the historic city of Salvador, and Brasilia, the capital, a planned city with a wealth of unique modern architecture. Brazil, which this week is holding the Soccerex football business global convention, is also putting particularly focus on attracting more global conferences. In the past seven years it has risen to ninth place in the International Congress and Convention Association global rankings, from 19th back in 2003. Tackling crime Regarding crime levels, the Brazilian authorities have this year dramatically increased their efforts to control or "pacify" the slums or favelas scattered across Rio. Backed by navy marines, and even tanks, armed police have moved in to control the favelas, and for the first time are establishing a permanent presence in the areas, thereby driving out drug gangs. Although exact statistics are hard to come by, most Brazilian commentators agree that crime levels have fallen sharply. Mr Dino says it shows that the federal government has been doing "everything possible", and has "achieved positive results". Mr Pedros adds that the issue of crime in Brazil is very much overplayed by the media in Europe, saying that this gives people an incorrect perception. 'Very exotic' Tourism industry analysts agree that Brazil is making great strides ahead of 2014 and 2016. Independent travel writer Alison Rice says: "For holidaymakers from Europe in particular, Brazil has traditionally been a bit of an unknown place. It was considered very exotic, and very far away, and this put off many people from visiting. "But world travel is now continuing to shrink, and people are prepared to travel longer distances. There is no reason, for example, that Brazil could not be as popular a long-haul destination as Thailand. "Particularly if the World Cup and Olympics are successful. It is a wonderful opportunity for Brazil to really promote itself." Travel industry analyst Mike Bugsgang, of London-based Bugsgang & Associates agrees. "Media coverage of crime levels in Brazil may have deterred European visitors in the past, but they are likely to have been reassured by the recent work to pacify Rio's favelas," he says. "European football fans will hardly need convincing that following their national team in Brazil is a must - providing they qualify. Many will doubtless already be saving up for such a once in a lifetime trip."

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the current state of Brazil's tourism industry in two sentences.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (a):
Brazil's tourism industry has huge potential, but remains relatively untapped with only 5.2 million overseas visitors in 2010. However, with investments in infrastructure ahead of the 2014 World Cup and 2016 summer Olympics, Brazil hopes to more than double the number of visitors by 2020.

# Output (b):
Brazil's tourism industry remains relatively untapped, with the country not featuring in the global top 10 for overseas visitors. Factors such as distance from Europe and the US, and a perception of high crime levels have contributed to this situation.

# Which is better, Output (a) or Output (b)? Your response should be either "Output (a)" or "Output (b)":

Output (a)

Instruction:
Here is an article:
Sipping a very cold beer on Rio de Janeiro's famous Copacabana beach, it is immediately obvious that Brazil has huge potential as a tourist destination. By Will SmaleBusiness reporter, BBC News, Soccerex, Rio de Janeiro As the city's young and beautiful strut their stuff under the azure sky, the sea in front of you, and mountains towering behind you, Rio is a picturesque spot. Add weather seemingly sent direct from heaven by Christ the Redeemer himself, who in statue form towers above the city, and Rio should be packed full of gringos (foreigners). Instead Brazil in general remains relatively untapped as a holiday destination. In 2010, the number of overseas visitors to the country totalled 5.2 million, according to the United Nations World Tourism Organisation. This meant that Brazil did not even feature in the global top 10, and it was dwarfed by world number one France, 76.8 million, and number two, the US, 60 million. There are numerous reasons why Brazil remains off the main holiday map, but perhaps the biggest two are the fact it is rather a long way from Europe and the US, and a perception of high crime levels. Flavio Dino, the president of Embratur, the Brazilian Tourist Board, told the BBC Business website that running a successful 2014 World Cup, and 2016 summer Olympics in Rio, will help to more than double the number of people visiting the country by 2020. Legacy Helped by its booming economy, Brazil is ploughing money into its infrastructure ahead of 2014. It is spending 6.5bn Brazilian real ($3.4bn; £2.3bn) on improving airports at the 12 host World Cup cities, and a further 16bn real on everything from better public transport and roads, to new and renovated hotels, and training for tourism staff. For Mr Dino this is money very well spent. "The investments into the country's infrastructure and tourism are a legacy that we cannot begin to measure, as it will establish Brazil as an even greater tourist destination in the years to follow," he says. And with 600,000 overseas visitors expected to come for the World Cup alone, Mr Dino says he is sure most will wish to go back to Brazil. "A recent survey of 39,000 international visitors to Brazil showed that 96% intend to return to the country... after they have had a taste of what Brazil has to offer. "Ultimately, the World Cup and the 2016 Olympics provide a unique opportunity for Brazil to showcase all it has to offer, and we are working very hard to make the most of this opportunity to transform and reinforce the country's image for years to come." Brazil hopes that showcasing the country in a successful light will mean more awareness of the country as a tourist destination for visitors from the US and Europe, much as happened after the 2010 South Africa World Cup and 2000 Sydney Olympics. Organisational skills Yet for a country so synonymous with football, beaches and carnivals, the Brazilian Tourist Board also hopes the World Cup and Olympics will highlight the country's other skills and attractions. Marcelo Pedros, Embratur's director of international markets, says: "Everyone knows that Brazil can play football and throw a party, but we want to show just how well we can organise international events. "When Germany held the World Cup in 2006 it was the other way around. Everyone knew they would be well organised, but could they hold a party? "They did, and it was very successful. We are going to prove the same success with Brazil's organisational skills." With 12 cities across Brazil hosting World Cup matches, the tourist board is also keen to show that there is more to the country than just Rio and the country's beaches. To do this, it is launching an advertising drive to highlight the country's numerous other attractions, such as the Iguassu Falls in the southern state of Parana, eco-holidays in the Amazon, the historic city of Salvador, and Brasilia, the capital, a planned city with a wealth of unique modern architecture. Brazil, which this week is holding the Soccerex football business global convention, is also putting particularly focus on attracting more global conferences. In the past seven years it has risen to ninth place in the International Congress and Convention Association global rankings, from 19th back in 2003. Tackling crime Regarding crime levels, the Brazilian authorities have this year dramatically increased their efforts to control or "pacify" the slums or favelas scattered across Rio. Backed by navy marines, and even tanks, armed police have moved in to control the favelas, and for the first time are establishing a permanent presence in the areas, thereby driving out drug gangs. Although exact statistics are hard to come by, most Brazilian commentators agree that crime levels have fallen sharply. Mr Dino says it shows that the federal government has been doing "everything possible", and has "achieved positive results". Mr Pedros adds that the issue of crime in Brazil is very much overplayed by the media in Europe, saying that this gives people an incorrect perception. 'Very exotic' Tourism industry analysts agree that Brazil is making great strides ahead of 2014 and 2016. Independent travel writer Alison Rice says: "For holidaymakers from Europe in particular, Brazil has traditionally been a bit of an unknown place. It was considered very exotic, and very far away, and this put off many people from visiting. "But world travel is now continuing to shrink, and people are prepared to travel longer distances. There is no reason, for example, that Brazil could not be as popular a long-haul destination as Thailand. "Particularly if the World Cup and Olympics are successful. It is a wonderful opportunity for Brazil to really promote itself." Travel industry analyst Mike Bugsgang, of London-based Bugsgang & Associates agrees. "Media coverage of crime levels in Brazil may have deterred European visitors in the past, but they are likely to have been reassured by the recent work to pacify Rio's favelas," he says. "European football fans will hardly need convincing that following their national team in Brazil is a must - providing they qualify. Many will doubtless already be saving up for such a once in a lifetime trip."

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the current state of Brazil's tourism industry in two sentences.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Brazil's tourism industry has huge potential, but remains relatively untapped with only 5.2 million overseas visitors in 2010. However, with investments in infrastructure ahead of the 2014 World Cup and 2016 summer Olympics, Brazil hopes to more than double the number of visitors by 2020.

Brazil's tourism industry remains relatively untapped, with the country not featuring in the global top 10 for overseas visitors. Factors such as distance from Europe and the US, and a perception of high crime levels have contributed to this situation.


You are a helpful assistant in evaluating the quality of the outputs for a given instruction. Your goal is to select the best output for the given instruction.

Select the Output (a) or Output (b) that is better for the given instruction. The two outputs are generated by two different AI chatbots respectively.

Here are some rules of the evaluation:
(1) You should prioritize evaluating whether the output honestly/precisely/closely executes the instruction, then consider its helpfulness, accuracy, level of detail, harmlessness, etc.
(2) Outputs should NOT contain more/less than what the instruction asks for, as such outputs do NOT precisely execute the instruction.
(3) You should avoid any potential bias and your judgment should be as objective as possible. For example, the order in which the outputs were presented should NOT affect your judgment, as Output (a) and Output (b) are **equally likely** to be the better.

Do NOT provide any explanation for your choice.
Do NOT say both / neither are good.
You should answer using ONLY "Output (a)" or "Output (b)". Do NOT output any other words.

# Instruction:
Here is an article:
The complex web of paramilitary gangs, security and intelligence forces, agents and informers, in Northern Ireland during the years of conflict were not a consideration for dictionary compilers when they wrote the entry for collusion. It has been left to others to come up with a definition that can be used to weigh the actions, omissions and behaviour of security forces in a series of murders in which they have been accused of collusion. For some, a charge of collusion can only stick if there has been a secret agreement to deliberately and consciously plot to do something wrong. For others the definition would also cover having a mindset that means that officers were predisposed to behave or think in ways that meant some people were less protected than they should have been, that investigations were frustrated to protect agents and informers, regardless of their actions. The first official attempt at a definition was made by Sir John (now Lord) Stevens in 2003. Lord Stevens, the then Metropolitan Police Commissioner, carried out a major investigation into collusion in several murders. He said collusion ranges "from the wilful failure to keep records, the absence of accountability, the withholding of intelligence and evidence, through to the extreme of agents being involved in murder." Applying that definition to his three inquiries he reported: "The co-ordination, dissemination and sharing of intelligence were poor. Informants and agents were allowed to operate without effective control and to participate in terrorist crimes. "Nationalists were known to be targeted but were not properly warned or protected. Crucial information was withheld from senior investigating officers. Important evidence was neither exploited nor preserved." In 2004, Canadian judge Peter Cory published six reports into alleged collusion in murders in Northern Ireland. In outlining his definition of collusion he highlighted several dictionary definitions of the word including "to co-operate secretly: to have a secret understanding." He added definitions of connive, a synonym of the verb collude, including this entry from the Oxford Compact Thesaurus: "to deliberately ignore; to overlook; to disregard; to pass over; to take no notice of; to turn a blind eye; to wink; to excuse; to condone; to look the other way; to let something ride." 'Connivance' From the Webster dictionary, he quoted: "To pretend ignorance or unawareness of something one ought morally, or officially or legally to oppose; to fail to take action against a known wrongdoing or misbehaviour - usually used with connive at the violation of a law." He went on to write: "How should collusion be defined for the purposes of this inquiry?" "There cannot be public confidence in any government agency that is guilty of collusion or connivance with regard to serious crimes. Because of the necessity for public confidence in government agencies the definition of collusion must be reasonably broad when it is applied to such agencies. "That is to say that they must not act collusively by ignoring or turning a blind eye to the wrongful acts of their servants or agents or by supplying information to assist those servants or agents in their wrongful acts or by encouraging others to commit a wrongful act." An inquiry into the death of Billy Wright, in the Maze prison in 1997, took issue with the emphasis on connivance. "It may be that the very wide definition of the word collusion that Judge Cory adopted was due to his concentration on one of the synonyms, namely the verb connive," the inquiry report said. "We have been concerned throughout the inquiry by the width of the meaning applied by Judge Cory, having in mind in particular that the word is not to be found in our terms of reference. "For our part we consider that the essence of collusion is an agreement or arrangement between individuals or organisations, including government departments, to achieve an unlawful or improper purpose. The purpose may also be fraudulent or underhand." The first police ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Nuala (now Baroness) O'Loan adopted the definitions, in 2007, of Lord Stevens and Peter Cory to examine whether there had been collusion in the murder of Raymond McCord jnr. Using those definitions, she concluded that there had been collusion. Her successor as police ombudsman, Al Hutchinson, applied a less broad definition in his report on the attack, in 1971, on McGurk's Bar. In the report he wrote: "The essence of collusion requires that a number of elements be present. Not only must there usually be an agreement between two or more parties, but there is also an additional requirement that a sufficiency of evidence exists to establish, on balance, that the act or omission complained of was deliberate and not merely negligent or inadvertent." In his review of the murder of Pat Finucane, Sir Christopher de Silva said he had adopted a "working definition" of collusion less broad than that of Judge Cory and more in line with that of the Billy Wright inquiry panel. "I do believe, as Judge Smithwick has said in relation to his Tribunal, that omissions by state agencies must be considered alongside positive acts when drawing a definition of collusion. "It is, however, important to stress that, in order to fall within the ambit of collusion, such omissions must be classified as deliberate and not merely represent examples of incompetence or inefficiency. "My own working definition, whilst not purporting to be definitive, is one I consider appropriate in relation to the allegations made and for the purposes of this particular case. "I consider collusion to involve: (i) agreements, arrangements or actions intended to achieve unlawful, improper, fraudulent or underhand objectives; and (ii) deliberately turning a blind eye or deliberately ignoring improper or unlawful activity." Irish judge Peter Smithwick gave a similar definition of collusion to that of Peter Cory. Smithwick, investigating allegations of Garda collusion in the murders of RUC officers Chief Supt Harry Breen and Supt Bob Buchanan, said: "While (collusion) generally means the commission of an act, I am also of the view that it should be considered in terms of an omission or failure to act. "In the active sense, collusion has amongst its meanings to conspire, connive or collaborate. "In addition I intend to examine whether anybody deliberately ignored a matter, or turned a blind eye to it, or to have pretended ignorance or unawareness of something one ought morally, legally or officially oppose."

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the differences in the definition of collusion provided by different people in this article.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (a):
The definition of collusion varies among different individuals in the article. Lord Stevens defines it as ranging from the failure to keep records and withholding intelligence to agents being involved in murder. Canadian judge Peter Cory includes secret cooperation and turning a blind eye to wrongful acts in his definition. The Billy Wright inquiry panel emphasizes the essence of collusion as an agreement or arrangement to achieve an unlawful or improper purpose. Al Hutchinson requires an agreement between parties and sufficient evidence to establish deliberate acts or omissions. Sir Christopher de Silva adopts a working definition similar to the Billy Wright inquiry panel but emphasizes that omissions must be deliberate. Irish judge Peter Smithwick's definition aligns with Peter Cory's, including both active acts and omissions or failures to act.

# Output (b):
This article examines the various definitions of collusion provided by different people in the context of Northern Ireland's years of conflict. Sir John (now Lord) Stevens, the then Metropolitan Police Commissioner, defined collusion as ranging "from the wilful failure to keep records, the absence of accountability, the withholding of intelligence and evidence, through to the extreme of agents being involved in murder." Canadian judge Peter Cory's definition of collusion highlighted several dictionary definitions of the word, including "to co-operate secretly: to have a secret understanding." The first police ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Nuala (now Baroness) O'Loan, adopted the definitions of Lord Stevens and Peter Cory to examine whether there had been collusion in the murder of Raymond McCord jnr. Al Hutchinson, the successor of O'Loan, applied a less broad definition in his report on the attack, in 1971, on McGurk's Bar. Sir Christopher de Silva's definition of collusion was less broad than that of Peter Cory and more in line with that of the Billy Wright inquiry panel. Irish judge Peter Smithwick gave a similar definition of collusion to that of Peter Cory, noting that it should be considered in terms of an omission or failure to act.

# Which is better, Output (a) or Output (b)? Your response should be either "Output (a)" or "Output (b)":

Output (a)

Instruction:
Here is an article:
The complex web of paramilitary gangs, security and intelligence forces, agents and informers, in Northern Ireland during the years of conflict were not a consideration for dictionary compilers when they wrote the entry for collusion. It has been left to others to come up with a definition that can be used to weigh the actions, omissions and behaviour of security forces in a series of murders in which they have been accused of collusion. For some, a charge of collusion can only stick if there has been a secret agreement to deliberately and consciously plot to do something wrong. For others the definition would also cover having a mindset that means that officers were predisposed to behave or think in ways that meant some people were less protected than they should have been, that investigations were frustrated to protect agents and informers, regardless of their actions. The first official attempt at a definition was made by Sir John (now Lord) Stevens in 2003. Lord Stevens, the then Metropolitan Police Commissioner, carried out a major investigation into collusion in several murders. He said collusion ranges "from the wilful failure to keep records, the absence of accountability, the withholding of intelligence and evidence, through to the extreme of agents being involved in murder." Applying that definition to his three inquiries he reported: "The co-ordination, dissemination and sharing of intelligence were poor. Informants and agents were allowed to operate without effective control and to participate in terrorist crimes. "Nationalists were known to be targeted but were not properly warned or protected. Crucial information was withheld from senior investigating officers. Important evidence was neither exploited nor preserved." In 2004, Canadian judge Peter Cory published six reports into alleged collusion in murders in Northern Ireland. In outlining his definition of collusion he highlighted several dictionary definitions of the word including "to co-operate secretly: to have a secret understanding." He added definitions of connive, a synonym of the verb collude, including this entry from the Oxford Compact Thesaurus: "to deliberately ignore; to overlook; to disregard; to pass over; to take no notice of; to turn a blind eye; to wink; to excuse; to condone; to look the other way; to let something ride." 'Connivance' From the Webster dictionary, he quoted: "To pretend ignorance or unawareness of something one ought morally, or officially or legally to oppose; to fail to take action against a known wrongdoing or misbehaviour - usually used with connive at the violation of a law." He went on to write: "How should collusion be defined for the purposes of this inquiry?" "There cannot be public confidence in any government agency that is guilty of collusion or connivance with regard to serious crimes. Because of the necessity for public confidence in government agencies the definition of collusion must be reasonably broad when it is applied to such agencies. "That is to say that they must not act collusively by ignoring or turning a blind eye to the wrongful acts of their servants or agents or by supplying information to assist those servants or agents in their wrongful acts or by encouraging others to commit a wrongful act." An inquiry into the death of Billy Wright, in the Maze prison in 1997, took issue with the emphasis on connivance. "It may be that the very wide definition of the word collusion that Judge Cory adopted was due to his concentration on one of the synonyms, namely the verb connive," the inquiry report said. "We have been concerned throughout the inquiry by the width of the meaning applied by Judge Cory, having in mind in particular that the word is not to be found in our terms of reference. "For our part we consider that the essence of collusion is an agreement or arrangement between individuals or organisations, including government departments, to achieve an unlawful or improper purpose. The purpose may also be fraudulent or underhand." The first police ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Nuala (now Baroness) O'Loan adopted the definitions, in 2007, of Lord Stevens and Peter Cory to examine whether there had been collusion in the murder of Raymond McCord jnr. Using those definitions, she concluded that there had been collusion. Her successor as police ombudsman, Al Hutchinson, applied a less broad definition in his report on the attack, in 1971, on McGurk's Bar. In the report he wrote: "The essence of collusion requires that a number of elements be present. Not only must there usually be an agreement between two or more parties, but there is also an additional requirement that a sufficiency of evidence exists to establish, on balance, that the act or omission complained of was deliberate and not merely negligent or inadvertent." In his review of the murder of Pat Finucane, Sir Christopher de Silva said he had adopted a "working definition" of collusion less broad than that of Judge Cory and more in line with that of the Billy Wright inquiry panel. "I do believe, as Judge Smithwick has said in relation to his Tribunal, that omissions by state agencies must be considered alongside positive acts when drawing a definition of collusion. "It is, however, important to stress that, in order to fall within the ambit of collusion, such omissions must be classified as deliberate and not merely represent examples of incompetence or inefficiency. "My own working definition, whilst not purporting to be definitive, is one I consider appropriate in relation to the allegations made and for the purposes of this particular case. "I consider collusion to involve: (i) agreements, arrangements or actions intended to achieve unlawful, improper, fraudulent or underhand objectives; and (ii) deliberately turning a blind eye or deliberately ignoring improper or unlawful activity." Irish judge Peter Smithwick gave a similar definition of collusion to that of Peter Cory. Smithwick, investigating allegations of Garda collusion in the murders of RUC officers Chief Supt Harry Breen and Supt Bob Buchanan, said: "While (collusion) generally means the commission of an act, I am also of the view that it should be considered in terms of an omission or failure to act. "In the active sense, collusion has amongst its meanings to conspire, connive or collaborate. "In addition I intend to examine whether anybody deliberately ignored a matter, or turned a blind eye to it, or to have pretended ignorance or unawareness of something one ought morally, legally or officially oppose."

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the differences in the definition of collusion provided by different people in this article.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

The definition of collusion varies among different individuals in the article. Lord Stevens defines it as ranging from the failure to keep records and withholding intelligence to agents being involved in murder. Canadian judge Peter Cory includes secret cooperation and turning a blind eye to wrongful acts in his definition. The Billy Wright inquiry panel emphasizes the essence of collusion as an agreement or arrangement to achieve an unlawful or improper purpose. Al Hutchinson requires an agreement between parties and sufficient evidence to establish deliberate acts or omissions. Sir Christopher de Silva adopts a working definition similar to the Billy Wright inquiry panel but emphasizes that omissions must be deliberate. Irish judge Peter Smithwick's definition aligns with Peter Cory's, including both active acts and omissions or failures to act.

This article examines the various definitions of collusion provided by different people in the context of Northern Ireland's years of conflict. Sir John (now Lord) Stevens, the then Metropolitan Police Commissioner, defined collusion as ranging "from the wilful failure to keep records, the absence of accountability, the withholding of intelligence and evidence, through to the extreme of agents being involved in murder." Canadian judge Peter Cory's definition of collusion highlighted several dictionary definitions of the word, including "to co-operate secretly: to have a secret understanding." The first police ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Nuala (now Baroness) O'Loan, adopted the definitions of Lord Stevens and Peter Cory to examine whether there had been collusion in the murder of Raymond McCord jnr. Al Hutchinson, the successor of O'Loan, applied a less broad definition in his report on the attack, in 1971, on McGurk's Bar. Sir Christopher de Silva's definition of collusion was less broad than that of Peter Cory and more in line with that of the Billy Wright inquiry panel. Irish judge Peter Smithwick gave a similar definition of collusion to that of Peter Cory, noting that it should be considered in terms of an omission or failure to act.


You are a helpful assistant in evaluating the quality of the outputs for a given instruction. Your goal is to select the best output for the given instruction.

Select the Output (a) or Output (b) that is better for the given instruction. The two outputs are generated by two different AI chatbots respectively.

Here are some rules of the evaluation:
(1) You should prioritize evaluating whether the output honestly/precisely/closely executes the instruction, then consider its helpfulness, accuracy, level of detail, harmlessness, etc.
(2) Outputs should NOT contain more/less than what the instruction asks for, as such outputs do NOT precisely execute the instruction.
(3) You should avoid any potential bias and your judgment should be as objective as possible. For example, the order in which the outputs were presented should NOT affect your judgment, as Output (a) and Output (b) are **equally likely** to be the better.

Do NOT provide any explanation for your choice.
Do NOT say both / neither are good.
You should answer using ONLY "Output (a)" or "Output (b)". Do NOT output any other words.

# Instruction:
Here is an article:
"I was shaking with rage and stress, I couldn't believe this had happened." By Dan WhitworthMoney Box reporter Sue is describing the moment she discovered that her late mother, Margaret (not their real names), who'd spent the last years of her life battling dementia, had had more than £14,000 stolen through direct debit fraud. "To be told that that amount of money had been taken... I was outraged that someone could steal off my mother," Sue says. And she is not alone in her concern. The charity Action on Elder Abuse is warning about the dangers of direct debits being fraudulently set up in the name of vulnerable victims. The charity says it's concerned about loopholes and a lack of transparency within the current system. But the Direct Debit scheme says its guarantee means companies that use it to take payments directly from customers' bank accounts are carefully vetted. 'Legitimately' set up After being diagnosed with dementia in 2010, Margaret moved into a nursing home. Three years later, at a point when Margaret could no longer care for herself, two direct debits were set up using her bank account details. Over the next four years more than £14,000 of Margaret's money was stolen to pay the direct debits and it was only after she died in 2017 that her daughter Sue discovered what had happened. Sue began trying to find out what had happened but was told by her mother's bank, Lloyds, that it had carried out an investigation and it had concluded the direct debits had been "legitimately" set up so it would not be refunding any money. Most of the money stolen from Margaret's account was used to pay Vodafone, but the company told Sue it was unable to help or provide any details of who was receiving its services because of "data protection" rules. Sue also contacted her local police force. It referred her to Action Fraud which said it was unlikely any further action would be taken. Sue described the reaction from her bank as "disgusting". "The whole thing was taking over my life. I didn't know where to go for help, I couldn't sleep. All day long I was on the internet trying to find out who else I could go to for help but there was nothing." "I wrote and explained that my mum couldn't have set up these direct debits. "I explained she couldn't feed herself, she couldn't go to the bathroom on her own, she was monitored all the time. "She didn't have the capacity in her mind to think about setting up a direct debit and nobody listened. It was like [I] was being ignored and I had the feeling that because my mum was dead they [Lloyds] couldn't care less." Direct Debit offers a guarantee which explains that companies wishing to use it to take payments directly from people's bank accounts have to go through a careful vetting process. A spokesperson for the Direct Debit scheme said: "The billers [companies] are required to carry out payer verification checks when a Direct Debit Instruction is set up - details of the verification checks used by billers cannot be shared for obvious reasons." The safeguards supposedly in place to protect vulnerable people, as well as the loopholes in the system, is something that Veronica Gray from Action on Elder Abuse says need tackling. "This particular case highlights a lack of transparency in how the system operates. This level of passing the buck when elderly or vulnerable people fall between the gaps is just not good enough. "The Financial Abuse Code of Practice, which is a voluntary code but which many banks have signed up to, is very clear about how financial institutions should treat vulnerable customers. Clearly this has not been used in this case. "[Bank] staff are struggling to know what signs to look for and clearly don't have the skills to and expertise to identify patterns of abuse when they see them." When it was contacted by BBC Money Box, Lloyds started a new investigation which concluded that its initial response was wrong and it would be refunding all of Margaret's money, plus interest and £600 by way of compensation. A Lloyds spokesperson said: "We were very sorry to hear of the difficulties experienced by Sue when dealing with her late mother's account. While we were not informed back in 2010 that Margaret had moved into a nursing home, it should have been clear when her daughter contacted us in 2017 - following her mother's death - that Margaret would not have been in a position to arrange these Direct Debits. "We would like to apologise for the distress and inconvenience caused by our handling of this case and have now arranged for a full refund of all the payments." Warning signs Vodafone said in a statement that it was also looking again at the case and would be providing the details of an individual who may have used Margaret's account to the police. It added there were a "wide range of security verification and fraud checks when opening a new account", but that people can subsequently change the direct debit details. It also said it would welcome any initiative that further strengthened the direct debit system. Whilst Sue is grateful that Lloyds have decided to refund the money stolen from her mother's account she just wants to make sure this can't happen to someone else. "I really would like someone to be accountable for doing this. You know, for the police or somebody to find out who did this - in case they're doing this to somebody else. "Lloyds should have looked into the fact that this account had laid dormant for years and then all of a sudden this money is coming out of it - surely that would ring a bell, that something's wrong there? "And once you say someone's in a home with dementia and these things have happened surely that should mean something?" You can hear more on BBC Radio 4's Money Box programme on Saturday at 12pm or listen again here. Follow Money Box and Dan on twitter.

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the conclusion of the fraud case.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (a):
The article discusses a case of fraud where a woman's mother had over 14,000 pounds stolen from her through direct debit fraud. The daughter, Sue, was outraged and contacted her mother's bank, Lloyds, and the company that the direct debits were being paid to, Vodafone. Both Lloyds and Vodafone told her that there was nothing they could do and that the direct debits had been "legitimately" set up. Sue then contacted her local police force and Action Fraud, but was told that it was unlikely any further action would be taken. Lloyds eventually agreed to refund the money stolen from Margaret's account, plus interest and compensation, after being contacted by the BBC. Vodafone said that it was also looking into the case and would provide the details of an individual who may have used Margaret's account to the police.

# Output (b):
After being contacted by BBC Money Box, Lloyds started a new investigation and concluded that its initial response was wrong. They agreed to refund all of Margaret's money, plus interest and £600 by way of compensation. Vodafone also said they would provide the details of an individual who may have used Margaret's account to the police. Sue is grateful for the refund but hopes that someone will be held accountable for the fraud.

# Which is better, Output (a) or Output (b)? Your response should be either "Output (a)" or "Output (b)":

Output (b)

Instruction:
Here is an article:
"I was shaking with rage and stress, I couldn't believe this had happened." By Dan WhitworthMoney Box reporter Sue is describing the moment she discovered that her late mother, Margaret (not their real names), who'd spent the last years of her life battling dementia, had had more than £14,000 stolen through direct debit fraud. "To be told that that amount of money had been taken... I was outraged that someone could steal off my mother," Sue says. And she is not alone in her concern. The charity Action on Elder Abuse is warning about the dangers of direct debits being fraudulently set up in the name of vulnerable victims. The charity says it's concerned about loopholes and a lack of transparency within the current system. But the Direct Debit scheme says its guarantee means companies that use it to take payments directly from customers' bank accounts are carefully vetted. 'Legitimately' set up After being diagnosed with dementia in 2010, Margaret moved into a nursing home. Three years later, at a point when Margaret could no longer care for herself, two direct debits were set up using her bank account details. Over the next four years more than £14,000 of Margaret's money was stolen to pay the direct debits and it was only after she died in 2017 that her daughter Sue discovered what had happened. Sue began trying to find out what had happened but was told by her mother's bank, Lloyds, that it had carried out an investigation and it had concluded the direct debits had been "legitimately" set up so it would not be refunding any money. Most of the money stolen from Margaret's account was used to pay Vodafone, but the company told Sue it was unable to help or provide any details of who was receiving its services because of "data protection" rules. Sue also contacted her local police force. It referred her to Action Fraud which said it was unlikely any further action would be taken. Sue described the reaction from her bank as "disgusting". "The whole thing was taking over my life. I didn't know where to go for help, I couldn't sleep. All day long I was on the internet trying to find out who else I could go to for help but there was nothing." "I wrote and explained that my mum couldn't have set up these direct debits. "I explained she couldn't feed herself, she couldn't go to the bathroom on her own, she was monitored all the time. "She didn't have the capacity in her mind to think about setting up a direct debit and nobody listened. It was like [I] was being ignored and I had the feeling that because my mum was dead they [Lloyds] couldn't care less." Direct Debit offers a guarantee which explains that companies wishing to use it to take payments directly from people's bank accounts have to go through a careful vetting process. A spokesperson for the Direct Debit scheme said: "The billers [companies] are required to carry out payer verification checks when a Direct Debit Instruction is set up - details of the verification checks used by billers cannot be shared for obvious reasons." The safeguards supposedly in place to protect vulnerable people, as well as the loopholes in the system, is something that Veronica Gray from Action on Elder Abuse says need tackling. "This particular case highlights a lack of transparency in how the system operates. This level of passing the buck when elderly or vulnerable people fall between the gaps is just not good enough. "The Financial Abuse Code of Practice, which is a voluntary code but which many banks have signed up to, is very clear about how financial institutions should treat vulnerable customers. Clearly this has not been used in this case. "[Bank] staff are struggling to know what signs to look for and clearly don't have the skills to and expertise to identify patterns of abuse when they see them." When it was contacted by BBC Money Box, Lloyds started a new investigation which concluded that its initial response was wrong and it would be refunding all of Margaret's money, plus interest and £600 by way of compensation. A Lloyds spokesperson said: "We were very sorry to hear of the difficulties experienced by Sue when dealing with her late mother's account. While we were not informed back in 2010 that Margaret had moved into a nursing home, it should have been clear when her daughter contacted us in 2017 - following her mother's death - that Margaret would not have been in a position to arrange these Direct Debits. "We would like to apologise for the distress and inconvenience caused by our handling of this case and have now arranged for a full refund of all the payments." Warning signs Vodafone said in a statement that it was also looking again at the case and would be providing the details of an individual who may have used Margaret's account to the police. It added there were a "wide range of security verification and fraud checks when opening a new account", but that people can subsequently change the direct debit details. It also said it would welcome any initiative that further strengthened the direct debit system. Whilst Sue is grateful that Lloyds have decided to refund the money stolen from her mother's account she just wants to make sure this can't happen to someone else. "I really would like someone to be accountable for doing this. You know, for the police or somebody to find out who did this - in case they're doing this to somebody else. "Lloyds should have looked into the fact that this account had laid dormant for years and then all of a sudden this money is coming out of it - surely that would ring a bell, that something's wrong there? "And once you say someone's in a home with dementia and these things have happened surely that should mean something?" You can hear more on BBC Radio 4's Money Box programme on Saturday at 12pm or listen again here. Follow Money Box and Dan on twitter.

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the conclusion of the fraud case.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

The article discusses a case of fraud where a woman's mother had over 14,000 pounds stolen from her through direct debit fraud. The daughter, Sue, was outraged and contacted her mother's bank, Lloyds, and the company that the direct debits were being paid to, Vodafone. Both Lloyds and Vodafone told her that there was nothing they could do and that the direct debits had been "legitimately" set up. Sue then contacted her local police force and Action Fraud, but was told that it was unlikely any further action would be taken. Lloyds eventually agreed to refund the money stolen from Margaret's account, plus interest and compensation, after being contacted by the BBC. Vodafone said that it was also looking into the case and would provide the details of an individual who may have used Margaret's account to the police.

After being contacted by BBC Money Box, Lloyds started a new investigation and concluded that its initial response was wrong. They agreed to refund all of Margaret's money, plus interest and £600 by way of compensation. Vodafone also said they would provide the details of an individual who may have used Margaret's account to the police. Sue is grateful for the refund but hopes that someone will be held accountable for the fraud.


You are a helpful assistant in evaluating the quality of the outputs for a given instruction. Your goal is to select the best output for the given instruction.

Select the Output (a) or Output (b) that is better for the given instruction. The two outputs are generated by two different AI chatbots respectively.

Here are some rules of the evaluation:
(1) You should prioritize evaluating whether the output honestly/precisely/closely executes the instruction, then consider its helpfulness, accuracy, level of detail, harmlessness, etc.
(2) Outputs should NOT contain more/less than what the instruction asks for, as such outputs do NOT precisely execute the instruction.
(3) You should avoid any potential bias and your judgment should be as objective as possible. For example, the order in which the outputs were presented should NOT affect your judgment, as Output (a) and Output (b) are **equally likely** to be the better.

Do NOT provide any explanation for your choice.
Do NOT say both / neither are good.
You should answer using ONLY "Output (a)" or "Output (b)". Do NOT output any other words.

# Instruction:
Here is an article:
"I was shaking with rage and stress, I couldn't believe this had happened." By Dan WhitworthMoney Box reporter Sue is describing the moment she discovered that her late mother, Margaret (not their real names), who'd spent the last years of her life battling dementia, had had more than £14,000 stolen through direct debit fraud. "To be told that that amount of money had been taken... I was outraged that someone could steal off my mother," Sue says. And she is not alone in her concern. The charity Action on Elder Abuse is warning about the dangers of direct debits being fraudulently set up in the name of vulnerable victims. The charity says it's concerned about loopholes and a lack of transparency within the current system. But the Direct Debit scheme says its guarantee means companies that use it to take payments directly from customers' bank accounts are carefully vetted. 'Legitimately' set up After being diagnosed with dementia in 2010, Margaret moved into a nursing home. Three years later, at a point when Margaret could no longer care for herself, two direct debits were set up using her bank account details. Over the next four years more than £14,000 of Margaret's money was stolen to pay the direct debits and it was only after she died in 2017 that her daughter Sue discovered what had happened. Sue began trying to find out what had happened but was told by her mother's bank, Lloyds, that it had carried out an investigation and it had concluded the direct debits had been "legitimately" set up so it would not be refunding any money. Most of the money stolen from Margaret's account was used to pay Vodafone, but the company told Sue it was unable to help or provide any details of who was receiving its services because of "data protection" rules. Sue also contacted her local police force. It referred her to Action Fraud which said it was unlikely any further action would be taken. Sue described the reaction from her bank as "disgusting". "The whole thing was taking over my life. I didn't know where to go for help, I couldn't sleep. All day long I was on the internet trying to find out who else I could go to for help but there was nothing." "I wrote and explained that my mum couldn't have set up these direct debits. "I explained she couldn't feed herself, she couldn't go to the bathroom on her own, she was monitored all the time. "She didn't have the capacity in her mind to think about setting up a direct debit and nobody listened. It was like [I] was being ignored and I had the feeling that because my mum was dead they [Lloyds] couldn't care less." Direct Debit offers a guarantee which explains that companies wishing to use it to take payments directly from people's bank accounts have to go through a careful vetting process. A spokesperson for the Direct Debit scheme said: "The billers [companies] are required to carry out payer verification checks when a Direct Debit Instruction is set up - details of the verification checks used by billers cannot be shared for obvious reasons." The safeguards supposedly in place to protect vulnerable people, as well as the loopholes in the system, is something that Veronica Gray from Action on Elder Abuse says need tackling. "This particular case highlights a lack of transparency in how the system operates. This level of passing the buck when elderly or vulnerable people fall between the gaps is just not good enough. "The Financial Abuse Code of Practice, which is a voluntary code but which many banks have signed up to, is very clear about how financial institutions should treat vulnerable customers. Clearly this has not been used in this case. "[Bank] staff are struggling to know what signs to look for and clearly don't have the skills to and expertise to identify patterns of abuse when they see them." When it was contacted by BBC Money Box, Lloyds started a new investigation which concluded that its initial response was wrong and it would be refunding all of Margaret's money, plus interest and £600 by way of compensation. A Lloyds spokesperson said: "We were very sorry to hear of the difficulties experienced by Sue when dealing with her late mother's account. While we were not informed back in 2010 that Margaret had moved into a nursing home, it should have been clear when her daughter contacted us in 2017 - following her mother's death - that Margaret would not have been in a position to arrange these Direct Debits. "We would like to apologise for the distress and inconvenience caused by our handling of this case and have now arranged for a full refund of all the payments." Warning signs Vodafone said in a statement that it was also looking again at the case and would be providing the details of an individual who may have used Margaret's account to the police. It added there were a "wide range of security verification and fraud checks when opening a new account", but that people can subsequently change the direct debit details. It also said it would welcome any initiative that further strengthened the direct debit system. Whilst Sue is grateful that Lloyds have decided to refund the money stolen from her mother's account she just wants to make sure this can't happen to someone else. "I really would like someone to be accountable for doing this. You know, for the police or somebody to find out who did this - in case they're doing this to somebody else. "Lloyds should have looked into the fact that this account had laid dormant for years and then all of a sudden this money is coming out of it - surely that would ring a bell, that something's wrong there? "And once you say someone's in a home with dementia and these things have happened surely that should mean something?" You can hear more on BBC Radio 4's Money Box programme on Saturday at 12pm or listen again here. Follow Money Box and Dan on twitter.

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the conclusion of the fraud case.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (a):
Lloyds Bank has refunded more than £14,000 stolen from the account of a dementia sufferer after direct debits were fraudulently set up. The bank initially refused to refund the money, claiming the direct debits had been "legitimately" set up. The victim's daughter, Sue, contacted the police and Action Fraud, but was told it was unlikely any further action would be taken. Lloyds has now apologised and refunded the money, plus interest and £600 compensation. Vodafone, which received most of the stolen money, said it was looking again at the case and would provide details of an individual who may have used the account to the police.

# Output (b):
The article discusses a case of fraud where a woman's mother had over 14,000 pounds stolen from her through direct debit fraud. The daughter, Sue, was outraged and contacted her mother's bank, Lloyds, and the company that the direct debits were being paid to, Vodafone. Both Lloyds and Vodafone told her that there was nothing they could do and that the direct debits had been "legitimately" set up. Sue then contacted her local police force and Action Fraud, but was told that it was unlikely any further action would be taken. Lloyds eventually agreed to refund the money stolen from Margaret's account, plus interest and compensation, after being contacted by the BBC. Vodafone said that it was also looking into the case and would provide the details of an individual who may have used Margaret's account to the police.

# Which is better, Output (a) or Output (b)? Your response should be either "Output (a)" or "Output (b)":

Output (a)

Instruction:
Here is an article:
"I was shaking with rage and stress, I couldn't believe this had happened." By Dan WhitworthMoney Box reporter Sue is describing the moment she discovered that her late mother, Margaret (not their real names), who'd spent the last years of her life battling dementia, had had more than £14,000 stolen through direct debit fraud. "To be told that that amount of money had been taken... I was outraged that someone could steal off my mother," Sue says. And she is not alone in her concern. The charity Action on Elder Abuse is warning about the dangers of direct debits being fraudulently set up in the name of vulnerable victims. The charity says it's concerned about loopholes and a lack of transparency within the current system. But the Direct Debit scheme says its guarantee means companies that use it to take payments directly from customers' bank accounts are carefully vetted. 'Legitimately' set up After being diagnosed with dementia in 2010, Margaret moved into a nursing home. Three years later, at a point when Margaret could no longer care for herself, two direct debits were set up using her bank account details. Over the next four years more than £14,000 of Margaret's money was stolen to pay the direct debits and it was only after she died in 2017 that her daughter Sue discovered what had happened. Sue began trying to find out what had happened but was told by her mother's bank, Lloyds, that it had carried out an investigation and it had concluded the direct debits had been "legitimately" set up so it would not be refunding any money. Most of the money stolen from Margaret's account was used to pay Vodafone, but the company told Sue it was unable to help or provide any details of who was receiving its services because of "data protection" rules. Sue also contacted her local police force. It referred her to Action Fraud which said it was unlikely any further action would be taken. Sue described the reaction from her bank as "disgusting". "The whole thing was taking over my life. I didn't know where to go for help, I couldn't sleep. All day long I was on the internet trying to find out who else I could go to for help but there was nothing." "I wrote and explained that my mum couldn't have set up these direct debits. "I explained she couldn't feed herself, she couldn't go to the bathroom on her own, she was monitored all the time. "She didn't have the capacity in her mind to think about setting up a direct debit and nobody listened. It was like [I] was being ignored and I had the feeling that because my mum was dead they [Lloyds] couldn't care less." Direct Debit offers a guarantee which explains that companies wishing to use it to take payments directly from people's bank accounts have to go through a careful vetting process. A spokesperson for the Direct Debit scheme said: "The billers [companies] are required to carry out payer verification checks when a Direct Debit Instruction is set up - details of the verification checks used by billers cannot be shared for obvious reasons." The safeguards supposedly in place to protect vulnerable people, as well as the loopholes in the system, is something that Veronica Gray from Action on Elder Abuse says need tackling. "This particular case highlights a lack of transparency in how the system operates. This level of passing the buck when elderly or vulnerable people fall between the gaps is just not good enough. "The Financial Abuse Code of Practice, which is a voluntary code but which many banks have signed up to, is very clear about how financial institutions should treat vulnerable customers. Clearly this has not been used in this case. "[Bank] staff are struggling to know what signs to look for and clearly don't have the skills to and expertise to identify patterns of abuse when they see them." When it was contacted by BBC Money Box, Lloyds started a new investigation which concluded that its initial response was wrong and it would be refunding all of Margaret's money, plus interest and £600 by way of compensation. A Lloyds spokesperson said: "We were very sorry to hear of the difficulties experienced by Sue when dealing with her late mother's account. While we were not informed back in 2010 that Margaret had moved into a nursing home, it should have been clear when her daughter contacted us in 2017 - following her mother's death - that Margaret would not have been in a position to arrange these Direct Debits. "We would like to apologise for the distress and inconvenience caused by our handling of this case and have now arranged for a full refund of all the payments." Warning signs Vodafone said in a statement that it was also looking again at the case and would be providing the details of an individual who may have used Margaret's account to the police. It added there were a "wide range of security verification and fraud checks when opening a new account", but that people can subsequently change the direct debit details. It also said it would welcome any initiative that further strengthened the direct debit system. Whilst Sue is grateful that Lloyds have decided to refund the money stolen from her mother's account she just wants to make sure this can't happen to someone else. "I really would like someone to be accountable for doing this. You know, for the police or somebody to find out who did this - in case they're doing this to somebody else. "Lloyds should have looked into the fact that this account had laid dormant for years and then all of a sudden this money is coming out of it - surely that would ring a bell, that something's wrong there? "And once you say someone's in a home with dementia and these things have happened surely that should mean something?" You can hear more on BBC Radio 4's Money Box programme on Saturday at 12pm or listen again here. Follow Money Box and Dan on twitter.

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the conclusion of the fraud case.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Lloyds Bank has refunded more than £14,000 stolen from the account of a dementia sufferer after direct debits were fraudulently set up. The bank initially refused to refund the money, claiming the direct debits had been "legitimately" set up. The victim's daughter, Sue, contacted the police and Action Fraud, but was told it was unlikely any further action would be taken. Lloyds has now apologised and refunded the money, plus interest and £600 compensation. Vodafone, which received most of the stolen money, said it was looking again at the case and would provide details of an individual who may have used the account to the police.

The article discusses a case of fraud where a woman's mother had over 14,000 pounds stolen from her through direct debit fraud. The daughter, Sue, was outraged and contacted her mother's bank, Lloyds, and the company that the direct debits were being paid to, Vodafone. Both Lloyds and Vodafone told her that there was nothing they could do and that the direct debits had been "legitimately" set up. Sue then contacted her local police force and Action Fraud, but was told that it was unlikely any further action would be taken. Lloyds eventually agreed to refund the money stolen from Margaret's account, plus interest and compensation, after being contacted by the BBC. Vodafone said that it was also looking into the case and would provide the details of an individual who may have used Margaret's account to the police.


You are a helpful assistant in evaluating the quality of the outputs for a given instruction. Your goal is to select the best output for the given instruction.

Select the Output (a) or Output (b) that is better for the given instruction. The two outputs are generated by two different AI chatbots respectively.

Here are some rules of the evaluation:
(1) You should prioritize evaluating whether the output honestly/precisely/closely executes the instruction, then consider its helpfulness, accuracy, level of detail, harmlessness, etc.
(2) Outputs should NOT contain more/less than what the instruction asks for, as such outputs do NOT precisely execute the instruction.
(3) You should avoid any potential bias and your judgment should be as objective as possible. For example, the order in which the outputs were presented should NOT affect your judgment, as Output (a) and Output (b) are **equally likely** to be the better.

Do NOT provide any explanation for your choice.
Do NOT say both / neither are good.
You should answer using ONLY "Output (a)" or "Output (b)". Do NOT output any other words.

# Instruction:
Here is an article:
"I was shaking with rage and stress, I couldn't believe this had happened." By Dan WhitworthMoney Box reporter Sue is describing the moment she discovered that her late mother, Margaret (not their real names), who'd spent the last years of her life battling dementia, had had more than £14,000 stolen through direct debit fraud. "To be told that that amount of money had been taken... I was outraged that someone could steal off my mother," Sue says. And she is not alone in her concern. The charity Action on Elder Abuse is warning about the dangers of direct debits being fraudulently set up in the name of vulnerable victims. The charity says it's concerned about loopholes and a lack of transparency within the current system. But the Direct Debit scheme says its guarantee means companies that use it to take payments directly from customers' bank accounts are carefully vetted. 'Legitimately' set up After being diagnosed with dementia in 2010, Margaret moved into a nursing home. Three years later, at a point when Margaret could no longer care for herself, two direct debits were set up using her bank account details. Over the next four years more than £14,000 of Margaret's money was stolen to pay the direct debits and it was only after she died in 2017 that her daughter Sue discovered what had happened. Sue began trying to find out what had happened but was told by her mother's bank, Lloyds, that it had carried out an investigation and it had concluded the direct debits had been "legitimately" set up so it would not be refunding any money. Most of the money stolen from Margaret's account was used to pay Vodafone, but the company told Sue it was unable to help or provide any details of who was receiving its services because of "data protection" rules. Sue also contacted her local police force. It referred her to Action Fraud which said it was unlikely any further action would be taken. Sue described the reaction from her bank as "disgusting". "The whole thing was taking over my life. I didn't know where to go for help, I couldn't sleep. All day long I was on the internet trying to find out who else I could go to for help but there was nothing." "I wrote and explained that my mum couldn't have set up these direct debits. "I explained she couldn't feed herself, she couldn't go to the bathroom on her own, she was monitored all the time. "She didn't have the capacity in her mind to think about setting up a direct debit and nobody listened. It was like [I] was being ignored and I had the feeling that because my mum was dead they [Lloyds] couldn't care less." Direct Debit offers a guarantee which explains that companies wishing to use it to take payments directly from people's bank accounts have to go through a careful vetting process. A spokesperson for the Direct Debit scheme said: "The billers [companies] are required to carry out payer verification checks when a Direct Debit Instruction is set up - details of the verification checks used by billers cannot be shared for obvious reasons." The safeguards supposedly in place to protect vulnerable people, as well as the loopholes in the system, is something that Veronica Gray from Action on Elder Abuse says need tackling. "This particular case highlights a lack of transparency in how the system operates. This level of passing the buck when elderly or vulnerable people fall between the gaps is just not good enough. "The Financial Abuse Code of Practice, which is a voluntary code but which many banks have signed up to, is very clear about how financial institutions should treat vulnerable customers. Clearly this has not been used in this case. "[Bank] staff are struggling to know what signs to look for and clearly don't have the skills to and expertise to identify patterns of abuse when they see them." When it was contacted by BBC Money Box, Lloyds started a new investigation which concluded that its initial response was wrong and it would be refunding all of Margaret's money, plus interest and £600 by way of compensation. A Lloyds spokesperson said: "We were very sorry to hear of the difficulties experienced by Sue when dealing with her late mother's account. While we were not informed back in 2010 that Margaret had moved into a nursing home, it should have been clear when her daughter contacted us in 2017 - following her mother's death - that Margaret would not have been in a position to arrange these Direct Debits. "We would like to apologise for the distress and inconvenience caused by our handling of this case and have now arranged for a full refund of all the payments." Warning signs Vodafone said in a statement that it was also looking again at the case and would be providing the details of an individual who may have used Margaret's account to the police. It added there were a "wide range of security verification and fraud checks when opening a new account", but that people can subsequently change the direct debit details. It also said it would welcome any initiative that further strengthened the direct debit system. Whilst Sue is grateful that Lloyds have decided to refund the money stolen from her mother's account she just wants to make sure this can't happen to someone else. "I really would like someone to be accountable for doing this. You know, for the police or somebody to find out who did this - in case they're doing this to somebody else. "Lloyds should have looked into the fact that this account had laid dormant for years and then all of a sudden this money is coming out of it - surely that would ring a bell, that something's wrong there? "And once you say someone's in a home with dementia and these things have happened surely that should mean something?" You can hear more on BBC Radio 4's Money Box programme on Saturday at 12pm or listen again here. Follow Money Box and Dan on twitter.

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the conclusion of the fraud case.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (a):
Lloyds Bank has apologized and refunded over £14,000, plus interest and £600 in compensation, to a woman whose late mother's account was targeted by direct debit fraud. The bank initially claimed the direct debits were legitimately set up and refused to refund the money. After being contacted by BBC Money Box, Lloyds conducted a new investigation and admitted its initial response was wrong. Vodafone, which received most of the stolen funds, is also reviewing the case and will provide details of a possible suspect to the police.

# Output (b):
The article discusses a case of fraud where a woman's mother had over 14,000 pounds stolen from her through direct debit fraud. The daughter, Sue, was outraged and contacted her mother's bank, Lloyds, and the company that the direct debits were being paid to, Vodafone. Both Lloyds and Vodafone told her that there was nothing they could do and that the direct debits had been "legitimately" set up. Sue then contacted her local police force and Action Fraud, but was told that it was unlikely any further action would be taken. Lloyds eventually agreed to refund the money stolen from Margaret's account, plus interest and compensation, after being contacted by the BBC. Vodafone said that it was also looking into the case and would provide the details of an individual who may have used Margaret's account to the police.

# Which is better, Output (a) or Output (b)? Your response should be either "Output (a)" or "Output (b)":

Output (a)

Instruction:
Here is an article:
"I was shaking with rage and stress, I couldn't believe this had happened." By Dan WhitworthMoney Box reporter Sue is describing the moment she discovered that her late mother, Margaret (not their real names), who'd spent the last years of her life battling dementia, had had more than £14,000 stolen through direct debit fraud. "To be told that that amount of money had been taken... I was outraged that someone could steal off my mother," Sue says. And she is not alone in her concern. The charity Action on Elder Abuse is warning about the dangers of direct debits being fraudulently set up in the name of vulnerable victims. The charity says it's concerned about loopholes and a lack of transparency within the current system. But the Direct Debit scheme says its guarantee means companies that use it to take payments directly from customers' bank accounts are carefully vetted. 'Legitimately' set up After being diagnosed with dementia in 2010, Margaret moved into a nursing home. Three years later, at a point when Margaret could no longer care for herself, two direct debits were set up using her bank account details. Over the next four years more than £14,000 of Margaret's money was stolen to pay the direct debits and it was only after she died in 2017 that her daughter Sue discovered what had happened. Sue began trying to find out what had happened but was told by her mother's bank, Lloyds, that it had carried out an investigation and it had concluded the direct debits had been "legitimately" set up so it would not be refunding any money. Most of the money stolen from Margaret's account was used to pay Vodafone, but the company told Sue it was unable to help or provide any details of who was receiving its services because of "data protection" rules. Sue also contacted her local police force. It referred her to Action Fraud which said it was unlikely any further action would be taken. Sue described the reaction from her bank as "disgusting". "The whole thing was taking over my life. I didn't know where to go for help, I couldn't sleep. All day long I was on the internet trying to find out who else I could go to for help but there was nothing." "I wrote and explained that my mum couldn't have set up these direct debits. "I explained she couldn't feed herself, she couldn't go to the bathroom on her own, she was monitored all the time. "She didn't have the capacity in her mind to think about setting up a direct debit and nobody listened. It was like [I] was being ignored and I had the feeling that because my mum was dead they [Lloyds] couldn't care less." Direct Debit offers a guarantee which explains that companies wishing to use it to take payments directly from people's bank accounts have to go through a careful vetting process. A spokesperson for the Direct Debit scheme said: "The billers [companies] are required to carry out payer verification checks when a Direct Debit Instruction is set up - details of the verification checks used by billers cannot be shared for obvious reasons." The safeguards supposedly in place to protect vulnerable people, as well as the loopholes in the system, is something that Veronica Gray from Action on Elder Abuse says need tackling. "This particular case highlights a lack of transparency in how the system operates. This level of passing the buck when elderly or vulnerable people fall between the gaps is just not good enough. "The Financial Abuse Code of Practice, which is a voluntary code but which many banks have signed up to, is very clear about how financial institutions should treat vulnerable customers. Clearly this has not been used in this case. "[Bank] staff are struggling to know what signs to look for and clearly don't have the skills to and expertise to identify patterns of abuse when they see them." When it was contacted by BBC Money Box, Lloyds started a new investigation which concluded that its initial response was wrong and it would be refunding all of Margaret's money, plus interest and £600 by way of compensation. A Lloyds spokesperson said: "We were very sorry to hear of the difficulties experienced by Sue when dealing with her late mother's account. While we were not informed back in 2010 that Margaret had moved into a nursing home, it should have been clear when her daughter contacted us in 2017 - following her mother's death - that Margaret would not have been in a position to arrange these Direct Debits. "We would like to apologise for the distress and inconvenience caused by our handling of this case and have now arranged for a full refund of all the payments." Warning signs Vodafone said in a statement that it was also looking again at the case and would be providing the details of an individual who may have used Margaret's account to the police. It added there were a "wide range of security verification and fraud checks when opening a new account", but that people can subsequently change the direct debit details. It also said it would welcome any initiative that further strengthened the direct debit system. Whilst Sue is grateful that Lloyds have decided to refund the money stolen from her mother's account she just wants to make sure this can't happen to someone else. "I really would like someone to be accountable for doing this. You know, for the police or somebody to find out who did this - in case they're doing this to somebody else. "Lloyds should have looked into the fact that this account had laid dormant for years and then all of a sudden this money is coming out of it - surely that would ring a bell, that something's wrong there? "And once you say someone's in a home with dementia and these things have happened surely that should mean something?" You can hear more on BBC Radio 4's Money Box programme on Saturday at 12pm or listen again here. Follow Money Box and Dan on twitter.

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the conclusion of the fraud case.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Lloyds Bank has apologized and refunded over £14,000, plus interest and £600 in compensation, to a woman whose late mother's account was targeted by direct debit fraud. The bank initially claimed the direct debits were legitimately set up and refused to refund the money. After being contacted by BBC Money Box, Lloyds conducted a new investigation and admitted its initial response was wrong. Vodafone, which received most of the stolen funds, is also reviewing the case and will provide details of a possible suspect to the police.

The article discusses a case of fraud where a woman's mother had over 14,000 pounds stolen from her through direct debit fraud. The daughter, Sue, was outraged and contacted her mother's bank, Lloyds, and the company that the direct debits were being paid to, Vodafone. Both Lloyds and Vodafone told her that there was nothing they could do and that the direct debits had been "legitimately" set up. Sue then contacted her local police force and Action Fraud, but was told that it was unlikely any further action would be taken. Lloyds eventually agreed to refund the money stolen from Margaret's account, plus interest and compensation, after being contacted by the BBC. Vodafone said that it was also looking into the case and would provide the details of an individual who may have used Margaret's account to the police.