[System] You are an English linguist performing fine-grained Word Sense Disambiguation. WordNet glosses are schematic. Use the sentence context, the examples, and the synonyms to choose the best indexed sense. Do not hedge. Choose the single best indexed sense.

[User]
Target lemma: particular
Target surface form: particular
Context:
3 -RRB- Republican congressional representatives, because of their belief in a minimalist state, are less willing to engage in local benefit-seeking than are Democratic members of Congress. If these assumptions hold, voters in races for Congress face what in economic theory is called a prisoner's dilemma and have an incentive, at the margin, to lean Democratic. If they put a Republican into office, not only will they acquire less in terms of local benefits but their selected legislator will be relatively powerless to prevent other legislators from "bringing home the bacon "to their respective constituencies. Each legislator, after all, is only one out of 535 when it comes to national policy making. In races for the White House, a voter's incentive, at the margin, is to lean Republican. Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's <t>particular</t> district/state, such a president is also likely to be more effective at preventing other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits. The individual voter's standing consequently will be enhanced through lower taxes.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=particular%5:00:00:specific:00 | definition=unique or specific to a person or thing or category | synonyms=peculiar, special | examples=the particular demands of the job; has a particular preference for Chinese art
2. sense_key=particular%5:00:02:specific:00 | definition=separate and distinct from others of the same group or category | examples=interested in one particular artist; a man who wishes to make a particular woman fall in love with him
3. sense_key=particular%5:00:00:uncommon:00 | definition=surpassing what is common or usual or expected | synonyms=especial, exceptional, special | examples=he paid especial attention to her; exceptional kindness
4. sense_key=particular%5:00:00:primary:00 | definition=first and most important | synonyms=special | examples=his special interest is music; she gets special (or particular) satisfaction from her volunteer work
5. sense_key=particular%5:00:00:fastidious:00 | definition=exacting especially about details | synonyms=finical, finicky, fussy, picky | examples=a finicky eater; fussy about clothes
6. sense_key=particular%5:00:00:careful:00 | definition=providing specific details or circumstances | examples=a particular description of the room

Instructions:
1. Choose the single best indexed sense for the target word in context.
2. WordNet glosses are schematic; use the context, synonyms, and examples together.
3. Do not answer with a WordNet sense key.
4. Return only a JSON object exactly like {"sense_index": 3}.

reasoning_content:
1.  **Analyze the Target Word and Context:**
    *   **Target lemma:** `particular`
    *   **Target surface form:** `particular`
    *   **Context Snippet:** "...Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's <t>particular</t> district/state..."
    *   **Sentence Meaning:** The sentence contrasts a specific voter's district/state with other districts/states mentioned earlier ("other districts/states and their legislators"). It refers to the specific district belonging to the voter in question.

2.  **Analyze the Candidate Senses:**

    *   **Sense 1:** `particular%5:00:00:specific:00` | Definition: unique or specific to a person or thing or category | Synonyms: peculiar, special | Examples: the particular demands of the job...
        *   *Analysis:* This sense emphasizes uniqueness or specificity to a category. It fits fairly well ("specific to a person or thing"), but let's see if others fit better. It often implies a specific quality or requirement unique to something.

    *   **Sense 2:** `particular%5:00:02:specific:00` | Definition: separate and distinct from others of the same group or category | Examples: interested in one particular artist...
        *   *Analysis:* This sense emphasizes distinction from the group. The context says "the voter's particular district/state" as opposed to "other districts/states". The phrase implies singling out one specific instance from the set of all districts. The example "interested in one particular artist" mirrors the logic here: identifying one specific entity from a group. The definition "separate and distinct from others of the same group" matches the contrast between the voter's district and the "other districts" mentioned in the text.

    *   **Sense 3:** `particular%5:00:00:uncommon:00` | Definition: surpassing what is common or usual or expected | Synonyms: especial, exceptional, special | Examples: he paid especial attention to her...
        *   *Analysis:* This implies being special or exceptional. The district isn't necessarily exceptional or unusual; it's just the one belonging to the voter. This is unlikely.

    *   **Sense 4:** `particular%5:00:00:primary:00` | Definition: first and most important | Synonyms: special | Examples: his special interest is music...
        *   *Analysis:* The district isn't described as the "most important" district in a hierarchy, just the specific one relevant to the voter. Unlikely.

    *   **Sense 5:** `particular%5:00:00:fastidious:00` | Definition: exacting especially about details | Synonyms: finical, finicky, fussy...
        *   *Analysis:* Adjective describing a person's character. The target modifies "district/state". Not applicable.

    *   **Sense 6:** `particular%5:00:00:careful:00` | Definition: providing specific details or circumstances | Examples: a particular description...
        *   *Analysis:* Usually modifies nouns like "description" or "instance". Here it modifies a noun referring to an entity ("district"). Unlikely.

3.  **Compare Sense 1 and Sense 2:**
    *   Sense 1 defines "unique or specific to a person or thing".
    *   Sense 2 defines "separate and distinct from others of the same group or category".
    *   The context involves a contrast: "voter's particular district" vs "other districts".
    *   Sense 2's definition explicitly mentions "separate and distinct from others of the same group". The sentence structure sets up exactly this kind of distinction.
    *   Sense 1 examples ("particular demands", "particular preference") lean slightly towards a nuance of "special/unique to". Sense 2 examples ("one particular artist") lean towards "specific one among many".
    *   In the phrase "voter's particular district," the word `particular` functions to single out that specific district from the general set of districts. This aligns most closely with Sense 2's definition of distinctness from the group. It is identifying the specific instance.

    *   Let's look closer at the definitions in standard WordNet (3.0/3.1).
        *   (often used interchangeably, but let's look for the fine-grained distinction).
        *   Sense 1 (specific/peculiar): "unique or specific to a person or thing or category". "The particular demands of the job" -> The demands unique to that job.
        *   Sense 2 (separate/distinct): "separate and distinct from others of the same group or category". "One particular artist".
    *   The context: "limit local benefits to the voter's particular district".
    *   Is it unique to the voter? Yes, it belongs to them.
    *   Is it distinct from the group? Yes, it is the one specific district distinct from the others.
    *   However, the usage "his particular car" vs "that particular car" often oscillates. Here it is "voter's particular district". It functions as a determinative adjective pointing to a specific instance.
    *   Sense 2 is the standard definition for the usage of `particular` when it means "specific one out of many" or "certain".
    *   Example: "He was in a particular hurry" (Sense 1/Special?) vs "I want that particular one" (Sense 2).
    *   The text discusses a specific district (this one) vs other districts. This is the "specific instance" meaning.
    *   Sense 1 often carries a connotation of "special" or "peculiar" (witness the synonym 'peculiar'). The district is not peculiar.
    *   Sense 2 fits "distinct from others of the same group". The sentence contrasts the voter's district with "other districts". This contrast makes Sense 2 the strongest fit.

    Let's re-evaluate Sense 1 vs Sense 2 based on the provided synonyms and examples.
    Sense 1 synonyms: peculiar, special. Examples: demands of the job.
    Sense 2 synonyms: (none listed in prompt, but usually 'specific'). Examples: one particular artist.

    The context "voter's particular district" is semantically equivalent to "one particular artist" (Sense 2 example) rather than "particular demands" (Sense 1 example, which implies uniqueness of nature). The district is just a specific instance, not a district with unique/special properties (other than belonging to the voter).

    Therefore, Sense 2 is the correct choice.

4.  **Final Check:**
    *   Context: "...limit local benefits to the voter's **particular** district/state..."
    *   Meaning: The specific district belonging to the voter, distinct from others.
    *   Sense 2: "separate and distinct from others of the same group or category". Fits perfectly.


attempt_kind: initial

status: success

[System] You are an English linguist performing fine-grained Word Sense Disambiguation. WordNet glosses are schematic. Use the sentence context, the examples, and the synonyms to choose the best indexed sense. Do not hedge. Choose the single best indexed sense.

[User]
Target lemma: president
Target surface form: president
Context:
3 -RRB- Republican congressional representatives, because of their belief in a minimalist state, are less willing to engage in local benefit-seeking than are Democratic members of Congress. If these assumptions hold, voters in races for Congress face what in economic theory is called a prisoner's dilemma and have an incentive, at the margin, to lean Democratic. If they put a Republican into office, not only will they acquire less in terms of local benefits but their selected legislator will be relatively powerless to prevent other legislators from "bringing home the bacon "to their respective constituencies. Each legislator, after all, is only one out of 535 when it comes to national policy making. In races for the White House, a voter's incentive, at the margin, is to lean Republican. Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state, such a <t>president</t> is also likely to be more effective at preventing other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits. The individual voter's standing consequently will be enhanced through lower taxes.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=president%1:18:01:: | definition=an executive officer of a firm or corporation
2. sense_key=president%1:18:04:: | definition=the person who holds the office of head of state of the United States government | synonyms=President of the United States, United States President, Chief Executive | examples=the President likes to jog every morning
3. sense_key=president%1:18:00:: | definition=the chief executive of a republic
4. sense_key=president%1:18:03:: | definition=the officer who presides at the meetings of an organization | synonyms=chairman, chairwoman, chair, chairperson | examples=address your remarks to the chairperson
5. sense_key=president%1:18:02:: | definition=the head administrative officer of a college or university | synonyms=prexy
6. sense_key=president%1:04:04:: | definition=the office of the United States head of state | synonyms=President of the United States, Chief Executive | examples=a President is elected every four years

Instructions:
1. Choose the single best indexed sense for the target word in context.
2. WordNet glosses are schematic; use the context, synonyms, and examples together.
3. Do not answer with a WordNet sense key.
4. Return only a JSON object exactly like {"sense_index": 3}.

finish_reason: stop

role: assistant

reasoning_content:
1.  **Analyze the context:** The text discusses political strategy in the United States. It mentions "Republican congressional representatives," "Democratic members of Congress," "voters in races for Congress," "White House," "GOP president," "districts/states," and "legislators." The specific sentence is: "Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state, such a <t>president</t> is also likely to be more effective at preventing other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits."

2.  **Identify the target:** The target word is "president". Specifically, it refers to a "GOP president" (Republican president) who occupies the "White House."

3.  **Evaluate the candidate senses:**
    *   **Sense 1:** "an executive officer of a firm or corporation." Incorrect. The context is US politics/government, not business.
    *   **Sense 2:** "the person who holds the office of head of state of the United States government." Synonyms: President of the United States, United States President, Chief Executive. This fits perfectly. The text explicitly mentions the "White House" and "GOP president" in the context of US national policy making.
    *   **Sense 3:** "the chief executive of a republic." This is a broader definition. While true for a US president, Sense 2 is more specific to the context (US government). The context explicitly mentions "White House," "Republican," "Democratic," "Congress" (US terms). Sense 2 captures the specific role of the US President better than the generic "chief executive of a republic." However, sometimes WordNet senses have specific granularity issues. Let's look at Sense 3 vs Sense 2. Sense 2 is defined specifically as the *United States* head of state. The text mentions "GOP president" and "White House". This is unmistakably the US President.
    *   **Sense 4:** "the officer who presides at the meetings of an organization." Incorrect. This is like a chairman.
    *   **Sense 5:** "the head administrative officer of a college or university." Incorrect.
    *   **Sense 6:** "the office of the United States head of state." This refers to the *office* (the position/institution), not the *person*. The target sentence says "such a president is also likely to be more effective..." referring to the person performing an action. Therefore, this is the wrong part of speech/semantic type for this instance.

4.  **Compare Sense 2 and Sense 3:**
    *   Sense 3 is generic ("chief executive of a republic").
    *   Sense 2 is specific ("head of state of the United States government").
    *   The text contains distinct markers of US politics: "Republican", "Democratic", "Congress", "White House", "GOP", "districts/states" (US federalism context).
    *   Usually, WSD systems prefer the most specific sense that fits the context. Sense 2 is specific to the US government. The text is about the US government.
    *   Let's check the definitions again.
        *   Sense 2 definition: "the person who holds the office of head of state of the United States government".
        *   Sense 3 definition: "the chief executive of a republic".
    *   The text refers to "a GOP president". "GOP" stands for Grand Old Party, the nickname for the Republican Party in the US.
    *   Therefore, Sense 2 is the correct specific sense.

5.  **Final Selection:** Sense 2.

6.  **Formatting Output:** The user wants a JSON object `{"sense_index": X}`. Since I selected Sense 2, the index is 2.

format: unknown

native_finish_reason: stop

provider: Friendli

currency: USD


[System] You are an English linguist performing fine-grained Word Sense Disambiguation. WordNet glosses are schematic. Use the sentence context, the examples, and the synonyms to choose the best indexed sense. Do not hedge. Choose the single best indexed sense.

[User]
Target lemma: likely
Target surface form: likely
Context:
3 -RRB- Republican congressional representatives, because of their belief in a minimalist state, are less willing to engage in local benefit-seeking than are Democratic members of Congress. If these assumptions hold, voters in races for Congress face what in economic theory is called a prisoner's dilemma and have an incentive, at the margin, to lean Democratic. If they put a Republican into office, not only will they acquire less in terms of local benefits but their selected legislator will be relatively powerless to prevent other legislators from "bringing home the bacon "to their respective constituencies. Each legislator, after all, is only one out of 535 when it comes to national policy making. In races for the White House, a voter's incentive, at the margin, is to lean Republican. Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state, such a president is also <t>likely</t> to be more effective at preventing other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits. The individual voter's standing consequently will be enhanced through lower taxes.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=likely%3:00:00:: | definition=has a good chance of being the case or of coming about | examples=these services are likely to be available to us all before long; she is likely to forget
2. sense_key=likely%3:00:04:: | definition=likely but not certain to be or become true or real | synonyms=probable | examples=a likely result; he foresaw a probable loss
3. sense_key=likely%5:00:00:prospective:00 | definition=expected to become or be; in prospect | synonyms=potential | examples=potential clients
4. sense_key=likely%5:00:00:credible:00 | definition=within the realm of credibility | examples=not a very likely excuse

Instructions:
1. Choose the single best indexed sense for the target word in context.
2. WordNet glosses are schematic; use the context, synonyms, and examples together.
3. Do not answer with a WordNet sense key.
4. Return only a JSON object exactly like {"sense_index": 3}.

reasoning_content:
Let me analyze the context and the candidate senses for the word "likely" in the given passage.

Context:
"Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state, such a president is also <t>likely</t> to be more effective at preventing other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits."

In this context, "likely" is used to express probability or likelihood. It's saying that a GOP president has a good chance of being more effective at preventing other districts/states from bringing home local benefits.

Now, let me examine each candidate sense:

1. sense_key=likely%3:00:00:: | definition=has a good chance of being the case or of coming about | examples=these services are likely to be available to us all before long; she is likely to forget

This sense refers to something that has a good chance of happening or being the case. The examples show uses where something is probable but not certain.

2. sense_key=likely%3:00:04:: | definition=likely but not certain to be or become true or real | synonyms=probable | examples=a likely result; he foresaw a probable loss

This sense is very similar to sense 1, but it emphasizes that the outcome is probable but not certain. The synonym "probable" and the examples highlight this aspect.

3. sense_key=likely%5:00:00:prospective:00 | definition=expected to become or be; in prospect | synonyms=potential | examples=potential clients

This sense has more to do with future potential or expectation, with "potential" being a synonym. This doesn't seem to fit well with our context, which is about probability rather than potentiality.

4. sense_key=likely%5:00:00:credible:00 | definition=within the realm of credibility | examples=not a very likely excuse

This sense relates to credibility rather than probability. It's used when evaluating whether something is believable or plausible. This doesn't match our context.

Let me distinguish between senses 1 and 2 more carefully:

Sense 1: "has a good chance of being the case or of coming about"
Sense 2: "likely but not certain to be or become true or real" with synonym "probable"

The main difference seems to be that sense 2 explicitly mentions the uncertainty aspect ("but not certain") and provides "probable" as a synonym. The examples for sense 2 ("a likely result", "he foresaw a probable loss") suggest outcomes or predictions.

In our context, the sentence is making a prediction or assessment about the probability of a GOP president being more effective at preventing other districts/states from bringing home local benefits. It's expressing that this outcome is probable but not guaranteed.

Sense 2 seems to be the closest match because:
1. It's making a probability assessment about a future outcome (similar to "a likely result")
2. The word "probable" as a synonym fits well here
3. The definition explicitly mentions being "likely but not certain," which captures the nuanced probabilistic assessment in the context

Therefore, I believe sense 2 is the best match for our target word in context.

Actually, let me be careful. Looking at the two senses again:

Sense 1: "has a good chance of being the case or of coming about"
Sense 2: "likely but not certain to be or become true or real"

There's a subtle distinction. Sense 1 seems to be focusing on the chance or probability, while sense 2 seems to be focusing on the likelihood of truth or reality of something.

In our context, "such a president is also <t>likely</t> to be more effective..." - we're talking about the probability of a president being effective. This aligns more with sense 1, which focuses on the chance of something coming about (in this case, the effectiveness of the president).

Sense 2's examples ("a likely result", "he foresaw a probable loss") are about outcomes or events being probable, which could apply here, but the definition specifically mentions "to be or become true or real," which slightly shifts the focus.

Given the context, I believe sense 1 is the best match. It captures the idea that there's a good chance that a GOP president will be more effective at preventing other districts/states from bringing home local benefits.

Actually, I think I was overthinking this. Let's reconsider the context:

"such a president is also <t>likely</t> to be more effective at preventing other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits."

Here, "likely" is used to express that there's a good probability that the president will be more effective. This aligns with:

Sense 1: "has a good chance of being the case or of coming about"

Sense 2: "likely but not certain to be or become true or real" with synonym "probable"

The difference between these two senses is subtle, but sense 2 explicitly includes the uncertainty aspect and provides "probable" as a synonym. The examples for sense 2 ("a likely result", "he foresaw a probable loss") are about predicting outcomes with probability.

In our context, we're making a probability assessment about a future outcome (the president's effectiveness). This aligns more closely with sense 2, which captures the idea of something being probable but not certain.

Therefore, I believe sense 2 is the best match for our target word in context.

Actually, I need to be careful and systematic about distinguishing between senses 1 and 2.

Sense 1: "has a good chance of being the case or of coming about"
Examples: "these services are likely to be available to us all before long", "she is likely to forget"

Sense 2: "likely but not certain to be or become true or real"
Synonyms: "probable"
Examples: "a likely result", "he foresaw a probable loss"

The definitions are very similar, with sense 2 explicitly mentioning "but not certain" and having "probable" as a synonym. The examples for sense 1 show "likely" being used in a verbal construction ("likely to be available", "likely to forget"), while the examples for sense 2 show "likely" as an adjective modifying a noun ("a likely result").

In our context, "such a president is also <t>likely</t> to be more effective...", "likely" is used in a verbal construction ("likely to be"), which aligns more with the examples for sense 1.

Additionally, sense 1's definition "has a good chance of being the case or of coming about" directly applies to our context, where we're talking about the probability of the president being effective.

While sense 2 also captures the probabilistic nature of the statement, the usage pattern in our context matches more closely with sense 1's examples.

Therefore, I believe sense 1 is the best match for our target word in context.

Actually, let me look at the exact examples again to be precise:

Sense 1 examples:
- "these services are likely to be available to us all before long"
- "she is likely to forget"

Sense 2 examples:
- "a likely result"
- "he foresaw a probable loss"

In our context, "such a president is also <t>likely</t> to be more effective...", "likely" is used in the construction "likely to be [adjective]", which matches the pattern in sense 1's examples.

Sense 2's examples show "likely" used as an adjective directly modifying a noun ("a likely result") or implied in a comparison with "probable" ("he foresaw a probable loss").

The usage in our context aligns more closely with sense 1's examples. Both definitions capture the probabilistic nature of the statement, but the syntactic pattern matches sense 1.

Therefore, I believe sense 1 is the best match for our target word in context.

Wait, let me check once more, carefully. I want to be absolutely sure I'm differentiating between these similar senses correctly.

Sense 1: "has a good chance of being the case or of coming about"
Examples: "these services are likely to be available to us all before long", "she is likely to forget"

Sense 2: "likely but not certain to be or become true or real"
Synonyms: "probable"
Examples: "a likely result", "he foresaw a probable loss"

In our context: "such a president is also <t>likely</t> to be more effective..."

The key distinctions I can identify:
1. Sense 1 focuses on having a "good chance," while sense 2 emphasizes being "likely but not certain."
2. Sense 1's examples use "likely to [verb]" constructions, while sense 2's examples use "likely" as a direct adjective modifier.
3. Sense 2 has "probable" as a synonym, suggesting a stronger connection to probability concepts.

Our context uses "likely to be," which follows the pattern of sense 1's examples. It's expressing that there's a good chance (but not certainty) that the president will be more effective. This aligns with both senses' definitions.

However, the syntactic pattern in our context ("likely to be") matches sense 1's examples ("likely to be available", "likely to forget"). This suggests that sense 1 is the better match.

Given these observations, I believe sense 1 is the best match for our target word in context.

Let me think more about how to distinguish between senses 1 and 2.

Sense 1 seems to be about the general concept of having a good chance of something happening or being the case. The examples show "likely" used in verbal constructions ("likely to be available", "likely to forget"), suggesting this sense is used when expressing the likelihood of an action or state.

Sense 2 is specifically about probability, with "probable" as a synonym. The examples show "likely" used as an adjective modifying a noun ("a likely result") or in relation to probability concepts ("he foresaw a probable loss"). This suggests this sense is used when making probabilistic predictions about outcomes or events.

In our context, "such a president is also <t>likely</t> to be more effective...", we're expressing the likelihood of a state (being effective). This aligns with sense 1's focus on the likelihood of states or actions.

While both senses capture the probabilistic nature of the statement, sense 1's definition ("has a good chance of being the case or of coming about") and example pattern ("likely to be available") more closely match our context.

Therefore, I believe sense 1 is the best match for our target word in context.

On second thought, I think I've been overthinking this. Let me take a step back and consider the most straightforward interpretation.

In our context, "such a president is also <t>likely</t> to be more effective...", "likely" is expressing that there's a good probability that the president will be more effective. It's not indicating certainty, but a reasonable expectation based on the context.

Sense 1: "has a good chance of being the case or of coming about"
This definition directly matches our context. It expresses that there's a good chance that the president will be more effective.

Sense 2: "likely but not certain to be or become true or real" with synonym "probable"
This definition also matches our context. It expresses that it's probable but not certain that the president will be more effective.

Both senses are very close, but sense 1's definition seems to be the most direct match for our context. It captures the idea that there's a "good chance" of the effectiveness "coming about," which is exactly what the context is expressing.

Therefore, I believe sense 1 is the best match for our target word in context.

Hmm, I'm getting caught in circles here. Let me try one more approach to differentiate between senses 1 and 2.

Sense 1: "has a good chance of being the case or of coming about"
Sense 2: "likely but not certain to be or become true or real" with synonym "probable"

I think the key difference is that sense 2 emphasizes the probability aspect more explicitly, with "probable" as a synonym. This sense seems to be used when making more formal probability assessments.

In our context, "such a president is also <t>likely</t> to be more effective...", we're making an assessment about the probability of the president being effective. This seems to align more with sense 2, which focuses on probability.

The construction "likely to be" is used in sense 1's examples, but this doesn't necessarily mean that sense 1 is the only one that can be used in such constructions. The key is whether the context is making a general likelihood statement (sense 1) or a more explicit probability assessment (sense 2).

Given that our context is making a probability assessment based on the political and economic theory discussed in the passage, I believe sense 2 is the best match.

Actually, I'm being too granular in my analysis. The definitions are:
Sense 1: "has a good chance of being the case or of coming about"
Sense 2: "likely but not certain to be or become true or real"

The difference is incredibly subtle, and both could apply to our context. The main distinguishing factor seems to be the synonym "probable" for sense 2 and the different example patterns.

In our context, "such a president is also <t>likely</t> to be more effective...", "likely" is used in the construction "likely to be," which matches the pattern in sense 1's examples.

Given this syntactic match and the fact that both definitions apply to our context, I believe sense 1 is the best match for our target word in context.

Let me make one final analysis:

Sense 1: "has a good chance of being the case or of coming about"
Examples: "these services are likely to be available to us all before long", "she is likely to forget"

Sense 2: "likely but not certain to be or become true or real"
Synonyms: "probable"
Examples: "a likely result", "he foresaw a probable loss"

In our context: "such a president is also <t>likely</t> to be more effective..."

Key observations:
1. Both senses express probability or likelihood, with sense 2 having "probable" as a synonym.
2. Sense 1's examples use "likely to [verb]" constructions, matching our context.
3. Sense 2's examples use "likely" as a direct adjective modifier, not matching our context.

Given these observations, I believe sense 1 is the best match for our target word in context, primarily due to the syntactic pattern match.

Actually, I think I've been making this more complicated than necessary. Let me take a simpler approach.

Sense 1: "has a good chance of being the case or of coming about"
Sense 2: "likely but not certain to be or become true or real" with synonym "probable"

Both of these senses express probability, but sense 2 has "probable" as a synonym, suggesting a stronger connection to probability concepts. Sense 1 seems to be more general.

In our context, "such a president is also <t>likely</t> to be more effective...", we're making a probability assessment about the president's effectiveness. This aligns with sense 2's focus on probability.

The examples for sense 1 use "likely to [verb]" constructions, which matches our context's "likely to be." However, this doesn't mean sense 2 can't be used in such constructions; it just means the examples provided for sense 2 use different patterns.

Given that our context is making a probability assessment and sense 2 has "probable" as a synonym, I believe sense 2 is the best match for our target word in context.

Actually, I think I've been overthinking this. The two senses are very similar, but there is a clear syntactic difference in the examples:

Sense 1 examples: "likely to [verb]" constructions
Sense 2 examples: "likely" as a direct adjective modifier

Our context uses "likely to be," which matches the pattern in sense 1's examples. This syntactic match, combined with the fact that both senses express probability, leads me to conclude that sense 1 is the best match for our target word in context.

Let me go with sense 1 as my final answer.

Actually, I'm going to try one more time to clearly distinguish between these senses.

Sense 1: "has a good chance of being the case or of coming about"
Examples: "these services are likely to be available to us all before long", "she is likely to forget"

Sense 2: "likely but not certain to be or become true or real"
Synonyms: "probable"
Examples: "a likely result", "he foresaw a probable loss"

The examples show a clear syntactic difference:
- Sense 1: "likely to [verb]" or "likely to be [adjective]"
- Sense 2: "likely" as a direct adjective modifier

Our context: "such a president is also <t>likely</t> to be more effective..."

The usage in our context matches the pattern in sense 1's examples. Both express probability, but the syntactic pattern aligns with sense 1.

Therefore, I believe sense 1 is the best match for our target word in context.

I'll go with sense 1.

provider: DigitalOcean


[System] You are an English linguist performing fine-grained Word Sense Disambiguation. WordNet glosses are schematic. Use the sentence context, the examples, and the synonyms to choose the best indexed sense. Do not hedge. Choose the single best indexed sense.

[User]
Target lemma: effective
Target surface form: effective
Context:
3 -RRB- Republican congressional representatives, because of their belief in a minimalist state, are less willing to engage in local benefit-seeking than are Democratic members of Congress. If these assumptions hold, voters in races for Congress face what in economic theory is called a prisoner's dilemma and have an incentive, at the margin, to lean Democratic. If they put a Republican into office, not only will they acquire less in terms of local benefits but their selected legislator will be relatively powerless to prevent other legislators from "bringing home the bacon "to their respective constituencies. Each legislator, after all, is only one out of 535 when it comes to national policy making. In races for the White House, a voter's incentive, at the margin, is to lean Republican. Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state, such a president is also likely to be more <t>effective</t> at preventing other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits. The individual voter's standing consequently will be enhanced through lower taxes.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=effective%3:00:00:: | definition=producing or capable of producing an intended result or having a striking effect; -LewisMumford | synonyms=effectual, efficacious | examples=an air-cooled motor was more effective than a witch's broomstick for rapid long-distance transportation; effective teaching methods
2. sense_key=effective%5:00:00:competent:00 | definition=able to accomplish a purpose; functioning effectively; -G.B.Shaw | synonyms=efficient | examples=people who will do nothing unless they get something out of it for themselves are often highly effective persons...; effective personnel
3. sense_key=effective%5:00:00:efficacious:00 | definition=works well as a means or remedy | examples=an effective reprimand; a lotion that is effective in cases of prickly heat
4. sense_key=effective%5:00:00:operative:00 | definition=exerting force or influence | synonyms=good, in effect, in force | examples=the law is effective immediately; a warranty good for two years
5. sense_key=effective%5:00:00:actual:00 | definition=existing in fact; not theoretical; real | examples=a decline in the effective demand; confused increased equipment and expenditure with the quantity of effective work done
6. sense_key=effective%5:00:00:operational:00 | definition=ready for service | examples=the fort was held by about 100 effective soldiers

Instructions:
1. Choose the single best indexed sense for the target word in context.
2. WordNet glosses are schematic; use the context, synonyms, and examples together.
3. Do not answer with a WordNet sense key.
4. Return only a JSON object exactly like {"sense_index": 3}.

reasoning_content:
1.  **Analyze the target word:** The target word is "effective" in the adjective form.
2.  **Analyze the context:** The sentence is: "Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state, such a president is also likely to be more **effective** at preventing other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits."
    *   The context discusses political strategy and the ability of a president to achieve a specific outcome (preventing "pork-barrel" spending/bringing home local benefits).
    *   The subject is a "GOP president".
    *   The object of the effectiveness is "preventing other districts/states...".
    *   The core meaning here is the capacity to produce a result or effect.
3.  **Analyze the candidate senses:**
    *   **Sense 1:** "producing or capable of producing an intended result or having a striking effect". Examples: "effective teaching methods", "an air-cooled motor was more effective...". Synonyms: effectual, efficacious. This is the general sense of achieving a result.
    *   **Sense 2:** "able to accomplish a purpose; functioning effectively". Examples: "effective personnel", "highly effective persons". Synonyms: efficient. This sense often applies to *people* or agents being capable/competent. While a president is a person, the focus here is on the *action* ("effective at preventing...").
    *   **Sense 3:** "works well as a means or remedy". Examples: "effective reprimand", "effective lotion". This usually applies to specific remedies or specific tools/means in a remedial context.
    *   **Sense 4:** "exerting force or influence". Synonyms: good, in effect, in force. Examples: "law is effective immediately". This refers to validity or operational status, not ability to perform a task.
    *   **Sense 5:** "existing in fact; not theoretical; real". Examples: "effective demand". This is a technical economic/financial sense.
    *   **Sense 6:** "ready for service". Examples: "effective soldiers". This refers to fitness for duty.
4.  **Compare context to senses:**
    *   The context describes a president achieving a political goal (preventing spending).
    *   Sense 4, 5, and 6 are clearly wrong (validity, economic reality, fitness for duty).
    *   The choice lies between Sense 1 (producing intended result) and Sense 2 (able to accomplish a purpose).
    *   Let's look at the structure: "more [adjective] at [verb phrase]".
    *   Sense 1 examples: "effective than a witch's broomstick", "effective teaching methods". These focus on the *thing/method* producing a result.
    *   Sense 2 examples: "effective persons", "effective personnel". These focus on the *agent* being competent/efficient.
    *   The sentence says a "president is ... likely to be more effective at preventing...". The president is the agent.
    *   However, WordNet distinctions can be subtle.
    *   Sense 1 (effective%3:00:00::) is often used for methods, tools, or the general quality of producing a result.
    *   Sense 2 (effective%5:00:00:competent:00) specifically defines the agent as "able to accomplish a purpose".
    *   Let's check the definitions again.
        *   Sense 1: "producing or capable of producing an intended result". This fits "effective at preventing".
        *   Sense 2: "able to accomplish a purpose; functioning effectively". Synonyms include "efficient".
    *   Let's look at the example for Sense 2: "people who will do nothing unless they get something out of it... are often highly effective persons". This strongly suggests agency/competence of a person.
    *   The context refers to a "president" (a person/agent) being effective.
    *   However, "effective at [doing something]" is a very common collocation for Sense 1 as well (producing a result).
    *   Let's look at the synonyms.
        *   Sense 1: effectual, efficacious.
        *   Sense 2: efficient.
    *   Is a president being "efficient" (Sense 2) or "efficacious" (Sense 1)?
    *   The context is about the *result* (preventing others). A president who prevents others is producing a result.
    *   Often, when referring to a person's ability to get a job done, Sense 2 is used (competent/efficient personnel). But when referring to the *effectiveness of an action* or the *potency* of an agent in a specific role, Sense 1 is often used.
    *   Let's check the gloss of Sense 1 again: "producing or capable of producing an intended result".
    *   Let's check the gloss of Sense 2 again: "able to accomplish a purpose".
    *   The difference is minimal in many contexts, but Sense 2 is usually tagged for "effective workers", "effective management" in the sense of competence.
    *   The sentence construction "effective at preventing" parallels "effective teaching methods" (Sense 1) or "effective remedy" (Sense 3) more than "effective personnel" (Sense 2).
    *   "Effective at [gerund]" is a standard construction for Sense 1. E.g., "This drug is effective at killing bacteria." "This strategy is effective at reducing costs."
    *   Although the subject is a person (president), the attribute being described is the efficacy of their potential action/policy stance.
    *   Sense 2 implies a general competency ("He is an effective leader"). Sense 1 implies the production of a result ("He was effective in his negotiations").
    *   Wait, let's look at Sense 2's example again. "effective personnel". This suggests a general quality of the person.
    *   Sense 1's example "effective teaching methods" refers to a method.
    *   In the text: "such a president is also likely to be more **effective** at preventing..."
    *   Is the president being described as a competent person (Sense 2) or as an agent producing a result (Sense 1)?
    *   Usually, "effective at [verb]" aligns with the production of results (Sense 1).
    *   "Effective leaders" (Sense 2) vs "Effective at leading" (Sense 1)?
    *   Actually, WordNet often maps "effective" when applied to agents doing a specific task to Sense 1 or Sense 2 depending on whether it emphasizes *power/potency* (Sense 1) or *competence/efficiency* (Sense 2).
    *   Let's look at the "synonyms" for Sense 2: "efficient". Is a GOP president "efficient" at preventing benefits? Or "efficacious"?
    *   The context emphasizes the *outcome*: preventing "bringing home the bacon". This is about efficacy/power to produce an effect.
    *   Sense 1 gloss: "producing or capable of producing an intended result".
    *   Sense 2 gloss: "able to accomplish a purpose".
    *   The distinction is extremely fine here.
    *   Let's look at Sense 1 example: "an air-cooled motor was more effective...". Motor = Agent/Machine.
    *   Let's look at Sense 2 example: "effective persons". Person = Agent.
    *   The text is about a "president".
    *   However, Sense 1 includes "having a striking effect".
    *   If we look at the phrase "effective at preventing", it fits the schema of Sense 1: "producing a result".
    *   Sense 2 is often used for "effective employees", "effective staff" (meaning competent/good at their job).
    *   Here, the president is being compared in a specific mechanism: preventing pork.
    *   Let's check SemCor or similar corpus usages if I can recall them.
    *   "Effective" followed by "at" + gerund is very commonly Sense 1.
    *   Example: "The detergent is effective at removing stains." (Sense 1 or 3).
    *   "He is effective at his job." (Sense 2).
    *   "The president is effective at preventing..." -> This sounds like the mechanism/action is what is being evaluated for efficacy.
    *   Sense 1 is the most general sense for "producing a result".
    *   Sense 2 is specifically "competent".
    *   Does the text mean the president is competent? Or that the president's role/stance produces the result? The text says "such a president is also likely to be more effective...".
    *   The previous clause mentions "limit local benefits". The "effectiveness" is about the *power* to stop an action.
    *   "Producing or capable of producing an intended result" (Sense 1) covers "effective at preventing".
    *   Sense 2 (competent) is a subset. Is the president being praised for skill, or simply stating the result will happen?
    *   The text is a political science theory. It argues that a GOP president will be *more capable of producing the result*.
    *   Sense 1 seems the primary definition for "capable of producing a result".
    *   Sense 2 involves "functioning effectively" (adverb derived from adj?) and "efficient". "Efficient" suggests work-to-output ratio. Here, the output (prevention) is the focus, not the efficiency.
    *   Therefore, Sense 1 is the best fit. The president (agent) is capable of producing the intended result.

    Let's double check Sense 1 vs Sense 2.
    Sense 1: "producing or capable of producing an intended result". Examples: "effective teaching methods" (method), "effective motor" (device). Synonyms: effectual, efficacious.
    Sense 2: "able to accomplish a purpose". Examples: "effective persons". Synonyms: efficient.

    Is the president an "effective person" (Sense 2) or "effective at X" (Sense 1)?
    Usually, when "effective" modifies a person directly ("an effective president"), Sense 2 is strong.
    But here it is "effective *at preventing*". The PP "at preventing" specifies the intended result.
    Sense 1 applies to agents, methods, and tools.
    Sense 2 is specific to "competent" agents.
    "Effective at" often implies efficacy in that specific action.
    Example from Sense 1: "an air-cooled motor was more effective...". A motor is an agent (mechanical).
    The president is an agent.
    The definition of Sense 1 "capable of producing an intended result" fits "capable of preventing...".
    The definition of Sense 2 "able to accomplish a purpose" fits too.
    Which is better?
    Sense 2 implies "efficient". Is a GOP president *efficient* at preventing benefits? Maybe. But the text focuses on the result (prevention), not the efficiency.
    Sense 1 synonyms: efficacious. This fits "producing the effect".
    Sense 1 seems the broader, foundational sense. The sense of "working/operative" (Sense 4) is out. "Ready for service" (Sense 6) is out.
    Sense 3 is "remedy".

    Let's compare Sense 1 and Sense 2 on the axis of "competence" vs "efficacy".
    Sense 2 is often used for "good workers".
    Sense 1 is used for "something that works".
    If I say "He is effective at public speaking", I mean he produces the intended result (persuasion/communication). This is Sense 1.
    If I say "He is an effective employee", I mean he is competent. This is Sense 2.
    Here, the phrase is "effective at preventing...". This targets the *performance of the action*, i.e., efficacy.
    Therefore, Sense 1 is the correct choice. It focuses on the *result being produced*.

    Let's verify against the example for Sense 1: "an air-cooled motor was more effective than a witch's broomstick". This compares two agents/tools on their ability to produce a result (transportation).
    The text compares a GOP president and others (implicitly) on their ability to produce a result (preventing benefits).
    This aligns perfectly with Sense 1.

    Sense 2 example: "people... are often highly effective persons". This refers to a personal quality/characteristic of being successful or competent.
    While a president is a person, the specific construction "effective at [gerund]" (producing a specific result) leans towards Sense 1 (efficacious). "Effective at" connects the adjective to the specific effect.
    Sense 1 definition: "producing or capable of producing an intended result".
    Context: "capable of... preventing".
    This matches Sense 1's definition word-for-word almost ("capable of producing" vs "capable of... preventing"). Preventing is the result.

    Conclusion: Sense 1 is the best fit.

provider: StreamLake


[System] You are an English linguist performing fine-grained Word Sense Disambiguation. WordNet glosses are schematic. Use the sentence context, the examples, and the synonyms to choose the best indexed sense. Do not hedge. Choose the single best indexed sense.

[User]
Target lemma: prevent
Target surface form: preventing
Context:
3 -RRB- Republican congressional representatives, because of their belief in a minimalist state, are less willing to engage in local benefit-seeking than are Democratic members of Congress. If these assumptions hold, voters in races for Congress face what in economic theory is called a prisoner's dilemma and have an incentive, at the margin, to lean Democratic. If they put a Republican into office, not only will they acquire less in terms of local benefits but their selected legislator will be relatively powerless to prevent other legislators from "bringing home the bacon "to their respective constituencies. Each legislator, after all, is only one out of 535 when it comes to national policy making. In races for the White House, a voter's incentive, at the margin, is to lean Republican. Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state, such a president is also likely to be more effective at <t>preventing</t> other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits. The individual voter's standing consequently will be enhanced through lower taxes.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=prevent%2:41:01:: | definition=keep from happening or arising; make impossible | synonyms=forestall, foreclose, preclude, forbid | examples=My sense of tact forbids an honest answer; Your role in the projects precludes your involvement in the competitive project
2. sense_key=prevent%2:41:00:: | definition=stop (someone or something) from doing something or being in a certain state | synonyms=keep | examples=We must prevent the cancer from spreading; His snoring kept me from falling asleep

Instructions:
1. Choose the single best indexed sense for the target word in context.
2. WordNet glosses are schematic; use the context, synonyms, and examples together.
3. Do not answer with a WordNet sense key.
4. Return only a JSON object exactly like {"sense_index": 3}.

raw_output:
```json
{"sense_index": 2}
```

content:
```json
{"sense_index": 2}
```

reasoning_content:
1.  **Analyze the Target Lemma and Context:**
    *   **Lemma:** prevent
    *   **Surface Form:** preventing
    *   **Context:** The text discusses political strategy, specifically the "prisoner's dilemma" in voting. It contrasts Republican and Democratic approaches to "local benefit-seeking" (bringing home the bacon).
    *   **Specific Sentence:** "Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state, such a president is also likely to be more effective at <t>preventing</t> other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits."
    *   **Meaning in Context:** The sentence describes a President stopping the action of other districts/legislators acquiring local benefits. It's about blocking an action (bringing home benefits) performed by an entity (other districts/legislators).

2.  **Analyze the Candidate Senses:**

    *   **Sense 1:**
        *   *Definition:* keep from happening or arising; make impossible.
        *   *Synonyms:* forestall, foreclose, preclude, forbid.
        *   *Examples:* "My sense of tact forbids an honest answer", "Your role in the projects precludes your involvement..."
        *   *Analysis:* This sense focuses on an event or situation not happening. It often implies making it impossible or ruling it out beforehand (preclude/forestall). While stopping "bringing home the bacon" is preventing an event, the structure in the context is "preventing [Agent] from [Action]". Let's look at Sense 2.

    *   **Sense 2:**
        *   *Definition:* stop (someone or something) from doing something or being in a certain state.
        *   *Synonyms:* keep.
        *   *Examples:* "We must prevent the cancer from spreading", "His snoring kept me from falling asleep".
        *   *Analysis:* This sense explicitly focuses on stopping an *agent* or *force* (someone or something) from performing a specific action. The structure is "prevent [someone/something] from [doing something]".
        *   *Context Match:* The text says "preventing other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits". Here, "other districts/states and their legislators" is the entity (agent) being stopped, and "bringing home the local benefits" is the action they are being stopped from doing. This fits Sense 2's definition ("stop (someone or something) from doing something") and its structural pattern ("prevent X from doing Y") perfectly. Sense 1 is more abstract/makimpossible, whereas Sense 2 focuses on the constraint of an agent's action. The synonym "keep" (as in "keep from") fits the "preventing... from" construction very well.

3.  **Compare and Decide:**
    *   The context sentence structure is: "...preventing [Object: other districts...] from [Verb Phrase: bringing home...]".
    *   Sense 1 examples: "forbids an honest answer" (no "from"), "precludes your involvement" (no "from"). Sense 1 is about impossibility/avoidance.
    *   Sense 2 examples: "prevent the cancer from spreading", "kept me from falling asleep". Sense 2 explicitly uses the "prevent/keep X from Y" construction involving an entity and an action.
    *   The context is about stopping specific political actors from performing a specific action.
    *   Therefore, Sense 2 is the precise fit for the construction "preventing X from doing Y" where X is an entity.

4.  **Final Output Generation:**
    *   The target sense is Sense 2.
    *   Format: JSON object `{"sense_index": 2}`.


[System] You are an English linguist performing fine-grained Word Sense Disambiguation. WordNet glosses are schematic. Use the sentence context, the examples, and the synonyms to choose the best indexed sense. Do not hedge. Choose the single best indexed sense.

[User]
Target lemma: other
Target surface form: other
Context:
3 -RRB- Republican congressional representatives, because of their belief in a minimalist state, are less willing to engage in local benefit-seeking than are Democratic members of Congress. If these assumptions hold, voters in races for Congress face what in economic theory is called a prisoner's dilemma and have an incentive, at the margin, to lean Democratic. If they put a Republican into office, not only will they acquire less in terms of local benefits but their selected legislator will be relatively powerless to prevent other legislators from "bringing home the bacon "to their respective constituencies. Each legislator, after all, is only one out of 535 when it comes to national policy making. In races for the White House, a voter's incentive, at the margin, is to lean Republican. Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state, such a president is also likely to be more effective at preventing <t>other</t> districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits. The individual voter's standing consequently will be enhanced through lower taxes.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=other%3:00:00:: | definition=not the same one or ones already mentioned or implied; - the White Queen | examples=today isn't any other day; the construction of highways and other public works
2. sense_key=other%5:00:00:past:00 | definition=recently past | examples=the other evening
3. sense_key=other%5:00:02:past:00 | definition=belonging to the distant past | synonyms=early, former | examples=the early inhabitants of Europe; former generations
4. sense_key=other%5:00:00:strange:00 | definition=very unusual; different in character or quality from the normal or expected; - Lance Morrow | examples=a strange, other dimension...where his powers seemed to fail

Instructions:
1. Choose the single best indexed sense for the target word in context.
2. WordNet glosses are schematic; use the context, synonyms, and examples together.
3. Do not answer with a WordNet sense key.
4. Return only a JSON object exactly like {"sense_index": 3}.

raw_output:
```json
{"sense_index": 1}
```

content:
```json
{"sense_index": 1}
```

reasoning_content:
1.  **Analyze the target word and context:**
    *   Target lemma: "other"
    *   Target surface form: "other"
    *   Context snippet: "...prevent other legislators from 'bringing home the bacon'..." and "...preventing other districts/states and their legislators..."
    *   The sentence where the target appears: "Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state, such a president is also likely to be more effective at preventing <t>other</t> districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits."

2.  **Analyze the candidate senses:**
    *   Sense 1: `other%3:00:00::` - Definition: "not the same one or ones already mentioned or implied". Examples: "today isn't any other day", "highways and other public works". This refers to distinct, additional entities, different from the specific one(s) just discussed.
    *   Sense 2: `other%5:00:00:past:00` - Definition: "recently past". Example: "the other evening". Temporal meaning.
    *   Sense 3: `other%5:00:02:past:00` - Definition: "belonging to the distant past". Synonyms: early, former. Temporal meaning.
    *   Sense 4: `other%5:00:00:strange:00` - Definition: "very unusual; different in character...". Example: "a strange, other dimension". Adjective meaning "strange" or "different".

3.  **Evaluate senses against the context:**
    *   The context contrasts the "voter's particular district/state" with "other districts/states".
    *   The meaning here is "different" or "distinct from the one mentioned".
    *   The voter's district is one entity. The "other" districts are the remaining ones that are not the voter's district.
    *   This fits perfectly with Sense 1: "not the same one or ones already mentioned or implied". The "implied" or "mentioned" one is the voter's own district.
    *   Sense 2 and 3 are temporal (time-related). The context is spatial/political (districts), not time.
    *   Sense 4 implies strangeness or alien character. The "other" districts aren't weird; they are just different specific districts.

4.  **Confirm Sense 1:**
    *   Sentence: "...preventing other districts/states..."
    *   Paraphrase: preventing districts/states that are not the one already mentioned (the voter's own).
    *   This matches the definition of Sense 1 exactly.

5.  **Formulate the output:**
    *   The chosen sense is index 1.
    *   Format: JSON object `{"sense_index": 1}`.

provider: Chutes


[System] You are an English linguist performing fine-grained Word Sense Disambiguation. WordNet glosses are schematic. Use the sentence context, the examples, and the synonyms to choose the best indexed sense. Do not hedge. Choose the single best indexed sense.

[User]
Target lemma: local
Target surface form: local
Context:
3 -RRB- Republican congressional representatives, because of their belief in a minimalist state, are less willing to engage in local benefit-seeking than are Democratic members of Congress. If these assumptions hold, voters in races for Congress face what in economic theory is called a prisoner's dilemma and have an incentive, at the margin, to lean Democratic. If they put a Republican into office, not only will they acquire less in terms of local benefits but their selected legislator will be relatively powerless to prevent other legislators from "bringing home the bacon "to their respective constituencies. Each legislator, after all, is only one out of 535 when it comes to national policy making. In races for the White House, a voter's incentive, at the margin, is to lean Republican. Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state, such a president is also likely to be more effective at preventing other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the <t>local</t> benefits. The individual voter's standing consequently will be enhanced through lower taxes.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=local%3:00:01:: | definition=relating to or applicable to or concerned with the administration of a city or town or district rather than a larger area | examples=local taxes; local authorities
2. sense_key=local%3:01:01:: | definition=of or belonging to or characteristic of a particular locality or neighborhood | examples=local customs; local schools
3. sense_key=local%3:00:02:: | definition=affecting only a restricted part or area of the body | examples=local anesthesia

Instructions:
1. Choose the single best indexed sense for the target word in context.
2. WordNet glosses are schematic; use the context, synonyms, and examples together.
3. Do not answer with a WordNet sense key.
4. Return only a JSON object exactly like {"sense_index": 3}.

reasoning_content:
1.  **Analyze the target word and context:**
    *   Target lemma: local
    *   Target surface form: local
    *   Context snippet: "...such a president is also likely to be more effective at preventing other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the <t>local</t> benefits."
    *   Broader context: The text discusses "local benefit-seeking", "local benefits", "district/state", "constituencies", and the contrast between national policy making (535 legislators) vs. specific districts/states. It talks about "bringing home the bacon" to specific areas.

2.  **Analyze the candidate senses:**
    *   Sense 1: `local%3:00:01::` | Definition: "relating to or applicable to or concerned with the administration of a city or town or district rather than a larger area" | Examples: "local taxes; local authorities".
    *   Sense 2: `local%3:01:01::` | Definition: "of or belonging to or characteristic of a particular locality or neighborhood" | Examples: "local customs; local schools".
    *   Sense 3: `local%3:00:02::` | Definition: "affecting only a restricted part or area of the body" | Examples: "local anesthesia".

3.  **Evaluate Sense 3:**
    *   This is a medical sense (local anesthesia). The context is political science/economics (Congress, White House, voters, benefits). This sense is clearly incorrect.

4.  **Evaluate Sense 2:**
    *   Definition focuses on "characteristic of a particular locality". Examples are "local customs" (cultural) or "local schools" (neighborhood attribute).
    *   In the context, "local benefits" refers to federal spending or pork-barrel legislation directed at a specific district or state.
    *   While "belonging to a particular locality" fits loosely, Sense 2 often implies a cultural or inherent characteristic of a place (like customs).

5.  **Evaluate Sense 1:**
    *   Definition: "relating to or applicable to or concerned with the administration of a city or town or district rather than a larger area".
    *   Context analysis: The text explicitly contrasts the "local" level (district/state/constituency) with the "larger area" (national policy making, White House). The phrase "local benefits" means benefits directed to a specific district or state (the administration of a district) rather than the nation as a whole.
    *   The text says "local benefit-seeking" and "local benefits" in the context of legislators serving their specific districts. This aligns perfectly with the administrative/political distinction made in Sense 1 (administration of a district vs. larger area).

6.  **Compare Sense 1 and Sense 2:**
    *   Sense 2 is often used for things like "local flavor," "local color," "local resident."
    *   Sense 1 is used for political or administrative distinctions: "local government," "local elections," "local authorities."
    *   The text discusses "local benefit-seeking" by members of Congress. These are benefits derived from the federal system for a specific jurisdiction (district/state). This is an administrative/political scope distinction.
    *   The definition of Sense 1 mentions "administration of a city or town or district rather than a larger area". The context contrasts specific districts/states with national policy/White House.
    *   Therefore, Sense 1 is the best fit because it captures the political/administrative scope (district vs. nation) inherent in the discussion of congressional representatives and "bringing home the bacon."

7.  **Conclusion:**
    *   The target word refers to the specific district/state level as opposed to the national level.
    *   This fits Sense 1's definition of administration of a district rather than a larger area.

8.  **Final Output Formatting:**
    *   Select Sense 1.
    *   Format: {"sense_index": 1}


[System] You are an English linguist performing fine-grained Word Sense Disambiguation. WordNet glosses are schematic. Use the sentence context, the examples, and the synonyms to choose the best indexed sense. Do not hedge. Choose the single best indexed sense.

[User]
Target lemma: benefit
Target surface form: benefits
Context:
3 -RRB- Republican congressional representatives, because of their belief in a minimalist state, are less willing to engage in local benefit-seeking than are Democratic members of Congress. If these assumptions hold, voters in races for Congress face what in economic theory is called a prisoner's dilemma and have an incentive, at the margin, to lean Democratic. If they put a Republican into office, not only will they acquire less in terms of local benefits but their selected legislator will be relatively powerless to prevent other legislators from "bringing home the bacon "to their respective constituencies. Each legislator, after all, is only one out of 535 when it comes to national policy making. In races for the White House, a voter's incentive, at the margin, is to lean Republican. Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state, such a president is also likely to be more effective at preventing other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local <t>benefits</t>. The individual voter's standing consequently will be enhanced through lower taxes.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=benefit%1:21:00:: | definition=financial assistance in time of need
2. sense_key=benefit%1:07:00:: | definition=something that aids or promotes well-being | synonyms=welfare | examples=for the benefit of all
3. sense_key=benefit%1:10:00:: | definition=a performance to raise money for a charitable cause

Instructions:
1. Choose the single best indexed sense for the target word in context.
2. WordNet glosses are schematic; use the context, synonyms, and examples together.
3. Do not answer with a WordNet sense key.
4. Return only a JSON object exactly like {"sense_index": 3}.

reasoning_content:
1.  **Analyze the target word**: The target lemma is "benefit" and the surface form is "benefits". It's a noun (plural).

2.  **Analyze the context**:
    *   The text discusses political science/economics concepts regarding voting behavior, specifically "local benefit-seeking" and "bringing home the bacon."
    *   Phrases used: "local benefits", "acquire less in terms of local benefits", "bringing home the bacon".
    *   Meaning: Politicians (specifically Democratic members of Congress) are described as more willing to "engage in local benefit-seeking." This refers to securing government funds, projects, or advantages for their specific district or state (pork-barrel politics).
    *   Later, it mentions "limit local benefits" and "preventing other districts/states... from bringing home the local benefits."
    *   The context implies tangible resources, money, or government spending directed at specific localities. "Bringing home the bacon" is a strong idiom for securing funding.

3.  **Analyze the candidate senses**:

    *   **Sense 1 (`benefit%1:21:00::`)**: Definition="financial assistance in time of need".
        *   Context check: Does "local benefits" here mean financial assistance in time of need? No, it refers to government spending or allocations to a district (pork). While it involves money, it's not necessarily "in time of need" (like unemployment benefits). It's more about general resources or funding secured for a constituency. However, WordNet sense 1:21:00 usually refers to welfare benefits or insurance payouts. This text is about political economy/distributive politics.

    *   **Sense 2 (`benefit%1:07:00::`)**: Definition="something that aids or promotes well-being" | Synonyms=welfare.
        *   Context check: "Local benefits" are things that aid the well-being of the district/state. The "welfare" synonym is tricky because it usually implies social welfare, but in a broader sense, "welfare" can mean the well-being of the group.
        *   Let's look at the examples: "for the benefit of all".
        *   Let's compare Sense 1 and Sense 2. Sense 1 is specific to "financial assistance in time of need" (like a benefit check). Sense 2 is broader: "something that aids or promotes well-being".
        *   The context mentions "bringing home the bacon". Bacon = resources, money, projects. These are things that promote the well-being of the local district.
        *   "Local benefits" in this political context refers to distributive goods (roads, contracts, jobs) provided by the federal government to the local district. These are "advantages" or "good things" for the district.
        *   Does Sense 1 fit better? "Financial assistance in time of need". Usually, "benefits" in the plural often triggers Sense 1 (welfare payments/unemployment). However, here the context is not about individuals receiving welfare in times of need, but districts receiving federal allocations.
        *   Let's look at how WordNet distinguishes them.
        *   Sense 1 (`benefit%1:21:00`) is often "unemployment benefits", "medical benefits". It's a countable noun often used for payments.
        *   Sense 2 (`benefit%1:07:00`) is "something that aids or promotes well-being". Synonyms: "welfare". This is often abstract ("for your benefit") but can be concrete.
        *   Is there a sense for "advantage" or "profit"? WordNet 3.0 (which these indices usually map to) has `benefit%1:04:00` (a tangible and visible entity...? No, usually abstract).
        *   Let's re-evaluate Sense 1 vs Sense 2 based on the provided options.
        *   Option 1: Financial assistance in time of need. (Unemployment, health benefits).
        *   Option 2: Something that aids or promotes well-being.
        *   Option 3: A performance.

    *   **Detailed comparison**:
        *   The sentence: "GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state".
        *   "Bringing home the bacon" implies securing funds/projects.
        *   Are these "financial assistance in time of need"? No, that describes a social safety net program.
        *   Are these "something that aids or promotes well-being"? Yes. A bridge, a military base, a grant—these aid the local economy/well-being.
        *   However, there is often a sense in WordNet for "advantage" (`benefit%1:09:00` or similar). Let's check if that is an option. It is NOT an option provided. The options are strictly 1, 2, or 3.
        *   Therefore, I must choose the closest fit among the provided choices.
        *   Sense 1 is specific to welfare/payments. "Local benefits" *could* be interpreted as federal payments to locals, but the phrase "benefit-seeking" and "bringing home the bacon" suggests the broader concept of distributive politics (pork barrel). Distributive politics is about gaining advantages/resources for a specific group.
        *   Sense 2 definition: "something that aids or promotes well-being". This is the most generic positive sense. Securing "local benefits" means securing things that help the district.
        *   In WordNet, Sense 1 (`benefit%1:21:00`) is listed under the "possession" hierarchy (inheritance: possession -> material possession ->...)
        *   Sense 2 (`benefit%1:07:00`) is listed under "state" (state -> welfare -> benefit).
        *   Actually, let's look closer at the definitions.
            *   `benefit%1:21:00`: "financial assistance in time of need". Examples might include unemployment benefits. This feels too specific and restricted to the social safety net context.
            *   `benefit%1:07:00`: "something that aids or promotes well-being". Example: "for the benefit of all". This is often abstract.
        *   Wait, is there a sense missing? Usually, "advantage" is a distinct sense. If "advantage" isn't provided, I have to pick between "financial assistance" and "promotes well-being".
        *   "Bringing home the bacon" = securing funding/projects. Does this fit "financial assistance"? Not really. It's funding for projects.
        *   Does it fit "something that aids or promotes well-being"? Yes, the projects aid the district.
        *   Let's consider standard WSD practices. Often, the plural "benefits" triggers the "financial assistance" sense (Sense 1). Many WSD systems jump to Sense 1 for "benefits" (employee benefits, health benefits).
        *   However, look at the context: "local benefit-seeking". This isn't about an individual seeking welfare. It's about a representative seeking goods for a district.
        *   Context: "voters... acquire less in terms of local benefits". The voters acquire benefits.
        *   If the voters "acquire" benefits, and it's financial/material ("bacon"), Sense 1 ("financial assistance") might seem closer than Sense 2 ("abstract well-being").
        *   However, Sense 1 usually implies a need or a social program. Pork barrel spending isn't strictly "in time of need".
        *   Let's look at the definition of Sense 2 again. "Something that aids or promotes well-being". "Welfare" is the synonym. While "welfare" often means "welfare checks", the definition "well-being" is broader.
        *   In WordNet 3.1:
            *   `benefit%1:21:00`: "financial assistance in time of need"
            *   `benefit%1:09:00`: "a promotional activity..." (not listed)
            *   `benefit%1:04:00`: "something that aids or promotes well-being" (This is usually Sense 2 in many mappings, or Sense 1 depending on version).
            *   Wait, let's check the numbering provided.
                *   Candidate Sense 2: `benefit%1:07:00::`. This maps to WordNet 3.0's `benefit%1:07:00`?
                *   WordNet 3.0 hierarchy:
                    *   `benefit%1:04:00`: Something that aids or promotes well-being.
                    *   `benefit%1:21:00`: Financial assistance in time of need.
                    *   `benefit%1:26:00`: A performance to raise money...
                *   The provided Sense 2 uses the key `benefit%1:07:00::`. Let's assume the standard WordNet 3.0 synset mapping might be slightly shifted or the provided index maps to the "well-being" sense. The definition "something that aids or promotes well-being" matches the standard sense for "benefit" (abstract advantage/good).
                *   Actually, looking at the provided mapping:
                    *   Sense 1: `benefit%1:21:00`. Definition: financial assistance... This corresponds to the "welfare payments" sense.
                    *   Sense 2: `benefit%1:07:00`. Definition: something that aids or promotes well-being.
        *   Let's reconsider Sense 1. Is "local benefits" in political science (pork barrel) considered "financial assistance"?
        *   Pork barrel projects (the "bacon") are indeed financial assistance/resources directed to the district. The context mentions "lower taxes" as the alternative. So it's about money flowing in vs taxes kept low.
        *   If a politician brings home "benefits", they are bringing money/projects.
        *   Is Sense 1 "financial assistance in time of need" too restrictive? Yes. "Time of need" is a specific condition.
        *   Sense 2 "something that aids or promotes well-being" is much broader. While often abstract, in this context ("local benefits"), it encompasses the "good" or "advantage" accruing to the district.
        *   Often, "advantage" (e.g., `benefit%1:04:00`) is the intended sense for "benefit" in contexts like "benefits of the trade deal" or "economic benefits". If that specific synset isn't listed, but "something that aids or promotes well-being" is listed, that definition covers the *concept* of an advantage or positive factor.
        *   However, many WSD datasets tag plural "benefits" as the "financial assistance" sense (like health benefits).
        *   Let's look at the specific phrase "local benefits". In political science literature (e.g., Fiorina, Mayhew), "local benefits" refers to federal spending in the district.
        *   Does this count as "financial assistance"? No, it counts as "material advantage" or "goods".
        *   Does it count as "something that promotes well-being"? Yes. The spending promotes the district's well-being.
        *   However, Sense 1 is often used for "fringe benefits" or "unemployment benefits". The phrase "local benefits" *sounds* like a distributive payment, but the "time of need" qualifier in the definition makes Sense 1 a poor fit. Districts aren't "in need" in the welfare sense; they are competing for resources.
        *   Therefore, Sense 2 is the best candidate among the choices because "promoting well-being" is the functional outcome of these benefits, and it covers the general concept of "good" or "advantage".
        *   Let me double check if Sense 2 is the "Advantage" sense.
            *   WordNet 3.0:
                *   `benefit%1:04:00`: something that aids or promotes well-being.
                *   `benefit%1:21:00`: financial assistance in time of need.
            *   The prompt lists Sense 2 as `benefit%1:07:00`. In some versions/variants, numbers shift.
            *   Regardless of the sense_key index number, the *definition* provided is the primary guide.
            *   Definition 1: "financial assistance in time of need".
            *   Definition 2: "something that aids or promotes well-being".
        *   Decision: "Local benefits" (pork barrel spending) are things that aid the district. They are not "assistance in time of need" (which implies distress/welfare). They are essentially advantages/resources.
        *   Definition 2 is the broader sense covering advantages/goods. Even though "welfare" is listed as a synonym (which can be misleading as it points to "welfare payments"), the definition "something that aids or promotes well-being" captures the "good thing for the district" meaning.
        *   Wait, is there a chance Sense 1 is correct? "Acquire less in terms of local benefits". If benefits = money/projects. "Financial assistance" is a subset of that. But "time of need" is the dealbreaker. Standard legislative benefits (pork) are for political gain, not distress relief.
        *   Conclusion: Sense 2 is the correct choice. The "benefits" are advantages/goods provided to the district, promoting its well-being/economy.

4.  **Final Verification**:
    *   Target: "benefits".
    *   Context: "local benefits" sought by legislators. "Bringing home the bacon". Resources for the district.
    *   Sense 1: Financial assistance in time of need. (Incorrect - specific to welfare/unemployment context).
    *   Sense 2: Something that aids or promotes well-being. (Correct - "local benefits" aid the district's well-being).
    *   Sense 3: Performance. (Incorrect).

    *   Choice: Sense 2.

provider: DeepInfra


[System] You are an English linguist performing fine-grained Word Sense Disambiguation. WordNet glosses are schematic. Use the sentence context, the examples, and the synonyms to choose the best indexed sense. Do not hedge. Choose the single best indexed sense.

[User]
Target lemma: individual
Target surface form: individual
Context:
If these assumptions hold, voters in races for Congress face what in economic theory is called a prisoner's dilemma and have an incentive, at the margin, to lean Democratic. If they put a Republican into office, not only will they acquire less in terms of local benefits but their selected legislator will be relatively powerless to prevent other legislators from "bringing home the bacon "to their respective constituencies. Each legislator, after all, is only one out of 535 when it comes to national policy making. In races for the White House, a voter's incentive, at the margin, is to lean Republican. Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state, such a president is also likely to be more effective at preventing other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits. The <t>individual</t> voter's standing consequently will be enhanced through lower taxes. While this theory is exceedingly simple, it appears to explain several things.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=individual%3:00:00:: | definition=being or characteristic of a single thing or person | synonyms=single | examples=individual drops of rain; please mark the individual pages
2. sense_key=individual%5:00:00:independent:00 | definition=separate and distinct from others of the same kind | synonyms=case-by-case, item-by-item | examples=mark the individual pages; on a case-by-case basis
3. sense_key=individual%5:00:00:unshared:00 | definition=characteristic of or meant for a single person or thing | synonyms=single | examples=an individual serving; single occupancy
4. sense_key=individual%5:00:00:personal:00 | definition=concerning one person exclusively | synonyms=private | examples=we all have individual cars; each room has a private bath

Instructions:
1. Choose the single best indexed sense for the target word in context.
2. WordNet glosses are schematic; use the context, synonyms, and examples together.
3. Do not answer with a WordNet sense key.
4. Return only a JSON object exactly like {"sense_index": 3}.

reasoning_content:
1.  **Analyze the Target Lemma and Form:**
    *   Lemma: individual
    *   Surface form: individual (adjective)
    *   Context: "The individual voter's standing consequently will be enhanced through lower taxes."

2.  **Analyze the Context:**
    *   The sentence focuses on "The individual voter's standing".
    *   The preceding sentences discuss voters in aggregate (voters in races, a voter's incentive) vs. the specific context of a single person making a decision.
    *   The text contrasts group dynamics (legislators, districts/states) with the specific, singular perspective of one voter.
    *   The phrase "individual voter" emphasizes the voter as a distinct, single entity within the larger group, or simply emphasizing the singular nature of "a voter".

3.  **Analyze the Candidate Senses:**

    *   **Sense 1:** `individual%3:00:00::` | definition="being or characteristic of a single thing or person" | synonyms=single | examples="individual drops of rain", "please mark the individual pages".
        *   *Analysis:* This sense emphasizes singularity ("a single thing or person"). In "the individual voter", we are talking about a single voter. This fits the idea of distinguishing one voter from the mass.

    *   **Sense 2:** `individual%5:00:00:independent:00` | definition="separate and distinct from others of the same kind" | synonyms=case-by-case, item-by-item | examples="mark the individual pages", "on a case-by-case basis".
        *   *Analysis:* This sense emphasizes distinctness or separate consideration (often implies examining things one by one). While a voter is distinct, "individual voter" is usually a fixed phrase emphasizing singularity rather than the "case-by-case" nature of a process. "Case-by-case" applies better to processes or evaluations. Here, it's a noun phrase modification.

    *   **Sense 3:** `individual%5:00:00:unshared:00` | definition="characteristic of or meant for a single person or thing" | synonyms=single | examples="an individual serving", "single occupancy".
        *   *Analysis:* This sense often implies privacy or exclusivity (like an individual serving of food meant for one person). "The individual voter's standing" isn't about a serving or a room meant for one; it's about the voter as a single entity.

    *   **Sense 4:** `individual%5:00:00:personal:00` | definition="concerning one person exclusively" | synonyms=private | examples="we all have individual cars", "each room has a private bath".
        *   *Analysis:* This sense leans heavily toward "private" or "personal" ownership/exclusivity. "Individual cars" means each person has their own. "Individual voter" doesn't mean the voter is private or owned by themselves in that sense. It means "the single voter".

4.  **Compare Sense 1 and Sense 2 (The main contenders):**
    *   Sense 1 focuses on "being... a single thing".
    *   Sense 2 focuses on "separate and distinct... case-by-case".
    *   In the phrase "the individual voter", the author is contrasting the aggregate outcome (society, districts) with the specific outcome for *one single person* (the individual).
    *   Let's look at WordNet hierarchy/structure.
        *   Sense 1 (adjective satellite) -> similar to "single".
        *   Sense 2 (adjective satellite) -> similar to "independent".
    *   In English usage, "the individual voter" is synonymous with "the single voter".
    *   Sense 1 examples: "individual drops of rain", "individual pages". This highlights singularity in a collection.
    *   Sense 2 examples: "mark the individual pages", "on a case-by-case basis". This highlights distinctness/separateness for analysis.
    *   The text says "The individual voter's standing... will be enhanced". It's talking about the standing of a single person. It emphasizes the unit (one person) rather than the separateness/distinctness for the sake of analysis. It is effectively saying "the single voter".

    *   Let's re-evaluate Sense 1 definition: "being or characteristic of a single thing or person".
    *   Context: "Each legislator, after all, is only one out of 535... The individual voter's standing...".
    *   This parallels the "one out of 535". It emphasizes the *single* nature of the voter.
    *   Sense 1 seems the best fit for the basic meaning of "single" applied to a person in a group context.

    *   Let's check if there's a specific distinction between Sense 1 and Sense 3.
        *   Sense 3: "meant for a single person". This usually applies to objects (servings, rooms). A voter isn't "meant for" a person. A voter *is* a person.
        *   Therefore, Sense 3 is out.

    *   Let's check Sense 4 again. Synonym "private". Not appropriate here.

    *   So it's between Sense 1 and Sense 2.
    *   "Individual voter" -> "Single voter".
    *   Sense 1 synonyms: "single".
    *   Sense 2 synonyms: "case-by-case", "item-by-item".
    *   "Case-by-case voter" doesn't make sense. "Single voter" does.
    *   Sense 1 is the standard adjectival use meaning "single/separate entity".
    *   Sense 2 seems to be more about a method of handling items (case-by-case basis).

    *   Conclusion: Sense 1 is the correct choice. The adjective describes the voter as a single entity.

5.  **Final Confirmation:**
    *   Target: "The individual voter's standing..."
    *   Meaning: The standing of the single voter.
    *   Sense 1 Definition: "being or characteristic of a single thing or person".
    *   Sense 1 Examples: "individual drops of rain" (single units within a mass).
    *   Context Match: The text discusses voters (mass) and focuses on the outcome for the single (individual) voter. This matches "individual drops of rain" (single units within a mass of rain).

    *   Sense 2 Definition: "separate and distinct from others of the same kind".
    *   While a voter is distinct, the collocation "individual voter" usually triggers the meaning "single voter" (Sense 1) rather than the "case-by-case" (Sense 2) nuance. Sense 2 is often used for methodological descriptions ("individual attention", "case-by-case basis").

    *   Therefore, Sense 1 is the best fit.

    *   Wait, let me double check the indexing in the prompt.
        *   1. sense_key=individual%3:00:00:: | definition=being or characteristic of a single thing or person
        *   ...
        *   2. sense_key=individual%5:00:00:independent:00 ...
        *   3. sense_key=individual%5:00:00:unshared:00 ...
        *   4. sense_key=individual%5:00:00:personal:00 ...

    *   Actually, checking WordNet 3.1:
        *   `individual%3:00:00::` maps to the adjective satellite synset {single, individual}.
        *   Definition: "being or characteristic of a single thing or person".
        *   This matches perfectly.

    *   The prompt asks for the index number.
    *   Index 1.

provider: Novita


[System] You are an English linguist performing fine-grained Word Sense Disambiguation. WordNet glosses are schematic. Use the sentence context, the examples, and the synonyms to choose the best indexed sense. Do not hedge. Choose the single best indexed sense.

[User]
Target lemma: standing
Target surface form: standing
Context:
If these assumptions hold, voters in races for Congress face what in economic theory is called a prisoner's dilemma and have an incentive, at the margin, to lean Democratic. If they put a Republican into office, not only will they acquire less in terms of local benefits but their selected legislator will be relatively powerless to prevent other legislators from "bringing home the bacon "to their respective constituencies. Each legislator, after all, is only one out of 535 when it comes to national policy making. In races for the White House, a voter's incentive, at the margin, is to lean Republican. Although a GOP president may limit local benefits to the voter's particular district/state, such a president is also likely to be more effective at preventing other districts/states and their legislators from bringing home the local benefits. The individual voter's <t>standing</t> consequently will be enhanced through lower taxes. While this theory is exceedingly simple, it appears to explain several things.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=standing%1:26:00:: | definition=social or financial or professional status or reputation | examples=of equal standing; a member in good standing
2. sense_key=standing%1:10:00:: | definition=an ordered listing of scores or results showing the relative positions of competitors (individuals or teams) in a sporting event
3. sense_key=standing%1:04:00:: | definition=the act of assuming or maintaining an erect upright position

Instructions:
1. Choose the single best indexed sense for the target word in context.
2. WordNet glosses are schematic; use the context, synonyms, and examples together.
3. Do not answer with a WordNet sense key.
4. Return only a JSON object exactly like {"sense_index": 3}.

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to perform Word Sense Disambiguation (WSD) on the word "standing" in a specific sentence context.

**Context Analysis:**
Sentence: "The individual voter's <t>standing</t> consequently will be enhanced through lower taxes."
Full passage discussion: The passage discusses voting behavior, Congress vs. White House, local benefits vs. national policy, and preventing others from "bringing home the bacon."
The core argument is:
- Voting Republican for Congress = less local power/benefits.
- Voting Republican for President = more effective at stopping others from getting benefits (national interest).
- Result for the voter: "The individual voter's standing consequently will be enhanced through lower taxes."

What does "standing" mean here?
It refers to the voter's position, status, or condition relative to the system.
Does it mean "social or financial or professional status or reputation" (Sense 1)?
Let's look at the consequence: "enhanced through lower taxes". Lower taxes usually improve financial status or position.
Does it mean "an ordered listing of scores" (Sense 2)? No, this isn't a sport.
Does it mean "the act of assuming or maintaining an erect upright position" (Sense 3)? No.

Let's evaluate Sense 1 more closely.
Definition: "social or financial or professional status or reputation".
Context clue: "enhanced through lower taxes". This implies a financial improvement or a better position in society/economy.
The text contrasts local benefits (pork barrel) with national policy.
If the voter votes for a GOP president, they get lower taxes (presumably better for their financial position) even if they lose local pork.
So, their "standing" (status/position/financial well-being) improves.

Is there any other sense?
Sometimes "standing" can mean "position" in a more abstract way, but WordNet sense 1 covers "status or reputation".
Let's check if there's a sense for "rank" or "position" generally.
WordNet 3.0 (which is usually the source for these tasks) often groups "status/reputation" under sense 1.
Sense 2 is specifically "ranking" in a sporting event or competition.
Sense 3 is physical standing.

The context is political science/economic theory. "The individual voter's standing" refers to their personal welfare, status, or financial condition within the system.
"The individual voter's standing" = their position/status.
Being "enhanced through lower taxes" strongly suggests financial status/welfare.

Sense 1 examples: "of equal standing", "member in good standing".
These usually refer to reputation or rank within a group.
However, "financial status" is explicitly part of the definition provided for Sense 1 ("social or financial or professional status").
Since lower taxes improve financial status, Sense 1 fits best.

Let's double check the mapping.
Sense 1: standing%1:26:00::
Definition: social or financial or professional status or reputation.
This fits "financial status" or "social status" in a broad sense (the voter's well-being).

Sense 2: standing%1:10:00::
Definition: an ordered listing of scores or results...
This is specific to sports/competitions. Not applicable.

Sense 3: standing%1:04:00::
Definition: the act of assuming or maintaining an erect upright position.
Physical. Not applicable.

Conclusion: Sense 1 is the correct choice. The text implies the voter's financial or general status is improved.

Final check:
"The individual voter's standing consequently will be enhanced..."
"Enhanced" suggests improvement in value, rank, or condition.
Sense 1 includes "status".
The sentence means the voter's status/position (financially or socially) improves.
Therefore, Sense 1 is the answer.

JSON format required: {"sense_index": 1}.