[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: national
Target surface form: national
Context:
First, economists James Bennett and Thomas DiLorenzo find that GOP senators turn back roughly 10% more of their allocated personal staff budgets than Democrats do. To the extent that the primary duty of personal staff involves local benefit - seeking, this indicates that political philosophy leads congressional Republicans to pay less attention to narrow constituent concerns. Second, if the key assumption is valid, Democrats should have lower attendance rates on roll-call votes than Republicans do to the extent that such votes reflect national policy making and that participating in such votes takes away from the time a legislator could otherwise devote to local benefit - seeking. This is indeed what the data indicate, particularly in the case of the House. The Democratic House attendance rate has not exceeded the Republican House attendance rate since 1959. Finally, as shown in the table, Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit - seeking duties matter more and <t>national</t> policy making activities matter less relative to Washington offices. An examination of changes in personal staffing decisions in the Senate between 1986 and 1987 -LRB- when control of that body changed party hands -RRB-, moreover, reveals that the personal staffing differences noted in the table can not be attributed to the disproportionate control Democrats exercise, due to their majority - party status, over other resources such as committee staff.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=national%3:01:00:: | definition=of or relating to or belonging to a nation or country | examples=national hero; national anthem
2. sense_key=national%3:00:00:: | definition=limited to or in the interests of a particular nation | examples=national interests; isolationism is a strictly national policy
3. sense_key=national%3:00:01:: | definition=concerned with or applicable to or belonging to an entire nation or country | examples=the national government; national elections
4. sense_key=national%5:00:00:public:00 | definition=owned or maintained for the public by the national government | examples=national parks
5. sense_key=national%5:00:00:domestic:00 | definition=inside the country | synonyms=home, interior, internal | examples=the British Home Office has broader responsibilities than the United States Department of the Interior; the nation's internal politics
6. sense_key=national%3:01:02:: | definition=characteristic of or peculiar to the people of a nation | examples=a national trait
7. sense_key=national%3:01:01:: | definition=of or relating to nationality | examples=national origin

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 for the word "national" in the given context.

 Let me analyze the context:
 - The text discusses how Democrats allocate more staff to district offices where "local benefit-seeking duties matter more and national policy making activities matter less relative to Washington offices."
 - The contrast is between "local" (district level) and "national" (country-wide/federal level).
 - The phrase is "national policy making activities" - this refers to policy making at the national/federal level as opposed to local/district level.

 Now let's look at the candidate senses:

 1. sense_key=national%3:01:00:: | definition=of or relating to or belonging to a nation or country | examples=national hero; national anthem
    - This is about belonging to a nation, but the context is about policy making scope (national vs local).

 2. sense_key=national%3:00:00:: | definition=limited to or in the interests of a particular nation | examples=national interests; isolationism is a strictly national policy
    - This suggests limited to a particular nation (as opposed to international), but here the contrast is with local, not international.

 3. sense_key=national%3:00:01:: | definition=concerned with or applicable to or belonging to an entire nation or country | examples=the national government; national elections
    - This fits well. The context contrasts "national policy making" with local/district activities. "National government" and "national elections" are examples that fit the pattern of "entire nation vs local parts."

 4. sense_key=national%5:00:00:public:00 | definition=owned or maintained for the public by the national government | examples=national parks
    - This is about ownership/maintenance, not applicable here.

 5. sense_key=national%5:00:00:domestic:00 | definition=inside the country | synonyms=home, interior, internal | examples=the British Home Office has broader responsibilities than the United States Department of the Interior; the nation's internal politics
    - This contrasts with foreign/international, not with local. The context contrasts with local, not foreign.

 6. sense_key=national%3:01:02:: | definition=characteristic of or peculiar to the people of a nation | examples=a national trait
    - This is about characteristics of people, not applicable.

 7. sense_key=national%3:01:01:: | definition=of or relating to nationality | examples=national origin
    - This is about nationality/ethnicity, not applicable.

 The key contrast in the text is between "local" (district offices, local benefit-seeking) and "national" (Washington offices, national policy making).

 Sense 3 ("concerned with or applicable to or belonging to an entire nation or country") with examples like "the national government; national elections" fits best because:
 - It contrasts local vs national (entire nation)
 - "National policy making" refers to policy making for the entire country as opposed to local districts
 - The examples "national government" aligns with "national policy making"

 Sense 1 could be tempting but it's more about belonging/relating to a nation in general (national hero, national anthem), whereas sense 3 specifically captures the "entire nation vs parts" distinction which is crucial here.

 Sense 2 is about "limited to a particular nation" (as opposed to international), which doesn't fit the local vs national contrast.

 Therefore, sense index 3 is the best choice.


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: policy
Target surface form: policy
Context:
First, economists James Bennett and Thomas DiLorenzo find that GOP senators turn back roughly 10% more of their allocated personal staff budgets than Democrats do. To the extent that the primary duty of personal staff involves local benefit - seeking, this indicates that political philosophy leads congressional Republicans to pay less attention to narrow constituent concerns. Second, if the key assumption is valid, Democrats should have lower attendance rates on roll-call votes than Republicans do to the extent that such votes reflect national policy making and that participating in such votes takes away from the time a legislator could otherwise devote to local benefit - seeking. This is indeed what the data indicate, particularly in the case of the House. The Democratic House attendance rate has not exceeded the Republican House attendance rate since 1959. Finally, as shown in the table, Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit - seeking duties matter more and national <t>policy</t> making activities matter less relative to Washington offices. An examination of changes in personal staffing decisions in the Senate between 1986 and 1987 -LRB- when control of that body changed party hands -RRB-, moreover, reveals that the personal staffing differences noted in the table can not be attributed to the disproportionate control Democrats exercise, due to their majority - party status, over other resources such as committee staff.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=policy%1:09:00:: | definition=a plan of action adopted by an individual or social group | examples=it was a policy of retribution; a politician keeps changing his policies
2. sense_key=policy%1:10:00:: | definition=a line of argument rationalizing the course of action of a government | examples=they debated the policy or impolicy of the proposed legislation
3. sense_key=policy%1:10:02:: | definition=written contract or certificate of insurance | synonyms=insurance policy, insurance | examples=you should have read the small print on your policy

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:
The user wants me to perform Word Sense Disambiguation (WSD) for the word "policy" in the given context. Let me analyze the context carefully.

Context analysis:
The text is discussing political science research comparing Republicans and Democrats in Congress. The specific sentence with the target word is: "Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit - seeking duties matter more and national <t>policy</t> making activities matter less relative to Washington offices."

Key points:
- The contrast is between "local benefit-seeking duties" and "national policy making activities"
- This is about legislative work in Congress (House and Senate)
- The text discusses "national policy making" vs local constituent services
- Earlier mentions: "national policy making" in contrast to "local benefit-seeking"
- The phrase is "national policy making activities"

Looking at the candidate senses:

1. sense_key=policy%1:09:00:: | definition=a plan of action adopted by an individual or social group | examples=it was a policy of retribution; a politician keeps changing his policies
   - This seems to refer to a specific plan or course of action (like a rule or guideline)
   - Example shows "policy of retribution" or changing policies

2. sense_key=policy%1:10:00:: | definition=a line of argument rationalizing the course of action of a government | examples=they debated the policy or impolicy of the proposed legislation
   - This refers to government policy, legislation, course of action by government
   - The example mentions "proposed legislation"
   - This fits "national policy making" - the creation of laws and government actions

3. sense_key=policy%1:10:02:: | definition=written contract or certificate of insurance | synonyms=insurance policy, insurance | examples=you should have read the small print on your policy
   - This is clearly about insurance, irrelevant to the political context

So it's between sense 1 and sense 2.

Sense 1 (plan of action): This could fit, as government policy making is about creating plans of action.

Sense 2 (line of argument rationalizing course of action of government): This specifically mentions government and legislation.

The context is about:
- Congressional behavior
- National policy making vs local benefit seeking
- Roll-call votes reflecting "national policy making"
- Legislative activities in Washington vs district offices

The phrase "national policy making" refers to the process of creating laws and government decisions at the national level, as opposed to local constituent services.

Sense 2 mentions "rationalizing the course of action of a government" and the example mentions "proposed legislation." This fits the legislative context very well.

Sense 1 is more general - "plan of action adopted by an individual or social group." While government policy fits this, sense 2 is more specific to governmental/legislative contexts.

However, looking closely at the definitions:

Sense 1: "a plan of action adopted by an individual or social group"
Sense 2: "a line of argument rationalizing the course of action of a government"

The context is about "policy making activities" - the act of creating or formulating policy. In political science contexts, "policy" when referring to legislation and government decision-making usually maps to sense 2, but I need to check if sense 1 might be better.

Actually, looking at WordNet structure:
- policy%1:09:00:: is under noun.cognition (1:09)
- policy%1:10:00:: is under noun.communication (1:10)

Sense 1 is the general "plan of action" sense (like company policy, personal policy).
Sense 2 is specific to government and argumentation about government action.

The text explicitly contrasts "local benefit-seeking" with "national policy-making." In political science, "policy making" refers to the creation of public policy (government policy).

The example for sense 2: "they debated the policy or impolicy of the proposed legislation" - this fits perfectly with the legislative context.

The example for sense 1: "it was a policy of retribution; a politician keeps changing his policies" - this could work too, but sense 2 is more specific to the governmental/legislative domain.

Wait, let me reconsider. The phrase is "national policy making activities." This refers to the activities involved in creating national policy (public policy).

In WordNet:
- Sense 1: a plan of action adopted by an individual or social group
- Sense 2: a line of argument rationalizing the course of action of a government

Sense 2 seems to focus on the "line of argument" aspect - the rationalization. But "policy making" usually refers to the creation of the plans of action themselves.

However, looking at the examples again:
Sense 1: "a politician keeps changing his policies" - this could refer to his positions or plans.
Sense 2: "they debated the policy or impolicy of the proposed legislation" - this refers to the wisdom/appropriateness of the legislation.

Actually, looking carefully at sense 2's definition: "a line of argument rationalizing the course of action of a government" - this seems to refer to the justification or reasoning behind government action, not the action itself or the plan itself.

But in the context of "national policy making activities," this refers to the process of creating laws and government decisions. This seems closer to sense 1 (plan of action), but specific to government.

However, WordNet often distinguishes between general "policy" (sense 1) and governmental "policy" (sense 2). Let me check the semantic categories.

policy%1:09:00:: - noun.cognition - a plan of action
policy%1:10:00:: - noun.communication - a line of argument rationalizing...

The text is discussing congressional behavior regarding legislation and national-level decision making. "National policy" here refers to the laws and decisions made at the national level (as opposed to local benefits).

I think sense 2 is the correct choice because:
1. It specifically mentions government
2. The example mentions legislation
3. The context is about governmental/legislative activities (roll-call votes, committee staff, district offices vs Washington)

Sense 1 is too general and could apply to any group or individual. The contrast between "local" and "national" in a legislative context strongly suggests the governmental sense.

Therefore, the best sense is sense 2 (policy%1:10:00::).

Wait, I need to be careful. The target word is "policy" in the phrase "national policy making activities."

Let me check if there's any chance it's sense 1. "National policy" could be interpreted as "the plan of action of the nation" (sense 1), where the social group is the nation/government.

But sense 2 is defined as "a line of argument rationalizing the course of action of a government." This seems to emphasize the argumentative/rhetorical aspect. Is "policy making" about rationalizing or about creating plans?

Actually, looking at standard WSD datasets and how these senses are distinguished:
- Sense 1 is the general sense (insurance policy is sense 3, so sense 1 is non-insurance general policy)
- Sense 2 is the specific governmental/legislative sense

In SemCor and other WSD datasets, when "policy" refers to government policy, legislation, public policy, it's usually tagged as sense 2 (1:10:00).

For example, "foreign policy," "economic policy," "public policy" in the context of government action typically map to sense 2.

The phrase "national policy making" clearly refers to the creation of national-level governmental policy, as opposed to local constituent services.

Therefore, sense 2 is the correct answer.

Double-checking: sense 3 is insurance, clearly wrong.

So the JSON should be {"sense_index": 2}.

format: unknown

native_finish_reason: stop

provider: StreamLake

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: making
Target surface form: making
Context:
First, economists James Bennett and Thomas DiLorenzo find that GOP senators turn back roughly 10% more of their allocated personal staff budgets than Democrats do. To the extent that the primary duty of personal staff involves local benefit - seeking, this indicates that political philosophy leads congressional Republicans to pay less attention to narrow constituent concerns. Second, if the key assumption is valid, Democrats should have lower attendance rates on roll-call votes than Republicans do to the extent that such votes reflect national policy making and that participating in such votes takes away from the time a legislator could otherwise devote to local benefit - seeking. This is indeed what the data indicate, particularly in the case of the House. The Democratic House attendance rate has not exceeded the Republican House attendance rate since 1959. Finally, as shown in the table, Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit - seeking duties matter more and national policy <t>making</t> activities matter less relative to Washington offices. An examination of changes in personal staffing decisions in the Senate between 1986 and 1987 -LRB- when control of that body changed party hands -RRB-, moreover, reveals that the personal staffing differences noted in the table can not be attributed to the disproportionate control Democrats exercise, due to their majority - party status, over other resources such as committee staff.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=making%1:04:00:: | definition=the act that results in something coming to be | synonyms=devising, fashioning | examples=the devising of plans; the fashioning of pots and pans
2. sense_key=making%1:07:00:: | definition=an attribute that must be met or complied with and that fits a person for something | synonyms=qualification | examples=her qualifications for the job are excellent; one of the qualifications for admission is an academic degree
3. sense_key=making%1:06:00:: | definition=(usually plural) the components needed for making or doing something | examples=the recipe listed all the makings for a chocolate cake

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 for the word "making" in the given context.

Let me analyze the context:
- The text is about political science/economics, discussing how legislators allocate their time and staff between local benefit-seeking and national policy making.
- The specific phrase is: "national policy <t>making</t> activities matter less relative to Washington offices"
- This is clearly referring to the act/process of creating or formulating national policy.

Now let's look at the candidate senses:

1. sense_key=making%1:04:00:: | definition=the act that results in something coming to be | synonyms=devising, fashioning | examples=the devising of plans; the fashioning of pots and pans
- This refers to the act/process of creating something. "Policy making" = the act of creating policy. This fits perfectly.

2. sense_key=making%1:07:00:: | definition=an attribute that must be met or complied with and that fits a person for something | synonyms=qualification | examples=her qualifications for the job are excellent
- This is about qualifications/having the makings of something. Doesn't fit "policy making."

3. sense_key=making%1:06:00:: | definition=(usually plural) the components needed for making or doing something | examples=the recipe listed all the makings for a chocolate cake
- This refers to ingredients/components (usually plural "makings"). Doesn't fit "policy making" as an activity.

The phrase "national policy making" refers to the act or process of creating/formulating national policy. This corresponds to sense 1: "the act that results in something coming to be" with synonyms like devising, fashioning.

The context contrasts "local benefit-seeking duties" with "national policy making activities" - both are activities/acts. So sense 1 is clearly the best fit.

I need to return only a JSON object: {"sense_index": 1}

provider: SiliconFlow


[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: activity
Target surface form: activities
Context:
First, economists James Bennett and Thomas DiLorenzo find that GOP senators turn back roughly 10% more of their allocated personal staff budgets than Democrats do. To the extent that the primary duty of personal staff involves local benefit - seeking, this indicates that political philosophy leads congressional Republicans to pay less attention to narrow constituent concerns. Second, if the key assumption is valid, Democrats should have lower attendance rates on roll-call votes than Republicans do to the extent that such votes reflect national policy making and that participating in such votes takes away from the time a legislator could otherwise devote to local benefit - seeking. This is indeed what the data indicate, particularly in the case of the House. The Democratic House attendance rate has not exceeded the Republican House attendance rate since 1959. Finally, as shown in the table, Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit - seeking duties matter more and national policy making <t>activities</t> matter less relative to Washington offices. An examination of changes in personal staffing decisions in the Senate between 1986 and 1987 -LRB- when control of that body changed party hands -RRB-, moreover, reveals that the personal staffing differences noted in the table can not be attributed to the disproportionate control Democrats exercise, due to their majority - party status, over other resources such as committee staff.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=activity%1:04:00:: | definition=any specific behavior | examples=they avoided all recreational activity
2. sense_key=activity%1:26:00:: | definition=the state of being active | synonyms=action, activeness | examples=his sphere of activity; he is out of action
3. sense_key=activity%1:22:00:: | definition=an organic process that takes place in the body | synonyms=bodily process, body process, bodily function | examples=respiratory activity
4. sense_key=activity%1:26:01:: | definition=(chemistry) the capacity of a substance to take part in a chemical reaction | examples=catalytic activity
5. sense_key=activity%1:22:01:: | definition=a process existing in or produced by nature (rather than by the intent of human beings) | synonyms=natural process, natural action, action | examples=the action of natural forces; volcanic activity
6. sense_key=activity%1:07:00:: | definition=the trait of being active; moving or acting rapidly and energetically | synonyms=activeness | examples=the level of activity declines with age

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 for the word "activities" in the given context. The target lemma is "activity" and the surface form is "activities".

Let me analyze the context:
The sentence is: "Finally, as shown in the table, Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit - seeking duties matter more and national policy making <t>activities</t> matter less relative to Washington offices."

The context is about congressional staff allocation. It contrasts "local benefit-seeking duties" with "national policy making activities".

Key observations:
1. "National policy making activities" refers to specific behaviors or actions related to making national policy.
2. It's contrasted with "duties" (which are specific tasks/behaviors).
3. The context is about what staff do - their tasks, behaviors, or actions.

Now let's look at the candidate senses:

1. sense_key=activity%1:04:00:: | definition=any specific behavior | examples=they avoided all recreational activity
   - This seems to fit well. "National policy making activities" would be specific behaviors related to policy making.

2. sense_key=activity%1:26:00:: | definition=the state of being active | synonyms=action, activeness | examples=his sphere of activity; he is out of action
   - This refers to the state/condition of being active, not specific actions themselves. "National policy making activities" isn't referring to the state of being active, but rather specific actions/behaviors.

3. sense_key=activity%1:22:00:: | definition=an organic process that takes place in the body | synonyms=bodily process, body process, bodily function | examples=respiratory activity
   - This is biological/physiological. Not relevant to policy making.

4. sense_key=activity%1:26:01:: | definition=(chemistry) the capacity of a substance to take part in a chemical reaction | examples=catalytic activity
   - Chemistry context. Not relevant.

5. sense_key=activity%1:22:01:: | definition=a process existing in or produced by nature (rather than by the intent of human beings) | synonyms=natural process, natural action, action | examples=the action of natural forces; volcanic activity
   - Natural processes. Policy making is human/intentional, not natural.

6. sense_key=activity%1:07:00:: | definition=the trait of being active; moving or acting rapidly and energetically | synonyms=activeness | examples=the level of activity declines with age
   - This is about the trait/quality of being active or energetic. Not about specific tasks or behaviors.

So the choice is between sense 1 and sense 2 (and maybe 6, but 6 is about traits).

Sense 1: "any specific behavior" - this fits "national policy making activities" as specific behaviors or actions involved in making policy.

Sense 2: "the state of being active" - this would be more like "there was a lot of activity in the office" meaning the office was busy/active.

In the context: "national policy making activities" refers to the specific behaviors or tasks involved in making national policy. It's parallel to "duties" in the first part of the sentence ("local benefit-seeking duties").

Therefore, sense 1 (activity%1:04:00::) is the best fit.

Wait, let me double-check the WordNet sense indices. The user lists them as:
1. sense_key=activity%1:04:00::
2. sense_key=activity%1:26:00::
3. sense_key=activity%1:22:00::
4. sense_key=activity%1:26:01::
5. sense_key=activity%1:22:01::
6. sense_key=activity%1:07:00::

So I need to return {"sense_index": 1}.

But let me verify the WordNet lexicographer file numbers (the 04, 26, 22, 07 parts):
- 04 = noun.act (acts or actions)
- 26 = noun.state (states and conditions)
- 22 = noun.process (natural processes)
- 07 = noun.attribute (attributes of people and objects)

Sense 1 (04): noun.act - specific behavior. This fits "policy making activities" as actions/acts.
Sense 2 (26): noun.state - state of being active. This would be like "the activity level".
Sense 3 (22): noun.process - organic process.
Sense 4 (26): noun.state - chemical capacity.
Sense 5 (22): noun.process - natural process.
Sense 6 (07): noun.attribute - trait of being active.

Yes, "national policy making activities" refers to specific actions or behaviors (things that are done), not the state of being active, not biological processes, not chemical properties, not natural phenomena, and not personality traits.

Therefore, sense 1 is correct.

The example for sense 1 is "they avoided all recreational activity" - recreational activities are specific behaviors/actions. Similarly, policy making activities are specific behaviors/actions related to policy making.

The parallel structure with "duties" (which are specific tasks/behaviors) also supports this.

So the answer is 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: relative
Target surface form: relative
Context:
First, economists James Bennett and Thomas DiLorenzo find that GOP senators turn back roughly 10% more of their allocated personal staff budgets than Democrats do. To the extent that the primary duty of personal staff involves local benefit - seeking, this indicates that political philosophy leads congressional Republicans to pay less attention to narrow constituent concerns. Second, if the key assumption is valid, Democrats should have lower attendance rates on roll-call votes than Republicans do to the extent that such votes reflect national policy making and that participating in such votes takes away from the time a legislator could otherwise devote to local benefit - seeking. This is indeed what the data indicate, particularly in the case of the House. The Democratic House attendance rate has not exceeded the Republican House attendance rate since 1959. Finally, as shown in the table, Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit - seeking duties matter more and national policy making activities matter less <t>relative</t> to Washington offices. An examination of changes in personal staffing decisions in the Senate between 1986 and 1987 -LRB- when control of that body changed party hands -RRB-, moreover, reveals that the personal staffing differences noted in the table can not be attributed to the disproportionate control Democrats exercise, due to their majority - party status, over other resources such as committee staff.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=relative%3:00:00:: | definition=estimated by comparison; not absolute or complete | synonyms=comparative | examples=a relative stranger
2. sense_key=relative%5:00:00:proportionate:00 | definition=properly related in size or degree or other measurable characteristics; usually followed by `to' | synonyms=proportional | examples=the punishment ought to be proportional to the crime; earnings relative to production

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 for the word "relative" in the given context.

First, let me analyze the context:
The sentence is: "Finally, as shown in the table, Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit - seeking duties matter more and national policy making activities matter less <t>relative</t> to Washington offices."

The word "relative" is used in the phrase "relative to Washington offices." This is comparing district offices to Washington offices, indicating that in district offices, national policy making activities matter less in comparison to Washington offices.

Now let's look at the two candidate senses:

1. sense_key=relative%3:00:00:: | definition=estimated by comparison; not absolute or complete | synonyms=comparative | examples=a relative stranger
   - This sense refers to something being comparative or not absolute. Example "a relative stranger" means someone who is somewhat of a stranger but not completely unknown.
   - In the context, "relative to" is used, but this sense seems more about the quality of being comparative or estimated by comparison in general, not necessarily the specific comparative relationship indicated by "relative to."

2. sense_key=relative%5:00:00:proportionate:00 | definition=properly related in size or degree or other measurable characteristics; usually followed by `to' | synonyms=proportional | examples=the punishment ought to be proportional to the crime; earnings relative to production
   - This sense specifically mentions "usually followed by `to'" which matches our usage: "relative to Washington offices."
   - The definition mentions being "properly related in size or degree or other measurable characteristics" and the example "earnings relative to production" shows exactly the kind of comparative relationship we're seeing in the text.
   - The context is comparing the degree to which national policy making activities matter in district offices versus Washington offices - it's about the proportional relationship or comparison between two things.

The phrase "matter less relative to Washington offices" means that they matter less in comparison to how much they matter in Washington offices, or in proportion to Washington offices.

Sense 2 specifically mentions "usually followed by `to'" and the example "earnings relative to production" is very similar to the usage here "matter less relative to Washington offices."

Sense 1 is more about something being "comparative" in the sense of "not absolute" - like "relative truth" vs "absolute truth", or "a relative stranger" (meaning somewhat of a stranger).

Therefore, sense 2 is the better fit because:
1. It explicitly mentions the construction "followed by `to'"
2. It deals with proportional relationships between measurable characteristics
3. The example "earnings relative to production" parallels the structure "matter less relative to Washington offices"

Actually, looking more carefully at the examples:
- Sense 1: "a relative stranger" - this is adjectival, meaning comparative/comparable
- Sense 2: "earnings relative to production" - this is the specific construction we have

In the context, "relative to" is functioning as a preposition or adjective phrase indicating comparison between two things (district offices vs Washington offices).

Sense 2 is definitely the correct choice here.

Wait, I need to check the exact sense keys. The user provided:
1. sense_key=relative%3:00:00::
2. sense_key=relative%5:00:00:proportionate:00

I need to return the sense_index. Looking at the candidates:
1. First candidate: index 1
2. Second candidate: index 2

So I should return {"sense_index": 2}.

Let me double-check the WordNet senses for "relative" as an adjective:

In WordNet 3.0 or similar:
- relative (adj) - not absolute or complete (as in "a relative stranger")
- relative (adj) - proportional; properly related in size or degree or other measurable characteristics; usually followed by `to' (as in "earnings relative to production")

Yes, sense 2 is the one that matches "relative to" when making a comparison between two things.

The context is saying national policy making activities matter less in district offices compared to Washington offices - this is a proportional/relational comparison.

Therefore, the answer is sense_index: 2.

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: office
Target surface form: offices
Context:
First, economists James Bennett and Thomas DiLorenzo find that GOP senators turn back roughly 10% more of their allocated personal staff budgets than Democrats do. To the extent that the primary duty of personal staff involves local benefit - seeking, this indicates that political philosophy leads congressional Republicans to pay less attention to narrow constituent concerns. Second, if the key assumption is valid, Democrats should have lower attendance rates on roll-call votes than Republicans do to the extent that such votes reflect national policy making and that participating in such votes takes away from the time a legislator could otherwise devote to local benefit - seeking. This is indeed what the data indicate, particularly in the case of the House. The Democratic House attendance rate has not exceeded the Republican House attendance rate since 1959. Finally, as shown in the table, Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit - seeking duties matter more and national policy making activities matter less relative to Washington <t>offices</t>. An examination of changes in personal staffing decisions in the Senate between 1986 and 1987 -LRB- when control of that body changed party hands -RRB-, moreover, reveals that the personal staffing differences noted in the table can not be attributed to the disproportionate control Democrats exercise, due to their majority - party status, over other resources such as committee staff.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=office%1:06:00:: | definition=place of business where professional or clerical duties are performed | synonyms=business office | examples=he rented an office in the new building
2. sense_key=office%1:14:01:: | definition=an administrative unit of government | synonyms=agency, federal agency, government agency, bureau, authority | examples=the Central Intelligence Agency; the Census Bureau
3. sense_key=office%1:04:01:: | definition=the actions and activities assigned to or required or expected of a person or group | synonyms=function, part, role | examples=the function of a teacher; the government must do its part
4. sense_key=office%1:26:00:: | definition=(of a government or government official) holding an office means being in power | synonyms=power | examples=being in office already gives a candidate a great advantage; during his first year in office
5. sense_key=office%1:14:00:: | definition=professional or clerical workers in an office | synonyms=office staff | examples=the whole office was late the morning of the blizzard
6. sense_key=office%1:04:00:: | definition=a religious rite or service prescribed by ecclesiastical authorities | examples=the offices of the mass
7. sense_key=office%1:04:02:: | definition=a job in an organization | synonyms=position, post, berth, spot, billet, place | examples=he occupied a post in the treasury

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 on the word "offices" in the given context. Let me analyze the context carefully.

The context is about political science/economics, discussing how Democrats and Republicans allocate their personal staff budgets. Specifically, it mentions:

"Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit-seeking duties matter more and national policy making activities matter less relative to Washington <t>offices</t>."

So here, "offices" is being contrasted with "district offices" - specifically "Washington offices" vs "district offices".

Looking at the candidate senses:

1. sense_key=office%1:06:00:: | definition=place of business where professional or clerical duties are performed | synonyms=business office | examples=he rented an office in the new building

This seems to refer to physical locations/offices where work is done. In the context, "Washington offices" likely refers to the physical offices located in Washington D.C. (the capital) as opposed to district offices (local offices in the representatives' home districts).

2. sense_key=office%1:14:01:: | definition=an administrative unit of government | synonyms=agency, federal agency, government agency, bureau, authority

This would be like "the Office of Management and Budget" - a government agency. But here we're talking about "Washington offices" in contrast to "district offices" - these are physical locations, not administrative units.

3. sense_key=office%1:04:01:: | definition=the actions and activities assigned to or required or expected of a person or group | synonyms=function, part, role

This is about duties/responsibilities. Doesn't fit - we're talking about physical places where staff work.

4. sense_key=office%1:26:00:: | definition=(of a government or government official) holding an office means being in power | synonyms=power

This is about holding political office. Not relevant here.

5. sense_key=office%1:14:00:: | definition=professional or clerical workers in an office | synonyms=office staff

This refers to the people working in an office. But the context says "allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices" - so "offices" here is the place where staff are allocated to, not the staff themselves.

6. sense_key=office%1:04:00:: | definition=a religious rite or service prescribed by ecclesiastical authorities

Definitely not relevant - this is about political offices, not religious offices.

7. sense_key=office%1:04:02:: | definition=a job in an organization | synonyms=position, post, berth, spot, billet, place

This is about a position/job. Not relevant - we're talking about physical locations.

So the best fit is sense 1: "place of business where professional or clerical duties are performed" - referring to the physical office spaces in Washington D.C. where congressional staff work, as opposed to district offices (local offices in the representatives' districts).

The context mentions "district offices" and contrasts them with "Washington offices" - clearly referring to physical locations where staff work. The phrase "allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices" means sending staff to work in those physical locations.

Therefore, sense_index: 1 is the correct answer.

Wait, let me double-check the sense keys. The user lists them as:
1. sense_key=office%1:06:00::
2. sense_key=office%1:14:01::
3. sense_key=office%1:04:01::
4. sense_key=office%1:26:00::
5. sense_key=office%1:14:00::
6. sense_key=office%1:04:00::
7. sense_key=office%1:04:02::

So I need to return the index number (1-7) corresponding to the best sense.

Sense 1 is office%1:06:00:: which is the physical place of business.

Yes, this is correct. The context is about physical office locations - district offices (local) vs Washington offices (capital).

The answer should be {"sense_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: examination
Target surface form: examination
Context:
To the extent that the primary duty of personal staff involves local benefit - seeking, this indicates that political philosophy leads congressional Republicans to pay less attention to narrow constituent concerns. Second, if the key assumption is valid, Democrats should have lower attendance rates on roll-call votes than Republicans do to the extent that such votes reflect national policy making and that participating in such votes takes away from the time a legislator could otherwise devote to local benefit - seeking. This is indeed what the data indicate, particularly in the case of the House. The Democratic House attendance rate has not exceeded the Republican House attendance rate since 1959. Finally, as shown in the table, Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit - seeking duties matter more and national policy making activities matter less relative to Washington offices. An <t>examination</t> of changes in personal staffing decisions in the Senate between 1986 and 1987 -LRB- when control of that body changed party hands -RRB-, moreover, reveals that the personal staffing differences noted in the table can not be attributed to the disproportionate control Democrats exercise, due to their majority - party status, over other resources such as committee staff. An additional piece of evidence from the Senate: Holding other factors constant, such as incumbency advantages and regional factors, the difference between popular votes for Republican presidential and senatorial candidates in states conducting a Senate election turns out to be a positive function of how onerous the federal government's tax burden is per state -LRB- a progressive tax rate hits higher - income states harder -RRB-.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=examination%1:04:00:: | definition=the act of examining something closely (as for mistakes) | synonyms=scrutiny
2. sense_key=examination%1:10:00:: | definition=a set of questions or exercises evaluating skill or knowledge | synonyms=exam, test | examples=when the test was stolen the professor had to make a new set of questions
3. sense_key=examination%1:10:01:: | definition=formal systematic questioning | synonyms=interrogation, interrogatory
4. sense_key=examination%1:09:03:: | definition=a detailed inspection of your conscience (as done daily by Jesuits) | synonyms=examen
5. sense_key=examination%1:04:02:: | definition=the act of giving students or candidates a test (as by questions) to determine what they know or have learned | synonyms=testing

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 do Word Sense Disambiguation for the word "examination" in the given context.

 Let me analyze the context:

 The sentence is: "An <t>examination</t> of changes in personal staffing decisions in the Senate between 1986 and 1987 -LRB- when control of that body changed party hands -RRB-, moreover, reveals that the personal staffing differences noted in the table can not be attributed to the disproportionate control Democrats exercise..."

 So "examination" here refers to analyzing or studying the changes in personal staffing decisions. It's about closely looking at data or information to understand something.

 Now let me look at the candidate senses:

 1. examination%1:04:00:: - the act of examining something closely (as for mistakes) - synonyms: scrutiny
 2. examination%1:10:00:: - a set of questions or exercises evaluating skill or knowledge - synonyms: exam, test
 3. examination%1:10:01:: - formal systematic questioning - synonyms: interrogation, interrogatory
 4. examination%1:09:03:: - a detailed inspection of your conscience (as done daily by Jesuits) - synonyms: examen
 5. examination%1:04:02:: - the act of giving students or candidates a test (as by questions) to determine what they know or have learned - synonyms: testing

 The context is about analyzing changes in staffing decisions - this is clearly sense 1: "the act of examining something closely". It's a scrutiny or close inspection of the data/changes. It's not about a test/exam (senses 2, 5), not about interrogation/questioning someone (sense 3), and not about religious conscience examination (sense 4).

 So the best sense is sense_key=examination%1:04:00::, which corresponds to index 1 in the list provided.

 Wait, looking at the candidate senses list:
 1. sense_key=examination%1:04:00::
 2. sense_key=examination%1:10:00::
 3. sense_key=examination%1:10:01::
 4. sense_key=examination%1:09:03::
 5. sense_key=examination%1:04:02::

 So index 1 is the correct answer.

 Let me double-check: The sentence says "An examination of changes... reveals that..." This is clearly sense 1 - looking closely at something to analyze it. The synonyms "scrutiny" fits well here. The other senses are about tests/exams or interrogation, which don't fit the context of analyzing staffing decisions.

 Therefore: {"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: change
Target surface form: changes
Context:
To the extent that the primary duty of personal staff involves local benefit - seeking, this indicates that political philosophy leads congressional Republicans to pay less attention to narrow constituent concerns. Second, if the key assumption is valid, Democrats should have lower attendance rates on roll-call votes than Republicans do to the extent that such votes reflect national policy making and that participating in such votes takes away from the time a legislator could otherwise devote to local benefit - seeking. This is indeed what the data indicate, particularly in the case of the House. The Democratic House attendance rate has not exceeded the Republican House attendance rate since 1959. Finally, as shown in the table, Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit - seeking duties matter more and national policy making activities matter less relative to Washington offices. An examination of <t>changes</t> in personal staffing decisions in the Senate between 1986 and 1987 -LRB- when control of that body changed party hands -RRB-, moreover, reveals that the personal staffing differences noted in the table can not be attributed to the disproportionate control Democrats exercise, due to their majority - party status, over other resources such as committee staff. An additional piece of evidence from the Senate: Holding other factors constant, such as incumbency advantages and regional factors, the difference between popular votes for Republican presidential and senatorial candidates in states conducting a Senate election turns out to be a positive function of how onerous the federal government's tax burden is per state -LRB- a progressive tax rate hits higher - income states harder -RRB-.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=change%1:11:00:: | definition=an event that occurs when something passes from one state or phase to another | synonyms=alteration, modification | examples=the change was intended to increase sales; this storm is certainly a change for the worse
2. sense_key=change%1:24:00:: | definition=a relational difference between states; especially between states before and after some event | examples=he attributed the change to their marriage
3. sense_key=change%1:04:00:: | definition=the action of changing something | examples=the change of government had no impact on the economy; his change on abortion cost him the election
4. sense_key=change%1:19:00:: | definition=the result of alteration or modification | examples=there were marked changes in the lining of the lungs; there had been no change in the mountains
5. sense_key=change%1:21:02:: | definition=the balance of money received when the amount you tender is greater than the amount due | examples=I paid with a twenty and pocketed the change
6. sense_key=change%1:06:01:: | definition=a thing that is different | examples=he inspected several changes before selecting one
7. sense_key=change%1:06:00:: | definition=a different or fresh set of clothes | examples=she brought a change in her overnight bag
8. sense_key=change%1:21:01:: | definition=coins of small denomination regarded collectively | examples=he had a pocketful of change
9. sense_key=change%1:21:03:: | definition=money received in return for its equivalent in a larger denomination or a different currency | examples=he got change for a twenty and used it to pay the taxi driver
10. sense_key=change%1:07:00:: | definition=a difference that is usually pleasant | synonyms=variety | examples=he goes to France for variety; it is a refreshing change to meet a woman mechanic

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 on the word "changes" in the given context. I need to choose the best sense from the 10 candidate senses provided.

Let me analyze the context:

The sentence is: "An examination of <t>changes</t> in personal staffing decisions in the Senate between 1986 and 1987 -LRB- when control of that body changed party hands -RRB-, moreover, reveals that the personal staffing differences noted in the table can not be attributed to the disproportionate control Democrats exercise..."

Key points:
- "changes in personal staffing decisions"
- This refers to examining how staffing decisions changed between 1986 and 1987
- It's about the differences or alterations in staffing decisions over time
- The context is about comparing states before and after (1986 vs 1987)

Now let's look at the candidate senses:

1. change%1:11:00:: - "an event that occurs when something passes from one state or phase to another" - examples: "the change was intended to increase sales; this storm is certainly a change for the worse"
   - This refers to the event/act of changing. But here we're looking at "changes" as in multiple instances or the results of changes?

2. change%1:24:00:: - "a relational difference between states; especially between states before and after some event" - examples: "he attributed the change to their marriage"
   - This seems to fit well. We're looking at differences between staffing decisions in 1986 vs 1987.

3. change%1:04:00:: - "the action of changing something" - examples: "the change of government had no impact on the economy"
   - This is the act/process of changing.

4. change%1:19:00:: - "the result of alteration or modification" - examples: "there were marked changes in the lining of the lungs"
   - This refers to the result/outcome of changes.

5. change%1:21:02:: - money/balance related - not relevant.

6. change%1:06:01:: - "a thing that is different" - examples: "he inspected several changes before selecting one"
   - This seems like physical objects that are different.

7. change%1:06:00:: - clothes - not relevant.

8. change%1:21:01:: - coins - not relevant.

9. change%1:21:03:: - money exchange - not relevant.

10. change%1:07:00:: - "a difference that is usually pleasant" - variety - not relevant.

Now between senses 1, 2, 3, and 4:

Sense 1: Event of passing from one state to another.
Sense 2: Relational difference between states (before and after).
Sense 3: The action of changing.
Sense 4: The result of alteration.

In the context: "An examination of changes in personal staffing decisions..."

The phrase "changes in personal staffing decisions" refers to the differences between the staffing decisions in 1986 and 1987. It's looking at what changed - the differences between the two time periods.

Sense 2 specifically mentions "a relational difference between states; especially between states before and after some event" and the example "he attributed the change to their marriage" fits well with comparing before/after states.

Sense 4 is about the result of alteration - "there were marked changes in the lining of the lungs" - this could also fit, as the changes in staffing decisions are the results of alterations made.

But let's look more carefully. The text says "An examination of changes in personal staffing decisions in the Senate between 1986 and 1987". This is comparing the staffing decisions at two time points. It's looking at the differences between these time points.

Sense 2: "a relational difference between states; especially between states before and after some event"
- This captures the comparative aspect - looking at the difference between the 1986 state and the 1987 state.

Sense 4: "the result of alteration or modification"
- This would be the end state after changes occurred.

But actually, looking at the example for sense 4: "there were marked changes in the lining of the lungs" - this suggests physical or observable differences that resulted from some process.

And sense 2 example: "he attributed the change to their marriage" - this is talking about a difference between states (before marriage vs after marriage).

In the context, "changes in personal staffing decisions" is referring to the differences in how staff was allocated between 1986 and 1987. It's the delta, the difference.

Sense 2 seems most appropriate because:
1. It emphasizes the relational difference between states (1986 vs 1987)
2. The context is about comparing two time periods (between 1986 and 1987)
3. It's about the difference before and after the event (control changing hands)

Wait, let me reconsider sense 1: "an event that occurs when something passes from one state or phase to another"
Example: "the change was intended to increase sales"
This could be the event of changing.

But "examination of changes" - are we examining the events of changing, or the differences that resulted?

Actually, looking at sense 4 again: "the result of alteration or modification" - examples: "there were marked changes in the lining of the lungs; there had been no change in the mountains"

This seems to fit "changes in personal staffing decisions" - the staffing decisions were altered, and we're examining those alterations/results.

But sense 2: "a relational difference between states; especially between states before and after some event" - example: "he attributed the change to their marriage"

If we say "changes in staffing decisions", we could mean:
- The differences between the 1986 and 1987 staffing patterns (sense 2)
- The modifications made to staffing decisions (sense 4)

Let me look at the broader context. The sentence is comparing Democrats and Republicans, looking at how staffing decisions differ. The phrase "between 1986 and 1987" suggests a comparison of states.

Also, the parenthetical "when control of that body changed party hands" uses "changed" as a verb (which would be sense 1 or 3 probably), but the noun "changes" is what we're analyzing.

"An examination of changes in personal staffing decisions... reveals that..."

I think sense 2 is the best fit because:
1. It specifically mentions "between states before and after some event"
2. The context explicitly mentions "between 1986 and 1987" - two time points/states
3. It's about the relational difference (how they differ) rather than the action or the result per se.

Actually, looking at WordNet sense keys:
- change%1:11:00:: is usually the event sense (act of changing)
- change%1:24:00:: is the "relation" sense - difference between states
- change%1:04:00:: is the action sense
- change%1:19:00:: is the result/artifact sense

In many WSD datasets, when "changes" refers to differences over time in data or measurements, sense 2 (the relational difference) or sense 4 (the result) could apply.

But sense 2 is specifically: "a relational difference between states; especially between states before and after some event"

This matches perfectly: we're looking at the relational difference in staffing decisions between the state in 1986 and the state in 1987 (before and after control changed hands).

Sense 4 is "the result of alteration or modification" - this would emphasize the outcome, but the context emphasizes the comparison between two time periods.

Also, looking at the example for sense 2: "he attributed the change to their marriage" - this is about attributing a difference between states to a cause.

In our context: "An examination of changes... reveals that the personal staffing differences... can not be attributed to..."

The word "differences" appears later in the sentence, which is synonymous with sense 2.

Therefore, sense 2 (change%1:24:00::) is the best choice.

Wait, I need to be careful. The index in the output should correspond to the numbering in the candidate list. The user lists them as 1, 2, 3, etc.

Sense 2 is: sense_key=change%1:24:00::

So the answer should be {"sense_index": 2}

Let me double-check by looking at sense 1 vs sense 2 vs sense 4 once more.

Sense 1: Event that occurs when something passes from one state to another. This is the happening itself.
Sense 2: Relational difference between states. This is the difference you observe when comparing before and after.
Sense 4: Result of alteration. This is the end product.

If I examine "changes in staffing decisions", I am examining how the decisions differed between the two years. That's a relational difference (sense 2).

If it were "the changes made to staffing decisions", that might be sense 3 (action) or sense 1 (event).

If it were "the changes resulting from the new policy", that might be sense 4.

But "changes in... between 1986 and 1987" strongly suggests the comparative, relational sense.

Also, the word "changes" is plural here, which fits with "differences" (sense 2) or "results" (sense 4).

But given the explicit temporal comparison "between 1986 and 1987", sense 2 is the best fit.

One more check: could it be sense 1? "An examination of events that occur when something passes from one state to another..."
That would mean examining the process of changing, but the context suggests examining the differences in the decisions themselves, not the events of changing.

Sense 4: "An examination of results of alteration..." - this is possible, but less precise than sense 2 for a before/after comparison.

I think sense 2 is correct.

Actually, looking at standard WordNet sense distinctions:
- Sense 1 (1:11:00) - event: "the change was intended to increase sales"
- Sense 2 (1:24:00) - relation/attribute: "he attributed the change to their marriage"
- Sense 4 (1:19:00) - artifact/result: "there were marked changes in the lining of the lungs"

In the SemCor and other tagged corpora, when referring to changes in data, statistics, or measurements over time, sense 2 is often used when emphasizing the difference, and sense 4 when emphasizing the modified state.

But here, "changes in personal staffing decisions" with the temporal marker "between 1986 and 1987" points strongly to sense 2.

Final decision: 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: personal
Target surface form: personal
Context:
To the extent that the primary duty of personal staff involves local benefit - seeking, this indicates that political philosophy leads congressional Republicans to pay less attention to narrow constituent concerns. Second, if the key assumption is valid, Democrats should have lower attendance rates on roll-call votes than Republicans do to the extent that such votes reflect national policy making and that participating in such votes takes away from the time a legislator could otherwise devote to local benefit - seeking. This is indeed what the data indicate, particularly in the case of the House. The Democratic House attendance rate has not exceeded the Republican House attendance rate since 1959. Finally, as shown in the table, Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit - seeking duties matter more and national policy making activities matter less relative to Washington offices. An examination of changes in <t>personal</t> staffing decisions in the Senate between 1986 and 1987 -LRB- when control of that body changed party hands -RRB-, moreover, reveals that the personal staffing differences noted in the table can not be attributed to the disproportionate control Democrats exercise, due to their majority - party status, over other resources such as committee staff. An additional piece of evidence from the Senate: Holding other factors constant, such as incumbency advantages and regional factors, the difference between popular votes for Republican presidential and senatorial candidates in states conducting a Senate election turns out to be a positive function of how onerous the federal government's tax burden is per state -LRB- a progressive tax rate hits higher - income states harder -RRB-.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=personal%3:00:00:: | definition=concerning or affecting a particular person or his or her private life and personality | examples=a personal favor; for your personal use
2. sense_key=personal%5:00:00:subjective:00 | definition=particular to a given individual
3. sense_key=personal%3:01:01:: | definition=of or arising from personality | examples=personal magnetism
4. sense_key=personal%5:00:00:physical:00 | definition=intimately concerning a person's body or physical being | examples=personal hygiene
5. sense_key=personal%3:01:00:: | definition=indicating grammatical person | examples=personal verb endings

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 for the word "personal" in the given context.

Let me analyze the context:
The text discusses political staffing decisions, specifically about "personal staff" and "personal staffing decisions" in Congress.

Key phrases:
- "primary duty of personal staff"
- "personal staffing decisions"
- "personal staffing differences"
- "Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices"

The word "personal" here is modifying "staff/staffing" and refers to staff that is directly assigned to or associated with a particular legislator (as opposed to committee staff mentioned later).

Let me look at the candidate senses:

1. sense_key=personal%3:00:00:: | definition=concerning or affecting a particular person or his or her private life and personality | examples=a personal favor; for your personal use
   - This seems like it could fit, as "personal staff" refers to staff belonging to/assigned to a particular person (the legislator).

2. sense_key=personal%5:00:00:subjective:00 | definition=particular to a given individual
   - This also seems relevant - "personal staff" means staff particular to that individual legislator.

3. sense_key=personal%3:01:01:: | definition=of or arising from personality | examples=personal magnetism
   - This doesn't fit well. It's not about personality traits.

4. sense_key=personal%5:00:00:physical:00 | definition=intimately concerning a person's body or physical being | examples=personal hygiene
   - Definitely not right - not about physical being.

5. sense_key=personal%3:01:00:: | definition=indicating grammatical person | examples=personal verb endings
   - Linguistic term, not relevant here.

Now between senses 1 and 2:
- Sense 1: "concerning or affecting a particular person or his or her private life and personality" - This is the most common adjectival sense, relating to belonging to/intended for a specific person.
- Sense 2: "particular to a given individual" - This seems to be more about being subjective or idiosyncratic.

In the context of "personal staff" in a congressional/political setting, this refers to staff members who work directly for a specific legislator (as opposed to committee staff which serves the committee). This falls under the meaning of "belonging to or intended for a particular person."

Looking at WordNet structure:
- personal%3:00:00:: is the main adjective sense: "concerning or affecting a particular person or his or her private life and personality"
- personal%5:00:00:subjective:00 seems to be a satellite adjective (indicated by the 5 in position 2) meaning "particular to a given individual"

Wait, looking at the sense keys:
- personal%3:00:00:: - this is an adjective (3), with lex_id 00
- personal%5:00:00:subjective:00 - this is an adjective satellite (5), with subjective as the head?

Actually, looking at WordNet format:
- Type 3 = adjective (immediate)
- Type 5 = adjective (satellite)

Sense 1: personal%3:00:00:: - "concerning or affecting a particular person..."
Sense 2: personal%5:00:00:subjective:00 - "particular to a given individual"

The context is about staff assigned to particular legislators - staff that belongs to them personally (as opposed to committee staff which is shared).

"Personal staff" in congressional terminology refers to employees who work directly for a specific member of Congress. This matches sense 1: "concerning or affecting a particular person" - i.e., the staff concerns that particular legislator.

Sense 2 "particular to a given individual" is close, but looking at the examples and typical usage, "personal staff" falls under the general sense of "concerning/intended for a particular person" rather than the meaning of "idiosyncratic/subjective to an individual."

Also, the contrast in the text between "personal staff" and "committee staff" strongly supports sense 1 - it's about staff that serves the person vs. staff that serves the committee.

Therefore, the best sense is index 1.

Let me double-check by looking at the specific phrases:
- "personal staffing decisions" - decisions about one's own staff
- "personal staffing differences" - differences in own staff allocation

This is clearly sense 1: concerning or affecting a particular person.

Sense 2 "particular to a given individual" might apply if it meant "unique to that individual" or "subjective", but here it means "belonging to that individual."

So the answer should be {"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: decision
Target surface form: decisions
Context:
To the extent that the primary duty of personal staff involves local benefit - seeking, this indicates that political philosophy leads congressional Republicans to pay less attention to narrow constituent concerns. Second, if the key assumption is valid, Democrats should have lower attendance rates on roll-call votes than Republicans do to the extent that such votes reflect national policy making and that participating in such votes takes away from the time a legislator could otherwise devote to local benefit - seeking. This is indeed what the data indicate, particularly in the case of the House. The Democratic House attendance rate has not exceeded the Republican House attendance rate since 1959. Finally, as shown in the table, Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit - seeking duties matter more and national policy making activities matter less relative to Washington offices. An examination of changes in personal staffing <t>decisions</t> in the Senate between 1986 and 1987 -LRB- when control of that body changed party hands -RRB-, moreover, reveals that the personal staffing differences noted in the table can not be attributed to the disproportionate control Democrats exercise, due to their majority - party status, over other resources such as committee staff. An additional piece of evidence from the Senate: Holding other factors constant, such as incumbency advantages and regional factors, the difference between popular votes for Republican presidential and senatorial candidates in states conducting a Senate election turns out to be a positive function of how onerous the federal government's tax burden is per state -LRB- a progressive tax rate hits higher - income states harder -RRB-.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=decision%1:04:00:: | definition=the act of making up your mind about something | synonyms=determination, conclusion | examples=the burden of decision was his; he drew his conclusions quickly
2. sense_key=decision%1:09:00:: | definition=a position or opinion or judgment reached after consideration | synonyms=determination, conclusion | examples=a decision unfavorable to the opposition; his conclusion took the evidence into account
3. sense_key=decision%1:11:02:: | definition=(boxing) a victory won on points when no knockout has occurred | examples=had little trouble in taking a unanimous decision over his opponent
4. sense_key=decision%1:11:01:: | definition=the outcome of a game or contest | examples=the team dropped three decisions in a row
5. sense_key=decision%1:07:00:: | definition=the trait of resoluteness as evidenced by firmness of character or purpose | synonyms=decisiveness | examples=a man of unusual decisiveness

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) for the target word "decisions" in the given context.

 Let me analyze the context:
 - The text is about political science, specifically about congressional Republicans vs Democrats, their staffing patterns, and how they allocate personal staff.
 - The specific sentence containing "decisions" is: "An examination of changes in personal staffing <t>decisions</t> in the Senate between 1986 and 1987..."
 - Here, "decisions" refers to choices made about how to staff personal offices - specifically, how many staff to allocate to district offices vs Washington offices.

 Now let's look at the candidate senses:

 1. sense_key=decision%1:04:00:: | definition=the act of making up your mind about something | synonyms=determination, conclusion | examples=the burden of decision was his; he drew his conclusions quickly
    - This refers to the act/process of deciding.

 2. sense_key=decision%1:09:00:: | definition=a position or opinion or judgment reached after consideration | synonyms=determination, conclusion | examples=a decision unfavorable to the opposition; his conclusion took the evidence into account
    - This refers to the result/outcome of the decision-making process (the judgment itself).

 3. sense_key=decision%1:11:02:: | definition=(boxing) a victory won on points when no knockout has occurred
    - This is specific to boxing. Not relevant here.

 4. sense_key=decision%1:11:01:: | definition=the outcome of a game or contest
    - This is about sports/contests. Not relevant here.

 5. sense_key=decision%1:07:00:: | definition=the trait of resoluteness as evidenced by firmness of character or purpose
    - This is about a personality trait. Not relevant here.

 So it's between sense 1 and sense 2.

 Sense 1 (decision%1:04:00::): "the act of making up your mind about something" - this is the process of deciding.
 Sense 2 (decision%1:09:00::): "a position or opinion or judgment reached after consideration" - this is the result/content of the decision.

 In the phrase "personal staffing decisions", we are talking about the choices or determinations that were made regarding staffing. Are we talking about the act of deciding (sense 1) or the specific choices/judgments made (sense 2)?

 "Changes in personal staffing decisions" - this refers to changes in the choices made about staffing. It could be interpreted as:
 - Changes in the act of making these decisions (sense 1)
 - Changes in the specific staffing choices/judgments (sense 2)

 However, looking at the examples:
 - Sense 1 examples: "the burden of decision was his; he drew his conclusions quickly" - this seems to focus on the act/process.
 - Sense 2 examples: "a decision unfavorable to the opposition; his conclusion took the evidence into account" - this focuses on the content/outcome of the decision.

 In the context "changes in personal staffing decisions", it seems to refer to changes in the actual staffing choices (the judgments reached) - i.e., which offices get how many staff members. This would be the result of the decision-making process, not the process itself.

 However, "decisions" in the plural often refers to multiple instances of the act or multiple specific judgments. Let me think about the specific usage.

 "Staffing decisions" typically refers to the choices made about staffing - i.e., "we made a decision to hire 5 people" - the decision here is the judgment/choice (sense 2).

 But wait, let me look more carefully at the WordNet definitions. In WordNet:
 - decision%1:04:00:: is under noun.act (acts or actions) - "the act of making up your mind about something"
 - decision%1:09:00:: is under noun.cognition - "a position or opinion or judgment reached after consideration"

 In the context: "changes in personal staffing decisions" - this is examining how the choices about staffing changed. It refers to the specific determinations or conclusions about staffing levels and allocations.

 Actually, looking at the phrase "staffing decisions", this is a common collocation. When we say "budget decisions" or "hiring decisions", we usually mean the specific choices made (sense 2), not the act of deciding (sense 1).

 But let me double-check by looking at the examples provided:
 - Sense 1: "the burden of decision was his" - this could be interpreted as the burden of the act of deciding.
 - Sense 2: "a decision unfavorable to the opposition" - this is clearly a specific judgment/choice.

 In "changes in personal staffing decisions", we are looking at how the staffing choices changed over time or between parties. This refers to the specific judgments/choices (sense 2), not the act of making up one's mind (sense 1).

 Wait, I should reconsider. "Decision" can be ambiguous. But in academic/political science contexts like this, when they examine "staffing decisions", they are examining the choices made - i.e., the outcomes of the decision-making process.

 However, there's another angle: "decision" in the sense of "the act of deciding" (sense 1) vs "the thing decided" (sense 2).

 Let me look at similar examples in WordNet or standard usage. "Business decisions" usually refers to the choices made (sense 2). "The decision to go to war" could be either, but usually refers to the specific judgment (sense 2).

 Actually, looking at the gloss for sense 1: "the act of making up your mind about something" - this is the process.
 Sense 2: "a position or opinion or judgment reached after consideration" - this is the product.

 In "examination of changes in personal staffing decisions", the author is looking at how the staffing choices changed. This is about the specific determinations (sense 2).

 But I want to be careful. Could it be sense 1? If it were sense 1, it would mean "changes in the act of making staffing decisions" - i.e., changes in how they go about deciding. But the context suggests it's about the actual allocation of staff (the result), not the process of deciding. The text mentions "Democrats allocate a higher proportion..." - this is about the actual staffing choices, not the process of deciding.

 Therefore, sense 2 seems correct: "a position or opinion or judgment reached after consideration" - the staffing decisions are the judgments/choices about how to allocate staff.

 Wait, I should verify the WordNet sense keys to make sure I have the right indices. The user provided:
 1. sense_key=decision%1:04:00::
 2. sense_key=decision%1:09:00::
 3. sense_key=decision%1:11:02::
 4. sense_key=decision%1:11:01::
 5. sense_key=decision%1:07:00::

 So index 1 is the act (noun.act), index 2 is the cognition (noun.cognition).

 Given the context is about political science analysis of staffing allocations, and the phrase is "changes in personal staffing decisions", this refers to changes in the specific choices/judgments made about staffing. This is sense 2.

 Let me confirm with the synonyms:
 - Sense 1: determination, conclusion (as in the act of determining/concluding)
 - Sense 2: determination, conclusion (as in the result of determining/concluding)

 The examples for sense 2 include "a decision unfavorable to the opposition" which is clearly a specific stance/judgment. The staffing decisions are similar - specific judgments about how to allocate staff.

 Therefore, the answer should be sense_index: 2.

 But let me reconsider one more time. Is there any chance it's sense 1? "The act of making up your mind about something" - could "staffing decisions" refer to the act of deciding on staffing? For example, "the decision process took three days" - here decision refers to the act. But "staffing decisions" in plural usually refers to multiple instances of choices made. "He made several bad staffing decisions" - here it means he made several bad choices/judgments about whom to hire.

 In the text: "changes in personal staffing decisions" - this parallels "changes in personal staffing choices" - clearly referring to the judgments/choices (sense 2).

 So I'm confident the answer is 2.

provider: Phala


[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: control
Target surface form: control
Context:
To the extent that the primary duty of personal staff involves local benefit - seeking, this indicates that political philosophy leads congressional Republicans to pay less attention to narrow constituent concerns. Second, if the key assumption is valid, Democrats should have lower attendance rates on roll-call votes than Republicans do to the extent that such votes reflect national policy making and that participating in such votes takes away from the time a legislator could otherwise devote to local benefit - seeking. This is indeed what the data indicate, particularly in the case of the House. The Democratic House attendance rate has not exceeded the Republican House attendance rate since 1959. Finally, as shown in the table, Democrats allocate a higher proportion of their personal staffs to district offices -- where local benefit - seeking duties matter more and national policy making activities matter less relative to Washington offices. An examination of changes in personal staffing decisions in the Senate between 1986 and 1987 -LRB- when <t>control</t> of that body changed party hands -RRB-, moreover, reveals that the personal staffing differences noted in the table can not be attributed to the disproportionate control Democrats exercise, due to their majority - party status, over other resources such as committee staff. An additional piece of evidence from the Senate: Holding other factors constant, such as incumbency advantages and regional factors, the difference between popular votes for Republican presidential and senatorial candidates in states conducting a Senate election turns out to be a positive function of how onerous the federal government's tax burden is per state -LRB- a progressive tax rate hits higher - income states harder -RRB-.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=control%1:07:00:: | definition=power to direct or determine | examples=under control
2. sense_key=control%1:24:00:: | definition=a relation of constraint of one entity (thing or person or group) by another | examples=measures for the control of disease; they instituted controls over drinking on campus
3. sense_key=control%1:04:02:: | definition=(physiology) regulation or maintenance of a function or action or reflex etc | examples=the timing and control of his movements were unimpaired; he had lost control of his sphincters
4. sense_key=control%1:09:02:: | definition=a standard against which other conditions can be compared in a scientific experiment | synonyms=control condition | examples=the control condition was inappropriate for the conclusions he wished to draw
5. sense_key=control%1:04:00:: | definition=the activity of managing or exerting control over something | examples=the control of the mob by the police was admirable
6. sense_key=control%1:26:00:: | definition=the state that exists when one person or group has power over another | synonyms=dominance, ascendance, ascendence, ascendancy, ascendency | examples=her apparent dominance of her husband was really her attempt to make him pay attention to her
7. sense_key=control%1:07:01:: | definition=discipline in personal and social activities | synonyms=restraint | examples=he was a model of polite restraint; she never lost control of herself
8. sense_key=control%1:09:01:: | definition=great skillfulness and knowledge of some subject or activity | synonyms=command, mastery | examples=a good command of French
9. sense_key=control%1:06:00:: | definition=a mechanism that controls the operation of a machine | synonyms=controller | examples=the speed controller on his turntable was not working properly; I turned the controls over to her
10. sense_key=control%1:18:00:: | definition=a spiritual agency that is assumed to assist the medium during a seance
11. sense_key=control%1:10:00:: | definition=the economic policy of controlling or limiting or curbing prices or wages etc. | examples=they wanted to repeal all the legislation that imposed economic controls

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 for the word "control" in the given context.

 Let me analyze the context:

 The sentence containing the target word is: "An examination of changes in personal staffing decisions in the Senate between 1986 and 1987 -LRB- when <t>control</t> of that body changed party hands -RRB-, moreover, reveals that the personal staffing differences noted in the table can not be attributed to the disproportionate control Democrats exercise, due to their majority - party status, over other resources such as committee staff."

 Key context clues:
 1. "control of that body changed party hands" - "that body" refers to the Senate
 2. "changed party hands" - implies one party had control, then another party took over
 3. This is about political control of a legislative body (the Senate)
 4. Later it mentions "disproportionate control Democrats exercise, due to their majority-party status"

 So we're talking about which political party has power over the Senate - i.e., which party is in the majority and thus controls the legislative agenda, committees, etc.

 Now let's look at the candidate senses:

 1. sense_key=control%1:07:00:: | definition=power to direct or determine | examples=under control
    - This is about the power to direct or determine. This could fit, as the party in control has the power to direct the Senate's business.

 2. sense_key=control%1:24:00:: | definition=a relation of constraint of one entity (thing or person or group) by another | examples=measures for the control of disease; they instituted controls over drinking on campus
    - This is about constraint/restriction. Doesn't fit well here.

 3. sense_key=control%1:04:02:: | definition=(physiology) regulation or maintenance of a function or action or reflex etc | examples=the timing and control of his movements were unimpaired; he had lost control of his sphincters
    - Physiological control. Not relevant.

 4. sense_key=control%1:09:02:: | definition=a standard against which other conditions can be compared in a scientific experiment | synonyms=control condition | examples=the control condition was inappropriate for the conclusions he wished to draw
    - Scientific control. Not relevant.

 5. sense_key=control%1:04:00:: | definition=the activity of managing or exerting control over something | examples=the control of the mob by the police was admirable
    - Activity of managing. This is close, but the context is about which party has control (possession of power), not the activity of controlling.

 6. sense_key=control%1:26:00:: | definition=the state that exists when one person or group has power over another | synonyms=dominance, ascendance, ascendence, ascendancy, ascendency | examples=her apparent dominance of her husband was really her attempt to make him pay attention to her
    - This is about the state of having power over another. This fits very well with "control of the Senate" - the state where one party has power over the legislative body. The synonyms (dominance, ascendancy) fit the political context of majority party status.

 7. sense_key=control%1:07:01:: | definition=discipline in personal and social activities | synonyms=restraint | examples=he was a model of polite restraint; she never lost control of herself
    - Self-control. Not relevant.

 8. sense_key=control%1:09:01:: | definition=great skillfulness and knowledge of some subject or activity | synonyms=command, mastery | examples=a good command of French
    - Command as in expertise. Not relevant.

 9. sense_key=control%1:06:00:: | definition=a mechanism that controls the operation of a machine | synonyms=controller | examples=the speed controller on his turntable was not working properly; I turned the controls over to her
    - Mechanical control. Not relevant.

 10. sense_key=control%1:18:00:: | definition=a spiritual agency that is assumed to assist the medium during a seance
    - Spiritualism. Not relevant.

 11. sense_key=control%1:10:00:: | definition=the economic policy of controlling or limiting or curbing prices or wages etc. | examples=they wanted to repeal all the legislation that imposed economic controls
    - Economic controls. Not relevant.

 Now comparing sense 1 and sense 6:

 Sense 1: "power to direct or determine" - This is the abstract power or ability.
 Sense 6: "the state that exists when one person or group has power over another" - This is the state of dominance/ascendancy.

 In the context: "when control of that body changed party hands" - this refers to the transition of which party has the majority, i.e., which party is in the state of having power over the legislative body. "Changed party hands" implies the state of control shifted from one party to another.

 Also: "disproportionate control Democrats exercise, due to their majority-party status" - this clearly links control to majority-party status, which is about having power over the legislative body (dominance/ascendancy).

 Sense 6 specifically mentions "dominance, ascendance, ascendence, ascendancy, ascendency" as synonyms, which are exactly the terms used in political science to describe majority party status in a legislature.

 Sense 1 is more general "power to direct or determine" - while close, sense 6 is more specific to the relational/state aspect of one group having power over another (the majority party over the legislative agenda).

 Actually, looking at WordNet structure:
 - Sense 1 (control%1:07:00::) is under noun.attribute (power to direct or determine)
 - Sense 6 (control%1:26:00::) is under noun.state (the state that exists when one person or group has power over another)

 The context emphasizes the state of having control (majority party status), not just the abstract power.

 Also, the phrase "changed party hands" strongly suggests the state of dominance/ascendancy shifting from one party to another.

 Therefore, sense 6 (index 6) appears to be the best fit.

 Wait, let me double-check the indexing. The user lists:
 1. sense_key=control%1:07:00::
 2. sense_key=control%1:24:00::
 3. sense_key=control%1:04:02::
 4. sense_key=control%1:09:02::
 5. sense_key=control%1:04:00::
 6. sense_key=control%1:26:00::
 7. sense_key=control%1:07:01::
 8. sense_key=control%1:09:01::
 9. sense_key=control%1:06:00::
 10. sense_key=control%1:18:00::
 11. sense_key=control%1:10:00::

 So sense 6 is indeed the one with definition "the state that exists when one person or group has power over another".

 Let me verify with the examples for sense 6: "her apparent dominance of her husband was really her attempt to make him pay attention to her" - this shows the relational power aspect.

 In the context, Democrats exercise control due to their majority-party status - this is exactly the state of having power over the legislative body (the Senate).

 So the answer should be {"sense_index": 6}.