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

[User]
Target lemma: particular
Target surface form: particular
Context:
For follow-up treatment, the animal owner can administer the tablets to the dog. Also, the treatment of vomiting should only be together with other supportive measure or other veterinary therapy while addressing the underlying causes of the vomiting. What is the risk associated with Cerenia? Cerenia was generally well tolerated when administered daily at dosages up to 5 times the recommended doses for an extended period of time (up to 3 times the recommended maximum duration of treatment). What are the precautions for the person who gives the medicine or comes into contact with the animal? Cerenia does not represent a <t>particular</t> risk for people.

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

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

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to perform Word Sense Disambiguation for the word "particular" in the given context.

 Context analysis:
 The sentence is: "Cerenia does not represent a <t>particular</t> risk for people."
 This is talking about a veterinary medicine (Cerenia) and whether it poses a specific/unique/distinct risk to humans who administer it or come into contact with treated animals.

 The meaning here seems to be that Cerenia does not represent a specific/unique/special risk - it's not a risk that is specific to this drug or distinct from other risks. Or it could mean it doesn't represent a significant/exceptional risk.

 Let's look at the candidate senses:

 1. sense_key=particular%5:00:00:specific:00 | definition=unique or specific to a person or thing or category | synonyms=peculiar, special | examples=the particular demands of the job; has a particular preference for Chinese art
    - This suggests something specific to a category. "Particular risk" could mean a risk specific to this drug. But the context suggests it's saying there's no special/specific risk.

 2. sense_key=particular%5:00:02:specific:00 | definition=separate and distinct from others of the same group or category | examples=interested in one particular artist; a man who wishes to make a particular woman fall in love with him
    - This emphasizes distinctness from others. "A particular risk" could mean a distinct risk separate from other risks.

 3. sense_key=particular%5:00:00:uncommon:00 | definition=surpassing what is common or usual or expected | synonyms=especial, exceptional, special | examples=he paid especial attention to her; exceptional kindness
    - This means unusual, exceptional. "Not a particular risk" could mean not an exceptional/unusual risk.

 4. sense_key=particular%5:00:00:primary:00 | definition=first and most important | synonyms=special | examples=his special interest is music; she gets special (or particular) satisfaction from her volunteer work
    - This means primary/important. "Not a particular risk" = not a primary/major risk.

 5. sense_key=particular%5:00:00:fastidious:00 | definition=exacting especially about details | synonyms=finical, finicky, fussy, picky
    - This is about being fussy/picky. Doesn't fit here.

 6. sense_key=particular%5:00:00:careful:00 | definition=providing specific details or circumstances
    - This is about being detailed. Doesn't fit here.

 Now between 1, 2, 3, and 4.

 The phrase "does not represent a particular risk" is a common phrase meaning "does not represent a specific/special/significant risk."

 Looking at sense 1: "unique or specific to a person or thing or category" - This would mean the risk is specific to Cerenia (or specific to people). But the sentence is saying it does NOT represent such a risk.

 Looking at sense 3: "surpassing what is common or usual or expected" - This would mean an exceptional/special risk. "Not a particular risk" = not an exceptional risk, not a special risk. This seems plausible.

 Looking at sense 4: "first and most important" - "Not a particular risk" = not a primary risk. Also plausible.

 However, looking at the examples and typical usage:
 - "Not a particular risk" usually means "not a specific risk" or "not a special/exceptional risk."

 Let me reconsider sense 1 vs sense 2. Both are "specific" but with different nuances.
 Sense 1: unique or specific to a person or thing or category (peculiar, special)
 Sense 2: separate and distinct from others of the same group or category

 Actually, looking at WordNet structure:
 - particular%5:00:00:specific:00 (sense 1) is about being specific/peculiar to something
 - particular%5:00:02:specific:00 (sense 2) is about being distinct/separate

 In the context "does not represent a particular risk", the meaning is that it doesn't pose a specific type of risk or a special risk.

 But wait, looking at the phrase "particular risk" in medical/regulatory contexts, it often means "specific risk" or "distinct risk."

 However, sense 3 (uncommon, exceptional) also fits: "does not represent an exceptional risk" = it's not a dangerous drug.

 Let me look at the examples again:
 Sense 1 examples: "the particular demands of the job" (specific to the job), "has a particular preference" (specific preference)
 Sense 3 examples: "especial attention", "exceptional kindness"

 The phrase "particular risk" in the sense of "specific risk" aligns with sense 1. But "particular" meaning "significant/special" (sense 3) is also common.

 Actually, looking at the sentence structure: "does not represent a particular risk" - this is similar to "not a particular concern" or "not a particular problem."

 In many contexts, "not a particular X" means "not a specific X" or "not an especially notable X."

 But let's look at the WordNet definitions carefully:

 Sense 1: "unique or specific to a person or thing or category"
 - If something is not a particular risk, it means it's not a risk specific to that thing. But here, the sentence is saying Cerenia doesn't represent a risk specific to people? Or that it's not a unique risk?

 Actually, the context is about precautions for people who give the medicine. The question is: what is the risk to humans? The answer: Cerenia does not represent a particular risk for people.

 This likely means: Cerenia does not pose a specific risk (i.e., a risk specific to this drug) or an exceptional risk to humans.

 Between sense 1 and sense 3:
 - Sense 1 focuses on specificity to a category (peculiar to)
 - Sense 3 focuses on being uncommon/exceptional

 In safety contexts, "not a particular risk" usually means "not a specific risk" or "not a special risk." But I think sense 1 is more about "specific to" while sense 3 is about "exceptional."

 Wait, looking at the synonyms for sense 1: peculiar, special
 Synonyms for sense 3: especial, exceptional, special

 Both have "special" as a synonym.

 But the definition of sense 1 is "unique or specific to a person or thing or category"
 The definition of sense 3 is "surpassing what is common or usual or expected"

 In the context, "does not represent a particular risk" most naturally means it does not represent a specific/distinct type of risk (sense 2) or a specific risk (sense 1).

 But sense 2 is "separate and distinct from others of the same group or category" - this would mean "a particular risk" = a risk that is distinct from other risks. But the sentence is saying it doesn't represent such a risk.

 Actually, looking at the phrase "particular" in negative constructions:
 - "Not a particular fan" = not a specific fan (not a fan in particular) OR not a special fan
 - "Not a particular risk" = not a specific risk

 But I think the intended meaning here is that it doesn't pose a specific or special risk to humans - it's not a risk that is specific to this drug or exceptional compared to other drugs.

 Let me reconsider sense 1. If "particular" means "specific to a category", then "not a particular risk" would mean "not a risk specific to people" - which makes sense! The drug is for dogs, and the question is about risk to humans. The answer is that it doesn't represent a risk that is specific to/peculiar to people (or specific to this drug).

 But actually, reading carefully: "Cerenia does not represent a particular risk for people."
 This could mean: Cerenia does not represent a risk that is particular (specific) to people. But that doesn't quite make sense because the risk would be to people, so it's already specific to people.

 Alternative reading: It does not represent a particular (specific/significant) risk.

 Let me look at similar usage in corpora. "Not a particular risk" often means "not a specific risk" in the sense of "not a risk in particular" or "not any specific risk."

 But in this medical context, I think sense 3 (exceptional, surpassing what is common) or sense 1 (specific) could work.

 However, looking at the examples for sense 1: "the particular demands of the job" - specific to the job. "has a particular preference" - specific preference.

 For sense 3: "exceptional kindness" - unusual kindness.

 In the sentence "Cerenia does not represent a particular risk", if we substitute:
 - Sense 1: "does not represent a specific risk" (specific to what?)
 - Sense 3: "does not represent an exceptional risk" (i.e., it's not dangerous)
 - Sense 4: "does not represent a primary risk"

 Given that the previous sentence asks "What are the precautions...", and the answer is that it doesn't represent a particular risk, this suggests that the risk level is low or not specific.

 But I think the most standard interpretation of "not a particular risk" in this context is "not a specific risk" meaning "not a risk that is specific to this situation" or simply "not a significant risk."

 Wait, I should look at the WordNet sense keys to understand the hierarchy.
 particular%5:00:00:specific:00 vs particular%5:00:02:specific:00

 The :00 and :02 indicate different senses under the adjective specific.

 Sense 1 (particular%5:00:00:specific:00) is the first sense under specific.
 Sense 2 (particular%5:00:02:specific:00) is the third sense (index 2) under specific.

 In WordNet, "particular" as an adjective:
 - Sense 1: specific to ... ("the particular demands of the job")
 - Sense 2: separate and distinct from others ("interested in one particular artist")

 Actually, looking at standard WordNet 3.0 or 3.1:
 particular.a.01: unique or specific to a person or thing or category; "the particular demands of the job"; "has a particular preference for Chinese art"; "a peculiar bond of sympathy between them"; "an expression peculiar to Canadians"; "rights peculiar to the rich"; "the special features of a computer"; "my own special chair"
 particular.a.02: separate and distinct from others of the same group or category; "interested in one particular artist"; "a man who wishes to make a particular woman fall in love with him"
 particular.a.03: surpassing what is common or usual or expected; "he paid especial attention to her"; "exceptional kindness"; "a matter of particular and unusual importance"; "a special occasion"; "a special reason to confide in her"; "what's so special about the year 2000?"
 particular.a.04: first and most important; "his special interest is music"; "she gets special (or particular) satisfaction from her volunteer work"
 particular.a.05: exacting especially about details; "a finicky eater"; "fussy about clothes"; "particular about one's food"
 particular.a.06: providing specific details or circumstances; "a particular description of the room"

 So the senses are:
 1. specific to (peculiar)
 2. distinct/separate
 3. exceptional/surpassing usual
 4. primary/important
 5. fastidious
 6. detailed

 Now, "does not represent a particular risk":
 - If sense 1: does not represent a risk specific to... (but specific to what? The sentence doesn't specify "particular risk for people [as opposed to animals]" in a way that suggests peculiarity. It just says "for people".)
 - If sense 2: does not represent a distinct risk (i.e., not a risk that stands out from other risks)
 - If sense 3: does not represent an exceptional risk (i.e., not a high/unusual risk)
 - If sense 4: does not represent a primary risk

 Given the context of safety information, "does not represent a particular risk" most likely means it does not pose a specific or special risk. But sense 3 (exceptional) seems to fit best with the idea that it's not a dangerous drug for humans. However, sense 1 is also very common in "particular" + noun constructions.

 But let's look at the phrase "particular risk" in actual usage. In medical leaflets, "no particular risk" often means "no specific risk" or "no special risk."

 However, looking at the definition of sense 1 again: "unique or specific to a person or thing or category"
 If we say "Cerenia does not represent a particular risk for people", using sense 1, it would mean it doesn't represent a risk that is specific to people (as opposed to animals). But the drug is for dogs, so the risk to people would be incidental. So saying it's not a risk specific to people makes sense - it's not like the drug is designed to affect people, so the risk to people is not specific/particular to the drug's nature.

 But actually, I think the intended meaning is simpler: it doesn't represent a significant/specific risk.

 Let me reconsider sense 2: "separate and distinct from others of the same group or category"
 "A particular risk" = a risk that is distinct from other risks. "Not a particular risk" = not a distinct risk, i.e., not a risk that stands out as different from other veterinary drugs.

 This seems plausible.

 But I think the most likely intended sense is sense 1 or sense 3.

 Let me look at the examples provided in the prompt for each sense:
 Sense 1 examples: "the particular demands of the job"; "has a particular preference for Chinese art"
 Sense 2 examples: "interested in one particular artist"; "a man who wishes to make a particular woman fall in love with him"
 Sense 3 examples: "he paid especial attention to her"; "exceptional kindness"

 In the target sentence, "particular" modifies "risk".
 - "Particular demands" (sense 1) = specific to the job
 - "Particular artist" (sense 2) = specific/distinct artist
 - "Particular importance" (sense 3) = exceptional importance

 "Particular risk":
 - Could be "specific risk" (sense 1 or 2)
 - Could be "exceptional risk" (sense 3)

 In the context of drug safety, when we say a drug "does not represent a particular risk", we usually mean it does not pose a specific hazard or a significant hazard.

 However, looking at the structure "a particular risk for people", this parallels "a particular preference for Chinese art" (sense 1). But "preference for" is different from "risk for".

 Actually, looking at the WordNet examples for sense 1: "has a particular preference for Chinese art" - here particular = specific.
 For sense 3: "a matter of particular and unusual importance" - here particular = exceptional.

 I think sense 1 is the best fit because "particular" here means "specific" or "special" in the sense of being specific to the situation. But wait, "not a particular risk" is often used to mean "not any specific risk" or "not a significant risk."

 Let me think about the negation. "Not particular" usually means "not specific" or "not fussy" (sense 5). Here it's "not a particular risk."

 If I say "It's not a particular problem", I mean it's not a specific problem or not a significant problem.

 But given the options, and the fact that sense 1 is the most common sense of "particular" (meaning specific/peculiar), and sense 3 is also common (meaning special/exceptional), I need to decide.

 The key might be in the synonyms.
 Sense 1: peculiar, special
 Sense 3: especial, exceptional, special

 "Peculiar" suggests something odd or specific to something. "Exceptional" suggests unusual degree.

 In the sentence "Cerenia does not represent a particular risk for people", if we substitute "peculiar", we get "does not represent a peculiar risk" - which makes sense (it's not a strange/unique risk). If we substitute "exceptional", we get "does not represent an exceptional risk" - which also makes sense (it's not a high risk).

 But "peculiar risk" is less common than "particular risk" in this context. "Particular risk" in safety contexts often means "specific hazard."

 However, looking at the WordNet sense 1 definition again: "unique or specific to a person or thing or category"
 This fits well: the risk is not specific to people (or not specific to this drug). But the sentence says "for people", not "to people". "Risk for people" = risk to people.

 Actually, "particular to" is the construction for sense 1. Here we have "particular risk for people". This is ambiguous.

 Let me look at sense 2: "separate and distinct from others of the same group or category"
 "A particular risk" = a risk that is distinct from other risks. This doesn't fit well with the negation "does not represent a particular risk" because it would mean it doesn't represent a distinct risk, i.e., it's like other risks, which is true but not the point.

 I think sense 3 is the best candidate. "Does not represent a particular risk" = does not represent an exceptional/surpassing risk = it's not a dangerous drug for humans.

 But I'm not entirely sure. Let me reconsider sense 1.
 If "particular" means "specific", then "not a particular risk" could mean "not a specific risk" i.e., not any one specific risk, or not a risk that is specific to this context.

 However, in many dictionaries, "particular" in "not a particular" constructions often relates to specificity (sense 1 or 2).

 But looking at the provided candidate senses, sense 1 has the synonym "special" and sense 3 has the synonym "special". So both can mean "special."

 Actually, looking carefully at the WordNet definitions:
 Sense 1: specific to a person or thing or category (peculiar)
 Sense 3: surpassing what is common (exceptional)

 In the phrase "a particular friend", it means special (sense 3 or 4).
 In the phrase "a particular case", it means specific (sense 1 or 2).

 "A particular risk" is more like "a particular case" - it's a specific kind of risk.

 But "not a particular risk" is ambiguous.

 Let me look at the context again. The previous sentences talk about the drug being well tolerated and dosages. Then it asks about precautions for people. The answer is that it doesn't represent a particular risk.

 This suggests that the risk to humans is not significant or not specific.

 Given that sense 1 is the first and most general sense (specific/peculiar), and it's often used in negative constructions like "not particular" to mean "not specific", I think sense 1 is the safest choice.

 But wait, sense 5 is "fastidious" and is also used in "particular about" constructions. But here it's "particular risk", not "particular about".

 Let me check if there's a pattern. In WordNet, sense 1 of "particular" is the most frequent.

 Also, looking at the example for sense 1: "the particular demands of the job" - specific demands.
 "A particular risk" - a specific risk.

 So sense 1 seems correct.

 However, sense 2 also means specific/distinct. What's the difference between sense 1 and sense 2?
 Sense 1: specific to a category (peculiar to)
 Sense 2: distinct from others (individual)

 "A particular artist" (sense 2) = a specific artist (as opposed to artists in general).
 "The particular demands" (sense 1) = demands specific to that job.

 "A particular risk" could be:
 - A risk specific to this drug (sense 1)
 - A specific risk (as opposed to risks in general) (sense 2)

 But with "for people", sense 1 might imply "a risk specific to people (as opposed to animals)", but the drug is for dogs, so the risk to people is secondary.

 Actually, I think the intended meaning is that it doesn't pose a specific risk (i.e., there's no specific danger to worry about).

 Between sense 1 and 2, sense 2 seems more about individuation ("one particular artist"), while sense 1 is about peculiarity/specificity to a category.

 "Particular risk" in safety contexts is often sense 1: a risk specific to the product.

 But I recall that in many WSD datasets, "not a particular" is often annotated as sense 1 (specific).

 Let me reconsider sense 3. If the sentence was "Cerenia is not particularly dangerous", that would be different. But "not a particular risk" is noun modification.

 I think I should go with sense 1.

 Wait, I found a similar example online: "The use of X does not pose a particular risk to Y." This is typically interpreted as "does not pose a specific risk" or "does not pose a special risk."

 Given that sense 1 is "unique or specific to a person or thing or category" and sense 3 is "surpassing what is common", and given that "particular" + noun often takes sense 1 (specific) while "particular" as an intensifier (like "particular importance") takes sense 3, I think for "particular risk", sense 1 is more appropriate.

 But I'm torn because "not a particular risk" could mean "not an exceptional risk."

 Let me look at the synonyms again.
 Sense 1: peculiar, special
 Sense 3: especial, exceptional, special

 "Special" appears in both.
 "Peculiar" suggests distinctiveness in a strange or specific way.
 "Exceptional" suggests degree.

 In the context, since they're talking about precautions, if there's no particular (exceptional) risk, then no special precautions are needed. This fits sense 3.

 If there's no particular (specific) risk, it means there's no specific risk identified, which also fits.

 But sense 3 (exceptional) seems to align better with the idea of "generally well tolerated" mentioned earlier. If it's well tolerated, it doesn't represent an exceptional risk.

 However, sense 1 is the hypernym for "specific" in WordNet.

 Let me check the sense keys. The user provided:
 1. particular%5:00:00:specific:00
 2. particular%5:00:02:specific:00
 3. particular%5:00:00:uncommon:00
 4. particular%5:00:00:primary:00

 So sense 1 and 2 are both under "specific", with sense 1 being the primary sense (00) and sense 2 being sense 02.

 Sense 1: specific (peculiar to)
 Sense 2: specific (distinct)

 In standard WordNet:
 particular.a.01 (specific/peculiar)
 particular.a.02 (distinct/separate)
 particular.a.03 (exceptional/surpassing)
 particular.a.04 (primary)
 particular.a.05 (fastidious)
 particular.a.06 (detailed)

 So the indices correspond to:
 1 -> particular.a.01
 2 -> particular.a.02
 3 -> particular.a.03
 4 -> particular.a.04
 5 -> particular.a.05
 6 -> particular.a.06

 Now, "does not represent a particular risk":
 - If sense 1: does not represent a risk peculiar to...
 - If sense 2: does not represent a distinct risk
 - If sense 3: does not represent an exceptional risk

 I think sense 1 is the best choice because "particular" here means "specific" in the general sense, and sense 1 is the main sense for "specific."

 But let me reconsider the exact wording. "Particular risk for people" - this is similar to "particular importance for people" which would be sense 3 or 4. But "risk" is different from "importance."

 Actually, looking at the example for sense 4: "she gets special (or particular) satisfaction from her volunteer work" - here particular = special/primary.

 But "particular risk" is not like "particular satisfaction."

 I think the answer is sense 1.

 Final check: In the sentence "Cerenia does not represent a particular risk for people", the word "particular" is most likely being used to mean "specific" or "special" in the sense of being specific to the context. Sense 1 covers "specific to a person or thing or category."

 So I'll go with sense_index: 1.

 Wait, I want to double-check sense 2. "Separate and distinct from others of the same group". If we interpret "a particular risk" as "a distinct risk" (i.e., a risk that stands out), then "not a particular risk" means it's not a distinct risk, i.e., it's like other risks. This is possible but less likely than "not a specific risk."

 Also, sense 3: "surpassing what is common". "Not a particular risk" = not an uncommon risk = a common risk? That doesn't make sense because if it's generally well tolerated, it's not a risk at all, or a low risk.

 Actually, "surpassing what is common" means greater than usual. So "not a particular risk" = not a greater than usual risk = not an exceptional risk. This fits the context of "generally well tolerated."

 But "particular" as "exceptional" is usually used with positive things (kindness, importance) or emphasis (attention), not with "risk" in this way. We say "particular danger" to mean specific danger, not exceptional danger.

 I think sense 1 is correct.

 Final answer: {"sense_index": 1}


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: risk
Target surface form: risk
Context:
For follow-up treatment, the animal owner can administer the tablets to the dog. Also, the treatment of vomiting should only be together with other supportive measure or other veterinary therapy while addressing the underlying causes of the vomiting. What is the risk associated with Cerenia? Cerenia was generally well tolerated when administered daily at dosages up to 5 times the recommended doses for an extended period of time (up to 3 times the recommended maximum duration of treatment). What are the precautions for the person who gives the medicine or comes into contact with the animal? Cerenia does not represent a particular <t>risk</t> for people.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=risk%1:26:00:: | definition=a source of danger; a possibility of incurring loss or misfortune | synonyms=hazard, jeopardy, peril, endangerment | examples=drinking alcohol is a health hazard
2. sense_key=risk%1:04:00:: | definition=a venture undertaken without regard to possible loss or injury | synonyms=peril, danger | examples=he saw the rewards but not the risks of crime; there was a danger he would do the wrong thing
3. sense_key=risk%1:07:02:: | definition=the probability of becoming infected given that exposure to an infectious agent has occurred | synonyms=risk of infection
4. sense_key=risk%1:07:01:: | definition=the probability of being exposed to an infectious agent | synonyms=risk of exposure

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 for the word "risk" in the given context.

 Context analysis:
 - The text is about a veterinary medicine called Cerenia (used for dogs)
 - The specific sentence is: "Cerenia does not represent a particular <t>risk</t> for people."
 - This is discussing whether the medicine poses a danger/hazard to humans who administer it or come into contact with the treated animal.

 Candidate senses analysis:

 1. sense_key=risk%1:26:00:: | definition=a source of danger; a possibility of incurring loss or misfortune | synonyms=hazard, jeopardy, peril, endangerment | examples=drinking alcohol is a health hazard
    - This sense refers to a source of danger or the possibility of loss/misfortune.
    - In the context, "Cerenia does not represent a particular risk for people" means it doesn't pose a danger/hazard to people.
    - This fits well with the definition of being a source of danger.

 2. sense_key=risk%1:04:00:: | definition=a venture undertaken without regard to possible loss or injury | synonyms=peril, danger | examples=he saw the rewards but not the risks of crime; there was a danger he would do the wrong thing
    - This sense refers to a venture or undertaking (like taking a risk).
    - The context is not about undertaking a venture, but about a substance posing a danger.
    - Doesn't fit.

 3. sense_key=risk%1:07:02:: | definition=the probability of becoming infected given that exposure to an infectious agent has occurred | synonyms=risk of infection
    - This is specifically about infection probability after exposure.
    - While Cerenia could theoretically involve infection, the context is broader - it's about general danger to people administering the medicine, not specifically about infectious agents.
    - Too specific.

 4. sense_key=risk%1:07:01:: | definition=the probability of being exposed to an infectious agent | synonyms=risk of exposure
    - This is about probability of exposure to infectious agents.
    - Again, too specific to infectious agents. The context doesn't mention infection specifically.

 The best fit is sense 1: "a source of danger; a possibility of incurring loss or misfortune"
 - The sentence means Cerenia is not a hazard/danger to people.
 - Synonyms like hazard, jeopardy, peril fit well.
 - The example "drinking alcohol is a health hazard" parallels "Cerenia does not represent a particular risk [hazard] for people."

 Wait, let me reconsider. The sentence "Cerenia does not represent a particular risk for people" - is "risk" here referring to:
 - The substance itself being a risk (source of danger) - sense 1
 - Or the probability of harm?

 Looking at sense 1 again: "a source of danger; a possibility of incurring loss or misfortune"
 This can be interpreted as: Cerenia is not a source of danger for people.

 Looking at the broader context:
 - "What is the risk associated with Cerenia?" - here risk could be interpreted as potential danger/adverse effects
 - "Cerenia does not represent a particular risk for people" - this clearly means it doesn't pose a danger/hazard.

 Sense 1 seems correct.

 But let me double-check if there's any nuance I'm missing. The WordNet sense 1 (risk%1:26:00::) is under noun.group or noun.state? Actually, looking at the sense key format:
 - risk%1:26:00:: - 26 usually refers to noun.group or noun.state? Let me recall WordNet lexicographer file numbers:
   - 26 is noun.state? No, checking...
   - Actually, in WordNet 3.0:
     - 04: noun.act
     - 07: noun.cognition
     - 26: noun.state or noun.group?

 Wait, the sense keys provided are:
 1. risk%1:26:00::
 2. risk%1:04:00::
 3. risk%1:07:02::
 4. risk%1:07:01::

 In WordNet sense keys:
 - %1:26:00:: would be noun group/state? Actually, 26 is noun.group.
 - %1:04:00:: is noun.act
 - %1:07:00:: is noun.cognition

 But regardless of the lexicographer file numbers, I should focus on the definitions.

 Sense 1: "a source of danger; a possibility of incurring loss or misfortune" - this is the general concept of risk as a hazard.
 Sense 2: "a venture undertaken without regard to possible loss or injury" - this is about taking risks, risky behavior.
 Sense 3: specific to infection probability.
 Sense 4: specific to exposure probability.

 In the context "Cerenia does not represent a particular risk for people", the meaning is clearly that Cerenia is not a hazard/danger to people. This aligns with sense 1.

 The question "What is the risk associated with Cerenia?" also points to sense 1 - what danger is associated with this drug.

 Therefore, the answer should be sense_index: 1.

 Wait, I need to make sure about the indexing. The user lists:
 1. sense_key=risk%1:26:00::
 2. sense_key=risk%1:04:00::
 3. sense_key=risk%1:07:02::
 4. sense_key=risk%1:07:01::

 So sense_index: 1 corresponds to the first one.

 Let me verify with the examples and synonyms:
 - Sense 1 synonyms: hazard, jeopardy, peril, endangerment
 - Context: "Cerenia does not represent a particular risk for people" = Cerenia is not a hazard for people. This fits perfectly.

 Yes, I'm confident it's sense 1.

format: unknown

native_finish_reason: stop

provider: DeepInfra

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: people
Target surface form: people
Context:
For follow-up treatment, the animal owner can administer the tablets to the dog. Also, the treatment of vomiting should only be together with other supportive measure or other veterinary therapy while addressing the underlying causes of the vomiting. What is the risk associated with Cerenia? Cerenia was generally well tolerated when administered daily at dosages up to 5 times the recommended doses for an extended period of time (up to 3 times the recommended maximum duration of treatment). What are the precautions for the person who gives the medicine or comes into contact with the animal? Cerenia does not represent a particular risk for <t>people</t>.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=people%1:14:00:: | definition=(plural) any group of human beings (men or women or children) collectively | examples=old people; there were at least 200 people in the audience
2. sense_key=people%1:14:01:: | definition=the body of citizens of a state or country | synonyms=citizenry | examples=the Spanish people
3. sense_key=people%1:14:02:: | definition=members of a family line | examples=his people have been farmers for generations; are your people still alive?
4. sense_key=people%1:14:03:: | definition=the common people generally | synonyms=multitude, masses, mass, hoi polloi, the great unwashed | examples=separate the warriors from the mass; power to the people

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 "people" in the given context.

 Context analysis:
 The text is about a veterinary medicine called Cerenia. It discusses treatment for dogs, risks, and precautions. The specific sentence is: "Cerenia does not represent a particular risk for <t>people</t>."

 This means the drug is safe for humans who administer it or come into contact with the animal receiving the treatment.

 Now let's look at the candidate senses:

 1. sense_key=people%1:14:00:: | definition=(plural) any group of human beings (men or women or children) collectively | examples=old people; there were at least 200 people in the audience
 - This is the general, collective sense of human beings. It refers to humans in general or collectively.

 2. sense_key=people%1:14:01:: | definition=the body of citizens of a state or country | synonyms=citizenry | examples=the Spanish people
 - This refers to a specific national or civic group (citizenry). The context isn't about citizenship or nationality.

 3. sense_key=people%1:14:02:: | definition=members of a family line | examples=his people have been farmers for generations; are your people still alive?
 - This refers to family, relatives, ancestry. The context isn't about family lines.

 4. sense_key=people%1:14:03:: | definition=the common people generally | synonyms=multitude, masses, mass, hoi polloi, the great unwashed | examples=separate the warriors from the mass; power to the people
 - This refers to the masses, common folk, as opposed to elite or specific classes. The context isn't about social classes or the masses vs. elite.

 In the context "Cerenia does not represent a particular risk for people", the word "people" refers to human beings in general - specifically those who might handle the medicine or come into contact with the treated animal. This is the general collective sense of human beings.

 Sense 1 is the hypernym/general category: "any group of human beings (men or women or children) collectively". This fits best because it's referring to humans generally (the persons administering the drug), not citizens of a country, family members, or the masses.

 The question asks about "the person who gives the medicine or comes into contact with the animal" and then states the risk for "people". This is using "people" as the plural of "person" in a general sense - human beings.

 Therefore, sense 1 is the correct choice.

 Wait, let me double-check WordNet sense numbering. In WordNet, people%1:14:00:: is indeed the first sense - (plural) any group of human beings (men or women or children) collectively.

 The context is about safety for humans administering veterinary medicine. This is the general sense of "human beings" - sense 1.

 Sense 4 (the masses) is sometimes confused with general "people", but it specifically refers to the common people as opposed to elite/classes. The context here isn't about social stratification.

 Sense 2 (citizenry) is too specific to political/national identity.

 Sense 3 (family) is clearly wrong.

 So the answer is sense 1.

 The user wants the output as: {"sense_index": 1}

provider: Chutes