[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: month
Target surface form: months
Context:
Scientists call the new class of genes tumor-suppressors, or simply anti-cancer genes. When functioning normally, they make proteins that hold a cell's growth in check. But if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation, a chemical or through a chance accident in cell division -- their growth-suppressing proteins no longer work, and cells normally under control turn malignant. The newly identified genes differ from a family of genes discovered in the early 1980s called oncogenes. Oncogenes must be present for a cell to become malignant, but researchers have found them in normal as well as in cancerous cells, suggesting that oncogenes don't cause cancer by themselves. In recent <t>months</t>, researchers have come to believe the two types of cancer genes work in concert: An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged. Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each parent.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=month%1:28:01:: | definition=one of the twelve divisions of the calendar year | synonyms=calendar month | examples=he paid the bill last month
2. sense_key=month%1:28:00:: | definition=a time unit of approximately 30 days | examples=he was given a month to pay the bill

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 "months" in the given context.

Target lemma: month
Target surface form: months
Context: "In recent <t>months</t>, researchers have come to believe..."

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=month%1:28:01:: | definition=one of the twelve divisions of the calendar year | synonyms=calendar month | examples=he paid the bill last month
2. sense_key=month%1:28:00:: | definition=a time unit of approximately 30 days | examples=he was given a month to pay the bill

Let me analyze the context:
- The phrase is "In recent months"
- This refers to a period of time in the recent past
- It's talking about a duration or period of time (several months)
- The context is scientific/research oriented, discussing recent developments in cancer gene research

Now let's look at the two senses:

Sense 1: "one of the twelve divisions of the calendar year" - This refers to specific named months (January, February, etc.) as divisions of the calendar year.

Sense 2: "a time unit of approximately 30 days" - This refers to the duration of time, approximately 30 days.

In the phrase "In recent months":
- This typically means "in the recent past, spanning a period of several months"
- It's referring to a duration of time (approximately 30-day units) rather than specific calendar divisions
- When we say "in recent months," we're not usually referring to specific named months like "January" or "February" as distinct entities, but rather a time period extending back from now for a few month-length durations.

However, I need to be careful. Let me think about how these senses are distinguished in WordNet.

Sense 1 (month%1:28:01::) - "calendar month" - refers to the named divisions: January, February, March, etc.
Sense 2 (month%1:28:00::) - refers to the duration of approximately 30 days.

In "In recent months":
- If I say "in recent months," I could be referring to "in the past few calendar months" (like September, October, November if we're in December)
- Or I could be referring to "a period of time consisting of several 30-day units"

But looking at the examples:
- Sense 1 example: "he paid the bill last month" - here "last month" refers to the specific calendar month (e.g., October if we're in November)
- Sense 2 example: "he was given a month to pay the bill" - here "a month" refers to a duration of approximately 30 days

In "In recent months":
- This is similar to "last month" in that it refers to specific calendar months (the recent ones), but plural
- However, it could also be interpreted as a duration

Wait, let me reconsider. The distinction in WordNet is often:
- Sense 1: The calendar month as a named entity (January, February, etc.)
- Sense 2: A month as a period of time (30 days)

But "recent months" is ambiguous. However, looking at typical WSD datasets and how these are annotated:

"In recent months" usually maps to sense 1 (calendar month) because it's referring to specific months of the calendar (like "in recent months, the economy has improved" - referring to March, April, May, etc.).

But wait, sense 2 is "a time unit of approximately 30 days". If I say "for recent months", that would clearly be sense 2. But "in recent months" is more like "during the recent calendar months".

Actually, looking more carefully:
- "In recent months" = during the recent calendar months (specific named months)
- This would be sense 1.

But let me check if there's a pattern. In WordNet:
- month%1:28:01:: is the "calendar month" sense (the 12 divisions)
- month%1:28:00:: is the "time unit" sense (approx 30 days)

The phrase "in recent months" typically refers to the recent calendar months (e.g., "In recent months, researchers have..." means during the past few calendar months like August, September, October).

However, there's a subtle distinction. When we say "recent months" we could mean:
1. The recent calendar months (as entities)
2. A recent time period measured in months

But looking at the examples provided:
- Sense 1: "he paid the bill last month" - refers to a specific calendar month
- Sense 2: "he was given a month to pay the bill" - refers to a duration

"In recent months" patterns with "last month" - both refer to specific time periods identified by the calendar system.

Actually, I think I need to look at this more carefully. In many WSD systems:
- "last month", "this month", "next month" -> sense 1 (calendar month)
- "a month", "two months", "several months" (as duration) -> sense 2

But "recent months" is plural and refers to multiple calendar months as entities.

Wait, but "months" in "in recent months" could be interpreted either way. Let me think about the semantics.

If sense 1 is "one of the twelve divisions of the calendar year", then "months" (plural) would be multiple such divisions.
If sense 2 is "a time unit of approximately 30 days", then "months" (plural) would be multiple such time units.

The phrase "in recent months" is most naturally interpreted as referring to the recent calendar months (e.g., September, October, November), which would be sense 1.

However, there's another way to look at it. "Recent months" as a duration vs. "recent months" as specific named months.

Actually, looking at WordNet sense distinctions more carefully:
- Sense 1 (month%1:28:01::): This is the hyponym of "time period, period of time, period" - specifically the calendar months.
- Sense 2 (month%1:28:00::): This is also a hyponym of "time unit, unit of time" - specifically approximately 30 days.

The key difference is:
- Sense 1: Calendar month (January, February, etc.) - a specific division of the year
- Sense 2: A month as a duration (30 days) - can be any consecutive 30 days

In "in recent months":
- This refers to the recent past, comprising the recent calendar months.
- It is not referring to an arbitrary duration of 30-day periods, but to the specific months of the calendar.

For example, if today is December 15, "in recent months" means September, October, November (or October, November, December depending on how you count). These are specific calendar months.

Therefore, this should be sense 1.

But wait, I should double-check. Is there any reason to think it's sense 2?

Sense 2 examples: "he was given a month to pay the bill" - here it's clearly a duration.
Sense 1 examples: "he paid the bill last month" - here it's a specific calendar month.

"In recent months" is similar to "last month" in that it anchors to the calendar.

However, I recall that in some WSD datasets, "months" when used as a plural duration (like "for two months") is sense 2, while "month" when referring to a specific named month is sense 1.

But "recent months" is borderline. However, the phrase "in recent months" typically patterns with calendar time references.

Let me reconsider the definitions:
1. "one of the twelve divisions of the calendar year" - This emphasizes the division of the year.
2. "a time unit of approximately 30 days" - This emphasizes the duration.

"In recent months" - are we talking about divisions of the year or time units?

I think the safest answer is sense 1, because:
1. "Recent months" refers to specific months on the calendar (like October, November, etc.)
2. It parallels "last month" which is the example for sense 1
3. If it were sense 2, it would emphasize the duration (approx 30 days each), but "recent" here is locating us in calendar time.

Actually, looking at it again, I think either could be argued, but sense 1 is more likely the intended answer because "in recent months" is a calendrical reference.

Wait, I should check if there's a convention. In WordNet 3.0 or 3.1, how are these distinguished?

month%1:28:01:: - calendar month
month%1:28:00:: - lunar month or approximately 30 days?

Actually, looking at the sense keys:
- month%1:28:01:: is the second sense (index 1)
- month%1:28:00:: is the first sense (index 0)

The user asks for the "sense_index". Looking at the candidate senses:
1. sense_key=month%1:28:01:: (this is index 1)
2. sense_key=month%1:28:00:: (this is index 0)

Wait, the user lists them as:
1. sense_key=month%1:28:01::
2. sense_key=month%1:28:00::

So "sense_index" would be 1 or 2? Or 0 or 1?

The user says "Choose the single best indexed sense" and "Return only a JSON object exactly like {"sense_index": 3}."

Looking at the candidate senses, they are numbered 1 and 2. So I should return either {"sense_index": 1} or {"sense_index": 2}.

Now, which one?

Let me think about the phrase "in recent months" again.

If I say "The research was conducted over a period of two months" - that's clearly sense 2 (duration).
If I say "The research was conducted in January and February" - that's sense 1 (calendar months).
If I say "The research was conducted in recent months" - this is closer to the second, referring to specific calendar months (March, April, etc.).

But there's a twist. "Recent months" could be interpreted as "the recent past, lasting several months" which emphasizes the duration.

However, I think the key is that sense 1 requires reference to the calendar system (the twelve divisions), while sense 2 is just a time unit.

"In recent months" makes sense as referring to the recent divisions of the calendar year.

But let me look for similar examples in SemCor or other WSD corpora.

In SemCor:
- "month" sense 1 (calendar month): "the month of January", "last month", "this month", "the past month"
- "month" sense 2 (30 days): "a month", "two months", "six months", "for a month"

The pattern seems to be:
- When referring to named months or specific months on the calendar (including "last month", "this month", "next month"), it's sense 1.
- When referring to a duration of approximately 30 days, it's sense 2.

"Recent months" - is this like "last month" (sense 1) or like "two months" (sense 2)?

"Recent months" is similar to "past months" or "last few months". This refers to specific calendar months.

Therefore, I believe the answer is sense 1 (the one with sense_key month%1:28:01::).

But wait, the user lists:
1. sense_key=month%1:28:01::
2. sense_key=month%1:28:00::

So if I choose sense 1, I return {"sense_index": 1}.

But I need to be absolutely sure. Let me reconsider.

Definition 1: "one of the twelve divisions of the calendar year"
Definition 2: "a time unit of approximately 30 days"

"In recent months" - are these divisions of the calendar year? Yes, they are recent divisions (September, October, November, etc.).

Are they time units of approximately 30 days? Well, yes, each month is approximately 30 days, but the phrase "recent months" emphasizes their calendrical identity rather than their duration.

Also, note that sense 1 has the synonym "calendar month", which strongly suggests that "in recent months" refers to calendar months.

Therefore, sense 1 is correct.

One final check: Could "in recent months" mean "in a recent time period measured in months" (sense 2)?

For example, "in recent months" = "in the recent past, a duration of several months".

But compare:
- "In the past two months" - this could be either, but likely sense 2 (duration).
- "In recent months" - this refers to the months themselves as entities.

I think I'm overthinking this. The answer is sense 1.

Wait, I just realized something. In WordNet, sense 1 (month%1:28:01::) is actually the more common sense for "month" when referring to the calendar month, and sense 2 (month%1:28:00::) is the lunar month or the 30-day unit.

But in the candidate list, sense 1 is month%1:28:01:: and sense 2 is month%1:28:00::.

Actually, looking at WordNet 3.1:
- month%1:28:00:: - a time unit of approximately 30 days; "he was given a month to pay the bill"
- month%1:28:01:: - one of the twelve divisions of the calendar year; "he paid the bill last month"

So the order in the candidate list is reversed from the WordNet offset order, but that's fine.

Now, "in recent months":
- If I say "in the past two months", I could argue for sense 2 (duration).
- But "in recent months" without a number is more like "lately", referring to the recent calendar months.

I found a similar example in my mind: "in recent years" - this would be sense 1 of "year" (calendar year), not sense 2 (a period of time occupying a regular part of a calendar year? No, year senses are different).

Actually, for "year":
- year%1:28:00:: - a period of time containing 365 (or 366) days
- year%1:28:01:: - a period of time occupying a regular part of a calendar year

Wait, that's different.

For month:
- Sense 0 (28:00): time unit of approximately 30 days
- Sense 1 (28:01): one of the twelve divisions of the calendar year

"In recent months" = in the recent divisions of the calendar year.

Yes, sense 1.

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: come
Target surface form: come
Context:
Scientists call the new class of genes tumor-suppressors, or simply anti-cancer genes. When functioning normally, they make proteins that hold a cell's growth in check. But if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation, a chemical or through a chance accident in cell division -- their growth-suppressing proteins no longer work, and cells normally under control turn malignant. The newly identified genes differ from a family of genes discovered in the early 1980s called oncogenes. Oncogenes must be present for a cell to become malignant, but researchers have found them in normal as well as in cancerous cells, suggesting that oncogenes don't cause cancer by themselves. In recent months, researchers have <t>come</t> to believe the two types of cancer genes work in concert: An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged. Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each parent.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=come%2:38:00:: | definition=move toward, travel toward something or somebody or approach something or somebody | synonyms=come up | examples=He came singing down the road; Come with me to the Casbah
2. sense_key=come%2:38:04:: | definition=reach a destination; arrive by movement or progress | synonyms=arrive, get | examples=She arrived home at 7 o'clock; She didn't get to Chicago until after midnight
3. sense_key=come%2:30:01:: | definition=come to pass; arrive, as in due course | examples=The first success came three days later; It came as a shock
4. sense_key=come%2:30:03:: | definition=reach or enter a state, relation, condition, use, or position | examples=The water came to a boil; We came to understand the true meaning of life
5. sense_key=come%2:42:04:: | definition=to be the product or result | synonyms=follow | examples=Melons come from a vine; Understanding comes from experience
6. sense_key=come%2:30:02:: | definition=be found or available | examples=These shoes come in three colors; The furniture comes unassembled
7. sense_key=come%2:42:13:: | definition=come forth | synonyms=issue forth | examples=A scream came from the woman's mouth; His breath came hard
8. sense_key=come%2:42:09:: | definition=be a native of | synonyms=hail | examples=She hails from Kalamazoo
9. sense_key=come%2:42:03:: | definition=extend or reach | examples=The water came up to my waist; The sleeves come to your knuckles
10. sense_key=come%2:42:05:: | definition=exist or occur in a certain point in a series | examples=Next came the student from France
11. sense_key=come%2:38:03:: | definition=cover a certain distance | examples=She came a long way
12. sense_key=come%2:42:00:: | definition=come under, be classified or included | synonyms=fall | examples=fall into a category; This comes under a new heading
13. sense_key=come%2:30:13:: | definition=happen as a result | examples=Nothing good will come of this
14. sense_key=come%2:42:12:: | definition=add up in number or quantity | synonyms=total, number, add up, amount | examples=The bills amounted to $2,000; The bill came to $2,000
15. sense_key=come%2:42:11:: | definition=develop into | synonyms=add up, amount | examples=This idea will never amount to anything; nothing came of his grandiose plans
16. sense_key=come%2:38:02:: | definition=be received | synonyms=come in | examples=News came in of the massacre in Rwanda
17. sense_key=come%2:31:14:: | definition=come to one's mind; suggest itself | synonyms=occur | examples=It occurred to me that we should hire another secretary; A great idea then came to her
18. sense_key=come%2:42:15:: | definition=come from; be connected by a relationship of blood, for example | synonyms=derive, descend | examples=She was descended from an old Italian noble family; he comes from humble origins
19. sense_key=come%2:42:02:: | definition=proceed or get along | synonyms=do, fare, make out, get along | examples=How is she doing in her new job?; How are you making out in graduate school?
20. sense_key=come%2:39:00:: | definition=experience orgasm | examples=she could not come because she was too upset
21. sense_key=come%2:31:13:: | definition=have a certain priority | examples=My family comes first

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) on the word "come" in the given context.

 Context analysis:
 - The sentence is: "In recent months, researchers have <t>come</t> to believe the two types of cancer genes work in concert..."
 - The structure is "come to believe" - this is a common construction meaning "to begin to believe" or "to reach a state of believing"
 - The meaning is about reaching a mental state or condition (the state of believing something)

 Looking at the candidate senses:

 1. sense_key=come%2:38:00:: - move toward, travel toward... (physical movement) - doesn't fit, not about physical movement.

 2. sense_key=come%2:38:04:: - reach a destination; arrive... (physical arrival) - doesn't fit.

 3. sense_key=come%2:30:01:: - come to pass; arrive, as in due course... (happen/occur) - "The first success came three days later" - this is about events happening, not about reaching a mental state.

 4. sense_key=come%2:30:03:: - reach or enter a state, relation, condition, use, or position - examples: "The water came to a boil", "We came to understand the true meaning of life" - This looks very promising. "Come to believe" fits the pattern "come to [verb/understand]" meaning reaching a state.

 5. sense_key=come%2:42:04:: - to be the product or result - "Melons come from a vine" - not this.

 6. sense_key=come%2:30:02:: - be found or available - "These shoes come in three colors" - not this.

 7. sense_key=come%2:42:13:: - come forth - "A scream came from the woman's mouth" - not this.

 8. sense_key=come%2:42:09:: - be a native of - "She hails from Kalamazoo" - not this.

 9. sense_key=come%2:42:03:: - extend or reach - physical extension - not this.

 10. sense_key=come%2:42:05:: - exist or occur in a certain point in a series - "Next came the student from France" - not this.

 11. sense_key=come%2:38:03:: - cover a certain distance - physical - not this.

 12. sense_key=come%2:42:00:: - come under, be classified or included - "fall into a category" - not this.

 13. sense_key=come%2:30:13:: - happen as a result - "Nothing good will come of this" - not this.

 14. sense_key=come%2:42:12:: - add up in number or quantity - "The bill came to $2,000" - not this.

 15. sense_key=come%2:42:11:: - develop into - "nothing came of his grandiose plans" - not this.

 16. sense_key=come%2:38:02:: - be received - "News came in..." - not this.

 17. sense_key=come%2:31:14:: - come to one's mind; suggest itself - "It occurred to me..." - not this, though similar, "come to believe" is not about something occurring to someone suddenly, but about reaching a state of belief over time.

 18. sense_key=come%2:42:15:: - come from; be connected by a relationship of blood - "he comes from humble origins" - not this.

 19. sense_key=come%2:42:02:: - proceed or get along - "How is she doing..." - not this.

 20. sense_key=come%2:39:00:: - experience orgasm - definitely not this.

 21. sense_key=come%2:31:13:: - have a certain priority - "My family comes first" - not this.

 So the best match is sense 4: "reach or enter a state, relation, condition, use, or position" with examples including "We came to understand..."

 The phrase "come to believe" is a standard idiom meaning "to begin to believe" or "to reach the state of believing", which fits sense 4 perfectly.

 Wait, let me double-check sense 3 vs sense 4.
 Sense 3: "come to pass; arrive, as in due course" - examples: "The first success came three days later; It came as a shock" - This is about events happening.
 Sense 4: "reach or enter a state, relation, condition, use, or position" - examples: "The water came to a boil; We came to understand the true meaning of life"

 Yes, "come to believe" is clearly about entering a state (the state of believing), so sense 4 is correct.

 The index is 4.

 Wait, I need to check if there's any other sense that might fit.
 Sense 17 is "come to one's mind" - but "come to believe" is not about something occurring to you, it's about a gradual or eventual reaching of a belief state.

 Sense 4 is definitely the right choice.

 The JSON should be: {"sense_index": 4}

format: unknown

native_finish_reason: stop

provider: AtlasCloud

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: cancer
Target surface form: cancer
Context:
Scientists call the new class of genes tumor-suppressors, or simply anti-cancer genes. When functioning normally, they make proteins that hold a cell's growth in check. But if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation, a chemical or through a chance accident in cell division -- their growth-suppressing proteins no longer work, and cells normally under control turn malignant. The newly identified genes differ from a family of genes discovered in the early 1980s called oncogenes. Oncogenes must be present for a cell to become malignant, but researchers have found them in normal as well as in cancerous cells, suggesting that oncogenes don't cause cancer by themselves. In recent months, researchers have come to believe the two types of <t>cancer</t> genes work in concert: An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged. Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each parent.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=cancer%1:26:00:: | definition=any malignant growth or tumor caused by abnormal and uncontrolled cell division; it may spread to other parts of the body through the lymphatic system or the blood stream | synonyms=malignant neoplastic disease
2. sense_key=cancer%1:18:00:: | definition=(astrology) a person who is born while the sun is in Cancer | synonyms=Crab
3. sense_key=cancer%1:17:00:: | definition=a small zodiacal constellation in the northern hemisphere; between Leo and Gemini
4. sense_key=cancer%1:15:00:: | definition=the fourth sign of the zodiac; the sun is in this sign from about June 21 to July 22 | synonyms=Cancer the Crab, Crab
5. sense_key=cancer%1:05:00:: | definition=type genus of the family Cancridae | synonyms=genus Cancer

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 "cancer" in the given context.

 Let me analyze the context:
 - The text is about genes, specifically "tumor-suppressors" or "anti-cancer genes"
 - It discusses how these genes function in relation to cell growth and malignancy
 - It mentions "cancerous cells"
 - It talks about "cancer genes" (the target word is in the phrase "two types of <t>cancer</t> genes")
 - The context is clearly medical/biological, discussing tumors, malignancy, cell division, oncogenes, etc.

 Now let's look at the candidate senses:
 1. sense_key=cancer%1:26:00:: - definition=any malignant growth or tumor caused by abnormal and uncontrolled cell division... (This is the disease/medical sense)
 2. sense_key=cancer%1:18:00:: - (astrology) a person who is born while the sun is in Cancer (astrological sign/person)
 3. sense_key=cancer%1:17:00:: - a small zodiacal constellation (astronomy)
 4. sense_key=cancer%1:15:00:: - the fourth sign of the zodiac (astrology)
 5. sense_key=cancer%1:05:00:: - type genus of the family Cancridae (crab genus - biology but crustaceans)

 The context is clearly about the disease "cancer" - malignant growth, tumors, oncogenes, tumor-suppressor genes, etc.

 The target word appears in the phrase: "two types of <t>cancer</t> genes"

 This refers to genes related to the disease cancer (malignant neoplastic disease).

 So the correct sense is sense 1: cancer%1:26:00:: (the disease).

 Wait, let me double-check the sense indices. The user lists them as:
 1. sense_key=cancer%1:26:00::
 2. sense_key=cancer%1:18:00::
 3. sense_key=cancer%1:17:00::
 4. sense_key=cancer%1:15:00::
 5. sense_key=cancer%1:05:00::

 So sense_index would be 1.

 But let me verify the WordNet sense keys to make sure I understand the numbering correctly. The user is asking for the "sense_index" which appears to be the number in the list (1, 2, 3, 4, or 5).

 The context is definitely about the medical condition/disease, not the astrological sign, constellation, or crab genus.

 Therefore, the answer should be {"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: turn
Target surface form: turn
Context:
Scientists call the new class of genes tumor-suppressors, or simply anti-cancer genes. When functioning normally, they make proteins that hold a cell's growth in check. But if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation, a chemical or through a chance accident in cell division -- their growth-suppressing proteins no longer work, and cells normally under control turn malignant. The newly identified genes differ from a family of genes discovered in the early 1980s called oncogenes. Oncogenes must be present for a cell to become malignant, but researchers have found them in normal as well as in cancerous cells, suggesting that oncogenes don't cause cancer by themselves. In recent months, researchers have come to believe the two types of cancer genes work in concert: An oncogene may <t>turn</t> proliferating cells malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged. Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each parent.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=turn%2:38:00:: | definition=change orientation or direction, also in the abstract sense | examples=Turn towards me; The mugger turned and fled before I could see his face
2. sense_key=turn%2:30:04:: | definition=undergo a transformation or a change of position or action | synonyms=change state | examples=We turned from Socialism to Capitalism; The people turned against the President when he stole the election
3. sense_key=turn%2:42:00:: | definition=undergo a change or development | synonyms=become | examples=The water turned into ice; Her former friend became her worst enemy
4. sense_key=turn%2:38:02:: | definition=cause to move around or rotate | examples=turn a key; turn your palm this way
5. sense_key=turn%2:30:00:: | definition=change to the contrary | synonyms=change by reversal, reverse | examples=The trend was reversed; the tides turned against him
6. sense_key=turn%2:38:03:: | definition=pass to the other side of | synonyms=move around | examples=turn the corner; move around the obstacle
7. sense_key=turn%2:30:03:: | definition=pass into a condition gradually, take on a specific property or attribute; become | synonyms=grow | examples=The weather turned nasty; She grew angry
8. sense_key=turn%2:35:08:: | definition=let (something) fall or spill from a container | synonyms=release | examples=turn the flour onto a plate
9. sense_key=turn%2:38:04:: | definition=move around an axis or a center | examples=The wheels are turning
10. sense_key=turn%2:38:01:: | definition=cause to move around a center so as to show another side of | synonyms=turn over | examples=turn a page of a book
11. sense_key=turn%2:38:06:: | definition=to send or let go | examples=They turned away the crowd at the gate of the governor's mansion
12. sense_key=turn%2:36:00:: | definition=to break and turn over earth especially with a plow | synonyms=plow, plough | examples=Farmer Jones plowed his east field last week; turn the earth in the Spring
13. sense_key=turn%2:35:06:: | definition=shape by rotating on a lathe or cutting device or a wheel | examples=turn the legs of the table; turn the clay on the wheel
14. sense_key=turn%2:30:09:: | definition=change color | examples=In Vermont, the leaves turn early
15. sense_key=turn%2:29:00:: | definition=twist suddenly so as to sprain | synonyms=twist, sprain, wrench, wrick, rick | examples=wrench one's ankle; The wrestler twisted his shoulder
16. sense_key=turn%2:42:13:: | definition=cause to change or turn into something different;assume new characteristics | examples=The princess turned the frog into a prince by kissing him; The alchemists tried to turn lead into gold
17. sense_key=turn%2:41:10:: | definition=accomplish by rotating | examples=turn a somersault; turn cartwheels
18. sense_key=turn%2:40:13:: | definition=get by buying and selling | examples=the company turned a good profit after a year
19. sense_key=turn%2:38:13:: | definition=cause to move along an axis or into a new direction | examples=turn your face to the wall; turn the car around
20. sense_key=turn%2:38:14:: | definition=channel one's attention, interest, thought, or attention toward or away from something | examples=The pedophile turned to boys for satisfaction; people turn to mysticism at the turn of a millennium
21. sense_key=turn%2:35:11:: | definition=cause (a plastic object) to assume a crooked or angular form | synonyms=flex, bend, deform, twist | examples=bend the rod; twist the dough into a braid
22. sense_key=turn%2:35:10:: | definition=alter the functioning or setting of | examples=turn the dial to 10; turn the heat down
23. sense_key=turn%2:33:13:: | definition=direct at someone | examples=She turned a smile on me; They turned their flashlights on the car
24. sense_key=turn%2:32:14:: | definition=have recourse to or make an appeal or request for help or information to | synonyms=call on | examples=She called on her Representative to help her; She turned to her relatives for help
25. sense_key=turn%2:30:01:: | definition=go sour or spoil | synonyms=sour, ferment, work | examples=The milk has soured; The wine worked
26. sense_key=turn%2:30:14:: | definition=become officially one year older | examples=She is turning 50 this year

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 "turn" in the given context.

 Let me analyze the context:
 "An oncogene may <t>turn</t> proliferating cells malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged."

 The sentence is saying that an oncogene may cause proliferating cells to become malignant (cancerous). So "turn" here means "cause to become" or "change into".

 Looking at the candidate senses:

 1. change orientation or direction - doesn't fit, not about physical orientation
 2. undergo a transformation - this is intransitive "We turned from Socialism..." but here we have "turn cells malignant" (transitive)
 3. undergo a change or development - intransitive "The water turned into ice" - similar to above but intransitive
 4. cause to move around or rotate - physical movement, not right
 5. change to the contrary - "The trend was reversed" - not quite right
 6. pass to the other side of - physical movement
 7. pass into a condition gradually - intransitive "The weather turned nasty"
 8. let fall or spill - not relevant
 9. move around an axis - physical
 10. cause to move around a center - physical
 11. to send or let go - not relevant
 12. break and turn over earth - farming, not relevant
 13. shape by rotating - manufacturing, not relevant
 14. change color - "leaves turn" - not relevant
 15. twist suddenly - injury, not relevant
 16. cause to change or turn into something different; assume new characteristics - "The princess turned the frog into a prince" - this fits! It's transitive and means causing something to become something else.
 17. accomplish by rotating - physical
 18. get by buying and selling - financial, not relevant
 19. cause to move along an axis - physical direction
 20. channel one's attention - "turn to boys for satisfaction" - not quite right
 21. cause to assume a crooked form - bending, not right
 22. alter the functioning or setting - "turn the dial" - not right
 23. direct at someone - "turn a smile on me" - not right
 24. have recourse to - "turn to her relatives" - not right
 25. go sour or spoil - "milk has soured" - not right
 26. become officially one year older - "turning 50" - not right

 Sense 16 looks like the best fit: "cause to change or turn into something different; assume new characteristics" with the example "The princess turned the frog into a prince by kissing him; The alchemists tried to turn lead into gold"

 The structure in the text is "turn [object] [adjective/state]" (turn cells malignant) which matches "turn the frog into a prince" or conceptually "turn lead into gold".

 Wait, let me look at sense 3 again: "undergo a change or development" - examples: "The water turned into ice; Her former friend became her worst enemy". This is intransitive.

 Sense 16 is transitive: "cause to change..."

 In the sentence: "An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant" - the oncogene is the agent causing the change, the cells are the object, and malignant is the resulting state. This is a causative use.

 Sense 16: "cause to change or turn into something different;assume new characteristics"

 This matches perfectly.

 Let me check if there's any other sense that could fit...

 Sense 2: "undergo a transformation" - but this is intransitive. The subject of "turn" in the sentence is "An oncogene", and it's causing the cells to turn malignant. So it's transitive.

 Sense 7: "pass into a condition gradually" - intransitive "The weather turned nasty"

 Sense 3: "undergo a change" - intransitive

 So yes, sense 16 is the correct one: turn%2:42:13::

 The user asks to return only a JSON object like {"sense_index": 3}.

 So I need to identify the index. Looking at the list:

 1. sense_key=turn%2:38:00::
 2. sense_key=turn%2:30:04::
 3. sense_key=turn%2:42:00::
 4. sense_key=turn%2:38:02::
 5. sense_key=turn%2:30:00::
 6. sense_key=turn%2:38:03::
 7. sense_key=turn%2:30:03::
 8. sense_key=turn%2:35:08::
 9. sense_key=turn%2:38:04::
 10. sense_key=turn%2:38:01::
 11. sense_key=turn%2:38:06::
 12. sense_key=turn%2:36:00::
 13. sense_key=turn%2:35:06::
 14. sense_key=turn%2:30:09::
 15. sense_key=turn%2:29:00::
 16. sense_key=turn%2:42:13::
 17. sense_key=turn%2:41:10::
 18. sense_key=turn%2:40:13::
 19. sense_key=turn%2:38:13::
 20. sense_key=turn%2:38:14::
 21. sense_key=turn%2:35:11::
 22. sense_key=turn%2:35:10::
 23. sense_key=turn%2:33:13::
 24. sense_key=turn%2:32:14::
 25. sense_key=turn%2:30:01::
 26. sense_key=turn%2:30:14::

 So sense 16 is index 16.

 Wait, I should double-check the sense numbers to make sure I'm counting correctly.

 The list shows:
 1. sense_key=...
 2. sense_key=...
 ...
 16. sense_key=turn%2:42:13::

 Yes, it's the 16th item in the list.

 So the answer should be {"sense_index": 16}.

 Let me verify once more that sense 16 is correct.

 Definition: "cause to change or turn into something different;assume new characteristics"
 Examples: "The princess turned the frog into a prince by kissing him; The alchemists tried to turn lead into gold"

 Context: "An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant..."

 This is exactly the structure: turn [cells] [malignant] - causing cells to become malignant.

 Yes, this is definitely sense 16.

provider: StreamLake


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

[User]
Target lemma: cell
Target surface form: cells
Context:
Scientists call the new class of genes tumor-suppressors, or simply anti-cancer genes. When functioning normally, they make proteins that hold a cell's growth in check. But if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation, a chemical or through a chance accident in cell division -- their growth-suppressing proteins no longer work, and cells normally under control turn malignant. The newly identified genes differ from a family of genes discovered in the early 1980s called oncogenes. Oncogenes must be present for a cell to become malignant, but researchers have found them in normal as well as in cancerous cells, suggesting that oncogenes don't cause cancer by themselves. In recent months, researchers have come to believe the two types of cancer genes work in concert: An oncogene may turn proliferating <t>cells</t> malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged. Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each parent.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=cell%1:06:03:: | definition=any small compartment | examples=the cells of a honeycomb
2. sense_key=cell%1:03:00:: | definition=(biology) the basic structural and functional unit of all organisms; they may exist as independent units of life (as in monads) or may form colonies or tissues as in higher plants and animals
3. sense_key=cell%1:06:00:: | definition=a device that delivers an electric current as the result of a chemical reaction | synonyms=electric cell
4. sense_key=cell%1:14:00:: | definition=a small unit serving as part of or as the nucleus of a larger political movement | synonyms=cadre
5. sense_key=cell%1:06:04:: | definition=a hand-held mobile radiotelephone for use in an area divided into small sections, each with its own short-range transmitter/receiver | synonyms=cellular telephone, cellular phone, cellphone, mobile phone
6. sense_key=cell%1:06:02:: | definition=small room in which a monk or nun lives | synonyms=cubicle
7. sense_key=cell%1:06:01:: | definition=a room where a prisoner is kept | synonyms=jail cell, prison cell

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 "cells" in the given context.

 Let me analyze the context:
 - The text is about biology, specifically genetics and cancer
 - It mentions "tumor-suppressors", "anti-cancer genes", "proteins", "cell division", "malignant", "oncogenes", "cancerous cells"
 - The specific sentence with the target word: "An oncogene may turn proliferating <t>cells</t> malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged."
 - The word "proliferating" suggests biological reproduction/growth of cells
 - The context is clearly biological/medical

 Now let's look at the candidate senses:

 1. cell%1:06:03:: - any small compartment (examples: honeycomb) - This is a physical structural sense, not biological.

 2. cell%1:03:00:: - (biology) the basic structural and functional unit of all organisms... - This is the biological definition. It mentions they may exist as independent units or form colonies/tissues. This fits perfectly with the context of cancer, genes, cell division, etc.

 3. cell%1:06:00:: - electric cell - This is about batteries/electricity. Not relevant.

 4. cell%1:14:00:: - political cell/cadre - Political movement sense. Not relevant.

 5. cell%1:06:04:: - cellular telephone - Mobile phone. Not relevant.

 6. cell%1:06:02:: - monk/nun living space. Not relevant.

 7. cell%1:06:01:: - prison cell. Not relevant.

 The context is clearly biological. The text discusses:
 - Genes (tumor-suppressors, oncogenes)
 - Cell division
 - Proteins
 - Cancer/malignant transformation
 - Biological cells proliferating (multiplying)

 Therefore, sense 2 (cell%1:03:00::) is the correct choice.

 The user wants the output as: {"sense_index": 2}

 Wait, let me double-check the indexing. The candidate senses are numbered 1-7. I need to return the index number that corresponds to the best sense.

 Sense 2 is: cell%1:03:00:: - the biological definition.

 Yes, that's correct.


[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: only
Target surface form: only
Context:
Scientists call the new class of genes tumor-suppressors, or simply anti-cancer genes. When functioning normally, they make proteins that hold a cell's growth in check. But if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation, a chemical or through a chance accident in cell division -- their growth-suppressing proteins no longer work, and cells normally under control turn malignant. The newly identified genes differ from a family of genes discovered in the early 1980s called oncogenes. Oncogenes must be present for a cell to become malignant, but researchers have found them in normal as well as in cancerous cells, suggesting that oncogenes don't cause cancer by themselves. In recent months, researchers have come to believe the two types of cancer genes work in concert: An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant <t>only</t> after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged. Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each parent.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=only%4:02:02:: | definition=and nothing more | synonyms=merely, simply, just, but | examples=I was merely asking; it is simply a matter of time
2. sense_key=only%4:02:01:: | definition=without any others being included or involved | synonyms=entirely, exclusively, solely, alone | examples=was entirely to blame; a school devoted entirely to the needs of problem children
3. sense_key=only%4:02:00:: | definition=with nevertheless the final result | examples=He arrived only to find his wife dead; We won only to lose again in the next round
4. sense_key=only%4:02:04:: | definition=in the final outcome | examples=These news will only make you more upset
5. sense_key=only%4:02:06:: | definition=except that | examples=It was the same story; only this time she came out better
6. sense_key=only%4:02:03:: | definition=never except when | synonyms=only if, only when | examples=call me only if your cold gets worse
7. sense_key=only%4:02:05:: | definition=as recently as | examples=I spoke to him only an hour ago

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 "only" in the given context.

 Let me analyze the context:
 "An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant <t>only</t> after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged."

 The sentence is saying that an oncogene can turn cells malignant exclusively/solely under the condition that the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged. It's indicating a necessary condition or exclusivity - the malignant transformation happens exclusively when/after the tumor-suppressor gene is damaged.

 Looking at the candidate senses:

 1. sense_key=only%4:02:02:: | definition=and nothing more | synonyms=merely, simply, just, but | examples=I was merely asking; it is simply a matter of time
    - This seems to be about "merely" or "simply" - minimizing importance. Not quite right here.

 2. sense_key=only%4:02:01:: | definition=without any others being included or involved | synonyms=entirely, exclusively, solely, alone | examples=was entirely to blame; a school devoted entirely to the needs of problem children
    - This suggests exclusivity. "Only after" could fit here - meaning exclusively after, solely after. The malignant transformation happens exclusively under this condition.

 3. sense_key=only%4:02:00:: | definition=with nevertheless the final result | examples=He arrived only to find his wife dead; We won only to lose again in the next round
    - This is about an unexpected or ironic result. Not applicable here.

 4. sense_key=only%4:02:04:: | definition=in the final outcome | examples=These news will only make you more upset
    - This suggests an inevitable or ultimate result. Not quite right.

 5. sense_key=only%4:02:06:: | definition=except that | examples=It was the same story; only this time she came out better
    - This is used as a conjunction meaning "but" or "except". Not applicable here.

 6. sense_key=only%4:02:03:: | definition=never except when | synonyms=only if, only when | examples=call me only if your cold gets worse
    - This is about conditional exclusivity. "Only after" fits this pattern - never except when/after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged.

 7. sense_key=only%4:02:05:: | definition=as recently as | examples=I spoke to him only an hour ago
    - This is about recency. Not applicable.

 Now I need to decide between sense 2 (exclusively/solely) and sense 6 (never except when/only if/only when).

 The phrase is "only after".

 Sense 6 examples: "call me only if your cold gets worse" - this is about conditionality.
 Sense 2 examples: "was entirely to blame" - this is about exclusivity.

 "Only after" indicates that this is the exclusive condition or time when something happens. It's similar to "only if" or "only when" but with "after".

 Looking at the gloss for sense 6: "never except when" - this captures the conditional necessity.
 Looking at the gloss for sense 2: "without any others being included or involved" - this captures the exclusivity.

 In the context: "An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged."

 This means: The oncogene can turn cells malignant exclusively/solely under the condition that the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged. Or: The oncogene can never turn cells malignant except when/after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged.

 Both seem plausible, but let's look at the WordNet sense keys and their typical usage.

 Sense 6 (only%4:02:03::) is specifically for conditional contexts like "only if", "only when".
 Sense 2 (only%4:02:01::) is for "exclusively", "solely", "alone".

 The phrase "only after" is semantically closer to "only when" (temporal condition) than to general exclusivity. However, "only" here is modifying the temporal clause "after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged", indicating that this is the sole circumstance under which the malignant transformation occurs.

 Actually, looking carefully at the examples:
 - Sense 2 examples: "was entirely to blame", "a school devoted entirely to the needs of problem children" - these are about exclusive focus or blame.
 - Sense 6 examples: "call me only if your cold gets worse" - this is about a necessary condition.

 The sentence "An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant only after..." is stating a necessary condition for the oncogene to cause malignancy. It's saying that the oncogene causes malignancy exclusively under the condition that the tumor-suppressor is damaged, or never except when the tumor-suppressor is damaged.

 However, looking at standard WordNet disambiguation, "only" in "only after" constructions often maps to sense 2 (exclusively) or sense 6 (conditional).

 Let me reconsider the exact wording. The target is "only" in "only after".

 If I look at the definition of sense 6: "never except when" - this fits "only after" perfectly because "after" is a temporal "when".
 If I look at sense 2: "without any others being included or involved" - this also fits because it means "exclusively after".

 But sense 6 has the synonym "only when", which is structurally identical to "only after" (just changing the temporal preposition).

 Actually, looking at WordNet's organization:
 - Sense 1: merely, simply (minimizing)
 - Sense 2: exclusively, solely (exclusivity)
 - Sense 3: with nevertheless the final result (adversative)
 - Sense 4: in the final outcome (resultative)
 - Sense 5: as recently as (temporal recency)
 - Sense 6: except that (contrastive)
 - Sense 7: never except when (conditional)

 Wait, I need to check the sense keys again as provided:
 1. only%4:02:02::
 2. only%4:02:01::
 3. only%4:02:00::
 4. only%4:02:04::
 5. only%4:02:06::
 6. only%4:02:03::
 7. only%4:02:05::

 So:
 - Index 1: merely/simply
 - Index 2: exclusively/solely
 - Index 3: with nevertheless the final result
 - Index 4: in the final outcome
 - Index 5: except that
 - Index 6: never except when (only if/when)
 - Index 7: as recently as

 The context is: "An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged."

 This is saying that the oncogene causes malignancy exclusively under the condition that the tumor-suppressor is damaged. This is a necessary condition.

 "Only after" is equivalent to "not before" and "exclusively when after".

 Between sense 2 (exclusively) and sense 6 (never except when), sense 6 seems more specific to the conditional nature. However, sense 2 is also used for "solely" and "exclusively" in general.

 But looking at the example for sense 6: "call me only if your cold gets worse" - this is a conditional.
 The example for sense 2: "was entirely to blame", "devoted entirely to" - these are about exclusive focus.

 In "only after", the word "only" is restricting the temporal condition - saying that this specific temporal condition is the exclusive one under which the event happens. This is very similar to "only if" or "only when".

 However, I should check if "only after" is typically tagged as sense 2 or 6 in WordNet/SemCor data.

 In standard WordNet, "only" sense 2 (exclusively) covers uses like "only John came", "only three people", "only after dark".

 Sense 6 (never except when) covers "only if", "only when".

 Actually, looking at the gloss for sense 6 again: "never except when" - this is essentially the definition of a necessary condition. "Only after" fits this because it means "never except after".

 But sense 2 "without any others being included or involved" also fits because it means the malignancy happens exclusively after the damage, not before or during.

 I think the key distinction is that sense 6 is specifically for conditional contexts (if/when), while sense 2 is for general exclusivity.

 In this scientific context, "only after" is indicating a necessary temporal condition. The oncogene can cause malignancy exclusively in the circumstance where the tumor-suppressor is already damaged.

 Given that sense 6 explicitly mentions "only when" as a synonym, and "only after" is structurally and semantically parallel to "only when", I lean toward sense 6.

 However, looking at the provided examples for sense 2: "was entirely to blame" - this is about exclusive attribution. "devoted entirely to" - exclusive focus.

 For sense 6: "call me only if your cold gets worse" - this sets up a necessary condition for calling.

 The sentence sets up a necessary condition for the oncogene to cause malignancy: the tumor-suppressor must be damaged first.

 Therefore, sense 6 seems most appropriate.

 Wait, let me double-check by paraphrasing:
 - "exclusively after" (sense 2)
 - "never except after" (sense 6)
 - "solely after" (sense 2)

 Both work. But sense 6 is specifically about the conditional "never except when", which captures the necessary condition aspect better than the general exclusivity of sense 2.

 Also, looking at the word "concert" in the previous sentence: "work in concert". This suggests interaction. Then "only after" specifies the sequence/condition of this interaction.

 I think sense 6 (index 6) is the best choice.

 But let me reconsider sense 2. If I say "I eat only after midnight", this could be sense 2 (exclusively after midnight, not at other times) or sense 6 (never except when it is after midnight).

 In WordNet practice, temporal restrictions like "only after", "only then", "only yesterday" often map to different senses. "Only yesterday" would be sense 7 (as recently as). "Only then" might be sense 2 or 6.

 Actually, looking at standard WSD datasets for "only":
 - "only if" -> sense 6
 - "only when" -> sense 6
 - "only after" -> likely sense 6 or sense 2

 Given the scientific context emphasizing a necessary causal condition (the damage must occur first), and the parallel to "only if", I choose sense 6.

 Final check: The definition for sense 6 is "never except when". The sentence says the oncogene turns cells malignant never except when/after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged. This fits perfectly.

 The definition for sense 2 is "without any others being included or involved". While this could stretch to fit, it's less precise for the conditional temporal relationship described.

 Therefore, the answer is sense_index: 6.


[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: damage
Target surface form: damaged
Context:
Scientists call the new class of genes tumor-suppressors, or simply anti-cancer genes. When functioning normally, they make proteins that hold a cell's growth in check. But if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation, a chemical or through a chance accident in cell division -- their growth-suppressing proteins no longer work, and cells normally under control turn malignant. The newly identified genes differ from a family of genes discovered in the early 1980s called oncogenes. Oncogenes must be present for a cell to become malignant, but researchers have found them in normal as well as in cancerous cells, suggesting that oncogenes don't cause cancer by themselves. In recent months, researchers have come to believe the two types of cancer genes work in concert: An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been <t>damaged</t>. Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each parent.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=damage%2:30:00:: | definition=inflict damage upon | examples=The snow damaged the roof; She damaged the car when she hit the tree
2. sense_key=damage%2:30:01:: | definition=suffer or be susceptible to damage | examples=These fine china cups damage easily

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

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to perform Word Sense Disambiguation (WSD) on the word "damaged" in the given context.

 Target lemma: damage
 Target surface form: damaged
 Context: A scientific text about tumor-suppressor genes and oncogenes. The specific sentence is: "An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been <t>damaged</t>."

 Candidate senses:
 1. sense_key=damage%2:30:00:: | definition=inflict damage upon | examples=The snow damaged the roof; She damaged the car when she hit the tree
 2. sense_key=damage%2:30:01:: | definition=suffer or be susceptible to damage | examples=These fine china cups damage easily

 Analysis:
 - Sense 1 (damage%2:30:00::): This is the transitive sense where an agent inflicts damage upon something. The examples show external agents (snow, she) causing damage to objects (roof, car).
 - Sense 2 (damage%2:30:01::): This is the intransitive sense where something suffers damage or is susceptible to being damaged. The example shows "These fine china cups damage easily" - meaning they are susceptible to damage.

 In the context: "the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged"
 - This is a passive construction: "has been damaged"
 - The subject is "the tumor-suppressor gene"
 - The meaning is that the genes have undergone damage (perhaps by radiation, chemical, etc. as mentioned earlier in the text: "if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation...")
 - Earlier in the text: "But if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation, a chemical or through a chance accident in cell division"

 Looking at the passive construction "has been damaged":
 - This could correspond to sense 1 in passive voice (something damaged the genes)
 - Or it could correspond to sense 2 (the genes suffered damage)

 However, looking at the definitions:
 - Sense 1: "inflict damage upon" - this is the causative/agentive sense
 - Sense 2: "suffer or be susceptible to damage" - this is the patient/experiencer sense

 In the passive construction "has been damaged", the gene is the patient undergoing the damage. But we need to see which WordNet sense this maps to.

 Actually, looking at WordNet structure:
 - damage%2:30:00:: is the verb "damage" meaning to inflict damage (transitive)
 - damage%2:30:01:: is the verb "damage" meaning to suffer damage (intransitive)

 In "the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged", this is clearly a passive construction of the transitive verb (sense 1), where an external agent (radiation, chemical, etc.) inflicts damage upon the gene.

 However, let me reconsider. The passive "has been damaged" describes the state of the gene as having undergone damage. But in WordNet, sense 2 is specifically defined as "suffer or be susceptible to damage" with the example "These fine china cups damage easily."

 The example for sense 2 is intransitive - the cups damage (easily). This is about the property of being fragile or susceptible.

 In our context, "has been damaged" refers to a specific event where the genes were harmed by external factors (radiation, chemical, accident). This is the passive of sense 1.

 But wait, the question asks for the "best indexed sense" and the candidate senses are numbered 1 and 2.

 Let me look at the examples again:
 Sense 1 examples: "The snow damaged the roof" (agent=snow, patient=roof), "She damaged the car" (agent=she, patient=car)
 Sense 2 examples: "These fine china cups damage easily" (subject=cups, no agent, intransitive meaning)

 In the text: "if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation..."
 - This is passive voice
 - The agent is "radiation, a chemical or through a chance accident"
 - The patient is "the genes"

 This matches sense 1 (inflict damage upon) in passive form.

 Sense 2 would be something like "These genes damage easily" meaning they are susceptible to damage, but that's not what's being said here. The text is saying they have actually undergone damage in a specific instance.

 Therefore, the correct sense is sense 1.

 Wait, I need to be careful. The passive construction "has been damaged" could be ambiguous between the two senses if sense 2 can be passivized, but sense 2 is intransitive ("suffer or be susceptible"), so it wouldn't normally be passivized in the same way.

 Actually, looking at WordNet:
 - damage.v.01: inflict damage upon
 - damage.v.02: suffer or be susceptible to damage

 damage.v.02 is intransitive. You can't say "The cups were damaged easily" to mean "The cups are susceptible to damage" in the same way. You would say "The cups damage easily."

 In our sentence: "the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged" - this is clearly the passive of the transitive verb (sense 1).

 The context supports this: "perhaps by radiation, a chemical..." - these are agents that inflict damage.

 So the answer should be sense 1.

 But let me double-check the sense indices. The user lists:
 1. sense_key=damage%2:30:00::
 2. sense_key=damage%2:30:01::

 So sense_index should be 1.

 Wait, I should verify the WordNet sense keys:
 - damage%2:30:00:: corresponds to wordnet sense 1 (inflict damage upon)
 - damage%2:30:01:: corresponds to wordnet sense 2 (suffer or be susceptible to damage)

 Yes.

 Therefore: {"sense_index": 1}

provider: DeepInfra


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

[User]
Target lemma: inherit
Target surface form: inherited
Context:
When functioning normally, they make proteins that hold a cell's growth in check. But if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation, a chemical or through a chance accident in cell division -- their growth-suppressing proteins no longer work, and cells normally under control turn malignant. The newly identified genes differ from a family of genes discovered in the early 1980s called oncogenes. Oncogenes must be present for a cell to become malignant, but researchers have found them in normal as well as in cancerous cells, suggesting that oncogenes don't cause cancer by themselves. In recent months, researchers have come to believe the two types of cancer genes work in concert: An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged. Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are <t>inherited</t> in two copies, one from each parent. Either copy can make the proteins needed to control cell growth, so for cancer to arise, both copies must be impaired.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=inherit%2:40:00:: | definition=obtain from someone after their death | examples=I inherited a castle from my French grandparents
2. sense_key=inherit%2:40:02:: | definition=receive from a predecessor | examples=The new chairman inherited many problems from the previous chair
3. sense_key=inherit%2:40:01:: | definition=receive by genetic transmission | examples=I inherited my good eyesight from my mother

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 "inherited" in the given context. The target lemma is "inherit" and the surface form is "inherited".

Let me analyze the context:
The text is talking about tumor-suppressor genes and how they are passed down. Specifically: "Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are <t>inherited</t> in two copies, one from each parent."

This is clearly referring to genetic inheritance - receiving genes from parents through biological heredity.

Now let's look at the candidate senses:

1. sense_key=inherit%2:40:00:: | definition=obtain from someone after their death | examples=I inherited a castle from my French grandparents
   - This is about inheriting property/assets after death. Not relevant here.

2. sense_key=inherit%2:40:02:: | definition=receive from a predecessor | examples=The new chairman inherited many problems from the previous chair
   - This is about receiving something (like problems, duties) from a predecessor in a role/position. Not about biological inheritance.

3. sense_key=inherit%2:40:01:: | definition=receive by genetic transmission | examples=I inherited my good eyesight from my mother
   - This is about genetic inheritance, receiving traits/genes from parents. This matches the context perfectly - genes are inherited from parents.

The context explicitly mentions "one from each parent" and talks about genes, which confirms this is about genetic transmission.

Therefore, the best sense is sense 3 (index 3).

The user wants a JSON object: {"sense_index": 3}

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: copy
Target surface form: copies
Context:
When functioning normally, they make proteins that hold a cell's growth in check. But if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation, a chemical or through a chance accident in cell division -- their growth-suppressing proteins no longer work, and cells normally under control turn malignant. The newly identified genes differ from a family of genes discovered in the early 1980s called oncogenes. Oncogenes must be present for a cell to become malignant, but researchers have found them in normal as well as in cancerous cells, suggesting that oncogenes don't cause cancer by themselves. In recent months, researchers have come to believe the two types of cancer genes work in concert: An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged. Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two <t>copies</t>, one from each parent. Either copy can make the proteins needed to control cell growth, so for cancer to arise, both copies must be impaired.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=copy%1:10:00:: | definition=a reproduction of a written record (e.g. of a legal or school record) | synonyms=transcript
2. sense_key=copy%1:06:00:: | definition=a thing made to be similar or identical to another thing | examples=she made a copy of the designer dress; the clone was a copy of its ancestor
3. sense_key=copy%1:10:01:: | definition=matter to be printed; exclusive of graphical materials | synonyms=written matter
4. sense_key=copy%1:10:02:: | definition=material suitable for a journalistic account | examples=catastrophes make good copy

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 "copies" in the given context. The target lemma is "copy" and the surface form is "copies".

Let me analyze the context:
- The text is about tumor-suppressor genes and oncogenes
- "Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two <t>copies</t>, one from each parent."
- This is talking about genetic inheritance - each parent contributes one copy of a gene
- So "copies" here refers to instances/versions of the gene, one from each parent

Now let's look at the candidate senses:

1. sense_key=copy%1:10:00:: | definition=a reproduction of a written record (e.g. of a legal or school record) | synonyms=transcript
   - This is about written records, documents. Not relevant to genes.

2. sense_key=copy%1:06:00:: | definition=a thing made to be similar or identical to another thing | examples=she made a copy of the designer dress; the clone was a copy of its ancestor
   - This refers to something made to be similar/identical to another thing. In genetics, when we say genes are inherited in two copies, we mean there are two instances/versions of the gene (alleles), one from each parent. This seems like the closest fit - each copy is an instance of the gene.

3. sense_key=copy%1:10:01:: | definition=matter to be printed; exclusive of graphical materials | synonyms=written matter
   - This is about printing/text. Not relevant.

4. sense_key=copy%1:10:02:: | definition=material suitable for a journalistic account | examples=catastrophes make good copy
   - This is about journalism/news. Not relevant.

Wait, I need to check if there are other senses of "copy" in WordNet that might be missing from this candidate list. The candidates provided are:
1. copy%1:10:00:: (written record/transcript)
2. copy%1:06:00:: (thing made to be similar/identical)
3. copy%1:10:01:: (matter to be printed)
4. copy%1:10:02:: (material for journalism)

But in genetics, when we talk about "two copies of a gene", we're referring to the fact that diploid organisms have two alleles of each gene, one on each homologous chromosome. This would be sense 2: "a thing made to be similar or identical to another thing" - each copy is an instance of the gene.

Actually, looking more carefully at WordNet:
- copy%1:06:00:: is "a thing made to be similar or identical to another thing"
- This could apply to genetic copies - the gene from one parent is a copy (in the sense of being an instance/replica) of that gene, and the one from the other parent is another copy.

But is there a more specific sense? Let me think about the WordNet hierarchy...
- copy%1:06:00:: is under artifact/creation? No, let me check...
- Actually, copy%1:06:00:: is: "a thing made to be similar or identical to another thing" - this is a noun.

In the biological context, "two copies" means two instances/versions of the gene. This fits sense 2 best among the given options.

Sense 1 is specifically about written records (transcripts).
Sense 2 is the general "duplicate/similar thing" sense.
Sense 3 is about printed matter.
Sense 4 is about journalism.

Therefore, sense 2 (copy%1:06:00::) is the correct choice.

Wait, I should double-check the WordNet sense keys to make sure I'm interpreting them correctly.
- copy%1:06:00:: - the "06" usually indicates a noun.artifact or noun.object? Let me recall WordNet lexicographer file numbers...
- 06 is usually noun.artifact? No:
  - 03: noun.animal
  - 06: noun.artifact? Actually, looking at standard WordNet lexicographer file numbers:
    - 06 is noun.artifact
    - But "copy" as a duplicate could be an artifact...

Actually, looking at the definition: "a thing made to be similar or identical to another thing" - this is clearly the general sense of duplicate/replica.

In genetics, "two copies of a gene" refers to the two alleles (or gene instances) inherited from parents. Each is a copy of the gene - similar/identical to the other (though potentially with variations/alleles).

So yes, sense 2 is the best fit.

The answer should be: {"sense_index": 2}

provider: Moonshot AI


[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: parent
Target surface form: parent
Context:
When functioning normally, they make proteins that hold a cell's growth in check. But if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation, a chemical or through a chance accident in cell division -- their growth-suppressing proteins no longer work, and cells normally under control turn malignant. The newly identified genes differ from a family of genes discovered in the early 1980s called oncogenes. Oncogenes must be present for a cell to become malignant, but researchers have found them in normal as well as in cancerous cells, suggesting that oncogenes don't cause cancer by themselves. In recent months, researchers have come to believe the two types of cancer genes work in concert: An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged. Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each <t>parent</t>. Either copy can make the proteins needed to control cell growth, so for cancer to arise, both copies must be impaired.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=parent%1:18:00:: | definition=a father or mother; one who begets or one who gives birth to or nurtures and raises a child; a relative who plays the role of guardian
2. sense_key=parent%1:03:00:: | definition=an organism (plant or animal) from which younger ones are obtained

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 "parent" in the given context.

 Context analysis:
 - The text is about genetics, specifically tumor-suppressor genes and oncogenes.
 - The specific sentence is: "Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each <t>parent</t>."
 - This is clearly talking about biological inheritance of genes.
 - The word "parent" here refers to the biological parents from whom an organism inherits genetic material.

 Candidate sense analysis:
 1. sense_key=parent%1:18:00:: | definition=a father or mother; one who begets or one who gives birth to or nurtures and raises a child; a relative who plays the role of guardian
    - This is the human/kinship sense of parent (father or mother).
    - In the context of genetic inheritance, we inherit genes from our biological parents (father and mother).
    - This fits the context well.

 2. sense_key=parent%1:03:00:: | definition=an organism (plant or animal) from which younger ones are obtained
    - This is a biological/technical sense referring to any organism that produces offspring.
    - While this could technically apply to humans, in the context of genetic inheritance specifically mentioning "inherited in two copies, one from each parent", this is referring to the two biological parents (mother and father) of a human/organism.
    - However, looking closely at the gloss: "an organism (plant or animal) from which younger ones are obtained" - this seems more general and often used in breeding contexts, asexual reproduction, or when talking about parent plants/animals in a general biological sense.
    - But in the context of human genetics and inheritance "from each parent", this is almost certainly referring to the mother and father.

 Let me reconsider the distinction:
 - Sense 1 (parent%1:18:00::) is specifically about humans: "a father or mother; one who begets or one who gives birth to or nurtures and raises a child"
 - Sense 2 (parent%1:03:00::) is about organisms in general: "an organism (plant or animal) from which younger ones are obtained"

 In the context of the text:
 - The text discusses tumor-suppressor genes in cells, but when it talks about inheritance "from each parent", it's referring to the human parents (or the parents of the organism being discussed).
 - The phrase "one from each parent" strongly implies the two parents (mother and father) in a sexual reproduction context.
 - While humans are organisms, the specific mention of "each parent" in the context of genetic inheritance of two copies (implying diploid organisms with two parents) aligns with the human kinship sense, or at least the specific sense of begetting/giving birth.

 Actually, looking at WordNet structure:
 - parent%1:18:00:: is under noun.person (a father or mother)
 - parent%1:03:00:: is under noun.animal or noun.entity? Let me check... actually parent%1:03:00:: is likely under noun.animal or noun.entity referring to organisms.

 In genetic contexts involving humans, "parent" typically maps to sense 1 (father or mother). The text is discussing human cancer genetics (implied by the medical context), so "parent" refers to the mother and father.

 However, I should verify if sense 2 could be correct. Sense 2 is often used in contexts like "the parent plant" or "parent strain" in breeding. But when we say "inherited from each parent" in genetics, we mean the maternal and paternal parents - the mother and father.

 The key phrase is "inherited in two copies, one from each parent". This is standard language in genetics referring to the two biological parents (male and female).

 Therefore, sense 1 (parent%1:18:00::) is the correct choice.

 Wait, let me double-check by looking at typical WordNet examples or usage patterns. Unfortunately I don't have the examples here, just the glosses.

 The gloss for sense 1: "a father or mother; one who begets or one who gives birth to or nurtures and raises a child; a relative who plays the role of guardian"
 The gloss for sense 2: "an organism (plant or animal) from which younger ones are obtained"

 In the sentence: "Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each parent."
 - This is talking about inheritance in organisms (likely humans, given the medical context).
 - The "parent" here is the source of genetic material.
 - But is it referring to the parents as people (father/mother) or as organisms?

 Actually, looking at the broader context, this could be about cells or organisms. But "inherited" typically refers to transmission from parents to offspring in a generational sense.

 I think sense 1 is correct because:
 1. The text discusses cancer in humans (implied by "malignant", "researchers", medical terminology)
 2. "One from each parent" is the standard way to describe diploid inheritance from mother and father
 3. While sense 2 is biological, it's more general and less specific to the sexual reproduction context implied by "each" (suggesting two distinct parents)

 However, I should consider if sense 2 could be better. In strict biological terminology, when discussing genetics at the cellular level, "parent" might refer to the parent organisms. But the gloss for sense 2 emphasizes "organism" and "obtained" which feels more like breeding or asexual reproduction contexts.

 Actually, looking carefully at the text: "Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each parent."
 - This is describing Mendelian inheritance.
 - In Mendelian genetics, we inherit one allele from each parent (the mother and the father).
 - This is definitely sense 1.

 The answer should be sense_index: 1.

 Wait, the user asks for the format: {"sense_index": 3} - but there are only 2 senses listed. So I should return {"sense_index": 1} or {"sense_index": 2} depending on which I choose.

 I choose sense 1.

 Let me reconsider one more time. Is there any ambiguity?
 The text says: "Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each parent."
 This is clearly referring to the two parents (maternal and paternal) in sexual reproduction. This is the standard definition of parent as father or mother.

 Sense 2 is more likely used in contexts like:
 - "The parent plant produced many seeds"
 - "Parent and offspring"
 - Without necessarily implying the specific relationship of mother/father, but just the source organism.

 But in the context of "each parent" in genetics, it's definitely the mother and father.

 Therefore: {"sense_index": 1}

provider: Venice


[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: copy
Target surface form: copy
Context:
But if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation, a chemical or through a chance accident in cell division -- their growth-suppressing proteins no longer work, and cells normally under control turn malignant. The newly identified genes differ from a family of genes discovered in the early 1980s called oncogenes. Oncogenes must be present for a cell to become malignant, but researchers have found them in normal as well as in cancerous cells, suggesting that oncogenes don't cause cancer by themselves. In recent months, researchers have come to believe the two types of cancer genes work in concert: An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged. Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each parent. Either <t>copy</t> can make the proteins needed to control cell growth, so for cancer to arise, both copies must be impaired. A person who is born with one defective copy of a suppressor gene, or in whom one copy is damaged early in life, is especially prone to cancer because he need only lose the other copy for a cancer to develop.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=copy%1:10:00:: | definition=a reproduction of a written record (e.g. of a legal or school record) | synonyms=transcript
2. sense_key=copy%1:06:00:: | definition=a thing made to be similar or identical to another thing | examples=she made a copy of the designer dress; the clone was a copy of its ancestor
3. sense_key=copy%1:10:01:: | definition=matter to be printed; exclusive of graphical materials | synonyms=written matter
4. sense_key=copy%1:10:02:: | definition=material suitable for a journalistic account | examples=catastrophes make good copy

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 "copy" in the given context.

 Let me analyze the context:
 - The text is about genes, specifically tumor-suppressor genes
 - "Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each parent."
 - "Either copy can make the proteins needed to control cell growth"
 - "both copies must be impaired"
 - "one defective copy of a suppressor gene"
 - "lose the other copy"

 Here, "copy" refers to one of the two instances/versions of a gene that a person inherits (one from each parent). In genetics, we talk about having two copies of a gene (alleles), one on each chromosome of a pair.

 Now let's look at the candidate senses:

 1. sense_key=copy%1:10:00:: | definition=a reproduction of a written record (e.g. of a legal or school record) | synonyms=transcript
 - This is about written documents, transcripts. Not relevant here.

 2. sense_key=copy%1:06:00:: | definition=a thing made to be similar or identical to another thing | examples=she made a copy of the designer dress; the clone was a copy of its ancestor
 - This refers to a duplicate, replica, or one of multiple similar/identical things. In genetics, when we say "two copies of a gene," we mean two instances of the same genetic material, one inherited from each parent. This fits the idea of "a thing made to be similar or identical to another thing" - the genes on homologous chromosomes are copies of each other.

 3. sense_key=copy%1:10:01:: | definition=matter to be printed; exclusive of graphical materials | synonyms=written matter
 - This is about text for printing/publishing. Not relevant.

 4. sense_key=copy%1:10:02:: | definition=material suitable for a journalistic account | examples=catastrophes make good copy
 - This is about news material. Not relevant.

 So sense 2 seems to be the best fit. The context is talking about genetic copies - the two alleles or instances of the gene inherited from each parent. These are biological copies/replicas of the genetic material.

 Wait, let me double-check WordNet sense numbering. The user provided:
 - sense_key=copy%1:06:00:: (this is the second one in the list, index 2)
 - The indices in the JSON should correspond to the order given: 1, 2, 3, 4.

 Sense 2 (copy%1:06:00::) is "a thing made to be similar or identical to another thing" - this includes the biological sense of having two copies of a chromosome or gene.

 Actually, looking more carefully at the WordNet structure:
 - copy%1:06:00:: is under noun.artifact (06)
 - The definition "a thing made to be similar or identical to another thing" with examples about designer dress and clone.

 In genetics, when we inherit "two copies" of a gene, we are referring to two instances of the gene (alleles), which are essentially identical or similar versions of the same genetic sequence. This matches sense 2.

 The other senses are clearly about:
 1. Written records/transcripts
 3. Written matter for printing
 4. Journalistic material

 None of these fit the genetic context. Sense 2 is the only one that can apply to biological replication/inheritance of genetic material.

 Therefore, the answer should be {"sense_index": 2}.

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: need
Target surface form: needed
Context:
But if the genes are damaged -- perhaps by radiation, a chemical or through a chance accident in cell division -- their growth-suppressing proteins no longer work, and cells normally under control turn malignant. The newly identified genes differ from a family of genes discovered in the early 1980s called oncogenes. Oncogenes must be present for a cell to become malignant, but researchers have found them in normal as well as in cancerous cells, suggesting that oncogenes don't cause cancer by themselves. In recent months, researchers have come to believe the two types of cancer genes work in concert: An oncogene may turn proliferating cells malignant only after the tumor-suppressor gene has been damaged. Like all genes, tumor-suppressor genes are inherited in two copies, one from each parent. Either copy can make the proteins <t>needed</t> to control cell growth, so for cancer to arise, both copies must be impaired. A person who is born with one defective copy of a suppressor gene, or in whom one copy is damaged early in life, is especially prone to cancer because he need only lose the other copy for a cancer to develop.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=need%2:42:00:: | definition=require as useful, just, or proper | synonyms=necessitate, ask, postulate, require, take, involve | examples=It takes nerve to do what she did; success usually requires hard work
2. sense_key=need%2:34:00:: | definition=have need of | synonyms=want, require | examples=This piano wants the attention of a competent tuner
3. sense_key=need%2:34:01:: | definition=have or feel a need for | examples=always needing friends and money

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 "needed" in the given context. The target lemma is "need" and the surface form is "needed" (past participle/adjective form).

Let me analyze the context:
"Either copy can make the proteins <t>needed</t> to control cell growth, so for cancer to arise, both copies must be impaired."

The sentence is saying that either copy of the tumor-suppressor gene can produce the proteins that are required/necessary to control cell growth.

Now let's look at the candidate senses:

1. sense_key=need%2:42:00:: | definition=require as useful, just, or proper | synonyms=necessitate, ask, postulate, require, take, involve | examples=It takes nerve to do what she did; success usually requires hard work
   - This sense seems to be about requiring something as a condition or prerequisite. The subject is typically the thing that requires something else.
   - Example: "It takes nerve..." - here "takes" is similar to "requires"
   - In our context: "proteins needed to control cell growth" - this could fit if we interpret it as "proteins required to control cell growth"

2. sense_key=need%2:34:00:: | definition=have need of | synonyms=want, require | examples=This piano wants the attention of a competent tuner
   - This sense is about having a need for something, lacking something necessary.
   - Example: "This piano wants the attention..." - here the piano lacks/requires attention
   - In our context, the proteins are not "having need of" something; rather, they are what is needed/required by the cell/process.

3. sense_key=need%2:34:01:: | definition=have or feel a need for | examples=always needing friends and money
   - This is about experiencing a need, feeling a lack.
   - This is clearly not the right sense because proteins don't "feel" needs.

Now, looking at the structure: "proteins needed to control cell growth"

This is a passive construction. The proteins are the object of the needing - they are what is required/necessary for the purpose of controlling cell growth.

Sense 1 (need%2:42:00::) is defined as "require as useful, just, or proper" with synonyms like necessitate, require, take, involve. This fits the passive usage where the proteins are required/necessitated for the purpose.

Sense 2 (need%2:34:00::) is "have need of" - this would imply the proteins themselves need something, which isn't the case here.

Actually, looking more carefully at WordNet senses for "need":

Sense 1 (2:42:00) is typically the transitive verb meaning "to require" - e.g., "This job needs patience" = "This job requires patience"

Sense 2 (2:34:00) is "to be in want of" - e.g., "I need a drink"

Wait, I need to be careful about the WordNet sense keys. The format is lemma%lexical_file_number:lexical_file_type:lexical_file_number:sense_number

But the user has provided:
1. need%2:42:00::
2. need%2:34:00::
3. need%2:34:01::

In WordNet:
- 2:42 is usually the verb "need" meaning "require" or "necessitate"
- 2:34 is usually the verb "need" meaning "want" or "be in need of"

Let me think about the specific context again:
"proteins needed to control cell growth"

This means "proteins that are required to control cell growth" or "proteins necessary for controlling cell growth."

This aligns with sense 1: "require as useful, just, or proper" - the proteins are required (needed) for the purpose of controlling cell growth.

Sense 2 "have need of" would be if the proteins themselves needed something else.

Sense 3 "have or feel a need for" is about the subjective experience of needing, which doesn't apply to proteins in this biological context.

Therefore, the best sense is sense 1 (index 1).

Wait, let me double-check the examples:
Sense 1 examples: "It takes nerve to do what she did; success usually requires hard work"
- Here "takes" and "requires" are synonyms. In "proteins needed to control cell growth", "needed" functions like "required" - the proteins are required for the task.

Sense 2 examples: "This piano wants the attention of a competent tuner"
- Here "wants" = "needs" in the sense of lacking/requires to have something supplied. But the subject is the piano (the thing that needs attention), not the attention itself.

In our sentence, "proteins" are the thing that is needed (the object of the needing), not the subject doing the needing. So this is a passive construction where the implied subject is "the cell" or "the process" or "we/cells" - something requires these proteins.

So sense 1 is correct: require as useful, just, or proper.

The answer should be {"sense_index": 1}

provider: Phala