[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: loss
Target surface form: losses
Context:
Gradually, a coherent picture of cancer development emerged. If both copies of a certain gene were knocked out, benign polyps would develop. If both copies of a second gene were then deleted, the polyps would progress to malignancy. It was clear that more than one gene had to be damaged for colon cancer to develop. Their report galvanized other molecular biologists. "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene <t>losses</t> were critical to the development of a common tumor, "says Ray White at Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Salt Lake City. But Dr. Vogelstein had yet to nail the identity of the gene that, if damaged, flipped a colon cell into full-blown malignancy.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=loss%1:21:01:: | definition=something that is lost | examples=the car was a total loss; loss of livestock left the rancher bankrupt
2. sense_key=loss%1:22:00:: | definition=gradual decline in amount or activity | examples=weight loss; a serious loss of business
3. sense_key=loss%1:04:00:: | definition=the act of losing someone or something | examples=everyone expected him to win so his loss was a shock
4. sense_key=loss%1:07:00:: | definition=the disadvantage that results from losing something | synonyms=deprivation | examples=his loss of credibility led to his resignation; losing him is no great deprivation
5. sense_key=loss%1:11:01:: | definition=the experience of losing a loved one | examples=he sympathized on the loss of their grandfather
6. sense_key=loss%1:21:00:: | definition=the amount by which the cost of a business exceeds its revenue | synonyms=red ink, red | examples=the company operated at a loss last year; the company operated in the red last year
7. sense_key=loss%1:11:00:: | definition=military personnel lost by death or capture | synonyms=personnel casualty
8. sense_key=loss%1:11:02:: | definition=euphemistic expressions for death | synonyms=passing, departure, exit, expiration, going, release | examples=thousands mourned his passing

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 "losses" in the given context.

Let me analyze the context:
- The text is about cancer development and molecular biology
- It mentions "gene losses" in the quote: "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene <t>losses</t> were critical to the development of a common tumor"
- The context is about genes being "knocked out" or "deleted" - referring to the loss of genetic material/function
- This is talking about the disappearance or removal of genes (both copies being knocked out or deleted)

Now let me look at the candidate senses:

1. sense_key=loss%1:21:01:: | definition=something that is lost | examples=the car was a total loss; loss of livestock left the rancher bankrupt
   - This refers to tangible things that are lost. While genes could be considered "something that is lost", this seems more about physical objects or assets.

2. sense_key=loss%1:22:00:: | definition=gradual decline in amount or activity | examples=weight loss; a serious loss of business
   - This is about decline in amount/activity. While gene function declines, the specific context mentions "knocked out" and "deleted", which suggests complete removal rather than gradual decline.

3. sense_key=loss%1:04:00:: | definition=the act of losing someone or something | examples=everyone expected him to win so his loss was a shock
   - This is about the act/event of losing. In the context, "gene losses" refers to the instances where genes are lost (deleted/knocked out).

4. sense_key=loss%1:07:00:: | definition=the disadvantage that results from losing something | synonyms=deprivation | examples=his loss of credibility led to his resignation; losing him is no great deprivation
   - This is about the disadvantage/deprivation resulting from loss. The context is talking about the physical deletion of genes, not the disadvantage resulting from it.

5. sense_key=loss%1:11:01:: | definition=the experience of losing a loved one | examples=he sympathized on the loss of their grandfather
   - This is about bereavement/emotional loss. Not applicable to genes.

6. sense_key=loss%1:21:00:: | definition=the amount by which the cost of a business exceeds its revenue | synonyms=red ink, red | examples=the company operated at a loss last year; the company operated in the red last year
   - Financial loss. Not applicable.

7. sense_key=loss%1:11:00:: | definition=military personnel lost by death or capture | synonyms=personnel casualty
   - Military context. Not applicable.

8. sense_key=loss%1:11:02:: | definition=euphemistic expressions for death | synonyms=passing, departure, exit, expiration, going, release | examples=thousands mourned his passing
   - Death euphemism. Not applicable.

Now I need to decide between sense 1 and sense 3 mainly, possibly sense 2.

Sense 1: "something that is lost" - This treats loss as the thing itself (the lost item).
Sense 3: "the act of losing someone or something" - This treats loss as the act/event.

In the context: "gene losses were critical"
- This could mean "instances of gene loss" (the acts/events of losing genes)
- Or it could mean "things that were lost" (the genes themselves)

But looking at the context: "If both copies of a certain gene were knocked out... If both copies of a second gene were then deleted... gene losses were critical"

The "losses" here refers to the events of deletion/knocking out - the act of losing the genes (the gene copies being deleted).

However, looking at sense 1: "something that is lost" - examples include "loss of livestock". This is similar to "loss of genes" or "gene losses".

Actually, looking more carefully:
- Sense 1: "something that is lost" - the car was a total loss; loss of livestock
- Sense 3: "the act of losing someone or something" - his loss was a shock (referring to losing a game/competition)

Wait, looking at the examples for sense 3: "everyone expected him to win so his loss was a shock" - this is about losing a competition/game.

Sense 1 examples: "the car was a total loss" (the car is the loss - the thing lost), "loss of livestock" (the livestock are the loss).

In "gene losses", the losses are the genes that have been lost (the genetic material), or the instances of loss.

But actually, in biology, when we talk about "gene losses", we usually mean the evolutionary or developmental event of losing a gene, or the state of having lost it.

Let me reconsider the WordNet senses more carefully.

Sense 1 (loss%1:21:01): "something that is lost" - This is a noun denoting the thing itself. Like "the ship was a loss to the fleet."

Sense 3 (loss%1:04:00): "the act of losing someone or something" - This is the act/event.

In the quote: "gene losses were critical to the development"
- This refers to the events of genes being knocked out/deleted.
- Or it could refer to the missing genes themselves.

But given the context mentions "knocked out" and "deleted" as actions, and "gene losses" parallels these actions, it seems like sense 3 (the act) might be better.

However, looking at the examples for sense 1: "loss of livestock" - this is very similar to "loss of genes" or "gene losses".

Actually, looking at WordNet structure:
- Sense 1: loss%1:21:01 - something that is lost (artifact?)
- Sense 3: loss%1:04:00 - the act of losing (act)

Wait, I should look at the lexicographer file numbers:
- %1:21:01 - noun.artifact or noun.possession? Actually 1:21 usually refers to noun.possession or similar categories.
- %1:04:00 - noun.act

Let me think about the biological context. When molecular biologists say "gene losses", they mean the deletion or inactivation of genes - the event of losing them, or the state of having lost them.

But looking at the specific phrase: "gene losses were critical" - this is parallel to "gene knockouts" or "gene deletions".

Sense 2 is "gradual decline" - but knocking out both copies is not gradual, it's complete deletion.

Sense 4 is "disadvantage resulting from loss" - this is about the consequence, not the genetic event itself.

Between sense 1 and 3:
- If I say "the loss of the gene", it could be either the act or the thing.
- But "gene losses" (plural) suggests multiple instances of the act, or multiple lost things.

In biology papers, "gene loss" typically refers to the evolutionary or somatic event of a gene being deleted or inactivated.

Given that sense 3 is defined as "the act of losing someone or something" and has the example about losing a competition, while sense 1 is "something that is lost" with examples like "loss of livestock", I think sense 1 might actually be closer because the genes are the "things" that are lost.

But wait, "loss of livestock" in the example is the livestock themselves being lost, or the event? "Loss of livestock left the rancher bankrupt" - here "loss of livestock" is the event (the losing of the livestock), not the livestock themselves. Actually, it's ambiguous.

Let me reconsider sense 2: "gradual decline in amount or activity" - examples: weight loss, loss of business. "Loss of business" could be similar to "loss of genes"?

Actually, looking carefully at the context again:
"It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene losses were critical to the development of a common tumor"

This refers to the fact that genes need to be deleted (both copies knocked out) for cancer to develop. So "gene losses" refers to the deletion/inactivation events.

But which sense index corresponds to this?

Let me look at the indices provided:
1. loss%1:21:01 - something that is lost
2. loss%1:22:00 - gradual decline
3. loss%1:04:00 - the act of losing
4. loss%1:07:00 - disadvantage
5. loss%1:11:01 - bereavement
6. loss%1:21:00 - financial loss
7. loss%1:11:00 - military personnel
8. loss%1:11:02 - death euphemism

The most likely candidates are 1, 2, or 3.

Sense 2 (gradual decline) doesn't fit because knocking out both copies is a discrete event, not a gradual decline (though tumor development is gradual, the genetic loss is the event).

Between sense 1 and 3:
- Sense 1: the thing lost (the missing gene copies)
- Sense 3: the act of losing (the deletion event)

In biological contexts, when we say "gene losses drive cancer", we usually mean the events of losing genes (the deletions).

However, looking at WordNet's examples:
- Sense 1: "the car was a total loss" - the car is the loss (thing)
- Sense 3: "everyone expected him to win so his loss was a shock" - the loss is the defeat (event/act)

But "loss of livestock" in sense 1 seems to be the event (the losing of livestock).

Actually, looking at standard WSD for "loss" in biological contexts...

The phrase "gene loss" is commonly disambiguated as sense 1 or sense 3 depending on the specific WordNet version. But given the options, and that "losses" refers to the missing genetic material (the things that are lost), or the instances of loss...

Wait, looking at the definition of sense 1 again: "something that is lost"
And sense 3: "the act of losing someone or something"

If we say "gene losses were critical", we mean that the absence of these genes (the things lost) was critical, or the events of losing them were critical.

But given the context mentions "knocked out" and "deleted" as actions that happen to the genes, and then refers to "gene losses" as the critical factor, it's referring to the state or fact of the genes being lost.

Actually, I think sense 1 is the best fit because:
1. The examples include "loss of livestock" which is structurally identical to "loss of genes"
2. In this biological context, "losses" refers to the specific gene copies that have been deleted (the things lost)
3. Sense 3 is more about the act of losing in a competition or misplacing, while sense 1 is about the resultant state of something being missing.

But I'm torn. Let me look at the examples again.

Sense 1 examples: "the car was a total loss; loss of livestock left the rancher bankrupt"
- "Loss of livestock" = the livestock that were lost (the things) OR the event of losing them? In "loss of livestock left the rancher bankrupt", it's the event (the fact that he lost livestock) that caused bankruptcy. But grammatically, "loss" here is the nominalization of the losing event.

Sense 3 examples: "everyone expected him to win so his loss was a shock"
- Here "his loss" clearly means his defeat (the act/event of losing).

Actually, both can be events. But sense 1 is categorized under noun.possession (21) or similar, while sense 3 is noun.act (04).

Given that "gene losses" refers to genetic deletions (acts of deletion or the deleted material), and looking at the gradual progression described (first one gene knocked out, then another), these are discrete events of deletion.

But I think the key is that "loss" in "gene loss" refers to the absence of the gene - the thing that is missing (sense 1).

Let me reconsider sense 2: "gradual decline in amount or activity" - "weight loss", "loss of business".
- "Loss of business" could mean decline in business activity.
- But "gene losses" are not gradual decline; they are specific deletion events.

So sense 2 is out.

Between 1 and 3, I think sense 1 is slightly better because:
- The genes themselves are the "things that are lost"
- The plural "losses" suggests multiple instances of lost genes or multiple lost gene copies
- In biology, "gene loss" is often categorized as the thing (the missing locus)

But actually, looking at the WordNet entry structure, sense 3 (the act) might be more appropriate for "knocked out" and "deleted" which are actions.

Wait, the text says: "gene losses were critical"
The quote is about confirming that losing genes (the act) is critical to tumor development.

But looking at the exact wording in the context: "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene <t>losses</t> were critical"

This parallels "gene knockouts" or "gene deletions" - which are acts/events.

However, looking at the available indices and the requirement to choose the single best one...

I think the answer is sense 1: "something that is lost"

Why? Because in the context of genetics, when we refer to "gene losses", we are referring to the genes that have been lost (the missing genetic material) - these are the "somethings" that are lost. The example "loss of livestock" is very similar - livestock are entities that are lost, genes are entities that are lost.

Sense 3 is more about the act of losing in the sense of defeat or misplacement in a process, often used for games, people, etc.

Actually, looking at the gloss for sense 3: "the act of losing someone or something" - this could fit "losing genes".

But sense 1: "something that is lost" - this could be the genes themselves.

Given the plural "losses" and the context of "both copies... were knocked out", referring to multiple instances of genetic material being deleted, I think sense 1 is intended here.

Wait, I should check if there's a pattern in WordNet for "loss" in scientific contexts.

Actually, looking at the instruction: "WordNet glosses are schematic. Use the sentence context, the examples, and the synonyms to choose the best indexed sense."

The examples for sense 1 include "loss of livestock". The phrase "loss of livestock" is structurally parallel to "gene losses" (or "loss of genes"). In "loss of livestock", the livestock are the things lost. Similarly, in "gene losses", the genes are the things lost.

Therefore, sense 1 is the best match.

Final check:
- Sense 1: something that is lost (the genes)
- Sense 3: the act of losing (the deletion event)

Both are plausible, but sense 1 has the example "loss of livestock" which provides the closest parallel to "gene losses" in terms of semantic structure (loss of [concrete countable entities]).

Therefore, the answer should be 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: critical
Target surface form: critical
Context:
Gradually, a coherent picture of cancer development emerged. If both copies of a certain gene were knocked out, benign polyps would develop. If both copies of a second gene were then deleted, the polyps would progress to malignancy. It was clear that more than one gene had to be damaged for colon cancer to develop. Their report galvanized other molecular biologists. "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene losses were <t>critical</t> to the development of a common tumor, "says Ray White at Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Salt Lake City. But Dr. Vogelstein had yet to nail the identity of the gene that, if damaged, flipped a colon cell into full-blown malignancy.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=critical%3:00:01:: | definition=marked by a tendency to find and call attention to errors and flaws | examples=a critical attitude
2. sense_key=critical%3:00:04:: | definition=at or of a point at which a property or phenomenon suffers an abrupt change especially having enough mass to sustain a chain reaction | examples=a critical temperature of water is 100 degrees C--its boiling point at standard atmospheric pressure; critical mass
3. sense_key=critical%3:00:02:: | definition=characterized by careful evaluation and judgment | examples=a critical reading; a critical dissertation
4. sense_key=critical%5:00:00:indispensable:00 | definition=urgently needed; absolutely necessary | synonyms=vital | examples=a critical element of the plan; critical medical supplies
5. sense_key=critical%5:00:00:crucial:00 | definition=forming or having the nature of a turning point or crisis | synonyms=decisive | examples=a critical point in the campaign; the critical test
6. sense_key=critical%3:00:03:: | definition=being in or verging on a state of crisis or emergency | examples=a critical shortage of food; a critical illness
7. sense_key=critical%3:01:00:: | definition=of or involving or characteristic of critics or criticism | examples=critical acclaim

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 fine-grained Word Sense Disambiguation for the word "critical" in the given context.

Context analysis:
The sentence is: "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene losses were critical to the development of a common tumor"

The meaning here is that gene losses were absolutely necessary or essential for the development of the tumor. The context is about cancer development requiring multiple genetic changes, and that these gene losses were crucial/essential to the process.

Looking at the candidate senses:

1. sense_key=critical%3:00:01:: - "marked by a tendency to find and call attention to errors and flaws" (e.g., "a critical attitude")
   - This is about being judgmental or finding faults. Doesn't fit the context of gene losses being necessary for tumor development.

2. sense_key=critical%3:00:04:: - "at or of a point at which a property or phenomenon suffers an abrupt change especially having enough mass to sustain a chain reaction" (e.g., critical temperature, critical mass)
   - This is about physics/chemistry thresholds. Not relevant here.

3. sense_key=critical%3:00:02:: - "characterized by careful evaluation and judgment" (e.g., "a critical reading")
   - This is about careful analysis. Not relevant.

4. sense_key=critical%5:00:00:indispensable:00 - "urgently needed; absolutely necessary" with synonym "vital" (e.g., "a critical element of the plan")
   - This fits well. The gene losses were absolutely necessary (vital, indispensable) for the tumor to develop.

5. sense_key=critical%5:00:00:crucial:00 - "forming or having the nature of a turning point or crisis" with synonym "decisive" (e.g., "a critical point in the campaign")
   - This is about turning points or decisive moments. While gene losses are important, the context emphasizes that they were necessary/essential rather than being a turning point or crisis point. The context says "gene losses were critical to the development" which suggests they were essential ingredients, not necessarily turning points in time.

6. sense_key=critical%3:00:03:: - "being in or verging on a state of crisis or emergency" (e.g., "a critical shortage", "a critical illness")
   - This is about urgent/crisis situations. Doesn't fit.

7. sense_key=critical%3:01:00:: - "of or involving or characteristic of critics or criticism" (e.g., "critical acclaim")
   - This is about literary/media criticism. Doesn't fit.

Between sense 4 and sense 5:
Sense 4: "urgently needed; absolutely necessary" - fits with the idea that gene losses were necessary for tumor development.
Sense 5: "forming or having the nature of a turning point or crisis" - could potentially fit but the examples given ("critical point in the campaign", "critical test") suggest a moment of decision or crisis, not an essential component.

The phrase "critical to the development" strongly suggests "essential to" or "necessary for", which aligns with sense 4. The synonym "vital" reinforces this interpretation - the gene losses were vital/necessary for tumor development.

Also, looking at the broader context: "more than one gene had to be damaged" and "gene losses were critical to the development" - this parallels "had to be" (necessity) with "critical" (essential).

Therefore, sense index 4 is the best choice.

Wait, I need to check the indexing. The user lists them as 1-7. So sense 4 is the one with sense_key=critical%5:00:00:indispensable:00.

Actually, looking carefully at the list:
1. sense_key=critical%3:00:01::
2. sense_key=critical%3:00:04::
3. sense_key=critical%3:00:02::
4. sense_key=critical%5:00:00:indispensable:00
5. sense_key=critical%5:00:00:crucial:00
6. sense_key=critical%3:00:03::
7. sense_key=critical%3:01:00::

So the answer should be {"sense_index": 4}.

format: unknown

native_finish_reason: stop

provider: DigitalOcean

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: development
Target surface form: development
Context:
Gradually, a coherent picture of cancer development emerged. If both copies of a certain gene were knocked out, benign polyps would develop. If both copies of a second gene were then deleted, the polyps would progress to malignancy. It was clear that more than one gene had to be damaged for colon cancer to develop. Their report galvanized other molecular biologists. "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene losses were critical to the <t>development</t> of a common tumor, "says Ray White at Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Salt Lake City. But Dr. Vogelstein had yet to nail the identity of the gene that, if damaged, flipped a colon cell into full-blown malignancy.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=development%1:04:01:: | definition=act of improving by expanding or enlarging or refining | examples=he congratulated them on their development of a plan to meet the emergency; they funded research and development
2. sense_key=development%1:22:02:: | definition=a process in which something passes by degrees to a different stage (especially a more advanced or mature stage) | synonyms=evolution | examples=the development of his ideas took many years; the evolution of Greek civilization
3. sense_key=development%1:22:01:: | definition=(biology) the process of an individual organism growing organically; a purely biological unfolding of events involved in an organism changing gradually from a simple to a more complex level | synonyms=growth, growing, maturation, ontogeny, ontogenesis | examples=he proposed an indicator of osseous development in children
4. sense_key=development%1:11:01:: | definition=a recent event that has some relevance for the present situation | examples=recent developments in Iraq; what a revolting development!
5. sense_key=development%1:04:02:: | definition=the act of making some area of land or water more profitable or productive or useful | synonyms=exploitation | examples=the development of Alaskan resources; the exploitation of copper deposits
6. sense_key=development%1:15:00:: | definition=a district that has been developed to serve some purpose | examples=such land is practical for small park developments
7. sense_key=development%1:26:00:: | definition=a state in which things are improving; the result of developing (as in the early part of a game of chess) | examples=after he saw the latest development he changed his mind and became a supporter; in chess your should take care of your development before moving your queen
8. sense_key=development%1:22:00:: | definition=processing a photosensitive material in order to make an image visible | synonyms=developing | examples=the development and printing of his pictures took only two hours
9. sense_key=development%1:10:00:: | definition=(music) the section of a composition or movement (especially in sonata form) where the major musical themes are developed and elaborated

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 "development" in the given context.

 Let me analyze the context:
 - The text is about cancer development, specifically colon cancer.
 - It describes a process where gene losses lead to the progression from benign polyps to malignancy.
 - The quote mentions: "gene losses were critical to the development of a common tumor"
 - This is referring to the biological process of how cancer develops/progresses.

 Now let's look at the candidate senses:

 1. sense_key=development%1:04:01:: - act of improving by expanding or enlarging or refining
    - This seems to be about improving plans or general development of projects. Not biological.

 2. sense_key=development%1:22:02:: - a process in which something passes by degrees to a different stage (especially a more advanced or mature stage)
    - Synonyms: evolution
    - Examples: "the development of his ideas took many years; the evolution of Greek civilization"
    - This is a general process of change/progression.

 3. sense_key=development%1:22:01:: - (biology) the process of an individual organism growing organically; a purely biological unfolding of events involved in an organism changing gradually from a simple to a more complex level
    - Synonyms: growth, growing, maturation, ontogeny, ontogenesis
    - Examples: "he proposed an indicator of osseous development in children"
    - This is specifically biological development.

 4. sense_key=development%1:11:01:: - a recent event that has some relevance for the present situation
    - Examples: "recent developments in Iraq"
    - This is about news/events.

 5. sense_key=development%1:04:02:: - the act of making some area of land or water more profitable...
    - This is about land development.

 6. sense_key=development%1:15:00:: - a district that has been developed...
    - This is about real estate/urban development.

 7. sense_key=development%1:26:00:: - a state in which things are improving...
    - This is about the state/result of developing.

 8. sense_key=development%1:22:00:: - processing a photosensitive material...
    - This is about photography.

 9. sense_key=development%1:10:00:: - (music) the section of a composition...
    - This is about music.

 Now, the context is clearly biological - it's about cancer development, tumor development, gene losses leading to malignancy.

 However, I need to distinguish between sense 2 (general process of passing to different stages) and sense 3 (specifically biological growth/ontogeny).

 Sense 3 is defined as: "(biology) the process of an individual organism growing organically; a purely biological unfolding of events involved in an organism changing gradually from a simple to a more complex level"

 But wait - cancer development is not exactly "normal biological growth" or "ontogeny". Cancer is a pathological process. However, the text is talking about the biological process of how the tumor develops.

 Let me look more carefully at sense 2: "a process in which something passes by degrees to a different stage (especially a more advanced or mature stage)" with synonym "evolution".

 The text says: "cancer development", "development of a common tumor". This is about the process by which the tumor comes into being and progresses.

 Actually, looking at WordNet sense keys:
 - development%1:22:01:: is specifically about biological growth (ontogeny)
 - development%1:22:02:: is about general evolution/progression

 In the context of cancer, we often use "development" to mean the process of formation and progression of the disease. This could fit sense 2 (general process of change) or sense 3 (biological process).

 But sense 3 specifically mentions "individual organism growing organically" and "ontogeny". Cancer is not normal organism growth - it's a disease process. However, it is a biological process.

 Let me reconsider the examples for sense 3: "he proposed an indicator of osseous development in children" - this is about normal bone development in children.

 The text mentions: "cancer development", "development of a common tumor", "colon cancer to develop".

 In medical/biological contexts, "development" of a disease usually maps to sense 2 (the general process meaning) rather than sense 3 (which is specifically about normal growth/ontogeny of an organism).

 However, looking at the specific wording of sense 3: "the process of an individual organism growing organically; a purely biological unfolding of events involved in an organism changing gradually from a simple to a more complex level"

 Cancer involves cells changing and progressing, but it's not "an individual organism growing organically" in the normal sense.

 But wait - the text is talking about the tumor as developing. A tumor is a growth (abnormal, but still biological growth).

 Actually, looking at standard WordNet disambiguation practices:
 - Sense 3 (development%1:22:01::) is for biological growth/ontogeny
 - Sense 2 (development%1:22:02::) is for evolution/progression in general

 In the context of "cancer development", this is typically sense 2, because it's about the disease progressing through stages (from benign polyps to malignancy). The text explicitly describes a process: "If both copies... knocked out, benign polyps would develop. If both copies... deleted, the polyps would progress to malignancy."

 This is describing a process passing by degrees to different stages (from benign to malignant).

 However, there's also the possibility that this is sense 3 because it's biological. But sense 3 is really about the development of an organism (ontogeny), not the development of a disease within an organism.

 Let me check the synonyms again:
 - Sense 2: evolution
 - Sense 3: growth, growing, maturation, ontogeny, ontogenesis

 The text mentions "gene losses were critical to the development of a common tumor". This is about the formation and progression of the tumor.

 In WordNet, "development" in the sense of disease development is usually sense 2 (the general process sense), not sense 3 (which is reserved for normal growth and maturation).

 But I should look at whether there's a specific sense for biological processes that aren't ontogeny...

 Actually, looking at the definition of sense 3 again: "(biology) the process of an individual organism growing organically; a purely biological unfolding of events involved in an organism changing gradually from a simple to a more complex level"

 The key phrase is "individual organism". A tumor is not an individual organism (though it grows like one in some ways). The organism here is the human with colon cancer.

 The process described is the progression of the disease, which fits better with sense 2: "a process in which something passes by degrees to a different stage".

 However, the context is clearly biological. But sense 2 is not marked as biological, while sense 3 is marked "(biology)".

 Let me think about the examples:
 - Sense 2: "the development of his ideas took many years; the evolution of Greek civilization" - these are abstract/non-biological examples.
 - Sense 3: "he proposed an indicator of osseous development in children" - biological

 But just because sense 2 examples are non-biological doesn't mean it can't apply to biological contexts. The definition is general.

 However, in WordNet, sense 3 is specifically for biological development (ontogeny), while sense 2 is for any gradual progression.

 Cancer development is a biological process, but is it "ontogeny"? Ontogeny is the development of an organism. Cancer is a pathological process.

 Actually, looking at the text: "cancer development", "development of a common tumor", "colon cancer to develop".

 In many WSD datasets, "development" in the context of cancer is annotated as sense 2 (the process sense) rather than sense 3 (the biological growth sense), because sense 3 is really about the life cycle development of an organism.

 But let me reconsider. The text says: "a coherent picture of cancer development emerged". This is parallel to "the development of his ideas" (sense 2 example).

 Also: "gene losses were critical to the development of a common tumor". This is about the process of the tumor coming into being and progressing.

 I think sense 2 is the best fit because:
 1. It captures the progressive nature (passing by degrees to different stages)
 2. Sense 3 is too specific to normal organismal growth (ontogeny)
 3. The examples for sense 2 include "evolution" which fits the context of cancer progressing from benign to malignant

 Wait, but let me double-check if there's any other sense that might fit.

 Sense 1: improving/expanding - not really, cancer isn't an improvement
 Sense 4: recent event - no
 Sense 5: land development - no
 Sense 6: district - no
 Sense 7: state of improving - no
 Sense 8: photography - no
 Sense 9: music - no

 So it's between sense 2 and sense 3.

 The key distinction:
 - Sense 3: biological growth of an organism (ontogeny)
 - Sense 2: any process of gradual change to a different stage

 Cancer is a disease process involving cells, not the normal development of the organism. Therefore, sense 2 is more appropriate.

 However, I should consider if "development" in "tumor development" could be considered sense 3. Tumors do grow and mature (in a pathological sense). But WordNet sense 3 is specifically defined as "a purely biological unfolding of events involved in an organism changing gradually from a simple to a more complex level" - this sounds like embryonic development or child development (ontogeny).

 The text explicitly describes stages: benign polyps → malignancy. This is "passing by degrees to a different stage" (sense 2).

 Also, the synonym "evolution" fits well here (cancer evolution is a common term).

 Therefore, I choose sense 2.

 Wait, I need to be careful about the indexing. The user asks for the "sense_index". Looking at the candidate senses:

 1. sense_key=development%1:04:01::
 2. sense_key=development%1:22:02::
 3. sense_key=development%1:22:01::
 4. sense_key=development%1:11:01::
 5. sense_key=development%1:04:02::
 6. sense_key=development%1:15:00::
 7. sense_key=development%1:26:00::
 8. sense_key=development%1:22:00::
 9. sense_key=development%1:10:00::

 So sense 2 in the list is development%1:22:02:: (the process/evolution sense).
 Sense 3 in the list is development%1:22:01:: (the biological growth sense).

 I believe the answer is sense_index 2.

 But let me reconsider one more time. Is there any chance it's sense 3?

 The text mentions: "cancer development", "development of a common tumor", "osseous development" (in the example for sense 3).

 Actually, looking at the example for sense 3: "he proposed an indicator of osseous development in children" - this is about bone development in children, which is normal growth.

 Cancer development is pathological, but it is a biological process. However, WordNet usually distinguishes between:
 - biological processes (sense 3: ontogeny, growth)
 - general processes of change (sense 2: evolution)

 In the SemCor corpus and other WSD datasets, "development" referring to cancer is typically tagged as sense 2, not sense 3.

 For example, "the development of cancer" is usually sense 2.

 Therefore, I will go with sense_index: 2.

 Wait, I need to check the exact format. The user wants: {"sense_index": 2}

 But I should verify once more. The context mentions "cancer development" and describes a multi-step process: gene knockout → benign polyps → gene deletion → malignancy. This is clearly "a process in which something passes by degrees to a different stage".

 Yes, sense 2.

 Final check: The user says "Do not hedge. Choose the single best indexed sense."

 So: {"sense_index": 2}

provider: AtlasCloud


[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: common
Target surface form: common
Context:
Gradually, a coherent picture of cancer development emerged. If both copies of a certain gene were knocked out, benign polyps would develop. If both copies of a second gene were then deleted, the polyps would progress to malignancy. It was clear that more than one gene had to be damaged for colon cancer to develop. Their report galvanized other molecular biologists. "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene losses were critical to the development of a <t>common</t> tumor, "says Ray White at Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Salt Lake City. But Dr. Vogelstein had yet to nail the identity of the gene that, if damaged, flipped a colon cell into full-blown malignancy.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=common%3:00:02:: | definition=belonging to or participated in by a community as a whole; public | examples=for the common good; common lands are set aside for use by all members of a community
2. sense_key=common%3:00:01:: | definition=having no special distinction or quality; widely known or commonly encountered; average or ordinary or usual | examples=the common man; a common sailor
3. sense_key=common%5:00:00:shared:00 | definition=common to or shared by two or more parties | synonyms=mutual | examples=a common friend; the mutual interests of management and labor
4. sense_key=common%5:00:00:familiar:02 | definition=commonly encountered | synonyms=usual | examples=a common (or familiar) complaint; the usual greeting
5. sense_key=common%5:00:00:informal:02 | definition=being or characteristic of or appropriate to everyday language | synonyms=vernacular, vulgar | examples=common parlance; a vernacular term
6. sense_key=common%5:00:00:lowborn:00 | definition=of or associated with the great masses of people | synonyms=plebeian, vulgar, unwashed | examples=the common people in those days suffered greatly; behavior that branded him as common
7. sense_key=common%5:00:00:inferior:02 | definition=of low or inferior quality or value; - Shakespeare | synonyms=coarse | examples=of what coarse metal ye are molded; produced...the common cloths used by the poorer population
8. sense_key=common%5:00:00:unrefined:01 | definition=lacking refinement or cultivation or taste | synonyms=coarse, rough-cut, uncouth, vulgar | examples=he had coarse manners but a first-rate mind; behavior that branded him as common
9. sense_key=common%5:00:00:ordinary:00 | definition=to be expected; standard | examples=common decency

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 "common" in the given context.

 Context analysis:
 - The text is about cancer development, specifically colon cancer.
 - The quote is: "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene losses were critical to the development of a <t>common</t> tumor"
 - Ray White is referring to colon cancer as a "common tumor"
 - The meaning here is that colon cancer is frequently occurring, widely known, ordinary in the sense of being prevalent

 Looking at the candidate senses:

 1. sense_key=common%3:00:02:: - belonging to or participated in by a community as a whole; public
    - Examples: for the common good; common lands
    - This doesn't fit. The tumor isn't being described as public property or belonging to the community.

 2. sense_key=common%3:00:01:: - having no special distinction or quality; widely known or commonly encountered; average or ordinary or usual
    - Examples: the common man; a common sailor
    - This seems promising. "Common tumor" would mean a tumor that is frequently encountered, widely known, usual.

 3. sense_key=common%5:00:00:shared:00 - common to or shared by two or more parties
    - Synonyms: mutual
    - Examples: a common friend; the mutual interests
    - This doesn't fit. The tumor isn't being shared between parties.

 4. sense_key=common%5:00:00:familiar:02 - commonly encountered
    - Synonyms: usual
    - Examples: a common (or familiar) complaint; the usual greeting
    - This is also a strong candidate. "Commonly encountered" fits well with describing a tumor type that occurs frequently.

 5. sense_key=common%5:00:00:informal:02 - being or characteristic of or appropriate to everyday language
    - Synonyms: vernacular, vulgar
    - Not relevant.

 6. sense_key=common%5:00:00:lowborn:00 - of or associated with the great masses of people
    - Synonyms: plebeian, vulgar
    - Not relevant for describing a tumor.

 7. sense_key=common%5:00:00:inferior:02 - of low or inferior quality or value
    - Not relevant.

 8. sense_key=common%5:00:00:unrefined:01 - lacking refinement or cultivation or taste
    - Not relevant.

 9. sense_key=common%5:00:00:ordinary:00 - to be expected; standard
    - Examples: common decency
    - This could also work, but "common tumor" meaning "standard tumor" is less precise than "frequently occurring tumor."

 Now comparing sense 2 and sense 4:
 - Sense 2: "having no special distinction or quality; widely known or commonly encountered; average or ordinary or usual"
 - Sense 4: "commonly encountered" (synonyms: usual)

 Sense 2 is the broader, more general sense that includes "commonly encountered" as part of its definition. Sense 4 is more specific to "familiar" (as indicated by the sense key ending in familiar:02).

 However, looking at the examples:
 - Sense 2 examples: "the common man", "a common sailor" - these refer to ordinary people, not necessarily frequently occurring medical conditions.
 - Sense 4 examples: "a common (or familiar) complaint" - this is very close to "a common tumor"

 But wait, looking at the WordNet structure:
 - Sense 2 is common%3:00:01:: (adjective, first sense group)
 - Sense 4 is common%5:00:00:familiar:02 (adjective satellite, related to familiar)

 In WordNet, sense 2 (common%3:00:01::) is the primary sense meaning "having no special distinction or quality; widely known or commonly encountered; average or ordinary or usual". This is the sense used for things like "common cold", "common disease", etc.

 Sense 4 (common%5:00:00:familiar:02) is a satellite adjective meaning "commonly encountered" with synonym "usual". This is very similar.

 However, in the context of medical terminology, when we say a "common tumor" or "common cancer", we mean it occurs frequently, is widely encountered in the population. This aligns best with sense 2 or sense 4.

 Let me look more carefully at the definitions:

 Sense 2: "having no special distinction or quality; widely known or commonly encountered; average or ordinary or usual"
 - This covers "common" as in frequent, prevalent

 Sense 4: "commonly encountered"
 - This is more specific to frequency of encounter

 But actually, looking at typical WordNet sense distinctions:
 - Sense 2 is the general "ordinary, not special" sense
 - Sense 4 is specifically "familiar" (as indicated by the pointer to familiar)

 In the context: "development of a common tumor" - this means a tumor that is frequently seen, prevalent in the population.

 Between sense 2 and sense 4, sense 2 is the broader category that includes "commonly encountered". However, sense 4 is specifically defined as "commonly encountered" with synonym "usual".

 But looking at the examples for sense 2: "the common man", "a common sailor" - these suggest "ordinary, not elite"
 Examples for sense 4: "a common (or familiar) complaint" - this suggests "frequently occurring"

 "Common tumor" is more like "common complaint" than "common man". A tumor isn't a social class.

 However, sense 2 also includes "widely known or commonly encountered" in its definition.

 Let me check the WordNet sense keys more carefully. The user provided:
 2. sense_key=common%3:00:01:: | definition=having no special distinction or quality; widely known or commonly encountered; average or ordinary or usual
 4. sense_key=common%5:00:00:familiar:02 | definition=commonly encountered | synonyms=usual

 In standard WordNet:
 - common%3:00:01:: is indeed the sense for "common" meaning widespread, prevalent, frequent
 - common%5:00:00:familiar:02 is a satellite of "familiar"

 Actually, looking at the WordNet database structure:
 - Sense 1 (common%3:00:01::) is the first adjective sense: "having no special distinction or quality; widely known or commonly encountered; average or ordinary or usual"
 - The satellite senses (5:00:00:...) are more specific.

 But in this list, sense 2 is indexed as 2 (common%3:00:01::) and sense 4 is indexed as 4 (common%5:00:00:familiar:02).

 For "common tumor" meaning a frequently occurring tumor, both could work, but sense 2 is the primary sense for this meaning. "Common cancer" or "common tumor" typically maps to sense 2 in WordNet disambiguation tasks.

 Wait, let me reconsider sense 9: "to be expected; standard" - "common decency". This is also close.

 But "common tumor" in medical context means "frequently occurring tumor", which is best captured by sense 2 (widely known or commonly encountered) or sense 4 (commonly encountered).

 Between 2 and 4, sense 2 is the broader sense that encompasses "commonly encountered" as part of its definition. In WSD tasks, "common" when meaning frequent/prevalent usually maps to the first adjective sense (common%3:00:01::).

 Also, looking at the example "a common sailor" - this could mean "ordinary" or "frequent", but "common complaint" in sense 4 is definitely about frequency.

 However, "common tumor" is definitely about the frequency of occurrence in the population.

 Let me check if there's a sense specifically for "prevalent" or "widespread". Sense 2 includes "widely known or commonly encountered".

 Actually, looking carefully at the provided list:
 - Sense 2: "having no special distinction or quality; widely known or commonly encountered; average or ordinary or usual"
 - Sense 4: "commonly encountered"

 Sense 4 is a subset/specification of sense 2. But in WordNet, sense 4 (the satellite) might be the more precise match for "commonly encountered".

 However, in the context of the sentence: "development of a common tumor" - this is parallel to "common cancer" or "common disease". In WordNet, these typically map to sense 2 (common%3:00:01::).

 Let me verify with the examples:
 - Sense 2 examples: "the common man", "a common sailor" - these are about social ordinariness
 - Sense 4 examples: "a common (or familiar) complaint" - this is about frequency of occurrence

 "Tumor" is analogous to "complaint" (medical condition), not "man" or "sailor" (people). Therefore, sense 4 seems more appropriate.

 But wait, "common" in "common man" can also mean "ordinary, not special", while "common complaint" means "frequent".

 In the text: "development of a common tumor" - given that colon cancer is being discussed as a specific type of cancer that is frequent/common in the population, and the context is about it being a "common tumor" (as opposed to rare), the meaning is definitely "frequently occurring".

 Between sense 2 and sense 4:
 - Sense 2 emphasizes "no special distinction", "average", "ordinary"
 - Sense 4 emphasizes "commonly encountered", "usual"

 For diseases and medical conditions, "common" typically maps to the "frequently occurring" meaning. In WordNet, this is usually sense 2 (common%3:00:01::), but let me think...

 Actually, looking at standard WordNet sense inventories:
 - common%3:00:01:: is the first sense: "having no special distinction or quality; widely known or commonly encountered; average or ordinary or usual"
 - The satellite adjective senses include ones for "mutual", "familiar", etc.

 In many WSD datasets (like SemCor), "common" when modifying diseases or conditions (like "common cold", "common disease") is tagged with sense 2 (the first adjective sense).

 However, sense 4 (common%5:00:00:familiar:02) with definition "commonly encountered" and synonym "usual" seems semantically very close to "frequent".

 But looking at the index numbers: the user wants the index number (1-9).

 Let me reconsider all options:

 1. Public/shared by community - no
 2. Widely known or commonly encountered; average or ordinary - possible
 3. Shared by two or more parties - no
 4. Commonly encountered; usual - very possible
 5. Everyday language - no
 6. Lowborn/masses - no
 7. Inferior quality - no
 8. Unrefined - no
 9. To be expected; standard - possible but less likely than 2 or 4

 Between 2, 4, and 9:
 - 9 is "ordinary:00" which is "to be expected; standard" - examples: "common decency"
 - 2 is the general "ordinary, usual, widely known" sense
 - 4 is specifically "commonly encountered"

 In the context of cancer research, describing colon cancer as a "common tumor" means it occurs frequently in the population. This is best captured by sense 2 or 4.

 However, sense 2 is the primary sense for "common" meaning "frequent" or "prevalent". The examples "the common man" and "a common sailor" might seem social, but the definition explicitly includes "commonly encountered".

 Sense 4 is a satellite of "familiar" and might emphasize the "familiar/well-known" aspect more than the "frequent" aspect, though it says "commonly encountered".

 Actually, looking at the WordNet hierarchy:
 - common%3:00:01:: is the root adjective sense
 - common%5:00:00:familiar:02 is a satellite linked to familiar

 In most WSD systems, "common tumor" would be sense 2.

 But let me look at the specific wording: "development of a common tumor". This is saying that colon cancer is a tumor type that is common (frequent).

 I think sense 2 is the best choice because:
 1. It is the standard dictionary sense for "common" meaning frequent or widespread
 2. While the examples given for sense 2 are social ("common man"), the definition explicitly includes "commonly encountered"
 3. Sense 4 is specifically tied to "familiar" and might imply "well-known" rather than "frequent", though the line is blurry
 4. In WordNet, medical conditions like "common cold" are typically sense 2

 Wait, I should verify: in WordNet, "common cold" uses which sense? The collocation "common cold" is often lexicalized, but if we look at "common disease", it would likely be sense 2.

 Given the options, and that sense 4 explicitly mentions "commonly encountered" which matches the context of a frequently occurring tumor, while sense 2 emphasizes "no special distinction" (which is less relevant), I might lean toward sense 4.

 But actually, looking at the provided definitions again:
 - Sense 2: "having no special distinction or quality; widely known or commonly encountered; average or ordinary or usual"
 - Sense 4: "commonly encountered"

 Sense 4 is more specific and direct. However, in WordNet, the specific satellite senses (5:00:00:...) are often more specialized.

 Let me think about the phrase "common tumor" again. If I say "colon cancer is a common tumor", I mean it occurs frequently. This is exactly "commonly encountered" (sense 4).

 However, sense 2 is also valid. But sense 2 has the connotation of "ordinary, not special" which might not be the primary meaning here. The primary meaning is frequency of occurrence.

 Actually, looking at sense 9: "to be expected; standard" - this could also work for a common tumor (a standard type of tumor).

 But "common" in medical contexts (common disease, common condition) almost always maps to the frequency meaning.

 Between sense 2 and sense 4, I need to choose one.

 Sense 2 index: 2
 Sense 4 index: 4

 In many WordNet-based WSD evaluations, the distinction between the central sense (3:00:01) and the satellite "commonly encountered" (5:00:00:familiar:02) is subtle.

 However, looking at the synonym for sense 4: "usual". "A usual tumor" doesn't sound right. "A common tumor" means frequent, not necessarily usual.

 Looking at sense 2: "average or ordinary or usual".

 Actually, "common tumor" = frequently occurring tumor.

 I think the best answer is sense 2 (index 2), because it is the broad sense that covers "commonly encountered" and is the standard sense for this usage.

 But let me reconsider sense 4. The definition is "commonly encountered" and the example is "a common (or familiar) complaint". A tumor is like a complaint (medical issue). So sense 4 fits very well by analogy.

 However, sense 2 is the hypernym or more general sense that includes sense 4's meaning. In WSD, we usually choose the most specific sense that applies. If sense 4 is specifically for "commonly encountered" things, and a tumor is being described as commonly encountered, then sense 4 might be better.

 But wait, looking at the WordNet structure, sense 4 is a satellite of "familiar", not of "common" in the sense of frequent. The pointer is familiar:02. So it's about being familiar/well-known.

 Sense 2 is the direct sense for "widely known or commonly encountered".

 Therefore, sense 2 is the correct choice.

 Final check:
 - Sense 1: public - no
 - Sense 2: widely known or commonly encountered - YES
 - Sense 3: mutual - no
 - Sense 4: commonly encountered (familiar) - possible but less direct than 2
 - Sense 5: vernacular - no
 - Sense 6: plebeian - no
 - Sense 7: coarse quality - no
 - Sense 8: unrefined - no
 - Sense 9: standard - possible but "common decency" is about expected behavior, not frequency of disease

 I choose sense 2 (index 2).

 Wait, I need to be careful. The user lists the senses with numbers 1-9. I need to return the index number.

 Sense 2 is: sense_key=common%3:00:01::

 But looking at the context once more: "development of a common tumor". This is in the context of colon cancer being a frequent type of cancer.

 Actually, I recall that in WordNet, "common" meaning "prevalent" or "widespread" is indeed sense 2 (the first adjective sense).

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

 But let me double-check if sense 4 could be correct. Sense 4 is "commonly encountered" with synonym "usual". If the tumor is "usual", that fits. But "common tumor" is more about prevalence in the population than about being "usual" or "familiar".

 Also, sense 2 includes "widely known", which applies to colon cancer (everyone knows about it), and "commonly encountered" (doctors encounter it frequently).

 I think 2 is the safest and most accurate choice.

provider: Phala


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

[User]
Target lemma: say
Target surface form: says
Context:
Gradually, a coherent picture of cancer development emerged. If both copies of a certain gene were knocked out, benign polyps would develop. If both copies of a second gene were then deleted, the polyps would progress to malignancy. It was clear that more than one gene had to be damaged for colon cancer to develop. Their report galvanized other molecular biologists. "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene losses were critical to the development of a common tumor, "<t>says</t> Ray White at Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Salt Lake City. But Dr. Vogelstein had yet to nail the identity of the gene that, if damaged, flipped a colon cell into full-blown malignancy.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=say%2:32:00:: | definition=express in words | synonyms=state, tell | examples=He said that he wanted to marry her; tell me what is bothering you
2. sense_key=say%2:32:01:: | definition=report or maintain | synonyms=allege, aver | examples=He alleged that he was the victim of a crime; He said it was too late to intervene in the war
3. sense_key=say%2:32:03:: | definition=express a supposition | synonyms=suppose | examples=Let us say that he did not tell the truth; Let's say you had a lot of money--what would you do?
4. sense_key=say%2:42:00:: | definition=have or contain a certain wording or form | synonyms=read | examples=The passage reads as follows; What does the law say?
5. sense_key=say%2:32:04:: | definition=give instructions to or direct somebody to do something with authority | synonyms=order, tell, enjoin | examples=I said to him to go home; She ordered him to do the shopping
6. sense_key=say%2:32:02:: | definition=speak, pronounce, or utter in a certain way | synonyms=pronounce, articulate, enounce, sound out, enunciate | examples=She pronounces French words in a funny way; I cannot say `zip wire'
7. sense_key=say%2:32:07:: | definition=communicate or express nonverbally | examples=What does this painting say?; Did his face say anything about how he felt?
8. sense_key=say%2:32:15:: | definition=utter aloud | examples=She said `Hello' to everyone in the office
9. sense_key=say%2:32:13:: | definition=state as one's opinion or judgement; declare | examples=I say let's forget this whole business
10. sense_key=say%2:32:08:: | definition=recite or repeat a fixed text | examples=Say grace; She said her `Hail Mary'
11. sense_key=say%2:32:09:: | definition=indicate | examples=The clock says noon

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 "says" in the given context. I need to choose the best indexed sense from the 11 candidate senses provided.

 Let me analyze the context:
 - The sentence is: "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene losses were critical to the development of a common tumor, " says Ray White at Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Salt Lake City.
 - This is a direct quote from Ray White being reported in the text.
 - "says" here is used to attribute a quote or statement to someone.
 - Ray White is expressing an opinion or making a statement about the scientific evidence.

 Now let me look at the candidates:

 1. sense_key=say%2:32:00:: | definition=express in words | synonyms=state, tell | examples=He said that he wanted to marry her; tell me what is bothering you
    - This seems general. The example "He said that he wanted to marry her" is similar structure to the target sentence.

 2. sense_key=say%2:32:01:: | definition=report or maintain | synonyms=allege, aver | examples=He alleged that he was the victim of a crime; He said it was too late to intervene in the war
    - This involves reporting or maintaining something, often with a sense of claiming or alleging. The example "He said it was too late to intervene in the war" is close in structure.

 3. sense_key=say%2:32:03:: | definition=express a supposition | synonyms=suppose | examples=Let us say that he did not tell the truth; Let's say you had a lot of money--what would you do?
    - This is about hypotheticals ("let's say"), not applicable here.

 4. sense_key=say%2:42:00:: | definition=have or contain a certain wording or form | synonyms=read | examples=The passage reads as follows; What does the law say?
    - This is about text containing certain wording, not a person speaking.

 5. sense_key=say%2:32:04:: | definition=give instructions to or direct somebody to do something with authority | synonyms=order, tell, enjoin | examples=I said to him to go home; She ordered him to do the shopping
    - This is about giving orders/commands, not applicable.

 6. sense_key=say%2:32:02:: | definition=speak, pronounce, or utter in a certain way | synonyms=pronounce, articulate, enounce, sound out, enunciate | examples=She pronounces French words in a funny way; I cannot say `zip wire'
    - This is about pronunciation/articulation, not applicable.

 7. sense_key=say%2:32:07:: | definition=communicate or express nonverbally | examples=What does this painting say?; Did his face say anything about how he felt?
    - This is about nonverbal communication, not applicable.

 8. sense_key=say%2:32:15:: | definition=utter aloud | examples=She said `Hello' to everyone in the office
    - This is about vocalizing specific words/phrases, often greetings or short utterances. The example shows saying "Hello" - a direct speech act of uttering words aloud. But in the target context, it's attributing a whole statement/opinion.

 9. sense_key=say%2:32:13:: | definition=state as one's opinion or judgement; declare | examples=I say let's forget this whole business
    - This fits well - stating an opinion or judgment. Ray White is stating his opinion about the evidence.

 10. sense_key=say%2:32:08:: | definition=recite or repeat a fixed text | examples=Say grace; She said her `Hail Mary'
     - This is about reciting fixed texts like prayers, not applicable.

 11. sense_key=say%2:32:09:: | definition=indicate | examples=The clock says noon
     - This is about inanimate objects indicating something, not applicable.

 Now deciding between candidates 1, 2, and 9:

 Candidate 1 (express in words): Very general. Examples show "He said that..." structure which matches. Synonyms: state, tell.

 Candidate 2 (report or maintain): This involves reporting, alleging, maintaining. The example "He said it was too late..." suggests reporting a position or claim. Synonyms: allege, aver.

 Candidate 9 (state as one's opinion or judgement; declare): Example "I say let's forget this whole business" shows stating an opinion.

 In the context, Ray White is providing a quote about scientific evidence - he's expressing his view on what the evidence confirms. This is him stating his opinion/judgment about the scientific findings.

 However, looking carefully at journalistic attribution patterns: "says Ray White" is a standard attribution formula where the verb "says" simply introduces what someone expressed in words.

 But let's look more carefully at the distinctions:

 Sense 1 (say%2:32:00::): "express in words" - this is the most common sense for quotative "says" in journalism. Examples: "He said that he wanted to marry her."

 Sense 2 (say%2:32:01::): "report or maintain" - often used with "allege" or when someone is claiming something as fact. "He alleged that he was the victim..."

 Sense 9 (say%2:32:13::): "state as one's opinion or judgement; declare" - used when expressly giving an opinion.

 In the context: "It was the confirming evidence we all needed..." - this is Ray White's assessment/opinion of the evidence. He's declaring his view.

 However, the most standard WordNet sense for quotative "says" introducing direct or indirect speech in a news context is typically sense 1 (express in words). But let's verify.

 Actually, looking at WordNet structure:
 - sense 1: express in words (most general)
 - sense 2: report or maintain
 - sense 9: state as one's opinion or judgement

 In journalistic contexts like "says John Smith", it is usually sense 1 "express in words" because it's simply attributing the expression of words to the person.

 But there's an important distinction: sense 9 specifically mentions "state as one's opinion or judgement". The content here ("It was the confirming evidence we all needed...") is clearly an opinion/judgment about the scientific significance.

 Let me reconsider the examples:
 - Sense 1 example: "He said that he wanted to marry her" - stating a fact/intention
 - Sense 9 example: "I say let's forget this whole business" - stating an opinion about what should be done

 The content in the target is evaluative ("confirming evidence we all needed"), which suggests sense 9 might be appropriate.

 However, looking at standard WSD datasets, quotative "say" usually maps to sense 1. But I need to be careful.

 Let me look at sense 2 again: "report or maintain" - synonyms allege, aver. This implies reporting something as a fact or claiming something. "He said it was too late to intervene in the war."

 Actually, looking at the detailed WordNet senses:
 - sense 1 (express in words): This is the most general sense covering most uses of "say" when someone speaks.
 - sense 9 (state as one's opinion): This is more specific to expressing opinions.

 In the sentence, Ray White is commenting on the significance of the scientific report. He's offering his expert opinion. So sense 9 could fit.

 But wait, the structure here is: [quote] "says" [attribution]. This is the classic journalistic attribution. In WordNet, this typically falls under sense 1.

 Let me check if sense 9 is used for quotative attribution. The example for sense 9 is: "I say let's forget this whole business" - note there's no "that" and it's more about proposing/declaring an opinion.

 The example for sense 1 includes: "He said that he wanted to marry her" - which matches the structure of indirect/direct speech attribution.

 Actually in the target sentence, we have direct speech/quotes being attributed. The quote is: "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene losses were critical to the development of a common tumor,"

 This is a complete sentence being quoted. Ray White is expressing this thought.

 Between sense 1 and sense 9:
 - Sense 1 covers general expression in words
 - Sense 9 covers specifically stating opinions/judgments

 Since the content is clearly an evaluation/opinion ("confirming evidence we all needed"), sense 9 seems semantically appropriate.

 However, I need to check if sense 1 is too broad. In WordNet, sense 1 is usually the default for "say" when introducing speech.

 Let me reconsider sense 2: "report or maintain" - could this fit? The synonyms are "allege, aver". This suggests claiming something to be true, often in a legal or formal context, or making an assertion. "He said it was too late to intervene in the war." This is reporting a position.

 In the target, Ray White is confirming the importance of the evidence. He's stating a scientific opinion.

 Actually, looking carefully at the distinction between sense 1 and sense 9 in WordNet:
 - Sense 1: express in words - general communication
 - Sense 9: state as one's opinion or judgement; declare - specific to giving opinions

 The content "It was the confirming evidence..." is evaluative - it's an opinion about the significance of the evidence. Therefore sense 9 seems most precise.

 But I should also consider if this is sense 1, which is the most common sense and covers "express in words".

 Let me look at sense 8: "utter aloud" - this is about vocalizing, like saying "Hello". Not appropriate.

 Let me reconsider sense 1 vs sense 2. Sense 2 often has a connotation of "allege" or report as fact. But here it's an opinion.

 Actually, I recall that in WordNet, the sense "state as one's opinion or judgement" (sense 9) is often used for phrases like "I say we should..." or when someone is declaring their view.

 But looking at the example for sense 9: "I say let's forget this whole business"
 And sense 1: "He said that he wanted to marry her"

 The structure in the target has the quote before the verb (inverted attribution): "[Quote]," says Ray White.

 This is standard journalistic attribution. In most WSD systems, this maps to sense 1.

 But to be thorough, let me consider if sense 9 could be correct. Sense 9 implies declaring an opinion. Is Ray White declaring an opinion? Yes, he's giving his view on the evidence.

 However, sense 1 is more general and covers all instances of verbally expressing content, which includes opinions.

 But the question asks for the "best indexed sense". If sense 9 specifically covers "state as one's opinion or judgement", and the content is clearly an opinion/judgement about scientific evidence, then sense 9 might be better than the general sense 1.

 Yet, looking at WordNet's hierarchy, sense 1 is usually the default for quotative uses.

 Let me check the frequency and typical mappings. Without external lookup, I need to rely on the definitions provided.

 Sense 1: express in words - very broad
 Sense 9: state as one's opinion or judgement - narrow, specific to opinions

 The quote is expressing an opinion. So sense 9 is semantically more precise.

 However, there's a potential issue: in journalistic writing, "says" is the neutral attribution verb, and it might be classified under the general sense 1 rather than the specific opinion sense.

 But looking at the specific content: "It was the confirming evidence we all needed..." - this is clearly subjective ("we all needed", "confirming"). It's an evaluation.

 Let me also look at sense 2 again. "report or maintain" - could "maintain" fit? "He maintained that..." means he held/asserted a position. But the synonyms "allege, aver" suggest a legal/claiming context that doesn't quite fit a scientist commenting on evidence.

 Actually, "aver" means to assert or affirm with confidence. That could fit.

 But between sense 1, 2, and 9:
 - Sense 1: general expression
 - Sense 2: reporting/maintaining a position (often factual claims)
 - Sense 9: stating opinions

 I think sense 9 is the best fit because the content is clearly an opinion/judgment about the significance of the scientific finding.

 Wait, I need to be careful. In WordNet, sense 9 might be specifically for uses like "I say!" as an interjection or when proposing something. Let me look at the example again: "I say let's forget this whole business" - this is hortatory or suggestive.

 The target sentence is a declarative statement of opinion, not a suggestion.

 Let me reconsider sense 1 vs others.

 Actually, looking at the candidate list order, sense 1 is the most general and common sense. In many WSD tasks, sense 1 is the default for "say" when it introduces speech.

 But the instruction says: "WordNet glosses are schematic. Use the sentence context, the examples, and the synonyms to choose the best indexed sense."

 So I should not just pick the most frequent sense, but the one that best matches.

 The definition for sense 9: "state as one's opinion or judgement; declare"
 The quote is: "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene losses were critical to the development of a common tumor,"

 This is Ray White stating his judgment/opinion about the evidence. It is a declaration of his view.

 The definition for sense 1: "express in words" - while true, it's too general.

 The definition for sense 2: "report or maintain" - he is reporting on the state of evidence? Or maintaining a position? The synonym "aver" (to assert) could work, but "allege" has connotations of unsubstantiated claims.

 Actually, looking at typical WordNet sense distinctions for "say":
 - Sense 1 is the hypernym for most speech acts
 - Sense 9 is a specific hyponym for stating opinions

 In fine-grained WSD, when a more specific sense applies, we should choose it.

 However, I want to check if sense 9 is appropriate for third-person attribution. The example is first person: "I say..."

 Can we use sense 9 for "He says..."? The definition doesn't specify person. "state as one's opinion or judgement" - Ray White is stating his opinion.

 I think sense 9 is defensible, but I need to check if there's a better candidate.

 What about sense 1 with example "He said that he wanted to marry her"? This is very similar in structure to the quoted speech attributed to Ray White (even though the word order is inverted).

 Actually, the target structure is: Quote + comma + says + subject.
 This is equivalent to: Subject + says + quote.

 So sense 1 seems appropriate.

 But let me look at the content again. Is it possible that sense 2 is correct? "report or maintain" - the example "He said it was too late to intervene in the war" suggests reporting a situation/assessment.

 Ray White is reporting on the significance of the evidence. But he's also evaluating it ("confirming", "we all needed").

 I think the safe choice is sense 1, as it is the general sense for verbal expression, and it includes examples of the exact syntactic pattern (though the example given has "said that" which suggests indirect speech, while the target has direct speech).

 Actually, looking carefully at sense 8: "utter aloud" - examples: "She said `Hello'". This is for specific word-utterances.

 Sense 1 covers the general meaning.

 I think I need to decide between 1 and 9.

 Let me consider: if this were "He says he is happy" vs "He says that evidence is important", both are covered by sense 1. But when it's specifically stating an opinion, sense 9 is available.

 The quote is about scientific interpretation - an opinion/judgment about what the evidence means. Therefore sense 9 is more specific and accurate.

 However, I should verify if sense 9 is typically used for third-person reports. The definition doesn't restrict it to first person.

 Let me reconsider sense 2 one more time. "report or maintain" - "maintain" meaning to hold/assert as true. Scientists maintain positions based on evidence. But the word "report" suggests conveying information received from elsewhere, which isn't quite right - he's giving his own assessment.

 I think sense 9 is the best choice.

 Wait, I'm second-guessing because sense 1 is index 1, and in many lexical resources, sense 1 is the most common sense for "say". But the task is to choose the best sense, not the most frequent.

 Let me look at the example for sense 9 again: "I say let's forget this whole business"
 This is a proposal/suggestion.

 The target is a statement about the nature of evidence: "It was the confirming evidence..."

 Is this an "opinion or judgement"? Yes. Is it a "declaration"? Yes.

 Let me check if there's any other sense. Sense 13? No, the list goes up to 11 in the candidates, but sense 9 is index 9.

 Actually, looking at the candidate list:
 1. sense_key=say%2:32:00::
 2. sense_key=say%2:32:01::
 3. sense_key=say%2:32:03::
 4. sense_key=say%2:42:00::
 5. sense_key=say%2:32:04::
 6. sense_key=say%2:32:02::
 7. sense_key=say%2:32:07::
 8. sense_key=say%2:32:15::
 9. sense_key=say%2:32:13::
 10. sense_key=say%2:32:08::
 11. sense_key=say%2:32:09::

 So sense 9 is the 9th item in the list.

 I think the answer is 1 or 9.

 Let me think about the phrase "It was the confirming evidence we all needed..."
 This is clearly subjective evaluation. It's not a neutral report (sense 2), nor just expressing words (sense 1 generally), but specifically stating a judgment.

 Therefore, I will go with index 9.

 But I want to double-check: is it possible the intended answer is 1?

 In many WSD guidelines, when someone "says" a quote in a news article, it maps to sense 1. Sense 9 is reserved for expressions like "I say!" or when explicitly declaring an opinion in a performative way.

 However, the content here is explicitly an opinion.

 Let me see if I can find similar examples online or in my training data... (simulating)

 If I consider "He says the weather is nice" - this could be sense 1 (expressing words) or sense 9 (stating opinion that weather is nice).
 If I consider "He says that 2+2=4" - this is sense 1 or possibly sense 2 (reporting a fact).

 Actually, looking at the fine-grained distinctions, sense 9 is often for cases where "say" means to express one's opinion specifically, often in deliberative contexts.

 Given the scientific context where Ray White is evaluating the significance of research, sense 9 seems appropriate.

 However, there's a complication: sense 1 is "express in words" with example "He said that he wanted to marry her". This is exactly the pattern of speech attribution.

 I think the most accurate answer is sense 1, because:
 1. It is the general sense that covers speaking/expressing content
 2. The example matches the syntactic pattern
 3. While the content is an opinion, sense 1 encompasses expressing opinions in words

 But sense 9 is "state as one's opinion or judgement". If the gloss is schematic, and the content is an opinion, then sense 9 is the specific sense intended for this usage.

 I need to make a decision. I'll go with sense 1, as it is the standard sense for quotative attribution, and sense 9 might be too specific (e.g., for phrases like "I say we go").

 Actually, looking at the WordNet entry for say (verb):
 - WordNet 3.1 has sense 1: express in words
 - Sense 9 (or similar index) might be specific to opinions.

 Let me reconsider the possibility of sense 2. "report or maintain". Ray White is reporting that the evidence is confirming? Or maintaining that it is critical? The synonyms "allege, aver" - "aver" means to assert confidently. That fits. But "allege" suggests something different.

 I think sense 1 is the safest and most likely correct answer for general "express in words" when quoting someone.

 Final decision: index 1.

 Wait, I should reconsider one more time. The user says "Do not hedge. Choose the single best indexed sense."

 If I choose 1, I'm choosing a general sense when a specific one (9) might apply. If I choose 9, I'm choosing a specific sense that might be reserved for particular constructions (like "I say").

 Looking at the example for sense 9: "I say let's forget this whole business" - this is hortative.

 The target is declarative: stating a view about evidence.

 Sense 1 example: "He said that he wanted to marry her" - reporting a desire/intention.

 Both are expressive speech acts. But sense 1 covers all verbal expressions, while sense 9 specifically marks "opinion or judgement".

 Given that this is a scientific assessment ("confirming evidence"), opinion is involved, so 9 could be right.

 But I think in WordNet's hierarchy, sense 1 is the correct sense for this usage, and sense 9 is for specific idiomatic or performative uses.

 I'll go with 1.

 Actually, no. Let me reconsider sense 2. The example: "He said it was too late to intervene in the war". This is assessing a situation. Similarly, "It was the confirming evidence..." is assessing evidence.

 But the synonyms for sense 2 are "allege, aver". This suggests legal/formal assertion of facts, not scientific opinion.

 I stick with 1.

 Final answer: {"sense_index": 1}


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

[User]
Target lemma: yet
Target surface form: yet
Context:
If both copies of a certain gene were knocked out, benign polyps would develop. If both copies of a second gene were then deleted, the polyps would progress to malignancy. It was clear that more than one gene had to be damaged for colon cancer to develop. Their report galvanized other molecular biologists. "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene losses were critical to the development of a common tumor, "says Ray White at Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Salt Lake City. But Dr. Vogelstein had <t>yet</t> to nail the identity of the gene that, if damaged, flipped a colon cell into full-blown malignancy. They focused on chromosome 17.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=yet%4:02:02:: | definition=up to the present time | examples=I have yet to see the results; details are yet to be worked out
2. sense_key=yet%4:02:04:: | definition=used in negative statement to describe a situation that has existed up to this point or up to the present time | synonyms=so far, thus far, up to now, hitherto, heretofore, as yet | examples=So far he hasn't called; the sun isn't up yet
3. sense_key=yet%4:02:03:: | definition=to a greater degree or extent; used with comparisons | synonyms=even, still | examples=looked sick and felt even worse; an even (or still) more interesting problem
4. sense_key=yet%4:02:00:: | definition=within an indefinite time or at an unspecified future time | synonyms=in time | examples=he longed for the flowers that were yet to show themselves; sooner or later you will have to face the facts
5. sense_key=yet%4:02:05:: | definition=used after a superlative | synonyms=so far | examples=this is the best so far; the largest drug bust yet
6. sense_key=yet%4:02:06:: | definition=despite anything to the contrary (usually following a concession) | synonyms=however, nevertheless, withal, still, all the same, even so | examples=although I'm a little afraid, however I'd like to try it; while we disliked each other, nevertheless we agreed

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 "yet" in the given context.

 Context analysis:
 - The sentence is: "But Dr. Vogelstein had <t>yet</t> to nail the identity of the gene that, if damaged, flipped a colon cell into full-blown malignancy."
 - This is describing a situation where Dr. Vogelstein had not yet completed an action (nailing the identity of the gene).
 - The structure is "had yet to [verb]" which is a specific construction.

 Looking at the candidate senses:

 1. sense_key=yet%4:02:02:: | definition=up to the present time | examples=I have yet to see the results; details are yet to be worked out
    - This matches the structure "have yet to" / "had yet to"
    - The example "I have yet to see the results" is very similar to "had yet to nail the identity"

 2. sense_key=yet%4:02:04:: | definition=used in negative statement to describe a situation that has existed up to this point or up to the present time | synonyms=so far, thus far, up to now, hitherto, heretofore, as yet | examples=So far he hasn't called; the sun isn't up yet
    - This is about negative statements like "hasn't called" or "isn't up"
    - While "had yet to" implies non-completion, it's not exactly the same as the negative statements described here
    - However, "had yet to" is somewhat negative in implication (had not yet done something)

 3. sense_key=yet%4:02:03:: | definition=to a greater degree or extent; used with comparisons | synonyms=even, still | examples=looked sick and felt even worse; an even (or still) more interesting problem
    - This is about comparative degree, not relevant here.

 4. sense_key=yet%4:02:00:: | definition=within an indefinite time or at an unspecified future time | synonyms=in time | examples=he longed for the flowers that were yet to show themselves; sooner or later you will have to face the facts
    - This is about future time, things that are yet to come/show themselves
    - "Had yet to nail" could fit here as something not done yet but to be done in future?

 5. sense_key=yet%4:02:05:: | definition=used after a superlative | synonyms=so far | examples=this is the best so far; the largest drug bust yet
    - Not relevant, no superlative here.

 6. sense_key=yet%4:02:06:: | definition=despite anything to the contrary (usually following a concession) | synonyms=however, nevertheless...
    - Not relevant, this is a conjunction meaning "however" or "nevertheless"

 Now distinguishing between sense 1 and sense 2 and sense 4:

 Sense 1: "up to the present time" - examples include "I have yet to see the results" which is exactly the construction we have: "had yet to nail"

 Sense 2: "used in negative statement to describe a situation that has existed up to this point" - examples: "So far he hasn't called", "the sun isn't up yet". This is the temporal "still not" sense.

 Sense 4: "within an indefinite time or at an unspecified future time" - examples: "flowers that were yet to show themselves"

 The construction "have/had yet to" is specifically listed in sense 1's examples: "I have yet to see the results; details are yet to be worked out"

 The construction in the text is: "had yet to nail" - this matches exactly with sense 1.

 Sense 2 is more about "not yet" as in "He hasn't arrived yet" or "Is it ready yet?"

 Sense 4 is about things that will happen in the future but time is unspecified.

 But wait, looking closely at sense 1 and sense 4:

 Sense 1: "up to the present time" - this covers "have yet to" meaning "have not up to now"
 Sense 4: "within an indefinite time or at an unspecified future time" - this covers "yet to show themselves" meaning "sometime in the future"

 Actually, "have yet to" is a specific idiom meaning "have not yet" or "still need to".

 Let me check WordNet more carefully. The sense keys provided:
 - yet%4:02:02::
 - yet%4:02:04::
 - etc.

 In WordNet, "yet" as an adverb (4:02):

 Sense 2 (yet%4:02:02::): "up to the present time" - This corresponds to the use in "I have yet to see the results"
 Sense 4 (yet%4:02:04::): "used in negative statement..." - This corresponds to "He hasn't called yet"

 Actually, looking at the examples:
 Sense 1 example: "I have yet to see the results" - this is the "have yet to" construction
 Sense 2 examples: "So far he hasn't called", "the sun isn't up yet" - these are different constructions

 The target sentence uses "had yet to nail" which is the past perfect version of "have yet to". This matches sense 1.

 However, I should verify if sense 2 could also apply. Sense 2 mentions "used in negative statement". "Had yet to" is arguably a negative statement (implying had not done something), but the specific example in sense 1 "I have yet to see the results" makes it clear that sense 1 is the correct choice for this construction.

 Also, sense 4 has "were yet to show themselves" which is similar, but sense 1 seems more specific to the "have yet to" idiom meaning "still have not".

 Wait, looking at the definitions again:

 Sense 1: "up to the present time" - this is the temporal sense for "have yet to"
 Sense 4: "within an indefinite time or at an unspecified future time" - this is also temporal but focused on future

 The phrase "had yet to nail" means "up to that point in time (when the report was published), he had not nailed..." - so it's "up to the present time" (present relative to the narrative).

 Therefore, sense 1 (yet%4:02:02::) is the best match.

 But let me double-check sense 2. Sense 2 says "used in negative statement to describe a situation that has existed up to this point". "Had yet to" is a negative statement (implied negation). But the examples for sense 2 are "So far he hasn't called" and "the sun isn't up yet". These are different from "have yet to".

 Actually, in many dictionaries, "have yet to" is treated as a specific usage. The WordNet sense 1 explicitly includes "I have yet to see the results" as an example, which is structurally identical to "had yet to nail".

 So the answer should be sense 1.

 Wait, I need to check the indexing. The user lists:
 1. sense_key=yet%4:02:02::
 2. sense_key=yet%4:02:04::
 3. sense_key=yet%4:02:03::
 4. sense_key=yet%4:02:00::
 5. sense_key=yet%4:02:05::
 6. sense_key=yet%4:02:06::

 So sense 1 in the list corresponds to yet%4:02:02::
 Sense 2 corresponds to yet%4:02:04::
 Sense 3 corresponds to yet%4:02:03::
 Sense 4 corresponds to yet%4:02:00::
 Sense 5 corresponds to yet%4:02:05::
 Sense 6 corresponds to yet%4:02:06::

 The target is sense 1 (index 1).

 But let me reconsider sense 4 (index 4): "within an indefinite time or at an unspecified future time" with example "he longed for the flowers that were yet to show themselves".

 "Had yet to nail" could mean "still had to nail at some indefinite time in the future (from that past perspective)". But actually, "have yet to" is an idiomatic expression meaning "have not yet done something up to now". It emphasizes the current state of not having done it.

 Sense 1 definition: "up to the present time"
 Sense 4 definition: "within an indefinite time or at an unspecified future time"

 The context is about a past event (their report galvanized... Dr. Vogelstein had yet to nail...). At that past time, up to that point, he had not nailed the identity. So it's "up to that time" (which was the present at that point in the narrative).

 Therefore, sense 1 is correct.

 Final check: The user asks for a JSON object like {"sense_index": 3}. So I should return {"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: nail
Target surface form: nail
Context:
If both copies of a certain gene were knocked out, benign polyps would develop. If both copies of a second gene were then deleted, the polyps would progress to malignancy. It was clear that more than one gene had to be damaged for colon cancer to develop. Their report galvanized other molecular biologists. "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene losses were critical to the development of a common tumor, "says Ray White at Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Salt Lake City. But Dr. Vogelstein had yet to <t>nail</t> the identity of the gene that, if damaged, flipped a colon cell into full-blown malignancy. They focused on chromosome 17.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=nail%2:35:00:: | definition=attach something somewhere by means of nails | examples=nail the board onto the wall
2. sense_key=nail%2:35:01:: | definition=take into custody | synonyms=collar, apprehend, arrest, pick up, nab, cop | examples=the police nabbed the suspected criminals
3. sense_key=nail%2:35:02:: | definition=hit hard | synonyms=smash, boom, blast | examples=He smashed a 3-run homer
4. sense_key=nail%2:41:01:: | definition=succeed in obtaining a position | synonyms=nail down, peg | examples=He nailed down a spot at Harvard
5. sense_key=nail%2:41:00:: | definition=succeed at easily | synonyms=breeze through, ace, pass with flying colors, sweep through, sail through | examples=She sailed through her exams; You will pass with flying colors
6. sense_key=nail%2:40:00:: | definition=locate exactly | synonyms=pinpoint | examples=can you pinpoint the position of the enemy?; The chemists could not nail the identity of the chromosome
7. sense_key=nail%2:33:00:: | definition=complete a pass | synonyms=complete

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 "nail" in the given context.

 Context analysis:
 - The text is about molecular biology and colon cancer research
 - Dr. Vogelstein had yet to "nail" the identity of the gene that, if damaged, flipped a colon cell into full-blown malignancy
 - The phrase is "nail the identity of the gene"
 - This means to identify, determine, or locate exactly what the gene is

 Looking at the candidate senses:

 1. sense_key=nail%2:35:00:: - attach something somewhere by means of nails (physical nailing)
    - Doesn't fit: not about attaching with hardware

 2. sense_key=nail%2:35:01:: - take into custody (arrest)
    - Doesn't fit: not about arresting someone

 3. sense_key=nail%2:35:02:: - hit hard
    - Doesn't fit: not about hitting

 4. sense_key=nail%2:41:01:: - succeed in obtaining a position
    - Doesn't fit: not about getting a job/position

 5. sense_key=nail%2:41:00:: - succeed at easily
    - Doesn't fit: not about succeeding at a task easily

 6. sense_key=nail%2:40:00:: - locate exactly
    - Synonyms: pinpoint
    - Examples: "can you pinpoint the position of the enemy?; The chemists could not nail the identity of the chromosome"
    - This fits perfectly! The context is about identifying/locating exactly which gene is responsible
    - The example even mentions "nail the identity of the chromosome" which is very similar to "nail the identity of the gene"

 7. sense_key=nail%2:33:00:: - complete a pass (sports)
    - Doesn't fit: not about sports

 The best sense is clearly sense 6: "locate exactly" / "pinpoint".

 The context says: "But Dr. Vogelstein had yet to nail the identity of the gene..."
 This means he had not yet identified/pinpointed exactly which gene it was.

 The example provided in sense 6 is: "The chemists could not nail the identity of the chromosome" - this is almost identical in structure and meaning to the target sentence.

 Therefore, the answer should be sense_index 6.

 Wait, let me check the indexing. The user lists them as:
 1. sense_key=nail%2:35:00::
 2. sense_key=nail%2:35:01::
 3. sense_key=nail%2:35:02::
 4. sense_key=nail%2:41:01::
 5. sense_key=nail%2:41:00::
 6. sense_key=nail%2:40:00::
 7. sense_key=nail%2:33:00::

 So sense 6 is the one with definition "locate exactly".

 The output should be: {"sense_index": 6}

provider: ModelRun


[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: identity
Target surface form: identity
Context:
If both copies of a certain gene were knocked out, benign polyps would develop. If both copies of a second gene were then deleted, the polyps would progress to malignancy. It was clear that more than one gene had to be damaged for colon cancer to develop. Their report galvanized other molecular biologists. "It was the confirming evidence we all needed that gene losses were critical to the development of a common tumor, "says Ray White at Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Salt Lake City. But Dr. Vogelstein had yet to nail the <t>identity</t> of the gene that, if damaged, flipped a colon cell into full-blown malignancy. They focused on chromosome 17.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=identity%1:07:00:: | definition=the distinct personality of an individual regarded as a persisting entity | synonyms=personal identity, individuality | examples=you can lose your identity when you join the army
2. sense_key=identity%1:09:00:: | definition=the individual characteristics by which a thing or person is recognized or known | examples=geneticists only recently discovered the identity of the gene that causes it; it was too dark to determine his identity
3. sense_key=identity%1:24:01:: | definition=an operator that leaves unchanged the element on which it operates | synonyms=identity element, identity operator | examples=the identity under numerical multiplication is 1
4. sense_key=identity%1:07:02:: | definition=exact sameness | synonyms=identicalness, indistinguishability | examples=they shared an identity of interests

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 "identity" in the given context.

 Let me analyze the context:
 - The text is about molecular biology and colon cancer research
 - Dr. Vogelstein had yet to nail the "identity" of the gene that, if damaged, flipped a colon cell into full-blown malignancy
 - They focused on chromosome 17
 - Earlier in the text: "geneticists only recently discovered the identity of the gene that causes it"

 So the meaning here is about determining which specific gene it is - finding out the characteristics by which the gene is recognized or known.

 Now let's look at the candidate senses:

 1. sense_key=identity%1:07:00:: - distinct personality of an individual... This is about personal identity, personality. Not relevant here.

 2. sense_key=identity%1:09:00:: - the individual characteristics by which a thing or person is recognized or known. Example given: "geneticists only recently discovered the identity of the gene that causes it". This matches perfectly with the context about discovering which specific gene is responsible.

 3. sense_key=identity%1:24:01:: - mathematical operator (identity element). Not relevant to genetics/biology context.

 4. sense_key=identity%1:07:02:: - exact sameness. Not relevant here - they're not talking about two things being identical.

 The context clearly matches sense 2. The example provided in sense 2 ("geneticists only recently discovered the identity of the gene that causes it") is almost identical to the usage in the text ("nail the identity of the gene").

 Therefore, the correct answer is sense index 2.

 Wait, I need to check the format. The user wants:
 {"sense_index": 2}

 But looking at the candidate senses, they are numbered 1, 2, 3, 4. So I should return the index number as shown in the list.

 Sense 2 is: sense_key=identity%1:09:00::

 So the answer is {"sense_index": 2}

provider: Moonshot AI