[User]
Which numbered sense of "ambitious" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: Locally elected school boards, especially in our larger cities, become the prey of <t>ambitious</t>, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic local politicians or would-be politicians.

Senses:
1. definition=having a strong desire for success or achievement
2. definition=requiring full use of your abilities or resources | examples=ambitious schedule

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to identify which sense of "ambitious" is used in the given sentence. The sentence is: "Locally elected school boards, especially in our larger cities, become the prey of <t>ambitious</t>, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic local politicians or would-be politicians."

The two senses provided are:
1. definition=having a strong desire for success or achievement
2. definition=requiring full use of your abilities or resources | examples=ambitious schedule

Let me analyze the context. The word "ambitious" is describing "local politicians or would-be politicians." It's used alongside "generally corrupt" and "invariably demagogic" - these are all describing personal characteristics of the politicians.

Sense 1 refers to people having a strong desire for success or achievement. This fits describing politicians who are ambitious (wanting to advance their careers, gain power, etc.).

Sense 2 refers to tasks, schedules, projects, etc. that are demanding or challenging. For example, "an ambitious schedule" means a schedule that is difficult to achieve, requiring full use of resources.

In this sentence, "ambitious" is clearly describing the politicians themselves - it's a characteristic of the people, not of a task or project. The politicians are described as ambitious (wanting success/power), corrupt, and demagogic.

Therefore, sense 1 is the correct answer.

The answer should be just the number: 1


attempt_kind: initial

status: success

[User]
Which numbered sense of "generally" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: Locally elected school boards, especially in our larger cities, become the prey of ambitious, <t>generally</t> corrupt, and invariably demagogic local politicians or would-be politicians.

Senses:
1. definition=usually; as a rule | examples=by and large it doesn't rain much here
2. definition=without distinction of one from others | examples=he is interested in snakes in general
3. definition=without regard to specific details or exceptions | examples=he interprets the law broadly

finish_reason: stop

role: assistant

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to identify which numbered sense of "generally" is used in the given sentence. Let me analyze the sentence and the definitions.

Sentence: "Locally elected school boards, especially in our larger cities, become the prey of ambitious, <t>generally</t> corrupt, and invariably demagogic local politicians or would-be politicians."

The word "generally" here is modifying "corrupt" and appears in a list: "ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic".

Let me look at the senses:

1. definition=usually; as a rule | examples=by and large it doesn't rain much here
   - This sense means "in most cases" or "typically"

2. definition=without distinction of one from others | examples=he is interested in snakes in general
   - This sense means "in general" as opposed to specific instances

3. definition=without regard to specific details or exceptions | examples=he interprets the law broadly
   - This sense means "broadly" or "loosely"

In the sentence, "generally corrupt" means "usually corrupt" or "as a rule corrupt" - implying that these politicians are typically corrupt, or corrupt in most cases. This matches sense 1.

Let me double-check:
- "generally corrupt" = usually corrupt, for the most part corrupt
- This fits sense 1: "usually; as a rule"

Sense 2 would be about general categories vs specific instances, which doesn't fit here.
Sense 3 would be about broad interpretation without details, which also doesn't fit.

The structure "ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic" suggests a progression or qualification:
- ambitious
- generally (usually) corrupt
- invariably (always) demagogic

So "generally" here means "usually" or "for the most part" - sense 1.

The answer should be 1.

format: unknown

native_finish_reason: stop

provider: DeepInfra

currency: USD


[User]
Which numbered sense of "corrupt" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: Locally elected school boards, especially in our larger cities, become the prey of ambitious, generally <t>corrupt</t>, and invariably demagogic local politicians or would-be politicians.

Senses:
1. definition=lacking in integrity | examples=humanity they knew to be corrupt...from the day of Adam's creation
2. definition=not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive
3. definition=containing errors or alterations | examples=a corrupt text
4. definition=touched by rot or decay | examples=tainted bacon

reasoning_content:
 The user wants me to identify which numbered sense of "corrupt" is used in the given sentence. Let me analyze the sentence and the definitions.

Sentence: "Locally elected school boards, especially in our larger cities, become the prey of ambitious, generally <t>corrupt</t>, and invariably demagogic local politicians or would-be politicians."

The word "corrupt" here is describing politicians. It's used alongside "ambitious" and "demagogic" to characterize these politicians.

Let me look at the senses:

1. definition=lacking in integrity | examples=humanity they knew to be corrupt...from the day of Adam's creation
   - This refers to moral corruption, lack of integrity in people.

2. definition=not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive
   - This also refers to dishonesty and immorality in people or actions.

3. definition=containing errors or alterations | examples=a corrupt text
   - This refers to textual corruption, like a corrupted file or text.

4. definition=touched by rot or decay | examples=tainted bacon
   - This refers to physical decay or rot, like food.

In the sentence, "corrupt" is describing politicians - people. So it's about moral/ethical corruption, not about text errors or physical decay.

Now I need to distinguish between sense 1 and sense 2.

Sense 1: "lacking in integrity" - this is about moral character, integrity.
Sense 2: "not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive" - this is about being dishonest.

Both could apply to politicians. Let me look more carefully.

The sentence describes politicians as "ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic."

"Demagogic" means appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than using rational argument - so it's about political manipulation.

"Corrupt" here likely means dishonest, willing to take bribes, or lacking integrity.

Looking at the definitions again:
1. lacking in integrity
2. not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive

These are quite similar. But let me think about the nuances.

Sense 1 focuses on "integrity" - moral uprightness.
Sense 2 focuses on being "dishonest" or "evasive."

In the context of politicians preying on school boards, and being described as "demagogic" (which is about manipulation and appealing to base instincts), the word "corrupt" here most likely means lacking integrity or being dishonest.

But I need to determine which specific numbered sense is the best fit.

Actually, looking at standard dictionary definitions:
- Sense 1: "lacking in integrity"
- Sense 2: "not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive"

Wait, these might be from WordNet or a similar lexical database. Let me think about the typical distinctions.

Sense 3 is clearly about texts/data (corrupt file).
Sense 4 is clearly about physical decay (rotten food).

So it's between 1 and 2.

The phrase "corrupt politicians" is a very common collocation. In this context, it means politicians who are dishonest, take bribes, or abuse their power for personal gain.

Sense 1: "lacking in integrity" - this is a general moral failing.
Sense 2: "not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive" - this emphasizes dishonesty.

Actually, looking at the example for sense 1: "humanity they knew to be corrupt...from the day of Adam's creation" - this is about original sin, moral corruption of human nature.

Sense 2 seems more about specific dishonest behavior.

But in the context of the sentence: "ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic local politicians"

"Corrupt" here modifies politicians and is parallel to "ambitious" and "demagogic."

"Demagogic" is about political manipulation.
"Corrupt" is about moral integrity or honesty.

I think sense 1 or 2 could work, but I need to see which one is the intended answer.

Let me reconsider the definitions more carefully.

Sense 1: "lacking in integrity"
Sense 2: "not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive"

The phrase "corrupt politician" typically means a politician who takes bribes or abuses power, which is about lacking integrity and being dishonest.

But looking at the exact wording:
Sense 1: "lacking in integrity"
Sense 2: "not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive"

Actually, sense 2's definition "not straight" suggests evasiveness or crookedness in dealings.

In many lexical databases (like WordNet), the senses of "corrupt" are:
1. corrupt, crooked, bribable, purchasable, venal - capable of being corrupted
2. corrupt, crooked - not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive
3. corrupt, corrupted - containing errors or alterations
4. corrupt, tainted - touched by rot or decay

Wait, let me think about this differently. The user is asking for a specific numbered sense. This looks like it might be from a specific dataset, possibly the WordNet senses or similar.

In WordNet 3.0, the adjective "corrupt" has these senses:
1. lacking in integrity (similar: corrupt, crooked)
2. not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive (similar: corrupt, crooked)
3. containing errors or alterations (similar: corrupt, corrupted)
4. touched by rot or decay (similar: corrupt, tainted)

Actually, looking at standard WordNet:
- corrupt (adj) sense 1: "lacking in integrity" (as in "a corrupt judge")
- corrupt (adj) sense 2: "not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive" (as in "corrupt practices")
- corrupt (adj) sense 3: "containing errors or alterations" (as in "a corrupt text")
- corrupt (adj) sense 4: "touched by rot or decay" (as in "`corrupt' is archaic")

Hmm, actually I need to be careful. Let me look at the examples given in the problem:

Sense 1: examples=humanity they knew to be corrupt...from the day of Adam's creation
Sense 3: examples=a corrupt text
Sense 4: examples=tainted bacon

Sense 2 has no example provided.

The example for sense 1 is about humanity being corrupt (moral corruption).
The example for sense 3 is about text (data corruption).
The example for sense 4 is about bacon (physical decay).

In the target sentence, we have politicians who are corrupt. This is clearly about moral/ethical corruption of people, not about text or physical decay.

Now, is it sense 1 or sense 2?

Sense 1: lacking in integrity
Sense 2: not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive

Both apply to people. However, "lacking in integrity" is the broader definition for moral corruption of persons. "Not straight; dishonest" might be more specific to actions or dealings.

But looking at the phrase "corrupt politicians," this is a very standard usage.

Let me think about the distinction between sense 1 and 2 in typical dictionaries.

In many dictionaries:
- Sense 1 might be the general moral sense: "having or showing a willingness to act dishonestly in return for money or personal gain"
- Sense 2 might be specific to being "crooked" or "bent" metaphorically

Actually, looking at the provided definitions again:
1. lacking in integrity
2. not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive

The phrase "not straight" suggests the metaphor of being crooked or bent, as opposed to straight/ honest.

In the context: "ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic local politicians"

"Demagogic" means appealing to the prejudices and desires of the people to gain power.

"Corrupt" here likely means willing to take bribes, abuse power, etc.

I think sense 1 is the most appropriate: "lacking in integrity."

But let me double-check. The word "corrupt" when applied to politicians could fit either:
1. lacking in integrity (general moral failing)
2. dishonest or immoral (specific dishonest acts)

However, looking at the example for sense 1: "humanity they knew to be corrupt...from the day of Adam's creation" - this is about the moral nature of humans.

The target sentence is about specific politicians being corrupt.

But actually, both senses apply to people. Let me think about which one is more commonly the first sense.

In WordNet, the first sense of "corrupt" as an adjective is:
1. (corrupt, crooked) - lacking in integrity

The second sense is:
2. (corrupt, crooked) - not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive

Wait, these look very similar. Let me check the actual WordNet entry.

Actually, looking it up in my knowledge:
WordNet 3.1 entry for corrupt (adjective):

Sense 1: lacking in integrity; "humanity they knew to be corrupt...from the day of Adam's creation"; "corrupt politicians"
Sense 2: not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive
Sense 3: containing errors or alterations; "a corrupt text"; "spoke a corrupted version of the language"
Sense 4: touched by rot or decay; "tainted bacon"; "`corrupt' is archaic"

If sense 1 has the example "corrupt politicians" in WordNet, then the answer is 1.

The user provided:
1. definition=lacking in integrity | examples=humanity they knew to be corrupt...from the day of Adam's creation

The example shows "humanity" but the definition is general.

Actually, looking at the pattern, this seems like it could be from the Oxford English Dictionary or similar, or perhaps a specific lexical sample dataset.

But regardless, the logic is:
- The word describes politicians (people)
- It's about moral character, not physical decay or textual errors
- Both sense 1 and 2 are about moral character

Sense 1: "lacking in integrity" - this is the general sense of being morally depraved or willing to act dishonestly.
Sense 2: "not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive" - this emphasizes the dishonesty aspect.

In the phrase "corrupt politicians," the most common meaning is that they are open to bribery, abuse their power, or lack moral integrity.

Given that sense 1 is "lacking in integrity" and sense 2 is "not straight; dishonest," and given that politicians are described as the prey of these people (meaning the politicians are the victims? Wait, let me reread).

"Locally elected school boards... become the prey of ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic local politicians"

Wait, the school boards become the prey of politicians. So the politicians are the predators, and they are described as corrupt.

These politicians are ambitious, corrupt, and demagogic.

"Corrupt" here means they are dishonest, lacking integrity.

Between sense 1 and 2, I think sense 1 is the primary sense for describing people as corrupt in a moral sense.

But let me look at the exact wording of sense 2: "not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive"

The word "evasive" suggests avoiding direct answers.
The word "not straight" suggests crookedness.

While this could apply to politicians, "lacking in integrity" is the broader and more fundamental definition for people who are corrupt.

Moreover, in many lexical databases, sense 1 is the person-related sense, and sense 2 might be more specific to actions or methods.

Actually, looking at the provided information again, I notice that sense 1 has an example about "humanity" being corrupt, which is about people. Sense 2 has no example. Sense 3 is about text. Sense 4 is about bacon/food.

Since the target is about politicians (people), and sense 1 is the one with the example about people (humanity), and sense 1 is "lacking in integrity," this is most likely the answer.

However, I want to be careful. Let me think about whether "corrupt" in this context could mean something else.

Could it mean sense 2? "not straight; dishonest"

Politicians who are corrupt are indeed dishonest.

But "lacking in integrity" captures the essence of political corruption - the abuse of public power for private gain, which is a lack of integrity.

I think the answer is 1.

Wait, I should also consider if there's any chance it's sense 2.

Let me look at the structure again. The definitions might be from WordNet, and in WordNet:

corrupt (adj)
1. lacking in integrity (humanity they knew to be corrupt...from the day of Adam's creation)
2. not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive
3. containing errors or alterations (a corrupt text)
4. touched by rot or decay (tainted bacon)

In WordNet, sense 1 is the one used for corrupt people in general.
Sense 2 is marked as similar to "crooked" and emphasizes the "not straight" aspect.

In the sentence, "corrupt" is used to describe the moral character of the politicians, not specifically their evasiveness or crookedness in a metaphorical sense, but their general lack of integrity.

Also, the parallel structure with "ambitious" and "demagogic" suggests character traits.
- Ambitious: having ambition
- Corrupt: lacking integrity
- Demagogic: being a demagogue

These are all character descriptors.

Therefore, sense 1: "lacking in integrity" is the best fit.

The answer should be 1.

provider: Chutes


[User]
Which numbered sense of "local" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: Locally elected school boards, especially in our larger cities, become the prey of ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic <t>local</t> politicians or would-be politicians.

Senses:
1. definition=relating to or applicable to or concerned with the administration of a city or town or district rather than a larger area | examples=local taxes
2. definition=of or belonging to or characteristic of a particular locality or neighborhood | examples=local customs
3. definition=affecting only a restricted part or area of the body | examples=local anesthesia

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to identify which sense of "local" is used in the given sentence. Let me analyze the sentence and the definitions.

Sentence: "Locally elected school boards, especially in our larger cities, become the prey of ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic <t>local</t> politicians or would-be politicians."

The word "local" here is modifying "politicians" and appears in the context of discussing school boards in larger cities.

Let me look at the senses:

Sense 1: "relating to or applicable to or concerned with the administration of a city or town or district rather than a larger area" - examples: local taxes, local government
This seems related to municipal or regional administration/governance.

Sense 2: "of or belonging to or characteristic of a particular locality or neighborhood" - examples: local customs
This seems more about characteristics of a specific place/neighborhood.

Sense 3: "affecting only a restricted part or area of the body" - examples: local anesthesia
This is clearly medical and not relevant here.

Now, looking at the context: "Locally elected school boards... become the prey of... local politicians"

The contrast is between locally elected school boards and local politicians. The context mentions "in our larger cities" which suggests municipal/city governance.

"Local politicians" here refers to politicians concerned with the administration of a city or town (municipal level) rather than state or national level. This aligns with Sense 1, which mentions "administration of a city or town or district."

Sense 2 is more about customs, characteristics, or things belonging to a neighborhood. While "local politicians" could theoretically fit Sense 2, in the context of discussing elected school boards and cities, it's clearly referring to municipal/administrative levels of government.

Also, looking at the example for Sense 1: "local taxes" - taxes administered by local government. Similarly, "local politicians" would be politicians involved in local administration.

Sense 2 examples include "local customs" which is more about cultural practices of a specific area.

The sentence is discussing governance (school boards, politicians), so Sense 1 about administration of a city/town/district is the best fit.

Wait, let me reconsider. "Local politicians" could mean politicians from that specific locality/neighborhood (Sense 2) or politicians concerned with local administration (Sense 1).

But the phrase "locally elected school boards" suggests we're talking about the level of government. School boards are administrative bodies. The politicians are described as preying on these boards.

Looking more carefully at Sense 1: "relating to or applicable to or concerned with the administration of a city or town or district rather than a larger area"
And Sense 2: "of or belonging to or characteristic of a particular locality or neighborhood"

The key difference is that Sense 1 focuses on administrative/governmental functions of a municipality, while Sense 2 is more general - belonging to a particular place.

In the phrase "local politicians," when contrasted with the context of school boards and cities, this is referring to municipal politicians - those involved in city/town administration. This is Sense 1.

However, I should check if there's any ambiguity. The word "local" appears twice in the sentence: "Locally elected" and "local politicians."

"Locally elected" - elected by the local community (could be Sense 2)
"local politicians" - politicians of the local area

Actually, looking at standard dictionary definitions:
Sense 1 corresponds to what would typically be the primary definition: relating to a particular area, especially relating to the government of that area (local government, local elections).
Sense 2 is about being restricted to a particular place (local news, local customs).

But wait, looking at the exact wording provided:
Sense 1: relating to or applicable to or concerned with the administration of a city or town or district rather than a larger area
Sense 2: of or belonging to or characteristic of a particular locality or neighborhood

The phrase "local politicians" most commonly refers to politicians at the municipal/city level (as opposed to state or national), which fits Sense 1's focus on "administration of a city or town."

Sense 2 would be more like "the local politician" meaning a politician from this specific neighborhood, emphasizing the geographical belonging rather than the administrative level.

Given the context of "larger cities" and "school boards" (which are administrative bodies), Sense 1 is clearly the right answer.

Actually, looking again at the sentence structure: It contrasts "locally elected school boards" with "local politicians." The repetition emphasizes that both are at the municipal/local government level, as opposed to state or federal.

Therefore, the answer is 1.

Let me double-check by eliminating others:
- Sense 3 is medical, clearly wrong.
- Sense 2 is about characteristics/belonging to a neighborhood. While a local politician belongs to a locality, the specific sense here is about the administrative/governmental level (city/town administration).

Yes, Sense 1 is correct.

provider: Novita


[User]
Which numbered sense of "politician" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: Locally elected school boards, especially in our larger cities, become the prey of ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic local <t>politicians</t> or would-be politicians.

Senses:
1. definition=a leader engaged in civil administration
2. definition=a person active in party politics
3. definition=a schemer who tries to gain advantage in an organization in sly or underhanded ways

reasoning_content:
The user is asking me to identify which numbered sense of "politician" is used in the given sentence. Let me analyze the sentence and the definitions.

 Sentence: "Locally elected school boards, especially in our larger cities, become the prey of ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic local <t>politicians</t> or would-be politicians."

 The key descriptors here are:
 - "ambitious"
 - "generally corrupt"
 - "invariably demagogic"
 - "local"

 Now let me look at the three senses:

 1. "a leader engaged in civil administration" - This seems like a neutral or positive definition, referring to someone who actually administers civil affairs.

 2. "a person active in party politics" - This is also relatively neutral, just describing someone involved in political parties.

 3. "a schemer who tries to gain advantage in an organization in sly or underhanded ways" - This has negative connotations, describing someone scheming, sly, underhanded.

 Looking at the sentence context:
 - The politicians are described as "ambitious" (in a negative context)
 - "generally corrupt"
 - "invariably demagogic" (demagogic means appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than using rational argument - typically negative)
 - They are described as preying on school boards

 The description emphasizes corruption, demagoguery, and scheming behavior. The phrase "prey of ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic" suggests these are people trying to gain advantage in a sly or underhanded way.

 Sense 3 specifically mentions "a schemer who tries to gain advantage in an organization in sly or underhanded ways."

 The words "corrupt" and "demagogic" align very well with sense 3, which emphasizes scheming and underhanded ways.

 Sense 1 is too neutral/positive - just a leader in civil administration.
 Sense 2 is also neutral - just someone active in party politics.

 But the sentence is clearly negative, describing these people as corrupt and demagogic. They are preying on school boards.

 Sense 3 is the only one with negative connotations that match "corrupt" and "demagogic" and the idea of preying on organizations.

 Actually, looking at the sentence again, these are "local politicians" who are ambitious, corrupt, and demagogic.

 Let me think about typical dictionary definitions.

 Sense 1: a leader engaged in civil administration - this would be the basic definition of someone holding political office.
 Sense 2: a person active in party politics - this is about party political activity
 Sense 3: a schemer... - this is the derogatory sense.

 The context clues "corrupt" and "demagogic" and the phrase "prey of" suggest that the author is using the word in a negative sense.

 In many dictionaries, "politician" has a neutral sense (someone holding or seeking office) and a negative sense (a schemer, someone unscrupulous).

 Looking at the exact wording:

 Sense 3: "a schemer who tries to gain advantage in an organization in sly or underhanded ways"

 The sentence says school boards become "the prey of" these people. That suggests they are being hunted or exploited by schemers. The words "corrupt" and "demagogic" fit with "sly or underhanded ways."

 However, I should also consider if this could be sense 1 or 2.

 Sense 1: "a leader engaged in civil administration" - The sentence mentions "locally elected school boards" and "local politicians." School boards are involved in civil administration (education). However, the description "corrupt" and "demagogic" suggests the author is using the word with negative connotations.

 But wait - the question is asking which numbered sense is USED in the sentence.

 Let me look at this more carefully.

 The sentence is describing these people as:
 1. Ambitious
 2. Generally corrupt
 3. Invariably demagogic
 4. Local

 And they are preying on school boards.

 Sense 3 specifically mentions "a schemer who tries to gain advantage in an organization in sly or underhanded ways."

 The key phrase is "tries to gain advantage in an organization."

 School boards are organizations. The politicians are preying on them - trying to gain advantage in them through corrupt and demagogic means.

 This matches sense 3 perfectly.

 Sense 1 is too neutral. Sense 2 is about party politics, but the sentence doesn't mention parties.

 The negative descriptors (corrupt, demagogic) strongly point to sense 3.

 Actually, I recall that in WordNet or similar lexical databases, "politician" has these senses:

 1. A leader engaged in civil administration
 2. A person active in party politics
 3. A schemer who tries to gain advantage in an organization in sly or underhanded ways

 The third sense is specifically the derogatory sense.

 Given the context words: "ambitious" (often negative in this context), "corrupt" (definitely negative), "demagogic" (negative), and "prey" (negative), the author is clearly using the word in the derogatory sense.

 Therefore, the answer is 3.

 Let me double-check the logic:

 - The sentence describes these people negatively
 - They are characterized as corrupt and demagogic
 - They prey on school boards
 - This fits "a schemer who tries to gain advantage in an organization in sly or underhanded ways"

 Yes, sense 3 is correct.

provider: AtlasCloud


[User]
Which numbered sense of "politician" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: Locally elected school boards, especially in our larger cities, become the prey of ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic local politicians or would-be <t>politicians</t>.

Senses:
1. definition=a leader engaged in civil administration
2. definition=a person active in party politics
3. definition=a schemer who tries to gain advantage in an organization in sly or underhanded ways

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to identify which numbered sense of "politician" is used in the given sentence. The target word is marked with <t></t> tags.

Sentence: "Locally elected school boards, especially in our larger cities, become the prey of ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic local politicians or would-be <t>politicians</t>."

Senses:
1. definition=a leader engaged in civil administration
2. definition=a person active in party politics
3. definition=a schemer who tries to gain advantage in an organization in sly or underhanded ways

Let me analyze the context. The sentence describes "ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic local politicians or would-be politicians."

The context suggests a negative connotation - "prey," "ambitious," "corrupt," "demagogic."

Sense 1: "a leader engaged in civil administration" - This is a neutral/positive definition focusing on civil administration. The context doesn't emphasize administration.

Sense 2: "a person active in party politics" - This is also relatively neutral, focusing on party politics activity.

Sense 3: "a schemer who tries to gain advantage in an organization in sly or underhanded ways" - This has a negative connotation, matching "corrupt," "demagogic," and the idea of being "prey" to such people.

Wait, let me reconsider. The sentence is talking about local politicians in the context of school boards. The phrase "would-be politicians" suggests people seeking political office or position.

But looking at the specific descriptors: "ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic." These strongly suggest sense 3, which emphasizes scheming, sly, underhanded ways. The word "demagogic" particularly suggests manipulation for political gain, which aligns with sense 3.

However, sense 2 "a person active in party politics" could also fit for "local politicians." But the negative descriptors ("corrupt," "demagogic") seem to push toward sense 3.

Let me think about this more carefully. The word "politician" often has multiple senses. Sense 3 is specifically the derogatory sense - someone who is scheming, sly, underhanded. Given the context words "corrupt" and "demagogic," this seems to be using the derogatory sense.

Actually, looking at the sentence structure: "local politicians or would-be politicians." The "would-be" suggests aspirants to political office. But the adjectives "ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic" modify both "politicians" and "would-be politicians."

In many dictionary sense distinctions for "politician":
- Sense 1: A person holding or seeking office in government (civil administration)
- Sense 2: A person active in party politics
- Sense 3: A person who maneuvers or schemes in an organization (derogatory)

Given the strongly negative context ("prey," "corrupt," "demagogic"), sense 3 seems most appropriate. The sentence is criticizing these people as schemers who try to gain advantage in the school boards (organizations) in underhanded ways.

Wait, I should be careful. Is this from a specific dataset like WordNet or similar? The definitions look like they might be from WordNet.

WordNet senses for "politician":
1. a leader engaged in civil administration
2. a person active in party politics
3. a schemer who tries to gain advantage in an organization in sly or underhanded ways

Yes, these look like WordNet 3.0 or similar senses.

In WordNet, sense 3 is indeed the derogatory sense. The context with "corrupt" and "demagogic" strongly supports sense 3.

But let me double-check. Could it be sense 2? "A person active in party politics" - local politicians are often active in party politics. But the definition says "a person active in party politics" which is often "pol" or "politico" - someone involved in political activities.

However, the phrase "would-be politicians" combined with "demagogic" and "corrupt" really points to the derogatory sense. The sentence is from a critical perspective about how school boards become prey to these kinds of people.

Actually, looking at the sentence again: "Locally elected school boards... become the prey of ambitious, generally corrupt, and invariably demagogic local politicians or would-be politicians."

The word "politician" here refers to people seeking or holding public office (local office). But the negative adjectives suggest the derogatory sense is intended.

In many lexical sample tasks (like SemCor or similar), the sense is determined by the specific usage. Given the definitions provided, sense 3 specifically captures the negative connotation of a schemer.

I think the answer is 3.

Wait, let me reconsider once more. The phrase "local politicians" typically refers to people holding local office. "Would-be politicians" means people who want to become politicians. If the sense were purely derogatory (sense 3), would "would-be politicians" make sense? Yes - aspiring schemers.

But actually, looking at typical usage in WordNet disambiguation datasets, this sentence might be from a specific corpus. Let me think about whether "politician" in this context is more likely sense 1, 2, or 3.

Sense 1: leader in civil administration - this would be someone actually administering civil affairs.
Sense 2: person active in party politics - emphasizes party political activity.
Sense 3: schemer in an organization - emphasizes sly/underhanded ways.

The context mentions "school boards" which are organizations. The politicians are described as making the school boards their "prey" - suggesting they are exploiting the school boards for personal gain. This fits "a schemer who tries to gain advantage in an organization in sly or underhanded ways."

Also, "demagogic" means appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than using rational argument - this is a manipulative, scheming behavior.

Therefore, sense 3 is the best fit.

I should return only the number.

provider: SiliconFlow


[User]
Which numbered sense of "process" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: New York is in the <t>process</t> of trying to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this system of school governance, even as Chicago and other cities are moving to institute it.

Senses:
1. definition=a particular course of action intended to achieve a result | examples=the procedure of obtaining a driver's license
2. definition=(psychology) the performance of some composite cognitive activity; an operation that affects mental contents | examples=the process of thinking
3. definition=a writ issued by authority of law; usually compels the defendant's attendance in a civil suit; failure to appear results in a default judgment against the defendant
4. definition=a mental process that you are not directly aware of | examples=the process of denial
5. definition=a natural prolongation or projection from a part of an organism either animal or plant | examples=a bony process
6. definition=a sustained phenomenon or one marked by gradual changes through a series of states | examples=events now in process

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to identify which numbered sense of "process" is used in the given sentence.

 Let me analyze the sentence:
 "New York is in the <t>process</t> of trying to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this system of school governance, even as Chicago and other cities are moving to institute it."

 The phrase is "in the process of trying to disengage". This means New York is currently undergoing or in the midst of this activity.

 Now let me look at the definitions:

 1. definition=a particular course of action intended to achieve a result | examples=the procedure of obtaining a driver's license
 2. definition=(psychology) the performance of some composite cognitive activity; an operation that affects mental contents | examples=the process of thinking
 3. definition=a writ issued by authority of law; usually compels the defendant's attendance in a civil suit; failure to appear results in a default judgment against the defendant
 4. definition=a mental process that you are not directly aware of | examples=the process of denial
 5. definition=a natural prolongation or projection from a part of an organism either animal or plant | examples=a bony process
 6. definition=a sustained phenomenon or one marked by gradual changes through a series of states | examples=events now in process

 Looking at the sentence, "in the process of" is an idiomatic expression meaning "in the course of" or "in the middle of undergoing" something. The definition that mentions "events now in process" is definition 6: "a sustained phenomenon or one marked by gradual changes through a series of states".

 Definition 6 seems to fit best because:
 - The sentence describes New York being in a state/condition of trying to disengage (a sustained phenomenon over time)
 - The phrase "in process" is explicitly mentioned in the examples for definition 6: "events now in process"
 - The context suggests an ongoing, gradual activity (disengaging from a 20-year commitment)

 Definition 1 (a particular course of action) could be tempting, but "in the process of" as used here refers to being in a state of gradual change or development, not specifically a procedure or course of action intended to achieve a result. Definition 6 captures the ongoing, sustained nature better.

 Definition 6 is the one about "a sustained phenomenon or one marked by gradual changes through a series of states" with the example "events now in process". This matches the usage in the sentence where New York is undergoing a gradual change (disengaging from a long-term commitment).

 Actually, let me reconsider. The phrase "in the process of" is very commonly used with definition 6. The key is "a sustained phenomenon or one marked by gradual changes through a series of states." Disengaging from a 20-year commitment is indeed a sustained phenomenon with gradual changes.

 Definition 1 is "a particular course of action intended to achieve a result" - this is more like a procedure or method. While "process" can mean this, the phrase "in the process of" typically aligns with definition 6 when referring to being in the midst of an ongoing activity.

 Let me check the example for definition 6 again: "events now in process". This parallels "in the process of trying to disengage".

 I believe the answer is 6.


[User]
Which numbered sense of "try" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: New York is in the process of <t>trying</t> to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this system of school governance, even as Chicago and other cities are moving to institute it.

Senses:
1. definition=make an effort or attempt | examples=He tried to shake off his fears
2. definition=put to the test, as for its quality, or give experimental use to | examples=This approach has been tried with good results
3. definition=put on trial or hear a case and sit as the judge at the trial of | examples=The football star was tried for the murder of his wife
4. definition=take a sample of | examples=Try these new crackers
5. definition=examine or hear (evidence or a case) by judicial process | examples=The jury had heard all the evidence
6. definition=give pain or trouble to | examples=I've been sorely tried by these students
7. definition=test the limits of | examples=You are trying my patience!
8. definition=melt (fat or lard) in order to separate out impurities | examples=try the yak butter
9. definition=put on a garment in order to see whether it fits and looks nice | examples=Try on this sweater to see how it looks

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to identify which sense of "try" is used in the given sentence. Let me analyze the sentence:

"New York is in the process of <t>trying</t> to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this system of school governance, even as Chicago and other cities are moving to institute it."

The structure is "trying to disengage" - this means making an effort or attempt to disengage.

Let me look at the definitions:

1. make an effort or attempt | examples=He tried to shake off his fears
2. put to the test, as for its quality, or give experimental use to | examples=This approach has been tried with good results
3. put on trial or hear a case and sit as the judge at the trial of | examples=The football star was tried for the murder of his wife
4. take a sample of | examples=Try these new crackers
5. examine or hear (evidence or a case) by judicial process | examples=The jury had heard all the evidence
6. give pain or trouble to | examples=I've been sorely tried by these students
7. test the limits of | examples=You are trying my patience!
8. melt (fat or lard) in order to separate out impurities | examples=try the yak butter
9. put on a garment in order to see whether it fits and looks nice | examples=Try on this sweater to see how it looks

In the sentence, "trying to disengage" clearly means making an effort or attempting to disengage. This matches sense 1: "make an effort or attempt" with the example "He tried to shake off his fears."

The other senses don't fit:
- Sense 2 is about testing something experimentally
- Sense 3 is about legal trials
- Sense 4 is about sampling/tasting
- Sense 5 is about judicial examination
- Sense 6 is about causing trouble/pain
- Sense 7 is about testing limits (patience)
- Sense 8 is about melting fat
- Sense 9 is about trying on clothes

So the answer is 1.


[User]
Which numbered sense of "system" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: New York is in the process of trying to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this <t>system</t> of school governance, even as Chicago and other cities are moving to institute it.

Senses:
1. definition=instrumentality that combines interrelated interacting artifacts designed to work as a coherent entity | examples=he bought a new stereo system
2. definition=a group of independent but interrelated elements comprising a unified whole | examples=a vast system of production and distribution and consumption keep the country going
3. definition=(physical chemistry) a sample of matter in which substances in different phases are in equilibrium | examples=in a static system oil cannot be replaced by water on a surface
4. definition=a complex of methods or rules governing behavior | examples=they have to operate under a system they oppose
5. definition=an organized structure for arranging or classifying | examples=he changed the arrangement of the topics
6. definition=a group of physiologically or anatomically related organs or parts | examples=the body has a system of organs for digestion
7. definition=a procedure or process for obtaining an objective | examples=they had to devise a system that did not depend on cooperation
8. definition=the living body considered as made up of interdependent components forming a unified whole | examples=exercise helped him get the alcohol out of his system
9. definition=an ordered manner; orderliness by virtue of being methodical and well organized | examples=his compulsive organization was not an endearing quality

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to identify which numbered sense of "system" is used in the given sentence.

 Sentence: "New York is in the process of trying to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this <t>system</t> of school governance, even as Chicago and other cities are moving to institute it."

 The word "system" here refers to "a system of school governance". Let's look at the definitions:

 1. instrumentality that combines interrelated interacting artifacts designed to work as a coherent entity (e.g., stereo system) - This is about physical devices/machines. Not applicable here.

 2. a group of independent but interrelated elements comprising a unified whole (e.g., production and distribution system) - This could potentially fit, but let's check others.

 3. (physical chemistry) a sample of matter in which substances in different phases are in equilibrium - Scientific/technical definition. Not applicable.

 4. a complex of methods or rules governing behavior (e.g., they have to operate under a system they oppose) - "School governance" involves methods/rules for governing/managing schools. This seems like a strong candidate.

 5. an organized structure for arranging or classifying (e.g., arrangement of topics) - This is more about classification/organization schemes. While governance has structure, this seems more specific to classification systems.

 6. a group of physiologically or anatomically related organs or parts (e.g., digestive system) - Biological. Not applicable.

 7. a procedure or process for obtaining an objective (e.g., they had to devise a system that did not depend on cooperation) - This could also fit, as governance involves procedures.

 8. the living body considered as made up of interdependent components - Biological. Not applicable.

 9. an ordered manner; orderliness by virtue of being methodical and well organized - This refers to the quality of being systematic, not a specific system itself.

 Now comparing 2, 4, and 7:

 Definition 2: "a group of independent but interrelated elements comprising a unified whole" - This is very general. It could apply to almost any system.

 Definition 4: "a complex of methods or rules governing behavior" - School governance specifically involves rules and methods for governing schools. The example "they have to operate under a system they oppose" suggests a system of rules/methods.

 Definition 7: "a procedure or process for obtaining an objective" - This is more about a method or procedure, whereas "school governance" is more about a structure of governance (which includes rules, methods, etc.).

 Looking at the specific context: "system of school governance" - this refers to a framework or set of rules/methods for governing schools.

 Definition 4 seems most precise: "a complex of methods or rules governing behavior" - school governance is exactly a set of methods/rules for governing (which is a type of behavior management/organizational behavior).

 Definition 2 is broader and more about elements comprising a whole, which while true, is less specific than definition 4 for "governance".

 Definition 7 focuses on "procedure or process for obtaining an objective" which is close, but governance is more about ongoing management/rules rather than a procedure to obtain a specific objective.

 Actually, looking at WordNet or similar lexical databases (which these definitions seem to come from), sense 4 often corresponds to "system" as in "operating system" or "legal system" - a set of rules or methods.

 The phrase "system of school governance" aligns well with "a complex of methods or rules governing behavior."

 Let me double-check by looking at the examples:
 - Sense 4 example: "they have to operate under a system they oppose" - This is similar to the sentence context where New York wants to disengage from a commitment to the system.

 Sense 2 example: "a vast system of production and distribution and consumption" - This is more about an economic system as a set of interrelated elements.

 Both could work, but "governance" specifically implies rules and methods for governing, which matches sense 4 better.

 Wait, let me reconsider sense 7: "a procedure or process for obtaining an objective" - Is governance a procedure? It's more of a structure/framework.

 Sense 4: "complex of methods or rules governing behavior" - Governance is about governing behavior (of the school system, administrators, etc.).

 I think sense 4 is the correct answer.

 But let me also consider if this could be sense 2. In WordNet, sense 2 is often the "system" as in "ecosystem" or "solar system" - a group of interacting elements. While a governance system has interacting elements, the specific phrase "system of school governance" is more likely to be classified under the "methods/rules" sense in most lexical databases.

 Actually, looking at standard WordNet definitions:
 - Sense 4 (in many WordNet versions): "a complex of methods or rules governing behavior" - examples often include "they have to operate under a system they oppose" or "that language has a complex system for indicating gender"

 The context is about a commitment to a system of governance, and cities instituting it or disengaging from it. This is clearly about a set of rules/methods.

 Therefore, the answer should be 4.

provider: ModelRun


[User]
Which numbered sense of "school" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: New York is in the process of trying to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this system of <t>school</t> governance, even as Chicago and other cities are moving to institute it.

Senses:
1. definition=an educational institution | examples=the school was founded in 1900
2. definition=a building where young people receive education | examples=the school was built in 1932
3. definition=the process of being formally educated at a school | examples=what will you do when you finish school?
4. definition=a body of creative artists or writers or thinkers linked by a similar style or by similar teachers | examples=the Venetian school of painting
5. definition=the period of instruction in a school; the time period when school is in session | examples=stay after school
6. definition=an educational institution's faculty and students | examples=the school keeps parents informed
7. definition=a large group of fish | examples=a school of small glittering fish swam by

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to identify which numbered sense of "school" is used in the given sentence.

Sentence: "New York is in the process of trying to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this system of <t>school</t> governance, even as Chicago and other cities are moving to institute it."

The word "school" here is part of the phrase "school governance". This refers to the governance of schools as educational institutions. Let me look at the senses:

1. definition=an educational institution | examples=the school was founded in 1900
2. definition=a building where young people receive education | examples=the school was built in 1932
3. definition=the process of being formally educated at a school | examples=what will you do when you finish school?
4. definition=a body of creative artists or writers or thinkers linked by a similar style or by similar teachers | examples=the Venetian school of painting
5. definition=the period of instruction in a school; the time period when school is in session | examples=stay after school
6. definition=an educational institution's faculty and students | examples=the school keeps parents informed
7. definition=a large group of fish | examples=a school of small glittering fish swam by

Wait, "school governance" - this is talking about the governance/management of schools. But the word "school" itself in this context is modifying "governance". It's used as an attributive noun.

Let me think about what "school" refers to here. "this system of school governance" - the governance of schools. So "school" here refers to educational institutions in general, or perhaps the educational system.

Looking at the options:
- Sense 1: an educational institution. "School governance" = governance of educational institutions. This seems like the best fit because "school" here refers to the institutions themselves.
- Sense 2: a building. Unlikely, as governance isn't about buildings specifically.
- Sense 3: the process of being educated. "School governance" doesn't mean governance of the process of education (though it could be argued). But usually "school" as a process would be "in school", "finish school", etc.
- Sense 4: a body of artists. No.
- Sense 5: period of instruction. "School governance" doesn't mean governance of the time period.
- Sense 6: faculty and students. "School governance" could mean governance by faculty and students, but more likely it means governance of schools (institutions).
- Sense 7: fish. No.

Actually, let me reconsider. In "school governance", is "school" being used to mean:
- The institution (sense 1)?
- The system of education?
- The faculty and students (sense 6)?

"school governance" typically refers to how schools are governed - i.e., the governance of educational institutions. So sense 1 seems right.

But wait, let me look at the example for sense 6: "the school keeps parents informed" - this uses "school" to mean the institution as a collective of people (faculty, students, administration).

In "school governance", the phrase is similar to "school system", "school policy", "school lunch" - where "school" refers to the educational institution/establishment.

Sense 1: "an educational institution" - this is the most general and fits attributive uses like "school governance" (governance of educational institutions).

Actually, looking at WordNet or similar lexicographic resources, sense 1 is usually the general "educational institution" sense, which is often used attributively to mean "relating to schools/educational institutions."

So the answer should be 1.

Wait, I should double-check. Is there any chance it's sense 6? "an educational institution's faculty and students" - if "school governance" meant governance by the school community... but no, "school governance" means the governance/management of schools.

Sense 1 is the correct answer.


[User]
Which numbered sense of "governance" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: New York is in the process of trying to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this system of school <t>governance</t>, even as Chicago and other cities are moving to institute it.

Senses:
1. definition=the persons (or committees or departments etc.) who make up a body for the purpose of administering something | examples=he claims that the present administration is corrupt
2. definition=the act of governing; exercising authority | examples=regulations for the governing of state prisons

reasoning_content:
 The user wants me to identify which sense of "governance" is used in the given sentence. The sentence is:

"New York is in the process of trying to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this system of school <t>governance</t>, even as Chicago and other cities are moving to institute it."

The two senses provided are:
1. definition=the persons (or committees or departments etc.) who make up a body for the purpose of administering something | examples=he claims that the present administration is corrupt
2. definition=the act of governing; exercising authority | examples=regulations for the governing of state prisons

Let me analyze the sentence. The word "governance" appears in the phrase "system of school governance".

Sense 1 refers to the people or bodies who administer something (the governors, the administration, the committee).
Sense 2 refers to the act or process of governing, the exercise of authority.

In the phrase "system of school governance", we're talking about a system. A system of governance would be the structure, rules, and processes by which something is governed. This aligns more with sense 2 - the act or process of governing, or the system of exercising authority.

However, let me look more carefully. "System of school governance" could mean:
- The system by which schools are governed (the processes, rules, authority structures) - this would be sense 2
- The system of people/committees who govern schools - this would be sense 1

But looking at the example for sense 1: "he claims that the present administration is corrupt" - this clearly refers to the people.
Looking at the example for sense 2: "regulations for the governing of state prisons" - this refers to the act/process/system of governing.

In the sentence, New York is trying to disengage from a "system of school governance". The context suggests they're moving away from a particular system or method of running schools. The word "system" here suggests a structure or method, which aligns with sense 2 (the act/process of governing).

Also, note that Chicago and other cities are moving to "institute it" - meaning they're adopting this system. You can institute a system of governance (a method/structure), but you don't typically "institute" people (sense 1). You might appoint or elect people, but "institute" in this context suggests establishing a system or process.

Therefore, sense 2 is the correct answer.

Wait, let me double-check. Could "governance" in "school governance" refer to the school board or governing body?

In educational contexts, "school governance" often refers to the structure and processes by which schools are managed and directed. This includes decision-making processes, authority distribution, etc. This is definitely sense 2.

Sense 1 would be if it said something like "the governance met yesterday" or "the governance voted on the issue" - referring to the actual people.

But here we have "system of school governance" - a system is not a group of people, it's a structure or method. So it must be sense 2.

The answer is 2.


[User]
Which numbered sense of "other" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: New York is in the process of trying to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this system of school governance, even as Chicago and <t>other</t> cities are moving to institute it.

Senses:
1. definition=not the same one or ones already mentioned or implied; - the White Queen | examples=today isn't any other day
2. definition=recently past | examples=the other evening
3. definition=belonging to the distant past | examples=the early inhabitants of Europe
4. definition=very unusual; different in character or quality from the normal or expected; - Lance Morrow | examples=a strange, other dimension...where his powers seemed to fail

reasoning_content:
 The user wants me to identify which numbered sense of "other" is used in the given sentence.

 Sentence: "New York is in the process of trying to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this system of school governance, even as Chicago and <t>other</t> cities are moving to institute it."

 The word "other" here modifies "cities". The context is talking about New York disengaging from a system, while Chicago and other cities are adopting it.

 Let's look at the senses:

 1. definition=not the same one or ones already mentioned or implied; - the White Queen | examples=today isn't any other day
    This seems to fit. "Other" here means additional or different cities (not New York). It refers to cities different from the one mentioned (New York).

 2. definition=recently past | examples=the other evening
    This doesn't fit. "Other cities" doesn't mean recently past cities.

 3. definition=belonging to the distant past | examples=the early inhabitants of Europe
    This doesn't fit. The context is about current actions, not distant past.

 4. definition=very unusual; different in character or quality from the normal or expected; - Lance Morrow | examples=a strange, other dimension...where his powers seemed to fail
    This doesn't fit. "Other cities" doesn't mean unusual or strange cities.

 So sense 1 is correct. The word "other" here means "not the same as the one already mentioned" (i.e., cities other than New York).

 The phrase "Chicago and other cities" means Chicago plus additional cities that are not New York. This matches sense 1: "not the same one or ones already mentioned or implied".

 Therefore, the answer is 1.

provider: DigitalOcean


[User]
Which numbered sense of "city" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: New York is in the process of trying to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this system of school governance, even as Chicago and other <t>cities</t> are moving to institute it.

Senses:
1. definition=a large and densely populated urban area; may include several independent administrative districts | examples=Ancient Troy was a great city
2. definition=an incorporated administrative district established by state charter | examples=the city raised the tax rate
3. definition=people living in a large densely populated municipality | examples=the city voted for Republicans in 1994

reasoning_content:
 The user wants me to identify which sense of "city" is used in the given sentence. The sentence is: "New York is in the process of trying to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this system of school governance, even as Chicago and other <t>cities</t> are moving to institute it."

The options are:
1. definition=a large and densely populated urban area; may include several independent administrative districts | examples=Ancient Troy was a great city
2. definition=an incorporated administrative district established by state charter | examples=the city raised the tax rate
3. definition=people living in a large densely populated municipality | examples=the city voted for Republicans in 1994

Let me analyze the context. The sentence mentions "Chicago and other cities" in the context of school governance systems. It's comparing New York (a city) with Chicago and other cities.

The key is to see what aspect of "city" is being referred to. The sentence is talking about cities as entities that can institute systems of school governance. This suggests the administrative/governmental aspect of cities.

Sense 1 focuses on the physical/geographic aspect - a large densely populated urban area.
Sense 2 focuses on the administrative/legal entity - an incorporated administrative district.
Sense 3 focuses on the people/residents - the inhabitants collectively.

In the sentence, "Chicago and other cities are moving to institute it" - "institute" here means to establish or put into practice. Cities as governmental entities can institute policies or systems. This aligns with sense 2, where the city is viewed as an administrative district that can take governmental actions like raising taxes or instituting systems.

Sense 3 would imply "the people of the city voted" or similar collective action by residents. While governance involves people, the phrasing "cities are moving to institute it" suggests the municipal government/administration is the actor.

Sense 1 would be more about the physical place itself.

So sense 2 seems most appropriate: "an incorporated administrative district established by state charter" - this is the entity that governs schools and makes policy decisions.

Wait, let me look at the example for sense 2: "the city raised the tax rate" - this clearly indicates the city as a governmental entity capable of taking action. Similarly, in our sentence, cities are "moving to institute it" (a system of school governance).

Therefore, the answer should be 2.


[User]
Which numbered sense of "institute" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: New York is in the process of trying to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this system of school governance, even as Chicago and other cities are moving to <t>institute</t> it.

Senses:
1. definition=set up or lay the groundwork for | examples=establish a new department
2. definition=advance or set forth in court; , | examples=bring charges

reasoning_content:
 The user wants me to identify which numbered sense of the word "institute" is used in the given sentence.

The sentence is: "New York is in the process of trying to disengage itself from a 20-year-old commitment to this system of school governance, even as Chicago and other cities are moving to <t>institute</t> it."

The senses provided are:
1. definition=set up or lay the groundwork for | examples=establish a new department
2. definition=advance or set forth in court; , | examples=bring charges

Let me analyze the context:
- The sentence is talking about a "system of school governance"
- New York is trying to disengage from it
- Chicago and other cities are moving to "institute" it
- The context suggests establishing or implementing this system

Sense 1 means "set up or lay the groundwork for" - this fits the context of establishing a system of school governance.

Sense 2 means "advance or set forth in court" with the example "bring charges" - this is a legal/technical meaning that doesn't fit the context of school governance systems.

Therefore, the correct answer is sense 1.

The user wants only the number returned, so I should return just "1".


[User]
Which numbered sense of "most" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: -- In <t>most</t> states, increasing expenditures on education, in our current circumstances, will probably make things worse, not better.

Senses:
1. definition=(superlative of `many' used with count nouns and often preceded by `the') quantifier meaning the greatest in number | examples=who has the most apples?
2. definition=the superlative of `much' that can be used with mass nouns and is usually preceded by `the'; a quantifier meaning the greatest in amount or extent or degree | examples=made the most money he could

reasoning_content:
 The user wants me to identify which sense of "most" is used in the given sentence. The sentence is: "-- In <t>most</t> states, increasing expenditures on education, in our current circumstances, will probably make things worse, not better."

The two senses provided are:
1. superlative of 'many' used with count nouns - quantifier meaning the greatest in number (e.g., "who has the most apples?")
2. superlative of 'much' used with mass nouns - quantifier meaning the greatest in amount or extent or degree (e.g., "made the most money he could")

Let me analyze the usage in the sentence:
- "In most states" - here "most" is modifying "states"
- "states" is a countable noun (you can count states: one state, two states, etc.)
- "most" here means "the majority of" or "the greatest number of"
- This aligns with sense 1: superlative of 'many' used with count nouns

Sense 2 is for mass nouns (uncountable nouns) like "money", "water", "time", etc.

Since "states" is clearly a count noun, and we're talking about the greatest number of states (not the greatest amount of something), sense 1 is the correct answer.

Wait, let me double-check. In the sentence "In most states", is "most" functioning as:
- A determiner/quantoifier meaning "the majority of" (which would be sense 1 - superlative of many)
- Or something else?

Actually, looking at the definitions:
Sense 1: "superlative of `many' used with count nouns" - this fits "most states" because "states" are countable, and "most" here means the greatest number of states.

Sense 2: "superlative of `much'... used with mass nouns" - this would be for things like "most money", "most time", "most water".

So yes, sense 1 is correct.

But wait, I should also consider if "most" in this context could be interpreted differently. In "In most states", "most" is indeed the superlative of "many" - comparing the number of states (many states, more states, most states). It's indicating that in the greatest number of states (as opposed to in few states or some states).

Actually, looking more carefully at the definitions:
Sense 1 examples: "who has the most apples?" - this is comparing quantities to find the maximum.
Sense 2 examples: "made the most money he could" - this is also about maximum amount.

But in "In most states", we're not necessarily making a comparison in the superlative sense (comparing all groups to find which has the greatest number). Rather, we're using "most" to mean "the majority of" or "more than half of".

However, looking at standard dictionary definitions, "most" as in "most states" is indeed derived from the superlative of "many". When we say "most states", we mean "the greatest number of states" (implied: compared to other possible groupings, or simply the majority).

Sense 1 is definitely the one for count nouns, and sense 2 is for mass nouns. Since "states" is a count noun, the answer is 1.

Let me verify with the examples:
- Sense 1 example: "who has the most apples?" - apples are countable
- Sense 2 example: "made the most money he could" - money is typically treated as a mass noun (though it can be countable in some contexts)

Yes, so for "most states" (countable), it's sense 1.

The answer should be: 1


[User]
Which numbered sense of "expenditure" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: -- In most states, increasing <t>expenditures</t> on education, in our current circumstances, will probably make things worse, not better.

Senses:
1. definition=money paid out; an amount spent
2. definition=the act of spending money for goods or services
3. definition=the act of consuming something

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to identify which sense of "expenditure" is used in the given sentence. The sentence is: "In most states, increasing <t>expenditures</t> on education, in our current circumstances, will probably make things worse, not better."

Let me look at the three senses:
1. definition=money paid out; an amount spent
2. definition=the act of spending money for goods or services
3. definition=the act of consuming something

In the sentence, "expenditures" is used in the context of "increasing expenditures on education." This refers to the amount of money being spent on education.

Let me analyze the differences:
- Sense 1 refers to the money itself (the amount spent).
- Sense 2 refers to the act or process of spending.
- Sense 3 refers to consuming something (which could be broader than just money, like consuming resources).

In the phrase "increasing expenditures on education," we're talking about increasing the amount of money spent. The word "expenditures" here is plural and refers to specific amounts of money being paid out.

However, let me think more carefully. "Expenditure" can refer to:
1. The act of spending (Sense 2)
2. The amount spent (Sense 1)

In the sentence "increasing expenditures on education," "expenditures" is the object of "increasing." We're increasing the amounts of money spent. This aligns with Sense 1: "money paid out; an amount spent."

But wait, "expenditures" in plural form often refers to the amounts themselves. For example, "government expenditures" means the amounts of money the government spends.

Let me reconsider Sense 2: "the act of spending money for goods or services." If the sentence were "the expenditure of funds," that would be Sense 2 (the act). But "expenditures" as a noun referring to the amounts spent would be Sense 1.

Actually, looking at standard dictionary definitions:
- Expenditure (countable): an amount of money spent (Sense 1)
- Expenditure (uncountable): the act of spending money (Sense 2)

In the sentence, "expenditures" is plural, which suggests it's being used as a countable noun referring to amounts of money. Therefore, Sense 1 is correct.

However, I should double-check. The phrase "increasing expenditures" could mean increasing the act of spending or increasing the amounts. But given the context of "on education," and the fact that it's plural, it's referring to the amounts of money.

Sense 3 "the act of consuming something" is clearly wrong because we're talking about education funding, not consuming resources in the general sense.

Between Sense 1 and Sense 2:
- Sense 1: money paid out; an amount spent
- Sense 2: the act of spending money for goods or services

The key distinction is whether it's the money/amount (Sense 1) or the action/process (Sense 2).

In "increasing expenditures on education," the word "expenditures" refers to the sums of money. You can say "expenditures rose by 5%" - this refers to amounts. You can also say "the expenditure of funds" - this refers to the act.

Since "expenditures" is plural here and is the object of "increasing," and we can increase amounts but we don't typically pluralize the act, this is Sense 1.

Wait, actually, let me think about this again. "Expenditure" in the plural can refer to specific instances or categories of spending. But the definition "money paid out; an amount spent" seems to fit best.

Let me look at examples:
- "The company's expenditures exceeded its revenue." (Sense 1 - amounts of money)
- "The expenditure of effort was worthwhile." (Sense 2 or 3 - the act of spending/expending)

In the given sentence: "increasing expenditures on education" - this means increasing the amount of money spent on education. This is Sense 1.

Actually, looking at WordNet or similar lexical databases might help clarify the standard senses. Typically:
Sense 1: The money spent (e.g., "expenditures for the project")
Sense 2: The act of spending (e.g., "the expenditure of funds")
Sense 3: Consumption (e.g., "the expenditure of energy")

Given "increasing expenditures on education," this is clearly referring to the amounts of money, so Sense 1.

But let me reconsider one more time. Could it be Sense 2? "Increasing the act of spending on education"? That doesn't quite make sense. You increase the amount, not the act itself. The act is continuous or happens, but you increase the magnitude or quantity.

Therefore, the answer is 1.


[User]
Which numbered sense of "education" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: -- In most states, increasing expenditures on <t>education</t>, in our current circumstances, will probably make things worse, not better.

Senses:
1. definition=the activities of educating or instructing; activities that impart knowledge or skill | examples=he received no formal education
2. definition=knowledge acquired by learning and instruction | examples=it was clear that he had a very broad education
3. definition=the gradual process of acquiring knowledge | examples=education is a preparation for life
4. definition=the profession of teaching (especially at a school or college or university)
5. definition=the result of good upbringing (especially knowledge of correct social behavior) | examples=a woman of breeding and refinement
6. definition=the United States federal department that administers all federal programs dealing with education (including federal aid to educational institutions and students); created 1979

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to identify which numbered sense of "education" is used in the given sentence.

Sentence: "In most states, increasing expenditures on <t>education</t>, in our current circumstances, will probably make things worse, not better."

Let's look at the context: "increasing expenditures on education" - this refers to spending money on the system/institution of teaching, or the activities of educating.

Let's examine each sense:

1. "the activities of educating or instructing; activities that impart knowledge or skill" - examples: "he received no formal education". This refers to the process/activity of education. "Expenditures on education" could mean spending on educational activities/systems.

2. "knowledge acquired by learning and instruction" - examples: "it was clear that he had a very broad education". This refers to the knowledge itself. You wouldn't typically say "expenditures on knowledge acquired" in this context.

3. "the gradual process of acquiring knowledge" - examples: "education is a preparation for life". This is the process from the learner's perspective. "Expenditures on the gradual process" is possible but less likely than sense 1 or 4.

4. "the profession of teaching (especially at a school or college or university)" - This refers to teaching as a profession. "Expenditures on the profession of teaching" - possible, but usually we'd say education as a field/system.

5. "the result of good upbringing (especially knowledge of correct social behavior)" - examples: "a woman of breeding and refinement". This is about manners/upbringing. Doesn't fit "expenditures on education" in a state policy context.

6. "the United States federal department..." - This is a proper noun, specific department. The sentence says "in most states" and doesn't capitalize "education" as a department name. Also, states don't increase expenditures on a federal department.

Now between 1, 3, and 4.

"In most states, increasing expenditures on education..." - This is talking about government spending on the educational system.

Sense 1: "the activities of educating or instructing" - this is the most common meaning when talking about spending on education. It encompasses the whole enterprise of schooling.

Sense 3: "the gradual process of acquiring knowledge" - this is more abstract, from the student's viewpoint.

Sense 4: "the profession of teaching" - while related, "expenditures on education" is broader than just the profession.

Looking at WordNet or similar lexicographic resources (which this seems to be based on), sense 1 is usually the primary sense: "the activities of educating or instructing; activities that impart knowledge or skill".

Wait, let me reconsider. In WordNet, the senses of "education" are:
- S: (n) education, instruction, teaching, pedagogy, didactics, educational activity (the activities of educating or instructing; activities that impart knowledge or skill) -> "he received no formal education"
- S: (n) education (knowledge acquired by learning and instruction) -> "it was clear that he had a very broad education"
- S: (n) education (the gradual process of acquiring knowledge) -> "education is a preparation for life"
- S: (n) education (the profession of teaching (especially at a school or college or university))
- S: (n) education, training, breeding (the result of good upbringing (especially knowledge of correct social behavior)) -> "a woman of breeding and refinement"
- S: (n) Department of Education, Education Department, Education (the United States federal department...)

In the sentence, "increasing expenditures on education" refers to spending on the educational system/activities. This aligns with sense 1: the activities of educating or instructing.

Actually, looking at sense 4: "the profession of teaching". While expenditures could go to the profession, the phrase "expenditures on education" in public policy discourse almost always refers to the sector/activities (sense 1).

Also, sense 1 examples include "he received no formal education" which shows it's about the institutional/activity aspect.

I think the answer is 1.

Wait, let me double-check. Could it be sense 4? "Expenditures on education" as a profession? No, that would be odd. Could it be sense 3? The process? Maybe, but sense 1 is more concrete and fits expenditures better.

The sentence is from a policy context: states spending money on schools/educational systems. That's sense 1.

Answer: 1


[User]
Which numbered sense of "circumstance" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: -- In most states, increasing expenditures on education, in our current <t>circumstances</t>, will probably make things worse, not better.

Senses:
1. definition=a condition that accompanies or influences some event or activity
2. definition=the set of facts or circumstances that surround a situation or event | examples=the historical context
3. definition=information that should be kept in mind when making a decision | examples=another consideration is the time it would take
4. definition=formal ceremony about important occasions | examples=pomp and circumstance

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to identify which numbered sense of "circumstance" is used in the given sentence.

 Sentence: "In most states, increasing expenditures on education, in our current <t>circumstances</t>, will probably make things worse, not better."

 Let's look at the definitions:

 1. definition=a condition that accompanies or influences some event or activity
 2. definition=the set of facts or circumstances that surround a situation or event | examples=the historical context
 3. definition=information that should be kept in mind when making a decision | examples=another consideration is the time it would take
 4. definition=formal ceremony about important occasions | examples=pomp and circumstance

 The sentence uses "circumstances" in the phrase "in our current circumstances". This refers to the existing situation, conditions, or context surrounding the issue of education expenditures.

 Let me analyze:
 - Sense 1: "a condition that accompanies or influences some event or activity" - This is close, but "circumstances" in the plural often refers to the overall situation.
 - Sense 2: "the set of facts or circumstances that surround a situation or event" - This seems to fit best. "In our current circumstances" means the current set of facts, conditions, or context surrounding the situation.
 - Sense 3: This is about specific information to consider when making a decision. While related, "in our current circumstances" is more about the general situation/context rather than a specific piece of information to keep in mind.
 - Sense 4: This is clearly wrong - it's about ceremonies.

 The phrase "in our current circumstances" is referring to the current situation or context. Sense 2 mentions "the set of facts or circumstances that surround a situation or event" and gives the example "the historical context". This aligns well with usage in the sentence where "current circumstances" refers to the present context/situation.

 However, let me reconsider sense 1. "A condition that accompanies or influences some event or activity." In the plural, "circumstances" often means the conditions surrounding something.

 Actually, looking at standard dictionary definitions:
 - Sense 1 seems to be the general definition of circumstances as conditions.
 - Sense 2 is about the surrounding context (like "context").
 - Sense 3 seems to be about "consideration" or factor.

 In the sentence "in our current circumstances", this typically means "in our current situation" or "given the current state of affairs." This aligns most closely with sense 2: "the set of facts or circumstances that surround a situation or event."

 But wait, sense 1 says "a condition that accompanies or influences some event or activity" - this is singular "a condition", but the word is used as plural "circumstances".

 Actually, looking at WordNet or similar lexical databases:
 - Sense 1: circumstance (a condition that accompanies or influences some event or activity)
 - Sense 2: context, circumstance, setting (the set of facts or circumstances that surround a situation or event)
 - Sense 3: circumstance, condition, consideration (information that should be kept in mind when making a decision)
 - Sense 4: ceremony, ceremonial, occasion, observance, circumstance (formal ceremony about important occasions)

 The phrase "in our current circumstances" is an idiomatic expression referring to the current situation or state of affairs. This maps best to sense 2, which is about the surrounding context or set of facts.

 But I should be careful. Sometimes "circumstances" in "in...circumstances" can be sense 1 (plural of condition). However, sense 2 specifically mentions "the set of facts or circumstances" which suggests it's the collective term for the surrounding situation.

 Let me think about the example given for sense 2: "the historical context". If someone says "in our current circumstances", they mean something similar to "in the current context" or "given the current situation."

 Sense 3 is about specific pieces of information to consider. The sentence isn't saying that "circumstances" is information to be kept in mind for a decision; it's stating a general fact about what happens in the current situation.

 Therefore, sense 2 appears to be the best fit.

 However, I should double-check. In many lexical semantic datasets (like WordNet), sense 1 is often the "condition" sense, and sense 2 is the "context" sense.

 "In our current circumstances" = in the current situation/context = sense 2.

 Actually, looking at the exact wording:
 Sense 1: "a condition that accompanies or influences some event or activity"
 Sense 2: "the set of facts or circumstances that surround a situation or event"

 The phrase "in our current circumstances" treats circumstances as the surrounding situation, not as a single condition. So sense 2.

 But there's a subtlety. "Circumstances" can be used in both ways. However, given the specific definitions provided:
 - Sense 2 explicitly mentions "surround a situation" and gives "context" as an example.
 - The phrase "in our current circumstances" is synonymous with "in the current context" or "given the current situation."

 Therefore, the answer is 2.

 Wait, I want to be absolutely sure. Let's consider if it could be sense 1. If "circumstances" means "conditions", then "in our current circumstances" = "in our current conditions." This is also plausible. But sense 1 is defined as singular "a condition" while the text uses plural "circumstances". The plural usage often maps to sense 2 (the set of facts).

 Also, sense 2's definition uses the word "circumstances" in its own definition ("the set of facts or circumstances"), which suggests it's the broader, collective sense.

 I think 2 is the intended answer.

 Let me reconsider sense 3: "information that should be kept in mind when making a decision." The sentence is making an argument about education policy. Is "in our current circumstances" referring to information to keep in mind? It's setting the context for the claim. The phrase introduces the situational context, not a specific consideration or factor in a decision-making process in the sense of "taking into account."

 Actually, looking at standard usage:
 "Circumstance" sense 1 (condition): "A victim of circumstance"
 "Circumstance" sense 2 (context/setting): "Pomp and circumstance" (wait, that's sense 4), or "the circumstances surrounding his death"
 "Circumstance" sense 3 (consideration): "There is one other circumstance to consider"

 In the given sentence, "in our current circumstances" refers to the existing state of affairs or context. This is sense 2.

 Final check: Could it be sense 4? No, definitely not about ceremony.

 So between 1, 2, and 3:
 - Sense 1 is too narrow (a single condition)
 - Sense 3 is about specific information for a decision
 - Sense 2 is the general surrounding situation

 The answer is 2.

provider: Moonshot AI


[User]
Which numbered sense of "probably" (marked with <t></t>) is used in the sentence below? Return only the number of the correct sense.

Sentence: -- In most states, increasing expenditures on education, in our current circumstances, will <t>probably</t> make things worse, not better.

Senses:
1. definition=with considerable certainty; without much doubt | examples=He is probably out of the country
2. definition=easy to believe on the basis of available evidence | examples=he talked plausibly before the committee

reasoning_content:
 The user wants me to identify which sense of "probably" is used in the given sentence. I need to choose between sense 1 and sense 2.

Let me analyze the sentence:
"-- In most states, increasing expenditures on education, in our current circumstances, will <t>probably</t> make things worse, not better."

Now let me look at the definitions:

Sense 1: "with considerable certainty; without much doubt" - This is the standard meaning of "probably" indicating high likelihood or probability.

Sense 2: "easy to believe on the basis of available evidence" - This seems to be describing "plausibly" rather than "probably." The example given is "he talked plausibly before the committee" which uses "plausibly," not "probably."

Wait, looking at sense 2 again: "easy to believe on the basis of available evidence" with the example "he talked plausibly before the committee."

Actually, looking at the example for sense 2: "he talked plausibly before the committee" - this uses "plausibly," not "probably." This suggests sense 2 might actually be for "plausibly" or there's a confusion here.

But let me reconsider. The word being defined is "probably" for both senses. Sense 2 says "easy to believe on the basis of available evidence."

Actually, looking at standard dictionary definitions:
- Sense 1 matches the standard definition of "probably" (meaning "most likely" or "with high probability")
- Sense 2 seems to be describing something closer to "plausibly" or credibly.

But in the context of the sentence: "will probably make things worse" - this means "will most likely make things worse" or "with considerable certainty will make things worse."

The sentence is expressing a high degree of likelihood that increasing expenditures will make things worse. This fits sense 1: "with considerable certainty; without much doubt."

Sense 2 "easy to believe on the basis of available evidence" doesn't fit as well. While the statement might be based on evidence, the word "probably" here is functioning to indicate likelihood/certainty, not plausibility or believability.

Also, looking at the example for sense 2: "he talked plausibly before the committee" - wait, that example uses "plausibly" not "probably." This is suspicious. Let me check if sense 2 is actually a definition of "plausibly" that got mixed up, or if it's a secondary sense of "probably."

Actually, looking at WordNet or similar lexical databases, "probably" typically has one main sense meaning "with considerable certainty." The second sense might be archaic or specific to certain contexts.

But looking at the example for sense 2 again: "he talked plausibly before the committee" - if the word being defined is "probably," then the example should use "probably." Since the example uses "plausibly," this suggests that sense 2 might actually be the definition of "plausibly" or there's an error in the question setup.

However, assuming the senses are correct as given:
- Sense 1: "with considerable certainty; without much doubt" - fits the sentence perfectly. The speaker is saying that increasing expenditures will almost certainly/make it worse.
- Sense 2: "easy to believe on the basis of available evidence" - this would mean "credibly" or "plausibly."

In the sentence "will probably make things worse," the meaning is clearly about likelihood/probability, not about being believable or plausible.

Therefore, the answer is 1.

Let me double-check by substituting the definitions:
- "will with considerable certainty make things worse" - makes sense
- "will easy to believe on the basis of available evidence make things worse" - doesn't make grammatical sense or semantic sense in this context.

So the answer is definitely 1.