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

[User]
Target lemma: now
Target surface form: now
Context:
His doubts stemmed from the fact that several years earlier a Princeton University researcher, Arnold Levine, had found in experiments with mice that a gene called p53 could transform normal cells into cancerous ones. The deletion Dr. Vogelstein found was in exactly the same spot as p53. But Mr. Levine had said the p53 gene caused cancer by promoting growth, whereas the Johns Hopkins scientists were looking for a gene that suppressed growth. Despite that, when the Johns Hopkins scientists compared the gene they had found in the human cancer cells with the Mr. Levine's p53 gene they found the two were identical; it turned out that in Mr. Levine's cancer studies, he had unknowingly been observing a damaged form of p53 -- a cancer-suppressing gene. The discovery "suddenly puts an obscure gene right in the cockpit of cancer formation, "says Robert Weinberg, a leader in cancer-gene research at Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass. Evidence <t>now</t> is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too. Researchers in Edinburgh, Scotland, have found that in 23 of 38 breast tumors, one copy of chromosome 17 was mutated at the spot where gene p53 lies.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=now%4:02:05:: | definition=in the historical present; at this point in the narration of a series of past events | examples=President Kennedy now calls in the National Guard; Washington now decides to cross the Delaware
2. sense_key=now%4:02:00:: | definition=in these times; - Nancy Mitford | synonyms=nowadays, today | examples=it is solely by their language that the upper classes nowadays are distinguished; we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets
3. sense_key=now%4:02:02:: | definition=used to preface a command or reproof or request | examples=now hear this!; now pay attention
4. sense_key=now%4:02:04:: | definition=at the present moment | synonyms=at present | examples=goods now on sale; the now-aging dictator
5. sense_key=now%4:02:01:: | definition=without delay or hesitation; with no time intervening | synonyms=immediately, instantly, straightaway, straight off, directly, right away | examples=he answered immediately; found an answer straightaway
6. sense_key=now%4:02:07:: | definition=(prefatory or transitional) indicates a change of subject or activity | examples=Now the next problem is...
7. sense_key=now%4:02:06:: | definition=in the immediate past | examples=told me just now

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

reasoning_content:
 We need determine sense index for "now" in context. Text: "Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too." This is present time meaning 'at the present time/today/nowadays'. Candidate sense key 4:02:00 definition in these times / nowadays. Candidate 4:02:04 at the present moment (goods now on sale). The difference between now%4:02:00 and now%4:02:04: 00 is in these times (nowadays), 04 is at the present moment. The phrase "Evidence now is emerging that..." implies currently at this point in time. Which WordNet sense fits best? Let's examine definitions of both.

WordNet now r:
1. in the historical present; at this point in the narration... (Kennedy now calls...)
2. in these times; "it is solely by their language that the upper classes nowadays are distinguished" - Nancy Mitford
3. used to preface command/reproof/request "now hear this"
4. at the present moment; "goods now on sale"; "the now-aging dictator"
5. without delay; immediately.
6. in the immediate past; "told me just now"
7. prefatory or transitional indicates change of subject.

In the context: evidence is emerging currently. Could map to sense 2 (nowadays/in these times) or sense 4 (at the present moment). The adverb "now" modifying verb "is emerging". "Evidence is emerging now" means at the present time. In WordNet old r (adv) distinctions, sense 2 "in these times" approximates currently, e.g. "we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets". Sense 4 "at the present moment" implies a specific instant; examples "goods now on sale" and "now-aging dictator". The sentence is about current time period in which evidence is emerging, not a single moment. It resembles sense 2: "in these times / nowadays / today". However "nowadays" often connotes present era compared to past; "today" used for current period. "Evidence now is emerging" is more "nowadays, currently" than "at this exact moment". Which is preferred?

Question asks choose single best indexed sense. We need output JSON {"sense_index": ...}. The candidate senses list with numbers. Numbered 1-7. So index likely 2 or 4. Need decide. Let's inspect each candidate mapping:

1. historical present - narrative past. Context not narrative past; it's a newspaper article current research. So not 1.
2. in these times; nowadays/today; examples include "we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets". This fits general current time.
3. preface command - no.
4. at the present moment; at present; goods now on sale. Could fit evidence emerging at present. But "at present" synonyms. Which stronger?
5. immediately - no.
6. immediate past - no.
7. prefatory change subject - no.

The phrase "Evidence now is emerging" could be idiomatically "at the present time" or "nowadays". WordNet sense "in these times" covers "We now rarely see...". WordNet sense "at the present moment" covers "goods now on sale" - inventory on sale now (immediately available). The example "the now-aging dictator" could be a state in current times.

The context: "Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too." The article was published in the past (WSJ 1990 maybe). It states evidence is emerging now, i.e., at the present time (when article was written). You could interpret as "now" = "at this point in the narrative of events"? It's reporting findings; not historical present though. It introduces current evidence in a journalistic narrative. But the phrase "evidence now is emerging that..." could be considered "in the immediate past"? No, it's present.

Let's reason about WordNet synset precision. now%4:02:00 has synonyms nowadays, today. now%4:02:04 has synonyms at present. They are related but distinct: one uses "nowadays" (temporal frequency over era), the other "at present" (current time). The sentence is not "at present" as a stative marker exactly. It says evidence is emerging - an ongoing process. "nowadays" is defined as in these times, meaning in the current era, often implying a recent trend. That's exactly: "Evidence now is emerging that..." implies a recent trend. So sense 2.

However many WSD systems may map "Evidence now is emerging" to sense 4 because of "at the present moment". Which is intended? We should not output a WordNet sense key, just index. The instruction says "Choose the single best indexed sense." Candidate list numbering. We need choose one.

Let's dive into definitions and examples in WordNet 3.0 maybe. The adv now has seven senses. Let's fetch exact definitions. now (r):
1. in the historical present; at this point in the narration of a series of past events; "President Kennedy now calls in the National Guard"
2. in these times; "it is solely by their language that the upper classes nowadays are distinguished" - Nancy Mitford; "we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets"
3. used to preface a command or reproof or request; "now hear this!"
4. at the present moment; "goods now on sale"; "the now-aging dictator"; "now is a good time to do it"; "worked for over hour now"
5. without delay or hesitation; with no time intervening; immediately, instantly, straightaway, straight off, directly, right away.
6. in the immediate past; "told me just now"
7. prefatory or transitional: "Now the next problem is..."

Actually sense 4 examples include "now is a good time to do it" and "worked for over an hour now"; these are present moment, duration-until-now. Our sentence "Evidence now is emerging" may align with "worked for over an hour now"? Hmm "now" in progressive ongoing: "It is raining now" maps to at the present moment. But "Evidence is emerging now" has a progressive present and "now" as adverbial marker meaning currently/at the present time. The synset "at present" is the closest perhaps. Yet "in these times" also includes "nowadays". There is some overlap. Need choose best.

Let's attempt to see usage notes. "nowadays" sense is typically in reference to modern times as opposed to the past: "nowadays, people have cell phones." "now" in "Evidence now is emerging" is not contrasting with past; it's simply current. But "nowadays" is too broad? It means current era. In journalistic text, "now" often= "currently".

If asked to use context, examples, and synonyms. Synonyms for sense 2: nowadays, today. Could substitute: "Evidence nowadays is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers" sounds somewhat off but acceptable. "Evidence today is emerging..." okay. Synonyms for sense 4: at present. "Evidence at present is emerging..." okay. Both acceptable.

Examples of sense 2: "we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets" - with verb. It's general frequency. Our sentence uses progressive "is emerging" about current developing state, not habit. Hmm.

Examples of sense 4: "goods now on sale" (attributive/modifier), "the now-aging dictator", "now is a good time to do it", "worked for over an hour now". It includes progressive/existence contexts: "now is a good time to do it". The emergence process happening currently fits.

I think sense 4 might be more exact because "at the present moment" includes current point in present, and "evidence (is) now emerging" uses "now" with present progressive to mean at this current time, not nowadays. However, WordNet's sense 2 (these times, nowadays) often aligns with "now" when describing general present period vs past, like "we now know". Actually "We now know p53 is a tumor suppressor" could be sense 2? Not sure.

Let's search memory of WordNet now sense assignments from SemCor. Sentences: "Evidence now is emerging that p53 is involved in other cancers" - This is from WSJ, could be in SemCor. In SemCor, now is tagged? I might recall mapping. Let's think: SemCor has many instances of "now". Notably "Evidence now is emerging that..." might be sense 4 or 6 maybe? Let's see if SemCor tagged it. I could try to recall from WN sense frequency. Well, not possible.

Maybe the best is to use structure: "Evidence now is emerging" - adverbial "now" between subject and verb. This is a temporal adverb indicating the present time. In common WSD, the distinction between "these times" and "at present moment" often resolves with collocation "is emerging" (dynamic event ongoing) -> at the present moment. But maybe "in these times" refers to evidence emerging in modern times as a generalization: "Evidence now is emerging that..." meaning "In recent research, evidence is mounting". The article's overall context: This discovery puts p53 in the cockpit of cancer formation, and evidence is emerging that it is involved in other cancers, too. It's not momentary; it's about ongoing scientific trend. Could be sense 2 (nowadays/today).

Let's analyze temporal reference. The previous sentence: "The discovery 'suddenly puts an obscure gene right in the cockpit of cancer formation,' says Robert Weinberg..." (a quote). Then: "Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too." It describes the current state/recent evidence after the discovery. In a narrative about past events (the scientist's work years earlier), "now" could function as "in the historical present"? Actually the article narrates in past tense about discoveries. Then uses present tense for quotes and current evidence. This is perhaps not historical present because it's a shift to general present known facts. It could be "at the present time" relative to article.

Let's consider the candidate numbering: The question expects perhaps one of these indexes. We need output. To make a confident choice, examine semantic contrast. "nowadays, today" sense 2 is gloss "in these times; - Nancy Mitford". In dictionary, "now" adverb: 1. at the present time or moment. 2. nowadays (under certain formal/literary use?). WordNet divides them. The "at the present moment" sense covers immediate current time; "in these times" covers the modern era. The given examples for sense 2: "we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets" - this is a general statement over the modern era, not a single event. Our sentence: "Evidence now is emerging that..." It's also a general statement about current ongoing evidence, akin to "we now know". But "emerging" is a process happening over current period. It might align with sense 2.

However synonyms "nowadays, today" – substituting "Evidence nowadays is emerging" could connote over recent years. "Evidence today is emerging" is more idiomatic. The context sets present day (1990). It's definitely not immediate-moment (like "Call now").

Can we find a guiding example: "Evidence is emerging now that..." Human annotators likely choose sense 2? Let's search memory: WordNet sense 4 "at the present moment" examples include "The now-aging dictator" where "now" is part of phrase meaning "currently". It's similar to "now is emerging". But sense 2 examples could include "Now we know he was correct" meaning currently. There is no exact guidance.

The instruction says "WordNet glosses are schematic. Use the sentence context, the examples, and the synonyms to choose the best indexed sense. Do not hedge." Since the surface form is "now" and it's an adverb with present time; which index is best? Let's enumerate and map numbers:

1 now%4:02:05:: (historical present)
2 now%4:02:00:: (nowadays)
3 now%4:02:02:: (command)
4 now%4:02:04:: (at present)
5 now%4:02:01:: (immediately)
6 now%4:02:07:: (prefatory change subject)
7 now%4:02:06:: (immediate past)

(Note weird ordering: sense index in WordNet offset: 00,01,02,04,05,06,07 but candidate list orders them per their list. The JSON sense_index uses candidate list numbers 1-7.)

If we choose 4 (at the present moment) - map candidate number 4. If we choose sense 2, index 2.

We should answer just JSON. Need decide. Let's reason more deeply about nuances of WordNet.

WordNet sense 2 "in these times": "in these times; - Nancy Mitford" synonyms: nowadays, today. It is about the present time considered as a period: "nowadays, the upper classes are distinguished...". "now" in this sense is often sentence-initial or after subject in general statements: "We now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles." I think our token is post-subject "Evidence now is emerging..." This could be tagged with sense 2.

WordNet sense 4 "at the present moment": "at the present moment". Example "goods now on sale" has "now" as part of NP; "the now-aging dictator". This sense seems to emphasize a state at the moment and can modify noun phrases. Our token is between subject and auxiliary verb: "Evidence now is emerging..." This syntactic position often carries sense "currently / at present", not "nowadays". Yet one could argue "Evidence nowadays is emerging."

Let's consider substitution tests in context:

- "Evidence at present is emerging that p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too." Very natural.
- "Evidence nowadays is emerging that p53 is involved in other cancers, too." Natural? Maybe, but "nowadays is emerging" sounds odd because "emerging" is progressive event; "nowadays" is adverb of indefinite frequency/era; acceptable: "Evidence nowadays is emerging...".
- "Evidence today is emerging..." natural.

But "at present" exactly means "currently". That connotes the situation as of now. The discovery caused p53 to be central, and now evidence is emerging about other cancers; "at present" fits narrative point.

I lean toward index 4 (at the present moment). However, the phrase "evidence now is emerging" is a fairly typical newspaper usage: "Evidence is now emerging that..." This is often glossed as "nowadays" or "currently". In WordNet, "now" might have separate synsets for present time (current). Which exact synset is used for "Evidence is emerging now"? We can try to infer from sense frequencies and sense ordering.

WordNet adverb "now" synset ordering in 3.0 in digital form: sense 1 "now, nowadays, today" (at the present... wait maybe different). Actually the order might be:
1. now, nowadays, today (in these times)
2. now (at the present moment)
3. now (in the historical present)... Let me check. WordNet r now:
S: (adv) now (in the historical present; at this point in the narration of a series of past events) ...
S: (adv) now (at the present moment) ...
But candidate list uses offset numbers. Let's not rely.

Maybe look up actual WordNet 3.0 output from memory:
now
=> 1. (1) now -- (in the historical present; at this point in the narration of a series of past events; "President Kennedy now calls in the National Guard"; "Washington now decides to cross the Delaware")
=> 2. (0) now -- (in these times; "it is solely by their language that the upper classes nowadays are distinguished"-Nancy Mitford; "we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets")
=> 3. (0) now -- (used to preface a command or reproof or request; "now hear this!"; "now pay attention")
=> 4. (0) now -- (at the present moment; "goods now on sale"; "the now-aging dictator"; "now is a good time to do it"; "worked for over an hour now")
=> 5. (1) immediately, instantly, straightaway, straight off, directly, now, right away, at once, forthwith, like a shot -- (without delay or hesitation; with no time intervening; "he answered immediately"; "found an answer straightaway"; "an indictment was handed down")
=> 6. (0) now -- ((prefatory or transitional) indicates a change of subject or activity; "Now the next problem is...")
=> 7. (0) now, just now -- (in the immediate past; "told me just now")

If that's order, sense offset numbers are 4:02:05 historical, 4:02:00 in these times, 4:02:02 command, 4:02:04 at present, 4:02:01 immediately, 4:02:07 change subject, 4:02:06 immediate past. Candidate list mapping given matches.

Now, word sense disambiguation: Which of these two adverbial senses is selected by default for "now" when used as current-time adverb in generics? I think many WSD systems choose sense 1 (nowadays/today) for common "now". But detailed context can change.

Let's try to search mentally for SemCor examples: SemCor 1.7 tags adverbs maybe with lexids. There is a famous sentence in SemCor from WSJ about p53? Actually SemCor includes Wall Street Journal articles. The sentence might be from WSJ 1990. In SemCor "now" might be tagged as "now%4:02:00::"? No idea.

The evaluation likely wants the standard WordNet sense. In tasks like WordNet Gloss corpus, "Evidence now is emerging that..." could be labelled "now%4:02:04::"? Let's see if I can recall any WSD benchmark with this exact sentence. It sounds like a sentence from the WSJ section of SemCor/line. In the line-hard-1500/line-hard contexts, there is target "now" maybe. line-hard task for "now" includes sentences and expected sense keys. Could be from ALL-WORDS WSD datasets. If this is from SensEval 2 or 3, they use WordNet 1.7 senses. The correct answer may be a specific sense index. We need try to infer from known WSD data.

The phrase "Evidence now is emerging..." appears in the Wall Street Journal article about p53 and cancer. Let me recall: It might be from the data set for noun/verb tasks, not adverbs. But there is a "now" target in Senseval? The sentences with scientific content. There is a standard test item: "<head>now</head>" in sentence "Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too." If I recall from Senseval-2 lexical sample for "now" maybe the correct sense is "now%4:02:04::". But not sure.

Let's reason with gloss+synonyms. The target "now" modifies "is emerging", a dynamic, in-progress verb. "At the present moment" is the temporal adverb modifying a present event. The "nowadays" sense modifies states/habits in modern times. The presence of progressive aspect and current scientific trend might still be "at the present moment". Example "worked for over an hour now" shows "now" with duration current-at-moment. "Evidence now is emerging" means start at present. I think index 4 best.

But let's not dismiss 2. Let's examine context more: The previous paragraph talks about a discovery in the past; this paragraph uses present tense to describe currently known evidence. It says "Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too." The adverb "now" could tie the narrative: up to this point, p53 known for one cancer; now evidence shows other cancers. In narrative time, "now" here could be "in the historical present"? Actually, the surrounding text is past-tense narrative about scientists, with a quote "suddenly puts... says Robert Weinberg". The next sentence uses present progressive "Evidence now is emerging". This could be the author stepping out into the narrative present: "Evidence now is emerging" as a development from that past discovery. In fiction/past accounts, "now" referring to the point in narration is sense 1 (historical present). But "historical present" examples are third-person narrative like "President Kennedy now calls in the National Guard". Here, the article is reporting news; the "evidence" emerging is at the time of writing, not a historical narrative technique. Not sense 1.

Could be sense 7 (change of subject/prefatory)? "Now, evidence is emerging..." but here follows a quote, not a transition. However it's not at beginning. Not sense 7.

Could be sense 6 (immediate past)? "Evidence now is emerging"? No.

So it's between 2 and 4. Let's use examples and synonyms more. Synonym substitution with "nowadays": The sentence would be "Evidence nowadays is emerging that..." This implies a new trend in modern times, which could be the intended meaning. But "nowadays" synonyms for WordNet sense 2: also "today". "Evidence today is emerging" fits. The example "we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets" is generic statement. Our sentence: "Evidence now is emerging..." is not a generic statement about a regular occurrence, but an event happening currently. Though using present progressive generic? "is emerging" can be process.

Synonyms for sense 4: "at present". "Evidence at present is emerging" is exactly the meaning: at this point in time, evidence is starting to appear. The examples: "now is a good time to do it" - similar to current timing. "worked for over an hour now" - duration. "goods now on sale" - current state.

Given the phrase "evidence now is emerging" often synonymous with "at present, evidence is emerging". Therefore index 4.

However, some may argue "in these times" includes "today" and fits. Let's check more nuance in the phrase "other cancers, too" - indicates addition to prior known cancers. So "Now" has a contrastive/additive flavor: up to then p53 linked to colon cancer? Actually preceding says the p53 gene cancer-suppressing. Then quote says puts obscure gene in cockpit. Now evidence shows involved in other cancers. This "now" is transitional/temporal: "at the present moment (after this discovery)". It can be sense 2 "in these times" maybe not. It also could be sense 7 (change of subject/activity)? True, it signals new point: "Now, evidence is emerging that..." In text, it functions as a transition to a new related fact, like "now the next problem". But target position not start; nonetheless the discourse relation is transitional/additive. But "now" is between subject and verb, not prefatory. Candidate 7 is "(prefatory or transitional) indicates a change of subject or activity; Now the next problem is...". It often occurs at the start of an utterance. Here, it's post-subject, and the content continues the topic of p53 gene, not a new subject. So not 7.

Thus index 4. Let's settle on 4. But maybe the question's expected answer is index 2 because "nowadays" includes "today" and this is a journalistic "currently". Let's see if the phrasing "Evidence now is emerging" could be considered "in these times". For sense 2, example: "we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets". The phrase "now" in that example is frequency adverb meaning "nowadays". In our sentence, "now" is also an adverb of time, but not a frequency adverb (rarely vs is emerging). But the sense still could be 2.

Potential disambiguation heuristics: If you can replace with "nowadays" and keep meaning, choose 2. If "at present", choose 4. "Evidence at present is emerging" is better than "Evidence nowadays is emerging"? Both okay. The phrase "now is emerging" emphasizes present moment relative to before ("now that the discovery occurred, evidence is emerging"). That is more "at present moment". So 4.

Let's also consider WordNet definition of sense 4 includes "at the present moment" gloss and no synonyms; sense 2 includes synonyms "nowadays, today". The instruction says use synonyms. "today" is a near-perfect synonym: "Evidence today is emerging..." That points to 2. "at present" is also good.

Need to decide with confidence. I think the more common sense for "now" in this type of sentence in everyday English is the "at the present moment" sense, though newspaper "now" often has current-era. But WordNet's division is subtle. Could we find actual sense ID by searching memory of sense keys for this token in supervised data? Let me think.

I recall using WordNet 2.1, adverb "now" sense 2 (nowadays; today) examples: "we now usually see...". I don't have exact recall. In the dataset from "line" for "now", there were contexts like "Other nations adopted the metric system long ago; now America is considering..." The correct sense for "now" contrasting to long ago might be "nowadays" (sense 2). Our context similarly contrasts past research and now emerging evidence. It might be labelled sense 2.

Let's imagine if this is an item from "senseval-2 lexical sample 'now'". They often include sentences with heavy context. A human annotator would think "now = at this time / currently". In WordNet 1.7, the senses for "now" might have been: (1) at the present time, (2) nowadays, (3) used as interjection, (4) historical present, etc. The "currently" might fall in sense 2 "nowadays"? Hmm.

Let's construct a mapping to WordNet 1.7 for now:
- now%4:02:00:: in these times; nowadays, today
- now%4:02:01:: immediately
- now%4:02:02:: preface command
- now%4:02:04:: at the present moment
- now%4:02:05:: historical present
- now%4:02:06:: immediate past
- now%4:02:07:: change subject

If a lexicographer asked "Evidence now is emerging that...", they'd pick "at the present moment" if they see it as a now-point in ongoing event. They'd pick "in these times" if they see it as "currently (modern science)". But WordNet's sense 4 title "at the present moment" maybe specifically for "precisely now", whereas the example "we now rarely see ..." is in sense 2 because it's modern times general. Our sentence: "Evidence now is emerging" is not about general modern times habit but about an ongoing, current development. So 4.

But one could argue "emerging" is a process over current era, similar to "we now know". Actually "we now know" is listed? Not. "Evidence now is emerging" uses "now" in same way as "we now know". Does "we now know" map to "nowadays" or "at the present moment"? If I say "We now know that smoking causes cancer" (has taken time, current state of knowledge). The word "now" means "at the present time" relative to before. In WordNet, I think this would be sense 2? The example "we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets" is exactly "we now [do X]". So "Evidence now is emerging" matches the pattern "we now [verb]". That strongly points to sense 2. Because "we now rarely see" uses "now" in the middle of subject-verb; generic/habitual. While "Evidence now is emerging" is not habitual, but pattern similar.

However, "we now know" is common. Lexical semantics: "now" in "We now know" means "at this point in time" (after considering evidence), not "nowadays". In WordNet, sense 2 includes "in these times" with example "we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets". That's more modern-times. "We now know" more often at present moment. But both use same.

Let's search mental WordNet examples: sense 4 examples: "Goods now on sale; the now-aging dictator; now is a good time to do it; worked for over an hour now; The call is for you now" maybe. The example "now is a good time to do it" is event timing. If "Evidence now is emerging", it's not a perfect example of either.

Maybe the answer intended by the benchmark is index 2. Let's think about the preceding target "now" in the sentence "Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too." The context: a researcher discovered p53 was cancer-suppressing rather than promoting. Then a quote. Then "Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too. Researchers in Edinburgh have found that in 23 of 38 breast tumors..." So "now" introduces current evidence, including the Edinburgh findings. It's not just present moment; it's "currently/in these times" there is accumulating evidence. The synonym "nowadays" captures that.

But "at present" also captures accumulating evidence as of now.

The question says "Do not hedge. Choose the single best indexed sense." It may be a rater validation. We need produce JSON. We must decide. I need be confident. Let's revisit candidate definitions exactly as provided by user:

2. sense_key=now%4:02:00:: | definition=in these times; - Nancy Mitford | synonyms=nowadays, today | examples=it is solely by their language that the upper classes nowadays are distinguished; we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets
4. sense_key=now%4:02:04:: | definition=at the present moment | synonyms=at present | examples=goods now on sale; the now-aging dictator

Notice user-provided examples for sense 4 lack "now is a good time..." they only include "goods now on sale" and "the now-aging dictator". These examples both modify noun constituents, not a verb phrase. In sense 2 examples include "we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets" which is a verb phrase where now modifies verb "see". Our token modifies verb "is emerging", between subject and verb, exactly analogous to "we now rarely see". This strongly points to sense 2. The candidate examples are curated maybe to reflect usage. Thus I think the intended answer is index 2.

But wait, the definition of sense 4 "at the present moment" can also modify verb: "I'm busy now" though not in examples. However provided examples are nominal. But instruction says use examples. The chosen examples may help. The token is in verb-modifying position, like sense 2 example. Also synonyms "nowadays, today" better fit context "Evidence now is emerging" (in the current scientific era) than "at present moment" (instant). But "at present" also fits.

Let's also consider sense 2's gloss "in these times" approximates "currently". The content: "Evidence now is emerging that ... in 23 of 38 breast tumors..." This is reporting scientific findings from current times. So index 2.

Let's consider previous sentences: "knew ... at that time" etc. They discovered years earlier; now evidence emerging. This contrast fits "in these times" (modern times vs before). I'd choose index 2.

I earlier leaned to 4 because of "at present" nuance. But if I see the pattern "we now rarely see", that's sense 2. The example includes "now" placed before a verb in a general statement. Our token exactly placed before "is emerging". So 2 seems more aligned.

Let's test: Replace "now" with "nowadays" in "Evidence nowadays is emerging that..." Slightly awkward due to progressive but acceptable. Replace with "today": "Evidence today is emerging that..." Good. Replace with "at present": "Evidence at present is emerging that..." Good. Both.

Now, which sense grouping would WordNet lexicographers assign to "Evidence now is emerging"? WordNet sense 2 examples: "we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets". Note the sentence is generic/habitual present; our sentence is progressive present. That difference might matter. But the placement is same. Sense 2 is "in these times" (i.e., in modern times), which aligns with generic statements. The progressive "is emerging" is not generic; it is a current event. Thus maybe sense 4 (at present moment) despite nominal examples. Hmm.

Let's read the sentence again: "Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too." This is an existential/specific claim: evidence is emerging (as a process). It is not a generalization about modern times; rather, an assertion about the current state: currently emerging. I think "at the present moment" (or "at present") is a better definition for "currently emerging". However, "in these times" covers current times broadly; scientific evidence emerges over current times. Still.

Would the WordNet sense 2 example "we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets" also be a generalization about current times. It is frequentative. Our sentence not. So sense 4 might be intended. But provided examples for sense 4 don't show verb.

Maybe we should look at the actual WordNet semantic tagger choices for "now" in similar contexts from SemCor. Search memory: SemCor sentence "Possibilities now are emerging for the use of hybrid pigs as a source of organs and tissue for transplanting into humans." Could have "now" tagged? If so, maybe sense 4? Not sure.

Let's think of line-hard-2001 data where target is "now". Example contexts may include: "The red tape is still there, but now it's less complicated." "Other types of radiation have now reached levels that most people can tolerate." "But now the service program faces a problem." Many of these map to sense 2 or 4? If a dataset with this sentence exists, what label would it receive? Possibly the most frequent sense for "now" in such data is "at the present moment" offset 4:02:04. Because adverb "now" meaning "at the present time" dominates. But WordNet splits off "nowadays" for generic modern-times, which is less frequent. In specific current events, it's sense 4.

To break tie, consider the adverb placement: "Evidence now is emerging" is a somewhat formal word order; typical would be "Evidence is now emerging" (between auxiliary and main verb). This post-subject "now" is used to signal "at this point" / "with the current state of affairs". It often has a discourse-ish transitional use but inserted after subject. It means "now" as a current-temporal adverb. I'd say sense 4.

Let's think of "at present" vs "nowadays". In the context of scientific discovery, saying "Evidence now is emerging" is not a contrast between past era and modern era; it's "currently (at this point)". That is exactly "at present".

Wait, "in these times" synonyms include "today" not just "nowadays". "Today" can mean "at the present time" in non-literal day (e.g., "today, scientists are finding..."). So sense 2 can cover "at the present time" broadly. The Nancy Mitford quote uses "nowadays". WordNet likely grouped dictionary definitions: "now" can mean "nowadays". It doesn't necessarily mean historical modern era; "today" is an exact synonym. So sense 2 is very broad current times.

But then sense 4 would be more specific "at the present moment" like "right now". In common sentences like "Call now" -> sense 4 or 5? "Call now" is sense 4 (?) maybe sense 5? Actually "Call now" means "at the present moment" not immediately? Maybe sense 4.
"Evidence now is emerging" not urgent, so not "immediately". It's not "right now", but "currently". I would still choose sense 4 because "at present moment" includes "currently".

Let's see definitions in dictionaries: Merriam-Webster now adv 1a: at the present time. 1b: at once 2: at the time referred to 3: in the time immediately before the present 4: used to introduce a statement. WordNet split 1a into sense 2 and 4? Maybe. "now (in these times)" corresponds to MW "now" under definition "in modern times". "at the present moment" corresponds to "at the present time". "Evidence now is emerging" uses present time, not modern times. So sense 4. But MW has no distinct "in modern times" vs "at present"? Some dictionaries: now adv: 1. at the present time or moment. 2. nowadays (informal). WordNet's sense 2 is formal/literary "nowadays"? Example Nancy Mitford quote suggests formal. Our sentence is formal journalistic; could use sense 2.

Maybe we can use the synonym list "nowadays, today" and example " upper classes nowadays are distinguished" – that is British/formal. "Evidence now is emerging" is formal, matching sense 2. But "at present" also formal.

I think I need to choose one. Let's try to reconstruct if there is an authoritative answer. This exact context is likely from the "SemCor 3.0" or "OMSTI" dataset. I can search my memory of reading lines. I recall a context for "now" in lexical sample maybe, but not the label. In any case, the scoring in these evaluations penalizes wrong. We need maximize correctness.

Let's model: The task expects linguist fine-grained WordNet disambiguation. The target "now" is the lexical item and the seven senses. In this context, "now" denotes the present time at which evidence is emerging. The best match is "at the present moment" (index 4). It is the most direct definition. The "nowadays" sense is for statements characterizing the present period generally, often with adverbs of frequency/comparison. Our sentence is more like a process state at the present moment. Therefore answer 4.

However, the example "we now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles on city streets" is not a frequency? It includes rarely. Without "rarely", "we now see horse-drawn vehicles..." is a general statement. "Evidence now is emerging" is also general (uncountable evidence). So still could be 2.

But "emerging" is an event, not a state of seeing. In WordNet, sense 2's examples are about distinguishing classes (state) and seeing (perception) in modern times. Sense 4's examples include "now-aging dictator" (state), "goods now on sale" (state). There is no dynamic event example. However, the definition "at the present moment" should include "It is raining now". The omission in examples is just limited.

Let's also think about the preceding sentence says "suddenly puts an obscure gene right in the cockpit of cancer formation" - quote in present tense. Then they say "Evidence now is emerging that ... too." The "now" connects from the discovery causing p53 to be central to new evidence. This is like a storyline: "now" at this point in the narration. That is sense 1 (historical present)? The quote "suddenly puts" is present tense but not narrative past. The remaining text is in past tense ("had found", "were looking", "found", "had been observing"). Then a present-tense quote. Then "Evidence now is emerging..." uses present tense, which in past-tense narrative might be called "historical present" or "at the present moment". The definition of sense 1: "in the historical present; at this point in the narration of a series of past events". The example "President Kennedy now calls in the National Guard" is precisely a narrator using present tense in past narrative. Could our sentence be an instance? The article describes past events (Levine's experiments, Vogelstein's deletion, comparison, discovery). Then it says "The discovery 'suddenly puts...' says Weinberg." Then "Evidence now is emerging..." In journalistic style, that might still be narrative historical present: at this point in the described events, evidence was emerging. But wait, there's a quote from Weinberg in present, then a factual present about evidence. The temporal reference of "now" could be "now (in the story)". But the article is reporting, and evidence now emerging is at the time of writing. The subsequent sentence about Edinburgh researchers uses past tense ("have found")? Actually "Researchers in Edinburgh, Scotland, have found that..." present perfect - also present-relevant. This is about current findings. So not historical present.

Therefore sense 4/2.

Let's consider the possibility that the correct index is 2 due to synonyms and examples. I can make final decision by weighing: The phrase "Evidence now is emerging" is a current-state process. "at the present moment" more precise. The token placed after subject. But "we now rarely see" pattern for 2. Hmm.

Maybe I can infer from sense key numbering and task design: Candidate list is not in standard order; they likely randomized? They are ordered by sense_key: 05, 00, 02, 04, 01, 07, 06. They included both 2 and 4. Maybe the correct answer is one of them. The instruction says "WordNet glosses are schematic." So we need context. The surrounding text emphasizes "suddenly" right before, and "now" after a quote. Maybe discourse transition sense 7? Actually "Now the next problem is..." is a context change. Here "Evidence now is emerging" is a continuation, not a change. But maybe after a quote, "now" introduces what is true now. Not sense 7 because not at the beginning.

If I had to decide independently, I'd say sense 4. But I'm uncertain. Let's search memory for a clue in the question phrasing "His doubts stemmed from the fact that several years earlier..." It starts as a historical narrative. The target sentence is in the middle of a paragraph that shifts to present and back. If asked to disambiguate "now" in historical narrative, the primary sense could be historical present (1). But the narrative is from a newspaper article about science, not fiction, and "now" refers to the present time of the article. Question may want to avoid historical present because it is not past-tense narration. The adjacent sentence "The discovery 'suddenly puts...' says Robert Weinberg" uses present tense quote. Then "Evidence now is emerging..." In news writing, one often uses present tenses to describe current implications. So "now" = in the present time (sense 2 or 4).

Perhaps the evaluation answer comes from the actual WordNet sense annotation. If semantically close, the intended label is often the "at the present moment" sense, because news "now" rarely means "nowadays" (comparing eras). I'll choose index 4.

But before final, let's simulate possible answer: if the benchmark expected 2, output 4 is wrong. Is there any test that exact sentence with "now" annotated in a well-known dataset? Let me try to recall line-hard contexts for "now". I might have seen a dataset file with target "now" context about p53. If I recall a line from WSD dataset: "<context>Evidence <head>now</head> is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too.</context>" Possibly from SensEval 1 or 2 English lexical sample. For such tasks, the possible senses are limited and the correct sense might be "at the present moment" because that's the sense key most frequent for "now" overall. The "nowadays" sense is less frequent but has contexts like "it is solely by their language...". The p53 sentence likely labeled as "4:02:04::". I recall something: in Senseval 2 lexical sample for nouns/verbs/adjectives/all, adverbs not included maybe. But in lexical sample for "now", the instances include "If only the dollar would drop now...", "The two sides ... now agreed to meet", "Other nations ... now America is considering ...". For "now" lexical sample, the labels were provided. I might recall one: "Evidence now is emerging that..." answer might be "now%4:02:00::" actually? Hmm.

Let's try to think from sense distribution. "now" in WN has many senses, but the "historical present" and "immediately" might divide. "At the present moment" vs "in these times" can be tricky. The lexical sample likely includes instances to disambiguate those two. Which one is this? They might have chosen a sentence that clearly means "nowadays" to test it. But is "Evidence now is emerging" a clear case? If the purpose is to disambiguate from "at present moment", they might choose a sentence with 'nowadays', not 'emerging'. The phrase "Evidence now is emerging" is not textbook "nowadays". If they want to test "in these times", they'd pick "We now rarely see horse-drawn vehicles...". So this is likely an "at the present moment" example.

Wait, but the candidate examples for sense 2 include exactly that pattern. Maybe they included an unseen instance to test if model overfits examples.

Let's check synonyms: sense 2 synonyms: nowadays, today. Could the sentence be paraphrased as "Evidence today is emerging that..." Yes. Does "today" mean "at the present moment" or "in these times" in WordNet? It belongs to the synset of sense 2 (today, nowadays, now). So "Evidence today is emerging" has "today" sense 1 of 'today'. Therefore 2. But "at present" also means "at the present time". Both synonyms.

Maybe the issue is aspect: "nowadays" and "today" as nouns/adverbs: 'today' can refer to the present day, while "now" sense 2 is the current period. "Evidence today is emerging" is fine. So no distinct advantage.

Let's invoke principles: In dictionaries, "now" sense 1 = at the present time or moment (the most frequent). WordNet split that into "at the present moment" and "in these times". In this usage, the speaker is not talking about the age or modern times, but the current state of evidence. Therefore "at the present moment". Choose index 4. I'll finalize 4.

But wait: If it were "at the present moment," one would expect to be able to replace with "at this moment": "Evidence at this moment is emerging..." Slightly awkward but okay. "Evidence at present is emerging" natural. If replace with "nowadays": "Evidence nowadays is emerging"... less natural because "nowadays" as an adverb of time often cannot modify a progressive event? Actually "Nowadays, he is working on a new project." That's okay. "Evidence nowadays is emerging" is odd grammatically because evidence is continuous. But acceptable.

If replace with "today": "Evidence today is emerging" - very natural. So sense 2 has strong synonym "today".

The phrase "Evidence now is emerging" could be from a transcript where "now" functions as a time marker in the present narration, not historical. I'd still choose 4.

Let's also inspect the broader context beginning: "His doubts stemmed from the fact that several years earlier a Princeton University researcher... had found... The deletion Dr. Vogelstein found was in exactly... But Mr. Levine had said ... whereas ... Despite that, when the Johns Hopkins scientists compared ... they found ...; it turned out that in Mr. Levine's cancer studies, he had unknowingly been observing a damaged form of p53 -- a cancer-suppressing gene. The discovery 'suddenly puts an obscure gene right in the cockpit of cancer formation,' says Robert Weinberg... Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too."

This is a narrative that is happening in the past, but includes present quotes and a present-fact statement about evidence emerging. The word "now" here could mean "then-currently" i.e., at the time of the events described (after the discovery). In a past narrative, "now" is a sequential marker indicating the next development, which is sense 1? Sense 1 specifically "in the historical present; at this point in the narration of a series of past events". Example: "President Kennedy now calls in the National Guard". In a past-tense narrative, "now" marks the next event. Our token is in a narrative with past events and present tense. If the sentence were "Evidence was now emerging..." definitely sense 1 (historical present? Actually past tense then sequential marker). But here verb is present "is emerging" with "now" - maybe narrative present. The definition of sense 1's examples both use present tense, with "now" marking a point in the story. Our sentence is present tense. This could be a strong candidate! Let's reconsider.

The context is a journalistic narrative. It describes past work by scientists. Then shifts to the present with a quote and then says "Evidence now is emerging..." That sounds like historical present: at this point in the narration, evidence is emerging. The examples for sense 1 are exactly historical present: "President Kennedy now calls in the National Guard; Washington now decides to cross the Delaware". In such contexts, "now" is not the actual present of writing but the current point in a past sequence. However, is the rest of the paragraph using past or present? Mostly past (had found, were, had said, found, had unknowingly been observing). Then the quote "puts" (present due to direct speech). Then "Evidence now is emerging" (present, not in quotes). Then "Researchers ... have found" (present perfect). So the author is partly using present tense after the discovery. That matches historical present narration.

But is "historical present" the right label for news writing where current evidence is presented? In newspaper articles, the convention is to describe events in past tense and then switch to present for ongoing current conditions. The author isn't narrating a series of past events after all; the article is informing readers about current knowledge. The "now" here refers to the article's present (the late 1980s). Thus not sense 1. The quote from Weinberg also uses present because he says it at that time. But "Evidence now is emerging" is general current statement.

Need to avoid over-reading. The best answer likely is one of 2 or 4.

Maybe we can infer from the preceding phrase "suddenly puts ..." and the following phrase "Evidence now is emerging". The quote says discovery suddenly puts gene in cockpit. Then the author says evidence now emerging. If "now" is "at the present moment", then the author timeline aligns. If "nowadays", it implies current era.

I think the safest is 4. Let me formulate final answer accordingly: {"sense_index": 4}. Ensure JSON only, no explanation or Markdown.

Wait, the instruction says "Return only a JSON object exactly like {"sense_index": 3}." Therefore final message must be only that JSON. Do not include markdown code fences. Need output plain JSON. {"sense_index": 4}.

Before finalizing, let's cross-check with semantic similarity. If I ask: "Evidence now is emerging" = present evidence. In datasets, the sense_key now%4:02:04:: has label "at the present moment". This is used for "now" as adverbial of time with present reference. It is the most common. For "now" after subject in a simple present statement (Evidence now is emerging), this is likely 4.

But let's think: The expression "now" often appears with AUX inversion? "Evidence now is emerging" could be rephrased as "Evidence is now emerging". That's typical "now" of current state, e.g., "She is now sleeping". Would you label "She is now sleeping" as sense 4 or 2? I'd say sense 4. Therefore 4.

Thus final answer index 4.


attempt_kind: initial

status: success

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

[User]
Target lemma: emerge
Target surface form: emerging
Context:
His doubts stemmed from the fact that several years earlier a Princeton University researcher, Arnold Levine, had found in experiments with mice that a gene called p53 could transform normal cells into cancerous ones. The deletion Dr. Vogelstein found was in exactly the same spot as p53. But Mr. Levine had said the p53 gene caused cancer by promoting growth, whereas the Johns Hopkins scientists were looking for a gene that suppressed growth. Despite that, when the Johns Hopkins scientists compared the gene they had found in the human cancer cells with the Mr. Levine's p53 gene they found the two were identical; it turned out that in Mr. Levine's cancer studies, he had unknowingly been observing a damaged form of p53 -- a cancer-suppressing gene. The discovery "suddenly puts an obscure gene right in the cockpit of cancer formation, "says Robert Weinberg, a leader in cancer-gene research at Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass. Evidence now is <t>emerging</t> that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too. Researchers in Edinburgh, Scotland, have found that in 23 of 38 breast tumors, one copy of chromosome 17 was mutated at the spot where gene p53 lies.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=emerge%2:30:00:: | definition=come out into view, as from concealment | examples=Suddenly, the proprietor emerged from his office
2. sense_key=emerge%2:30:02:: | definition=come out of | synonyms=issue, come out, come forth, go forth, egress | examples=Water issued from the hole in the wall; The words seemed to come out by themselves
3. sense_key=emerge%2:30:01:: | definition=become known or apparent | examples=Some nice results emerged from the study
4. sense_key=emerge%2:38:00:: | definition=come up to the surface of or rise | examples=He felt new emotions emerge
5. sense_key=emerge%2:42:00:: | definition=happen or occur as a result of something | synonyms=come forth

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

finish_reason: stop

role: assistant

reasoning_content:
 The user wants me to perform Word Sense Disambiguation for the target word "emerging" in the given context. Let me analyze the sentence and the candidate senses.

The target word appears in: "Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too."

Let me consider each sense:

1. emerge%2:30:00:: = come out into view, as from concealment
   Example: "Suddenly, the proprietor emerged from his office"
   This sense involves physically coming into view. "Evidence" is abstract, not physical.

2. emerge%2:30:02:: = come out of
   Synonyms: issue, come out, come forth, go forth, egress
   Examples: "Water issued from the hole in the wall", "The words seemed to come out by themselves"
   This is more about physical emanation or issuing from a source.

3. emerge%2:30:01:: = become known or apparent
   Example: "Some nice results emerged from the study"
   This fits very well with evidence becoming known/apparent. "Evidence is emerging that..." means evidence is becoming known.

4. emerge%2:38:00:: = come up to the surface of or rise
   Example: "He felt new emotions emerge"
   This is about surfacing, emotions rising. While "emerging evidence" could metaphorically surface, sense 3 is more specific to factual/abstract information.

5. emerge%2:42:00:: = happen or occur as a result of something
   Synonyms: come forth
   This is about resulting from something. "Evidence is emerging" - the evidence isn't happening as a result; it's becoming known.

The best fit is clearly sense 3: "become known or apparent". The example "Some nice results emerged from the study" is very analogous to "Evidence now is emerging that..."

The answer should be only a JSON object: {"sense_index": 3}

format: unknown

native_finish_reason: stop

provider: Ambient

currency: USD


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

[User]
Target lemma: involved
Target surface form: involved
Context:
His doubts stemmed from the fact that several years earlier a Princeton University researcher, Arnold Levine, had found in experiments with mice that a gene called p53 could transform normal cells into cancerous ones. The deletion Dr. Vogelstein found was in exactly the same spot as p53. But Mr. Levine had said the p53 gene caused cancer by promoting growth, whereas the Johns Hopkins scientists were looking for a gene that suppressed growth. Despite that, when the Johns Hopkins scientists compared the gene they had found in the human cancer cells with the Mr. Levine's p53 gene they found the two were identical; it turned out that in Mr. Levine's cancer studies, he had unknowingly been observing a damaged form of p53 -- a cancer-suppressing gene. The discovery "suddenly puts an obscure gene right in the cockpit of cancer formation, "says Robert Weinberg, a leader in cancer-gene research at Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass. Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is <t>involved</t> in other cancers, too. Researchers in Edinburgh, Scotland, have found that in 23 of 38 breast tumors, one copy of chromosome 17 was mutated at the spot where gene p53 lies.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=involved%3:00:00:: | definition=connected by participation or association or use | examples=we accomplished nothing, simply because of the large number of people involved; the problems involved
2. sense_key=involved%5:00:00:encumbered:00 | definition=entangled or hindered as if e.g. in mire | synonyms=mired | examples=the difficulties in which the question is involved; brilliant leadership mired in details and confusion
3. sense_key=involved%5:00:00:attached:01 | definition=emotionally involved
4. sense_key=involved%5:00:00:complex:00 | definition=highly complex or intricate and occasionally devious; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; - Sir Walter Scott | synonyms=Byzantine, convoluted, knotty, tangled, tortuous | examples=the Byzantine tax structure; Byzantine methods for holding on to his chairmanship
5. sense_key=involved%5:00:00:enclosed:00 | definition=enveloped | examples=a castle involved in mist; the difficulties in which the question is involved

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

reasoning_content: We need answer with JSON only. Need choose best sense for "involved" in sentence: "Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too." Means p53 participates/associated in other cancers. Candidate 1 definition connected by participation or association or use. Fits. Others: encumbered, emotionally involved, complex, enveloped don't fit. So index 1. Need return {"sense_index": 1}. Ensure only JSON object exactly.

provider: Cloudflare


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

[User]
Target lemma: other
Target surface form: other
Context:
His doubts stemmed from the fact that several years earlier a Princeton University researcher, Arnold Levine, had found in experiments with mice that a gene called p53 could transform normal cells into cancerous ones. The deletion Dr. Vogelstein found was in exactly the same spot as p53. But Mr. Levine had said the p53 gene caused cancer by promoting growth, whereas the Johns Hopkins scientists were looking for a gene that suppressed growth. Despite that, when the Johns Hopkins scientists compared the gene they had found in the human cancer cells with the Mr. Levine's p53 gene they found the two were identical; it turned out that in Mr. Levine's cancer studies, he had unknowingly been observing a damaged form of p53 -- a cancer-suppressing gene. The discovery "suddenly puts an obscure gene right in the cockpit of cancer formation, "says Robert Weinberg, a leader in cancer-gene research at Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass. Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in <t>other</t> cancers, too. Researchers in Edinburgh, Scotland, have found that in 23 of 38 breast tumors, one copy of chromosome 17 was mutated at the spot where gene p53 lies.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=other%3:00:00:: | definition=not the same one or ones already mentioned or implied; - the White Queen | examples=today isn't any other day; the construction of highways and other public works
2. sense_key=other%5:00:00:past:00 | definition=recently past | examples=the other evening
3. sense_key=other%5:00:02:past:00 | definition=belonging to the distant past | synonyms=early, former | examples=the early inhabitants of Europe; former generations
4. sense_key=other%5:00:00:strange:00 | 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

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

reasoning_content:
The user wants me to do Word Sense Disambiguation for the word "other" in the given context. The instructions say not to answer with a WordNet sense key and to return only a JSON object. The desired format is {"sense_index": 3} where 3 is an example.

Let's analyze the context:

"Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in <t>other</t> cancers, too."

This means the p53 gene is involved in cancers other than the ones already mentioned (presumably colon cancer or the specific cancer being discussed before this).

Let's look at the candidates:

1. sense_key=other%3:00:00:: | definition=not the same one or ones already mentioned or implied; - the White Queen | examples=today isn't any other day; the construction of highways and other public works

This fits perfectly. "other cancers" means cancers different from those already mentioned/discussed.

2. sense_key=other%5:00:00:past:00 | definition=recently past | examples=the other evening

This refers to time (recently past), like "the other day". Doesn't fit.

3. sense_key=other%5:00:02:past:00 | definition=belonging to the distant past | synonyms=early, former | examples=the early inhabitants of Europe; former generations

This means "former" or "early". Doesn't fit "other cancers."

4. sense_key=other%5:00:00:strange:00 | 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 means strange/unusual. Doesn't fit in this context.

So the best sense is sense 1. Therefore the JSON should be {"sense_index": 1}.

Wait, I need to make sure about the "sense_index" terminology. The user says "Return only a JSON object exactly like {"sense_index": 3}." So I should return the index number (1 in this case) as {"sense_index": 1}.

The candidate senses are numbered 1 to 4, so sense_index 1 corresponds to the first sense. Yes.

Let me format correctly. Only JSON object. No additional text.

provider: DeepInfra


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

[User]
Target lemma: cancer
Target surface form: cancers
Context:
His doubts stemmed from the fact that several years earlier a Princeton University researcher, Arnold Levine, had found in experiments with mice that a gene called p53 could transform normal cells into cancerous ones. The deletion Dr. Vogelstein found was in exactly the same spot as p53. But Mr. Levine had said the p53 gene caused cancer by promoting growth, whereas the Johns Hopkins scientists were looking for a gene that suppressed growth. Despite that, when the Johns Hopkins scientists compared the gene they had found in the human cancer cells with the Mr. Levine's p53 gene they found the two were identical; it turned out that in Mr. Levine's cancer studies, he had unknowingly been observing a damaged form of p53 -- a cancer-suppressing gene. The discovery "suddenly puts an obscure gene right in the cockpit of cancer formation, "says Robert Weinberg, a leader in cancer-gene research at Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass. Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other <t>cancers</t>, too. Researchers in Edinburgh, Scotland, have found that in 23 of 38 breast tumors, one copy of chromosome 17 was mutated at the spot where gene p53 lies.

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

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

reasoning_content: We need answer only JSON object with sense_index. Need choose among candidate senses for target lemma cancer surface cancers in context. Context is biological/medical gene p53 involved in other cancers. So sense 1: malignant growth/tumor caused by abnormal cell division. Synonyms malignant neoplastic disease. That's correct. Need return {"sense_index": 1}. Ensure exactly JSON.

provider: Novita


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

[User]
Target lemma: too
Target surface form: too
Context:
His doubts stemmed from the fact that several years earlier a Princeton University researcher, Arnold Levine, had found in experiments with mice that a gene called p53 could transform normal cells into cancerous ones. The deletion Dr. Vogelstein found was in exactly the same spot as p53. But Mr. Levine had said the p53 gene caused cancer by promoting growth, whereas the Johns Hopkins scientists were looking for a gene that suppressed growth. Despite that, when the Johns Hopkins scientists compared the gene they had found in the human cancer cells with the Mr. Levine's p53 gene they found the two were identical; it turned out that in Mr. Levine's cancer studies, he had unknowingly been observing a damaged form of p53 -- a cancer-suppressing gene. The discovery "suddenly puts an obscure gene right in the cockpit of cancer formation, "says Robert Weinberg, a leader in cancer-gene research at Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass. Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, <t>too</t>. Researchers in Edinburgh, Scotland, have found that in 23 of 38 breast tumors, one copy of chromosome 17 was mutated at the spot where gene p53 lies.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=too%4:02:00:: | definition=to a degree exceeding normal or proper limits | synonyms=excessively, overly, to a fault | examples=too big
2. sense_key=too%4:02:01:: | definition=in addition | synonyms=besides, also, likewise, as well | examples=he has a Mercedes, too

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

reasoning_content:
 The user wants me to disambiguate the word "too" in the given context. I need to choose between two senses:
1. "to a degree exceeding normal or proper limits" (excessively)
2. "in addition" (also, as well)

Let me look at the context: "Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too."

The sentence is saying that evidence is emerging that the p53 gene is involved in other cancers in addition to the ones already mentioned/discussed. This is clearly the "in addition / also / as well" meaning, not the "excessively" meaning.

So the correct sense is sense 2.

I need to return only a JSON object: {"sense_index": 2}

provider: Venice


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

[User]
Target lemma: find
Target surface form: found
Context:
The deletion Dr. Vogelstein found was in exactly the same spot as p53. But Mr. Levine had said the p53 gene caused cancer by promoting growth, whereas the Johns Hopkins scientists were looking for a gene that suppressed growth. Despite that, when the Johns Hopkins scientists compared the gene they had found in the human cancer cells with the Mr. Levine's p53 gene they found the two were identical; it turned out that in Mr. Levine's cancer studies, he had unknowingly been observing a damaged form of p53 -- a cancer-suppressing gene. The discovery "suddenly puts an obscure gene right in the cockpit of cancer formation, "says Robert Weinberg, a leader in cancer-gene research at Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass. Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too. Researchers in Edinburgh, Scotland, have <t>found</t> that in 23 of 38 breast tumors, one copy of chromosome 17 was mutated at the spot where gene p53 lies. The scientists say that since breast cancer often strikes multiple members of certain families, the gene, when inherited in a damaged form, may predispose women to the cancer.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=find%2:40:02:: | definition=come upon, as if by accident; meet with | synonyms=happen, chance, bump, encounter | examples=We find this idea in Plato; I happened upon the most wonderful bakery not very far from here
2. sense_key=find%2:39:02:: | definition=discover or determine the existence, presence, or fact of | synonyms=detect, observe, discover, notice | examples=She detected high levels of lead in her drinking water; We found traces of lead in the paint
3. sense_key=find%2:40:00:: | definition=come upon after searching; find the location of something that was missed or lost | synonyms=regain | examples=Did you find your glasses?; I cannot find my gloves!
4. sense_key=find%2:32:00:: | definition=establish after a calculation, investigation, experiment, survey, or study | synonyms=determine, find out, ascertain | examples=find the product of two numbers; The physicist who found the elusive particle won the Nobel Prize
5. sense_key=find%2:31:10:: | definition=come to believe on the basis of emotion, intuitions, or indefinite grounds | synonyms=feel | examples=I feel that he doesn't like me; I find him to be obnoxious
6. sense_key=find%2:39:01:: | definition=perceive or be contemporaneous with | synonyms=witness, see | examples=We found Republicans winning the offices; You'll see a lot of cheating in this school
7. sense_key=find%2:40:01:: | definition=get something or somebody for a specific purpose | synonyms=line up, get hold, come up | examples=I found this gadget that will serve as a bottle opener; I got hold of these tools to fix our plumbing
8. sense_key=find%2:36:00:: | definition=make a discovery, make a new finding | synonyms=discover | examples=Roentgen discovered X-rays; Physicists believe they found a new elementary particle
9. sense_key=find%2:31:09:: | definition=make a discovery | synonyms=discover | examples=She found that he had lied to her; The story is false, so far as I can discover
10. sense_key=find%2:40:03:: | definition=obtain through effort or management | examples=She found the time and energy to take care of her aging parents; We found the money to send our sons to college
11. sense_key=find%2:32:01:: | definition=decide on and make a declaration about | synonyms=rule | examples=find someone guilty
12. sense_key=find%2:30:00:: | definition=receive a specified treatment (abstract) | synonyms=receive, get, obtain, incur | examples=These aspects of civilization do not find expression or receive an interpretation; His movie received a good review
13. sense_key=find%2:39:05:: | definition=perceive oneself to be in a certain condition or place | examples=I found myself in a difficult situation; When he woke up, he found himself in a hospital room
14. sense_key=find%2:40:15:: | definition=get or find back; recover the use of | synonyms=recover, retrieve, regain | examples=She regained control of herself; She found her voice and replied quickly
15. sense_key=find%2:38:10:: | definition=succeed in reaching; arrive at | examples=The arrow found its mark
16. sense_key=find%2:30:13:: | definition=accept and make use of one's personality, abilities, and situation | synonyms=find oneself | examples=My son went to Berkeley to find himself

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

reasoning_content:
We need perform WSD for target word 'found' (past tense of FIND lemma). Need pick single best indexed sense from 16 candidates. Need return JSON exactly {"sense_index": N}. Determine context. Sentence: Researchers in Edinburgh, Scotland, have found that in 23 of 38 breast tumors, one copy of chromosome 17 was mutated at the spot where gene p53 lies. The sense: they have discovered/ascertained/observed a fact through investigation. Which sense covers "find that..." in scientific context? Let's examine candidates.

find%2:32:00 (4) definition establish after calculation, investigation, experiment, survey, or study; synonyms determine, find out, ascertain; examples find product of two numbers; The physicist who found the elusive particle. This can apply to discovered particle after investigation. But ' Researchers ... have found that...' finding a fact via study: could be find%2:31:09 (9) make a discovery; examples She found that he had lied to her; The story is false, so far as I can discover. Or sense 2: detect/existence. Or sense 6 perceive/witness. Or sense 8 make a discovery, new finding. Need choose best. Let's map WordNet index. find%2:40:00 locational finding of lost object. find%2:39:02 detect/notice. find%2:40:02 come upon by accident. find%2:40:01 get for specific purpose. find%2:32:00 determine/ascertain after research. find%2:31:09 discover information. find%2:32:01 decide/rule.

In WordNet, the sense for "find, discover" transitive when object clause? For "She found that he had lied to her" is sense 2:31:09? Let's check: "make a discovery" example includes clause. Indeed sense 9 is "SC = make a discovery" example: She found he had lied. Synonyms discover. It corresponds to WN sense 9 "discover or notice". But another sense 2:31:10 is "come to believe on basis of emotion..." examples I find him obnoxious. That's evaluative not scientific.

Let's inspect relationships. Candidate 8 "make a discovery, make a new finding" examples: Roentgen discovered X-rays; physicists believe they found a new elementary particle. This sense is about discovering a thing/object/phenomenon, often scientific. But here 'found that [clause]' is a fact discovered through study. Could be sense 2:32:00 (determine after investigation) because "The physicist who found the elusive particle" vs "The astronomers found that...". However, when complement is a "that" clause reporting an observation, sense 2:31:09 likely fits: "She found that he had lied..." = discover a fact/truth.

But also sense 2:32:01? No, that's legal ruling. Sense 2:39:02 detect existence, presence, fact. Example: She found traces of lead. That is detecting concrete presence, not a proposition. "found that one copy was mutated" is more ascertaining/discovering a fact.

Let's consider the first sentence in context: "The deletion Dr. Vogelstein found was in exactly the same spot as p53." target there is 'found' also? But user target is the <t>found</t> in last context maybe only. The instruction says target lemma find, surface form found, context with <t>found</t> around last occurrence. So focus only on that. Researchers found that in 23 ... mutated. It's a scientific discovery through investigation.

Need choose among indexes 1..16. Let's see numbering: 1 accident; 2 detect presence; 3 find lost; 4 determine after calculation/investigation; 5 believe; 6 witness; 7 get specific purpose; 8 discover/new finding; 9 discover fact (make a discovery that...); 10 obtain through effort/time; 11 rule/decide; 12 receive treatment; 13 perceive condition; 14 regain; 15 reach mark; 16 accept personality.

Which is more precise? WordNet schemas around find%2:40:03? Wait. We need use Princeton WordNet index. The examples for each:
Sense 4 find%2:32:00 includes examples: find the product of two numbers; The physicist who found the elusive particle won the Nobel Prize. That is "establish after a calculation, investigation, experiment, survey, or study" maybe complements can be thing or that? But "found the elusive particle" is direct object -> discover through research. The target has "found that..." clause. Sense 9 specifically "make a discovery" examples: She found that he had lied to her; The story is false, so far as I can discover. That corresponds to making discovery about truth of proposition. It seems perfect.

But let's also check sense 2 find%2:39:02 "discover or determine the existence, presence, or fact of" examples: detect high levels; found traces of lead. This is for detecting concrete presence/fact, often with direct object, not that-clause. Example She found that... not given.

Sense 6 find%2:39:01 perceive/be contemporaneous with: examples polynym We found Republicans winning offices; see cheating. Not that clause.

Sense 8 find%2:36:00 make a discovery; make a new finding. Examples: discover X-rays; physicists found new elementary particle. Again direct object.

Sense 9 find%2:31:09 make a discovery. Examples clause. This is likely the intended for "found that...".

Let's verify WordNet senses mapping. Actually WordNet has FIND v senses maybe:

1. come on, come upon, chance upon s2.40:02
2. discover/find v2.40:15?
3. determine/find out s2.32:00
4. perceive/find v2.39:02
5. obtain/find v2.40:03
6. discover/find v2.36:00
7. detect/find v2.39:02? hmm.

But the given list is custom indexed. We just select by index.

Could be 4 because definition "establish after a calculation, investigation, experiment, survey, or study" synonyms determine, find out, ascertain. Researchers in Edinburgh have determined that ... mutated. That's exactly scientific conclusion. The example "physicist who found the elusive particle" suggests new discovery. Did they establish through investigation? Yes, they conducted study of breast tumors, found that one copy was mutated at p53 spot. "Find that" in research often maps to sense 4: establish/determine/ascertain.

However, sense 9 "make a discovery" also. What is the difference? Let's examine examples. Sense 4: find the product of two numbers (calculation), physicist found the elusive particle. These are not that-clause; direct object. Sense 9: She found that he had lied. Clause. Our target is that clause. So 9 likely better.

But is there WordNet sense for "find, discover (past tense)" with subordinate clause? Could be 2:31:09. The definition "make a discovery", synonyms discover. It is used with "that" or bare clause. Yes.

Alternatively 2:32:00 might also permit that clause: "We found that p53 suppresses growth" earlier in context? The first part: "Dr. Vogelstein found was ..."? There are multiple 'found'. Maybe the task chooses one occurrence for <t>. Let's analyze entire paragraph occurrences of found:
- "The deletion Dr. Vogelstein found was in exactly the same spot as p53." Here 'found' = located/discovered (direct object deletion) - likely sense 2 detection or 8, maybe 3? The deletion he found (among tumor samples) = discover presence.
- "when the Johns Hopkins scientists compared the gene they had found in the human cancer cells" - found by searching/experiment = discover/locate.
- "they found the two were identical" - 'found' with small clause/that omission: discovered/ascertained.
- "Object..."

Target is marked <t>found</t> in last usage. So "Researchers in Edinburgh, Scotland, have found that in 23 of 38 breast tumors ..." It's a finding of fact. The best sense might be index 9: "make a discovery" as example clause.

But maybe 2 (detect existence, presence, or fact of) includes seeing a fact. Definition says "discover or determine the existence, presence, or fact of". The target is determining a fact: one copy was mutated. But not direct object; complement is clause. Use examples: She found traces of lead; We found traces of lead in the paint. It can be "found that..." too? WordNet 2.39.02 maybe labeled "discover or determine the existence, presence, or fact of" and example "The story is false, so far as I can discover" is in sense 9.

Let's carefully parse WordNet definitions from standard list. I know verb.find in WN 3.0:
1. (27) find, happen, chance, bump, encounter (come upon, as if by accident; meet with) "We find this idea in Plato"; "I happened upon most wonderful bakery"
2. (23) detect, observe, find, discover, notice (discover or determine the existence, presence, or fact of) "She detected high levels of lead"; "We found traces of lead in the paint"
3. (17) find, regain (come upon after searching; find location of) "Did you find your glasses? I can't find my gloves"
4. (7) determine, find, find out, ascertain (establish after a calculation, investigation etc.) "find the product of two numbers"; "The physicist who found the elusive particle won the Nobel"
5. (4) find, feel (come to believe on basis...) "I feel he doesn't like me; I find him obnoxious"
6. (3) witness, find, see (perceive or be contemporaneous with)...
7. (3) line up, get hold, come up, find (get something/somebody for specific purpose)
8. (2) discover, find (make a discovery, make a new finding) "Roentgen discovered X-rays"
9. (2) discover, find (make a discovery) "She found that he had lied to her"; "The story is false..."
10. (1) find (obtain through effort or management)...
11. (1) rule, find (decide on...)
12. receive, get, find, obtain, incur (receive specified treatment... abstract) "These aspects of civilization do not find expression..."
13. find (perceive oneself to be in a certain condition or place) "I found myself in a difficult situation"
14. recover, retrieve, find, regain... "She regained control...; She found her voice"
15. find (succeed in reaching; arrive at) "The arrow found its mark"
16. find oneself (accept...)

This matches candidate list exactly. So target "found that..." is candidate 9 (make a discovery). Because definition and example clause. However scientific discovery could also be 8 (discover/make new finding) but that's new thing/object not that-clause; 9 is the "find that" fact/truth sense. Also maybe 4 because "determine/ascertain after investigation": The clause "found that one copy was mutated" = ascertain/prove through study. In the examples, "find the product of two numbers" and "the physicist found the elusive particle". While "found that A is B" could be sense 9 or 4? Standard framing might map "find that" to sense 9, but in many WSD datasets (Senseval) maybe it maps to "find%2:32:00::"? Let's search memory: In WSD all-words, "find" occurrences often labeled. "researchers found that..." might map to "discover" senses. The clause introduces a proposition discovered. I think index 9.

Let's examine examples for sense 9: "She found that he had lied to her; The story is false, so far as I can discover"—a fact discovered, not necessarily new scientific discovery. It matches our target: "found that in 23 of 38 ... one copy ... was mutated" = discover/ascertain a fact. The subject is researchers investigating tumors. So sense 9.

Would sense 8 "Roentgen discovered X-rays; Physicists believe they found a new elementary particle" be too specific to discovering a new thing? They didn't find a new gene; they found a fact about mutations. So not 8.

Sense 2 detect/presence: examples detect high levels; found traces of lead. Could work if treated as "presence of mutation". But the target is a clause, not a noun phrase. Better to choose clause-specific sense.

Sense 4 "determine/ascertain after calculation/investigation" example clause? Maybe "We found that p53 suppresses growth" earlier in paragraph (Levine) is similar. But the definition says establish, synonyms determine. A 'that' clause after determine/discover/defect? The clause is indeed establishing a fact. But WordNet distinguishes find(9) for "make a discovery" clause. Find(4) is for establishing after calculation/investigation, with direct object concrete. Hmm "find the product..." With clause: "The physicist found that the particle was elusive"? Not sure belongs to 9 or 4.

Let's see WordNet hierarchy: verb.cognition. For find%2:32:00 (determine/ascertain) and find%2:31:09 (make a discovery, learn). To "find that" as in "I found that he wasn't at home" is typically sense 9? Actually in WN, "find%2:31:09" synonyms discover, which is same hypernym as learn. It is broadly "discover, find out, learn" -> "gain knowledge or information". The example "She found that he had lied" is exactly.

Our target: "Researchers have found that one copy ... was mutated"—gained knowledge about mutations through study. So 9.

However, sense 4 "determine, find out, ascertain" is also about gaining after investigation. But "find out" and "ascertain" can take that-clause. Example from WordNet: maybe "Please find out the time of the meeting". But the candidate 4 example uses calculation. Could map. Need decide.

Let's think about why someone might choose 4. The researchers performed an investigation/experiment (tumor study) and "established" that one copy was mutated. The definition "establish after a calculation, investigation, experiment, survey, or study" is exactly science context. If the target were "found [direct object e.g., a mutation]" 2 would fit. Since clause, 4 or 9.

Which is more likely in a WordNet mapping? I recall that for "find" there is a sense mapping in SemCor: "found" with relative clause or that-clause often labeled as "verb.cognition: find, discover" index 9? Let's see examples: In SemCor, "I think you will find it interesting" is sense find%2:31:10 (feel/come to believe). "found that ..." in news might be find%2:31:09. But scientific "Researchers have found that..." might be tagged as find%2:32:00? Hmm.

Let's search mental memory: WSD test sentences for find:
- "The analysis found that women who smoke are more likely..." Could map to "find%2:32:00::" determ? maybe.
- But no, WordNet sense for "discover" with clause is 9.

Let's parse precise WordNet sense descriptions (from Robyn).
- 2:40:02 come upon, as if by accident.
- 2:39:02 detect/notice.
- 2:40:00 locate after searching.
- 2:32:00 establish after calculation.
- 2:31:10 believe/feel.
- 2:39:01 witness/see.
- 2:40:01 get specific.
- 2:36:00 make a discovery, new finding (direct object new phenomenon).
- 2:31:09 make a discovery (clause, truth).
- 2:40:03 obtain.
- 2:32:01 rule.
- 2:30:00 receive.
- 2:39:05 condition.
- 2:40:15 recover.
- 2:38:10 succeed.
- 2:30:13 find oneself.

Definition of 2:31:09 in WordNet exact: "discover, find (make a discovery)" — examples: "She found that he had lied to her"; "The story is false, so far as I can discover." The second example implies judging truth. So clause. Definition of 2:32:00 exact: "determine, find, find out, ascertain (establish after a calculation, investigation, experiment, survey, or study)" examples: "find the product"; "The physicist who found the elusive particle..." It's about a scientific/computational act, often direct object. Yet target phrase is reporting results of a survey (38 breast tumors): "have found that [in 23 ... mutated]"—this is establishing after a study, therefore candidate 4 might be more accurate because they did an investigation.

The last sentence says "Researchers in Edinburgh... have found that in 23 of 38 breast tumors one copy of chromosome 17 was mutated". The phrase "have found that" conveys a learned finding. But does WordNet distinguish find%2:32:00 from find%2:31:09 on that basis? Usually the difference:
- find = determine/ascertain (a result by investigation/computation)
- find, discover = make a discovery (become aware of something, get to know)

If you "have found that 23 of 38 tumors have mutation", did you determine it through study or learn/discover it? Both. Which sense definition fits best? "establish after an investigation" matches because it's a result of research. "make a discovery" also. Which example set most analogous?
- candidate 4: "The physicist who found the elusive particle won the Nobel Prize" (discovered a particle by investigation).
- candidate 9: "She found that he had lied to her" (discovered a truth).

Our object is a proposition discovered in a study. Candidate 9 example is clause about someone else; candidate 4 examples are direct object. Since WordNet examples of 9 include a that clause, that is strong. Definition of 9 says "make a discovery" generic. It covers both. In WordNet's ordering, 9 is lower frequency than 8. The clause meaning maybe considered the same as "discover, learn".

Given instructions: "WordNet glosses are schematic. Use sentence context, examples, and synonyms to choose the best indexed sense. Do not hedge. Choose the single best indexed sense." Compare synonyms: 4 synonyms determine, find out, ascertain; 9 synonyms discover. Which synonyms best match? In the context, the researchers concluded/ascertained a fact, not just made a discovery. Hmm. 4 synonyms "determine" fit better: they investigated tumors and determined mutation presence. 9 synonyms "discover" also fits. But "Researchers have discovered that..." good.

The noun "evidence now is emerging" and "found" all convey discovery.

Let's check other sentences for 'found' without target to assess writer's find sense.
- "But Mr. Levine had said the p53 gene caused cancer by promoting growth, whereas the Johns Hopkins scientists were looking for a gene that suppressed growth. Despite that, ... they found the two were identical; it turned out ..." Here "found the two were identical" is exactly clause = discovered/ascertained after comparison. If target set included this sentence, likely 9 or 4? "compared" = investigation, outcome identical; "they found the two were identical". That's "determine after investigation" and/or "discover fact". Might map same as target.

- "Dr. Vogelstein found was in exactly same spot" is relative clause no direct object complement. Actually "The deletion Dr. Vogelstein found" = deletion that he found (discovered).

- "the gene they had found in human cancer cells" = direct object, discover by research.

Because all occurrences are scientific discovery, if they ask a specific one, we should pick sense closest to that grammatical structure: clause.

I think answer should be {"sense_index": 9}. But could be 4. Need decide definitively. Let's think about potential ambiguity. In WSD tasks like WN WSD, the text "have found that" in scientific research is often ground-truth sense 9? Let's attempt to recall actual WordNet mappings for "found that" phrases from labeled corpora.

In OntoNotes maybe "find" has fewer frames. But in SemCor, sentence: "We found some phonograph records in the attic"; "The workmen found a deep lake ..." etc. Not helpful.

In WordNet dictionary, find%2:32:00 exact definition: "establish after a calculation, investigation, experiment, survey, or study". This is a verb that takes something as object: "find the product", "find the elusive particle". But can it take "that" clause? In construction, "do you think she will find that..." maybe is 9.

Because target is "have found that in 23 of 38 ... was mutated", I'd lean 9. The phrase "that in 23 of 38 breast tumors" is a clause; no calculation/survey phrase. The researchers didn't establish after calculation; they observed the mutation in a study sample, so 9 "discover" is most natural. "Researchers in Edinburgh have found that..." means they discovered/learned through experiments.

Also synonyms: candidate 9 synonyms = discover; candidate 4 synonyms = determine/find out/ascertain. In the sentence, "have found that one copy was mutated" is more like "discovered" than "determined". Could be either.

The examples for 9: "She found that he had lied to her; The story is false, so far as I can discover" relate to ascertaining truth of a proposition. Our proposition is that one chromosome copy was mutated. It's true/false. So 9 is best.

Let's return JSON only. Ensure no extra text. Output contains only {"sense_index": 9}.

provider: Together


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

[User]
Target lemma: breast
Target surface form: breast
Context:
The deletion Dr. Vogelstein found was in exactly the same spot as p53. But Mr. Levine had said the p53 gene caused cancer by promoting growth, whereas the Johns Hopkins scientists were looking for a gene that suppressed growth. Despite that, when the Johns Hopkins scientists compared the gene they had found in the human cancer cells with the Mr. Levine's p53 gene they found the two were identical; it turned out that in Mr. Levine's cancer studies, he had unknowingly been observing a damaged form of p53 -- a cancer-suppressing gene. The discovery "suddenly puts an obscure gene right in the cockpit of cancer formation, "says Robert Weinberg, a leader in cancer-gene research at Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass. Evidence now is emerging that the p53 suppressor gene is involved in other cancers, too. Researchers in Edinburgh, Scotland, have found that in 23 of 38 <t>breast</t> tumors, one copy of chromosome 17 was mutated at the spot where gene p53 lies. The scientists say that since breast cancer often strikes multiple members of certain families, the gene, when inherited in a damaged form, may predispose women to the cancer.

Candidate senses:
1. sense_key=breast%1:08:01:: | definition=the front of the trunk from the neck to the abdomen | synonyms=chest | examples=he beat his breast in anger
2. sense_key=breast%1:08:00:: | definition=either of two soft fleshy milk-secreting glandular organs on the chest of a woman | synonyms=bosom, knocker, boob, tit, titty
3. sense_key=breast%1:13:00:: | definition=meat carved from the breast of a fowl | synonyms=white meat
4. sense_key=breast%1:05:00:: | definition=the part of an animal's body that corresponds to a person's chest

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

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

Let me analyze the context:
- The passage is about cancer research, specifically the p53 gene and its involvement in various cancers
- The target sentence: "Researchers in Edinburgh, Scotland, have found that in 23 of 38 breast tumors, one copy of chromosome 17 was mutated at the spot where gene p53 lies."
- It mentions "breast cancer" and "breast tumors"
- The context is medical, specifically about human breast tissue/organs affected by cancer

Now let's evaluate the candidate senses:

1. breast%1:08:01:: - "the front of the trunk from the neck to the abdomen" - synonyms=chest; examples=he beat his breast in anger
   - This refers to the chest area generally. In the context of "breast tumors" and "breast cancer," this is related to the human female breast, not the general chest area.

2. breast%1:08:00:: - "either of two soft fleshy milk-secreting glandular organs on the chest of a woman" - synonyms=bosom, knocker, boob, tit, titty
   - This refers to the female mammary gland. In medical contexts, "breast cancer" and "breast tumors" specifically refer to cancer/tumors in this organ. This is the correct sense.

3. breast%1:13:00:: - "meat carved from the breast of a fowl" - synonyms=white meat
   - This refers to poultry meat. Not relevant in the context of human cancer research.

4. breast%1:05:00:: - "the part of an animal's body that corresponds to a person's chest"
   - This refers to animal anatomy. Not relevant in the context of human breast cancer.

The best sense is sense 2 (breast%1:08:00::), which refers to the milk-secreting glandular organs in women, as this is the specific anatomical sense used in "breast cancer" and "breast tumors."

The user wants me to return only a JSON object like {"sense_index": 3}, with the correct index.

I should return {"sense_index": 2}.

provider: Moonshot AI