Write the right answer to the question based on the context passage.

[Q]: Alona's persistent knocking at the door of room 412 went unanswered for three minutes as she nervously shuffled her feet. Her book bag was super-saturated with textbooks, notebooks, schedules, rough drafts, and various other forms of academic paraphernalia. It was getting heavier. She continued to knock, even though there had as yet been no answer, because the note card tacked to the right of the door indicated that these indeed were Prof. Turgy K. Sigger's office hours. She could see the light under the door and thought she had heard a groan. Just before she decided to give up, slow feet approached from the opposite side, then silence; with a dramatic turn of the knob, the door swung open.
"Was this trip really necessary?" asked Prof. Sigger, blinking and brushing his oily, graying hair back into place.
"These are your office hours," Alona replied. She nervously smiled, feeling the corners of her mouth twitch. Somewhere in the darkened hall, a janitor coughed.
"All right," conceded Prof. Sigger. "Come in."
The carpet was smothered by leaning towers of textbooks. Papers lined the left side of the desk, above which was a small note card which read "To Be Graded." On the right side, the oak finish gleamed of the mid-morning light piercing the Venetian blinds.
"You've come about your final project," Prof. Sigger stated.
"It's only mid-term," Alona reminded him.
"Oh yes, yes," continued Prof. Sigger, without conscious embarrassment. "Mid-term grade. I think I have it here. Somewhere." His hands disappeared into the left side of his desk.
"You told the class that we would get a C if we maintained that Coca-Cola isn't a crypto-fascist conspiracy."
"Oh yes," said Prof. Sigger. "We were discussing social issues, as I remember. I was quoting Marx and some little idiot brought up Rush Limbaugh."
"That was me," Alona muttered. Question: What was getting heavier as time went on?
[A]: Alona's book bag


[Q]: SEOUL — South Korean Foreign Minister Kang, Kyung-wha said on Wednesday that the U.S. and South Korea jointly made the decision to suspend combined military exercises scheduled for August, but would not confirm if her government was given advanced notice before U.S. President Trump announced his intention to cancel the drills, after he met with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Singapore on June 12.
"We have made it clear that this is a goodwill gesture to strengthen the dialogue momentum at this point, but they are not irreversible. They could quickly come back should we see the dialogue momentum losing speed or North Korea not living up to its denuclearization commitment," said Foreign Minister Kang.
During a press briefing in Seoul, the foreign minister said she was in in close communication with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo about the drills directly following the Singapore summit. And while the announcement canceling the exercises came suddenly, Kang said, South Korea was also considering this option to keep diplomatic momentum moving forward following the U.S.-North Korea summit where Kim reaffirmed his commitment to the "complete denuclearization" of North Korea.
The now cancelled Ulchi Freedom Guardian exercises normally held in August usually bring in 3,000 more American troops from abroad and involve 50,000 South Korean troops.
No decision has yet been made whether the other large-scale joint exercise held in the spring would be suspended as well.
At the Singapore summit Trump said he would cancel the "war games" that he said were both enormously expensive and "provocative," as an act of good faith and in response to North Korea's commitment to denuclearization, its continued suspension of nuclear and missile teats, and the recent closing of its nuclear testing site.
North Korea has long called for the end of these joint military exercises that it says are offensive "rehearsals for war."
In the past U.S. officials refused to suspend the joint drills, that they defended as defensive in nature and legal under international law, for a pledge from North Korea to freeze its nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities that are prohibited by United Nations resolutions. Question: Who called for an end to the Ulchi Freedom Guardian exercises?
[A]: North Korea


[Q]: I am currently waiting for peer reviews of two books I've worked on: one sole-authored, one co-authored. We don't talk much about the experience of waiting for reviews, and it's not something that appears to have been researched. Yet it's something everyone doing academic work has to go through and it may be bad for our mental health.
I'm finding it particularly difficult at the moment because a lot rides on these reviews. The sole-authored book, which is on a contentious topic, has already had one set of reviews. Reviewer 1 was utterly damning, saying "I couldn't find anything to praise". Luckily, Reviewers 2 and 3 were more measured, offering both praise and constructive criticism, and their input helped me to revise and strengthen the typescript. However, in the process, my editor and I realised that we needed further reviews from people with a particular kind of specialist knowledge. My editor approached around ten potential reviewers, but only one agreed to do the job. So I'm gibbering – what if that person agrees with Reviewer 1?
The co-authored book is in a contentious format. My co-authors and I decided that I would be the person to liaise with publishers, as I have form in this process. The last time I liaised with academic publishers for a co-authored book was in the early 2000s, and I'd forgotten how heavily responsible it makes me feel. Fortunately, I've found a publisher that is interested and has sent the book out for reviews, to two professional academics and two students. This is great – and terrifying – but at least there are four reviewers. Even so, what if they all think it's rubbish?
In many ways I love the peer review system. I welcome feedback on my writing, and I'm not at all averse to constructive criticism. I am by no means arrogant enough to think I can write a good book without input from others. Yet peer review, as a process, is fraught with uncertainty. Comments may not be constructive, or may not come at all. They may be positive, or negative, or in between, or a mixture. Question: Who said "I couldn't find anything to praise"?
[A]:
Reviewer 1


