In this task, you're given an article, a question which often contains a blank, four options (associated with "A", "B", "C", "D") and the answer to that question. Your task is to classify whether the given answer is correct or not by providing "Yes" or "No", based on the article.

Ex Input:
Article: Most of the time, the ground feels solid beneath our feet. That's comforting. But it's also misleading because there's actually a lot going on underground. Masses of land (called plates) slip, slide, and bump against each other, slowly changing the shape of continents and oceans over millions and billions of years. Scientists know that Earth formed about 4. 5 billion years ago.  They also know that our planet was hot at first. As it cooled, its outermost layer, called the crust  , eventually formed moving plates. Exactly when this shift happened, however, is an open question. Now, an international group of researchers has an answer. They've found new evidence suggesting that Earth's crust started shifting at least 3.8 billion years ago. The new estimate is l. 3 billion years earlier than previous ones. Not long before 3. 8 billion years ago,  lots of small planets were hitting Earth, keeping its crust in a hot, melting state. After the hard crust formed, much of it sank at various times into the planet's hot insides. There, it melted before returning to the surface. In some places, however, the crust never sank. One of the oldest such places is in Greenland, in an area called the Isua supracrustal   belt. The rocky crust there is between 3. 7 and 3. 8 billion years old. The belt was once part of the seafloor, but now it is exposed to air. The researchers recently took a close look at the Isua supracrustal belt. They noticed long, parallel cracks in the rock that have been filled in with a type of volcanic rock. To explain this structure, the scientists propose that tension in the crust caused the seafloor to crack open long ago. Hot, liquid rock oozed from deep inside Earth to fill the cracks. Finally, the whole area cooled, forming what we see today. That explanation, plus chemical clues inside the rock, suggests that the Isua supracrustal belt was once part of plate under the ocean, beginning around 3.8 billion years ago. "It's a fantastic case of solving a jigsaw puzzle ,"says one of the researchers. He notes that the puzzle was "a very difficult one because these rocks are all very old and have been badly ruined". 
 Question: What can we infer from the text? 
 Options: (A) The shapes of continents and oceans changed slowly. (B) The Earth's crust started shifting l.3 billion years ago. (C) The crust began to shift when the Earth was hot. (D) The hit from small planets made the Earth cool. 
 Asnwer: B

Ex Output:
No


Ex Input:
Article: Though the facts that too many people on earth and a too rapid increase in the number added each year are not in argument, we always begin the discussion of "population as global issue" with what most persons mean like this. It was quite right to compare demographic growth to "a long, thin powder fuse that bums steadily and hesitatingly until it finally reaches the charge and explodes". To understand the current situation, which is characterized by rapid increases in population, it is necessary to understand the history of population trends. Rapid growth is a comparatively recent phenomenon. Looking back at the 8,000 years of demographic history, we find that populations have been virtually stable or growing very slightly for most of human history. For most of our ancestors, life was hard, often nasty, and very short. There was high fertility in most places, but this was usually balanced by high mortality. For most of human history, it was seldom the case that one in ten persons would live past forty, while infancy and childhood were especially risky periods. Often, societies were in clear danger of extinction because death rates could exceed their birthrates. Thus, the population problem throughout most of history was how to prevent extinction of the human race. This pattern is important to notice. Not only does it put the current problems of demographic growth into a historical perspective, but it suggests that the cause of rapid increase in population in recent years is not a sudden enthusiasm for more children, but an improvement in the conditions that traditionally have caused high mortality. Demographic history can be divided into two major periods: a time of long, slow growth which extended from about 8000 B.C. till approximately 1650 A.D. In the first period of some 9,600 years, the population increased from some 8 million to 500 million in 1650. Between 1650 and 1975, the population has increased from 500 million to more than 4 billion. And the population reached 6.2 billion throughout the world by the year 2000, One way to appreciate this dramatic difference in such abstract numbers is to reduce the time frame to something that is more manageable. Between 8000 B.C. and 1650, an average of only 50,000 persons was being added annually to the world's population, At present, this number is added every six hours. The increase is about 800000,000 persons annually. 
 Question: Which of the following demographic growth patterns is most similar to the long thin powder fuse? 
 Options: (A) A slow growth for a long time and then a period of rapid, dramatic increase. (B) Too many people on earth and a few rapid increases in the number added each year. (C) A virtually stable or slightly decreasing period and then a sudden explosion of population. (D) A long period when death rates exceed birthrates and then a short period with higher fertility and lower mortality. 
 Asnwer: A

Ex Output:
Yes


Ex Input:
Article: Raymond Schneider politely made his way through crowds of customers as he made for the candy bins at Dylan's Candy Bar in Manhattan. Since he was out of employment, Mr. Schneider, a 33-year-old designer, says he has become a person who always buys a lot of sweets every time he shops for groceries. "Sugar is comforting," he said. "There's nothing more stressful than growing financial insecurity   everywhere." The recession   seems to have a sweet tooth. As unemployment has risen, Americans, particularly adults, have been consuming   growing amounts of candy. Theories vary on exactly why. For many, sugar lifts spirits dragged low by the economy. For others, candy also reminds them of better times. And not importantly, it is  ly cheap.   At Candyality, a store in Chicago, business has jumped by nearly 80 percent and the owner, Terese McDonald, said she was struggling to keep up with the demand for Bit-O-Honeys, and Sour Balls.  Many big candy makers are also reporting rising sales and big profits  .  "It's not surprising." said Peter Liebhold, chairman of the Smithsonian Institution's work and industry division. "During the Great Depression in the 1930's, candy companies stayed in business." 
 Question: Raymond Schneider was set as an example to show   _  . 
 Options: (A) many Americans were jobless in the recession (B) lots of Americans like candies (C) many Americans in the recession like sweets which are comforting (D) Americans are suffering much in the recession 
 Asnwer: A

Ex Output:

No


