In this task, you will be presented with a context from an academic paper and a question separated with a 
. You have to answer the question based on the context.

Q: This algorithm finds the optimal number by minimising a cost function based on the eigenvector structure of the word similarity matrix. We refer the reader to the relevant literature for further details.

Results and Discussion 
 Question: What are the six target languages?

A: Answer with content missing: (3 Experimental Setup) We experiment with six target languages: French (FR), Brazilian Portuguese (PT), Italian (IT), Polish (PL), Croatian (HR), and Finnish (FI).
****
Q: For capturing facial presence, we rely on BIBREF56 's approach that uses multilevel convolutional coarse-to-fine network cascade to tackle facial landmark localization. Facial Expression:

Following BIBREF8 's approach, we adopt Ekman's model of six emotions: anger, disgust, fear, joy, sadness and surprise, and use the Face++ API to automatically capture them from the shared images. General Image Features:

The importance of interpretable computational aesthetic features for studying users' online behavior has been highlighted by several efforts BIBREF55 , BIBREF8 , BIBREF57 .  Qualitative Language Analysis: The recent LIWC version summarizes textual content in terms of language variables such as analytical thinking, clout, authenticity, and emotional tone.  It also measures other linguistic dimensions such as descriptors categories (e.g., percent of target words gleaned by dictionary, or longer than six letters - Sixltr) and informal language markers (e.g., swear words, netspeak), and other linguistic aspects (e.g., 1st person singular pronouns.) 
 Question: What types of features are used from each data type?

A: facial presence Facial Expression General Image Features  textual content analytical thinking clout authenticity emotional tone Sixltr  informal language markers 1st person singular pronouns
****
Q: While the neural syntax-agnostic system obtains superior performance on the L1 data, the two syntax-based systems both produce better analyses on the L2 data. Furthermore, as illustrated in the comparison between different parsers, the better the parsing results we get, the better the performance on L2 we achieve. This shows that syntactic parsing is important in semantic construction for learner Chinese. The main reason, according to our analysis, is that the syntax-based system may generate correct syntactic analyses for partial grammatical fragments in L2 texts, which provides crucial information for SRL. 
 Question: Do the authors suggest why syntactic parsing is so important for semantic role labelling for interlanguages?

A:
syntax-based system may generate correct syntactic analyses for partial grammatical fragments
****
