Question:
Mr. Neville ( ( ( Anthony Higgins , a young and arrogant artist and something of a Byronic hero , is contracted to produce a series of 12 landscape drawings of an estate by Mrs. Virginia Herbert for her absent and estranged husband .  Part of the contract is that Mrs. Herbert agrees `` to meet Mr. Neville in private and to comply with his requests concerning his pleasure with me . ''  Several sexual encounters between them follow , each of them acted in such a way as to emphasise reluctance or distress on the part of Mrs Herbert and sexual aggression or insensitivity on the part of Mr Neville .  Meanwhile , whilst living on the estate , Mr. Neville gains quite a reputation with its dwellers , especially with Mrs. Herbert's son-in-law , Mr. Talmann .  Mrs. Herbert , wearied of meeting Mr. Neville for his pleasure , tries to terminate the contract before all of the drawings are completed and orders Mr. Neville to stop .  But he refuses to void the contract and continues as before .  Then Mrs. Herbert's married , but as yet childless , daughter , Mrs. Talmann , who has apparently become attracted to Mr. Neville , seems to blackmail him into making a second contract in Which he agrees to comply with what is described as her pleasure , rather than his a reversal of the position in regard to her mother .  A number of curious objects appear in Neville's drawings , Which point ultimately to the murder of Mr. Herbert , whose body is discovered in the moat of the house .  Mr. Neville completes his twelve drawings and leaves the house .  After reading the above, is "No" the correct answer to the question "Did Mr. Neville enjoy the terms of the contract?"? OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer:
no
Input: While this process moved along, diplomacy continued its rounds. Direct pressure on the Taliban had proved unsuccessful. As one NSC staff note put it, "Under the Taliban, Afghanistan is not so much a state sponsor of terrorism as it is a state sponsored by terrorists." In early 2000, the United States began a high-level effort to persuade Pakistan to use its influence over the Taliban. In January 2000, Assistant Secretary of State Karl Inderfurth and the State Department's counterterrorism coordinator, Michael Sheehan, met with General Musharraf in Islamabad, dangling before him the possibility of a presidential visit in March as a reward for Pakistani cooperation. Such a visit was coveted by Musharraf, partly as a sign of his government's legitimacy. He told the two envoys that he would meet with Mullah Omar and press him on  Bin Laden. They left, however, reporting to Washington that Pakistan was unlikely in fact to do anything," given what it sees as the benefits of Taliban control of Afghanistan." President Clinton was scheduled to travel to India. The State Department felt that he should not visit India without also visiting Pakistan. The Secret Service and the CIA, however, warned in the strongest terms that visiting Pakistan would risk the President's life. Counterterrorism officials also argued that Pakistan had not done enough to merit a presidential visit. But President Clinton insisted on including Pakistan in the itinerary for his trip to South Asia. His one-day stopover on March 25, 2000, was the first time a U.S. president had been there since 1969. At his meeting with Musharraf and others, President Clinton concentrated on tensions between Pakistan and India and the dangers of nuclear proliferation, but also discussed  Bin Laden. President Clinton told us that when he pulled Musharraf aside for a brief, one-on-one meeting, he pleaded with the general for help regarding  Bin Laden." I offered him the moon when I went to see him, in terms of better relations with the United States, if he'd help us get  Bin Laden and deal with another issue or two." The U.S. effort continued. 
"Why did Musharraf want the President to visit Pakistan?" is "It would be a sign of his government's legitimacy"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
Output: yes
Input: Life for the partners of Cates, Katalinic & Lund holds little of the glamour one might expect from a career in law. Instead of lunches at Lut��ce, they caucus at the Palace Diner in Queens. Wooing clients means passing out fliers on street corners, not securing box seats at Madison Square Garden. To make ends meet, one partner stacks pipe and cleans the yard at a plumbing warehouse. Another handles urine samples in a hospital lab. A sign of failure, of a feeble economy, perhaps? Hardly. They are heeding the call of a growing pool of law schools, which are for the first time pointing graduates in a new direction and teaching them how to get there. Forget the lure of large firms, the security of a government post. Here is how to grapple "in the service of justice," as many of the schools put it, instead. Convinced that corporate largess and government programs barely dent the nation's legal needs, the law schools are urging graduates to buck tradition, pass up big salaries and ignore mushrooming student debt to join tiny neighborhood practices or simply start their own, all with an eye toward charging no more than their clients can afford. This is not pro bono legal work; it is "low bono," a term the schools coined to define the atypical kind of law career they are training students for. While its practitioners do charge for their services, they are also dead set on turning no one away - or at least as few as possible. "When you go into this kind of social justice law, it's really brutal and you're almost guaranteed to struggle for a couple of years before there's a light at the end of the tunnel," said Fred Rooney, director of the Community Legal Resource Network at City University of New York School of Law, from which the lawyers of the newly formed Cates, Katalinic & Lund graduated last May. "But if our graduates don't do it, the millions of people who cannot access justice in this country will continue to soar." The movement, primly called the consortium, started four years ago by CUNY, Northeastern University, the University of Maryland and St. Mary's Law School in Texas. (St. Mary's later dropped out.) Since then, it has drawn seven additional law schools to its ranks: the University of Michigan, Rutgers and Syracuse Law Schools, New York Law School, University of New Mexico School of Law, Thomas M. Cooley Law School and Touro Law School. It has elicited at least initial interest from 19 more. 

Does the response "Community legal resource network" correctly answer the question "What food establishment do Cates, Katalinic & Lund frequent?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output: no
Question:
Density is also an important physical property of matter. The concept of density combines what we know about an objects mass and volume. Density reflects how closely packed the particles of matter are. When particles are packed together more tightly, matter is more dense. Differences in density of matter explain many phenomena. It explains why helium balloons rise. It explains why currents such as the Gulf Stream flow through the oceans. It explains why some things float in or sink. You can see this in action by pouring vegetable oil into water. You can see a colorful demonstration in this video.  After reading the above, is "How closely packed the particles of matter are" the correct answer to the question "What does density tell?"? OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer:

yes