section_id
string | query_id
string | passage
string | question
string | answers_spans
sequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
history_2463 | d0185d1e-5808-463a-a0d0-131a5f536777 | In 2011 the estimated median income for a household in the city was $44,846, and the median income for a family was $53,896. Males had a median income of $42,120 versus $31,362 for females. The per capita income for the city was $25,041. About 9.6% of families and 14.4% of the population were below the poverty line, including 15.1% of those under age 18 and 12.8% of those age 65 or over. The population was 180,480 at the 2000 United States Census; in 2010, its population had risen to 225,221, making it the third-largest city in the state after Las Vegas, Nevada and Henderson, Nevada, and the largest outside Clark County, Nevada. Reno lies north of the Nevada state capital, Carson City, Nevada, and northeast of Lake Tahoe in a shrub-steppe environment. Reno shares its eastern border with the city of Sparks and is the larger of the principal cities of the Reno-Sparks metropolitan area (MSA), a United States metropolitan area that covers Storey County, Nevada and Washoe counties. The MSA had a combined population of 425,417 at the 2010 United States Census. The MSA is combined with the Lyon County, Nevada to form the Reno-Sparks-Fernley, NV CSA Combined Statistical Area, which had a total population of 477,397 at the 2010 census. | Which two cities were larger? | {
"spans": [
"Las Vegas, Nevada",
"Henderson, Nevada"
],
"types": [
"span",
"span"
]
} |
history_2463 | 72ef37a2-50ab-42dc-826c-6a02584743ac | In 2011 the estimated median income for a household in the city was $44,846, and the median income for a family was $53,896. Males had a median income of $42,120 versus $31,362 for females. The per capita income for the city was $25,041. About 9.6% of families and 14.4% of the population were below the poverty line, including 15.1% of those under age 18 and 12.8% of those age 65 or over. The population was 180,480 at the 2000 United States Census; in 2010, its population had risen to 225,221, making it the third-largest city in the state after Las Vegas, Nevada and Henderson, Nevada, and the largest outside Clark County, Nevada. Reno lies north of the Nevada state capital, Carson City, Nevada, and northeast of Lake Tahoe in a shrub-steppe environment. Reno shares its eastern border with the city of Sparks and is the larger of the principal cities of the Reno-Sparks metropolitan area (MSA), a United States metropolitan area that covers Storey County, Nevada and Washoe counties. The MSA had a combined population of 425,417 at the 2010 United States Census. The MSA is combined with the Lyon County, Nevada to form the Reno-Sparks-Fernley, NV CSA Combined Statistical Area, which had a total population of 477,397 at the 2010 census. | How many percent of families were not below the poverty line? | {
"spans": [
"90.4"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2463 | e4967f06-5f12-466f-b8ca-3f127edc4f44 | In 2011 the estimated median income for a household in the city was $44,846, and the median income for a family was $53,896. Males had a median income of $42,120 versus $31,362 for females. The per capita income for the city was $25,041. About 9.6% of families and 14.4% of the population were below the poverty line, including 15.1% of those under age 18 and 12.8% of those age 65 or over. The population was 180,480 at the 2000 United States Census; in 2010, its population had risen to 225,221, making it the third-largest city in the state after Las Vegas, Nevada and Henderson, Nevada, and the largest outside Clark County, Nevada. Reno lies north of the Nevada state capital, Carson City, Nevada, and northeast of Lake Tahoe in a shrub-steppe environment. Reno shares its eastern border with the city of Sparks and is the larger of the principal cities of the Reno-Sparks metropolitan area (MSA), a United States metropolitan area that covers Storey County, Nevada and Washoe counties. The MSA had a combined population of 425,417 at the 2010 United States Census. The MSA is combined with the Lyon County, Nevada to form the Reno-Sparks-Fernley, NV CSA Combined Statistical Area, which had a total population of 477,397 at the 2010 census. | How many percent of the population under age 18 were not below the poverty line? | {
"spans": [
"84.9"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2463 | 3e736c0e-21d5-4503-bd70-24439a020956 | In 2011 the estimated median income for a household in the city was $44,846, and the median income for a family was $53,896. Males had a median income of $42,120 versus $31,362 for females. The per capita income for the city was $25,041. About 9.6% of families and 14.4% of the population were below the poverty line, including 15.1% of those under age 18 and 12.8% of those age 65 or over. The population was 180,480 at the 2000 United States Census; in 2010, its population had risen to 225,221, making it the third-largest city in the state after Las Vegas, Nevada and Henderson, Nevada, and the largest outside Clark County, Nevada. Reno lies north of the Nevada state capital, Carson City, Nevada, and northeast of Lake Tahoe in a shrub-steppe environment. Reno shares its eastern border with the city of Sparks and is the larger of the principal cities of the Reno-Sparks metropolitan area (MSA), a United States metropolitan area that covers Storey County, Nevada and Washoe counties. The MSA had a combined population of 425,417 at the 2010 United States Census. The MSA is combined with the Lyon County, Nevada to form the Reno-Sparks-Fernley, NV CSA Combined Statistical Area, which had a total population of 477,397 at the 2010 census. | How many percent of the population aged 65 or over were not below the poverty line? | {
"spans": [
"87.2"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2343 | 4603c7a0-2a7b-498c-8d5d-eb55c119270f | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | What age group had the lowest cigar usage? | {
"spans": [
"25-44"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2343 | d3b3a137-9252-4713-a759-cfcce3e1c95b | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | Which group had the highest cigar usage, men, women, LGBT or heterosexual? | {
"spans": [
"LGBT"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2343 | 35186a6f-b7f9-4f9b-879d-a7ac76080aad | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | Which groups of people saw a prevalence of over 10% or more using tobacco products? | {
"spans": [
"18–24 years",
"men",
"LGBT"
],
"types": [
"span",
"span",
"span"
]
} |
history_2343 | b7e46f08-2c8d-4e45-8d16-e9eac644f908 | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | In 2015, which time saw a higher amount of Americans smoking a cigar product, in the past month or in the past year? | {
"spans": [
"in the past year"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2343 | 2852a38d-914f-4249-8bea-3b089267743f | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | Which group was smoking more, Native Americans or white Americans? | {
"spans": [
"Native Americans"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2343 | 0c744341-8fec-4dc5-b655-82c5fe8cd90d | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | Which group was smoking less, men or women? | {
"spans": [
"women"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2343 | 1ad2df73-478c-474b-b635-0fca0bc036e1 | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | In the Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, which gender smoke the most, men or women? | {
"spans": [
"men"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2343 | 7c69f8c8-516e-4d5e-b745-872664679223 | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | Which sexual orientation saw the most amount of smokers in the Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, LGBT or heterosexual? | {
"spans": [
"LGBT"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2343 | b2c392e7-95d9-41f2-93d4-b72e1d76fb02 | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | Which age group in the Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015 saw the least amount of smokers, 18–24 years or 25–44 years old? | {
"spans": [
"25–44 years old"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2343 | b6fd5013-8a70-46ad-bc8d-b7ffafd0e1c9 | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | Over how many years was the consumption of cigars in the US slightly over 6.1 billion? | {
"spans": [
"12"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2343 | 17ea831f-c776-4ec9-9b97-fc49180ba57d | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | How many more billions of cigars were consumed in 2012 than in 2000? | {
"spans": [
"7.6"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2343 | e2ace117-d671-4f02-900f-d1a9f002ccc7 | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | How many more, in percent, was the prevalence among adults 18–24 than 25–44? | {
"spans": [
"8.7"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2343 | 9bdcf4ee-2245-4771-9a15-008a807113c4 | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | How many more, in percent, was the prevalence among men than women? | {
"spans": [
"7.3"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2343 | 0a386c31-64b0-45d7-9b62-39a527a0c9d9 | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | How many more, in percent, was the prevalence among LGBT than heterosexual respondents? | {
"spans": [
"5.7"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2343 | 544f2753-7575-44e3-bcf6-7cdb9100df78 | From 2000 to 2012, consumption of cigars more than doubled in the United States, from slightly over 6.1 billion in 2000 to more than 13.7 billion in 2012. Cigar use is most common among young people. In the 2012 National Youth Tobacco Survey data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 12.6% of high school students had smoked at least one cigar in the past 30 days. After cigarettes, cigars were the second most commonly used tobacco product in youths and the most commonly used tobacco product among African American high school students. From the CDC’s national Adult Tobacco Survey for 2009-2015, data suggest that prevalence among adults was highest among 18-24 years (15.9%) followed by 25-44 years old (7.2%). From the same survey, prevalence among men (10.4%) was significantly higher than women (3.1%) and likewise among LGBT (12.2%) and heterosexual (6.5%) respondents. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2015) indicated that 12.5 million American (over age 12) smoked a cigar product in the past month and over 24 million smoked a cigar product in the past year. As reported in other surveys, use was more common among most often among men than women and more prevalent among African- Americans and Native Americans than among white Americans. | How many more million, in percent, smoked a cigar product in the past year than smoked a cigar product in the past month? | {
"spans": [
"11.5"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
nfl_3350 | 70c5b4ce-788d-47b8-b7ba-c9cdf52a505e | In the 195th meeting between the Packers and Bears, the Packers took advantage early, scoring first on their opening drive, then scoring less than a minute later after recovering a Bear fumble. Taking advantage of several Chicago miscues, including three turnovers and a missed field goal, the Packers rolled to a convincing win over their rivals, with Aaron Rodgers throwing four touchdown passes. The victory also gave the Packers a 95-94-6 edge in the rivalry with the Bears, the first time the Packers had the lead in the rivalry since 1933. In the third quarter wide receiver Davante Adams took a vicious and illegal hit from Bears linebacker Danny Trevathan that required a stretcher to take Adams off the field. Adams was diagnosed with a concussion and immediately taken to the hospital, where he spent the night. He did not have any significant nerve damage and would return for next Sunday's game against the Dallas Cowboys. | Of the 195 times the teams have met, how many games have not ended in a tie? | {
"spans": [
"189"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
nfl_3350 | c9d0250c-bb74-47c7-b42a-a1aa089a0b78 | In the 195th meeting between the Packers and Bears, the Packers took advantage early, scoring first on their opening drive, then scoring less than a minute later after recovering a Bear fumble. Taking advantage of several Chicago miscues, including three turnovers and a missed field goal, the Packers rolled to a convincing win over their rivals, with Aaron Rodgers throwing four touchdown passes. The victory also gave the Packers a 95-94-6 edge in the rivalry with the Bears, the first time the Packers had the lead in the rivalry since 1933. In the third quarter wide receiver Davante Adams took a vicious and illegal hit from Bears linebacker Danny Trevathan that required a stretcher to take Adams off the field. Adams was diagnosed with a concussion and immediately taken to the hospital, where he spent the night. He did not have any significant nerve damage and would return for next Sunday's game against the Dallas Cowboys. | Which team missed a field goal? | {
"spans": [
"Bears"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
nfl_3350 | dcfb3c2c-359f-47eb-86d4-94c164262aa6 | In the 195th meeting between the Packers and Bears, the Packers took advantage early, scoring first on their opening drive, then scoring less than a minute later after recovering a Bear fumble. Taking advantage of several Chicago miscues, including three turnovers and a missed field goal, the Packers rolled to a convincing win over their rivals, with Aaron Rodgers throwing four touchdown passes. The victory also gave the Packers a 95-94-6 edge in the rivalry with the Bears, the first time the Packers had the lead in the rivalry since 1933. In the third quarter wide receiver Davante Adams took a vicious and illegal hit from Bears linebacker Danny Trevathan that required a stretcher to take Adams off the field. Adams was diagnosed with a concussion and immediately taken to the hospital, where he spent the night. He did not have any significant nerve damage and would return for next Sunday's game against the Dallas Cowboys. | Which team had a player injured? | {
"spans": [
"Packers"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2329 | fe4a341e-57e8-44ad-a8d0-7019dd553367 | Leading 28–10 in the 3rd quarter, the 49ers added 14 more points. The Chargers were forced to punt after three plays on the opening drive of the second half, and Dexter Carter returned the ball 11 yards to his own 38-yard line. Young subsequently completed three consecutive passes for 53 yards on a 7-play, 62-yard drive that ended with Watters third touchdown on a 9-yard run. After a 33-yard kickoff return by Andre Coleman, the Chargers advanced to the San Francisco 33-yard line, but they turned the ball over on downs when Humphries fourth-down pass was broken up by Davis. After the turnover, Young led his team on a 10-play, 67-yard drive, aided by a 22-yard pass interference penalty against Darrien Gordon on third and 14, to score on his fifth touchdown pass, a 15-yard completion to Rice. The Chargers only highlight of the 3rd quarter was when Coleman returned the ensuing kickoff 98 yards for a touchdown. Then, wide receiver Mark Seay caught a pass for a successful two-point conversion (the first in Super Bowl history; the rule had been adopted by the NFL at the start of the season), but it only cut the deficit to 42–18. | How many points was the deficit after Mark Seay's successful two-point conversion? | {
"spans": [
"24"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2329 | fadfe425-f5f5-47a0-886d-f2718774d6b7 | Leading 28–10 in the 3rd quarter, the 49ers added 14 more points. The Chargers were forced to punt after three plays on the opening drive of the second half, and Dexter Carter returned the ball 11 yards to his own 38-yard line. Young subsequently completed three consecutive passes for 53 yards on a 7-play, 62-yard drive that ended with Watters third touchdown on a 9-yard run. After a 33-yard kickoff return by Andre Coleman, the Chargers advanced to the San Francisco 33-yard line, but they turned the ball over on downs when Humphries fourth-down pass was broken up by Davis. After the turnover, Young led his team on a 10-play, 67-yard drive, aided by a 22-yard pass interference penalty against Darrien Gordon on third and 14, to score on his fifth touchdown pass, a 15-yard completion to Rice. The Chargers only highlight of the 3rd quarter was when Coleman returned the ensuing kickoff 98 yards for a touchdown. Then, wide receiver Mark Seay caught a pass for a successful two-point conversion (the first in Super Bowl history; the rule had been adopted by the NFL at the start of the season), but it only cut the deficit to 42–18. | Who returned the ball more yards, Carter or Coleman? | {
"spans": [
"Coleman"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2233 | 521341bd-3552-4a30-b3e9-a4b11860231a | After the founding of the subsequent Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR or Soviet Union) in 1922, Lenin had introduced a mixed economy, commonly referred to as the New Economic Policy, which allowed for capitalist practices to resume under the Communist Party dictation in order to develop the necessary conditions for socialism to become a practical pursuit in the economically undeveloped country. In 1929, as Marshal Joseph Stalin (1878-1953, in power 1929-1953), became the leader of the party, Marxism-Leninism, a fusion of the original ideas of German Empire philosopher and economic theorist Karl Marx (1818-1883), and Lenin, became formalized as the partys guiding ideology and would remain so throughout the rest of its existence. The party pursued state socialism, under which all industries were nationalized and a planned economy was implemented. After recovering from the Second World War (1939-1945), De-Stalinization which 1965 Soviet economic reform and Khrushchev thaw under Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971, in power 1953/1958-1964). By 1980, various factors, including the continuing Cold War (1946-1991), and ongoing nuclear arms race with the United States and other Western Europe powers and unaddressed inefficiencies in the economy, led to Era of Stagnation under Alexei Kosygin (1904-1980, in power 1964), and further with Leonid Brezhnev (1906-1982, in power 1964-1982) and a growing disillusionment. After a younger vigorous Mikhail Gorbachev (b.1931), assumed leadership in 1985, (following two short-term elderly leaders who quickly died in succession), rapid steps were taken to transform the tottering Soviet economic system in the direction of a market economy once again. Gorbachev and his allies envisioned the introduction of an economy similar to Lenins earlier New Economic Policy through a program of "perestroika", or restructuring, but their reforms along with the institution of free multiparty elections led to a decline in the partys power, and after the Dissolution of the Soviet Union (1990-1991), the banning of the party by later last RSFSR President Boris Yeltsin (1931-2007, in power 1991-1999) and subsequent first President of an evolving democratic and free market economy of the successor Russian Federation. | Who lived longer, Stalin or Marx? | {
"spans": [
"Stalin"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2233 | 469f85c2-e75a-4aa3-9ebb-8fda4739a92c | After the founding of the subsequent Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR or Soviet Union) in 1922, Lenin had introduced a mixed economy, commonly referred to as the New Economic Policy, which allowed for capitalist practices to resume under the Communist Party dictation in order to develop the necessary conditions for socialism to become a practical pursuit in the economically undeveloped country. In 1929, as Marshal Joseph Stalin (1878-1953, in power 1929-1953), became the leader of the party, Marxism-Leninism, a fusion of the original ideas of German Empire philosopher and economic theorist Karl Marx (1818-1883), and Lenin, became formalized as the partys guiding ideology and would remain so throughout the rest of its existence. The party pursued state socialism, under which all industries were nationalized and a planned economy was implemented. After recovering from the Second World War (1939-1945), De-Stalinization which 1965 Soviet economic reform and Khrushchev thaw under Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971, in power 1953/1958-1964). By 1980, various factors, including the continuing Cold War (1946-1991), and ongoing nuclear arms race with the United States and other Western Europe powers and unaddressed inefficiencies in the economy, led to Era of Stagnation under Alexei Kosygin (1904-1980, in power 1964), and further with Leonid Brezhnev (1906-1982, in power 1964-1982) and a growing disillusionment. After a younger vigorous Mikhail Gorbachev (b.1931), assumed leadership in 1985, (following two short-term elderly leaders who quickly died in succession), rapid steps were taken to transform the tottering Soviet economic system in the direction of a market economy once again. Gorbachev and his allies envisioned the introduction of an economy similar to Lenins earlier New Economic Policy through a program of "perestroika", or restructuring, but their reforms along with the institution of free multiparty elections led to a decline in the partys power, and after the Dissolution of the Soviet Union (1990-1991), the banning of the party by later last RSFSR President Boris Yeltsin (1931-2007, in power 1991-1999) and subsequent first President of an evolving democratic and free market economy of the successor Russian Federation. | Who maintained power longer, Stalin or Khrushchev? | {
"spans": [
"Stalin"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2233 | 2b034946-e3af-4da2-bdb7-a0f403b100d1 | After the founding of the subsequent Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR or Soviet Union) in 1922, Lenin had introduced a mixed economy, commonly referred to as the New Economic Policy, which allowed for capitalist practices to resume under the Communist Party dictation in order to develop the necessary conditions for socialism to become a practical pursuit in the economically undeveloped country. In 1929, as Marshal Joseph Stalin (1878-1953, in power 1929-1953), became the leader of the party, Marxism-Leninism, a fusion of the original ideas of German Empire philosopher and economic theorist Karl Marx (1818-1883), and Lenin, became formalized as the partys guiding ideology and would remain so throughout the rest of its existence. The party pursued state socialism, under which all industries were nationalized and a planned economy was implemented. After recovering from the Second World War (1939-1945), De-Stalinization which 1965 Soviet economic reform and Khrushchev thaw under Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971, in power 1953/1958-1964). By 1980, various factors, including the continuing Cold War (1946-1991), and ongoing nuclear arms race with the United States and other Western Europe powers and unaddressed inefficiencies in the economy, led to Era of Stagnation under Alexei Kosygin (1904-1980, in power 1964), and further with Leonid Brezhnev (1906-1982, in power 1964-1982) and a growing disillusionment. After a younger vigorous Mikhail Gorbachev (b.1931), assumed leadership in 1985, (following two short-term elderly leaders who quickly died in succession), rapid steps were taken to transform the tottering Soviet economic system in the direction of a market economy once again. Gorbachev and his allies envisioned the introduction of an economy similar to Lenins earlier New Economic Policy through a program of "perestroika", or restructuring, but their reforms along with the institution of free multiparty elections led to a decline in the partys power, and after the Dissolution of the Soviet Union (1990-1991), the banning of the party by later last RSFSR President Boris Yeltsin (1931-2007, in power 1991-1999) and subsequent first President of an evolving democratic and free market economy of the successor Russian Federation. | Which two leaders both lived 76 years? | {
"spans": [
"Alexei Kosygin",
"Leonid Brezhnev"
],
"types": [
"span",
"span"
]
} |
history_2233 | 35e5b2c8-4750-4976-8db7-1b88dbc1a687 | After the founding of the subsequent Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR or Soviet Union) in 1922, Lenin had introduced a mixed economy, commonly referred to as the New Economic Policy, which allowed for capitalist practices to resume under the Communist Party dictation in order to develop the necessary conditions for socialism to become a practical pursuit in the economically undeveloped country. In 1929, as Marshal Joseph Stalin (1878-1953, in power 1929-1953), became the leader of the party, Marxism-Leninism, a fusion of the original ideas of German Empire philosopher and economic theorist Karl Marx (1818-1883), and Lenin, became formalized as the partys guiding ideology and would remain so throughout the rest of its existence. The party pursued state socialism, under which all industries were nationalized and a planned economy was implemented. After recovering from the Second World War (1939-1945), De-Stalinization which 1965 Soviet economic reform and Khrushchev thaw under Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971, in power 1953/1958-1964). By 1980, various factors, including the continuing Cold War (1946-1991), and ongoing nuclear arms race with the United States and other Western Europe powers and unaddressed inefficiencies in the economy, led to Era of Stagnation under Alexei Kosygin (1904-1980, in power 1964), and further with Leonid Brezhnev (1906-1982, in power 1964-1982) and a growing disillusionment. After a younger vigorous Mikhail Gorbachev (b.1931), assumed leadership in 1985, (following two short-term elderly leaders who quickly died in succession), rapid steps were taken to transform the tottering Soviet economic system in the direction of a market economy once again. Gorbachev and his allies envisioned the introduction of an economy similar to Lenins earlier New Economic Policy through a program of "perestroika", or restructuring, but their reforms along with the institution of free multiparty elections led to a decline in the partys power, and after the Dissolution of the Soviet Union (1990-1991), the banning of the party by later last RSFSR President Boris Yeltsin (1931-2007, in power 1991-1999) and subsequent first President of an evolving democratic and free market economy of the successor Russian Federation. | How many years was Gorbachev in power? | {
"spans": [
"6"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2233 | 68a673c2-89d2-463d-89f2-53e9eac50c03 | After the founding of the subsequent Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR or Soviet Union) in 1922, Lenin had introduced a mixed economy, commonly referred to as the New Economic Policy, which allowed for capitalist practices to resume under the Communist Party dictation in order to develop the necessary conditions for socialism to become a practical pursuit in the economically undeveloped country. In 1929, as Marshal Joseph Stalin (1878-1953, in power 1929-1953), became the leader of the party, Marxism-Leninism, a fusion of the original ideas of German Empire philosopher and economic theorist Karl Marx (1818-1883), and Lenin, became formalized as the partys guiding ideology and would remain so throughout the rest of its existence. The party pursued state socialism, under which all industries were nationalized and a planned economy was implemented. After recovering from the Second World War (1939-1945), De-Stalinization which 1965 Soviet economic reform and Khrushchev thaw under Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971, in power 1953/1958-1964). By 1980, various factors, including the continuing Cold War (1946-1991), and ongoing nuclear arms race with the United States and other Western Europe powers and unaddressed inefficiencies in the economy, led to Era of Stagnation under Alexei Kosygin (1904-1980, in power 1964), and further with Leonid Brezhnev (1906-1982, in power 1964-1982) and a growing disillusionment. After a younger vigorous Mikhail Gorbachev (b.1931), assumed leadership in 1985, (following two short-term elderly leaders who quickly died in succession), rapid steps were taken to transform the tottering Soviet economic system in the direction of a market economy once again. Gorbachev and his allies envisioned the introduction of an economy similar to Lenins earlier New Economic Policy through a program of "perestroika", or restructuring, but their reforms along with the institution of free multiparty elections led to a decline in the partys power, and after the Dissolution of the Soviet Union (1990-1991), the banning of the party by later last RSFSR President Boris Yeltsin (1931-2007, in power 1991-1999) and subsequent first President of an evolving democratic and free market economy of the successor Russian Federation. | Which leader was 58 years old when he was brought to power? | {
"spans": [
"Leonid Brezhnev"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2233 | a7ace61f-886a-4728-bb35-43d7ead7d764 | After the founding of the subsequent Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR or Soviet Union) in 1922, Lenin had introduced a mixed economy, commonly referred to as the New Economic Policy, which allowed for capitalist practices to resume under the Communist Party dictation in order to develop the necessary conditions for socialism to become a practical pursuit in the economically undeveloped country. In 1929, as Marshal Joseph Stalin (1878-1953, in power 1929-1953), became the leader of the party, Marxism-Leninism, a fusion of the original ideas of German Empire philosopher and economic theorist Karl Marx (1818-1883), and Lenin, became formalized as the partys guiding ideology and would remain so throughout the rest of its existence. The party pursued state socialism, under which all industries were nationalized and a planned economy was implemented. After recovering from the Second World War (1939-1945), De-Stalinization which 1965 Soviet economic reform and Khrushchev thaw under Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971, in power 1953/1958-1964). By 1980, various factors, including the continuing Cold War (1946-1991), and ongoing nuclear arms race with the United States and other Western Europe powers and unaddressed inefficiencies in the economy, led to Era of Stagnation under Alexei Kosygin (1904-1980, in power 1964), and further with Leonid Brezhnev (1906-1982, in power 1964-1982) and a growing disillusionment. After a younger vigorous Mikhail Gorbachev (b.1931), assumed leadership in 1985, (following two short-term elderly leaders who quickly died in succession), rapid steps were taken to transform the tottering Soviet economic system in the direction of a market economy once again. Gorbachev and his allies envisioned the introduction of an economy similar to Lenins earlier New Economic Policy through a program of "perestroika", or restructuring, but their reforms along with the institution of free multiparty elections led to a decline in the partys power, and after the Dissolution of the Soviet Union (1990-1991), the banning of the party by later last RSFSR President Boris Yeltsin (1931-2007, in power 1991-1999) and subsequent first President of an evolving democratic and free market economy of the successor Russian Federation. | Which leader served for the second longest number of years? | {
"spans": [
"Leonid Brezhnev"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2233 | 2490c499-b9e5-4b36-88ca-622dab9ba7e6 | After the founding of the subsequent Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR or Soviet Union) in 1922, Lenin had introduced a mixed economy, commonly referred to as the New Economic Policy, which allowed for capitalist practices to resume under the Communist Party dictation in order to develop the necessary conditions for socialism to become a practical pursuit in the economically undeveloped country. In 1929, as Marshal Joseph Stalin (1878-1953, in power 1929-1953), became the leader of the party, Marxism-Leninism, a fusion of the original ideas of German Empire philosopher and economic theorist Karl Marx (1818-1883), and Lenin, became formalized as the partys guiding ideology and would remain so throughout the rest of its existence. The party pursued state socialism, under which all industries were nationalized and a planned economy was implemented. After recovering from the Second World War (1939-1945), De-Stalinization which 1965 Soviet economic reform and Khrushchev thaw under Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971, in power 1953/1958-1964). By 1980, various factors, including the continuing Cold War (1946-1991), and ongoing nuclear arms race with the United States and other Western Europe powers and unaddressed inefficiencies in the economy, led to Era of Stagnation under Alexei Kosygin (1904-1980, in power 1964), and further with Leonid Brezhnev (1906-1982, in power 1964-1982) and a growing disillusionment. After a younger vigorous Mikhail Gorbachev (b.1931), assumed leadership in 1985, (following two short-term elderly leaders who quickly died in succession), rapid steps were taken to transform the tottering Soviet economic system in the direction of a market economy once again. Gorbachev and his allies envisioned the introduction of an economy similar to Lenins earlier New Economic Policy through a program of "perestroika", or restructuring, but their reforms along with the institution of free multiparty elections led to a decline in the partys power, and after the Dissolution of the Soviet Union (1990-1991), the banning of the party by later last RSFSR President Boris Yeltsin (1931-2007, in power 1991-1999) and subsequent first President of an evolving democratic and free market economy of the successor Russian Federation. | Who was the leader when Khurshchev died? | {
"spans": [
"Leonid Brezhnev"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2233 | e39568a3-acc2-44cc-afca-4b4245201d33 | After the founding of the subsequent Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR or Soviet Union) in 1922, Lenin had introduced a mixed economy, commonly referred to as the New Economic Policy, which allowed for capitalist practices to resume under the Communist Party dictation in order to develop the necessary conditions for socialism to become a practical pursuit in the economically undeveloped country. In 1929, as Marshal Joseph Stalin (1878-1953, in power 1929-1953), became the leader of the party, Marxism-Leninism, a fusion of the original ideas of German Empire philosopher and economic theorist Karl Marx (1818-1883), and Lenin, became formalized as the partys guiding ideology and would remain so throughout the rest of its existence. The party pursued state socialism, under which all industries were nationalized and a planned economy was implemented. After recovering from the Second World War (1939-1945), De-Stalinization which 1965 Soviet economic reform and Khrushchev thaw under Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971, in power 1953/1958-1964). By 1980, various factors, including the continuing Cold War (1946-1991), and ongoing nuclear arms race with the United States and other Western Europe powers and unaddressed inefficiencies in the economy, led to Era of Stagnation under Alexei Kosygin (1904-1980, in power 1964), and further with Leonid Brezhnev (1906-1982, in power 1964-1982) and a growing disillusionment. After a younger vigorous Mikhail Gorbachev (b.1931), assumed leadership in 1985, (following two short-term elderly leaders who quickly died in succession), rapid steps were taken to transform the tottering Soviet economic system in the direction of a market economy once again. Gorbachev and his allies envisioned the introduction of an economy similar to Lenins earlier New Economic Policy through a program of "perestroika", or restructuring, but their reforms along with the institution of free multiparty elections led to a decline in the partys power, and after the Dissolution of the Soviet Union (1990-1991), the banning of the party by later last RSFSR President Boris Yeltsin (1931-2007, in power 1991-1999) and subsequent first President of an evolving democratic and free market economy of the successor Russian Federation. | Who was in power the year that Boris Yeltsin was born? | {
"spans": [
"Joseph Stalin"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2233 | f08becb7-8f62-4d27-b88d-97dfd018268c | After the founding of the subsequent Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR or Soviet Union) in 1922, Lenin had introduced a mixed economy, commonly referred to as the New Economic Policy, which allowed for capitalist practices to resume under the Communist Party dictation in order to develop the necessary conditions for socialism to become a practical pursuit in the economically undeveloped country. In 1929, as Marshal Joseph Stalin (1878-1953, in power 1929-1953), became the leader of the party, Marxism-Leninism, a fusion of the original ideas of German Empire philosopher and economic theorist Karl Marx (1818-1883), and Lenin, became formalized as the partys guiding ideology and would remain so throughout the rest of its existence. The party pursued state socialism, under which all industries were nationalized and a planned economy was implemented. After recovering from the Second World War (1939-1945), De-Stalinization which 1965 Soviet economic reform and Khrushchev thaw under Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971, in power 1953/1958-1964). By 1980, various factors, including the continuing Cold War (1946-1991), and ongoing nuclear arms race with the United States and other Western Europe powers and unaddressed inefficiencies in the economy, led to Era of Stagnation under Alexei Kosygin (1904-1980, in power 1964), and further with Leonid Brezhnev (1906-1982, in power 1964-1982) and a growing disillusionment. After a younger vigorous Mikhail Gorbachev (b.1931), assumed leadership in 1985, (following two short-term elderly leaders who quickly died in succession), rapid steps were taken to transform the tottering Soviet economic system in the direction of a market economy once again. Gorbachev and his allies envisioned the introduction of an economy similar to Lenins earlier New Economic Policy through a program of "perestroika", or restructuring, but their reforms along with the institution of free multiparty elections led to a decline in the partys power, and after the Dissolution of the Soviet Union (1990-1991), the banning of the party by later last RSFSR President Boris Yeltsin (1931-2007, in power 1991-1999) and subsequent first President of an evolving democratic and free market economy of the successor Russian Federation. | How many years after the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was founded was Stalin made the leader of the party? | {
"spans": [
"7"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_3836 | 0bd423e6-72b7-4c39-ac6e-d33214922d79 | In the restricted regions there are 317,225 wells, qanats and springs that discharge 36,719 million cubic meters water a year, out of which 3,409 million cubic meters is surplus to the aquifer capacity. in 2005, in the country as a whole, there were 130,008 deep wells with a discharge of 31,403 million cubic meter, 33,8041 semi deep wells with a discharge of 13,491 million cubic meters, 34,355 qanats with a discharge of 8,212 million cubic meters, and 55,912 natural springs with a discharge of 21,240 million cubic meters. | How many more semi-deep wells were there than deep wells and qanats? | {
"spans": [
"242388"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_3836 | 4d6886e2-3b6f-4d0c-b1b8-10508d7eac56 | In the restricted regions there are 317,225 wells, qanats and springs that discharge 36,719 million cubic meters water a year, out of which 3,409 million cubic meters is surplus to the aquifer capacity. in 2005, in the country as a whole, there were 130,008 deep wells with a discharge of 31,403 million cubic meter, 33,8041 semi deep wells with a discharge of 13,491 million cubic meters, 34,355 qanats with a discharge of 8,212 million cubic meters, and 55,912 natural springs with a discharge of 21,240 million cubic meters. | How many more deep wells were there than qanats and natural springs? | {
"spans": [
"39741"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_3836 | 0205ce87-d15d-4bfd-b41b-dab69a86c3ee | In the restricted regions there are 317,225 wells, qanats and springs that discharge 36,719 million cubic meters water a year, out of which 3,409 million cubic meters is surplus to the aquifer capacity. in 2005, in the country as a whole, there were 130,008 deep wells with a discharge of 31,403 million cubic meter, 33,8041 semi deep wells with a discharge of 13,491 million cubic meters, 34,355 qanats with a discharge of 8,212 million cubic meters, and 55,912 natural springs with a discharge of 21,240 million cubic meters. | How many million cubic meters is the aquifer capacity? | {
"spans": [
"33310"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_3836 | 48401b38-0152-4e16-b016-4322e590332c | In the restricted regions there are 317,225 wells, qanats and springs that discharge 36,719 million cubic meters water a year, out of which 3,409 million cubic meters is surplus to the aquifer capacity. in 2005, in the country as a whole, there were 130,008 deep wells with a discharge of 31,403 million cubic meter, 33,8041 semi deep wells with a discharge of 13,491 million cubic meters, 34,355 qanats with a discharge of 8,212 million cubic meters, and 55,912 natural springs with a discharge of 21,240 million cubic meters. | How many wells, qanats and springs were there in the whole country in 2005? | {
"spans": [
"558316"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_3836 | 4168ad38-7281-4a2b-8a37-dbdd43668d49 | In the restricted regions there are 317,225 wells, qanats and springs that discharge 36,719 million cubic meters water a year, out of which 3,409 million cubic meters is surplus to the aquifer capacity. in 2005, in the country as a whole, there were 130,008 deep wells with a discharge of 31,403 million cubic meter, 33,8041 semi deep wells with a discharge of 13,491 million cubic meters, 34,355 qanats with a discharge of 8,212 million cubic meters, and 55,912 natural springs with a discharge of 21,240 million cubic meters. | Which type of natural water supply had the smallest cumulative discharge in 2005? | {
"spans": [
"qanats"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_3836 | d8f0aa7a-e3a0-4d54-8ae9-bc37dede9f2f | In the restricted regions there are 317,225 wells, qanats and springs that discharge 36,719 million cubic meters water a year, out of which 3,409 million cubic meters is surplus to the aquifer capacity. in 2005, in the country as a whole, there were 130,008 deep wells with a discharge of 31,403 million cubic meter, 33,8041 semi deep wells with a discharge of 13,491 million cubic meters, 34,355 qanats with a discharge of 8,212 million cubic meters, and 55,912 natural springs with a discharge of 21,240 million cubic meters. | Which natural water sources had cumulative discharges of over 20,000 million cubic meters in 2005? | {
"spans": [
"deep wells",
"natural springs"
],
"types": [
"span",
"span"
]
} |
history_4131 | 67173536-8f0e-40be-8fae-71119ddbd734 | In the same year, for the City of Los Angeles, of the 1,721,778 workers aged 16 or older, 63.3% commuted to work driving alone, 11.5% commuted by driving in a carpool, 11.0% commuted by public transportation, and 3.4% walked. The percentage of population using public transport in Los Angeles is lower than other large U.S. cities such as Chicago and New York City, but similar to or higher than other western U.S. cities such as Portland, Oregon and Denver, CO. 63.8% of public transportation commuters in the City of Los Angeles in 2006 were non-white, 75.1% were Hispanic and 73.9% were foreign born. 79.4% of public transportation commuters earned less than $25,000 and 37.6% had no vehicle available to them for their commute. | What type of commute was used by the majority of the population? | {
"spans": [
"driving alone"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_4131 | 8d6115de-22d5-4708-985f-c8dbcc98ba68 | In the same year, for the City of Los Angeles, of the 1,721,778 workers aged 16 or older, 63.3% commuted to work driving alone, 11.5% commuted by driving in a carpool, 11.0% commuted by public transportation, and 3.4% walked. The percentage of population using public transport in Los Angeles is lower than other large U.S. cities such as Chicago and New York City, but similar to or higher than other western U.S. cities such as Portland, Oregon and Denver, CO. 63.8% of public transportation commuters in the City of Los Angeles in 2006 were non-white, 75.1% were Hispanic and 73.9% were foreign born. 79.4% of public transportation commuters earned less than $25,000 and 37.6% had no vehicle available to them for their commute. | What type of commute was used the least? | {
"spans": [
"walk"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_4131 | efc7980b-10ab-4204-9b96-c1e6e58dfe77 | In the same year, for the City of Los Angeles, of the 1,721,778 workers aged 16 or older, 63.3% commuted to work driving alone, 11.5% commuted by driving in a carpool, 11.0% commuted by public transportation, and 3.4% walked. The percentage of population using public transport in Los Angeles is lower than other large U.S. cities such as Chicago and New York City, but similar to or higher than other western U.S. cities such as Portland, Oregon and Denver, CO. 63.8% of public transportation commuters in the City of Los Angeles in 2006 were non-white, 75.1% were Hispanic and 73.9% were foreign born. 79.4% of public transportation commuters earned less than $25,000 and 37.6% had no vehicle available to them for their commute. | What race used public transportation the most? | {
"spans": [
"Hispanic"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_4131 | 1d1b55b3-d5f9-4dc5-bcbe-84e687d47523 | In the same year, for the City of Los Angeles, of the 1,721,778 workers aged 16 or older, 63.3% commuted to work driving alone, 11.5% commuted by driving in a carpool, 11.0% commuted by public transportation, and 3.4% walked. The percentage of population using public transport in Los Angeles is lower than other large U.S. cities such as Chicago and New York City, but similar to or higher than other western U.S. cities such as Portland, Oregon and Denver, CO. 63.8% of public transportation commuters in the City of Los Angeles in 2006 were non-white, 75.1% were Hispanic and 73.9% were foreign born. 79.4% of public transportation commuters earned less than $25,000 and 37.6% had no vehicle available to them for their commute. | How many percent of users of public transportation had another vehicle available to them? | {
"spans": [
"62.4"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2634 | 5130d17f-ac66-4765-91a1-842f69ac3714 | The ratings increased in 2010, thanks to the "Who Killed Archie?" storyline and second wedding of Ricky Butcher and Bianca Jackson, and the shows first EastEnders Live on 19 February 2010. The live-episode averaged 15.6 million viewers, peaking at 16.6 million in the final five minutes of broadcast. In January 2010, the average audience was higher than that of Coronation Street for the first time in three years. During the 30th anniversary week in which there were live elements and the climax of the Who Killed Lucy Beale? storyline, 10.84 million viewers tuned in for the 30th anniversary episode itself in an hour long special on 19 February 2015 (peaking with 11.9 million). Later on in the same evening, a special flashback episode averaged 10.3 million viewers, and peaked with 11.2 million. The following day, the anniversary week was rounded off with another fully live episode (the second after 2010) with 9.97 million viewers watching the aftermath of the reveal, the Beale family finding out the truth of Lucys killer and deciding to keep it a secret. | Whose second wedding was it? | {
"spans": [
"Ricky Butcher",
"Bianca Jackson"
],
"types": [
"span",
"span"
]
} |
history_2634 | fc155463-732e-4cf1-b222-e783bf08bfe8 | The ratings increased in 2010, thanks to the "Who Killed Archie?" storyline and second wedding of Ricky Butcher and Bianca Jackson, and the shows first EastEnders Live on 19 February 2010. The live-episode averaged 15.6 million viewers, peaking at 16.6 million in the final five minutes of broadcast. In January 2010, the average audience was higher than that of Coronation Street for the first time in three years. During the 30th anniversary week in which there were live elements and the climax of the Who Killed Lucy Beale? storyline, 10.84 million viewers tuned in for the 30th anniversary episode itself in an hour long special on 19 February 2015 (peaking with 11.9 million). Later on in the same evening, a special flashback episode averaged 10.3 million viewers, and peaked with 11.2 million. The following day, the anniversary week was rounded off with another fully live episode (the second after 2010) with 9.97 million viewers watching the aftermath of the reveal, the Beale family finding out the truth of Lucys killer and deciding to keep it a secret. | How many more millions of people watched the final five minutes of the broadcast compared to the average viewers throughout the show? | {
"spans": [
"1"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2634 | 214c3a45-b5d2-48d2-9dd9-f6b3d0908863 | The ratings increased in 2010, thanks to the "Who Killed Archie?" storyline and second wedding of Ricky Butcher and Bianca Jackson, and the shows first EastEnders Live on 19 February 2010. The live-episode averaged 15.6 million viewers, peaking at 16.6 million in the final five minutes of broadcast. In January 2010, the average audience was higher than that of Coronation Street for the first time in three years. During the 30th anniversary week in which there were live elements and the climax of the Who Killed Lucy Beale? storyline, 10.84 million viewers tuned in for the 30th anniversary episode itself in an hour long special on 19 February 2015 (peaking with 11.9 million). Later on in the same evening, a special flashback episode averaged 10.3 million viewers, and peaked with 11.2 million. The following day, the anniversary week was rounded off with another fully live episode (the second after 2010) with 9.97 million viewers watching the aftermath of the reveal, the Beale family finding out the truth of Lucys killer and deciding to keep it a secret. | Which show had less viewers in January of 2010, EastEnders or Coronation Street? | {
"spans": [
"Coronation Street"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2634 | e7e8a45d-20da-4648-9bb1-00f3465630ac | The ratings increased in 2010, thanks to the "Who Killed Archie?" storyline and second wedding of Ricky Butcher and Bianca Jackson, and the shows first EastEnders Live on 19 February 2010. The live-episode averaged 15.6 million viewers, peaking at 16.6 million in the final five minutes of broadcast. In January 2010, the average audience was higher than that of Coronation Street for the first time in three years. During the 30th anniversary week in which there were live elements and the climax of the Who Killed Lucy Beale? storyline, 10.84 million viewers tuned in for the 30th anniversary episode itself in an hour long special on 19 February 2015 (peaking with 11.9 million). Later on in the same evening, a special flashback episode averaged 10.3 million viewers, and peaked with 11.2 million. The following day, the anniversary week was rounded off with another fully live episode (the second after 2010) with 9.97 million viewers watching the aftermath of the reveal, the Beale family finding out the truth of Lucys killer and deciding to keep it a secret. | How many millions of viewers difference was there between the average watchers and the peaked amount of watchers? | {
"spans": [
".9"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2634 | c1c2c251-82a9-4117-a9a2-214a6f968f50 | The ratings increased in 2010, thanks to the "Who Killed Archie?" storyline and second wedding of Ricky Butcher and Bianca Jackson, and the shows first EastEnders Live on 19 February 2010. The live-episode averaged 15.6 million viewers, peaking at 16.6 million in the final five minutes of broadcast. In January 2010, the average audience was higher than that of Coronation Street for the first time in three years. During the 30th anniversary week in which there were live elements and the climax of the Who Killed Lucy Beale? storyline, 10.84 million viewers tuned in for the 30th anniversary episode itself in an hour long special on 19 February 2015 (peaking with 11.9 million). Later on in the same evening, a special flashback episode averaged 10.3 million viewers, and peaked with 11.2 million. The following day, the anniversary week was rounded off with another fully live episode (the second after 2010) with 9.97 million viewers watching the aftermath of the reveal, the Beale family finding out the truth of Lucys killer and deciding to keep it a secret. | Which were there more viewers for, the first EastEnders Live or the 30th anniversary episode? | {
"spans": [
"first EastEnders Live"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2634 | cf68a042-27db-4edc-95e5-47370978e86f | The ratings increased in 2010, thanks to the "Who Killed Archie?" storyline and second wedding of Ricky Butcher and Bianca Jackson, and the shows first EastEnders Live on 19 February 2010. The live-episode averaged 15.6 million viewers, peaking at 16.6 million in the final five minutes of broadcast. In January 2010, the average audience was higher than that of Coronation Street for the first time in three years. During the 30th anniversary week in which there were live elements and the climax of the Who Killed Lucy Beale? storyline, 10.84 million viewers tuned in for the 30th anniversary episode itself in an hour long special on 19 February 2015 (peaking with 11.9 million). Later on in the same evening, a special flashback episode averaged 10.3 million viewers, and peaked with 11.2 million. The following day, the anniversary week was rounded off with another fully live episode (the second after 2010) with 9.97 million viewers watching the aftermath of the reveal, the Beale family finding out the truth of Lucys killer and deciding to keep it a secret. | How many years after the first EastEnders Live was the shows 30th anniversary? | {
"spans": [
"5"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2634 | 9c033535-a9f4-4675-b03a-33fa7cc27e99 | The ratings increased in 2010, thanks to the "Who Killed Archie?" storyline and second wedding of Ricky Butcher and Bianca Jackson, and the shows first EastEnders Live on 19 February 2010. The live-episode averaged 15.6 million viewers, peaking at 16.6 million in the final five minutes of broadcast. In January 2010, the average audience was higher than that of Coronation Street for the first time in three years. During the 30th anniversary week in which there were live elements and the climax of the Who Killed Lucy Beale? storyline, 10.84 million viewers tuned in for the 30th anniversary episode itself in an hour long special on 19 February 2015 (peaking with 11.9 million). Later on in the same evening, a special flashback episode averaged 10.3 million viewers, and peaked with 11.2 million. The following day, the anniversary week was rounded off with another fully live episode (the second after 2010) with 9.97 million viewers watching the aftermath of the reveal, the Beale family finding out the truth of Lucys killer and deciding to keep it a secret. | Which were there more viewers for, the 30th anniversary episode or the special flashback episode? | {
"spans": [
"30th anniversary episode"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2634 | 178135c7-e551-4b30-a8ed-ae0aa08223f5 | The ratings increased in 2010, thanks to the "Who Killed Archie?" storyline and second wedding of Ricky Butcher and Bianca Jackson, and the shows first EastEnders Live on 19 February 2010. The live-episode averaged 15.6 million viewers, peaking at 16.6 million in the final five minutes of broadcast. In January 2010, the average audience was higher than that of Coronation Street for the first time in three years. During the 30th anniversary week in which there were live elements and the climax of the Who Killed Lucy Beale? storyline, 10.84 million viewers tuned in for the 30th anniversary episode itself in an hour long special on 19 February 2015 (peaking with 11.9 million). Later on in the same evening, a special flashback episode averaged 10.3 million viewers, and peaked with 11.2 million. The following day, the anniversary week was rounded off with another fully live episode (the second after 2010) with 9.97 million viewers watching the aftermath of the reveal, the Beale family finding out the truth of Lucys killer and deciding to keep it a secret. | Which two characters were killed between 2010 and 2015? | {
"spans": [
"Archie",
"Lucy"
],
"types": [
"span",
"span"
]
} |
history_2634 | d3005d22-670a-427d-b448-8cf0995070ed | The ratings increased in 2010, thanks to the "Who Killed Archie?" storyline and second wedding of Ricky Butcher and Bianca Jackson, and the shows first EastEnders Live on 19 February 2010. The live-episode averaged 15.6 million viewers, peaking at 16.6 million in the final five minutes of broadcast. In January 2010, the average audience was higher than that of Coronation Street for the first time in three years. During the 30th anniversary week in which there were live elements and the climax of the Who Killed Lucy Beale? storyline, 10.84 million viewers tuned in for the 30th anniversary episode itself in an hour long special on 19 February 2015 (peaking with 11.9 million). Later on in the same evening, a special flashback episode averaged 10.3 million viewers, and peaked with 11.2 million. The following day, the anniversary week was rounded off with another fully live episode (the second after 2010) with 9.97 million viewers watching the aftermath of the reveal, the Beale family finding out the truth of Lucys killer and deciding to keep it a secret. | What day was the second live episode aired? | {
"spans": [
"20 February 2015"
],
"types": [
"date"
]
} |
history_2634 | 99e7d7ae-67d4-4b6d-a4e1-0fd340789c25 | The ratings increased in 2010, thanks to the "Who Killed Archie?" storyline and second wedding of Ricky Butcher and Bianca Jackson, and the shows first EastEnders Live on 19 February 2010. The live-episode averaged 15.6 million viewers, peaking at 16.6 million in the final five minutes of broadcast. In January 2010, the average audience was higher than that of Coronation Street for the first time in three years. During the 30th anniversary week in which there were live elements and the climax of the Who Killed Lucy Beale? storyline, 10.84 million viewers tuned in for the 30th anniversary episode itself in an hour long special on 19 February 2015 (peaking with 11.9 million). Later on in the same evening, a special flashback episode averaged 10.3 million viewers, and peaked with 11.2 million. The following day, the anniversary week was rounded off with another fully live episode (the second after 2010) with 9.97 million viewers watching the aftermath of the reveal, the Beale family finding out the truth of Lucys killer and deciding to keep it a secret. | How many episodes aired during anniversary week? | {
"spans": [
"3"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2634 | 39db2d25-56ad-4e84-a054-eab16fc7311c | The ratings increased in 2010, thanks to the "Who Killed Archie?" storyline and second wedding of Ricky Butcher and Bianca Jackson, and the shows first EastEnders Live on 19 February 2010. The live-episode averaged 15.6 million viewers, peaking at 16.6 million in the final five minutes of broadcast. In January 2010, the average audience was higher than that of Coronation Street for the first time in three years. During the 30th anniversary week in which there were live elements and the climax of the Who Killed Lucy Beale? storyline, 10.84 million viewers tuned in for the 30th anniversary episode itself in an hour long special on 19 February 2015 (peaking with 11.9 million). Later on in the same evening, a special flashback episode averaged 10.3 million viewers, and peaked with 11.2 million. The following day, the anniversary week was rounded off with another fully live episode (the second after 2010) with 9.97 million viewers watching the aftermath of the reveal, the Beale family finding out the truth of Lucys killer and deciding to keep it a secret. | How many more millions watched the show "Who Killed Archie?" in the final last minutes than in a average show? | {
"spans": [
"1"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2634 | 97b7838d-e497-4f9b-b60e-96f4c949c50c | The ratings increased in 2010, thanks to the "Who Killed Archie?" storyline and second wedding of Ricky Butcher and Bianca Jackson, and the shows first EastEnders Live on 19 February 2010. The live-episode averaged 15.6 million viewers, peaking at 16.6 million in the final five minutes of broadcast. In January 2010, the average audience was higher than that of Coronation Street for the first time in three years. During the 30th anniversary week in which there were live elements and the climax of the Who Killed Lucy Beale? storyline, 10.84 million viewers tuned in for the 30th anniversary episode itself in an hour long special on 19 February 2015 (peaking with 11.9 million). Later on in the same evening, a special flashback episode averaged 10.3 million viewers, and peaked with 11.2 million. The following day, the anniversary week was rounded off with another fully live episode (the second after 2010) with 9.97 million viewers watching the aftermath of the reveal, the Beale family finding out the truth of Lucys killer and deciding to keep it a secret. | How many more millions did the show peak on "Who Killed Lucy Beale" in 2015? | {
"spans": [
"1.06"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2634 | e3fa1fe6-4b33-496b-b3b2-372eb323782f | The ratings increased in 2010, thanks to the "Who Killed Archie?" storyline and second wedding of Ricky Butcher and Bianca Jackson, and the shows first EastEnders Live on 19 February 2010. The live-episode averaged 15.6 million viewers, peaking at 16.6 million in the final five minutes of broadcast. In January 2010, the average audience was higher than that of Coronation Street for the first time in three years. During the 30th anniversary week in which there were live elements and the climax of the Who Killed Lucy Beale? storyline, 10.84 million viewers tuned in for the 30th anniversary episode itself in an hour long special on 19 February 2015 (peaking with 11.9 million). Later on in the same evening, a special flashback episode averaged 10.3 million viewers, and peaked with 11.2 million. The following day, the anniversary week was rounded off with another fully live episode (the second after 2010) with 9.97 million viewers watching the aftermath of the reveal, the Beale family finding out the truth of Lucys killer and deciding to keep it a secret. | How many more millions of people watched Lucy Beale flashback during the peak than on average? | {
"spans": [
"0.9"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2400 | 9903e7de-8b62-4e2b-b455-3aa97846adca | As a result of these factors, many investors were eager to invest, at any valuation, in any dot-com company, especially if it had one of the Internet-related prefixes or a ".com" suffix in its name. Venture capital was easy to raise. Investment banks, which profited significantly from initial public offerings (IPO), fueled speculation and encouraged investment in technology. A combination of rapidly increasing stock prices in the quaternary sector of the economy and confidence that the companies would turn future profits created an environment in which many investors were willing to overlook traditional metrics, such as the price–earnings ratio, and base confidence on technological advancements, leading to a stock market bubble. Between 1995 and 2000, the Nasdaq Composite stock market index rose 400%. It reached a price–earnings ratio of 200, dwarfing the peak price–earnings ratio of 80 for the Japanese Nikkei 225 during the Japanese asset price bubble of 1991. In 1999, shares of Qualcomm rose in value by 2,619%, 12 other large-cap stocks each rose over 1,000% value, and 7 additional large-cap stocks each rose over 900% in value. Even though the Nasdaq Composite rose 85.6% and the S&P 500 Index rose 19.5% in 1999, more stocks fell in value than rose in value as investors sold stocks in slower growing companies to invest in Internet stocks. | What rose higher in 1999, the composite or the S&P 500 index? | {
"spans": [
"composite"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2400 | 943fd47d-4850-47e5-91de-9d8e05b22305 | As a result of these factors, many investors were eager to invest, at any valuation, in any dot-com company, especially if it had one of the Internet-related prefixes or a ".com" suffix in its name. Venture capital was easy to raise. Investment banks, which profited significantly from initial public offerings (IPO), fueled speculation and encouraged investment in technology. A combination of rapidly increasing stock prices in the quaternary sector of the economy and confidence that the companies would turn future profits created an environment in which many investors were willing to overlook traditional metrics, such as the price–earnings ratio, and base confidence on technological advancements, leading to a stock market bubble. Between 1995 and 2000, the Nasdaq Composite stock market index rose 400%. It reached a price–earnings ratio of 200, dwarfing the peak price–earnings ratio of 80 for the Japanese Nikkei 225 during the Japanese asset price bubble of 1991. In 1999, shares of Qualcomm rose in value by 2,619%, 12 other large-cap stocks each rose over 1,000% value, and 7 additional large-cap stocks each rose over 900% in value. Even though the Nasdaq Composite rose 85.6% and the S&P 500 Index rose 19.5% in 1999, more stocks fell in value than rose in value as investors sold stocks in slower growing companies to invest in Internet stocks. | How many more percentage did the Composite rise than the S&P? | {
"spans": [
"66.1"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2400 | 3c3aaf5d-d6ac-4c7d-bfeb-e8c3f7c3053d | As a result of these factors, many investors were eager to invest, at any valuation, in any dot-com company, especially if it had one of the Internet-related prefixes or a ".com" suffix in its name. Venture capital was easy to raise. Investment banks, which profited significantly from initial public offerings (IPO), fueled speculation and encouraged investment in technology. A combination of rapidly increasing stock prices in the quaternary sector of the economy and confidence that the companies would turn future profits created an environment in which many investors were willing to overlook traditional metrics, such as the price–earnings ratio, and base confidence on technological advancements, leading to a stock market bubble. Between 1995 and 2000, the Nasdaq Composite stock market index rose 400%. It reached a price–earnings ratio of 200, dwarfing the peak price–earnings ratio of 80 for the Japanese Nikkei 225 during the Japanese asset price bubble of 1991. In 1999, shares of Qualcomm rose in value by 2,619%, 12 other large-cap stocks each rose over 1,000% value, and 7 additional large-cap stocks each rose over 900% in value. Even though the Nasdaq Composite rose 85.6% and the S&P 500 Index rose 19.5% in 1999, more stocks fell in value than rose in value as investors sold stocks in slower growing companies to invest in Internet stocks. | Which shares rose the least: Qualcomm or 12 other large-cap stocks? | {
"spans": [
"large-cap stocks"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2400 | 96b412e7-cd26-4c11-9087-ce741dfe76b7 | As a result of these factors, many investors were eager to invest, at any valuation, in any dot-com company, especially if it had one of the Internet-related prefixes or a ".com" suffix in its name. Venture capital was easy to raise. Investment banks, which profited significantly from initial public offerings (IPO), fueled speculation and encouraged investment in technology. A combination of rapidly increasing stock prices in the quaternary sector of the economy and confidence that the companies would turn future profits created an environment in which many investors were willing to overlook traditional metrics, such as the price–earnings ratio, and base confidence on technological advancements, leading to a stock market bubble. Between 1995 and 2000, the Nasdaq Composite stock market index rose 400%. It reached a price–earnings ratio of 200, dwarfing the peak price–earnings ratio of 80 for the Japanese Nikkei 225 during the Japanese asset price bubble of 1991. In 1999, shares of Qualcomm rose in value by 2,619%, 12 other large-cap stocks each rose over 1,000% value, and 7 additional large-cap stocks each rose over 900% in value. Even though the Nasdaq Composite rose 85.6% and the S&P 500 Index rose 19.5% in 1999, more stocks fell in value than rose in value as investors sold stocks in slower growing companies to invest in Internet stocks. | How many more percentage did Qualcomm rise than Nasdaq? | {
"spans": [
"2533.4"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2863 | 36c4d442-1680-47b3-ac1e-08c5e7fd02ea | The Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that, for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database. | How many percentage points represents the chance of neither positive or negative effect from conventional treatments? | {
"spans": [
"28.1"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2863 | 4b94be7b-fdef-431e-898d-a0ed52576c95 | The Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that, for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database. | How many percent of studies for CAM did not show a positive effect? | {
"spans": [
"61.6"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2863 | 49da9d98-61c5-4bd9-a4ec-d4897c01d591 | The Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that, for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database. | What databases were used for the reviews? | {
"spans": [
"2004 Cochrane database",
"1998 Cochrane database"
],
"types": [
"span",
"span"
]
} |
history_2863 | 6ba2b128-3685-476d-b0b3-77b9557ac732 | The Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that, for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database. | How many percent of readers did not agree? | {
"spans": [
"17"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2863 | 03c83abd-9827-4eaa-a6bc-61741a588e15 | The Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that, for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database. | How many percent of readers did not disagree? | {
"spans": [
"83"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2863 | 909ae840-eab4-432c-9d1b-a59b73979747 | The Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that, for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database. | How many percent of readers did not conclude positive effect? | {
"spans": [
"61.6"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2863 | 3b81e167-691e-486d-9a96-cc9be776bf57 | The Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that, for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database. | How many percent of readers did not conclude possibly positive effect? | {
"spans": [
"87.6"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2863 | 1a4370dd-bfc3-4583-ad93-200a3e04b7f3 | The Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that, for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database. | How many percent of readers did not conclude no effect? | {
"spans": [
"95.2"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2863 | 48dd44e2-8f6b-4228-bf01-ffe05ffba613 | The Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that, for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database. | How many percent of readers did not conclude harmful effect? | {
"spans": [
"99.3"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2863 | a54f61b9-809b-4ed7-9e3c-ec4d4df9fcf2 | The Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that, for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database. | How many percent of readers did not conclude insufficient evidence? | {
"spans": [
"43.4"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2863 | 5757da3a-aa7b-4de7-ae75-d08b4752175a | The Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that, for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database. | How many percent of people did not conclude positive effect, when assessing conventional treatments? | {
"spans": [
"58.7"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2863 | e0be0c63-3785-4b36-b08e-cf9f48dbb33d | The Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that, for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database. | How many percent of people did not conclude no effect, when assessing conventional treatments? | {
"spans": [
"80"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2863 | 360f6802-9fbf-4ae8-b9d2-b7b60e1e14e7 | The Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that, for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database. | Which review used the 1998 Cochrane database, the CAM review or the conventional review? | {
"spans": [
"conventional review"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_3596 | 7919a072-29cd-4b00-a75c-2a56b7621ceb | Early in the 1981-82 Los Angeles Lakers season, Johnson complained to the media about head coach Paul Westhead and demanded a trade. Westhead was fired shortly after Johnsons criticisms, and although Lakers owner Jerry Buss stated that Johnsons comments did not factor into the decision, Johnson was vilified by the national media and booed both on the road and at home. Buss promoted assistant coach Pat Riley to "co-head coach" with Jerry West (although West considered himself Rileys assistant) on November 19 and the team won 17 of its next 20 games. Nicknamed "Showtime (basketball)" due to the teams new Johnson-led fast break-offense, the Lakers won the Pacific Division title and swept both the 1981-82 Phoenix Suns season and 1981-82 San Antonio Spurs season in the 1982 NBA Playoffs. Los Angeles stretched its postseason winning streak to nine games by taking the first contest of the 1982 NBA Finals from the 1981-82 Philadelphia 76ers season. The team won the Finals 4-2 to finish a 12-2 playoff run. On draft night in 1982 NBA draft, the Lakers had the first overall pick (the result of a trade with Cleveland midway through the 1979-80 season, when the Lakers had sent Don Ford and a 1980 first-round pick to the Cavaliers for Butch Lee and their 1982 selection) and selected James Worthy from North Carolina Tar Heels mens basketball. The 1982-83 Los Angeles Lakers season won the Pacific Division at 58-24, but Worthy suffered a leg injury in the last week of the season and missed the rest of the season. Nevertheless, they advanced to play 1982-83 Philadelphia 76ers season in the 1983 NBA Finals after defeating 1982-83 Portland Trail Blazers season and 1982-83 San Antonio Spurs season. The Sixers, however, won the series and the championship in four games. After the season West replaced Sharman as the teams GM. | Which teams did the Lakers beat in the 1981-82 postseason? | {
"spans": [
"Phoenix Suns",
"San Antonio Spurs",
"Philadelphia 76ers"
],
"types": [
"span",
"span",
"span"
]
} |
history_3596 | 5f625b65-595a-4657-959c-570d435adce8 | Early in the 1981-82 Los Angeles Lakers season, Johnson complained to the media about head coach Paul Westhead and demanded a trade. Westhead was fired shortly after Johnsons criticisms, and although Lakers owner Jerry Buss stated that Johnsons comments did not factor into the decision, Johnson was vilified by the national media and booed both on the road and at home. Buss promoted assistant coach Pat Riley to "co-head coach" with Jerry West (although West considered himself Rileys assistant) on November 19 and the team won 17 of its next 20 games. Nicknamed "Showtime (basketball)" due to the teams new Johnson-led fast break-offense, the Lakers won the Pacific Division title and swept both the 1981-82 Phoenix Suns season and 1981-82 San Antonio Spurs season in the 1982 NBA Playoffs. Los Angeles stretched its postseason winning streak to nine games by taking the first contest of the 1982 NBA Finals from the 1981-82 Philadelphia 76ers season. The team won the Finals 4-2 to finish a 12-2 playoff run. On draft night in 1982 NBA draft, the Lakers had the first overall pick (the result of a trade with Cleveland midway through the 1979-80 season, when the Lakers had sent Don Ford and a 1980 first-round pick to the Cavaliers for Butch Lee and their 1982 selection) and selected James Worthy from North Carolina Tar Heels mens basketball. The 1982-83 Los Angeles Lakers season won the Pacific Division at 58-24, but Worthy suffered a leg injury in the last week of the season and missed the rest of the season. Nevertheless, they advanced to play 1982-83 Philadelphia 76ers season in the 1983 NBA Finals after defeating 1982-83 Portland Trail Blazers season and 1982-83 San Antonio Spurs season. The Sixers, however, won the series and the championship in four games. After the season West replaced Sharman as the teams GM. | Which teams did the Lakers beat in the 1982-83 postseason? | {
"spans": [
"Portland Trail Blazers",
"San Antonio Spurs"
],
"types": [
"span",
"span"
]
} |
history_3596 | 4e82e586-10a3-4d91-8a8a-2cd84be137ee | Early in the 1981-82 Los Angeles Lakers season, Johnson complained to the media about head coach Paul Westhead and demanded a trade. Westhead was fired shortly after Johnsons criticisms, and although Lakers owner Jerry Buss stated that Johnsons comments did not factor into the decision, Johnson was vilified by the national media and booed both on the road and at home. Buss promoted assistant coach Pat Riley to "co-head coach" with Jerry West (although West considered himself Rileys assistant) on November 19 and the team won 17 of its next 20 games. Nicknamed "Showtime (basketball)" due to the teams new Johnson-led fast break-offense, the Lakers won the Pacific Division title and swept both the 1981-82 Phoenix Suns season and 1981-82 San Antonio Spurs season in the 1982 NBA Playoffs. Los Angeles stretched its postseason winning streak to nine games by taking the first contest of the 1982 NBA Finals from the 1981-82 Philadelphia 76ers season. The team won the Finals 4-2 to finish a 12-2 playoff run. On draft night in 1982 NBA draft, the Lakers had the first overall pick (the result of a trade with Cleveland midway through the 1979-80 season, when the Lakers had sent Don Ford and a 1980 first-round pick to the Cavaliers for Butch Lee and their 1982 selection) and selected James Worthy from North Carolina Tar Heels mens basketball. The 1982-83 Los Angeles Lakers season won the Pacific Division at 58-24, but Worthy suffered a leg injury in the last week of the season and missed the rest of the season. Nevertheless, they advanced to play 1982-83 Philadelphia 76ers season in the 1983 NBA Finals after defeating 1982-83 Portland Trail Blazers season and 1982-83 San Antonio Spurs season. The Sixers, however, won the series and the championship in four games. After the season West replaced Sharman as the teams GM. | Which team did the Lakers play in both the 1981-82 and the 1982-83 postseasons? | {
"spans": [
"San Antonio Spurs"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_3596 | 05629025-42e3-4419-a0ea-8d7326bc1fff | Early in the 1981-82 Los Angeles Lakers season, Johnson complained to the media about head coach Paul Westhead and demanded a trade. Westhead was fired shortly after Johnsons criticisms, and although Lakers owner Jerry Buss stated that Johnsons comments did not factor into the decision, Johnson was vilified by the national media and booed both on the road and at home. Buss promoted assistant coach Pat Riley to "co-head coach" with Jerry West (although West considered himself Rileys assistant) on November 19 and the team won 17 of its next 20 games. Nicknamed "Showtime (basketball)" due to the teams new Johnson-led fast break-offense, the Lakers won the Pacific Division title and swept both the 1981-82 Phoenix Suns season and 1981-82 San Antonio Spurs season in the 1982 NBA Playoffs. Los Angeles stretched its postseason winning streak to nine games by taking the first contest of the 1982 NBA Finals from the 1981-82 Philadelphia 76ers season. The team won the Finals 4-2 to finish a 12-2 playoff run. On draft night in 1982 NBA draft, the Lakers had the first overall pick (the result of a trade with Cleveland midway through the 1979-80 season, when the Lakers had sent Don Ford and a 1980 first-round pick to the Cavaliers for Butch Lee and their 1982 selection) and selected James Worthy from North Carolina Tar Heels mens basketball. The 1982-83 Los Angeles Lakers season won the Pacific Division at 58-24, but Worthy suffered a leg injury in the last week of the season and missed the rest of the season. Nevertheless, they advanced to play 1982-83 Philadelphia 76ers season in the 1983 NBA Finals after defeating 1982-83 Portland Trail Blazers season and 1982-83 San Antonio Spurs season. The Sixers, however, won the series and the championship in four games. After the season West replaced Sharman as the teams GM. | Who was coach of the Lakers first, Paul Westhead or Pat Riley? | {
"spans": [
"Paul Westhead"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_3596 | 7f11a3b8-4120-4874-adbe-2436d55c59be | Early in the 1981-82 Los Angeles Lakers season, Johnson complained to the media about head coach Paul Westhead and demanded a trade. Westhead was fired shortly after Johnsons criticisms, and although Lakers owner Jerry Buss stated that Johnsons comments did not factor into the decision, Johnson was vilified by the national media and booed both on the road and at home. Buss promoted assistant coach Pat Riley to "co-head coach" with Jerry West (although West considered himself Rileys assistant) on November 19 and the team won 17 of its next 20 games. Nicknamed "Showtime (basketball)" due to the teams new Johnson-led fast break-offense, the Lakers won the Pacific Division title and swept both the 1981-82 Phoenix Suns season and 1981-82 San Antonio Spurs season in the 1982 NBA Playoffs. Los Angeles stretched its postseason winning streak to nine games by taking the first contest of the 1982 NBA Finals from the 1981-82 Philadelphia 76ers season. The team won the Finals 4-2 to finish a 12-2 playoff run. On draft night in 1982 NBA draft, the Lakers had the first overall pick (the result of a trade with Cleveland midway through the 1979-80 season, when the Lakers had sent Don Ford and a 1980 first-round pick to the Cavaliers for Butch Lee and their 1982 selection) and selected James Worthy from North Carolina Tar Heels mens basketball. The 1982-83 Los Angeles Lakers season won the Pacific Division at 58-24, but Worthy suffered a leg injury in the last week of the season and missed the rest of the season. Nevertheless, they advanced to play 1982-83 Philadelphia 76ers season in the 1983 NBA Finals after defeating 1982-83 Portland Trail Blazers season and 1982-83 San Antonio Spurs season. The Sixers, however, won the series and the championship in four games. After the season West replaced Sharman as the teams GM. | Who were the co-head coaches of the Lakers after Westhead was fired? | {
"spans": [
"Pat Riley",
"Jerry West"
],
"types": [
"span",
"span"
]
} |
history_3596 | b91f8020-0181-439c-80ad-bef3ee7acf39 | Early in the 1981-82 Los Angeles Lakers season, Johnson complained to the media about head coach Paul Westhead and demanded a trade. Westhead was fired shortly after Johnsons criticisms, and although Lakers owner Jerry Buss stated that Johnsons comments did not factor into the decision, Johnson was vilified by the national media and booed both on the road and at home. Buss promoted assistant coach Pat Riley to "co-head coach" with Jerry West (although West considered himself Rileys assistant) on November 19 and the team won 17 of its next 20 games. Nicknamed "Showtime (basketball)" due to the teams new Johnson-led fast break-offense, the Lakers won the Pacific Division title and swept both the 1981-82 Phoenix Suns season and 1981-82 San Antonio Spurs season in the 1982 NBA Playoffs. Los Angeles stretched its postseason winning streak to nine games by taking the first contest of the 1982 NBA Finals from the 1981-82 Philadelphia 76ers season. The team won the Finals 4-2 to finish a 12-2 playoff run. On draft night in 1982 NBA draft, the Lakers had the first overall pick (the result of a trade with Cleveland midway through the 1979-80 season, when the Lakers had sent Don Ford and a 1980 first-round pick to the Cavaliers for Butch Lee and their 1982 selection) and selected James Worthy from North Carolina Tar Heels mens basketball. The 1982-83 Los Angeles Lakers season won the Pacific Division at 58-24, but Worthy suffered a leg injury in the last week of the season and missed the rest of the season. Nevertheless, they advanced to play 1982-83 Philadelphia 76ers season in the 1983 NBA Finals after defeating 1982-83 Portland Trail Blazers season and 1982-83 San Antonio Spurs season. The Sixers, however, won the series and the championship in four games. After the season West replaced Sharman as the teams GM. | How many games did the Lakers lose out of 20 after West and Riley were names co-head coaches? | {
"spans": [
"3"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_3596 | 925e1347-a239-4429-8a8a-6917dd00a2fa | Early in the 1981-82 Los Angeles Lakers season, Johnson complained to the media about head coach Paul Westhead and demanded a trade. Westhead was fired shortly after Johnsons criticisms, and although Lakers owner Jerry Buss stated that Johnsons comments did not factor into the decision, Johnson was vilified by the national media and booed both on the road and at home. Buss promoted assistant coach Pat Riley to "co-head coach" with Jerry West (although West considered himself Rileys assistant) on November 19 and the team won 17 of its next 20 games. Nicknamed "Showtime (basketball)" due to the teams new Johnson-led fast break-offense, the Lakers won the Pacific Division title and swept both the 1981-82 Phoenix Suns season and 1981-82 San Antonio Spurs season in the 1982 NBA Playoffs. Los Angeles stretched its postseason winning streak to nine games by taking the first contest of the 1982 NBA Finals from the 1981-82 Philadelphia 76ers season. The team won the Finals 4-2 to finish a 12-2 playoff run. On draft night in 1982 NBA draft, the Lakers had the first overall pick (the result of a trade with Cleveland midway through the 1979-80 season, when the Lakers had sent Don Ford and a 1980 first-round pick to the Cavaliers for Butch Lee and their 1982 selection) and selected James Worthy from North Carolina Tar Heels mens basketball. The 1982-83 Los Angeles Lakers season won the Pacific Division at 58-24, but Worthy suffered a leg injury in the last week of the season and missed the rest of the season. Nevertheless, they advanced to play 1982-83 Philadelphia 76ers season in the 1983 NBA Finals after defeating 1982-83 Portland Trail Blazers season and 1982-83 San Antonio Spurs season. The Sixers, however, won the series and the championship in four games. After the season West replaced Sharman as the teams GM. | Which two teams did the Lakers beat in the 1982 NBA Playoffs? | {
"spans": [
"Phoenix Suns",
"San Antonio Spurs"
],
"types": [
"span",
"span"
]
} |
history_3596 | cca6deb9-ea5f-431a-8f0d-78ec84099f39 | Early in the 1981-82 Los Angeles Lakers season, Johnson complained to the media about head coach Paul Westhead and demanded a trade. Westhead was fired shortly after Johnsons criticisms, and although Lakers owner Jerry Buss stated that Johnsons comments did not factor into the decision, Johnson was vilified by the national media and booed both on the road and at home. Buss promoted assistant coach Pat Riley to "co-head coach" with Jerry West (although West considered himself Rileys assistant) on November 19 and the team won 17 of its next 20 games. Nicknamed "Showtime (basketball)" due to the teams new Johnson-led fast break-offense, the Lakers won the Pacific Division title and swept both the 1981-82 Phoenix Suns season and 1981-82 San Antonio Spurs season in the 1982 NBA Playoffs. Los Angeles stretched its postseason winning streak to nine games by taking the first contest of the 1982 NBA Finals from the 1981-82 Philadelphia 76ers season. The team won the Finals 4-2 to finish a 12-2 playoff run. On draft night in 1982 NBA draft, the Lakers had the first overall pick (the result of a trade with Cleveland midway through the 1979-80 season, when the Lakers had sent Don Ford and a 1980 first-round pick to the Cavaliers for Butch Lee and their 1982 selection) and selected James Worthy from North Carolina Tar Heels mens basketball. The 1982-83 Los Angeles Lakers season won the Pacific Division at 58-24, but Worthy suffered a leg injury in the last week of the season and missed the rest of the season. Nevertheless, they advanced to play 1982-83 Philadelphia 76ers season in the 1983 NBA Finals after defeating 1982-83 Portland Trail Blazers season and 1982-83 San Antonio Spurs season. The Sixers, however, won the series and the championship in four games. After the season West replaced Sharman as the teams GM. | Which team won the first contest of the NBA Finals, the Lakers or the 76ers? | {
"spans": [
"the Lakers"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2772 | 311e1df8-beb5-4080-b18e-7e725db76678 | Research funded by the Public Policy Institute of California indicates that in 1996, 1,786 Silicon Valley technology companies with $12.5 billion in sales and 46,000 employees were run by Indian or Chinese executives. Moreover, the pace of entrepreneurship among local immigrants is increasing rapidly. While Chinese or Indian executives are at the helm of 13% of the Silicon Valley technology businesses started between 1980 and 1985, they are running 27% of the more than 4,000 businesses started between 1991 and 1996. Start-up firms remain a primary source for new ideas and innovation for Chinese American internet entrepreneurs. Many of them are employed or directly engaged in new start-up activities. The proportional share of start-up firms by ethnic Chinese in Silicon Valley skyrocketed from 9% in 1980-1984 to about 20% between 1995-1998. By 2006, Chinese American internet entrepreneurs continued to start 20% of all Silicon Valley start-up firms, leading 2000 Silicon Valley companies, and employing 58,000 workers. They still continue to own about 20% of all information technology companies that were founded in Silicon Valley since 1980. | How many percent did the number of Chinese American entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley increase from 1984 to 1995? | {
"spans": [
"11"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2772 | 5e0f2e7c-83f7-4d24-8373-4741cf7b1a32 | Research funded by the Public Policy Institute of California indicates that in 1996, 1,786 Silicon Valley technology companies with $12.5 billion in sales and 46,000 employees were run by Indian or Chinese executives. Moreover, the pace of entrepreneurship among local immigrants is increasing rapidly. While Chinese or Indian executives are at the helm of 13% of the Silicon Valley technology businesses started between 1980 and 1985, they are running 27% of the more than 4,000 businesses started between 1991 and 1996. Start-up firms remain a primary source for new ideas and innovation for Chinese American internet entrepreneurs. Many of them are employed or directly engaged in new start-up activities. The proportional share of start-up firms by ethnic Chinese in Silicon Valley skyrocketed from 9% in 1980-1984 to about 20% between 1995-1998. By 2006, Chinese American internet entrepreneurs continued to start 20% of all Silicon Valley start-up firms, leading 2000 Silicon Valley companies, and employing 58,000 workers. They still continue to own about 20% of all information technology companies that were founded in Silicon Valley since 1980. | Did Chinese and Indian executives run more technology businesses in the 80s or the 90s? | {
"spans": [
"90s"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2772 | 6e45b131-a0f6-4aa6-a11d-f0e3e63e7906 | Research funded by the Public Policy Institute of California indicates that in 1996, 1,786 Silicon Valley technology companies with $12.5 billion in sales and 46,000 employees were run by Indian or Chinese executives. Moreover, the pace of entrepreneurship among local immigrants is increasing rapidly. While Chinese or Indian executives are at the helm of 13% of the Silicon Valley technology businesses started between 1980 and 1985, they are running 27% of the more than 4,000 businesses started between 1991 and 1996. Start-up firms remain a primary source for new ideas and innovation for Chinese American internet entrepreneurs. Many of them are employed or directly engaged in new start-up activities. The proportional share of start-up firms by ethnic Chinese in Silicon Valley skyrocketed from 9% in 1980-1984 to about 20% between 1995-1998. By 2006, Chinese American internet entrepreneurs continued to start 20% of all Silicon Valley start-up firms, leading 2000 Silicon Valley companies, and employing 58,000 workers. They still continue to own about 20% of all information technology companies that were founded in Silicon Valley since 1980. | How many percent more ethnic Chinese were in Silicon Valley between 1995-1998 than were in 1980-1984? | {
"spans": [
"11"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2772 | 11008908-7582-4311-959b-fe88ea6ebc81 | Research funded by the Public Policy Institute of California indicates that in 1996, 1,786 Silicon Valley technology companies with $12.5 billion in sales and 46,000 employees were run by Indian or Chinese executives. Moreover, the pace of entrepreneurship among local immigrants is increasing rapidly. While Chinese or Indian executives are at the helm of 13% of the Silicon Valley technology businesses started between 1980 and 1985, they are running 27% of the more than 4,000 businesses started between 1991 and 1996. Start-up firms remain a primary source for new ideas and innovation for Chinese American internet entrepreneurs. Many of them are employed or directly engaged in new start-up activities. The proportional share of start-up firms by ethnic Chinese in Silicon Valley skyrocketed from 9% in 1980-1984 to about 20% between 1995-1998. By 2006, Chinese American internet entrepreneurs continued to start 20% of all Silicon Valley start-up firms, leading 2000 Silicon Valley companies, and employing 58,000 workers. They still continue to own about 20% of all information technology companies that were founded in Silicon Valley since 1980. | How many more workers were employed by Chinese American internet entrepreneurs in 2006 than were in 1996 by both Chinese and Indian executives? | {
"spans": [
"12000"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2728 | cb3ecf0d-4d16-4e7c-ab8f-73f31ec5927d | More than 64,000 students applied for admission to the undergraduate class entering in 2018, with 12.9% being admitted. Among enrolled freshman for Fall 2017, the interquartile range for SAT composite scores was 1300 – 1500 and the average unweighted GPA was 3.76. Thirty-four percent of the accepted students in 2018 had perfect GPAs of 4.0 and 60 percent scored in the 99th percentile on standardized tests. There were 257 National Merit Scholarship Program enrolled during the 2016-17 academic year (including 60 recipients of the prestigious National Merit $2,500 Scholarship), ranking USC third in the nation. USC was ranked the 10th most applied to university in the nation for fall 2014 by U.S. News & World Report. | How many percent of students that applied were not admitted? | {
"spans": [
"87.1"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2728 | 30c13b8b-1a7f-4fac-bb0d-e29742dfcfeb | More than 64,000 students applied for admission to the undergraduate class entering in 2018, with 12.9% being admitted. Among enrolled freshman for Fall 2017, the interquartile range for SAT composite scores was 1300 – 1500 and the average unweighted GPA was 3.76. Thirty-four percent of the accepted students in 2018 had perfect GPAs of 4.0 and 60 percent scored in the 99th percentile on standardized tests. There were 257 National Merit Scholarship Program enrolled during the 2016-17 academic year (including 60 recipients of the prestigious National Merit $2,500 Scholarship), ranking USC third in the nation. USC was ranked the 10th most applied to university in the nation for fall 2014 by U.S. News & World Report. | How many percent of the students admitted did not have a perfect GPA? | {
"spans": [
"66"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2935 | 782899f4-af10-473e-b103-2b9743592184 | In order to be eligible for in-work benefit, applicants must first have children under the age of 23, and from that point, benefits vary depending on marital status and the number of people employed per family. For a single parent in employment who earns between €6,600-€16,500, they are eligible for a maximum payable rate of up to €1,250 annually per child. For a married couple whose collective income is between €10,000 and is less than €24,000 (the income of one of the spouses must be over €3,000), they are eligible for a maximum payment rate of up to €1,200 annually per child. In 2016, the in-work benefit was extended to married couples where only one parent works, extending the benefit to an additional 3,700 families. For a married couple with only one parent gainfully employed whose income is greater than €6,600 and less than €16,500, they are eligible for a maximum payable rate of up to €350 yearly per child. The in-work benefit is paid quarterly in January, April, July, and October. | What is the most per child a married couple can get per year that makes between between €10,000 and is less than €24,000? | {
"spans": [
"€1,200"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2473 | 5f360c6a-7d9a-4a9c-9c59-eee080058acf | Some economic historians have observed that Standard Oil was in the process of losing its monopoly at the time of its breakup in 1911. Although Standard had 90 percent of American refining capacity in 1880, by 1911 that had shrunk to between 60 and 65 percent, due to the expansion in capacity by competitors. Numerous regional competitors (such as Pure Oil in the East, Texaco and Gulf Oil in the Gulf Coast, Cities Service Company and Sun Oil in the Midcontinent, Union Oil in California, and Royal Dutch Shell overseas) had organized themselves into competitive vertically integrated oil companies, the industry structure pioneered years earlier by Standard itself. In addition, demand for petroleum products was increasing more rapidly than the ability of Standard to expand. The result was that although in 1911 Standard still controlled most production in the older regions of the Appalachian Basin (78 percent share, down from 92 percent in 1880), Lima-Indiana (90 percent, down from 95 percent in 1906), and the Illinois Basin (83 percent, down from 100 percent in 1906), its share was much lower in the rapidly expanding new regions that would dominate U.S. oil production in the 20th century. In 1911 Standard controlled only 44 percent of production in the Midcontinent, 29 percent in California, and 10 percent on the Gulf Coast. | Which of Standard Oil's competitors were from the Southern US? | {
"spans": [
"Texaco",
"Gulf Oil"
],
"types": [
"span",
"span"
]
} |
history_2473 | 4185d6f2-536a-4bb6-a664-a1942417c0b6 | Some economic historians have observed that Standard Oil was in the process of losing its monopoly at the time of its breakup in 1911. Although Standard had 90 percent of American refining capacity in 1880, by 1911 that had shrunk to between 60 and 65 percent, due to the expansion in capacity by competitors. Numerous regional competitors (such as Pure Oil in the East, Texaco and Gulf Oil in the Gulf Coast, Cities Service Company and Sun Oil in the Midcontinent, Union Oil in California, and Royal Dutch Shell overseas) had organized themselves into competitive vertically integrated oil companies, the industry structure pioneered years earlier by Standard itself. In addition, demand for petroleum products was increasing more rapidly than the ability of Standard to expand. The result was that although in 1911 Standard still controlled most production in the older regions of the Appalachian Basin (78 percent share, down from 92 percent in 1880), Lima-Indiana (90 percent, down from 95 percent in 1906), and the Illinois Basin (83 percent, down from 100 percent in 1906), its share was much lower in the rapidly expanding new regions that would dominate U.S. oil production in the 20th century. In 1911 Standard controlled only 44 percent of production in the Midcontinent, 29 percent in California, and 10 percent on the Gulf Coast. | in 1911, which areas did Standard still control more than 80 percent of the share? | {
"spans": [
"Lima-Indiana",
"Illinois Basin"
],
"types": [
"span",
"span"
]
} |
history_2473 | 364a01c7-a712-4409-ba05-80160c516a60 | Some economic historians have observed that Standard Oil was in the process of losing its monopoly at the time of its breakup in 1911. Although Standard had 90 percent of American refining capacity in 1880, by 1911 that had shrunk to between 60 and 65 percent, due to the expansion in capacity by competitors. Numerous regional competitors (such as Pure Oil in the East, Texaco and Gulf Oil in the Gulf Coast, Cities Service Company and Sun Oil in the Midcontinent, Union Oil in California, and Royal Dutch Shell overseas) had organized themselves into competitive vertically integrated oil companies, the industry structure pioneered years earlier by Standard itself. In addition, demand for petroleum products was increasing more rapidly than the ability of Standard to expand. The result was that although in 1911 Standard still controlled most production in the older regions of the Appalachian Basin (78 percent share, down from 92 percent in 1880), Lima-Indiana (90 percent, down from 95 percent in 1906), and the Illinois Basin (83 percent, down from 100 percent in 1906), its share was much lower in the rapidly expanding new regions that would dominate U.S. oil production in the 20th century. In 1911 Standard controlled only 44 percent of production in the Midcontinent, 29 percent in California, and 10 percent on the Gulf Coast. | In which area did Standard's percent share drop the most by 1911? | {
"spans": [
"Illinois Basin"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2473 | 13ddc558-f9b8-4a12-abf9-826d0ee5e96b | Some economic historians have observed that Standard Oil was in the process of losing its monopoly at the time of its breakup in 1911. Although Standard had 90 percent of American refining capacity in 1880, by 1911 that had shrunk to between 60 and 65 percent, due to the expansion in capacity by competitors. Numerous regional competitors (such as Pure Oil in the East, Texaco and Gulf Oil in the Gulf Coast, Cities Service Company and Sun Oil in the Midcontinent, Union Oil in California, and Royal Dutch Shell overseas) had organized themselves into competitive vertically integrated oil companies, the industry structure pioneered years earlier by Standard itself. In addition, demand for petroleum products was increasing more rapidly than the ability of Standard to expand. The result was that although in 1911 Standard still controlled most production in the older regions of the Appalachian Basin (78 percent share, down from 92 percent in 1880), Lima-Indiana (90 percent, down from 95 percent in 1906), and the Illinois Basin (83 percent, down from 100 percent in 1906), its share was much lower in the rapidly expanding new regions that would dominate U.S. oil production in the 20th century. In 1911 Standard controlled only 44 percent of production in the Midcontinent, 29 percent in California, and 10 percent on the Gulf Coast. | In which area did Standard's percent share drop the least by 1911? | {
"spans": [
"Lima-Indiana"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2473 | 44661fe5-8aaa-4e8e-9dbe-9df10257c7a4 | Some economic historians have observed that Standard Oil was in the process of losing its monopoly at the time of its breakup in 1911. Although Standard had 90 percent of American refining capacity in 1880, by 1911 that had shrunk to between 60 and 65 percent, due to the expansion in capacity by competitors. Numerous regional competitors (such as Pure Oil in the East, Texaco and Gulf Oil in the Gulf Coast, Cities Service Company and Sun Oil in the Midcontinent, Union Oil in California, and Royal Dutch Shell overseas) had organized themselves into competitive vertically integrated oil companies, the industry structure pioneered years earlier by Standard itself. In addition, demand for petroleum products was increasing more rapidly than the ability of Standard to expand. The result was that although in 1911 Standard still controlled most production in the older regions of the Appalachian Basin (78 percent share, down from 92 percent in 1880), Lima-Indiana (90 percent, down from 95 percent in 1906), and the Illinois Basin (83 percent, down from 100 percent in 1906), its share was much lower in the rapidly expanding new regions that would dominate U.S. oil production in the 20th century. In 1911 Standard controlled only 44 percent of production in the Midcontinent, 29 percent in California, and 10 percent on the Gulf Coast. | In 1911, which area of the country did Standard have the second lowest share? | {
"spans": [
"California"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
history_2473 | bdf6e598-6604-4c69-a91e-cd3c67902db8 | Some economic historians have observed that Standard Oil was in the process of losing its monopoly at the time of its breakup in 1911. Although Standard had 90 percent of American refining capacity in 1880, by 1911 that had shrunk to between 60 and 65 percent, due to the expansion in capacity by competitors. Numerous regional competitors (such as Pure Oil in the East, Texaco and Gulf Oil in the Gulf Coast, Cities Service Company and Sun Oil in the Midcontinent, Union Oil in California, and Royal Dutch Shell overseas) had organized themselves into competitive vertically integrated oil companies, the industry structure pioneered years earlier by Standard itself. In addition, demand for petroleum products was increasing more rapidly than the ability of Standard to expand. The result was that although in 1911 Standard still controlled most production in the older regions of the Appalachian Basin (78 percent share, down from 92 percent in 1880), Lima-Indiana (90 percent, down from 95 percent in 1906), and the Illinois Basin (83 percent, down from 100 percent in 1906), its share was much lower in the rapidly expanding new regions that would dominate U.S. oil production in the 20th century. In 1911 Standard controlled only 44 percent of production in the Midcontinent, 29 percent in California, and 10 percent on the Gulf Coast. | What areas did Standard Oil control in 1911? | {
"spans": [
"Midcontinent",
"California",
"Gulf Coast"
],
"types": [
"span",
"span",
"span"
]
} |
history_2689 | 3347e46c-dfca-4c6e-9b00-6d2f0fc52002 | In 2007, the Peruvian economy experienced a growth rate of 9%, the highest in Latin America, and this repeated in 2008 with a 9.8% rate; in 2006 and 2007, the Lima Stock Exchange grew by 185.24% and 168.3%, respectively. However, in the wake of the 2008 global crisis, growth for 2009 was only 0.9 percent, but rebounded to 8.8 percent the following year. The pro-market policies enacted by Fujimori, were continued by presidents Alejandro Toledo and Alan Garcia, While poverty of Lima is 8.5%, the national average is 25.8%, while the unemployment rate is 6.5% and 74% are employed formally. | Which year did the Peruvian economy experience a higher growth rate, 2007 or 2008? | {
"spans": [
"2008"
],
"types": [
"date"
]
} |
history_2689 | 76484f23-3a2a-424a-96a2-c0a9449a8c30 | In 2007, the Peruvian economy experienced a growth rate of 9%, the highest in Latin America, and this repeated in 2008 with a 9.8% rate; in 2006 and 2007, the Lima Stock Exchange grew by 185.24% and 168.3%, respectively. However, in the wake of the 2008 global crisis, growth for 2009 was only 0.9 percent, but rebounded to 8.8 percent the following year. The pro-market policies enacted by Fujimori, were continued by presidents Alejandro Toledo and Alan Garcia, While poverty of Lima is 8.5%, the national average is 25.8%, while the unemployment rate is 6.5% and 74% are employed formally. | How many percentage points higher with the growth rate of the Peruvian economy in 2008 compared to 2007? | {
"spans": [
".8"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2689 | 50e55940-743f-46b4-acb6-227a507a3e32 | In 2007, the Peruvian economy experienced a growth rate of 9%, the highest in Latin America, and this repeated in 2008 with a 9.8% rate; in 2006 and 2007, the Lima Stock Exchange grew by 185.24% and 168.3%, respectively. However, in the wake of the 2008 global crisis, growth for 2009 was only 0.9 percent, but rebounded to 8.8 percent the following year. The pro-market policies enacted by Fujimori, were continued by presidents Alejandro Toledo and Alan Garcia, While poverty of Lima is 8.5%, the national average is 25.8%, while the unemployment rate is 6.5% and 74% are employed formally. | What year was the growth for the Lima Stock Exchange 8.8 percent? | {
"spans": [
"2010"
],
"types": [
"date"
]
} |
history_2689 | e8fe6e9f-7757-4afa-8bba-b1b06385ea08 | In 2007, the Peruvian economy experienced a growth rate of 9%, the highest in Latin America, and this repeated in 2008 with a 9.8% rate; in 2006 and 2007, the Lima Stock Exchange grew by 185.24% and 168.3%, respectively. However, in the wake of the 2008 global crisis, growth for 2009 was only 0.9 percent, but rebounded to 8.8 percent the following year. The pro-market policies enacted by Fujimori, were continued by presidents Alejandro Toledo and Alan Garcia, While poverty of Lima is 8.5%, the national average is 25.8%, while the unemployment rate is 6.5% and 74% are employed formally. | How many percentage points higher was the growth of the Lima Stock Exchange in 2010 compared to 2009? | {
"spans": [
"7.9"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2689 | 9eb47c30-c464-4147-883d-5c029e72a108 | In 2007, the Peruvian economy experienced a growth rate of 9%, the highest in Latin America, and this repeated in 2008 with a 9.8% rate; in 2006 and 2007, the Lima Stock Exchange grew by 185.24% and 168.3%, respectively. However, in the wake of the 2008 global crisis, growth for 2009 was only 0.9 percent, but rebounded to 8.8 percent the following year. The pro-market policies enacted by Fujimori, were continued by presidents Alejandro Toledo and Alan Garcia, While poverty of Lima is 8.5%, the national average is 25.8%, while the unemployment rate is 6.5% and 74% are employed formally. | How many percentage points lower was the Lima poverty rate compared to the national average? | {
"spans": [
"17.3"
],
"types": [
"number"
]
} |
history_2689 | ec194dd8-183e-4401-ba2f-c3defc5d9db2 | In 2007, the Peruvian economy experienced a growth rate of 9%, the highest in Latin America, and this repeated in 2008 with a 9.8% rate; in 2006 and 2007, the Lima Stock Exchange grew by 185.24% and 168.3%, respectively. However, in the wake of the 2008 global crisis, growth for 2009 was only 0.9 percent, but rebounded to 8.8 percent the following year. The pro-market policies enacted by Fujimori, were continued by presidents Alejandro Toledo and Alan Garcia, While poverty of Lima is 8.5%, the national average is 25.8%, while the unemployment rate is 6.5% and 74% are employed formally. | Which poverty rate is lower, the poverty rate of Lima or the national average poverty rate? | {
"spans": [
"poverty of Lima"
],
"types": [
"span"
]
} |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.