You are a helpful assistant in evaluating the quality of the outputs for a given instruction. Your goal is to select the best output for the given instruction.

Select the Output (a) or Output (b) that is better for the given instruction. The two outputs are generated by two different AI chatbots respectively.

Here are some rules of the evaluation:
(1) You should prioritize evaluating whether the output honestly/precisely/closely executes the instruction, then consider its helpfulness, accuracy, level of detail, harmlessness, etc.
(2) Outputs should NOT contain more/less than what the instruction asks for, as such outputs do NOT precisely execute the instruction.
(3) You should avoid any potential bias and your judgment should be as objective as possible. For example, the order in which the outputs were presented should NOT affect your judgment, as Output (a) and Output (b) are **equally likely** to be the better.

Do NOT provide any explanation for your choice.
Do NOT say both / neither are good.
You should answer using ONLY "Output (a)" or "Output (b)". Do NOT output any other words.

# Instruction:
Here is an article:
Playboy magazine is stopping publishing pictures of totally nude women because the internet has made them outdated, its US owners say. It's a break with a 62-year format that has had a significant impact on American culture. By Vanessa BarfordBBC News Magazine, Washington Every month since 1953, fold-out spreads of fully nude women have filled Playboy. The glossy adult men's magazine boasts a plethora of celebrity conquests in its portfolio. Madonna, Sharon Stone and Naomi Campbell were photographed at the peak of their fame. Kate Moss posed for its front cover in a bunny outfit. Lindsay Lohan and Pamela Anderson have also graced it. The magazine may have offended some who see it as sexist and demeaning to women, but the idea of Playboy dispensing with nudity would once have been unthinkable. But in March 2016, that will happen. "You're now one click away from every sex act imaginable for free. And so it's just passe at this juncture," Playboy chief executive Scott Flanders is quoted by the New York Times as saying. The redesigned Playboy will still feature "sexy, seductive pictorials of the world's most beautiful women," but full nudity will be banished. It ends a cultural phenomenon that was a rite of passage for a generation of American men - an illicit thrill in adolescent bedrooms or garden sheds - and helped spark America's sexual revolution. From its beginnings editor-in-chief Hugh Hefner founded the magazine on full nudity. Marilyn Monroe famously appeared on the magazine's first cover and centrefold. Hefner didn't hide the magazine's intentions. "If you're a man between the ages of 18 and 80, Playboy is meant for you," he wrote in the first issue. "We want to make it clear from the very start, we aren't a 'family magazine.' If you're somebody's sister, wife or mother-in-law and picked us up by mistake, please pass us along to the man in your life and get back to your Ladies Home Companion." He also described the "pleasure-primer" he wanted to create. "Most of today's 'magazines for men' spend all their time out-of-doors - thrashing through thorny thickets or splashing about in fast-flowing streams. We enjoy mixing up cocktails and an hors d'oeuvre or two, putting a little mood music on the phonograph, and inviting in a female acquaintance for a quiet discussion on Picasso, Nietzsche, jazz, sex," it said. The 50,000 copies - which were sold for 50 cents each - flew off the shelf. Dian Hanson, author of a six-volume history of men's magazines and an editor for Taschen, says Hefner tapped into a new consumer attitude that emerged at the end of World War Two. "America came out the war relatively unscathed, it did not suffer like Europe. Many young men didn't see battle but had experienced more adventurous things, more nudity, and wanted something different when they came back. "It wasn't the first nude magazine, but rather than showing a macho Hemingwayesque way of life that many men didn't relate to, it showed scrawny intelligent guys they didn't have to be rough, tough guys to be a playboy. It was a nerds' way to sexuality - which is what Hefner himself did to get girls," she says. During Playboy's heyday, readers could plausibly claim they read it for its writing and journalism. The magazine published stories by Jack Kerouac, Joseph Heller, Haruki Murakami and Margaret Atwood among others, and interviewed culturally and politically significant figures such as Frank Sinatra, Malcolm X and Jimmy Carter. But nudity was always a big selling point of the magazine, which attracted or coaxed well-known female public figures into gracing its pages. "Some of the pictures were pretty amazing and became pop culture references. Naomi Campbell in her white trap outfit. American actress Bo Derek," says Hanson. "Esquire magazine was the template. They had painted pin-ups but they didn't have nudes. Hefner basically reconfigured a magazine made by older men to fit a younger man's need, and then took it a step further," she says. Playboy's circulation peaked at more than 7.16m copies in 1972, with a quarter of all American male college students reportedly reading it in the 1970s. It literally explained sex to a generation of American men. The success of Playboy magazine gave way to the rise of the Playboy lifestyle, allowing Hefner to build a Playboy mansion, create Playboy clubs with cocktail waitresses decked out in Bunny outfits and endless Playboy merchandise. The rise of feminism led to some criticism that women were being objectified. US feminist and journalist Gloria Steinem worked undercover at the New York Playboy Club to write "A Bunny's Tale," which showed conditions waitresses faced in 1963. But Hanson argues Playboy magazine was a respectable, even desirable, place for women to "show themselves off". "It was a poor girl's pageant, grandmothers would approve," she says. It also ushered in a new era of women's magazine publishing. Cosmopolitan famously published a nude photo of Burt Reynolds as a centrefold in 1972 and the debut issue of Playgirl appeared in June 1973. More raunchy US competitors like Hustler and Penthouse soon arrived, while so-called lad mags such as Maxim, Stuff and FHM followed later. But it was the internet era - which made pornography more readily available - which the magazine blamed for the circulation plummeting to its current 800,000. The company no longer makes most of its money from its racy photos. Instead it's made from licensing its logo on merchandise. Playboy's website has already banished nudity, and web traffic has quadrupled. Magazine executives hope the print version will follow in its footsteps. But Hanson isn't convinced. "Unless a new breed of hipster manages to get retro magazines back in fashion like vinyl records, without nudity Playboy is a limping beast," she says. More from the Magazine Burt Reynolds nude: 10 facts about the Cosmo centrefold (April 2012) Subscribe to the BBC News Magazine's email newsletter to get articles sent to your inbox.

Here is a summary requirement:
List some of the celebrities who have appeared in Playboy magazine.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Playboy magazine, which has been publishing pictures of fully nude women since 1953, is stopping the practice due to the internet making them outdated. Celebrities who have appeared in the magazine include Madonna, Sharon Stone, Naomi Campbell, Kate Moss, Lindsay Lohan, Pamela Anderson, Marilyn Monroe, Burt Reynolds, and many more.

# Output (a):
Some of the celebrities who have appeared in Playboy magazine include Madonna, Sharon Stone, Naomi Campbell, Kate Moss, Lindsay Lohan, and Pamela Anderson.

# Which is better, Output (a) or Output (b)? Your response should be either "Output (a)" or "Output (b)":

Output (a)

Instruction:
Here is an article:
Playboy magazine is stopping publishing pictures of totally nude women because the internet has made them outdated, its US owners say. It's a break with a 62-year format that has had a significant impact on American culture. By Vanessa BarfordBBC News Magazine, Washington Every month since 1953, fold-out spreads of fully nude women have filled Playboy. The glossy adult men's magazine boasts a plethora of celebrity conquests in its portfolio. Madonna, Sharon Stone and Naomi Campbell were photographed at the peak of their fame. Kate Moss posed for its front cover in a bunny outfit. Lindsay Lohan and Pamela Anderson have also graced it. The magazine may have offended some who see it as sexist and demeaning to women, but the idea of Playboy dispensing with nudity would once have been unthinkable. But in March 2016, that will happen. "You're now one click away from every sex act imaginable for free. And so it's just passe at this juncture," Playboy chief executive Scott Flanders is quoted by the New York Times as saying. The redesigned Playboy will still feature "sexy, seductive pictorials of the world's most beautiful women," but full nudity will be banished. It ends a cultural phenomenon that was a rite of passage for a generation of American men - an illicit thrill in adolescent bedrooms or garden sheds - and helped spark America's sexual revolution. From its beginnings editor-in-chief Hugh Hefner founded the magazine on full nudity. Marilyn Monroe famously appeared on the magazine's first cover and centrefold. Hefner didn't hide the magazine's intentions. "If you're a man between the ages of 18 and 80, Playboy is meant for you," he wrote in the first issue. "We want to make it clear from the very start, we aren't a 'family magazine.' If you're somebody's sister, wife or mother-in-law and picked us up by mistake, please pass us along to the man in your life and get back to your Ladies Home Companion." He also described the "pleasure-primer" he wanted to create. "Most of today's 'magazines for men' spend all their time out-of-doors - thrashing through thorny thickets or splashing about in fast-flowing streams. We enjoy mixing up cocktails and an hors d'oeuvre or two, putting a little mood music on the phonograph, and inviting in a female acquaintance for a quiet discussion on Picasso, Nietzsche, jazz, sex," it said. The 50,000 copies - which were sold for 50 cents each - flew off the shelf. Dian Hanson, author of a six-volume history of men's magazines and an editor for Taschen, says Hefner tapped into a new consumer attitude that emerged at the end of World War Two. "America came out the war relatively unscathed, it did not suffer like Europe. Many young men didn't see battle but had experienced more adventurous things, more nudity, and wanted something different when they came back. "It wasn't the first nude magazine, but rather than showing a macho Hemingwayesque way of life that many men didn't relate to, it showed scrawny intelligent guys they didn't have to be rough, tough guys to be a playboy. It was a nerds' way to sexuality - which is what Hefner himself did to get girls," she says. During Playboy's heyday, readers could plausibly claim they read it for its writing and journalism. The magazine published stories by Jack Kerouac, Joseph Heller, Haruki Murakami and Margaret Atwood among others, and interviewed culturally and politically significant figures such as Frank Sinatra, Malcolm X and Jimmy Carter. But nudity was always a big selling point of the magazine, which attracted or coaxed well-known female public figures into gracing its pages. "Some of the pictures were pretty amazing and became pop culture references. Naomi Campbell in her white trap outfit. American actress Bo Derek," says Hanson. "Esquire magazine was the template. They had painted pin-ups but they didn't have nudes. Hefner basically reconfigured a magazine made by older men to fit a younger man's need, and then took it a step further," she says. Playboy's circulation peaked at more than 7.16m copies in 1972, with a quarter of all American male college students reportedly reading it in the 1970s. It literally explained sex to a generation of American men. The success of Playboy magazine gave way to the rise of the Playboy lifestyle, allowing Hefner to build a Playboy mansion, create Playboy clubs with cocktail waitresses decked out in Bunny outfits and endless Playboy merchandise. The rise of feminism led to some criticism that women were being objectified. US feminist and journalist Gloria Steinem worked undercover at the New York Playboy Club to write "A Bunny's Tale," which showed conditions waitresses faced in 1963. But Hanson argues Playboy magazine was a respectable, even desirable, place for women to "show themselves off". "It was a poor girl's pageant, grandmothers would approve," she says. It also ushered in a new era of women's magazine publishing. Cosmopolitan famously published a nude photo of Burt Reynolds as a centrefold in 1972 and the debut issue of Playgirl appeared in June 1973. More raunchy US competitors like Hustler and Penthouse soon arrived, while so-called lad mags such as Maxim, Stuff and FHM followed later. But it was the internet era - which made pornography more readily available - which the magazine blamed for the circulation plummeting to its current 800,000. The company no longer makes most of its money from its racy photos. Instead it's made from licensing its logo on merchandise. Playboy's website has already banished nudity, and web traffic has quadrupled. Magazine executives hope the print version will follow in its footsteps. But Hanson isn't convinced. "Unless a new breed of hipster manages to get retro magazines back in fashion like vinyl records, without nudity Playboy is a limping beast," she says. More from the Magazine Burt Reynolds nude: 10 facts about the Cosmo centrefold (April 2012) Subscribe to the BBC News Magazine's email newsletter to get articles sent to your inbox.

Here is a summary requirement:
List some of the celebrities who have appeared in Playboy magazine.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Some of the celebrities who have appeared in Playboy magazine include Madonna, Sharon Stone, Naomi Campbell, Kate Moss, Lindsay Lohan, and Pamela Anderson.

Playboy magazine, which has been publishing pictures of fully nude women since 1953, is stopping the practice due to the internet making them outdated. Celebrities who have appeared in the magazine include Madonna, Sharon Stone, Naomi Campbell, Kate Moss, Lindsay Lohan, Pamela Anderson, Marilyn Monroe, Burt Reynolds, and many more.


You are a helpful assistant in evaluating the quality of the outputs for a given instruction. Your goal is to select the best output for the given instruction.

Select the Output (a) or Output (b) that is better for the given instruction. The two outputs are generated by two different AI chatbots respectively.

Here are some rules of the evaluation:
(1) You should prioritize evaluating whether the output honestly/precisely/closely executes the instruction, then consider its helpfulness, accuracy, level of detail, harmlessness, etc.
(2) Outputs should NOT contain more/less than what the instruction asks for, as such outputs do NOT precisely execute the instruction.
(3) You should avoid any potential bias and your judgment should be as objective as possible. For example, the order in which the outputs were presented should NOT affect your judgment, as Output (a) and Output (b) are **equally likely** to be the better.

Do NOT provide any explanation for your choice.
Do NOT say both / neither are good.
You should answer using ONLY "Output (a)" or "Output (b)". Do NOT output any other words.

# Instruction:
Here is an article:
Playboy magazine is stopping publishing pictures of totally nude women because the internet has made them outdated, its US owners say. It's a break with a 62-year format that has had a significant impact on American culture. By Vanessa BarfordBBC News Magazine, Washington Every month since 1953, fold-out spreads of fully nude women have filled Playboy. The glossy adult men's magazine boasts a plethora of celebrity conquests in its portfolio. Madonna, Sharon Stone and Naomi Campbell were photographed at the peak of their fame. Kate Moss posed for its front cover in a bunny outfit. Lindsay Lohan and Pamela Anderson have also graced it. The magazine may have offended some who see it as sexist and demeaning to women, but the idea of Playboy dispensing with nudity would once have been unthinkable. But in March 2016, that will happen. "You're now one click away from every sex act imaginable for free. And so it's just passe at this juncture," Playboy chief executive Scott Flanders is quoted by the New York Times as saying. The redesigned Playboy will still feature "sexy, seductive pictorials of the world's most beautiful women," but full nudity will be banished. It ends a cultural phenomenon that was a rite of passage for a generation of American men - an illicit thrill in adolescent bedrooms or garden sheds - and helped spark America's sexual revolution. From its beginnings editor-in-chief Hugh Hefner founded the magazine on full nudity. Marilyn Monroe famously appeared on the magazine's first cover and centrefold. Hefner didn't hide the magazine's intentions. "If you're a man between the ages of 18 and 80, Playboy is meant for you," he wrote in the first issue. "We want to make it clear from the very start, we aren't a 'family magazine.' If you're somebody's sister, wife or mother-in-law and picked us up by mistake, please pass us along to the man in your life and get back to your Ladies Home Companion." He also described the "pleasure-primer" he wanted to create. "Most of today's 'magazines for men' spend all their time out-of-doors - thrashing through thorny thickets or splashing about in fast-flowing streams. We enjoy mixing up cocktails and an hors d'oeuvre or two, putting a little mood music on the phonograph, and inviting in a female acquaintance for a quiet discussion on Picasso, Nietzsche, jazz, sex," it said. The 50,000 copies - which were sold for 50 cents each - flew off the shelf. Dian Hanson, author of a six-volume history of men's magazines and an editor for Taschen, says Hefner tapped into a new consumer attitude that emerged at the end of World War Two. "America came out the war relatively unscathed, it did not suffer like Europe. Many young men didn't see battle but had experienced more adventurous things, more nudity, and wanted something different when they came back. "It wasn't the first nude magazine, but rather than showing a macho Hemingwayesque way of life that many men didn't relate to, it showed scrawny intelligent guys they didn't have to be rough, tough guys to be a playboy. It was a nerds' way to sexuality - which is what Hefner himself did to get girls," she says. During Playboy's heyday, readers could plausibly claim they read it for its writing and journalism. The magazine published stories by Jack Kerouac, Joseph Heller, Haruki Murakami and Margaret Atwood among others, and interviewed culturally and politically significant figures such as Frank Sinatra, Malcolm X and Jimmy Carter. But nudity was always a big selling point of the magazine, which attracted or coaxed well-known female public figures into gracing its pages. "Some of the pictures were pretty amazing and became pop culture references. Naomi Campbell in her white trap outfit. American actress Bo Derek," says Hanson. "Esquire magazine was the template. They had painted pin-ups but they didn't have nudes. Hefner basically reconfigured a magazine made by older men to fit a younger man's need, and then took it a step further," she says. Playboy's circulation peaked at more than 7.16m copies in 1972, with a quarter of all American male college students reportedly reading it in the 1970s. It literally explained sex to a generation of American men. The success of Playboy magazine gave way to the rise of the Playboy lifestyle, allowing Hefner to build a Playboy mansion, create Playboy clubs with cocktail waitresses decked out in Bunny outfits and endless Playboy merchandise. The rise of feminism led to some criticism that women were being objectified. US feminist and journalist Gloria Steinem worked undercover at the New York Playboy Club to write "A Bunny's Tale," which showed conditions waitresses faced in 1963. But Hanson argues Playboy magazine was a respectable, even desirable, place for women to "show themselves off". "It was a poor girl's pageant, grandmothers would approve," she says. It also ushered in a new era of women's magazine publishing. Cosmopolitan famously published a nude photo of Burt Reynolds as a centrefold in 1972 and the debut issue of Playgirl appeared in June 1973. More raunchy US competitors like Hustler and Penthouse soon arrived, while so-called lad mags such as Maxim, Stuff and FHM followed later. But it was the internet era - which made pornography more readily available - which the magazine blamed for the circulation plummeting to its current 800,000. The company no longer makes most of its money from its racy photos. Instead it's made from licensing its logo on merchandise. Playboy's website has already banished nudity, and web traffic has quadrupled. Magazine executives hope the print version will follow in its footsteps. But Hanson isn't convinced. "Unless a new breed of hipster manages to get retro magazines back in fashion like vinyl records, without nudity Playboy is a limping beast," she says. More from the Magazine Burt Reynolds nude: 10 facts about the Cosmo centrefold (April 2012) Subscribe to the BBC News Magazine's email newsletter to get articles sent to your inbox.

Here is a summary requirement:
List some of the celebrities who have appeared in Playboy magazine.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Playboy magazine, which has been publishing pictures of fully nude women since 1953, is stopping the practice due to the internet making them outdated. Celebrities who have appeared in the magazine include Madonna, Sharon Stone, Naomi Campbell, Kate Moss, Lindsay Lohan, Pamela Anderson, Marilyn Monroe, Burt Reynolds, and many more.

# Output (a):
Some of the celebrities who have appeared in Playboy magazine include Madonna, Sharon Stone, Naomi Campbell, Kate Moss, Lindsay Lohan, Pamela Anderson, and Marilyn Monroe.

# Which is better, Output (a) or Output (b)? Your response should be either "Output (a)" or "Output (b)":

Output (a)

Instruction:
Here is an article:
Playboy magazine is stopping publishing pictures of totally nude women because the internet has made them outdated, its US owners say. It's a break with a 62-year format that has had a significant impact on American culture. By Vanessa BarfordBBC News Magazine, Washington Every month since 1953, fold-out spreads of fully nude women have filled Playboy. The glossy adult men's magazine boasts a plethora of celebrity conquests in its portfolio. Madonna, Sharon Stone and Naomi Campbell were photographed at the peak of their fame. Kate Moss posed for its front cover in a bunny outfit. Lindsay Lohan and Pamela Anderson have also graced it. The magazine may have offended some who see it as sexist and demeaning to women, but the idea of Playboy dispensing with nudity would once have been unthinkable. But in March 2016, that will happen. "You're now one click away from every sex act imaginable for free. And so it's just passe at this juncture," Playboy chief executive Scott Flanders is quoted by the New York Times as saying. The redesigned Playboy will still feature "sexy, seductive pictorials of the world's most beautiful women," but full nudity will be banished. It ends a cultural phenomenon that was a rite of passage for a generation of American men - an illicit thrill in adolescent bedrooms or garden sheds - and helped spark America's sexual revolution. From its beginnings editor-in-chief Hugh Hefner founded the magazine on full nudity. Marilyn Monroe famously appeared on the magazine's first cover and centrefold. Hefner didn't hide the magazine's intentions. "If you're a man between the ages of 18 and 80, Playboy is meant for you," he wrote in the first issue. "We want to make it clear from the very start, we aren't a 'family magazine.' If you're somebody's sister, wife or mother-in-law and picked us up by mistake, please pass us along to the man in your life and get back to your Ladies Home Companion." He also described the "pleasure-primer" he wanted to create. "Most of today's 'magazines for men' spend all their time out-of-doors - thrashing through thorny thickets or splashing about in fast-flowing streams. We enjoy mixing up cocktails and an hors d'oeuvre or two, putting a little mood music on the phonograph, and inviting in a female acquaintance for a quiet discussion on Picasso, Nietzsche, jazz, sex," it said. The 50,000 copies - which were sold for 50 cents each - flew off the shelf. Dian Hanson, author of a six-volume history of men's magazines and an editor for Taschen, says Hefner tapped into a new consumer attitude that emerged at the end of World War Two. "America came out the war relatively unscathed, it did not suffer like Europe. Many young men didn't see battle but had experienced more adventurous things, more nudity, and wanted something different when they came back. "It wasn't the first nude magazine, but rather than showing a macho Hemingwayesque way of life that many men didn't relate to, it showed scrawny intelligent guys they didn't have to be rough, tough guys to be a playboy. It was a nerds' way to sexuality - which is what Hefner himself did to get girls," she says. During Playboy's heyday, readers could plausibly claim they read it for its writing and journalism. The magazine published stories by Jack Kerouac, Joseph Heller, Haruki Murakami and Margaret Atwood among others, and interviewed culturally and politically significant figures such as Frank Sinatra, Malcolm X and Jimmy Carter. But nudity was always a big selling point of the magazine, which attracted or coaxed well-known female public figures into gracing its pages. "Some of the pictures were pretty amazing and became pop culture references. Naomi Campbell in her white trap outfit. American actress Bo Derek," says Hanson. "Esquire magazine was the template. They had painted pin-ups but they didn't have nudes. Hefner basically reconfigured a magazine made by older men to fit a younger man's need, and then took it a step further," she says. Playboy's circulation peaked at more than 7.16m copies in 1972, with a quarter of all American male college students reportedly reading it in the 1970s. It literally explained sex to a generation of American men. The success of Playboy magazine gave way to the rise of the Playboy lifestyle, allowing Hefner to build a Playboy mansion, create Playboy clubs with cocktail waitresses decked out in Bunny outfits and endless Playboy merchandise. The rise of feminism led to some criticism that women were being objectified. US feminist and journalist Gloria Steinem worked undercover at the New York Playboy Club to write "A Bunny's Tale," which showed conditions waitresses faced in 1963. But Hanson argues Playboy magazine was a respectable, even desirable, place for women to "show themselves off". "It was a poor girl's pageant, grandmothers would approve," she says. It also ushered in a new era of women's magazine publishing. Cosmopolitan famously published a nude photo of Burt Reynolds as a centrefold in 1972 and the debut issue of Playgirl appeared in June 1973. More raunchy US competitors like Hustler and Penthouse soon arrived, while so-called lad mags such as Maxim, Stuff and FHM followed later. But it was the internet era - which made pornography more readily available - which the magazine blamed for the circulation plummeting to its current 800,000. The company no longer makes most of its money from its racy photos. Instead it's made from licensing its logo on merchandise. Playboy's website has already banished nudity, and web traffic has quadrupled. Magazine executives hope the print version will follow in its footsteps. But Hanson isn't convinced. "Unless a new breed of hipster manages to get retro magazines back in fashion like vinyl records, without nudity Playboy is a limping beast," she says. More from the Magazine Burt Reynolds nude: 10 facts about the Cosmo centrefold (April 2012) Subscribe to the BBC News Magazine's email newsletter to get articles sent to your inbox.

Here is a summary requirement:
List some of the celebrities who have appeared in Playboy magazine.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Some of the celebrities who have appeared in Playboy magazine include Madonna, Sharon Stone, Naomi Campbell, Kate Moss, Lindsay Lohan, Pamela Anderson, and Marilyn Monroe.

Playboy magazine, which has been publishing pictures of fully nude women since 1953, is stopping the practice due to the internet making them outdated. Celebrities who have appeared in the magazine include Madonna, Sharon Stone, Naomi Campbell, Kate Moss, Lindsay Lohan, Pamela Anderson, Marilyn Monroe, Burt Reynolds, and many more.


You are a helpful assistant in evaluating the quality of the outputs for a given instruction. Your goal is to select the best output for the given instruction.

Select the Output (a) or Output (b) that is better for the given instruction. The two outputs are generated by two different AI chatbots respectively.

Here are some rules of the evaluation:
(1) You should prioritize evaluating whether the output honestly/precisely/closely executes the instruction, then consider its helpfulness, accuracy, level of detail, harmlessness, etc.
(2) Outputs should NOT contain more/less than what the instruction asks for, as such outputs do NOT precisely execute the instruction.
(3) You should avoid any potential bias and your judgment should be as objective as possible. For example, the order in which the outputs were presented should NOT affect your judgment, as Output (a) and Output (b) are **equally likely** to be the better.

Do NOT provide any explanation for your choice.
Do NOT say both / neither are good.
You should answer using ONLY "Output (a)" or "Output (b)". Do NOT output any other words.

# Instruction:
Here is an article:
Playboy magazine is stopping publishing pictures of totally nude women because the internet has made them outdated, its US owners say. It's a break with a 62-year format that has had a significant impact on American culture. By Vanessa BarfordBBC News Magazine, Washington Every month since 1953, fold-out spreads of fully nude women have filled Playboy. The glossy adult men's magazine boasts a plethora of celebrity conquests in its portfolio. Madonna, Sharon Stone and Naomi Campbell were photographed at the peak of their fame. Kate Moss posed for its front cover in a bunny outfit. Lindsay Lohan and Pamela Anderson have also graced it. The magazine may have offended some who see it as sexist and demeaning to women, but the idea of Playboy dispensing with nudity would once have been unthinkable. But in March 2016, that will happen. "You're now one click away from every sex act imaginable for free. And so it's just passe at this juncture," Playboy chief executive Scott Flanders is quoted by the New York Times as saying. The redesigned Playboy will still feature "sexy, seductive pictorials of the world's most beautiful women," but full nudity will be banished. It ends a cultural phenomenon that was a rite of passage for a generation of American men - an illicit thrill in adolescent bedrooms or garden sheds - and helped spark America's sexual revolution. From its beginnings editor-in-chief Hugh Hefner founded the magazine on full nudity. Marilyn Monroe famously appeared on the magazine's first cover and centrefold. Hefner didn't hide the magazine's intentions. "If you're a man between the ages of 18 and 80, Playboy is meant for you," he wrote in the first issue. "We want to make it clear from the very start, we aren't a 'family magazine.' If you're somebody's sister, wife or mother-in-law and picked us up by mistake, please pass us along to the man in your life and get back to your Ladies Home Companion." He also described the "pleasure-primer" he wanted to create. "Most of today's 'magazines for men' spend all their time out-of-doors - thrashing through thorny thickets or splashing about in fast-flowing streams. We enjoy mixing up cocktails and an hors d'oeuvre or two, putting a little mood music on the phonograph, and inviting in a female acquaintance for a quiet discussion on Picasso, Nietzsche, jazz, sex," it said. The 50,000 copies - which were sold for 50 cents each - flew off the shelf. Dian Hanson, author of a six-volume history of men's magazines and an editor for Taschen, says Hefner tapped into a new consumer attitude that emerged at the end of World War Two. "America came out the war relatively unscathed, it did not suffer like Europe. Many young men didn't see battle but had experienced more adventurous things, more nudity, and wanted something different when they came back. "It wasn't the first nude magazine, but rather than showing a macho Hemingwayesque way of life that many men didn't relate to, it showed scrawny intelligent guys they didn't have to be rough, tough guys to be a playboy. It was a nerds' way to sexuality - which is what Hefner himself did to get girls," she says. During Playboy's heyday, readers could plausibly claim they read it for its writing and journalism. The magazine published stories by Jack Kerouac, Joseph Heller, Haruki Murakami and Margaret Atwood among others, and interviewed culturally and politically significant figures such as Frank Sinatra, Malcolm X and Jimmy Carter. But nudity was always a big selling point of the magazine, which attracted or coaxed well-known female public figures into gracing its pages. "Some of the pictures were pretty amazing and became pop culture references. Naomi Campbell in her white trap outfit. American actress Bo Derek," says Hanson. "Esquire magazine was the template. They had painted pin-ups but they didn't have nudes. Hefner basically reconfigured a magazine made by older men to fit a younger man's need, and then took it a step further," she says. Playboy's circulation peaked at more than 7.16m copies in 1972, with a quarter of all American male college students reportedly reading it in the 1970s. It literally explained sex to a generation of American men. The success of Playboy magazine gave way to the rise of the Playboy lifestyle, allowing Hefner to build a Playboy mansion, create Playboy clubs with cocktail waitresses decked out in Bunny outfits and endless Playboy merchandise. The rise of feminism led to some criticism that women were being objectified. US feminist and journalist Gloria Steinem worked undercover at the New York Playboy Club to write "A Bunny's Tale," which showed conditions waitresses faced in 1963. But Hanson argues Playboy magazine was a respectable, even desirable, place for women to "show themselves off". "It was a poor girl's pageant, grandmothers would approve," she says. It also ushered in a new era of women's magazine publishing. Cosmopolitan famously published a nude photo of Burt Reynolds as a centrefold in 1972 and the debut issue of Playgirl appeared in June 1973. More raunchy US competitors like Hustler and Penthouse soon arrived, while so-called lad mags such as Maxim, Stuff and FHM followed later. But it was the internet era - which made pornography more readily available - which the magazine blamed for the circulation plummeting to its current 800,000. The company no longer makes most of its money from its racy photos. Instead it's made from licensing its logo on merchandise. Playboy's website has already banished nudity, and web traffic has quadrupled. Magazine executives hope the print version will follow in its footsteps. But Hanson isn't convinced. "Unless a new breed of hipster manages to get retro magazines back in fashion like vinyl records, without nudity Playboy is a limping beast," she says. More from the Magazine Burt Reynolds nude: 10 facts about the Cosmo centrefold (April 2012) Subscribe to the BBC News Magazine's email newsletter to get articles sent to your inbox.

Here is a summary requirement:
List some of the celebrities who have appeared in Playboy magazine.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Some of the celebrities who have appeared in Playboy magazine include Madonna, Sharon Stone, Naomi Campbell, Kate Moss, Lindsay Lohan, Pamela Anderson, and Marilyn Monroe.

# Output (a):
Playboy magazine will no longer publish pictures of fully nude women due to the availability of free online pornography. The redesigned magazine will still feature "sexy, seductive pictorials of the world's most beautiful women," but full nudity will be banished. Playboy has featured a plethora of celebrity conquests in its portfolio, including Madonna, Sharon Stone, Naomi Campbell, Kate Moss, Lindsay Lohan, and Pamela Anderson.

# Which is better, Output (a) or Output (b)? Your response should be either "Output (a)" or "Output (b)":

Output (b)

Instruction:
Here is an article:
Playboy magazine is stopping publishing pictures of totally nude women because the internet has made them outdated, its US owners say. It's a break with a 62-year format that has had a significant impact on American culture. By Vanessa BarfordBBC News Magazine, Washington Every month since 1953, fold-out spreads of fully nude women have filled Playboy. The glossy adult men's magazine boasts a plethora of celebrity conquests in its portfolio. Madonna, Sharon Stone and Naomi Campbell were photographed at the peak of their fame. Kate Moss posed for its front cover in a bunny outfit. Lindsay Lohan and Pamela Anderson have also graced it. The magazine may have offended some who see it as sexist and demeaning to women, but the idea of Playboy dispensing with nudity would once have been unthinkable. But in March 2016, that will happen. "You're now one click away from every sex act imaginable for free. And so it's just passe at this juncture," Playboy chief executive Scott Flanders is quoted by the New York Times as saying. The redesigned Playboy will still feature "sexy, seductive pictorials of the world's most beautiful women," but full nudity will be banished. It ends a cultural phenomenon that was a rite of passage for a generation of American men - an illicit thrill in adolescent bedrooms or garden sheds - and helped spark America's sexual revolution. From its beginnings editor-in-chief Hugh Hefner founded the magazine on full nudity. Marilyn Monroe famously appeared on the magazine's first cover and centrefold. Hefner didn't hide the magazine's intentions. "If you're a man between the ages of 18 and 80, Playboy is meant for you," he wrote in the first issue. "We want to make it clear from the very start, we aren't a 'family magazine.' If you're somebody's sister, wife or mother-in-law and picked us up by mistake, please pass us along to the man in your life and get back to your Ladies Home Companion." He also described the "pleasure-primer" he wanted to create. "Most of today's 'magazines for men' spend all their time out-of-doors - thrashing through thorny thickets or splashing about in fast-flowing streams. We enjoy mixing up cocktails and an hors d'oeuvre or two, putting a little mood music on the phonograph, and inviting in a female acquaintance for a quiet discussion on Picasso, Nietzsche, jazz, sex," it said. The 50,000 copies - which were sold for 50 cents each - flew off the shelf. Dian Hanson, author of a six-volume history of men's magazines and an editor for Taschen, says Hefner tapped into a new consumer attitude that emerged at the end of World War Two. "America came out the war relatively unscathed, it did not suffer like Europe. Many young men didn't see battle but had experienced more adventurous things, more nudity, and wanted something different when they came back. "It wasn't the first nude magazine, but rather than showing a macho Hemingwayesque way of life that many men didn't relate to, it showed scrawny intelligent guys they didn't have to be rough, tough guys to be a playboy. It was a nerds' way to sexuality - which is what Hefner himself did to get girls," she says. During Playboy's heyday, readers could plausibly claim they read it for its writing and journalism. The magazine published stories by Jack Kerouac, Joseph Heller, Haruki Murakami and Margaret Atwood among others, and interviewed culturally and politically significant figures such as Frank Sinatra, Malcolm X and Jimmy Carter. But nudity was always a big selling point of the magazine, which attracted or coaxed well-known female public figures into gracing its pages. "Some of the pictures were pretty amazing and became pop culture references. Naomi Campbell in her white trap outfit. American actress Bo Derek," says Hanson. "Esquire magazine was the template. They had painted pin-ups but they didn't have nudes. Hefner basically reconfigured a magazine made by older men to fit a younger man's need, and then took it a step further," she says. Playboy's circulation peaked at more than 7.16m copies in 1972, with a quarter of all American male college students reportedly reading it in the 1970s. It literally explained sex to a generation of American men. The success of Playboy magazine gave way to the rise of the Playboy lifestyle, allowing Hefner to build a Playboy mansion, create Playboy clubs with cocktail waitresses decked out in Bunny outfits and endless Playboy merchandise. The rise of feminism led to some criticism that women were being objectified. US feminist and journalist Gloria Steinem worked undercover at the New York Playboy Club to write "A Bunny's Tale," which showed conditions waitresses faced in 1963. But Hanson argues Playboy magazine was a respectable, even desirable, place for women to "show themselves off". "It was a poor girl's pageant, grandmothers would approve," she says. It also ushered in a new era of women's magazine publishing. Cosmopolitan famously published a nude photo of Burt Reynolds as a centrefold in 1972 and the debut issue of Playgirl appeared in June 1973. More raunchy US competitors like Hustler and Penthouse soon arrived, while so-called lad mags such as Maxim, Stuff and FHM followed later. But it was the internet era - which made pornography more readily available - which the magazine blamed for the circulation plummeting to its current 800,000. The company no longer makes most of its money from its racy photos. Instead it's made from licensing its logo on merchandise. Playboy's website has already banished nudity, and web traffic has quadrupled. Magazine executives hope the print version will follow in its footsteps. But Hanson isn't convinced. "Unless a new breed of hipster manages to get retro magazines back in fashion like vinyl records, without nudity Playboy is a limping beast," she says. More from the Magazine Burt Reynolds nude: 10 facts about the Cosmo centrefold (April 2012) Subscribe to the BBC News Magazine's email newsletter to get articles sent to your inbox.

Here is a summary requirement:
List some of the celebrities who have appeared in Playboy magazine.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Playboy magazine will no longer publish pictures of fully nude women due to the availability of free online pornography. The redesigned magazine will still feature "sexy, seductive pictorials of the world's most beautiful women," but full nudity will be banished. Playboy has featured a plethora of celebrity conquests in its portfolio, including Madonna, Sharon Stone, Naomi Campbell, Kate Moss, Lindsay Lohan, and Pamela Anderson.

Some of the celebrities who have appeared in Playboy magazine include Madonna, Sharon Stone, Naomi Campbell, Kate Moss, Lindsay Lohan, Pamela Anderson, and Marilyn Monroe.


You are a helpful assistant in evaluating the quality of the outputs for a given instruction. Your goal is to select the best output for the given instruction.

Select the Output (a) or Output (b) that is better for the given instruction. The two outputs are generated by two different AI chatbots respectively.

Here are some rules of the evaluation:
(1) You should prioritize evaluating whether the output honestly/precisely/closely executes the instruction, then consider its helpfulness, accuracy, level of detail, harmlessness, etc.
(2) Outputs should NOT contain more/less than what the instruction asks for, as such outputs do NOT precisely execute the instruction.
(3) You should avoid any potential bias and your judgment should be as objective as possible. For example, the order in which the outputs were presented should NOT affect your judgment, as Output (a) and Output (b) are **equally likely** to be the better.

Do NOT provide any explanation for your choice.
Do NOT say both / neither are good.
You should answer using ONLY "Output (a)" or "Output (b)". Do NOT output any other words.

# Instruction:
Here is an article:
Quantum computers have long been touted as incredibly powerful machines that will be able to solve hugely complex computational problems much faster than any computer we have available today. But no-one can agree on the best way to make them. Who will win the race? By Mary-Ann RussonTechnology of Business reporter Superfast quantum computers could speed up the discovery of new medicines, crack the most complex cryptographic security systems, design new materials, model climate change, and supercharge artificial intelligence, computer scientists say. But there's currently no consensus on the best way to make them or how to make them available to the mass market. Physicists, engineers and computer scientists around the world are trying to develop four very different types of quantum computers, based around light particles, trapped ions, superconducting qubits, or nitrogen-vacancy centres in diamonds. Companies like IBM, Google, Rigetti, Intel and Microsoft are currently leading the quantum charge. Each method has its pros and cons, but the overarching challenge is the fragile nature of quantum itself. What is quantum computing? Instead of using ones and noughts called bits, representing on or off, in long sequences as in classical computing a quantum bit - or qubit - uses the near magical properties of sub-atomic particles. Electrons or photons, for example, can be in two states at the same time - a phenomenon called superposition. As a result, a qubit-based computer can do far more calculations much faster than a conventional computer. "If you had a two-qubit computer and you add two qubits, it becomes a four-qubit computer. But you're not doubling the computer power, you're increasing it exponentially," explains Martin Giles, San Francisco bureau chief of the MIT Technology Review. Computer scientists sometimes describe this quantum computing effect as like being able to go down each path of a very complex maze at the same time. Qubits can also influence each other even when they're not physically connected, a process called "entanglement". In computing terms, this gives them the ability to make logical leaps conventional computers never could. The search for stability But qubits are highly unstable and prone to interference or "noise" from other sources of energy, leading to errors in calculations. So the race is one to find a way to stabilise them for mass-production. Computing giant IBM firmly believes that "transmon superconducting qubits" hold the most promise for quantum computing, and they have three prototype quantum processors that the public can access in the cloud. "So far, over 94,000 people have accessed IBM quantum computers in the cloud. They've run over five million experiments and written 110 papers," says Dr Robert Sutor, vice president for quantum computing strategy and ecosystem at IBM Research. "People are learning and experimenting... we hope in three to five years to be able to point at one specific example, and say that quantum significantly improves on anything classical computers can do." But IBM's method required the quantum computer to be stored within a large fridge, where the qubits are stored at temperatures close to absolute zero to ensure that they remain in their useful states. This means it would be extremely hard to miniaturise, and thus very expensive. "It seems likely that superconducting qubits will be among the first technologies to enable useful quantum computation," says Joseph Fitzsimons, a principal investigator at the National University of Singapore's Centre of Quantum Technologies. "However, my impression is that they are analogous to vacuum tubes in early computers, rather than transistors which came along later. "We may yet see another technology emerge which becomes the ultimate winner." Microsoft and academics at the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen are working on what they believe will be much more stable qubits based on so-called Majorana particles. While other teams are working on trapping qubits in silicon - the material traditional computer chips have been made from. And computer scientists at Oxford University are looking at ways to link smaller qubit computers rather than creating bigger computers with lots of qubits. There are many ways to skin Schrodinger's Cat it seems. Classical potential? While we wait for quantum computers, what's the future for conventional, or classical, computing? In July, Ewin Tang, an 18-year-old graduate in computer science and mathematics from the University of Texas at Austin, made waves in the international computing world by developing a classical computer algorithm that can solve a problem almost as fast as a quantum computer. The problem involved developing a recommendation engine that suggests products to users based on data about their preferences. And the EU recently announced it is working on the next generation of computers - exascale - which would enable a billion billion calculations per second. "Exascale means 10 to the power of 18 operations per second," explains says Prof Scott Aaronson, a theoretical computer scientist at UT Austin who mentored Mr Tang. "10 to the power of 18 is big, but quantum systems, which will be capable of 10 to the power of 1,000 operations per second, is much, much bigger." And the problem for classical computing is that we are reaching the limits of how many transistors we can fit onto a chip - Apple's A11 squeezes in an astonishing 4.3 billion, for example. Moore's Law - that every two years, microprocessors will get twice as fast, use half as much energy, and take up half as much space - is finally breaking down. Quantum leap Even if a stable, mass-produced quantum computer always remains elusive, the research is already yielding interesting results. "If we hadn't invested in quantum computing, the quantum algorithm that inspired Mr Tang wouldn't have existed," says Prof Robert Young, a Royal Society research fellow and director of the University of Lancaster's Quantum Technology Centre. More Technology of Business Already, he says that quantum research has yielded a new way to cool devices to low temperatures; light-based chip enhancements that have improved the fibre optic broadband experience; and the invention of lab-on-a-chip technologies to speed up the diagnosis of illnesses. "The real benefit of going to the Moon wasn't going to the Moon, it was the peripheral technologies that were developed on the way," says Prof Young - GPS satellite navigation and ball point pens that write upside down, to name but two.

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize the people quoted in the article and their identity.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Martin Giles is the San Francisco bureau chief of the MIT Technology Review. Dr Robert Sutor is the vice president for quantum computing strategy and ecosystem at IBM Research. Joseph Fitzsimons is a principal investigator at the National University of Singapore's Centre of Quantum Technologies. Ewin Tang is an 18-year-old graduate in computer science and mathematics from the University of Texas at Austin. Prof Scott Aaronson is a theoretical computer scientist at UT Austin. Prof Robert Young is a Royal Society research fellow and director of the University of Lancaster's Quantum Technology Centre.

# Output (a):
The article quotes several experts in the field of quantum computing. Martin Giles, San Francisco bureau chief of the MIT Technology Review, explains the exponential increase in computing power with qubits. Dr. Robert Sutor, vice president for quantum computing strategy and ecosystem at IBM Research, discusses the public's access to IBM's quantum computers in the cloud. Joseph Fitzsimons, a principal investigator at the National University of Singapore's Centre of Quantum Technologies, shares his thoughts on superconducting qubits. Prof. Scott Aaronson, a theoretical computer scientist at UT Austin, explains the difference between exascale and quantum systems. Finally, Prof. Robert Young, a Royal Society research fellow and director of the University of Lancaster's Quantum Technology Centre, highlights the peripheral benefits of quantum research.

# Which is better, Output (a) or Output (b)? Your response should be either "Output (a)" or "Output (b)":

Output (a)

Instruction:
Here is an article:
Quantum computers have long been touted as incredibly powerful machines that will be able to solve hugely complex computational problems much faster than any computer we have available today. But no-one can agree on the best way to make them. Who will win the race? By Mary-Ann RussonTechnology of Business reporter Superfast quantum computers could speed up the discovery of new medicines, crack the most complex cryptographic security systems, design new materials, model climate change, and supercharge artificial intelligence, computer scientists say. But there's currently no consensus on the best way to make them or how to make them available to the mass market. Physicists, engineers and computer scientists around the world are trying to develop four very different types of quantum computers, based around light particles, trapped ions, superconducting qubits, or nitrogen-vacancy centres in diamonds. Companies like IBM, Google, Rigetti, Intel and Microsoft are currently leading the quantum charge. Each method has its pros and cons, but the overarching challenge is the fragile nature of quantum itself. What is quantum computing? Instead of using ones and noughts called bits, representing on or off, in long sequences as in classical computing a quantum bit - or qubit - uses the near magical properties of sub-atomic particles. Electrons or photons, for example, can be in two states at the same time - a phenomenon called superposition. As a result, a qubit-based computer can do far more calculations much faster than a conventional computer. "If you had a two-qubit computer and you add two qubits, it becomes a four-qubit computer. But you're not doubling the computer power, you're increasing it exponentially," explains Martin Giles, San Francisco bureau chief of the MIT Technology Review. Computer scientists sometimes describe this quantum computing effect as like being able to go down each path of a very complex maze at the same time. Qubits can also influence each other even when they're not physically connected, a process called "entanglement". In computing terms, this gives them the ability to make logical leaps conventional computers never could. The search for stability But qubits are highly unstable and prone to interference or "noise" from other sources of energy, leading to errors in calculations. So the race is one to find a way to stabilise them for mass-production. Computing giant IBM firmly believes that "transmon superconducting qubits" hold the most promise for quantum computing, and they have three prototype quantum processors that the public can access in the cloud. "So far, over 94,000 people have accessed IBM quantum computers in the cloud. They've run over five million experiments and written 110 papers," says Dr Robert Sutor, vice president for quantum computing strategy and ecosystem at IBM Research. "People are learning and experimenting... we hope in three to five years to be able to point at one specific example, and say that quantum significantly improves on anything classical computers can do." But IBM's method required the quantum computer to be stored within a large fridge, where the qubits are stored at temperatures close to absolute zero to ensure that they remain in their useful states. This means it would be extremely hard to miniaturise, and thus very expensive. "It seems likely that superconducting qubits will be among the first technologies to enable useful quantum computation," says Joseph Fitzsimons, a principal investigator at the National University of Singapore's Centre of Quantum Technologies. "However, my impression is that they are analogous to vacuum tubes in early computers, rather than transistors which came along later. "We may yet see another technology emerge which becomes the ultimate winner." Microsoft and academics at the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen are working on what they believe will be much more stable qubits based on so-called Majorana particles. While other teams are working on trapping qubits in silicon - the material traditional computer chips have been made from. And computer scientists at Oxford University are looking at ways to link smaller qubit computers rather than creating bigger computers with lots of qubits. There are many ways to skin Schrodinger's Cat it seems. Classical potential? While we wait for quantum computers, what's the future for conventional, or classical, computing? In July, Ewin Tang, an 18-year-old graduate in computer science and mathematics from the University of Texas at Austin, made waves in the international computing world by developing a classical computer algorithm that can solve a problem almost as fast as a quantum computer. The problem involved developing a recommendation engine that suggests products to users based on data about their preferences. And the EU recently announced it is working on the next generation of computers - exascale - which would enable a billion billion calculations per second. "Exascale means 10 to the power of 18 operations per second," explains says Prof Scott Aaronson, a theoretical computer scientist at UT Austin who mentored Mr Tang. "10 to the power of 18 is big, but quantum systems, which will be capable of 10 to the power of 1,000 operations per second, is much, much bigger." And the problem for classical computing is that we are reaching the limits of how many transistors we can fit onto a chip - Apple's A11 squeezes in an astonishing 4.3 billion, for example. Moore's Law - that every two years, microprocessors will get twice as fast, use half as much energy, and take up half as much space - is finally breaking down. Quantum leap Even if a stable, mass-produced quantum computer always remains elusive, the research is already yielding interesting results. "If we hadn't invested in quantum computing, the quantum algorithm that inspired Mr Tang wouldn't have existed," says Prof Robert Young, a Royal Society research fellow and director of the University of Lancaster's Quantum Technology Centre. More Technology of Business Already, he says that quantum research has yielded a new way to cool devices to low temperatures; light-based chip enhancements that have improved the fibre optic broadband experience; and the invention of lab-on-a-chip technologies to speed up the diagnosis of illnesses. "The real benefit of going to the Moon wasn't going to the Moon, it was the peripheral technologies that were developed on the way," says Prof Young - GPS satellite navigation and ball point pens that write upside down, to name but two.

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize the people quoted in the article and their identity.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

The article quotes several experts in the field of quantum computing. Martin Giles, San Francisco bureau chief of the MIT Technology Review, explains the exponential increase in computing power with qubits. Dr. Robert Sutor, vice president for quantum computing strategy and ecosystem at IBM Research, discusses the public's access to IBM's quantum computers in the cloud. Joseph Fitzsimons, a principal investigator at the National University of Singapore's Centre of Quantum Technologies, shares his thoughts on superconducting qubits. Prof. Scott Aaronson, a theoretical computer scientist at UT Austin, explains the difference between exascale and quantum systems. Finally, Prof. Robert Young, a Royal Society research fellow and director of the University of Lancaster's Quantum Technology Centre, highlights the peripheral benefits of quantum research.

Martin Giles is the San Francisco bureau chief of the MIT Technology Review. Dr Robert Sutor is the vice president for quantum computing strategy and ecosystem at IBM Research. Joseph Fitzsimons is a principal investigator at the National University of Singapore's Centre of Quantum Technologies. Ewin Tang is an 18-year-old graduate in computer science and mathematics from the University of Texas at Austin. Prof Scott Aaronson is a theoretical computer scientist at UT Austin. Prof Robert Young is a Royal Society research fellow and director of the University of Lancaster's Quantum Technology Centre.


You are a helpful assistant in evaluating the quality of the outputs for a given instruction. Your goal is to select the best output for the given instruction.

Select the Output (a) or Output (b) that is better for the given instruction. The two outputs are generated by two different AI chatbots respectively.

Here are some rules of the evaluation:
(1) You should prioritize evaluating whether the output honestly/precisely/closely executes the instruction, then consider its helpfulness, accuracy, level of detail, harmlessness, etc.
(2) Outputs should NOT contain more/less than what the instruction asks for, as such outputs do NOT precisely execute the instruction.
(3) You should avoid any potential bias and your judgment should be as objective as possible. For example, the order in which the outputs were presented should NOT affect your judgment, as Output (a) and Output (b) are **equally likely** to be the better.

Do NOT provide any explanation for your choice.
Do NOT say both / neither are good.
You should answer using ONLY "Output (a)" or "Output (b)". Do NOT output any other words.

# Instruction:
Here is an article:
Quantum computers have long been touted as incredibly powerful machines that will be able to solve hugely complex computational problems much faster than any computer we have available today. But no-one can agree on the best way to make them. Who will win the race? By Mary-Ann RussonTechnology of Business reporter Superfast quantum computers could speed up the discovery of new medicines, crack the most complex cryptographic security systems, design new materials, model climate change, and supercharge artificial intelligence, computer scientists say. But there's currently no consensus on the best way to make them or how to make them available to the mass market. Physicists, engineers and computer scientists around the world are trying to develop four very different types of quantum computers, based around light particles, trapped ions, superconducting qubits, or nitrogen-vacancy centres in diamonds. Companies like IBM, Google, Rigetti, Intel and Microsoft are currently leading the quantum charge. Each method has its pros and cons, but the overarching challenge is the fragile nature of quantum itself. What is quantum computing? Instead of using ones and noughts called bits, representing on or off, in long sequences as in classical computing a quantum bit - or qubit - uses the near magical properties of sub-atomic particles. Electrons or photons, for example, can be in two states at the same time - a phenomenon called superposition. As a result, a qubit-based computer can do far more calculations much faster than a conventional computer. "If you had a two-qubit computer and you add two qubits, it becomes a four-qubit computer. But you're not doubling the computer power, you're increasing it exponentially," explains Martin Giles, San Francisco bureau chief of the MIT Technology Review. Computer scientists sometimes describe this quantum computing effect as like being able to go down each path of a very complex maze at the same time. Qubits can also influence each other even when they're not physically connected, a process called "entanglement". In computing terms, this gives them the ability to make logical leaps conventional computers never could. The search for stability But qubits are highly unstable and prone to interference or "noise" from other sources of energy, leading to errors in calculations. So the race is one to find a way to stabilise them for mass-production. Computing giant IBM firmly believes that "transmon superconducting qubits" hold the most promise for quantum computing, and they have three prototype quantum processors that the public can access in the cloud. "So far, over 94,000 people have accessed IBM quantum computers in the cloud. They've run over five million experiments and written 110 papers," says Dr Robert Sutor, vice president for quantum computing strategy and ecosystem at IBM Research. "People are learning and experimenting... we hope in three to five years to be able to point at one specific example, and say that quantum significantly improves on anything classical computers can do." But IBM's method required the quantum computer to be stored within a large fridge, where the qubits are stored at temperatures close to absolute zero to ensure that they remain in their useful states. This means it would be extremely hard to miniaturise, and thus very expensive. "It seems likely that superconducting qubits will be among the first technologies to enable useful quantum computation," says Joseph Fitzsimons, a principal investigator at the National University of Singapore's Centre of Quantum Technologies. "However, my impression is that they are analogous to vacuum tubes in early computers, rather than transistors which came along later. "We may yet see another technology emerge which becomes the ultimate winner." Microsoft and academics at the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen are working on what they believe will be much more stable qubits based on so-called Majorana particles. While other teams are working on trapping qubits in silicon - the material traditional computer chips have been made from. And computer scientists at Oxford University are looking at ways to link smaller qubit computers rather than creating bigger computers with lots of qubits. There are many ways to skin Schrodinger's Cat it seems. Classical potential? While we wait for quantum computers, what's the future for conventional, or classical, computing? In July, Ewin Tang, an 18-year-old graduate in computer science and mathematics from the University of Texas at Austin, made waves in the international computing world by developing a classical computer algorithm that can solve a problem almost as fast as a quantum computer. The problem involved developing a recommendation engine that suggests products to users based on data about their preferences. And the EU recently announced it is working on the next generation of computers - exascale - which would enable a billion billion calculations per second. "Exascale means 10 to the power of 18 operations per second," explains says Prof Scott Aaronson, a theoretical computer scientist at UT Austin who mentored Mr Tang. "10 to the power of 18 is big, but quantum systems, which will be capable of 10 to the power of 1,000 operations per second, is much, much bigger." And the problem for classical computing is that we are reaching the limits of how many transistors we can fit onto a chip - Apple's A11 squeezes in an astonishing 4.3 billion, for example. Moore's Law - that every two years, microprocessors will get twice as fast, use half as much energy, and take up half as much space - is finally breaking down. Quantum leap Even if a stable, mass-produced quantum computer always remains elusive, the research is already yielding interesting results. "If we hadn't invested in quantum computing, the quantum algorithm that inspired Mr Tang wouldn't have existed," says Prof Robert Young, a Royal Society research fellow and director of the University of Lancaster's Quantum Technology Centre. More Technology of Business Already, he says that quantum research has yielded a new way to cool devices to low temperatures; light-based chip enhancements that have improved the fibre optic broadband experience; and the invention of lab-on-a-chip technologies to speed up the diagnosis of illnesses. "The real benefit of going to the Moon wasn't going to the Moon, it was the peripheral technologies that were developed on the way," says Prof Young - GPS satellite navigation and ball point pens that write upside down, to name but two.

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize the people quoted in the article and their identity.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Martin Giles is the San Francisco bureau chief of the MIT Technology Review. Dr Robert Sutor is the vice president for quantum computing strategy and ecosystem at IBM Research. Joseph Fitzsimons is a principal investigator at the National University of Singapore's Centre of Quantum Technologies. Prof Scott Aaronson is a theoretical computer scientist at UT Austin. Prof Robert Young is a Royal Society research fellow and director of the University of Lancaster's Quantum Technology Centre.

# Output (a):
The article quotes various experts in the field of quantum computing, including Martin Giles, San Francisco bureau chief of the MIT Technology Review, Dr Robert Sutor, vice president for quantum computing strategy and ecosystem at IBM Research, Joseph Fitzsimons, a principal investigator at the National University of Singapore's Centre of Quantum Technologies, and Prof Scott Aaronson, a theoretical computer scientist at UT Austin. The article also mentions companies like IBM, Google, Rigetti, Intel, and Microsoft who are leading the quantum computing charge.

# Which is better, Output (a) or Output (b)? Your response should be either "Output (a)" or "Output (b)":

Output (b)

Instruction:
Here is an article:
Quantum computers have long been touted as incredibly powerful machines that will be able to solve hugely complex computational problems much faster than any computer we have available today. But no-one can agree on the best way to make them. Who will win the race? By Mary-Ann RussonTechnology of Business reporter Superfast quantum computers could speed up the discovery of new medicines, crack the most complex cryptographic security systems, design new materials, model climate change, and supercharge artificial intelligence, computer scientists say. But there's currently no consensus on the best way to make them or how to make them available to the mass market. Physicists, engineers and computer scientists around the world are trying to develop four very different types of quantum computers, based around light particles, trapped ions, superconducting qubits, or nitrogen-vacancy centres in diamonds. Companies like IBM, Google, Rigetti, Intel and Microsoft are currently leading the quantum charge. Each method has its pros and cons, but the overarching challenge is the fragile nature of quantum itself. What is quantum computing? Instead of using ones and noughts called bits, representing on or off, in long sequences as in classical computing a quantum bit - or qubit - uses the near magical properties of sub-atomic particles. Electrons or photons, for example, can be in two states at the same time - a phenomenon called superposition. As a result, a qubit-based computer can do far more calculations much faster than a conventional computer. "If you had a two-qubit computer and you add two qubits, it becomes a four-qubit computer. But you're not doubling the computer power, you're increasing it exponentially," explains Martin Giles, San Francisco bureau chief of the MIT Technology Review. Computer scientists sometimes describe this quantum computing effect as like being able to go down each path of a very complex maze at the same time. Qubits can also influence each other even when they're not physically connected, a process called "entanglement". In computing terms, this gives them the ability to make logical leaps conventional computers never could. The search for stability But qubits are highly unstable and prone to interference or "noise" from other sources of energy, leading to errors in calculations. So the race is one to find a way to stabilise them for mass-production. Computing giant IBM firmly believes that "transmon superconducting qubits" hold the most promise for quantum computing, and they have three prototype quantum processors that the public can access in the cloud. "So far, over 94,000 people have accessed IBM quantum computers in the cloud. They've run over five million experiments and written 110 papers," says Dr Robert Sutor, vice president for quantum computing strategy and ecosystem at IBM Research. "People are learning and experimenting... we hope in three to five years to be able to point at one specific example, and say that quantum significantly improves on anything classical computers can do." But IBM's method required the quantum computer to be stored within a large fridge, where the qubits are stored at temperatures close to absolute zero to ensure that they remain in their useful states. This means it would be extremely hard to miniaturise, and thus very expensive. "It seems likely that superconducting qubits will be among the first technologies to enable useful quantum computation," says Joseph Fitzsimons, a principal investigator at the National University of Singapore's Centre of Quantum Technologies. "However, my impression is that they are analogous to vacuum tubes in early computers, rather than transistors which came along later. "We may yet see another technology emerge which becomes the ultimate winner." Microsoft and academics at the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen are working on what they believe will be much more stable qubits based on so-called Majorana particles. While other teams are working on trapping qubits in silicon - the material traditional computer chips have been made from. And computer scientists at Oxford University are looking at ways to link smaller qubit computers rather than creating bigger computers with lots of qubits. There are many ways to skin Schrodinger's Cat it seems. Classical potential? While we wait for quantum computers, what's the future for conventional, or classical, computing? In July, Ewin Tang, an 18-year-old graduate in computer science and mathematics from the University of Texas at Austin, made waves in the international computing world by developing a classical computer algorithm that can solve a problem almost as fast as a quantum computer. The problem involved developing a recommendation engine that suggests products to users based on data about their preferences. And the EU recently announced it is working on the next generation of computers - exascale - which would enable a billion billion calculations per second. "Exascale means 10 to the power of 18 operations per second," explains says Prof Scott Aaronson, a theoretical computer scientist at UT Austin who mentored Mr Tang. "10 to the power of 18 is big, but quantum systems, which will be capable of 10 to the power of 1,000 operations per second, is much, much bigger." And the problem for classical computing is that we are reaching the limits of how many transistors we can fit onto a chip - Apple's A11 squeezes in an astonishing 4.3 billion, for example. Moore's Law - that every two years, microprocessors will get twice as fast, use half as much energy, and take up half as much space - is finally breaking down. Quantum leap Even if a stable, mass-produced quantum computer always remains elusive, the research is already yielding interesting results. "If we hadn't invested in quantum computing, the quantum algorithm that inspired Mr Tang wouldn't have existed," says Prof Robert Young, a Royal Society research fellow and director of the University of Lancaster's Quantum Technology Centre. More Technology of Business Already, he says that quantum research has yielded a new way to cool devices to low temperatures; light-based chip enhancements that have improved the fibre optic broadband experience; and the invention of lab-on-a-chip technologies to speed up the diagnosis of illnesses. "The real benefit of going to the Moon wasn't going to the Moon, it was the peripheral technologies that were developed on the way," says Prof Young - GPS satellite navigation and ball point pens that write upside down, to name but two.

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize the people quoted in the article and their identity.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

The article quotes various experts in the field of quantum computing, including Martin Giles, San Francisco bureau chief of the MIT Technology Review, Dr Robert Sutor, vice president for quantum computing strategy and ecosystem at IBM Research, Joseph Fitzsimons, a principal investigator at the National University of Singapore's Centre of Quantum Technologies, and Prof Scott Aaronson, a theoretical computer scientist at UT Austin. The article also mentions companies like IBM, Google, Rigetti, Intel, and Microsoft who are leading the quantum computing charge.

Martin Giles is the San Francisco bureau chief of the MIT Technology Review. Dr Robert Sutor is the vice president for quantum computing strategy and ecosystem at IBM Research. Joseph Fitzsimons is a principal investigator at the National University of Singapore's Centre of Quantum Technologies. Prof Scott Aaronson is a theoretical computer scientist at UT Austin. Prof Robert Young is a Royal Society research fellow and director of the University of Lancaster's Quantum Technology Centre.


You are a helpful assistant in evaluating the quality of the outputs for a given instruction. Your goal is to select the best output for the given instruction.

Select the Output (a) or Output (b) that is better for the given instruction. The two outputs are generated by two different AI chatbots respectively.

Here are some rules of the evaluation:
(1) You should prioritize evaluating whether the output honestly/precisely/closely executes the instruction, then consider its helpfulness, accuracy, level of detail, harmlessness, etc.
(2) Outputs should NOT contain more/less than what the instruction asks for, as such outputs do NOT precisely execute the instruction.
(3) You should avoid any potential bias and your judgment should be as objective as possible. For example, the order in which the outputs were presented should NOT affect your judgment, as Output (a) and Output (b) are **equally likely** to be the better.

Do NOT provide any explanation for your choice.
Do NOT say both / neither are good.
You should answer using ONLY "Output (a)" or "Output (b)". Do NOT output any other words.

# Instruction:
Here is an article:
Ride-sharing company Lyft has begun trading on the stock market with a surge in its share price. Soon, Lyft will be joined by rival Uber. Both companies will be worth tens of billions of dollars. Dave LeeNorth America technology reporter But, with neither of the firms ever coming close to turning a profit, the flotations are being seen as a reckoning - not just Uber and Lyft, but for the so-called “gig economy” itself, the business model that does away with traditional employment in favour of dishing out small jobs via an app. Uber and Lyft have, until now, been funded entirely by unprecedented amounts of venture capital. Uber in particular has made eyes water: it attracted almost $25bn, earning the company the title of “most valuable start-up in history”. Lyft, which has not (yet) expanded globally, raised $5bn. Yet for both firms, reality is arriving soon. Once public, "there's no more hype - it's just results”, said Alex Wilhelm, editor-in-chief of Crunchbase, a site which tracks the financial health of technology firms around the world. “It's going to be tough." Removing the most costly ingredient In 2018, Uber suffered a staggering net loss of $1.8bn. Lyft lost $911m. Those losses are narrowing, and revenues are increasing, but there are clearly massive hills to climb. And so, for the millions of people around the world that use ride-sharing, efforts to balance these very unbalanced books may quickly become apparent. “Eventually they’re going to have to raise prices on passengers to be profitable,” suggested Dara Kerr, a reporter who covers the gig economy for technology news site CNET. “They're also trying to make bets on other types of transportation, like the scooters and bicycles and self-driving cars. Because all three of those don't have the most costly ingredient, which is the drivers.” While there are small-scale tests with self-driving cars happening in a handful of cities, we are - by most estimates - perhaps a decade away from that being a reality. Uber and Lyft will need to make up that difference somehow. In preparation for their flotations, and in an effort to boost the number of customers they have, Lyft and Uber have aggressively discounted rides, at levels most consider to be wholly unsustainable. Yet, if Silicon Valley’s history tells us much, it’s that profits often don’t matter all that much. "Facebook, Snap, Twitter… none of them came into an IPO with a profit,” Ms Kerr added. "So I don't know how much that will scare investors or not.” A driver’s $1,000 decision What could be more important, at least on the first day’s trading, is the degree to which a hot new technology stock sends share prices sky high. Jay Cradeur certainly hopes that’s the case. He’s driven an incredible 23,000 rides for Uber and Lyft combined, experience that he shares regularly with other drivers on a blog and podcast. Drivers with 10,000 rides on either platform have been offered a $1,000 bonus that can be taken either in cash or in stock (those with over 20,000 on either platform are being given $10,000). Mr Cradeur is going to take the offer of stock. "I don't have a lot of confidence they're going to, you know, turn a profit anytime soon. "But there does seem to be just a lot of a lot of cultural and social support. So I think there's gonna be a lot of people wanting to buy the stock, which is going to drive the price up - at least initially.” He too predicts the firms might have to bump up prices for riders in order to turn a profit. “They're going to be between a rock and a hard place, right? They're going to have to satisfy shareholders. "These artificially low prices are great for right now. But when they go up, I still think people will use the service because it's so convenient.” Hordes of millionaires These flotations don't occur in a vacuum. What happens to Lyft and Uber will reverberate around the technology industry - and its overwhelmed epicenter, San Francisco. The companies are just the first of several tech firms expected to go public this year, creating thousands of new millionaires in the process. It’s a grim prospect for the region's “normal” residents, for whom the prospect of home ownership is now mostly an impossibility. This is an area where rents have been driven so high, teachers must take up second jobs in order to scrape together money to live within the communities they teach. Of course, that second job is often as a ride-share driver. However - if these companies can’t make it work, and fail to live up to the hype we’re likely about to see over the next 12 months, it will be major wake-up call for tech’s apparently best and brightest. “There's a lot of the ‘smartest' tech money, and a lot of the big tech money inside his company,” Mr Wilhelm notes, citing investments in ride-sharing from firms such as Andreessen Horowitz, and Google parent company Alphabet. “If they don't do well, I'm curious what that says about the theoretical savvy at these firms.” _____ Follow Dave Lee on Twitter @DaveLeeBBC Do you have more information about this or any other technology story? You can reach Dave directly and securely through encrypted messaging app Signal on: +1 (628) 400-7370

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize the quoted persons and their identities.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Dave Lee is a North America technology reporter. Alex Wilhelm is the editor-in-chief of Crunchbase, a site which tracks the financial health of technology firms around the world. Dara Kerr is a reporter who covers the gig economy for technology news site CNET. Jay Cradeur is a driver who has driven an incredible 23,000 rides for Uber and Lyft combined and shares his experience with other drivers on a blog and podcast.

# Output (a):
Alex Wilhelm is the editor-in-chief of Crunchbase, a site which tracks the financial health of technology firms around the world.

Dara Kerr is a reporter who covers the gig economy for technology news site CNET.

Jay Cradeur is a driver who has driven 23,000 rides for Uber and Lyft combined. He shares his experience with other drivers on a blog and podcast.

# Which is better, Output (a) or Output (b)? Your response should be either "Output (a)" or "Output (b)":

Output (b)

Instruction:
Here is an article:
Ride-sharing company Lyft has begun trading on the stock market with a surge in its share price. Soon, Lyft will be joined by rival Uber. Both companies will be worth tens of billions of dollars. Dave LeeNorth America technology reporter But, with neither of the firms ever coming close to turning a profit, the flotations are being seen as a reckoning - not just Uber and Lyft, but for the so-called “gig economy” itself, the business model that does away with traditional employment in favour of dishing out small jobs via an app. Uber and Lyft have, until now, been funded entirely by unprecedented amounts of venture capital. Uber in particular has made eyes water: it attracted almost $25bn, earning the company the title of “most valuable start-up in history”. Lyft, which has not (yet) expanded globally, raised $5bn. Yet for both firms, reality is arriving soon. Once public, "there's no more hype - it's just results”, said Alex Wilhelm, editor-in-chief of Crunchbase, a site which tracks the financial health of technology firms around the world. “It's going to be tough." Removing the most costly ingredient In 2018, Uber suffered a staggering net loss of $1.8bn. Lyft lost $911m. Those losses are narrowing, and revenues are increasing, but there are clearly massive hills to climb. And so, for the millions of people around the world that use ride-sharing, efforts to balance these very unbalanced books may quickly become apparent. “Eventually they’re going to have to raise prices on passengers to be profitable,” suggested Dara Kerr, a reporter who covers the gig economy for technology news site CNET. “They're also trying to make bets on other types of transportation, like the scooters and bicycles and self-driving cars. Because all three of those don't have the most costly ingredient, which is the drivers.” While there are small-scale tests with self-driving cars happening in a handful of cities, we are - by most estimates - perhaps a decade away from that being a reality. Uber and Lyft will need to make up that difference somehow. In preparation for their flotations, and in an effort to boost the number of customers they have, Lyft and Uber have aggressively discounted rides, at levels most consider to be wholly unsustainable. Yet, if Silicon Valley’s history tells us much, it’s that profits often don’t matter all that much. "Facebook, Snap, Twitter… none of them came into an IPO with a profit,” Ms Kerr added. "So I don't know how much that will scare investors or not.” A driver’s $1,000 decision What could be more important, at least on the first day’s trading, is the degree to which a hot new technology stock sends share prices sky high. Jay Cradeur certainly hopes that’s the case. He’s driven an incredible 23,000 rides for Uber and Lyft combined, experience that he shares regularly with other drivers on a blog and podcast. Drivers with 10,000 rides on either platform have been offered a $1,000 bonus that can be taken either in cash or in stock (those with over 20,000 on either platform are being given $10,000). Mr Cradeur is going to take the offer of stock. "I don't have a lot of confidence they're going to, you know, turn a profit anytime soon. "But there does seem to be just a lot of a lot of cultural and social support. So I think there's gonna be a lot of people wanting to buy the stock, which is going to drive the price up - at least initially.” He too predicts the firms might have to bump up prices for riders in order to turn a profit. “They're going to be between a rock and a hard place, right? They're going to have to satisfy shareholders. "These artificially low prices are great for right now. But when they go up, I still think people will use the service because it's so convenient.” Hordes of millionaires These flotations don't occur in a vacuum. What happens to Lyft and Uber will reverberate around the technology industry - and its overwhelmed epicenter, San Francisco. The companies are just the first of several tech firms expected to go public this year, creating thousands of new millionaires in the process. It’s a grim prospect for the region's “normal” residents, for whom the prospect of home ownership is now mostly an impossibility. This is an area where rents have been driven so high, teachers must take up second jobs in order to scrape together money to live within the communities they teach. Of course, that second job is often as a ride-share driver. However - if these companies can’t make it work, and fail to live up to the hype we’re likely about to see over the next 12 months, it will be major wake-up call for tech’s apparently best and brightest. “There's a lot of the ‘smartest' tech money, and a lot of the big tech money inside his company,” Mr Wilhelm notes, citing investments in ride-sharing from firms such as Andreessen Horowitz, and Google parent company Alphabet. “If they don't do well, I'm curious what that says about the theoretical savvy at these firms.” _____ Follow Dave Lee on Twitter @DaveLeeBBC Do you have more information about this or any other technology story? You can reach Dave directly and securely through encrypted messaging app Signal on: +1 (628) 400-7370

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize the quoted persons and their identities.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Alex Wilhelm is the editor-in-chief of Crunchbase, a site which tracks the financial health of technology firms around the world.

Dara Kerr is a reporter who covers the gig economy for technology news site CNET.

Jay Cradeur is a driver who has driven 23,000 rides for Uber and Lyft combined. He shares his experience with other drivers on a blog and podcast.

Dave Lee is a North America technology reporter. Alex Wilhelm is the editor-in-chief of Crunchbase, a site which tracks the financial health of technology firms around the world. Dara Kerr is a reporter who covers the gig economy for technology news site CNET. Jay Cradeur is a driver who has driven an incredible 23,000 rides for Uber and Lyft combined and shares his experience with other drivers on a blog and podcast.