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:
Health warnings have been issued for parts of England, as air pollution reaches high levels. So what exactly is the problem, and how serious is it? How bad is the pollution in the UK? By UK standards, air pollution levels are high. The Department of the Environment measures outdoor air pollution on a one-to-10 scale. Parts of north-west Norfolk hit level 10 on Tuesday. On Wednesday, levels were recorded at seven - meaning high - in towns and cities in East Anglia and rural parts of south-east England. Pollution levels of five were reached in London, the Midlands and Yorkshire and Humberside. What has caused it? The tipping point seems to have been dust from storms in the Sahara. Normally it settles in the countries of southern Europe - Spain, Malta and Greece, for example. However, winds from the south and east have brought the dust to the UK, along with industrial pollution from Europe. And because those weather conditions are stable and not changing, those particles are not being dispersed. But that is only part of the problem. Most air pollution in the UK comes from road transport and residential emissions. What is being measured? Leaving aside the Sahara dust, the pollution is made up of various substances, including nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide and ammonia. These form particles in the atmosphere. The two most common measurements are particulate matter measuring 2.5 micrometres or less, known as PM2.5; and larger particles measuring 10 micrometres, known as PM10. The World Health Organization (WHO) uses PM10 levels to measure pollution, expressed in micrograms per cubic metre. It recommends mean exposure over 24 hours to PM2.5 of no more than 10 micrograms/m3, and to PM10 of no more than 25. PM2.5 particles are thought to be particularly damaging because they are so small, they can penetrate into the deepest parts of the lungs. WHO air quality guidelines Why is the UK doing so badly? Last month, the EU announced it was taking legal action against the UK because it was persistently over the safe limit for air pollution - in particular, levels of nitrogen dioxide. But the UK is not alone - most EU countries struggle to meet the targets, says Martin Adams of the European Environment Agency. In fact, the EU is currently taking action against 17 out of 28 member states with serious air quality problems. EU standards make allowances for natural sources of air pollution, including Saharan dust for Spain and ozone for coastal countries such as the UK. Frank Kelly, professor of Environmental Health at King's College London, puts the blame for the UK's pollution woes squarely on the shift to diesel vehicles over the past 10 years. Six out of 10 cars sold today in the UK are diesels, and these produce a lot of nitrogen dioxide, he says. King's College London air quality monitoring project (London only) How serious a problem is air pollution generally? In all, the WHO says air pollution is responsible for seven million premature deaths a year around the world. That includes indoor as well as outdoor pollution - typically, smoke from cooking stoves in developing countries. About 80% of deaths related to outdoor pollution are linked to heart disease and strokes, while 14% are due to lung or respiratory diseases, and 6% to cancer, estimates the WHO. But even at times of lower pollution, UK air quality still routinely breaches WHO recommended limits. Even when the air looks clean, it is not. WHO: Air pollution 'killed seven million' According to Joe Hennon, the European Commission's spokesman on pollution, around 30,000 people in the UK die prematurely every year from problems associated with air pollution. He describes it as an "invisible killer". "Air pollution can be carcinogenic," he said. "It also causes all kinds of respiratory problems, heart disease, [and] lung problems". Some headlines have said the UK's air quality is worse than China - is that true? No, says Professor Kelly. When it comes to bad air quality, Beijing has few rivals. In February, at the height of a severe smog episode, the BBC's Jo Floto, in Beijing, wrote that the air quality in the city was "so bad it's comparable to living near a forest fire". The Chinese government has recently begun publishing air quality figures for the major cities, although the accuracy of these is sometimes contested. The US embassy in Beijing runs an air quality monitor and releases updates several times daily. At 21:00 (13:00 GMT) on Wednesday, it measured PM2.5 levels of 87 - more than eight times the WHO 24-hour limit. In February, levels soared to 15 times the WHO limit. Compare that with the UK - in the hour to 16:00 on Wednesday, the highest PM2.5 level recorded by the Department for the Environment was 57, in Rochester, Kent. UK air quality levels (Department for the Environment) What might help cut the air pollution? A change in the weather forecast for the end of the week is expected to bring some relief. When pollution measures soared last month, Paris imposed restrictions, banning cars with even-numbered plates from driving on one day, followed by a ban on odd-numbered plates the following day. The EU Environment Agency is awaiting data on whether the ban had much effect. In any case, London will not be following suit. Mr Hennon says the UK can learn from cities like Amsterdam, where there are traffic restrictions - including speed restrictions on motorways - as well as good public transport links and cycle lanes. But he warns there is no easy answer and a range of measures are needed to tackle the problem. A shift towards less polluting forms of transport will be necessary, believes Prof Kelly. In 10 years' time, diesel vehicles will have been largely replaced by low-emission vehicles. But he warns: "The political will needs to be substantial, because it will be costly."

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize the five key points mentioned in this article.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
1) Air pollution levels in the UK have reached high levels due to dust from storms in the Sahara and industrial pollution from Europe. 2) Most air pollution in the UK comes from road transport and residential emissions, and is made up of various substances including nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide and ammonia. 3) The EU is taking legal action against the UK for persistently exceeding safe limits for air pollution, particularly nitrogen dioxide. 4) Air pollution is responsible for seven million premature deaths a year worldwide, and in the UK 30,000 people die prematurely every year from air pollution-related problems. 5) To reduce air pollution, a shift towards less polluting forms of transport is needed, but this will require substantial political will and cost.

# Output (a):
1. Air pollution levels in parts of England have reached high levels due to dust from storms in the Sahara and industrial pollution from Europe.
2. The most common pollutants in the UK are nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, and ammonia, which form particles in the atmosphere.
3. The World Health Organization recommends mean exposure over 24 hours to PM2.5 of no more than 10 micrograms/m3, and to PM10 of no more than 25.
4. The UK is persistently over the safe limit for air pollution, with nitrogen dioxide being a major contributor due to the shift to diesel vehicles.
5. Air pollution is responsible for seven million premature deaths a year around the world, with around 30,000 people in the UK dying prematurely every year from problems associated with air pollution.

# 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:
Health warnings have been issued for parts of England, as air pollution reaches high levels. So what exactly is the problem, and how serious is it? How bad is the pollution in the UK? By UK standards, air pollution levels are high. The Department of the Environment measures outdoor air pollution on a one-to-10 scale. Parts of north-west Norfolk hit level 10 on Tuesday. On Wednesday, levels were recorded at seven - meaning high - in towns and cities in East Anglia and rural parts of south-east England. Pollution levels of five were reached in London, the Midlands and Yorkshire and Humberside. What has caused it? The tipping point seems to have been dust from storms in the Sahara. Normally it settles in the countries of southern Europe - Spain, Malta and Greece, for example. However, winds from the south and east have brought the dust to the UK, along with industrial pollution from Europe. And because those weather conditions are stable and not changing, those particles are not being dispersed. But that is only part of the problem. Most air pollution in the UK comes from road transport and residential emissions. What is being measured? Leaving aside the Sahara dust, the pollution is made up of various substances, including nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide and ammonia. These form particles in the atmosphere. The two most common measurements are particulate matter measuring 2.5 micrometres or less, known as PM2.5; and larger particles measuring 10 micrometres, known as PM10. The World Health Organization (WHO) uses PM10 levels to measure pollution, expressed in micrograms per cubic metre. It recommends mean exposure over 24 hours to PM2.5 of no more than 10 micrograms/m3, and to PM10 of no more than 25. PM2.5 particles are thought to be particularly damaging because they are so small, they can penetrate into the deepest parts of the lungs. WHO air quality guidelines Why is the UK doing so badly? Last month, the EU announced it was taking legal action against the UK because it was persistently over the safe limit for air pollution - in particular, levels of nitrogen dioxide. But the UK is not alone - most EU countries struggle to meet the targets, says Martin Adams of the European Environment Agency. In fact, the EU is currently taking action against 17 out of 28 member states with serious air quality problems. EU standards make allowances for natural sources of air pollution, including Saharan dust for Spain and ozone for coastal countries such as the UK. Frank Kelly, professor of Environmental Health at King's College London, puts the blame for the UK's pollution woes squarely on the shift to diesel vehicles over the past 10 years. Six out of 10 cars sold today in the UK are diesels, and these produce a lot of nitrogen dioxide, he says. King's College London air quality monitoring project (London only) How serious a problem is air pollution generally? In all, the WHO says air pollution is responsible for seven million premature deaths a year around the world. That includes indoor as well as outdoor pollution - typically, smoke from cooking stoves in developing countries. About 80% of deaths related to outdoor pollution are linked to heart disease and strokes, while 14% are due to lung or respiratory diseases, and 6% to cancer, estimates the WHO. But even at times of lower pollution, UK air quality still routinely breaches WHO recommended limits. Even when the air looks clean, it is not. WHO: Air pollution 'killed seven million' According to Joe Hennon, the European Commission's spokesman on pollution, around 30,000 people in the UK die prematurely every year from problems associated with air pollution. He describes it as an "invisible killer". "Air pollution can be carcinogenic," he said. "It also causes all kinds of respiratory problems, heart disease, [and] lung problems". Some headlines have said the UK's air quality is worse than China - is that true? No, says Professor Kelly. When it comes to bad air quality, Beijing has few rivals. In February, at the height of a severe smog episode, the BBC's Jo Floto, in Beijing, wrote that the air quality in the city was "so bad it's comparable to living near a forest fire". The Chinese government has recently begun publishing air quality figures for the major cities, although the accuracy of these is sometimes contested. The US embassy in Beijing runs an air quality monitor and releases updates several times daily. At 21:00 (13:00 GMT) on Wednesday, it measured PM2.5 levels of 87 - more than eight times the WHO 24-hour limit. In February, levels soared to 15 times the WHO limit. Compare that with the UK - in the hour to 16:00 on Wednesday, the highest PM2.5 level recorded by the Department for the Environment was 57, in Rochester, Kent. UK air quality levels (Department for the Environment) What might help cut the air pollution? A change in the weather forecast for the end of the week is expected to bring some relief. When pollution measures soared last month, Paris imposed restrictions, banning cars with even-numbered plates from driving on one day, followed by a ban on odd-numbered plates the following day. The EU Environment Agency is awaiting data on whether the ban had much effect. In any case, London will not be following suit. Mr Hennon says the UK can learn from cities like Amsterdam, where there are traffic restrictions - including speed restrictions on motorways - as well as good public transport links and cycle lanes. But he warns there is no easy answer and a range of measures are needed to tackle the problem. A shift towards less polluting forms of transport will be necessary, believes Prof Kelly. In 10 years' time, diesel vehicles will have been largely replaced by low-emission vehicles. But he warns: "The political will needs to be substantial, because it will be costly."

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize the five key points mentioned in this article.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

1. Air pollution levels in parts of England have reached high levels due to dust from storms in the Sahara and industrial pollution from Europe.
2. The most common pollutants in the UK are nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, and ammonia, which form particles in the atmosphere.
3. The World Health Organization recommends mean exposure over 24 hours to PM2.5 of no more than 10 micrograms/m3, and to PM10 of no more than 25.
4. The UK is persistently over the safe limit for air pollution, with nitrogen dioxide being a major contributor due to the shift to diesel vehicles.
5. Air pollution is responsible for seven million premature deaths a year around the world, with around 30,000 people in the UK dying prematurely every year from problems associated with air pollution.

1) Air pollution levels in the UK have reached high levels due to dust from storms in the Sahara and industrial pollution from Europe. 2) Most air pollution in the UK comes from road transport and residential emissions, and is made up of various substances including nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide and ammonia. 3) The EU is taking legal action against the UK for persistently exceeding safe limits for air pollution, particularly nitrogen dioxide. 4) Air pollution is responsible for seven million premature deaths a year worldwide, and in the UK 30,000 people die prematurely every year from air pollution-related problems. 5) To reduce air pollution, a shift towards less polluting forms of transport is needed, but this will require substantial political will and cost.


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:
Health warnings have been issued for parts of England, as air pollution reaches high levels. So what exactly is the problem, and how serious is it? How bad is the pollution in the UK? By UK standards, air pollution levels are high. The Department of the Environment measures outdoor air pollution on a one-to-10 scale. Parts of north-west Norfolk hit level 10 on Tuesday. On Wednesday, levels were recorded at seven - meaning high - in towns and cities in East Anglia and rural parts of south-east England. Pollution levels of five were reached in London, the Midlands and Yorkshire and Humberside. What has caused it? The tipping point seems to have been dust from storms in the Sahara. Normally it settles in the countries of southern Europe - Spain, Malta and Greece, for example. However, winds from the south and east have brought the dust to the UK, along with industrial pollution from Europe. And because those weather conditions are stable and not changing, those particles are not being dispersed. But that is only part of the problem. Most air pollution in the UK comes from road transport and residential emissions. What is being measured? Leaving aside the Sahara dust, the pollution is made up of various substances, including nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide and ammonia. These form particles in the atmosphere. The two most common measurements are particulate matter measuring 2.5 micrometres or less, known as PM2.5; and larger particles measuring 10 micrometres, known as PM10. The World Health Organization (WHO) uses PM10 levels to measure pollution, expressed in micrograms per cubic metre. It recommends mean exposure over 24 hours to PM2.5 of no more than 10 micrograms/m3, and to PM10 of no more than 25. PM2.5 particles are thought to be particularly damaging because they are so small, they can penetrate into the deepest parts of the lungs. WHO air quality guidelines Why is the UK doing so badly? Last month, the EU announced it was taking legal action against the UK because it was persistently over the safe limit for air pollution - in particular, levels of nitrogen dioxide. But the UK is not alone - most EU countries struggle to meet the targets, says Martin Adams of the European Environment Agency. In fact, the EU is currently taking action against 17 out of 28 member states with serious air quality problems. EU standards make allowances for natural sources of air pollution, including Saharan dust for Spain and ozone for coastal countries such as the UK. Frank Kelly, professor of Environmental Health at King's College London, puts the blame for the UK's pollution woes squarely on the shift to diesel vehicles over the past 10 years. Six out of 10 cars sold today in the UK are diesels, and these produce a lot of nitrogen dioxide, he says. King's College London air quality monitoring project (London only) How serious a problem is air pollution generally? In all, the WHO says air pollution is responsible for seven million premature deaths a year around the world. That includes indoor as well as outdoor pollution - typically, smoke from cooking stoves in developing countries. About 80% of deaths related to outdoor pollution are linked to heart disease and strokes, while 14% are due to lung or respiratory diseases, and 6% to cancer, estimates the WHO. But even at times of lower pollution, UK air quality still routinely breaches WHO recommended limits. Even when the air looks clean, it is not. WHO: Air pollution 'killed seven million' According to Joe Hennon, the European Commission's spokesman on pollution, around 30,000 people in the UK die prematurely every year from problems associated with air pollution. He describes it as an "invisible killer". "Air pollution can be carcinogenic," he said. "It also causes all kinds of respiratory problems, heart disease, [and] lung problems". Some headlines have said the UK's air quality is worse than China - is that true? No, says Professor Kelly. When it comes to bad air quality, Beijing has few rivals. In February, at the height of a severe smog episode, the BBC's Jo Floto, in Beijing, wrote that the air quality in the city was "so bad it's comparable to living near a forest fire". The Chinese government has recently begun publishing air quality figures for the major cities, although the accuracy of these is sometimes contested. The US embassy in Beijing runs an air quality monitor and releases updates several times daily. At 21:00 (13:00 GMT) on Wednesday, it measured PM2.5 levels of 87 - more than eight times the WHO 24-hour limit. In February, levels soared to 15 times the WHO limit. Compare that with the UK - in the hour to 16:00 on Wednesday, the highest PM2.5 level recorded by the Department for the Environment was 57, in Rochester, Kent. UK air quality levels (Department for the Environment) What might help cut the air pollution? A change in the weather forecast for the end of the week is expected to bring some relief. When pollution measures soared last month, Paris imposed restrictions, banning cars with even-numbered plates from driving on one day, followed by a ban on odd-numbered plates the following day. The EU Environment Agency is awaiting data on whether the ban had much effect. In any case, London will not be following suit. Mr Hennon says the UK can learn from cities like Amsterdam, where there are traffic restrictions - including speed restrictions on motorways - as well as good public transport links and cycle lanes. But he warns there is no easy answer and a range of measures are needed to tackle the problem. A shift towards less polluting forms of transport will be necessary, believes Prof Kelly. In 10 years' time, diesel vehicles will have been largely replaced by low-emission vehicles. But he warns: "The political will needs to be substantial, because it will be costly."

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize the five key points mentioned in this article.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
1) Air pollution levels in the UK have reached high levels due to dust from storms in the Sahara and industrial pollution from Europe. 2) Most air pollution in the UK comes from road transport and residential emissions, and is made up of various substances including nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide and ammonia. 3) The EU is taking legal action against the UK for persistently exceeding safe limits for air pollution, particularly nitrogen dioxide. 4) Air pollution is responsible for seven million premature deaths a year worldwide, and in the UK 30,000 people die prematurely every year from air pollution-related problems. 5) To reduce air pollution, a shift towards less polluting forms of transport is needed, but this will require substantial political will and cost.

# Output (a):
1. High air pollution levels have been recorded in parts of England, with north-west Norfolk reaching level 10 on the Department of the Environment's one-to-10 scale.
2. The tipping point for the pollution increase is believed to be dust from Sahara storms, which has been brought to the UK by winds from the south and east, along with industrial pollution from Europe.
3. Most air pollution in the UK comes from road transport and residential emissions, with a significant shift to diesel vehicles in the past 10 years contributing to the problem.
4. The European Union is taking legal action against the UK for persistently exceeding safe limits for air pollution, particularly nitrogen dioxide levels.
5. Air pollution is responsible for seven million premature deaths a year worldwide, according to the World Health Organization, with 30,000 of those occurring in the UK.

# 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:
Health warnings have been issued for parts of England, as air pollution reaches high levels. So what exactly is the problem, and how serious is it? How bad is the pollution in the UK? By UK standards, air pollution levels are high. The Department of the Environment measures outdoor air pollution on a one-to-10 scale. Parts of north-west Norfolk hit level 10 on Tuesday. On Wednesday, levels were recorded at seven - meaning high - in towns and cities in East Anglia and rural parts of south-east England. Pollution levels of five were reached in London, the Midlands and Yorkshire and Humberside. What has caused it? The tipping point seems to have been dust from storms in the Sahara. Normally it settles in the countries of southern Europe - Spain, Malta and Greece, for example. However, winds from the south and east have brought the dust to the UK, along with industrial pollution from Europe. And because those weather conditions are stable and not changing, those particles are not being dispersed. But that is only part of the problem. Most air pollution in the UK comes from road transport and residential emissions. What is being measured? Leaving aside the Sahara dust, the pollution is made up of various substances, including nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide and ammonia. These form particles in the atmosphere. The two most common measurements are particulate matter measuring 2.5 micrometres or less, known as PM2.5; and larger particles measuring 10 micrometres, known as PM10. The World Health Organization (WHO) uses PM10 levels to measure pollution, expressed in micrograms per cubic metre. It recommends mean exposure over 24 hours to PM2.5 of no more than 10 micrograms/m3, and to PM10 of no more than 25. PM2.5 particles are thought to be particularly damaging because they are so small, they can penetrate into the deepest parts of the lungs. WHO air quality guidelines Why is the UK doing so badly? Last month, the EU announced it was taking legal action against the UK because it was persistently over the safe limit for air pollution - in particular, levels of nitrogen dioxide. But the UK is not alone - most EU countries struggle to meet the targets, says Martin Adams of the European Environment Agency. In fact, the EU is currently taking action against 17 out of 28 member states with serious air quality problems. EU standards make allowances for natural sources of air pollution, including Saharan dust for Spain and ozone for coastal countries such as the UK. Frank Kelly, professor of Environmental Health at King's College London, puts the blame for the UK's pollution woes squarely on the shift to diesel vehicles over the past 10 years. Six out of 10 cars sold today in the UK are diesels, and these produce a lot of nitrogen dioxide, he says. King's College London air quality monitoring project (London only) How serious a problem is air pollution generally? In all, the WHO says air pollution is responsible for seven million premature deaths a year around the world. That includes indoor as well as outdoor pollution - typically, smoke from cooking stoves in developing countries. About 80% of deaths related to outdoor pollution are linked to heart disease and strokes, while 14% are due to lung or respiratory diseases, and 6% to cancer, estimates the WHO. But even at times of lower pollution, UK air quality still routinely breaches WHO recommended limits. Even when the air looks clean, it is not. WHO: Air pollution 'killed seven million' According to Joe Hennon, the European Commission's spokesman on pollution, around 30,000 people in the UK die prematurely every year from problems associated with air pollution. He describes it as an "invisible killer". "Air pollution can be carcinogenic," he said. "It also causes all kinds of respiratory problems, heart disease, [and] lung problems". Some headlines have said the UK's air quality is worse than China - is that true? No, says Professor Kelly. When it comes to bad air quality, Beijing has few rivals. In February, at the height of a severe smog episode, the BBC's Jo Floto, in Beijing, wrote that the air quality in the city was "so bad it's comparable to living near a forest fire". The Chinese government has recently begun publishing air quality figures for the major cities, although the accuracy of these is sometimes contested. The US embassy in Beijing runs an air quality monitor and releases updates several times daily. At 21:00 (13:00 GMT) on Wednesday, it measured PM2.5 levels of 87 - more than eight times the WHO 24-hour limit. In February, levels soared to 15 times the WHO limit. Compare that with the UK - in the hour to 16:00 on Wednesday, the highest PM2.5 level recorded by the Department for the Environment was 57, in Rochester, Kent. UK air quality levels (Department for the Environment) What might help cut the air pollution? A change in the weather forecast for the end of the week is expected to bring some relief. When pollution measures soared last month, Paris imposed restrictions, banning cars with even-numbered plates from driving on one day, followed by a ban on odd-numbered plates the following day. The EU Environment Agency is awaiting data on whether the ban had much effect. In any case, London will not be following suit. Mr Hennon says the UK can learn from cities like Amsterdam, where there are traffic restrictions - including speed restrictions on motorways - as well as good public transport links and cycle lanes. But he warns there is no easy answer and a range of measures are needed to tackle the problem. A shift towards less polluting forms of transport will be necessary, believes Prof Kelly. In 10 years' time, diesel vehicles will have been largely replaced by low-emission vehicles. But he warns: "The political will needs to be substantial, because it will be costly."

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize the five key points mentioned in this article.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

1. High air pollution levels have been recorded in parts of England, with north-west Norfolk reaching level 10 on the Department of the Environment's one-to-10 scale.
2. The tipping point for the pollution increase is believed to be dust from Sahara storms, which has been brought to the UK by winds from the south and east, along with industrial pollution from Europe.
3. Most air pollution in the UK comes from road transport and residential emissions, with a significant shift to diesel vehicles in the past 10 years contributing to the problem.
4. The European Union is taking legal action against the UK for persistently exceeding safe limits for air pollution, particularly nitrogen dioxide levels.
5. Air pollution is responsible for seven million premature deaths a year worldwide, according to the World Health Organization, with 30,000 of those occurring in the UK.

1) Air pollution levels in the UK have reached high levels due to dust from storms in the Sahara and industrial pollution from Europe. 2) Most air pollution in the UK comes from road transport and residential emissions, and is made up of various substances including nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide and ammonia. 3) The EU is taking legal action against the UK for persistently exceeding safe limits for air pollution, particularly nitrogen dioxide. 4) Air pollution is responsible for seven million premature deaths a year worldwide, and in the UK 30,000 people die prematurely every year from air pollution-related problems. 5) To reduce air pollution, a shift towards less polluting forms of transport is needed, but this will require substantial political will and cost.


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:
I went back to the little Japanese town of Namie this week. It lies just 5km (three miles) north of the sprawling complex that was once the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. By Rupert Wingfield-HayesBBC News, Fukushima, Japan You can see the tall white chimneys of the plant peaking over a low hill. I've been to Namie before. Each time I go back is like the first, so arresting is the scene that confronts you. For three years, time here has stood still. An old wooden house brought down by the earthquake still lies in the middle of a road. Through the broken window of a noodle shop I can see used bowls and chopsticks still lying on tables. I look through the windows of an old people's home. Beds lie unmade; laundry hangs from a drier. It's as if the residents have gone off for breakfast and at any moment they'll be shuffling back in. But no one is coming back. When explosions hit the nuclear plant the pall of radiation was blown right across this town. And so Namie remains utterly deserted, its residents scattered far and wide. In their exile they live in constant fear and anxiety. Fear of what the radiation may have done to their children and anxiety that they will never get their old lives back. 'Need to be sure' At a private hospital 60km from the plant I meet Miyuki Arakawa and her two little boys, five-year-old Ryota and three-year-old Haruto. The boys are changing in to hospital pyjamas. They giggle with the nurses. They've done all this before; it's no longer frightening. But it is for their mother. In a narrow room Haruto climbs in to a large blue machine that looks a bit like a bath. The big blue bathtub is the world's first and only infant full-body radiation scanner. Inside Haruto begins to fidget as the data starts to show on a nearby computer screen. "After the Chernobyl disaster children were diagnosed many years later," Miyuki said. "My boys may be fine now, but if there is any risk I need to find out as soon as possible." Her anxiety level has been raised further by the latest government findings. Since 2011 Japan has surveyed 260,000 Fukushima children. So far 33 cases of thyroid cancer have been confirmed; another 42 are suspected. "The government gives us very little information," she said. "I need to be completely sure my boys are fine. I want this hospital to follow up next year and the following year and the one after that." 'Not related' Look up "Fukushima thyroid cancer" on the internet and you will find a legion of horror stories, predictions that thousands of Fukushima children will get cancer. It's little wonder parents like Miyuki are scared. But should they be? At Fukushima University Medical School Professor Shinichi Suzuki leads the team studying the children of Fukushima. A cheerful round-faced man with a grey moustache, Prof Suzuki is frustrated by the constant likening of Fukushima to Chernobyl. "The first thing to understand is that the amount of radiation released from Fukushima was much lower than at Chernobyl," he said. "Second, the number of children in Fukushima who got a radiation dose above 50 millisieverts is very few, maybe as low as zero." In other words the highest level of exposure children at Fukushima are thought to have received (50 millisieverts) is at the very lowest end of exposure for children in Chernobyl. In that case how does Professor Suzuki explain the 33 confirmed cases of thyroid cancer his team have found? "In Japan there has never been a survey on this scale done before," he said. "Once you start using very sensitive equipment to check for thyroid cancer in a very large group of children then you will inevitably find an increase in the number of cases. That is why we are seeing the increase now. These cases are not related to the nuclear disaster." Prof Suzuki says his team will need to carry on their work for many more years to be sure that the children of Fukushima are in the clear. But he and other experts now say they think there will be very few, or even zero, extra childhood cancers because of Fukushima. 'Took everything' That does not mean that the Fukushima disaster is not taking lives. According to the government's own figures, in the last three years more than 1,600 Fukushima evacuees have died from causes that are "related to the disaster" On a freezing March morning I meet 56-year-old Hideko Takeda at a grave yard a few kilometres from the little town of Namie. She has come to burn incense on her father's grave. The black marble is still shiny and new. She has a photograph of him with her. He was tall for a Japanese farmer and at 80 still robust. Each day he still milked the cows and tended his fields. But then the disaster stuck and he was forced to flee, leaving his cows to starve to death in their shed. It broke him, Mrs Takeda says; his health collapsed, within two years he was dead. "I blame the power company [Tepco] for his death," she said. "They took everything from him, his dreams, his hope. They took his land and scattered his family far from home. Nothing will ever bring those back." There is also growing evidence of an increase in suicides among Fukushima evacuees. Mrs Takeda says she knows of several from the villages around her farm. "One man I know went back to check his house," she said. "When he didn't return his family went to find him. His car was parked outside. He had hanged himself. I think he'd given up, he couldn't see any future." So far no one has died from radiation in Fukushima. But unable to return to their homes, scattered in evacuations centres, perhaps lonely and depressed, a growing number of evacuees are dying from anxiety, from suicide or from simply losing the will to live.

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize Professor Suzuki's opinions.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Professor Suzuki believes that the cases of thyroid cancer in Fukushima are not related to the nuclear disaster, and that the children of Fukushima are not at risk of developing cancer from the exposure to radiation. He attributes the increase in cases of thyroid cancer to the fact that more sensitive equipment is being used to detect it, and says that his team will need to carry out their work for many more years to be sure that the children of Fukushima are in the clear.

# Output (a):
Professor Shinichi Suzuki from Fukushima University Medical School believes that the number of thyroid cancer cases found in children after the Fukushima disaster is not related to the nuclear incident. He explains that the radiation levels released from Fukushima were much lower than Chernobyl and that the large-scale survey conducted in Japan has never been done before, leading to an increase in detected cases. Prof. Suzuki and other experts think there will be very few or even zero extra childhood cancers due to Fukushima.

# 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:
I went back to the little Japanese town of Namie this week. It lies just 5km (three miles) north of the sprawling complex that was once the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. By Rupert Wingfield-HayesBBC News, Fukushima, Japan You can see the tall white chimneys of the plant peaking over a low hill. I've been to Namie before. Each time I go back is like the first, so arresting is the scene that confronts you. For three years, time here has stood still. An old wooden house brought down by the earthquake still lies in the middle of a road. Through the broken window of a noodle shop I can see used bowls and chopsticks still lying on tables. I look through the windows of an old people's home. Beds lie unmade; laundry hangs from a drier. It's as if the residents have gone off for breakfast and at any moment they'll be shuffling back in. But no one is coming back. When explosions hit the nuclear plant the pall of radiation was blown right across this town. And so Namie remains utterly deserted, its residents scattered far and wide. In their exile they live in constant fear and anxiety. Fear of what the radiation may have done to their children and anxiety that they will never get their old lives back. 'Need to be sure' At a private hospital 60km from the plant I meet Miyuki Arakawa and her two little boys, five-year-old Ryota and three-year-old Haruto. The boys are changing in to hospital pyjamas. They giggle with the nurses. They've done all this before; it's no longer frightening. But it is for their mother. In a narrow room Haruto climbs in to a large blue machine that looks a bit like a bath. The big blue bathtub is the world's first and only infant full-body radiation scanner. Inside Haruto begins to fidget as the data starts to show on a nearby computer screen. "After the Chernobyl disaster children were diagnosed many years later," Miyuki said. "My boys may be fine now, but if there is any risk I need to find out as soon as possible." Her anxiety level has been raised further by the latest government findings. Since 2011 Japan has surveyed 260,000 Fukushima children. So far 33 cases of thyroid cancer have been confirmed; another 42 are suspected. "The government gives us very little information," she said. "I need to be completely sure my boys are fine. I want this hospital to follow up next year and the following year and the one after that." 'Not related' Look up "Fukushima thyroid cancer" on the internet and you will find a legion of horror stories, predictions that thousands of Fukushima children will get cancer. It's little wonder parents like Miyuki are scared. But should they be? At Fukushima University Medical School Professor Shinichi Suzuki leads the team studying the children of Fukushima. A cheerful round-faced man with a grey moustache, Prof Suzuki is frustrated by the constant likening of Fukushima to Chernobyl. "The first thing to understand is that the amount of radiation released from Fukushima was much lower than at Chernobyl," he said. "Second, the number of children in Fukushima who got a radiation dose above 50 millisieverts is very few, maybe as low as zero." In other words the highest level of exposure children at Fukushima are thought to have received (50 millisieverts) is at the very lowest end of exposure for children in Chernobyl. In that case how does Professor Suzuki explain the 33 confirmed cases of thyroid cancer his team have found? "In Japan there has never been a survey on this scale done before," he said. "Once you start using very sensitive equipment to check for thyroid cancer in a very large group of children then you will inevitably find an increase in the number of cases. That is why we are seeing the increase now. These cases are not related to the nuclear disaster." Prof Suzuki says his team will need to carry on their work for many more years to be sure that the children of Fukushima are in the clear. But he and other experts now say they think there will be very few, or even zero, extra childhood cancers because of Fukushima. 'Took everything' That does not mean that the Fukushima disaster is not taking lives. According to the government's own figures, in the last three years more than 1,600 Fukushima evacuees have died from causes that are "related to the disaster" On a freezing March morning I meet 56-year-old Hideko Takeda at a grave yard a few kilometres from the little town of Namie. She has come to burn incense on her father's grave. The black marble is still shiny and new. She has a photograph of him with her. He was tall for a Japanese farmer and at 80 still robust. Each day he still milked the cows and tended his fields. But then the disaster stuck and he was forced to flee, leaving his cows to starve to death in their shed. It broke him, Mrs Takeda says; his health collapsed, within two years he was dead. "I blame the power company [Tepco] for his death," she said. "They took everything from him, his dreams, his hope. They took his land and scattered his family far from home. Nothing will ever bring those back." There is also growing evidence of an increase in suicides among Fukushima evacuees. Mrs Takeda says she knows of several from the villages around her farm. "One man I know went back to check his house," she said. "When he didn't return his family went to find him. His car was parked outside. He had hanged himself. I think he'd given up, he couldn't see any future." So far no one has died from radiation in Fukushima. But unable to return to their homes, scattered in evacuations centres, perhaps lonely and depressed, a growing number of evacuees are dying from anxiety, from suicide or from simply losing the will to live.

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize Professor Suzuki's opinions.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Professor Shinichi Suzuki from Fukushima University Medical School believes that the number of thyroid cancer cases found in children after the Fukushima disaster is not related to the nuclear incident. He explains that the radiation levels released from Fukushima were much lower than Chernobyl and that the large-scale survey conducted in Japan has never been done before, leading to an increase in detected cases. Prof. Suzuki and other experts think there will be very few or even zero extra childhood cancers due to Fukushima.

Professor Suzuki believes that the cases of thyroid cancer in Fukushima are not related to the nuclear disaster, and that the children of Fukushima are not at risk of developing cancer from the exposure to radiation. He attributes the increase in cases of thyroid cancer to the fact that more sensitive equipment is being used to detect it, and says that his team will need to carry out their work for many more years to be sure that the children of Fukushima are in the clear.


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:
I went back to the little Japanese town of Namie this week. It lies just 5km (three miles) north of the sprawling complex that was once the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. By Rupert Wingfield-HayesBBC News, Fukushima, Japan You can see the tall white chimneys of the plant peaking over a low hill. I've been to Namie before. Each time I go back is like the first, so arresting is the scene that confronts you. For three years, time here has stood still. An old wooden house brought down by the earthquake still lies in the middle of a road. Through the broken window of a noodle shop I can see used bowls and chopsticks still lying on tables. I look through the windows of an old people's home. Beds lie unmade; laundry hangs from a drier. It's as if the residents have gone off for breakfast and at any moment they'll be shuffling back in. But no one is coming back. When explosions hit the nuclear plant the pall of radiation was blown right across this town. And so Namie remains utterly deserted, its residents scattered far and wide. In their exile they live in constant fear and anxiety. Fear of what the radiation may have done to their children and anxiety that they will never get their old lives back. 'Need to be sure' At a private hospital 60km from the plant I meet Miyuki Arakawa and her two little boys, five-year-old Ryota and three-year-old Haruto. The boys are changing in to hospital pyjamas. They giggle with the nurses. They've done all this before; it's no longer frightening. But it is for their mother. In a narrow room Haruto climbs in to a large blue machine that looks a bit like a bath. The big blue bathtub is the world's first and only infant full-body radiation scanner. Inside Haruto begins to fidget as the data starts to show on a nearby computer screen. "After the Chernobyl disaster children were diagnosed many years later," Miyuki said. "My boys may be fine now, but if there is any risk I need to find out as soon as possible." Her anxiety level has been raised further by the latest government findings. Since 2011 Japan has surveyed 260,000 Fukushima children. So far 33 cases of thyroid cancer have been confirmed; another 42 are suspected. "The government gives us very little information," she said. "I need to be completely sure my boys are fine. I want this hospital to follow up next year and the following year and the one after that." 'Not related' Look up "Fukushima thyroid cancer" on the internet and you will find a legion of horror stories, predictions that thousands of Fukushima children will get cancer. It's little wonder parents like Miyuki are scared. But should they be? At Fukushima University Medical School Professor Shinichi Suzuki leads the team studying the children of Fukushima. A cheerful round-faced man with a grey moustache, Prof Suzuki is frustrated by the constant likening of Fukushima to Chernobyl. "The first thing to understand is that the amount of radiation released from Fukushima was much lower than at Chernobyl," he said. "Second, the number of children in Fukushima who got a radiation dose above 50 millisieverts is very few, maybe as low as zero." In other words the highest level of exposure children at Fukushima are thought to have received (50 millisieverts) is at the very lowest end of exposure for children in Chernobyl. In that case how does Professor Suzuki explain the 33 confirmed cases of thyroid cancer his team have found? "In Japan there has never been a survey on this scale done before," he said. "Once you start using very sensitive equipment to check for thyroid cancer in a very large group of children then you will inevitably find an increase in the number of cases. That is why we are seeing the increase now. These cases are not related to the nuclear disaster." Prof Suzuki says his team will need to carry on their work for many more years to be sure that the children of Fukushima are in the clear. But he and other experts now say they think there will be very few, or even zero, extra childhood cancers because of Fukushima. 'Took everything' That does not mean that the Fukushima disaster is not taking lives. According to the government's own figures, in the last three years more than 1,600 Fukushima evacuees have died from causes that are "related to the disaster" On a freezing March morning I meet 56-year-old Hideko Takeda at a grave yard a few kilometres from the little town of Namie. She has come to burn incense on her father's grave. The black marble is still shiny and new. She has a photograph of him with her. He was tall for a Japanese farmer and at 80 still robust. Each day he still milked the cows and tended his fields. But then the disaster stuck and he was forced to flee, leaving his cows to starve to death in their shed. It broke him, Mrs Takeda says; his health collapsed, within two years he was dead. "I blame the power company [Tepco] for his death," she said. "They took everything from him, his dreams, his hope. They took his land and scattered his family far from home. Nothing will ever bring those back." There is also growing evidence of an increase in suicides among Fukushima evacuees. Mrs Takeda says she knows of several from the villages around her farm. "One man I know went back to check his house," she said. "When he didn't return his family went to find him. His car was parked outside. He had hanged himself. I think he'd given up, he couldn't see any future." So far no one has died from radiation in Fukushima. But unable to return to their homes, scattered in evacuations centres, perhaps lonely and depressed, a growing number of evacuees are dying from anxiety, from suicide or from simply losing the will to live.

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize Professor Suzuki's opinions.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Professor Suzuki believes that the cases of thyroid cancer in Fukushima are not related to the nuclear disaster, and that the children of Fukushima are not at risk of developing cancer from the exposure to radiation. He attributes the increase in cases of thyroid cancer to the fact that more sensitive equipment is being used to detect it, and says that his team will need to carry out their work for many more years to be sure that the children of Fukushima are in the clear.

# Output (a):
Professor Shinichi Suzuki from Fukushima University Medical School believes that the number of thyroid cancer cases found in children after the Fukushima disaster is not related to the nuclear incident. He explains that the radiation levels released from Fukushima were much lower than Chernobyl and that the large-scale survey conducted in Japan has never been done before, leading to an increase in detected cases. Prof. Suzuki and other experts think there will be very few or even zero extra childhood cancers due to Fukushima.

# 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:
I went back to the little Japanese town of Namie this week. It lies just 5km (three miles) north of the sprawling complex that was once the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. By Rupert Wingfield-HayesBBC News, Fukushima, Japan You can see the tall white chimneys of the plant peaking over a low hill. I've been to Namie before. Each time I go back is like the first, so arresting is the scene that confronts you. For three years, time here has stood still. An old wooden house brought down by the earthquake still lies in the middle of a road. Through the broken window of a noodle shop I can see used bowls and chopsticks still lying on tables. I look through the windows of an old people's home. Beds lie unmade; laundry hangs from a drier. It's as if the residents have gone off for breakfast and at any moment they'll be shuffling back in. But no one is coming back. When explosions hit the nuclear plant the pall of radiation was blown right across this town. And so Namie remains utterly deserted, its residents scattered far and wide. In their exile they live in constant fear and anxiety. Fear of what the radiation may have done to their children and anxiety that they will never get their old lives back. 'Need to be sure' At a private hospital 60km from the plant I meet Miyuki Arakawa and her two little boys, five-year-old Ryota and three-year-old Haruto. The boys are changing in to hospital pyjamas. They giggle with the nurses. They've done all this before; it's no longer frightening. But it is for their mother. In a narrow room Haruto climbs in to a large blue machine that looks a bit like a bath. The big blue bathtub is the world's first and only infant full-body radiation scanner. Inside Haruto begins to fidget as the data starts to show on a nearby computer screen. "After the Chernobyl disaster children were diagnosed many years later," Miyuki said. "My boys may be fine now, but if there is any risk I need to find out as soon as possible." Her anxiety level has been raised further by the latest government findings. Since 2011 Japan has surveyed 260,000 Fukushima children. So far 33 cases of thyroid cancer have been confirmed; another 42 are suspected. "The government gives us very little information," she said. "I need to be completely sure my boys are fine. I want this hospital to follow up next year and the following year and the one after that." 'Not related' Look up "Fukushima thyroid cancer" on the internet and you will find a legion of horror stories, predictions that thousands of Fukushima children will get cancer. It's little wonder parents like Miyuki are scared. But should they be? At Fukushima University Medical School Professor Shinichi Suzuki leads the team studying the children of Fukushima. A cheerful round-faced man with a grey moustache, Prof Suzuki is frustrated by the constant likening of Fukushima to Chernobyl. "The first thing to understand is that the amount of radiation released from Fukushima was much lower than at Chernobyl," he said. "Second, the number of children in Fukushima who got a radiation dose above 50 millisieverts is very few, maybe as low as zero." In other words the highest level of exposure children at Fukushima are thought to have received (50 millisieverts) is at the very lowest end of exposure for children in Chernobyl. In that case how does Professor Suzuki explain the 33 confirmed cases of thyroid cancer his team have found? "In Japan there has never been a survey on this scale done before," he said. "Once you start using very sensitive equipment to check for thyroid cancer in a very large group of children then you will inevitably find an increase in the number of cases. That is why we are seeing the increase now. These cases are not related to the nuclear disaster." Prof Suzuki says his team will need to carry on their work for many more years to be sure that the children of Fukushima are in the clear. But he and other experts now say they think there will be very few, or even zero, extra childhood cancers because of Fukushima. 'Took everything' That does not mean that the Fukushima disaster is not taking lives. According to the government's own figures, in the last three years more than 1,600 Fukushima evacuees have died from causes that are "related to the disaster" On a freezing March morning I meet 56-year-old Hideko Takeda at a grave yard a few kilometres from the little town of Namie. She has come to burn incense on her father's grave. The black marble is still shiny and new. She has a photograph of him with her. He was tall for a Japanese farmer and at 80 still robust. Each day he still milked the cows and tended his fields. But then the disaster stuck and he was forced to flee, leaving his cows to starve to death in their shed. It broke him, Mrs Takeda says; his health collapsed, within two years he was dead. "I blame the power company [Tepco] for his death," she said. "They took everything from him, his dreams, his hope. They took his land and scattered his family far from home. Nothing will ever bring those back." There is also growing evidence of an increase in suicides among Fukushima evacuees. Mrs Takeda says she knows of several from the villages around her farm. "One man I know went back to check his house," she said. "When he didn't return his family went to find him. His car was parked outside. He had hanged himself. I think he'd given up, he couldn't see any future." So far no one has died from radiation in Fukushima. But unable to return to their homes, scattered in evacuations centres, perhaps lonely and depressed, a growing number of evacuees are dying from anxiety, from suicide or from simply losing the will to live.

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize Professor Suzuki's opinions.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Professor Shinichi Suzuki from Fukushima University Medical School believes that the number of thyroid cancer cases found in children after the Fukushima disaster is not related to the nuclear incident. He explains that the radiation levels released from Fukushima were much lower than Chernobyl and that the large-scale survey conducted in Japan has never been done before, leading to an increase in detected cases. Prof. Suzuki and other experts think there will be very few or even zero extra childhood cancers due to Fukushima.

Professor Suzuki believes that the cases of thyroid cancer in Fukushima are not related to the nuclear disaster, and that the children of Fukushima are not at risk of developing cancer from the exposure to radiation. He attributes the increase in cases of thyroid cancer to the fact that more sensitive equipment is being used to detect it, and says that his team will need to carry out their work for many more years to be sure that the children of Fukushima are in the clear.


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:
Farming can be a tough enough business at the best of times, but imagine not being able to prove that the land you farm is even yours. By Gabriella MulliganTechnology of Business reporter In Ghana, for example, only 10% of smallholder farmers have any kind of certificate documenting their ownership rights. Not only does this put them in a vulnerable position, it can often lead to disputes. And if your land is the main asset you want to borrow against, getting a loan can prove difficult, too. So tech company Landmapp has come up with an innovative mobile platform that uses GPS location functionality to map and survey smallholder farmers. Farmers receive a certified plan of the land and land tenure documentation signed by the surveyor, chiefs and high court. "Land tenure insecurity is a core barrier to land investment and farming," explains Thomas Vaassen, Landmapp's co-founder and chief technical officer. "Without proper documentation, there is a real risk of losing the rights to a land parcel. Also, without documentation it is often not possible to access financing, as the document is the only collateral at hand for most farmers." The company started operations in Ghana earlier this year and has already completed more than 1,000 land maps. It says 80% of traditional chiefs are interested in the service. Smart contracts Disputes can also occur between farmers and food companies who buy their produce. These arrangements have traditionally relied on a large element of trust on both sides. But sometimes producers don't get paid when food companies think farmers haven't delivered what they promised. So Freshmarte for Provenance has developed a mobile app that enables food companies and farmers to operate digital smart contracts based on blockchain, the technology underpinning the Bitcoin digital currency. These contracts are recorded in an encrypted, decentralised ledger that cannot be tampered with, so there can be no dispute about the agreements or whether the terms have been fulfilled or not. The app integrates satellite imagery to monitor the progress of farming projects. And following harvest, the price of produce is fairly determined by an algorithm. The tech has other uses, too. Freshmarte is based on open data, allowing anyone to view the source of the products being sold. Buyers can be sure that no child labour was used, for example, or that producers are receiving a fair wage. "Our platform, with independent open data APIs [application programming interfaces], allows any concerned individual to research how, when, where, under which labour conditions, and price in respect to trade, the food on their table was grown, packaged, transported and delivered," explains founder Job Oyebisi. The app is currently being trialled in southern Nigeria by British American Tobacco, and goes live country-wide in November. A problem shared Of course, it's not just hi-tech solutions helping farmers. Lo-tech phones have given them better access to live market prices, weather forecasts, and, crucially, advice for many years now. One company, WeFarm, operates a peer-to-peer knowledge exchange service via SMS text message, allowing farmers to ask questions of other farmers. Its algorithm routes the question to the most relevant farmers, based on their location and expertise, for example. When Ugandan farmer Erick Beinenama's chickens were dying from coccidiosis, he turned to WeFarm in a bid to save them. Another chicken farmer saw his SMS, gave him advice, and Mr Beinenama managed to save his remaining 23 chickens. "With farming, you need knowledge from other farmers for better yields," he says. "Without the information from WeFarm, I would have lost all of my chickens." Each farmer receives on average three to five answers within a couple of hours, and often farmers from other countries begin sending in advice within 24 hours. Until now, rural farmers typically relied on government field officers for assistance if they had a problem with their crops or livestock. Visits to rural villages from these officers are often only once a month - enough time for all of a farmer's animals to die, or their crops to fail. "Technology opens up lots of opportunities, whether that is solving a problem on their farm, finding a market for produce, or being able to enhance their resilience to climate change," says Kenny Ewan, WeFarm's founder and chief executive. "These small differences can make a huge impact on smallholders' livelihoods." Finance for farming In the meantime, improving farmers' access to financial services - and financial security - also needs to be a priority for technical innovation, says Ross Baird, chief executive of investment and business training organisation, Village Capital. With around 33 million small farms producing up to 90% of Africa's entire agricultural output, Mr Baird argues it is important to help farmers build their wealth and achieve financial security. Nearly two-thirds of the rural population in sub-Saharan Africa live on less than $1.25 (95p) a day. "Low-cost smartphones have given farmers access to financial services they never had before. But other tools, such as access to credit, savings, investments, and income-smoothing mechanisms require data that is currently too expensive for the plans that farmers have," Mr Baird says. Village Capital recently ran a business accelerator in East Africa focusing on these challenges. He says Africa needs better infrastructure, and preferably free internet, if farmers are to benefit fully from new technology. "Ultimately, we will be successful when we see the average farmer earn a living wage and have financial security," he says. Follow Technology of Business editor Matthew Wall on Twitter Click here for more Technology of Business features

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize the statistics mentioned in this article.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
In Ghana, only 10% of smallholder farmers have any kind of certificate documenting their ownership rights. Landmapp has completed more than 1,000 land maps and 80% of traditional chiefs are interested in the service. Freshmarte is being trialled in southern Nigeria by British American Tobacco and goes live country-wide in November. WeFarm has helped farmers with advice via SMS text message and has seen an average of three to five answers within a couple of hours. Nearly two-thirds of the rural population in sub-Saharan Africa live on less than $1.25 (95p) a day.

# Output (a):
The article discusses how technology can help improve the lives of smallholder farmers in Africa. It cites statistics showing that only 10% of smallholder farmers in Ghana have any kind of certificate documenting their ownership rights, and that nearly two-thirds of the rural population in sub-Saharan Africa live on less than $1.25 a day. The article also discusses how companies like Landmapp and Freshmarte are using technology to help farmers overcome these challenges.

# 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:
Farming can be a tough enough business at the best of times, but imagine not being able to prove that the land you farm is even yours. By Gabriella MulliganTechnology of Business reporter In Ghana, for example, only 10% of smallholder farmers have any kind of certificate documenting their ownership rights. Not only does this put them in a vulnerable position, it can often lead to disputes. And if your land is the main asset you want to borrow against, getting a loan can prove difficult, too. So tech company Landmapp has come up with an innovative mobile platform that uses GPS location functionality to map and survey smallholder farmers. Farmers receive a certified plan of the land and land tenure documentation signed by the surveyor, chiefs and high court. "Land tenure insecurity is a core barrier to land investment and farming," explains Thomas Vaassen, Landmapp's co-founder and chief technical officer. "Without proper documentation, there is a real risk of losing the rights to a land parcel. Also, without documentation it is often not possible to access financing, as the document is the only collateral at hand for most farmers." The company started operations in Ghana earlier this year and has already completed more than 1,000 land maps. It says 80% of traditional chiefs are interested in the service. Smart contracts Disputes can also occur between farmers and food companies who buy their produce. These arrangements have traditionally relied on a large element of trust on both sides. But sometimes producers don't get paid when food companies think farmers haven't delivered what they promised. So Freshmarte for Provenance has developed a mobile app that enables food companies and farmers to operate digital smart contracts based on blockchain, the technology underpinning the Bitcoin digital currency. These contracts are recorded in an encrypted, decentralised ledger that cannot be tampered with, so there can be no dispute about the agreements or whether the terms have been fulfilled or not. The app integrates satellite imagery to monitor the progress of farming projects. And following harvest, the price of produce is fairly determined by an algorithm. The tech has other uses, too. Freshmarte is based on open data, allowing anyone to view the source of the products being sold. Buyers can be sure that no child labour was used, for example, or that producers are receiving a fair wage. "Our platform, with independent open data APIs [application programming interfaces], allows any concerned individual to research how, when, where, under which labour conditions, and price in respect to trade, the food on their table was grown, packaged, transported and delivered," explains founder Job Oyebisi. The app is currently being trialled in southern Nigeria by British American Tobacco, and goes live country-wide in November. A problem shared Of course, it's not just hi-tech solutions helping farmers. Lo-tech phones have given them better access to live market prices, weather forecasts, and, crucially, advice for many years now. One company, WeFarm, operates a peer-to-peer knowledge exchange service via SMS text message, allowing farmers to ask questions of other farmers. Its algorithm routes the question to the most relevant farmers, based on their location and expertise, for example. When Ugandan farmer Erick Beinenama's chickens were dying from coccidiosis, he turned to WeFarm in a bid to save them. Another chicken farmer saw his SMS, gave him advice, and Mr Beinenama managed to save his remaining 23 chickens. "With farming, you need knowledge from other farmers for better yields," he says. "Without the information from WeFarm, I would have lost all of my chickens." Each farmer receives on average three to five answers within a couple of hours, and often farmers from other countries begin sending in advice within 24 hours. Until now, rural farmers typically relied on government field officers for assistance if they had a problem with their crops or livestock. Visits to rural villages from these officers are often only once a month - enough time for all of a farmer's animals to die, or their crops to fail. "Technology opens up lots of opportunities, whether that is solving a problem on their farm, finding a market for produce, or being able to enhance their resilience to climate change," says Kenny Ewan, WeFarm's founder and chief executive. "These small differences can make a huge impact on smallholders' livelihoods." Finance for farming In the meantime, improving farmers' access to financial services - and financial security - also needs to be a priority for technical innovation, says Ross Baird, chief executive of investment and business training organisation, Village Capital. With around 33 million small farms producing up to 90% of Africa's entire agricultural output, Mr Baird argues it is important to help farmers build their wealth and achieve financial security. Nearly two-thirds of the rural population in sub-Saharan Africa live on less than $1.25 (95p) a day. "Low-cost smartphones have given farmers access to financial services they never had before. But other tools, such as access to credit, savings, investments, and income-smoothing mechanisms require data that is currently too expensive for the plans that farmers have," Mr Baird says. Village Capital recently ran a business accelerator in East Africa focusing on these challenges. He says Africa needs better infrastructure, and preferably free internet, if farmers are to benefit fully from new technology. "Ultimately, we will be successful when we see the average farmer earn a living wage and have financial security," he says. Follow Technology of Business editor Matthew Wall on Twitter Click here for more Technology of Business features

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize the statistics mentioned in this article.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

The article discusses how technology can help improve the lives of smallholder farmers in Africa. It cites statistics showing that only 10% of smallholder farmers in Ghana have any kind of certificate documenting their ownership rights, and that nearly two-thirds of the rural population in sub-Saharan Africa live on less than $1.25 a day. The article also discusses how companies like Landmapp and Freshmarte are using technology to help farmers overcome these challenges.

In Ghana, only 10% of smallholder farmers have any kind of certificate documenting their ownership rights. Landmapp has completed more than 1,000 land maps and 80% of traditional chiefs are interested in the service. Freshmarte is being trialled in southern Nigeria by British American Tobacco and goes live country-wide in November. WeFarm has helped farmers with advice via SMS text message and has seen an average of three to five answers within a couple of hours. Nearly two-thirds of the rural population in sub-Saharan Africa live on less than $1.25 (95p) a day.


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:
Farming can be a tough enough business at the best of times, but imagine not being able to prove that the land you farm is even yours. By Gabriella MulliganTechnology of Business reporter In Ghana, for example, only 10% of smallholder farmers have any kind of certificate documenting their ownership rights. Not only does this put them in a vulnerable position, it can often lead to disputes. And if your land is the main asset you want to borrow against, getting a loan can prove difficult, too. So tech company Landmapp has come up with an innovative mobile platform that uses GPS location functionality to map and survey smallholder farmers. Farmers receive a certified plan of the land and land tenure documentation signed by the surveyor, chiefs and high court. "Land tenure insecurity is a core barrier to land investment and farming," explains Thomas Vaassen, Landmapp's co-founder and chief technical officer. "Without proper documentation, there is a real risk of losing the rights to a land parcel. Also, without documentation it is often not possible to access financing, as the document is the only collateral at hand for most farmers." The company started operations in Ghana earlier this year and has already completed more than 1,000 land maps. It says 80% of traditional chiefs are interested in the service. Smart contracts Disputes can also occur between farmers and food companies who buy their produce. These arrangements have traditionally relied on a large element of trust on both sides. But sometimes producers don't get paid when food companies think farmers haven't delivered what they promised. So Freshmarte for Provenance has developed a mobile app that enables food companies and farmers to operate digital smart contracts based on blockchain, the technology underpinning the Bitcoin digital currency. These contracts are recorded in an encrypted, decentralised ledger that cannot be tampered with, so there can be no dispute about the agreements or whether the terms have been fulfilled or not. The app integrates satellite imagery to monitor the progress of farming projects. And following harvest, the price of produce is fairly determined by an algorithm. The tech has other uses, too. Freshmarte is based on open data, allowing anyone to view the source of the products being sold. Buyers can be sure that no child labour was used, for example, or that producers are receiving a fair wage. "Our platform, with independent open data APIs [application programming interfaces], allows any concerned individual to research how, when, where, under which labour conditions, and price in respect to trade, the food on their table was grown, packaged, transported and delivered," explains founder Job Oyebisi. The app is currently being trialled in southern Nigeria by British American Tobacco, and goes live country-wide in November. A problem shared Of course, it's not just hi-tech solutions helping farmers. Lo-tech phones have given them better access to live market prices, weather forecasts, and, crucially, advice for many years now. One company, WeFarm, operates a peer-to-peer knowledge exchange service via SMS text message, allowing farmers to ask questions of other farmers. Its algorithm routes the question to the most relevant farmers, based on their location and expertise, for example. When Ugandan farmer Erick Beinenama's chickens were dying from coccidiosis, he turned to WeFarm in a bid to save them. Another chicken farmer saw his SMS, gave him advice, and Mr Beinenama managed to save his remaining 23 chickens. "With farming, you need knowledge from other farmers for better yields," he says. "Without the information from WeFarm, I would have lost all of my chickens." Each farmer receives on average three to five answers within a couple of hours, and often farmers from other countries begin sending in advice within 24 hours. Until now, rural farmers typically relied on government field officers for assistance if they had a problem with their crops or livestock. Visits to rural villages from these officers are often only once a month - enough time for all of a farmer's animals to die, or their crops to fail. "Technology opens up lots of opportunities, whether that is solving a problem on their farm, finding a market for produce, or being able to enhance their resilience to climate change," says Kenny Ewan, WeFarm's founder and chief executive. "These small differences can make a huge impact on smallholders' livelihoods." Finance for farming In the meantime, improving farmers' access to financial services - and financial security - also needs to be a priority for technical innovation, says Ross Baird, chief executive of investment and business training organisation, Village Capital. With around 33 million small farms producing up to 90% of Africa's entire agricultural output, Mr Baird argues it is important to help farmers build their wealth and achieve financial security. Nearly two-thirds of the rural population in sub-Saharan Africa live on less than $1.25 (95p) a day. "Low-cost smartphones have given farmers access to financial services they never had before. But other tools, such as access to credit, savings, investments, and income-smoothing mechanisms require data that is currently too expensive for the plans that farmers have," Mr Baird says. Village Capital recently ran a business accelerator in East Africa focusing on these challenges. He says Africa needs better infrastructure, and preferably free internet, if farmers are to benefit fully from new technology. "Ultimately, we will be successful when we see the average farmer earn a living wage and have financial security," he says. Follow Technology of Business editor Matthew Wall on Twitter Click here for more Technology of Business features

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize the statistics mentioned in this article.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
The article discusses how technology can help improve the lives of smallholder farmers in Africa. It cites statistics showing that only 10% of smallholder farmers in Ghana have any kind of certificate documenting their ownership rights, and that nearly two-thirds of the rural population in sub-Saharan Africa live on less than $1.25 a day. The article also discusses how companies like Landmapp and Freshmarte are using technology to help farmers overcome these challenges.

# Output (a):
In Ghana, only 10% of smallholder farmers have documentation proving their ownership rights. Tech company Landmapp has developed a mobile platform that uses GPS to map and survey smallholder farmers, providing them with certified land tenure documentation. The company has already completed over 1,000 land maps in Ghana, with 80% of traditional chiefs expressing interest in the service. Nearly two-thirds of the rural population in sub-Saharan Africa live on less than $1.25 a day, with 33 million small farms producing up to 90% of Africa's entire agricultural output.

# 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:
Farming can be a tough enough business at the best of times, but imagine not being able to prove that the land you farm is even yours. By Gabriella MulliganTechnology of Business reporter In Ghana, for example, only 10% of smallholder farmers have any kind of certificate documenting their ownership rights. Not only does this put them in a vulnerable position, it can often lead to disputes. And if your land is the main asset you want to borrow against, getting a loan can prove difficult, too. So tech company Landmapp has come up with an innovative mobile platform that uses GPS location functionality to map and survey smallholder farmers. Farmers receive a certified plan of the land and land tenure documentation signed by the surveyor, chiefs and high court. "Land tenure insecurity is a core barrier to land investment and farming," explains Thomas Vaassen, Landmapp's co-founder and chief technical officer. "Without proper documentation, there is a real risk of losing the rights to a land parcel. Also, without documentation it is often not possible to access financing, as the document is the only collateral at hand for most farmers." The company started operations in Ghana earlier this year and has already completed more than 1,000 land maps. It says 80% of traditional chiefs are interested in the service. Smart contracts Disputes can also occur between farmers and food companies who buy their produce. These arrangements have traditionally relied on a large element of trust on both sides. But sometimes producers don't get paid when food companies think farmers haven't delivered what they promised. So Freshmarte for Provenance has developed a mobile app that enables food companies and farmers to operate digital smart contracts based on blockchain, the technology underpinning the Bitcoin digital currency. These contracts are recorded in an encrypted, decentralised ledger that cannot be tampered with, so there can be no dispute about the agreements or whether the terms have been fulfilled or not. The app integrates satellite imagery to monitor the progress of farming projects. And following harvest, the price of produce is fairly determined by an algorithm. The tech has other uses, too. Freshmarte is based on open data, allowing anyone to view the source of the products being sold. Buyers can be sure that no child labour was used, for example, or that producers are receiving a fair wage. "Our platform, with independent open data APIs [application programming interfaces], allows any concerned individual to research how, when, where, under which labour conditions, and price in respect to trade, the food on their table was grown, packaged, transported and delivered," explains founder Job Oyebisi. The app is currently being trialled in southern Nigeria by British American Tobacco, and goes live country-wide in November. A problem shared Of course, it's not just hi-tech solutions helping farmers. Lo-tech phones have given them better access to live market prices, weather forecasts, and, crucially, advice for many years now. One company, WeFarm, operates a peer-to-peer knowledge exchange service via SMS text message, allowing farmers to ask questions of other farmers. Its algorithm routes the question to the most relevant farmers, based on their location and expertise, for example. When Ugandan farmer Erick Beinenama's chickens were dying from coccidiosis, he turned to WeFarm in a bid to save them. Another chicken farmer saw his SMS, gave him advice, and Mr Beinenama managed to save his remaining 23 chickens. "With farming, you need knowledge from other farmers for better yields," he says. "Without the information from WeFarm, I would have lost all of my chickens." Each farmer receives on average three to five answers within a couple of hours, and often farmers from other countries begin sending in advice within 24 hours. Until now, rural farmers typically relied on government field officers for assistance if they had a problem with their crops or livestock. Visits to rural villages from these officers are often only once a month - enough time for all of a farmer's animals to die, or their crops to fail. "Technology opens up lots of opportunities, whether that is solving a problem on their farm, finding a market for produce, or being able to enhance their resilience to climate change," says Kenny Ewan, WeFarm's founder and chief executive. "These small differences can make a huge impact on smallholders' livelihoods." Finance for farming In the meantime, improving farmers' access to financial services - and financial security - also needs to be a priority for technical innovation, says Ross Baird, chief executive of investment and business training organisation, Village Capital. With around 33 million small farms producing up to 90% of Africa's entire agricultural output, Mr Baird argues it is important to help farmers build their wealth and achieve financial security. Nearly two-thirds of the rural population in sub-Saharan Africa live on less than $1.25 (95p) a day. "Low-cost smartphones have given farmers access to financial services they never had before. But other tools, such as access to credit, savings, investments, and income-smoothing mechanisms require data that is currently too expensive for the plans that farmers have," Mr Baird says. Village Capital recently ran a business accelerator in East Africa focusing on these challenges. He says Africa needs better infrastructure, and preferably free internet, if farmers are to benefit fully from new technology. "Ultimately, we will be successful when we see the average farmer earn a living wage and have financial security," he says. Follow Technology of Business editor Matthew Wall on Twitter Click here for more Technology of Business features

Here is a summary requirement:
Summarize the statistics mentioned in this article.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

In Ghana, only 10% of smallholder farmers have documentation proving their ownership rights. Tech company Landmapp has developed a mobile platform that uses GPS to map and survey smallholder farmers, providing them with certified land tenure documentation. The company has already completed over 1,000 land maps in Ghana, with 80% of traditional chiefs expressing interest in the service. Nearly two-thirds of the rural population in sub-Saharan Africa live on less than $1.25 a day, with 33 million small farms producing up to 90% of Africa's entire agricultural output.

The article discusses how technology can help improve the lives of smallholder farmers in Africa. It cites statistics showing that only 10% of smallholder farmers in Ghana have any kind of certificate documenting their ownership rights, and that nearly two-thirds of the rural population in sub-Saharan Africa live on less than $1.25 a day. The article also discusses how companies like Landmapp and Freshmarte are using technology to help farmers overcome these challenges.