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 an summary requirement:
Summarize what Miyuki Arakawa is worried about.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential health effects of radiation on her two young sons, Ryota and Haruto, due to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster. She is concerned that the government is not providing enough information and wants her sons to be monitored for radiation exposure in the future.

# Output (a):
Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential long-term effects of radiation exposure on her two young sons due to the Fukushima nuclear disaster. She is concerned that the government provides very little information and wants to be completely sure her children are fine, seeking regular check-ups in the following years.

# 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 an summary requirement:
Summarize what Miyuki Arakawa is worried about.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential long-term effects of radiation exposure on her two young sons due to the Fukushima nuclear disaster. She is concerned that the government provides very little information and wants to be completely sure her children are fine, seeking regular check-ups in the following years.

Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential health effects of radiation on her two young sons, Ryota and Haruto, due to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster. She is concerned that the government is not providing enough information and wants her sons to be monitored for radiation exposure in the future.


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 an summary requirement:
Summarize what Miyuki Arakawa is worried about.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential health effects of radiation on her two young sons, Ryota and Haruto, due to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster. She is concerned that the government is not providing enough information and wants her sons to be monitored for radiation exposure in the future.

# Output (a):
Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential long-term effects of radiation exposure on her two young sons due to the Fukushima nuclear disaster. She is concerned that the government provides very little information and wants to be completely sure her children are fine, seeking regular check-ups in the following years.

# 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 an summary requirement:
Summarize what Miyuki Arakawa is worried about.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential long-term effects of radiation exposure on her two young sons due to the Fukushima nuclear disaster. She is concerned that the government provides very little information and wants to be completely sure her children are fine, seeking regular check-ups in the following years.

Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential health effects of radiation on her two young sons, Ryota and Haruto, due to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster. She is concerned that the government is not providing enough information and wants her sons to be monitored for radiation exposure in the future.


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 an summary requirement:
Summarize what Miyuki Arakawa is worried about.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential long-term effects of radiation exposure on her two young sons due to the Fukushima nuclear disaster. She is concerned that the government provides very little information and wants to be completely sure her children are fine, seeking regular check-ups in the following years.

# Output (a):
Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential risk of radiation exposure to her two little boys, who are being scanned in a full-body radiation scanner at a private hospital 60km from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. She wants to ensure that her boys are fine and is anxious about the lack of information provided by the government regarding the 33 confirmed cases of thyroid cancer and 42 suspected cases among Fukushima children.

# 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:
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 an summary requirement:
Summarize what Miyuki Arakawa is worried about.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential risk of radiation exposure to her two little boys, who are being scanned in a full-body radiation scanner at a private hospital 60km from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. She wants to ensure that her boys are fine and is anxious about the lack of information provided by the government regarding the 33 confirmed cases of thyroid cancer and 42 suspected cases among Fukushima children.

Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential long-term effects of radiation exposure on her two young sons due to the Fukushima nuclear disaster. She is concerned that the government provides very little information and wants to be completely sure her children are fine, seeking regular check-ups in the following years.


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 an summary requirement:
Summarize what Miyuki Arakawa is worried about.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential long-term effects of radiation exposure on her two young sons due to the Fukushima nuclear disaster. She is concerned that the government provides very little information and wants to be completely sure her children are fine, seeking regular check-ups in the following years.

# Output (a):
Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential risk of radiation exposure to her two little boys, who are being scanned in a full-body radiation scanner at a private hospital 60km from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. She wants to ensure that her boys are fine and is anxious about the lack of information provided by the government regarding the 33 confirmed cases of thyroid cancer and 42 suspected cases among Fukushima children.

# 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:
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 an summary requirement:
Summarize what Miyuki Arakawa is worried about.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential risk of radiation exposure to her two little boys, who are being scanned in a full-body radiation scanner at a private hospital 60km from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. She wants to ensure that her boys are fine and is anxious about the lack of information provided by the government regarding the 33 confirmed cases of thyroid cancer and 42 suspected cases among Fukushima children.

Miyuki Arakawa is worried about the potential long-term effects of radiation exposure on her two young sons due to the Fukushima nuclear disaster. She is concerned that the government provides very little information and wants to be completely sure her children are fine, seeking regular check-ups in the following years.


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:
Imagine that suddenly you cannot recognise your mother, your partner, your child. You can see them but your brain cannot process the information - you don't know whether they are smiling, or understand their emotions. By Gabriela TorresBBC Mundo health reporter That is what happened to David Bromley, after he suffered a brain injury that left him with face blindness. David has prosopagnosia. People with this condition can see the eyes, the nose, and the mouth, what is known as the context - but they cannot see them as a whole. They do not recognise gestures or emotions. "I can even recognise my wife if I walk into the house and know that she is there," says David. "But if I'm in the street and she passes by and I don't know that she is going to be there, I wouldn't recognise her." David, who lives in Essex, had unknowingly been living with eye damage since birth - the arteries and veins were mixed up. This eventually caused a partial loss of sight and damage in the brain which caused the prosopagnosia. Perhaps the most difficult aspect of this condition is that people do not notice right away that something is wrong with them. 'Social embarrassment' He remembers when he realised there was a problem. "I went to a reunion where I saw friends that I hadn't seen for 30 years. We were pretty close but we went our separate ways." On the way home, he told his brother-in-law: "'Fran and Mickey haven't changed a bit, they are exactly the same!'. And then I said 'hold on, were they wearing tank tops?'" What David was seeing was his memory of their friends back then. "My brain was telling me that there they were and what they looked like, but that wasn't the reality". After that, he discovered he was face blind. There are two main forms of prosopagnosia; developmental - where people fail to develop face processing abilities which is thought to affect around 2% of the population, and acquired, which develops after some form of brain injury and is much rarer. Dr Ashok Jansari, a cognitive neuropsychology expert from the University of East London said: "Acquired prosopagnosia is extremely rare because the type of brain damage is very specific,. "It can be caused by damage to the back of the brain on the right-hand side in an area known generally as the right occipito-temporal region." David said: "I don't know what's worse - not being able to ever recognise people or at 56 years old - as it happened to me - suddenly not being able to recognise anybody". He added that the worst part is the social embarrassment. "We were on holiday in Cuba and I'd been snorkelling in the sea. I was talking with this guy from Denmark, when this woman swam up and said 'buenos dias' and I went 'hello, pleased to meet you', thinking it was his wife, but it was actually my wife and I hadn't recognised her." David can see people perfectly well - but 10 or 15 minutes later he cannot recognise them. He now tells clients: "If I ignore you, I'm not being rude, it is just that I can't recognise you." Job fears Sandra, from London, who only wants to give her first name, is also afraid of social embarrassment. She had encephalitis - inflammation of the brain - 14 years ago, which left her with face blindness. Even though her prosopagnosia is mild - she can recognise people she knew before her illness - she would rather not let people know because she does not want anyone to think she has some sort of incapacity. "Life with prosopagnosia is very shameful," she says. She is teacher and at work almost nobody knows that she is face blind. "If I see someone every day, I can recognise them. But if one of the children says hi to me on the street, I would know it is a student from the school, but I wouldn't know who. "I don't say anything to the children, I just work every day to learn their faces." But she says: "Perhaps the reason why I don't mention it is because I don't want them to think that I cannot do my job, because that's not true. I don't want to feel ashamed or that people think that there is something wrong with me." Dr Jansari understands the feelings and fears of David and Sandra. He knows of cases in which people have lost their jobs because of the condition - including a teacher who had difficulty recognising pupils, causing problems when parents came to pick up their children at the end of the day, Even though prosopagnosia is not recognised as a disability, Dr Jansari thinks it should be treated as such in some cases. This condition has no cure. "In the case of acquired prosopagnosia, once a part of the brain is damaged it is not going to 'grow' back, so it is impossible to fix the problem," he said. "With developmental prosopagnosia, we don't know what causes it, but hypothetically in the future if they find that there is a genetic cause, that could be corrected - but that would be a very long way off." Even though people develop strategies to cope - because people change their appearance, they are not foolproof. Dr Jansari says: "Once David thought that a photograph he saw was of George Michael but it was of me, from a time when I used to have a goatee beard and a gold earring!"

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the symptoms of prosopagnosia.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Prosopagnosia is a condition in which people cannot recognize faces, even if they can see the eyes, nose, and mouth. People with this condition cannot recognize gestures or emotions, and may not recognize even close friends or family members if they are not expecting to see them. It can be caused by birth defects or brain injuries, and has no cure. People with prosopagnosia may develop strategies to cope, but these are not foolproof.

# Output (a):
Prosopagnosia is a condition in which people have difficulty recognizing faces. People with prosopagnosia can see the eyes, nose, and mouth, but they cannot see them as a whole. They do not recognize gestures or emotions.

# 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:
Imagine that suddenly you cannot recognise your mother, your partner, your child. You can see them but your brain cannot process the information - you don't know whether they are smiling, or understand their emotions. By Gabriela TorresBBC Mundo health reporter That is what happened to David Bromley, after he suffered a brain injury that left him with face blindness. David has prosopagnosia. People with this condition can see the eyes, the nose, and the mouth, what is known as the context - but they cannot see them as a whole. They do not recognise gestures or emotions. "I can even recognise my wife if I walk into the house and know that she is there," says David. "But if I'm in the street and she passes by and I don't know that she is going to be there, I wouldn't recognise her." David, who lives in Essex, had unknowingly been living with eye damage since birth - the arteries and veins were mixed up. This eventually caused a partial loss of sight and damage in the brain which caused the prosopagnosia. Perhaps the most difficult aspect of this condition is that people do not notice right away that something is wrong with them. 'Social embarrassment' He remembers when he realised there was a problem. "I went to a reunion where I saw friends that I hadn't seen for 30 years. We were pretty close but we went our separate ways." On the way home, he told his brother-in-law: "'Fran and Mickey haven't changed a bit, they are exactly the same!'. And then I said 'hold on, were they wearing tank tops?'" What David was seeing was his memory of their friends back then. "My brain was telling me that there they were and what they looked like, but that wasn't the reality". After that, he discovered he was face blind. There are two main forms of prosopagnosia; developmental - where people fail to develop face processing abilities which is thought to affect around 2% of the population, and acquired, which develops after some form of brain injury and is much rarer. Dr Ashok Jansari, a cognitive neuropsychology expert from the University of East London said: "Acquired prosopagnosia is extremely rare because the type of brain damage is very specific,. "It can be caused by damage to the back of the brain on the right-hand side in an area known generally as the right occipito-temporal region." David said: "I don't know what's worse - not being able to ever recognise people or at 56 years old - as it happened to me - suddenly not being able to recognise anybody". He added that the worst part is the social embarrassment. "We were on holiday in Cuba and I'd been snorkelling in the sea. I was talking with this guy from Denmark, when this woman swam up and said 'buenos dias' and I went 'hello, pleased to meet you', thinking it was his wife, but it was actually my wife and I hadn't recognised her." David can see people perfectly well - but 10 or 15 minutes later he cannot recognise them. He now tells clients: "If I ignore you, I'm not being rude, it is just that I can't recognise you." Job fears Sandra, from London, who only wants to give her first name, is also afraid of social embarrassment. She had encephalitis - inflammation of the brain - 14 years ago, which left her with face blindness. Even though her prosopagnosia is mild - she can recognise people she knew before her illness - she would rather not let people know because she does not want anyone to think she has some sort of incapacity. "Life with prosopagnosia is very shameful," she says. She is teacher and at work almost nobody knows that she is face blind. "If I see someone every day, I can recognise them. But if one of the children says hi to me on the street, I would know it is a student from the school, but I wouldn't know who. "I don't say anything to the children, I just work every day to learn their faces." But she says: "Perhaps the reason why I don't mention it is because I don't want them to think that I cannot do my job, because that's not true. I don't want to feel ashamed or that people think that there is something wrong with me." Dr Jansari understands the feelings and fears of David and Sandra. He knows of cases in which people have lost their jobs because of the condition - including a teacher who had difficulty recognising pupils, causing problems when parents came to pick up their children at the end of the day, Even though prosopagnosia is not recognised as a disability, Dr Jansari thinks it should be treated as such in some cases. This condition has no cure. "In the case of acquired prosopagnosia, once a part of the brain is damaged it is not going to 'grow' back, so it is impossible to fix the problem," he said. "With developmental prosopagnosia, we don't know what causes it, but hypothetically in the future if they find that there is a genetic cause, that could be corrected - but that would be a very long way off." Even though people develop strategies to cope - because people change their appearance, they are not foolproof. Dr Jansari says: "Once David thought that a photograph he saw was of George Michael but it was of me, from a time when I used to have a goatee beard and a gold earring!"

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the symptoms of prosopagnosia.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Prosopagnosia is a condition in which people have difficulty recognizing faces. People with prosopagnosia can see the eyes, nose, and mouth, but they cannot see them as a whole. They do not recognize gestures or emotions.

Prosopagnosia is a condition in which people cannot recognize faces, even if they can see the eyes, nose, and mouth. People with this condition cannot recognize gestures or emotions, and may not recognize even close friends or family members if they are not expecting to see them. It can be caused by birth defects or brain injuries, and has no cure. People with prosopagnosia may develop strategies to cope, but these are not foolproof.


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:
Imagine that suddenly you cannot recognise your mother, your partner, your child. You can see them but your brain cannot process the information - you don't know whether they are smiling, or understand their emotions. By Gabriela TorresBBC Mundo health reporter That is what happened to David Bromley, after he suffered a brain injury that left him with face blindness. David has prosopagnosia. People with this condition can see the eyes, the nose, and the mouth, what is known as the context - but they cannot see them as a whole. They do not recognise gestures or emotions. "I can even recognise my wife if I walk into the house and know that she is there," says David. "But if I'm in the street and she passes by and I don't know that she is going to be there, I wouldn't recognise her." David, who lives in Essex, had unknowingly been living with eye damage since birth - the arteries and veins were mixed up. This eventually caused a partial loss of sight and damage in the brain which caused the prosopagnosia. Perhaps the most difficult aspect of this condition is that people do not notice right away that something is wrong with them. 'Social embarrassment' He remembers when he realised there was a problem. "I went to a reunion where I saw friends that I hadn't seen for 30 years. We were pretty close but we went our separate ways." On the way home, he told his brother-in-law: "'Fran and Mickey haven't changed a bit, they are exactly the same!'. And then I said 'hold on, were they wearing tank tops?'" What David was seeing was his memory of their friends back then. "My brain was telling me that there they were and what they looked like, but that wasn't the reality". After that, he discovered he was face blind. There are two main forms of prosopagnosia; developmental - where people fail to develop face processing abilities which is thought to affect around 2% of the population, and acquired, which develops after some form of brain injury and is much rarer. Dr Ashok Jansari, a cognitive neuropsychology expert from the University of East London said: "Acquired prosopagnosia is extremely rare because the type of brain damage is very specific,. "It can be caused by damage to the back of the brain on the right-hand side in an area known generally as the right occipito-temporal region." David said: "I don't know what's worse - not being able to ever recognise people or at 56 years old - as it happened to me - suddenly not being able to recognise anybody". He added that the worst part is the social embarrassment. "We were on holiday in Cuba and I'd been snorkelling in the sea. I was talking with this guy from Denmark, when this woman swam up and said 'buenos dias' and I went 'hello, pleased to meet you', thinking it was his wife, but it was actually my wife and I hadn't recognised her." David can see people perfectly well - but 10 or 15 minutes later he cannot recognise them. He now tells clients: "If I ignore you, I'm not being rude, it is just that I can't recognise you." Job fears Sandra, from London, who only wants to give her first name, is also afraid of social embarrassment. She had encephalitis - inflammation of the brain - 14 years ago, which left her with face blindness. Even though her prosopagnosia is mild - she can recognise people she knew before her illness - she would rather not let people know because she does not want anyone to think she has some sort of incapacity. "Life with prosopagnosia is very shameful," she says. She is teacher and at work almost nobody knows that she is face blind. "If I see someone every day, I can recognise them. But if one of the children says hi to me on the street, I would know it is a student from the school, but I wouldn't know who. "I don't say anything to the children, I just work every day to learn their faces." But she says: "Perhaps the reason why I don't mention it is because I don't want them to think that I cannot do my job, because that's not true. I don't want to feel ashamed or that people think that there is something wrong with me." Dr Jansari understands the feelings and fears of David and Sandra. He knows of cases in which people have lost their jobs because of the condition - including a teacher who had difficulty recognising pupils, causing problems when parents came to pick up their children at the end of the day, Even though prosopagnosia is not recognised as a disability, Dr Jansari thinks it should be treated as such in some cases. This condition has no cure. "In the case of acquired prosopagnosia, once a part of the brain is damaged it is not going to 'grow' back, so it is impossible to fix the problem," he said. "With developmental prosopagnosia, we don't know what causes it, but hypothetically in the future if they find that there is a genetic cause, that could be corrected - but that would be a very long way off." Even though people develop strategies to cope - because people change their appearance, they are not foolproof. Dr Jansari says: "Once David thought that a photograph he saw was of George Michael but it was of me, from a time when I used to have a goatee beard and a gold earring!"

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the symptoms of prosopagnosia.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Prosopagnosia is a condition in which people have difficulty recognizing faces. People with prosopagnosia can see the eyes, nose, and mouth, but they cannot see them as a whole. They do not recognize gestures or emotions.

# Output (a):
Prosopagnosia is a condition where people cannot recognize faces, even of those they know well. They can see the eyes, nose, and mouth, but cannot process them as a whole. There are two main forms of prosopagnosia: developmental and acquired. Developmental affects around 2% of the population and acquired is much rarer, caused by damage to the back of the brain on the right-hand side. There is no cure for prosopagnosia, and people with the condition often develop strategies to cope with it.

# 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:
Imagine that suddenly you cannot recognise your mother, your partner, your child. You can see them but your brain cannot process the information - you don't know whether they are smiling, or understand their emotions. By Gabriela TorresBBC Mundo health reporter That is what happened to David Bromley, after he suffered a brain injury that left him with face blindness. David has prosopagnosia. People with this condition can see the eyes, the nose, and the mouth, what is known as the context - but they cannot see them as a whole. They do not recognise gestures or emotions. "I can even recognise my wife if I walk into the house and know that she is there," says David. "But if I'm in the street and she passes by and I don't know that she is going to be there, I wouldn't recognise her." David, who lives in Essex, had unknowingly been living with eye damage since birth - the arteries and veins were mixed up. This eventually caused a partial loss of sight and damage in the brain which caused the prosopagnosia. Perhaps the most difficult aspect of this condition is that people do not notice right away that something is wrong with them. 'Social embarrassment' He remembers when he realised there was a problem. "I went to a reunion where I saw friends that I hadn't seen for 30 years. We were pretty close but we went our separate ways." On the way home, he told his brother-in-law: "'Fran and Mickey haven't changed a bit, they are exactly the same!'. And then I said 'hold on, were they wearing tank tops?'" What David was seeing was his memory of their friends back then. "My brain was telling me that there they were and what they looked like, but that wasn't the reality". After that, he discovered he was face blind. There are two main forms of prosopagnosia; developmental - where people fail to develop face processing abilities which is thought to affect around 2% of the population, and acquired, which develops after some form of brain injury and is much rarer. Dr Ashok Jansari, a cognitive neuropsychology expert from the University of East London said: "Acquired prosopagnosia is extremely rare because the type of brain damage is very specific,. "It can be caused by damage to the back of the brain on the right-hand side in an area known generally as the right occipito-temporal region." David said: "I don't know what's worse - not being able to ever recognise people or at 56 years old - as it happened to me - suddenly not being able to recognise anybody". He added that the worst part is the social embarrassment. "We were on holiday in Cuba and I'd been snorkelling in the sea. I was talking with this guy from Denmark, when this woman swam up and said 'buenos dias' and I went 'hello, pleased to meet you', thinking it was his wife, but it was actually my wife and I hadn't recognised her." David can see people perfectly well - but 10 or 15 minutes later he cannot recognise them. He now tells clients: "If I ignore you, I'm not being rude, it is just that I can't recognise you." Job fears Sandra, from London, who only wants to give her first name, is also afraid of social embarrassment. She had encephalitis - inflammation of the brain - 14 years ago, which left her with face blindness. Even though her prosopagnosia is mild - she can recognise people she knew before her illness - she would rather not let people know because she does not want anyone to think she has some sort of incapacity. "Life with prosopagnosia is very shameful," she says. She is teacher and at work almost nobody knows that she is face blind. "If I see someone every day, I can recognise them. But if one of the children says hi to me on the street, I would know it is a student from the school, but I wouldn't know who. "I don't say anything to the children, I just work every day to learn their faces." But she says: "Perhaps the reason why I don't mention it is because I don't want them to think that I cannot do my job, because that's not true. I don't want to feel ashamed or that people think that there is something wrong with me." Dr Jansari understands the feelings and fears of David and Sandra. He knows of cases in which people have lost their jobs because of the condition - including a teacher who had difficulty recognising pupils, causing problems when parents came to pick up their children at the end of the day, Even though prosopagnosia is not recognised as a disability, Dr Jansari thinks it should be treated as such in some cases. This condition has no cure. "In the case of acquired prosopagnosia, once a part of the brain is damaged it is not going to 'grow' back, so it is impossible to fix the problem," he said. "With developmental prosopagnosia, we don't know what causes it, but hypothetically in the future if they find that there is a genetic cause, that could be corrected - but that would be a very long way off." Even though people develop strategies to cope - because people change their appearance, they are not foolproof. Dr Jansari says: "Once David thought that a photograph he saw was of George Michael but it was of me, from a time when I used to have a goatee beard and a gold earring!"

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the symptoms of prosopagnosia.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Prosopagnosia is a condition where people cannot recognize faces, even of those they know well. They can see the eyes, nose, and mouth, but cannot process them as a whole. There are two main forms of prosopagnosia: developmental and acquired. Developmental affects around 2% of the population and acquired is much rarer, caused by damage to the back of the brain on the right-hand side. There is no cure for prosopagnosia, and people with the condition often develop strategies to cope with it.

Prosopagnosia is a condition in which people have difficulty recognizing faces. People with prosopagnosia can see the eyes, nose, and mouth, but they cannot see them as a whole. They do not recognize gestures or emotions.


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:
Imagine that suddenly you cannot recognise your mother, your partner, your child. You can see them but your brain cannot process the information - you don't know whether they are smiling, or understand their emotions. By Gabriela TorresBBC Mundo health reporter That is what happened to David Bromley, after he suffered a brain injury that left him with face blindness. David has prosopagnosia. People with this condition can see the eyes, the nose, and the mouth, what is known as the context - but they cannot see them as a whole. They do not recognise gestures or emotions. "I can even recognise my wife if I walk into the house and know that she is there," says David. "But if I'm in the street and she passes by and I don't know that she is going to be there, I wouldn't recognise her." David, who lives in Essex, had unknowingly been living with eye damage since birth - the arteries and veins were mixed up. This eventually caused a partial loss of sight and damage in the brain which caused the prosopagnosia. Perhaps the most difficult aspect of this condition is that people do not notice right away that something is wrong with them. 'Social embarrassment' He remembers when he realised there was a problem. "I went to a reunion where I saw friends that I hadn't seen for 30 years. We were pretty close but we went our separate ways." On the way home, he told his brother-in-law: "'Fran and Mickey haven't changed a bit, they are exactly the same!'. And then I said 'hold on, were they wearing tank tops?'" What David was seeing was his memory of their friends back then. "My brain was telling me that there they were and what they looked like, but that wasn't the reality". After that, he discovered he was face blind. There are two main forms of prosopagnosia; developmental - where people fail to develop face processing abilities which is thought to affect around 2% of the population, and acquired, which develops after some form of brain injury and is much rarer. Dr Ashok Jansari, a cognitive neuropsychology expert from the University of East London said: "Acquired prosopagnosia is extremely rare because the type of brain damage is very specific,. "It can be caused by damage to the back of the brain on the right-hand side in an area known generally as the right occipito-temporal region." David said: "I don't know what's worse - not being able to ever recognise people or at 56 years old - as it happened to me - suddenly not being able to recognise anybody". He added that the worst part is the social embarrassment. "We were on holiday in Cuba and I'd been snorkelling in the sea. I was talking with this guy from Denmark, when this woman swam up and said 'buenos dias' and I went 'hello, pleased to meet you', thinking it was his wife, but it was actually my wife and I hadn't recognised her." David can see people perfectly well - but 10 or 15 minutes later he cannot recognise them. He now tells clients: "If I ignore you, I'm not being rude, it is just that I can't recognise you." Job fears Sandra, from London, who only wants to give her first name, is also afraid of social embarrassment. She had encephalitis - inflammation of the brain - 14 years ago, which left her with face blindness. Even though her prosopagnosia is mild - she can recognise people she knew before her illness - she would rather not let people know because she does not want anyone to think she has some sort of incapacity. "Life with prosopagnosia is very shameful," she says. She is teacher and at work almost nobody knows that she is face blind. "If I see someone every day, I can recognise them. But if one of the children says hi to me on the street, I would know it is a student from the school, but I wouldn't know who. "I don't say anything to the children, I just work every day to learn their faces." But she says: "Perhaps the reason why I don't mention it is because I don't want them to think that I cannot do my job, because that's not true. I don't want to feel ashamed or that people think that there is something wrong with me." Dr Jansari understands the feelings and fears of David and Sandra. He knows of cases in which people have lost their jobs because of the condition - including a teacher who had difficulty recognising pupils, causing problems when parents came to pick up their children at the end of the day, Even though prosopagnosia is not recognised as a disability, Dr Jansari thinks it should be treated as such in some cases. This condition has no cure. "In the case of acquired prosopagnosia, once a part of the brain is damaged it is not going to 'grow' back, so it is impossible to fix the problem," he said. "With developmental prosopagnosia, we don't know what causes it, but hypothetically in the future if they find that there is a genetic cause, that could be corrected - but that would be a very long way off." Even though people develop strategies to cope - because people change their appearance, they are not foolproof. Dr Jansari says: "Once David thought that a photograph he saw was of George Michael but it was of me, from a time when I used to have a goatee beard and a gold earring!"

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the symptoms of prosopagnosia.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

# Output (b):
Prosopagnosia is a condition in which people have difficulty recognizing faces. People with prosopagnosia can see the eyes, nose, and mouth, but they cannot see them as a whole. They do not recognize gestures or emotions.

# Output (a):
Prosopagnosia is a condition in which people cannot recognize faces, even if they can see the eyes, nose, and mouth. People with this condition cannot recognize gestures or emotions, and may not recognize even close friends or family members if they are not expecting to see them.

# 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:
Imagine that suddenly you cannot recognise your mother, your partner, your child. You can see them but your brain cannot process the information - you don't know whether they are smiling, or understand their emotions. By Gabriela TorresBBC Mundo health reporter That is what happened to David Bromley, after he suffered a brain injury that left him with face blindness. David has prosopagnosia. People with this condition can see the eyes, the nose, and the mouth, what is known as the context - but they cannot see them as a whole. They do not recognise gestures or emotions. "I can even recognise my wife if I walk into the house and know that she is there," says David. "But if I'm in the street and she passes by and I don't know that she is going to be there, I wouldn't recognise her." David, who lives in Essex, had unknowingly been living with eye damage since birth - the arteries and veins were mixed up. This eventually caused a partial loss of sight and damage in the brain which caused the prosopagnosia. Perhaps the most difficult aspect of this condition is that people do not notice right away that something is wrong with them. 'Social embarrassment' He remembers when he realised there was a problem. "I went to a reunion where I saw friends that I hadn't seen for 30 years. We were pretty close but we went our separate ways." On the way home, he told his brother-in-law: "'Fran and Mickey haven't changed a bit, they are exactly the same!'. And then I said 'hold on, were they wearing tank tops?'" What David was seeing was his memory of their friends back then. "My brain was telling me that there they were and what they looked like, but that wasn't the reality". After that, he discovered he was face blind. There are two main forms of prosopagnosia; developmental - where people fail to develop face processing abilities which is thought to affect around 2% of the population, and acquired, which develops after some form of brain injury and is much rarer. Dr Ashok Jansari, a cognitive neuropsychology expert from the University of East London said: "Acquired prosopagnosia is extremely rare because the type of brain damage is very specific,. "It can be caused by damage to the back of the brain on the right-hand side in an area known generally as the right occipito-temporal region." David said: "I don't know what's worse - not being able to ever recognise people or at 56 years old - as it happened to me - suddenly not being able to recognise anybody". He added that the worst part is the social embarrassment. "We were on holiday in Cuba and I'd been snorkelling in the sea. I was talking with this guy from Denmark, when this woman swam up and said 'buenos dias' and I went 'hello, pleased to meet you', thinking it was his wife, but it was actually my wife and I hadn't recognised her." David can see people perfectly well - but 10 or 15 minutes later he cannot recognise them. He now tells clients: "If I ignore you, I'm not being rude, it is just that I can't recognise you." Job fears Sandra, from London, who only wants to give her first name, is also afraid of social embarrassment. She had encephalitis - inflammation of the brain - 14 years ago, which left her with face blindness. Even though her prosopagnosia is mild - she can recognise people she knew before her illness - she would rather not let people know because she does not want anyone to think she has some sort of incapacity. "Life with prosopagnosia is very shameful," she says. She is teacher and at work almost nobody knows that she is face blind. "If I see someone every day, I can recognise them. But if one of the children says hi to me on the street, I would know it is a student from the school, but I wouldn't know who. "I don't say anything to the children, I just work every day to learn their faces." But she says: "Perhaps the reason why I don't mention it is because I don't want them to think that I cannot do my job, because that's not true. I don't want to feel ashamed or that people think that there is something wrong with me." Dr Jansari understands the feelings and fears of David and Sandra. He knows of cases in which people have lost their jobs because of the condition - including a teacher who had difficulty recognising pupils, causing problems when parents came to pick up their children at the end of the day, Even though prosopagnosia is not recognised as a disability, Dr Jansari thinks it should be treated as such in some cases. This condition has no cure. "In the case of acquired prosopagnosia, once a part of the brain is damaged it is not going to 'grow' back, so it is impossible to fix the problem," he said. "With developmental prosopagnosia, we don't know what causes it, but hypothetically in the future if they find that there is a genetic cause, that could be corrected - but that would be a very long way off." Even though people develop strategies to cope - because people change their appearance, they are not foolproof. Dr Jansari says: "Once David thought that a photograph he saw was of George Michael but it was of me, from a time when I used to have a goatee beard and a gold earring!"

Here is an summary requirement:
Summarize the symptoms of prosopagnosia.

Please summarize the above article based on the given requirement:

Prosopagnosia is a condition in which people cannot recognize faces, even if they can see the eyes, nose, and mouth. People with this condition cannot recognize gestures or emotions, and may not recognize even close friends or family members if they are not expecting to see them.

Prosopagnosia is a condition in which people have difficulty recognizing faces. People with prosopagnosia can see the eyes, nose, and mouth, but they cannot see them as a whole. They do not recognize gestures or emotions.