Article: Rembrandt was an extraordinary Dutch painter. He was most well-known for his brushwork and the way in which he connected with the human soul. His life, however, was not happy. He was born on July 15,1606 in Leiden, the Netherlands. His father wanted him to have a real, learned profession but Rembrandt left the University of Leiden after becoming bored. He began studying art under a local teacher but soon left and studied in Amsterdam where he mastered all his lessons in six months! At the age of 22, he moved back to Leiden and began to get his own students. One of his students was the famous artist Gerrit Dou. In 1631 he returned to Amsterdam where he became the most popular portrait painter in Holland. Rembrandt met Saskia and married her in 1634. She was a cousin of a very successful art dealer and she helped him to meet wealhy people who commissioned  many paintings from him. He used her as a model in many of his paintings. Rembrandt's private life, however, was very unfortunate. He had four children with Saskia but only one, Titus, survived. Saskia died in 1642 at the age of only 30. In 1649, his housekeeper became his second wife and was also a model for many of his paintings. Even though Rembrandt was very successful as an artist, art dealer and teacher, he lived in a careless way and had to declare bankruptcy  in 1656. He even had to sell his whole art collection and his house to pay off his debts. His unfortunate life, however, didn't affect his art. He painted many great paintings during that time. His new love, Hendrickje, died in 1663 and his 27-year-old son, Titus, died in 1668. Eleven months later, on October 4, 1669, Rembrandt died in Amsterdam. He produced more than 600 paintings and over 2,000 drawings! Question: What's the best title for this passage? Yes or no, is the answer "A brief biography of Rembrandt"?
No

Article: With America's national debt continuing to climb, Congress is constantly debating ways to save money. The Dollar Coin Alliance, a lobbying group, says billions could be saved if dollar coins were used instead of paper bills. But many people won't use them. The U.S. government tried to push dollar coins again in recent years, but then suspended almost all production in 2011. American likes paper dollars, but Jim Kolbe, co-chairman of the Dollar Coin Alliance, thinks switching to the coin is worth it. "The coin does cost more to produce, roughly on the neighborhood of 17 cents versus the 5 or 6 cents that a paper dollar costs to produce," he said. "However, the coin lasts 35 years, and it's made of mostly recycled metals, and the paper has to be produced from new materials, and we shred 3 billion of those every year because they wear out." For years, the former Arizona congressman has been pushing legislation that would prop up the dollar coin by phasing out the greenback -- a move that has met resistance from both politicians and the public. But today, he said, _ and a recent poll indicates 61 percent of Americans like the idea. "When they learn of the savings that can be involved with this, they will support the idea of substituting the coin for the paper dollar," he said. Major savings Kolbe points to a study by the Government Accountability Office, which investigates how the government spends taxpayer dollars. The GAO estimates taxpayers would save more than $4 billion over 30 years, and that figure could be much higher. That appeals to taxpayer Christy Thompson, who said, "I'd probably say, yes, we need to do it." But plenty of people aren't convinced, including Kim Doering of Alexandria, Virginia. "It's easier to carry the paper bill than a bunch of coins. They're louder; they're heavier in your pocket," she said. Washington, D.C. restaurant owner Sue Fouladi doesn't like the idea of having more dollar coins in her cash register. "It's very inconvenient," she said. "If I don't have a choice, then I'll do... Question: Which of the following is in favor of using dollar coins? Yes or no, is the answer "Sue Fouladi"?
No

Article: Very soon a computer will be able to teach you English. It will also be able to translate any language for you,too. It's just one more incredible result of the development of microprocessors - those tiny parts of a computer commonly known as "silicon chips". So give up going to classes, stop buying more textbooks and relax. In a couple of years you won't need the international language of English. Already Texas Instruments in the United States is developing an electronic translation machine. Imagine a Spanish secretary, for example, who wants to type a letter from the boss to a businessman in Sweden. All he or she will have to do is this: first type the letter in Spanish. The letter will appear on a television screen. After a few seconds the translated letter will appear on another television screen in Stockholm in perfect Swedish. And that's not all. Soon a computer will be able to teach you English, if you really want to learn the language. You'll sit in front of a television screen and practice endless structures. The computer will tell you when you are correct and when you are wrong. It will even talk to you because the silicon chips can change electrical impulses into sounds. And clever programmers can predict the responses you, the learner, are likely to make. So think of it.You will be able to teach yourself at your own pace.You will waste very little time,and you can work at home.And if after all that,you still can't speak English,you can always use the translating machine.In a few years,therefore,perhaps there will be no need for BBC Modern English,or BBC English by Radio programmes - no more textbooks or teachers of English.Instead of buying an exciting new textbook,the computer will ask you to replace it with a microprocessor.Fast,reliable and efficient language learning and translating facilities will be available to you.Think of that,no more tears or embarrassing moments.One little problem is that a computer can't laugh yet - but the scientists are working on it.Happy learning! Question: This passage is mainly about   _ Yes or no, is the answer "what language learning could be like when computerized"?
Yes

Article: _ . Very attractive people tend to form partnerships that are less stable and satisfying than those enjoyed by _ . According to research by Dr John Blaine of the University of Southern California, relationships between people whose professions largely depend on their appearances, such as models or actors, tend to end much faster than those between lawyers, doctors or students. Blaine said the beautiful felt different from childhood. They are treated as special, which may create botharrogance  and insecurity. All too often, beauty can be used as an alternative to education. Often they are pushed out of their class or town, told to go off and make their fortune in Hollywood or London and, when the majority fail, they have fewtalents  to make a living. Blaine added that beautiful people score poorly on the "big five" -- the key factors American experts consider when helping distressed couples. These areneuroticism , including anger and anxiety;extroversion ; openness to new experiences; agreeableness; and conscientiousness, or sticking by agreements they have made. Attractive people often see no reason to try to change until their looks start to fade. Krista Sutherland, of the University of California Los Angeles, said partnerships that appeared to be perfect from the outside, such as the former "dream teams" of Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise or Hugh Grant and Elizabeth Hurley, where backgrounds andaspirations  are often shared, did not necessarily lead to happiness. Question: Which of the following is the best title? Yes or no, is the answer "Beauties are doomed to fail in love"?
