I originally selected sense 9 only because the author is thinking more generally about open land that could be planted or not, whereas sense 1 is more specifically agricultural. On reflection, I decided that this is specifically set in England, where fields are reasonably small and enclosed, and most commonly used as farmland; in addition, there are few vast plains, so I ended up selecting both.


I selected sense 5 because it takes a human object, whereas in sense 7, it's the meeting or conference that is called. Sense 24 (summon or request) feels too formal and civic-duty-related.


The examples don't help much to distinguish between sense 2 and 3 because they show 'remain' followed by a complement. I chose sense 3 because the definition 'be left' is substitutable for 'remain' in the text.


Sense 8 seems to be about direct speech, i.e. a quote + a reporting verb (say). But there is no proof that he uttered this statement aloud; it could have been a written statement. That's why I also selected sense 1.

Unclear if reported speech or quote from something written


I selected sense 4 assuming that 'the continents' refers to the main geographical part of those places.

The meaning here is "relating to Europe" but explicitly excluding Britain and Ireland

This common sense of "continental", which can only modify "Europe" or European ways, customs, values or ideas, means "excluding Britain" or "outside of Britain". Europe as a foreign place, seen from the British perspective.


The word "straight" in the phrase "straight ahead" serves as an intensifier and is essentially redundant. "Straight ahead" simply means "ahead", neither to left or right. Sense 1 is probably close enough, but it's not entirely accurate.


Sense 2 is closest, but to cover the meaning exactly, it would have to say 'in the way indicated *or described*.


The desired effect of "madly" in this sentence seems to be to give an impression of great kinetic force. The author is seeking effect by using a term that would usually be applied to an animate referent. The sense is figurative and means "powerfully, forcefully".


I've chosen sense 4, but the grammar is odd. It seems to be defining the noun 'swing' as if it were an adjective (e.g. 'swinging bells'). It should be worded as something like 'a back-and-forth movement'. I suppose it's seen as a gerund, but still, it seems a bit misleading and it's not usual to do this.


The focus is the pattern of sounds.


In my opinion this sense of "mathematical" is figurative, and is intended to evoke the full logical development and expression from start to finish of a pattern, which can then be repeated. It's not only about "exactness or precision" (sense 5), but completeness within a cycle, as if the modifier has been chosen only to give more force to the head noun "completeness".


Sense 13 because it's a kind of phrasal verb: 'to come of something' and sense 13 is the only sense that demonstrates that. However, it could be said the 'come of sth' (sense 13)and come from sth' (sense 5) are simply variants of the same phrasal verb, which means 'to be the result of something'.


Not sense 9 because they are not leaving worship *in the care of* the others below.


I can see good reasons to include both sense 8 and sense 9. But since we're opting for one meaning where possible, sense 9 is the better choice.


The fact that part of this complement clause is a direct quotation does not justify choosing sense 8 over sense 9.


The stairs are responsible. There are no defects in the stairs.


There's a (sentence adverb) sense missing – 'used to introduce the next part of a story or description', e.g. 'So, the next thing I know, she's left the room in tears!' 'So, once they've finished, the bellringers come down the back stairs, chatting and laughing for all to hear.'


The sense missing is 'fulfilling, involving lots of interesting things'.


Based on the context, I think it's very likely to be sense 4 and not 2, although I'm sure they would also be happy to exchange thoughts and talk with the students. Another thing that put me off sense 2 were the examples, none of which illustrate the most common use: 'speak to someone about something'.

It is unclear whether the Council will give a formal talk to the students or just conduct informal conversations.

Both of the sense I've chosen seem equally plausible, and the context doesn't give any indication which one is meant. In practice, probably both.


Not sense 8 this time because it is specified that his was in writing.


I rejected sense 5 because it seems to be more about setting an event in motion rather than causing something to exist (sense 1).


Definitions 3 and 5 are reasonably close, but the examples are all abstract, not physical entities that are produced. Sense 6 would have worked if it hadn't specified 'as part of a man-made process'. The inventory is lacking the basic sense of 'make', which is 'create or produce something as a result of a process.'

Although the thing produced is not man-made, this sense seems the best.


I chose a sense which is very close to the intended meaning. However, the verb in this sentence is actually the phrasal verb "hold in check", rather than just "hold".


While sense 1 appears to be the correct one at first glance, I think it is more about natural development, e.g. from a child to and adult.


I chose sense 1 because researchers now accept this to be true, based on evidence. Sense 2 seems to be more about saying what you think someone is like. Sense 3 seems to be more about trusting in fate.

This sense of "believe", in a context involving researchers, can be described as "consider to be true, on the balance of probabilities and based on evidence and reason, a hypothesis that is not yet proven to be true". Obviously close to sense 1, but much more specific.


I rejected sense 1 because I think that's more to do with natural developments, e.g. of a foetus, or of a child growing into an adult.


Sense 8 seems to be about direct speech, i.e. a quote + a reporting verb (say). But there is no proof that he uttered this statement aloud; it could have been a written statement. That's why I also selected sense 1.

Unclear if reported speech or quote from something written


Sense 1 refers to the natural biological process whereby, for example, a child becomes an adult. Retinal cell growth is abnormal, so I've opted for sense 3.


It is tempting to also select sense 3, but I think I would be inferring too much from the text. Yes, basic/core/underlying insights often have far-reaching effects, but the text is not explicitly talking about fundamental changes or shifts.

Both senses fit perfectly, and the context doesn't clarify which one is the intended meaning.


Sense 3 seems to be more about natural development, e.g. as a children becomes an adult.


Constituting one individual member of a set, as distinct from any other member of that set.


The second example in sense 1 mirrors the example in the text. I rejected sense 3 because it's not the act of losing both copies of the gene that leads to the eruption of a cancer, and sense 4 because it's not the disadvantage that results in the eruption of the cancer.


I rejected sense 1 because that seems to be more about being sure that someone is not lying (and the examples show a direct object: 'believe someone or something'. Sense 3 is tempting, but I think that is more about believing that things will work out, like trusting in fate. Sense 3 is substitutable: I believe he's right = I think he's right / I judge him to be right.


This sense of "attention" can be described as "focused, sustained inquiry", rather than concentration.


Sense 3 is also close, but sense 3's combination of definition and examples seem to be emphasising triggering something that then gets bigger and develops a life of its own.


I'm concerned that sense 6 is referring to the language used by doctors when diagnosing a patient, rather than researchers discussing findings. My question is, does gene damage constitute a disorder? Whether it is a disorder or not, I've gone for sense 6 because I think it's close enough to be acceptable. If not, I would opt for the more general, but accurate, sense 1.


Sense 3 seems to refer more to a subjective image in someone's mind.

This is a figurative sense of "picture" which implies no visual or pictorial element whatsoever. It suggests "a comprehensive overview, description, explanation or understanding" of some event or situation or process.


Sense 2 works better for talking about the progression of the disease. Sense 3 is more about natural development, e.g. of a foetus, or from a child to an adult.


I was tempted to go for sense 3, but concluded that sense 3 refers to personal desires ('feel', 'friends', 'money'), whereas the scientific community needed this evidence from a more objective point of view.


The plural form 'losses' suggests sense 1 – a thing that is lost rather than an act or process. It equates to the use demonstrated in the second example: 'loss of livestock', which could be rephrased as 'livestock losses'.


I think sense 3 is about a natural developmental process, e.g. a child into an adult.


Neither of the senses seem to cover the countable sense of 'doubt' that is demonstrated in the text – a *feeling* of uncertainty about something.


The use of the word 'exactly the same' initially suggests sense 1, but the author is talking about the *equivalent* spot in a different organism, so I've opted for sense 2. Dr Vogelstein's finding was in a spot that was *comparable in kind* to the spot where Arnold Levine found it. It wasn't the very same one because they were working with different materials.


I went by the examples as the definitions for senses 3 and 4 mean pretty much the same.


Sense 8 seems to be about direct speech, i.e. a quote + a reporting verb (say). But there is no proof that he uttered this statement aloud; it could have been a written statement. That's why I also selected sense 1.

Unclear if reported speech or quote from something written


There is a hint of sense 1 in the author's use of 'implicate' because of the negative nature of lung cancer; we might see the p53 gene as the 'baddie' here.


Not sense 2 because they weren't testing the tissue for disease; they were trying to determine the presence of a particular gene.


I hesitated over sense 2, which specifies 'used in a negative statement'. But the exact text is 'as yet unpublished', not 'which hasn't been published yet'. It's a close call, though.

Although the fixed phrase "as yet" is used here

The choice of sense is clear. However, the lexeme is really "as yet", rather than "yet".


I rejected sense 2 because it seems to be more about speculating or guessing.

This sense of "thought", in a research context, can be described as "believed, based on evidence and reason, but not yet proven".


As mentioned before, I think sense 3 relates to believing in fate, or believing that things will somehow work out.

This sense of "believe", in a context involving researchers, can be described as "consider that a hypothesis not yet proven to be true, is probably true". This is distinct from sense 1 because it's specific to scientific hypotheses.


I think the emphasis in the text is on *what* scientists will find rather than the act or process of finding. (In addition, pharmaceutical companies can't turn *the act of discovery* into predictive tests.) Sense 3 refers to 'insights', whereas here, scientists are referring to hunting for and finding specific genes.


I'm presuming the text is talking about parents teaching their own children because as a society, we can and do teach our children to read, write, and reckon.


I've decided to choose sense 1, though with reservations, because the example sentences fit but the definition doesn't. This is a particular sense of "require" that is always impersonal: there's no sentient being that "would require us to relinquish", etc, in the above sentence. The sense is close to "necessitate".


Sense 3 is more about deliberate rejection. Sense 2 (my choice) suggests letting go. Not sense 1 because a belief is not a possession or right.


This sense of "metaphysical" is approximately opposite in meaning to "empirical, concrete, observable, demonstrable". It has connotations of not being rooted in observable everyday reality.


To 'violate vested interests' means to disregard or undermine them. I think 'laws, contracts or promises' are similar to vested interests, so have opted for sense 2.

A tentative assignment of sense as this collocation is not a typical one.


The original meaning of 'vested interest' is what is described in sense 5: a financial or legal share of something, or a financial involvement in something. However, in the text it's being used to talk about a personal reason for wanting something to happen.

"vested interest" is a compound with its own meanings.


I opted for sense 2 because according to the text, these beliefs strongly influence (i.e. dominate) the educational establishment, and 'control' and 'strongly influence' are similar in meaning,

Sense is "be the most important/noticeable part of something". Close to sense 1.


Sense 2 is roughly the right area, but the definition should say 'to want to do something or _to want something to happen_, with an example like 'Do you wish me to stay?' Sense 1 is about things you want, but that are unlikely to happen. Sense 4 is about wishing people well or wishing them a happy birthday/Christmas, etc.

Wish (x to do y) in this sense simply means "want or prefer" x to do y. None of the senses given seem to reflect the direct object + infinitive complement structure found in this example. Sense 2 might be the closest, but the definition doesn't seem to extend to this sense (which is why I've also ticked "Inventory inadequate").


As before, not sense 2 because the text does not technically constitute a negative statement.

Although the usage here is as part of fixed phrase "as yet"

As stated elsewhere, the sense is clear enough, but the lexeme that has that sense is "as yet", rather than just "yet".


According to the author, these characteristics are essential constituents of what these children are – they are naturally present in them (Sense 1). However, they are also qualities that exist within children by their nature — and they are not immediately visible, or readily apparent (sense 2). So senses 1 and 2 both work for this one. I opted for sense 1 because the author's aim does not seem to be to emphasise the fact that these characteristics are invisible.


It's not clear this time whether the author is talking about our offspring or all the young people in a society.


Sense 2 (not chosen) focuses on the end product, whereas sense 1 (chosen) is more about the process of schooling.


Despite having the word 'believe' in its definition, which would appear to be substitutable in the text, sense 2 seems to be more about speculating or making a guess.


Again, it is not clear from the text whether the author is referring to the offspring of the parents who are reading the article or young people considered as part of our society.


The meaning of "things" in the phrase "other things being equal" is close to "factors" or "considerations".  None of the senses given above is a good match, but sense 9 seems less wrong than the others.


Sense 2 because each successful school is sending a message that is comparable in kind to those of other schools.


Sense 2 focuses on the process, which is what the author seems to be talking about. Sense 1 is about changes that have already been made. However, there is an argument for selecting sense 1: the efforts are being made to attain *changes to the education system* (sense 1). The question is whether the efforts are directed at *the process* or at *obtaining changes*. The difference between the two is very subtle, but I'm opting for sense 2 because the efforts being made are ongoing, and changes have not yet come about.

These senses are not very well formulated. Sense 1 is the most relevant in this case, though it's not perfect.


Sense 3 describes 'really' as an intensifier, insisting on a fact that is already understood or accepted. Sense 2 is more about disabusing people of a misunderstanding, and sense 1 is about emphasising that a description (American, open society) is accurate.


Sense 1 omits to mention that a *person* may choose not to express themselves through speech. There are no examples with a human noun.

Figurative sense of "mute", meaning "silent, not saying anything", though out of choice rather than inability. Of a person rather than a communication or a feeling (or an animal).


In this case, we are discussing reforms that have already been made, and whether they have had a positive effect on children's education or not.


Sense 1 is more about active participation.

This sense of "involvement" includes the idea of participating, not only in an activity, but also in control or decision-making. It's about sharing power, having a say in how things are done, as well as taking an active part in doing them. So it's close to sense 5 above, but more specific.


This one is more about the relationship between the school and the community, e.g. local politicians having an influence over policy decisions (sense 5). It is not about the community's active participation in the children's learning (which would be sense 1).


School governance is specifically about rules and hierarchies. Sense 2 seems to be more general (e.g. how an economy works, or an ecosystem, for example).


'Even as' is a phrase which means 'just at the same time as something else happens', which is not covered in the inventory.

"evan as" is a fixed phrase meaning "at the same time as"

In this sentence, "even" is part of the phrase "even as", meaning "at the very same time as" (Concise Oxford). None of the senses listed come close to this.


Sense 2's example shows that this sense is about decision-making bodies within a city.


"Things" in this context means "the general situation", at its broadest and vaguest. It's not a sense of the noun "thing" properly speaking, since it's always plural and uncountable.


I've picked sense 1 because it's close enough; however, 'the fact that ...' is a phrase that is used to refer to a particular situation that exists, and ideally, the inventory would include that as a sense in its own right. It's not the same as when you say 'Collect all the facts' (i.e. things that are true and can be proved); rather it's a way of talking about a situation.


Sense 2 mentions 'influential', which is what is described in the text.


The text is talking about the findings, not the process.


Arguably, sense 4 is even more apt, since in using the word "fact" the writer is trying to invest his narrative as objectively, inherently true; presenting a statement of opinion (which may well be demonstrable with data) as a "fact".


Sense 2 mentions a statement or assertion, which is what we have in the text.


What Haney saw would, of course, have been indistinct or hazy in outline (sense 2), but his *eyes* were not indistinct or hazy in outline. Sense 1 is much closer, but it suggests that 'bleary' means 'tired'. A better definition for sense 1 would be 'not able to see clearly, especially due to exhaustion'.

Sense is "(of the eyes) unable to see clearly"


While sense 5 was the most obvious choice, the definition describes someone's mind rather than something they might say. Sense 2 works better from the point of view of having something clever ready to say, and I would have opted for that if the definition were worded differently, perhaps as: 'available to be used easily and immediately', without the mention of 'especially money'. Examples might be 'a ready supply', 'a ready answer' and 'ready cash'.

This attributive sense of "ready" seems quite distinct from the more common predicative senses (like sense 1 above). It corresponds colosely to this, form the Concise Oxford: "immediate, quick, or prompt". Sense 2 is close.


This is another sense of "bright", wholly figurative. Although the analogy is with light, it's not saying that the person's eyes are emitting or reflecting light, but that they convey something - emotion, or intelligence, or attention - with a certain degree of intensity.


Poetic/figurative usage makes it hard to be precise in sense attribution


Even though sense 6 mentions warmth, the author uses the word modified by 'cold' in order to be deliberately contradictory.

"Fire" in this figurative sense is not a feeling but a manifestation of spirit, of intensity.


The example at sense 4 is distracting because it mentions a special occasion (60th birthday), which is sense 1. If you read sense 4 without its example, it works perfectly well for the use we have in the text – a particular time when something happens. (I was close to opting for 'Inventory is inadequate', but in the end, went with the sense 4 definition and tried to ignore the example.)


Not sense 1, because that refers to the use of 'time' in every time, next time, this time, etc.

"at the time" is a fixed phrase meaning at that time in the past when something happened


In the text, 'good money' means 'great in number, amount or degree' and is used in an approving way, e.g. a good size, a good number of people, a good amount of money. That sense isn't covered in the inventory.

Here "good" means large, a sense that does not seem to be covered, although sense 2 is close


The correct sense does not appear in the inventory: 'to be with someone', e.g. 'She had a few friends with her' 'I had a screwball (with me) for company.' The man doesn't possess the screwball (sense 1), neither is 'screwball' a type of relationship (sense 7), neither is he confronted by a screwball; he just has a screwball with him.

I chose sense 10 after much hesitation, but it's not perfect because it's over-specific. I would say this sense is more "be" than "have": "be with", "be in the proximity of", be in some relation to some particular situation.


Sense 1 definition should include the option ' ... /become'. It should read 'be/become fully aware or cognizant of'.


I picked sense 2 because I think that is referring to the use that is not followed by an object, which is the use demonstrated in the text.


Haney is thinking about all the people he knows and trying to select one who could fit the bill (sense 6). However, sense 6's example does seem to be more about choosing a random number/name.

A more appropriate definition for this use of 'think of' might be 'find or produce an answer'.


Even though the character mentions money ('a cent'), he is not talking about a price of a commodity; he's using the grammatical structure '(not) cost sb sth' to say that Phil wouldn't have to sacrifice anything (in this case, money) for this favour.

Sense is to oblige someone to pay a certain amount of money. Related to sense 1 semantically,

This sense of "cost nothing" (or "cost something" etc), means "to have a monetary cost, to have a price". This is not exactly the same sense as "to cost $x, to be priced at $x".


Sense 6 seems to be specifically about what is written on envelopes and packages. In the text, the man wants to know the details of where the other man lives. That's why I opted for sense 2 – he simply wants to know where he can find him. But it's a close thing, because he will probably write his address down on a piece of paper.


This time, it's clear that he said those words out loud because the wider context shows that this is a conversation.


Not sense 4 because it's not relevant whether it's light or not – it's the time when you are awake.


Given the context, I believe the intended meaning knowingly evokes both of these senses. An unhurried and dignified walk that's done consciously and for a tactical purpose.


This time, it's clear that he didn't say the words out loud. In fact, he said these words 'to himself', which means that he just thought them. I've opted for sense 1, because even though he didn't say or write the words, he did express them in his mind.

The sense is specific to the reflexive form "say to oneself". Here it means "to muse, to reflect".


I opted for sense 2 because in the text, 'end' refers to the later part of the time period when he was drinking his fourth highball. Sense 3 seems to be more about events that are structured to have a beginning, middle and end, and sense 5 seems to be about specific texts, such as a chapter or section.


Sense 1 seems to be about the intransitive sense of 'smile'. Sense 2 is very close because it covers the transitive sense of 'smile'. However, you don't 'express *a smile* with a smile' so it doesn't quite fit.

This use should be defined as 'to give a smile of a particular type'.

tautologous usage for stylistic effect. Neither of the WordNet senses allows for the noun "smile" as the object of the verb "smile"

The stative sense "to be smiling, to have a smile on one's face" is missing. Sense 1 specifies "change one's facial expression..." etc., so it's not stative. This usage in this particular sentence, "smiling a smile", obviously contains a redundancy, but it appears to underlyingly be about the stative sense that I've just described. Probably with an additional suggestion of intentionality.


Sense 2 is the closest because it gives the idea of *becoming* aware, whereas sense 1 only talks about *being aware*. However, the sense 2 examples do seem to be more about suddenly understanding something after a period of being 'in the dark'. Ideally, there would be a definition that read: 'be *or become* fully aware or cognizant of'.


Senses 2 and 3 refer to situations where someone lacks something such as success or confidence, and needs someone or something to push them to do it. In the text, the author's companion isn't shy, and doesn't need to be coaxed or boosted with helpful encouragement. So I opted for sense 1, which seems to be talking about making something (in this case, Pete's company) more likely to develop.

This usage does not fit neatly with the WordNet senses. It is close to sense 2 but the object is not a person.


I rejected sense 1 because it suggests interaction. (There is none apparent in the text.) Sense 3 seems to refer to the ability or willingness to speak. Sense 2 (which I opted for) is about simply producing speech. One reservation I have about sense 2 is that the definition seems to suggest it only covers a transitive use – I would prefer 'express (oneself) in speech' – whereas in the text, 'talk' is intransitive. However, sense 2's second example is intransitive, so I went with it.

Sense 3 is the nearest fit, but it's not great. In this sentence "talk" seems to mean something like "talk to fill the silence, make small-talk".


'Renewed interest' suggests that the listener's 'bright eyes' related to a positive feeling (although we cannot be sure without more context).

Although it's more "interest" than "happiness"


It's unclear from the input text whether this is a crime or a legal piece of work

The text really does evoke both sense 2 and sense 13. But there's a sort of comic irony in the casual way that the assassin uses this term as sense 2 only, as if he was a plumber offering to fix someone's tap for free.


Because it 'ran circles' around his brain, it could also be sense 1; however, sense 9 is specifically about fanciful thoughts, so I opted for that.


The popular vote is the vote of all a country's voters.


These two sense are close, but I rejected sense 2 because in the text, we're talking about action rather than who is affected. The sense 1 example 'public funds' suggests government intervention, which is what the text is talking about.

This is a distinct sense of "public", defined by the Concise Oxford English Dictionary as "of or provided by the state". Although superficially close to sense 1, it's virtually interchangeable with "government" or "state", used as modifiers.


As above, I rejected sense 2 because in the text, we're talking about action rather than who is affected. The sense 1 example 'public funds' suggests government intervention, which is what the text is talking about.


This is the plural noun "costs", meaning "the total amount of money that you must spend on running your home or business" (www.collinsdictionary.com) -  roughly synonymous with "expenses".


The intended meaning of "benefits" here appears to be "advantages" or "improvements" in the most general sense, not necessarily financial assistance. It could also be about the provision of public services.


It may well involve money (sense 1), but it could be other things, such as better working conditions.


They are issues, not events.


The inventory is missing the sense '(of problems) appear, and need to be dealt with'.

In this common usage, it is the problems/situation that are the subject and a person is the object. Sense 2 is closest but describes the reverse situation.


'Winning benefits' is something that a legislator 'gets done' (sense 3).


Sense 7 because the text refers to a candidate applying for a post, not running to be in power.


Sense 2 is more about an internal feeling, involving someone losing motivation for something. Sense 1 is more about someone else actively trying to prevent a person from doing something.

Sense 2 is close but here the meaning is to make someone less confident in doing something rather than have less hope or courage.


Sense is "as good as or better than others"

The sense appears to be this (cited from the Concise Oxford English Dictionary, 12th edition): "as good as or better than others of a comparable nature". It's about quality rather than the will to compete.


Sense 1 relates to municipal administration, but the text is not talking about local government; it's talking about members of Congress bringing benefits back to their local communities (sense 2).


in the compound "attendance rates", attendance has this meaning. However, this sentence could equally wellbe written withoiut the word "rates" and it would then have sense 2.

The full phrase used in the text is "attendance rates", which corresponds to the meaning of "attendance" in sense 2. But the lexeme "attendance" alone, as used in the text, corresponds to sense 1.


I rejected sense 1 because the attendance rate is not measured by time unit; it's measured as a proportion of votes attended (sense 4).


Sense 1 feels more moral or spiritual, involving giving oneself up entirely to something. Sense 2 is close, but seems to be more about paying attention to things rather than actually doing anything. Sense 3 is best because it suggests setting aside resources: time (mentioned in the text) is a resource.

Pretty strange definitions. The Concise Oxford defines this sense as "give time or resources to (a person or activity)", which seems much clearer.


The full phrase used in the text is "attendance rate", which corresponds to the meaning of "attendance" in sense 2. But the lexeme "attendance" alone, as used in the text, corresponds to sense 1.


See reasoning at previous instance.


The context is generally 'statistical' enough to warrant a specifically statistical definition of 'function'.


Sense 1 suggests a state, whereas in the text, 'advantages' are specific benefits (sense 3).


The context is sufficiently technical to warrant the more technical definition.


'Positive' here means that as one thing increases, the other thing also increases.


I rejected sense 1, even though it is closely related, because the text is not about mathematical calculations; sense 4 covers a similar idea but in more general terms.


Sense 2 is close but it is too restrictive. It would work better if it simply said 'make known to someone'


Even though sense 5 is written in mathematical terms, this is the best definition of what is described in the text.


The party vote refers to the total number of votes cast.


I rejected sense 3 because 'the allotment of' suggests an act rather than the resulting assets.


The synonym 'tier' at sense 2 helps to distinguish it from sense 1 because we talk about 'tiers of hierarchy'. In addition, levels of government are not establish based on intensity, amount or quality (sense 1). Sense 7 seems to be more to do with abstract thought.


The residents wanted to have their worries taken away (sense 2). Sense 1 is more about general domestic comfort (having nice furniture or luxury household items) rather than finding something comforting because it stops you from being anxious, like a child's dummy, a teddy bear or a computer screen (sense 2). I rejected sense 3, even though it's in the right ballpark semantically, because it talks about an 'act' of consoling, whereas in the text, residents were seeking a 'feeling'.


The inventory is missing a sense: 'to give a particular type of smile', e.g. to smile a gentle/wry/beguiling smile.

The usage "to smile a smile" means just "to smile"


An auto paint shop is a workshop where car bodywork is touched up or where they do re-sprays, for example (i.e. it's not where you buy paint for cars).

Because it's preceded by "auto", this sense of "shop"probably means a place where cars are serviced, in this case (auto paint shop), where they are repainted. This is a US term that is equivalent to "garage" in British English.


While sene 9 seems to fit as well, the examples suggest that it is referring to devices that are deliberately designed to explode.


I think this is still the 'vague concerns' usage, as in 'How are things?' 'Things are good/tough right now'. But it is in the context of an event (a gas tank exploding). The author is saying that there are no special events happening at the moment despite that, so there is an argument for selecting sense 5.

The sense is "everything in general", the status quo, the general situation. As noted elsewhere, this sense is always plural and uncountable.


The word 'intervals' in the text helps to narrow this down to sense 3, although sense 1 is not wrong.


This one is more specific than the vague 'How are things?' or 'Things are a bit rough at the moment' usage because an event is now taking place.

Once again, this sense means "everything in general", the status quo, the general situation. This sense is always plural and uncountable.


The context suggests that they were indeed fleeing, but from a grammatical and semantic point of view, they were moving fast towards the door, which is sense 1.


Sense 2 is the correct one, but it is worded as if it is defining an adjective ('rhythmic'). It should be defined as a noun: 'a regular recurring pattern'.

This usage of "rhythm" suggests "repeated, roughly cyclical movement of diverse items, not necessarily with regularity". Thus it's probably a figurative or even incorrect usage of "rhythm".


I chose sense 2 because it seems to be more specific, involving performing a particular task. However, I did wonder if sense 2 was meant to define 'do' in the sense of completing or accomplishing a specific task, since all the examples seem to suggest this. If the definition of sense 2 had mentioned the idea of completion, I would have gone for sense 1.


Sense 8 seems to be about direct speech, i.e. a quote + a reporting verb (say). But there is no proof that he uttered this statement aloud; it could have been a written statement. That's why I also selected sense 1.


I rejected sense 1 because it specifies 'obliquely or sideways', which suggests a person or vehicle that had been advancing forwards in a controlled way, and then lost control and went sideways off the path or road. In the text, on the other hand, the computer had been stationary, and then moved smoothly along the floor (sense 3). It didn't lose control, even if it seemed that way in the commotion.


Sense 2 is the closest because it gives the idea of *becoming* aware, whereas sense 1 only talks about *being aware*. However, the sense 2 examples do seem to be more about suddenly understanding something after a period of being 'in the dark'. Ideally, there would be a definition that read 'be *or become* fully aware or cognizant of'.


Not sense 2 because that seems to be the intransitive sense: 'drinking' without a direct object means 'drinking alcohol', whereas in the text, the author is talking about taking in a liquid, in this case, beer.


Sense 2 is closest, but 'family' in the text could be referring to aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents, etc.

Ambiguous as to whether group living together, or parents/children, or indeed extended family members

This uncountable US English sense of "family" is equivalent to "family members" collectively. In sense 4, the description is heading in the right direction but the example makes it clear that this is a countable sense. Sense 5 includes "he's family" as an example, but the definition doesn't work because "a person having kinship" is not a description of an uncountable noun. So it seems that this exact sense of "family" is not listed.


Sense 2 is the only one that definitely describes the transitive use of the verb bounce. In the text, the tremor is the agent, throwing the author against the ground. Sense 3 is also possible, but I don't think the tremor is repeatedly moving the author up and down – I think what is being described is a single bounce (sense 2). Also, sense 3 could be only describing the intransitive use of 'bounce', as in 'We bounced along the rough road in the truck.' but I can't tell.


I rejected sense 4 because it refers to a specific object; sense 8 is non-specific and could refer to any item.

The word "thing" is really part of the phrase "not one thing", a more emphatic variant of the pronoun "nothing". As such none of the senses given here is entirely right, though sense 4 is the closest.


Sense 2 seems to be more about the absence of noise and gives the example of a place being quiet (the text is also talking about a place). Sense 1 is more about a lack of unrest, and doesn't mention sound at all.

Both senses are equally plausible, and the extra context provided by preceding and following sentences doesn't clarify which sense is meant.


Sense 4 is an old-fashioned, culturally specific term relating to people who are engaged to be married sleeping together while fully clothed. I've chosen sense 1 because the couple seem as if they have been wrapped up together in a bundle and put in the sleeping bag. However, normally, 'to bundle someone *into* something' (i.e with 'into') means 'to push somebody somewhere quickly'. I'm pretty sure that's not what the author means, though.

The point of this imagistic and figurative sense of the verb "bundle" is to suggest that the couple resembles a "bundle" (noun). They "look like a bundle", huddling close together and well wrapped up in their sleeping bag. I've chosen "Inventory inadequate" because I think the issue here is the POS.


A 'negotiation text' is a document that is produced as part of the negotiation process, describing the state of the negotiations at any point during the process. Sense 2 is more about the activity or process of coming to an agreement. The 'negotiation text' is the product of this process. I rejected sense 1 because it describes a specific event or set of talks – not the process involved.


In this sentence "game" is figurative, and means something like "tactical or diplomatic manoeuvring". This sense is quite common, so it's surprising that none of the definitions given above seem to cover it. From www.collinsdictionary.com: "a way of behaving in which a person uses a particular plan, usually in order to gain an advantage". From the Concise Oxford: "a type of activity or business regarded as a game".


Sense 2 seems to be more about justification or reasoning behind decisions. I did hesitate about sense 1 because it only seems to define the countable sense, whereas the text demonstrates the uncountable use of 'policy'. Most dictionaries would give the same definition as here, but give the label (C, U) to cover both uses.


The sense demonstrated in the text is 'a failure to win a contest', which is not covered by the WordNet inventory.

This text reads like it was written by a non-native. "Losses" here refers to players who were unable to play in the team, as is clear from the following paragraph. It's not natural English.


The sentence, seen in isolation, is ambiguous in that it may or may not refer specifically to the US Treasury (sense 5). The larger context confirms that this is the case.


Sense 1 is close because the military belongs to the US government. But I think the text refers to the military as part of the country as a whole.

I feel that sense 1 is closer. The "US military" doesn't mean the "military from the United States". The adjunct has the same role in "US military" as in "US president", "US Senate", "US Supreme Court", etc.


Sense 2 is the closest but it's too restrictive – the family in the text was not necessarily just parents and children – it might have included aunts, uncles, cousins or grandparents. The definition at sense 2 should read 'primary social group; parents,  children and close relations'.

The text doesn't give enough information to disambiguate between the two senses chosen (further research shows that both senses are in fact equally applicable).


I chose sense 1 over sense 8 because a tribunal is specifically a type of court with the authority to deal with a particular problem or disagreement (military, war, etc.), and that isn't the case, looking at the wider context of the text.

These two definitions seem to be defining the same thing.


The use of 'sketch out' in the text suggests that they explained their line of reasoning and didn't simply list assertions.


Sense 1 would have worked too, but the context is a court ruling with a judge, so I've opted for the more specific sense (3).

Despite the fact that this use of the word "evidence" is used by a judge in a ruling, the intended sense is not the legal one (sense 3). What's under discussion is not evidence presented as part of a trial with a view to securing a verdict.


Without the five sentences that precede it, this sentence's use of the word "issue" is so wide open that almost all the senses are at least possible. Seen in the light of the preceding context, it's immediately clear that what's meant is a matter under discussion. Sense 1 is probably the most accurate answer. But sense 3, which is more general, also seems to cover the sense intended in the text quite comfortably.


But input text is non-natural English.

This sense of "law", modified by an adjective or a noun adjunct, normally means the ensemble of legislation relevant to a specific field. As in company law, planning law, family law, etc.


I opted for sense 2 because the world of football does refer to a group of people with a shared interest. However, the example at sense 2 ('the Western world') muddies the waters – it should be at sense 6, which refers to 'a part of the earth that can be considered separately'. The sense 6 example, 'the world of insects', mirrors 'the world of football', which caused me to hover over sense 6; however, the definition at sense 6 doesn't work at all for 'the world of football'. It would be better if the sense 2 definition were reworded as 'the people or things belonging to a particular group or connected with a particular interest'. Then 'the world of insects' and 'the world of football' would be examples for that sense.

"The world of football" is a particular milieu, like the "world of finance", etc. The term doesn't refer only to people, but to organizations, clubs that are run like businesses, a system, a complex body of rules and conventions. There's no sense given here that comes close to this.


The adjective 'unwritten' makes me slightly less confident of this selection – because we don't expect the rules of any sport to be 'unwritten'. However, that seems to be the case here, and we are talking about the rules of a sport, so I think sense 8 is the most logical.

I've chosen a single sense (sense 1), but really the intended meaning is not just the meaning of "rules", but that of the collocation "unwritten rules". If I considered "rules" strictly in isolation, totally ignoring the collocation and therefore the word's meaning in the sentence, then sense 8 would have been the best match.


Sense 3 is close to the correct sense, but it only seems to refer to a person's character ('... determining one's character'). In the text, the author is referring to how we expect people to think and behave when playing sports. The definition should be something like 'the values and principles that determine how someone approaches something'.

In addition, this text seems to be machine-translated or written by someone who has low proficiency in English.


Sense 3 is close to the correct sense, but it only seems to refer to a person ('... determining one's character'). In the text, the author is referring to the fundamental emotional principles behind a sport. The definition should be something like 'the ideas, beliefs and aims of something', with examples like 'the spirit of the times', 'sporting spirit' and 'the spirit of democracy'.

In addition, this text seems to be machine-translated or written by someone who has low proficiency in English.


Even though the "rules" in question concern how players behave during a game, sense 3 is still more apt than the explicitly game-related sense 8, because this isn't about the central definitions that determine how a game functions, but about player conduct.


Senses 1 and 5 are close, but I chose sense 1 because of the substitutable synonym 'round'.

Input text is non-natural English, probably written by a Spanish or French speaker for whom "ciclo/cycle" would be the right word in this context.

Sense 1 is close, except that this sense is not about "an interval" during which events occur, but about the specific, pre-arranged series of events itself. It corresponds exactly to this definition (from collinsdictionary.com): "a completed series of events that follows or is followed by another series of similar events occurring in the same sequence".


Senses 1 and 5 are close, but I chose sense 1 based on the substitutable synonym 'round'.


Sense 3 is close to the correct sense, but it only seems to refer to a person's character ('... determining one's character'). In the text, the author is referring to how we expect people to think and behave when playing sports. The definition should be something like 'the values and principles that determine how someone approaches something'.

From the Concise Oxford: "the prevailing or typical quality or mood". None of the senses listed above really works for the sentence, though sense 2 is the closest.


This text seems to be machine-translated or written by someone who has low proficiency in English.


Even though I have (reasonably confidently) made a selection, I believe that this text is unlikely to have been written by someone with proficiency in English.


Both senses are close but they only cover animals and plants, not bacteria. It would be better to replace them both with one definition that refers to any substance that is needed to keep 'a living thing' alive, help it grow, etc.


Davies explains that it has certain features that prove that it is an organic phenomenon – and this proves that it is a living organism (sense 11).


The passage talks about the researchers' findings, a co-author and the report, so this is more about the paper itself and less about the process of investigating.


When selecting Sense 1, I'm thinking about formal organizations such as parliament, the judiciary, etc.).


Sense 2 is also possible, but I would be more inclined to select sense 2 if the context were something like 'in different parts of the country'.


Sense 3 is close, but it suggests an extended period, whereas the text refers to a point in time. A suitable definition would be 'a period of time or a point in time when something happens', with examples like 'By the time you arrive, we will have left' or 'I was still at school at the time' or 'It seemed like a good time to leave'. Sense 1 refers to the sense demonstrated by phrases like 'every time', 'this time', 'next time', etc.

although this usage is part of a fixed phrase "by the time (that)..."

"By the time" is an adverbial that is equivalent in meaning to "when". None of the senses above cover it.


Even though there is no 'Conservative Party' (see sense 2) per se in the US, I am taking this definition to refer to right-leaning political parties in general, and this text is clearly about politics.

Although this very American sense of "conservatives" is political, it does not imply membership of a political party, but rather, "ideological allegiance to right-wing values" generally (and moreover these right-wing values are not necessarily very conservative or Conservative).


CONCACAF is an organisation, not a geographical area in itself. The synonyms at sense 4 (domain, sphere, arena) help to pin things down.

This text appears to be written by a non-native English speaker but this is the sense that I think is intended.

This is a case where the input is arguably defective. Seen in context, the sentence seems to be referring to the geographical area for which CONCACAF, one of FIFA's continental governing bodies, is responsible. If so, then sense 1 is the best choice. If not, then this sense of "area" is like "field of activity", which is a figurative sense not represented here.


The text is about a *quantity* of games. Sense 2 is close if you focus on the figures themselves (97 and 100), but the reality is that we're talking about a quantity or amount.

NB this text not written by a non-native English speaker: "centennial number" is not an English expression.


Sense 1 is definitely the best fit; however, the use of 'from' in the text ('from various aspects') suggests that that author means 'from various perspectives' or 'from the point of view of various groups who were involved'. Maybe this is an 'Inventory inadequate' answer, but I don't think any dictionary would include that sense at the entry for 'aspect'.


Sense 4 is more about atmosphere; sense 10 is about revealing attitudes and opinions (as in the text).


Sense 1 is also a good fit, but this use of "proportion" is not really concerned with the exact number (quotient) of American Nobel prize winners who are immigrants. It's simply saying that they represent a significant subset of the whole. Sense 4 is more in line with this sense.


The mention of 'qualification or power' in the definition for sense 3 seems a bit over the top/superfluous, but I opted for sense 3 because of the wording: 'a time of life (usually defined in years)', which is what we have in the text.


The correct sense would be '[plural] money that a business or person receives'.

This sense is usually or always plural, and means "the amount of money received", in this case by the public exchequer.


The intended meaning is ambiguous - could be just area/example of growth, or percentage points of growth

This phrase is a very non-literal translation of an utterance by Nicolas Sarkozy. The word "points" was added in translation and doesn't correspond to anything in the original French. It's not entirely clear what it refers to, though the phrase "points de croissance" ("growth areas") translates literally as "growth points", so that's a candidate. However, "percentage points", and "areas" in the sense of "localities" are also fairly plausible.


The difference between senses 1 and 4 is subtle. Sense 1 seems to refer to ranking people or things by worth, whereas sense 4 refers to the act or process of reasoning and forming an opinion (i.e. considering studies and making judgements about how the medicines should be used). Since the latter is what the EPAR report does, I selected sense 4.


Sense 2 suggests 'exclusively', as in 'there are no other options', or 'there are no other ways to get it'. Sense 6 would work if the sentence were rephrased as: 'You can get this medicine only if you have a prescription.' I think the grammar is important there, judging by the synonyms, so I've opted for sense 2.


Senses 1 and 3 are close but I went for 1 because of the word 'prevent' in sense 3. There is no need to *prevent* something from being completed; doctors simply have to stop administering it.


The emphasis here seems to be more on a commodity offered for sale than just 'something produced'.


Sense 1's '(usually following a concession)', together with the examples that mostly show concession, led me to feel that sense 2 was more suited to the use demonstrated in the text.


It's not possible to know from the text whether the author is talking about just being able to read MathML (i.e. having it in one's mind) (sense 7), or also knowing how to write/create' the code (sense 2).


I rejected sense 4 because that seems to be more about producing something physical, while sense 1 relates specifically to electronic systems.

Sense is entering of information into a computer

This sense of the noun "input" seems derived from a sense of the verb "input", "to enter, to write in". It means "a writing in, an entry, an entering"., the act of writing in. An "input field" is a place where something can be entered in written form. It doesn't fundamentally have to be electronic.


While the sense 2 definition 'wiser or more advantageous and hence advisable' sounds like it would fit best, the examples suggest that this sense is restricted to such expressions as 'It would be better (not) to ...' or 'It would be best not to ...'. There are no examples of attributive position. The example of 'best solution' in sense 1 influenced me in deciding that the 'best thing' is simply the thing that has the most positive qualities.


It's not possible to tell from the text whether the author means that it's not necessary to know how to code in MathML or just to be able to understand it.


Sense 2 seems to be more about functional style or design.

Sense 2 is closer than sense 1, but the sentence is odd: it feels like "useful" is intended to mean "can be used". It's debatable whether this is a correct usage. Maybe the writer should have chosen "usable", or written "...can be used as a calculator"?


As before, I think it's 1 because we're talking about an electronic system (a computer), but there could be an argument for 4 because one is inputting data that will be processed and become output.


I rejected sense 4 because it seems to be talking about giving more detail. In the text, the sentence is saying that
you don’t need to say exactly which function you are using (sense 2).


Sense of phrasal verb usage, deal with, is to be about something.


I think sense 3 is referring to the intransitive sense of 'debate' (as in 'We debated long into the night'). The first example in sense 1 suggests that this is the transitive sense: 'debate an issue/question/topic/proposal'.


Sense 1 focuses on participating in activities.; sense 5 focuses on the state of being associated. I can't make the call here.


The meaning of "roles played by public welfare" in this particular sentence is very unclear, and it's worth noting that the sentence is unfinished. However, the next paragraph refers to "public welfare services", and on the balance of probabilities this is what the term refers to in both cases.


This sense of "affairs", which is always a plural, falls somewhere between sense 1 and sense 2 above. The problem is that sense 2 is too specific, or indeed is poorly formulated. The sense here is "matters of public or state interest".


Sense 2 is close, but I think the emphasis in the text is on these nations as organised political bodies (sense 1) rather than the land they cover.


The sentence is not very well written, but I think it's trying to say 'the way work is organised'.


As I see it, sense 1 refers to the investigation itself and sense 3 is about the findings. It is the findings that will form the basis of a European report.


Sense 3 is close, but "most important or necessary part" is too specific. This sense of "basis" is more like the material the study builds on, or takes as a starting point. So: "starting point", with synonyms like "foundation, support, base, ground" (from collinsdictionary.com).


Sense 2 because I think the author is saying that the national studies will take everything into account, rather than giving a broad outline of general patterns.

It's debatable which sense is intended here, but on the balance of probability sense 1 is the better choice.


"Consider" is being used as a synonym of other verbs in the text (examine, assess). Sense 3 is closest to the intended meaning.


Sense 2 seems to be more about telling someone to stop doing something, according to the example and the suggested synonyms.


'... an injection followed by tablets' is a passive construction which can be rephrased as 'tablets follow an injection' (just as Wednesday follows Tuesday). There is no human agent involved. This means it can't be sense 10 because it would have to be 'She/he follows the injections with tablets.' It isn't sense 6 either because the tablets do not come as a result of the injection.


This sense of "act" can't be defined in isolation, it's really "act in the central nervous system": the location of the act is what matters, more than what the event is or what exactly the receptor does. It "has its role, its function, its purpose" in the central nervous system. Something "happens" in the central nervous system.