README.md

---
license: other
task_categories:
- visual-question-answering
language:
- en
---

# funsd_train_cleaned

The **funsd_train** family of the ElliotVL supervised-fine-tuning pool, **after VLM cleaning**.

| | |
|---|---|
| images | 363 |
| QA turns | 6,820 |
| answers rewritten by the cleaning pass | 33 |
| QA created by the cleaning pass (`new_qa`) | 3,750 (55.0%) |
| shards | 1 |

## How this was cleaned

A vision-language model read each image together with its QA and judged the item. The pass is
**not a filter that only removes rows** — it rewrites answers it finds wrong but salvageable,
drops what it cannot salvage, and adds QA where the image supports more than the source provided.
Each row carries the judge's own record in `clean_meta`, including the cleaner identity, the
policy it applied, and its per-item scores for legibility, richness and coverage.

**A large share of the QA here was written by the cleaning pass, not by the original dataset.**
Across the pool that share runs from roughly half to over 80% of a family's turns, and it is
reported in the table above. Those rows have an empty `org_answer` because no pre-clean original
exists. Treat them as model-generated supervision: they were judged against the image, but they
are not human annotation, and model-written QA is where formatting defects are most likely.

The effect on the answers that *were* carried over is substantive rather than cosmetic. In this pool the pass corrects values, not just
wording — a curve's critical point restated from `4.00` to `2.00`, a computed ratio from `1` to
`Approximately 1.33` — and for some families it removed the content entirely, which is why those
families are absent here rather than published empty.

## `answer` vs `org_answer`

- `answer` — the cleaned answer. **Train on this.**
- `org_answer` — the pre-cleaning answer from the same `(image, question)` in the uncleaned pool.
  It is empty for QA the cleaning pass added, which have no original.

Where the two differ, the difference is the correction. Keeping both makes every edit auditable
instead of asking you to take the cleaning on trust.



## Schema

- `image` — HF `Image()`, renders directly in the dataset viewer
- `image_sha256` — content hash of the image
- `n_qa` — number of turns attached to this image
- `qa` — list of {`question`, `answer`, `org_answer`}, **in source order**
- `family` / `clean_meta` — provenance and the judge's per-row record

A row with more than one entry in `qa` is a **conversation over a single image**, not a set of
independent questions — the turns depend on each other and the image belongs to all of them.
Keep them together and in order when training.

Parquet row groups are written at ~32 MB so the dataset viewer pages without stalling.

## What is NOT claimed

No rejection sampling was run against this family: there is no accept/reject verdict per row, and
`answer` is the cleaned reference rather than a model generation that a string verifier confirmed.
For that, use the `*_RS_think` / `*_rejected` datasets in [elliot-mllm](https://huggingface.co/elliot-mllm).


## Examples
10 rows taken straight from this dataset. Images are the **original files** as stored here - no downscaling, no recompression - and every turn is shown in full.

### Example 1 — 16 turns on one image

![case1](samples/case1.png)

| # | question | answer |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Date | 9/ 3/ 92 |
| 2 | Name / Phone Ext. | M. Hamann P. Harper, P. Martinez |
| 3 | R&D Group | Licensee |
| 4 | Supervisor / Manager | J. S. Wigand |
| 5 | Suggestion | Discontinue coal retention analyses on licensee submitted product samples (Note : Coal Retention testing is not performed by most licensees. Other B&W physical measurements as ends stability and inspection for soft spots in ciparettes are thought to be sufficient measures to assure cigarette physical integrity. The proposed action will increase laboratory productivity . ) |
| 6 | Suggested Solutions (s) | Delete coal retention from the list of standard analyses performed on licensee submitted product samples. Special requests for coal retention testing could still be submitted on an exception basis |
| 7 | Manager Comments | Manager, please contact suggester and forward |
| 8 | What is the full title printed at the top of the form? | R&D QUALITY IMPROVEMENT SUGGESTION/SOLUTION FORM |
| 9 | What symbol or logo appears at the top center of the page? | A circular R&D logo containing a leaf-like symbol. |
| 10 | What is the status of the 'Have you contacted your Manager/Supervisor?' response boxes? | Neither the Yes nor the No checkbox is marked. |
| 11 | What text is printed in the lower-left corner of the form? | qip.wp |
| 12 | What number appears in the lower-right corner of the page? | 597005708 |
| 13 | How many blank ruled lines appear below the Manager Comments prompt? | Four |
| 14 | What visual elements compose the R&D logo at the top center of the page? | The logo features a circular border with the letters 'R&D' at the top, a stylized leaf or plant symbol in the center, and a pointed tab or banner shape at the bottom. |
| 15 | What layout feature is visible along the right edge of the form? | A vertical line runs along the entire right margin of the page. |
| 16 | What is the typographic style of the text printed on the form? | The text is printed in a monospaced, typewriter-style font. |


### Example 2 — 36 turns on one image

![case2](samples/case2.png)

| # | question | answer |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | COMPOUND | 3-Hydroxy-3-methylbutanoic acid (Tur 13) |
| 2 | SOURCE | Lorillard - Organic Chemistry |
| 3 | LORILLARD NO | OR39- 23 |
| 4 | TESTED | 12/28/78 |
| 5 | REPORTED | 5/3/79 10/6/80 , Update |
| 6 | DATE RECEIVED | Unk |
| 7 | INVESTIGATOR(S) | H. S. Tong & M. S. Forte' |
| 8 | NOTEBOOK PAGE | B1014- 23 |
| 9 | MALE | X |
| 10 | STRAIN OF MICE | Swiss- Webster |
| 11 | P.O | ☑ |
| 12 | .5 % METHYL CELULOSE | ☑ |
| 13 | GROUP NO | 1 |
| 14 | % SOLUTION | 5 |
| 15 | DOSAGE (mg/ kg BODY WEIGHT) | 1800 |
| 16 | RESULTS (NO TESTED) | 1/ 6 |
| 17 | REFERENCE FOR CALCULATION | Litchfield, J. T. and Wilcoxin F. , J. of Pharmacol |
| 18 | LD50 (95% CONFIDENCE LIMITS) | 3.5 (3.1 to 3.9 g /kg |
| 19 | CONCLUSION | This compound appears to act as a CNS depressant with symptons |
| 20 | Copies to the Following | Dr. H. J. Minnemeyer Ms. L. B. Gray |
| 21 | What is the LOT NO? | A4 |
| 22 | What is the date in the LOT NO field? | 5/3/79 |
| 23 | What are the signatures on the form? | H.S. Tong and M.S. Forte (by A. Poole) |
| 24 | What is the source of the mice? | Camm Research |
| 25 | What is the date received for the mice? | Unk. |
| 26 | What compound vehicle was used? | .5% METHYL CELLULOSE |
| 27 | What are all the group numbers, % solutions, dosages, and results in the table? | Group 1: 5%, 1800 mg/kg, 1/6; Group 2: 10%, 2160 mg/kg, 0/6; Group 3: 10%, 2592 mg/kg, 0/6; Group 4: 10%, 3732 mg/kg, 3/6; Group 5: 10%, 4479 mg/kg, 6/6 |
| 28 | What is the full reference for calculation? | Litchfield, J. T. and Wilcoxin, F., J. of Pharmacol. and Exper. Ther., 90:99, 1948. |
| 29 | What is the full conclusion text? | This compound appears to act as a CNS depressant with symptoms of respiratory depression, constriction of blood vessels, and in-activity. Survivors recovered in 48 hours. The recommended safe dose for a single trial by inhalation in man is 0.3 mg. |
| 30 | What is the form number and revision date? | FORM 7 (5/80) |
| 31 | What is the document title? | ACUTE TOXICITY IN MICE |
| 32 | What is the institution name at the bottom? | LORILLARD RESEARCH CENTER |
| 33 | What is the stamped number on the right side? | 00040534 |
| 34 | What route of administration boxes are NOT checked? | I.P., I.V., INHALATION |
| 35 | What compound vehicle boxes are NOT checked? | CORN OIL, SALINE, OTHER |
| 36 | What is the female status in the strain section? | Not marked (blank) |


### Example 3 — 43 turns on one image

![case3](samples/case3.png)

| # | question | answer |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Date | 10/ /9 87 |
| 2 | No | C- 40 |
| 3 | Description: CAPRI Expansion | California- A&U Wave II |
| 4 | Yes | x |
| 5 | Requested By | S. H. Trebilcock |
| 6 | Est. Travel | -0 |
| 7 | Cost Per Interview | $47 .22 |
| 8 | Cost ($) | $70 70,825 +/ - 10% |
| 9 | Supplier | Kapuler Market Research |
| 10 | Total Cost | $70 ,825 + - 10% |
| 11 | Initiation Date | 8/ 3/ 87 |
| 12 | Total Area Budget | 780, 900. 00 |
| 13 | Field Start | 9/ 23/ 87* |
| 14 | Current Bal. Available | (381, 583. 08) |
| 15 | Field Complete | 10/ 11/ 87 |
| 16 | This Change (From Current Budget) | -70, 825. 00 |
| 17 | Final Report Due | 11/ 16/ 87 |
| 18 | New Balance | (452 ,408, 08) |
| 19 | Committed to Date: (Current Year) | 1, 233, 308. 08 |
| 20 | Sample Size | 1. 500 |
| 21 | Recommemded Supplier | Kapuler Marketing Research |
| 22 | Reason(s) for Recommendation | Low bidder |
| 23 | Submitted By | L J L. J. Spurtier |
| 24 | Approved By | L. E. Gravely |
| 25 | Budget Check | K. F. Lyle |
| 26 | Original | Project File |
| 27 | Project No | 1987- 113CA |
| 28 | cc | S. Willinger (3) |
| 29 | Account Name | CAPRI |
| 30 | What is the document title? | MARKET RESEARCH AUTHORIZATION (Recommended Proposal Attached) |
| 31 | What is the second supplier listed and their cost? | Market Facts, Inc.; $112,000 +/- 10% |
| 32 | What is the total cost for Market Facts, Inc.? | $112,000 +/- 10% |
| 33 | What is the cost per interview for Market Facts, Inc.? | $74.67 |
| 34 | What is the estimated travel cost for both suppliers? | -0- for both |
| 35 | What does the handwritten note at the top right say? | Revised per GDR request; Waves II-III to be on one MRA LS |
| 36 | What is the handwritten note about the actual start date? | Actual start date on the part of supplier. Technically was due to start 9/7 (the 10 week post-intro period) See Project File Note LJS 10/13/87 |
| 37 | What is the amount from next year's budget? | 0 |
| 38 | What are the other cc recipients besides S. Willinger (3)? | G. D. Raphael; V. Hansberry (If Int.) |
| 39 | What is the date submitted? | 10/9/87 |
| 40 | What is the date approved by L. E. Gravely? | 10/13/87 |

_3 further turns on this image are in the data._


### Example 4 — 27 turns on one image

![case4](samples/case4.png)

| # | question | answer |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Characteristic Tested | Smoke Analysis |
| 2 | Mean of Last 12 Samples | 1 .132 |
| 3 | Present Sample | 1 .111 |
| 4 | Weight | 1 .089 |
| 5 | Draw | 0. .34 |
| 6 | Tar | 39. .7 |
| 7 | Nicotine | 4 .26 |
| 8 | ction to Litmus | Basic |
| 9 | Static -Complete Cigar | 0 |
| 10 | -1 /2 Cigar | 5 |
| 11 | -1 /3 Cigar | 7 |
| 12 | -Went out immediately | 12 |
| 13 | What company and division produced this report? | P. LORILLARD CO., INC., RESEARCH DIVISION, QUALITY CONTROL DEPARTMENT |
| 14 | What is the full title of this report? | SMOKE ANALYSIS AND BURNING TEST REPORT WEEKLY PRODUCTION LITTLE CIGARS NON FILTERS WEEK ENDING 11/25/66 |
| 15 | What are the two brands tested in this report? | BETWEEN-THE-ACTS and MADISON |
| 16 | What is the butt size specified for both brands? | 25 mm. Butt |
| 17 | What is the Mean of Last 12 Samples for Weight under BETWEEN-THE-ACTS? | 1.106 |
| 18 | What is the Mean of Last 12 Samples for Draw under BETWEEN-THE-ACTS? | 0.37 |
| 19 | What is the Mean of Last 12 Samples for Tar under BETWEEN-THE-ACTS? | 35.6 |
| 20 | What is the Mean of Last 12 Samples for Nicotine under BETWEEN-THE-ACTS? | 3.83 |
| 21 | What is the Mean of Last 12 Samples for Tar under MADISON? | 31.0 |
| 22 | What is the Mean of Last 12 Samples for Nicotine under MADISON? | 2.99 |
| 23 | What is the Mean of Last 12 Samples for Draw under MADISON? | 0.37 |
| 24 | What is the Mean of Last 12 Samples for Weight under MADISON? | 1.132 |
| 25 | What entries are blank or dashed out in the Burn Test section? | Dynamic -Time in seconds and -% Burned Completely for both Present Sample and Mean of Last 12 Samples under both brands |
| 26 | What is the document form number at the bottom right? | SQC-36 |
| 27 | What number appears vertically on the right edge of the document? | 80620665 |


### Example 5 — 33 turns on one image

![case5](samples/case5.png)

| # | question | answer |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | DATE | 11/1381 |
| 2 | LRC COMPOUND CODE | A32 |
| 3 | MOLECULAR WEIGHT | 200. 29 |
| 4 | SOLUBILITY | MEASURED |
| 5 | AMOUNT | g100ml |
| 6 | CLASS | ACID |
| 7 | WITHOUT HEATING | UNCHANGED |
| 8 | WITH HEATING (80C) | UNCHANGED |
| 9 | 1) WATER or BRINE | UNCHANGED |
| 10 | 2) 5% HCL | UNCHANGED |
| 11 | 3) 5% NaOH | UNCHANGED |
| 12 | 4) ALCOHOLS | UNCHANCED |
| 13 | 5) OXYGEN | UNCHANGED |
| 14 | 6) LIGHT | UNCHANGED |
| 15 | STORAGE RECOMMENDATIONS | NORMAL STORAGE |
| 16 | COMPOUND SENSITIVE TO | AIR |
| 17 | COMMENTS | pH- The pH of a 50% concentration of A32 in a 52.6% dioxane/water solution was calculated to be 2.92 at 22°C according to the extra- polation procedures by Dr. P. D. Schickedantz, Lorillard Research Center Accession No. 1662, Reference OR 83- 125 |
| 18 | SIGNATURE | Johnson |
| 19 | LORILLARD RESEARCH CENTER | Acute Cardiovascular- Mix 2 mg A32 with 0.2 ml 80% propylene glycol and grind lightly. Add 0.8 ml saline solution. A32 is a suspension in this mixture at room temperature. Reference OR 72- 152 |
| 20 | What is the form title and addendum number? | COMPOUND PHYSICAL PARAMETERS, ADDENDUM II |
| 21 | What is the page number? | 24 |
| 22 | What is the form number and date at bottom right? | FORM 9 (10/80) |
| 23 | What is the signature date? | 1/6/82 |
| 24 | What is the document control number stamped vertically? | 00837285 |
| 25 | What does the Solubility comment say? | See SOP for Biological Solutions |
| 26 | What is the Oral preparation procedure? | 5g A32 forms a suspension with stirring in 10 ml 1% Tween 80 at room temperature. Reference OR 72-151. |
| 27 | What is the complete Acute Cardiovascular preparation procedure? | Mix 2 mg A32 with 0.2 ml 80% propylene glycol and grind lightly. Add 0.8 ml saline solution. A32 is a suspension in this mixture at room temperature. Reference OR 72-152. |
| 28 | What are the solubility solvent options listed? | WATER, OTHER (with AMOUNT field showing g100ml) |
| 29 | What is the complete pH comment with all details? | The pH of a 50% concentration of A32 in a 52.6% dioxane/water solution was calculated to be 2.92 at 22°C according to the extrapolation procedures by Dr. P. D. Schickedantz, Lorillard Research Center Accession No. 1662, Reference OR 83-125. |
| 30 | What checkboxes are available for CLASS? | ACID, BASE, SALT, OTHER (BASE is checked) |
| 31 | What reactivity conditions are tested? | WITHOUT HEATING and WITH HEATING (80°C) for: 1) WATER or BRINE, 2) 5% HCl, 3) 5% NaOH, 4) ALCOHOLS, 5) OXYGEN, 6) LIGHT |
| 32 | What is the complete storage recommendation text? | Refrigerate in amber bottle at no more than 8°C |
| 33 | What fields are present but blank or unchecked? | SOLUBILITY AMOUNT value (blank), CHEMICAL PURITY (blank), ANALYTICAL METHOD(S) (blank), SAFETY COMMENTS (blank), all COMPOUND SENSITIVE TO checkboxes unchecked |


### Example 6 — 46 turns on one image

![case6](samples/case6.png)

| # | question | answer |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | No | 1995- 48D |
| 2 | Date | March3, 1995 |
| 3 | Description | LUCKY STRIKE QUALITATIVE ADVERTISING RESEARCH - GATEWAY CITIES |
| 4 | Requested by | A. A. Strobel |
| 5 | Yes | X |
| 6 | Competitive Proposals Obtained | Only two bidders because third supplier has not yet signed B & W |
| 7 | Total Cost | 29,500 |
| 8 | Supplier | Analytic Insight, Inc |
| 9 | Cost ($) | 27,000 |
| 10 | Est. Travel | 2,500 |
| 11 | Summary of MRD Budget | 1995 |
| 12 | Internal Init Date | 3/ 1/ 95 |
| 13 | Total Area Authorized | 500,000 |
| 14 | Current Balance Available | 382,575 |
| 15 | Wave(s) | 3/ 20/ 95 |
| 16 | This Change | 29,500 |
| 17 | This amount: (From Next Year's Budget) | 0 |
| 18 | Waves(s) | 3/ 25/ 95 |
| 19 | New Balance | 353,075 |
| 20 | Committed to Date: (Current Year) | 146,925 |
| 21 | Recommended Supplier | Analytic Insight, Inc |
| 22 | Reason(s) for Recommendation | Lowest Bid |
| 23 | Submitted By | Lumea |
| 24 | Budget Check | Musiclask |
| 25 | Original | Project File |
| 26 | cc | H. Williams |
| 27 | What is the document title? | MARKETING RESEARCH AUTHORIZATION (DOMESTIC) (Recommended Proposal Attached) |
| 28 | What is the Original Budgeted Amount? | $0 |
| 29 | Is the project Budgeted? | No (X marked in No box) |
| 30 | Who is the second supplier and what is their total cost? | Goldfarb Consultants, 31,716 |
| 31 | What is Goldfarb Consultants' cost and estimated travel? | Cost: $29,216, Est. Travel: $2,500 |
| 32 | What is the Project Type? | Qualitative Research |
| 33 | What is the Final Report Due date for the Supplier Report? | 3/31/95 |
| 34 | Who approved this and what are their authorization limits? | Asst. Mgr. Con. Res. (to $100,000), Director Forecasting & Mkt. Res. (to $250,000), Senior VP Marketing (to $1,000,000) |
| 35 | What are the approval dates shown? | 3/3/95 for Asst. Mgr. and Senior VP; blank for Director |
| 36 | What is the Submitted By date? | 3/3/95 |
| 37 | What is the document number at the bottom? | 466840246 |
| 38 | What production note appears at the bottom? | PRODUCED FROM B&W WEB SITE |
| 39 | What does MRDOM stand for in the cc block? | MRDOM (appears as a code/abbreviation, meaning not explicitly defined) |
| 40 | What is the Cost per Interview for Analytic Insight, Inc.? | (blank - not filled in) |

_6 further turns on this image are in the data._


### Example 7 — 25 turns on one image

![case7](samples/case7.png)

| # | question | answer |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Project Title | Direct Mail Conversion Research |
| 2 | Job# | 5543/295 |
| 3 | Revision | ☑ |
| 4 | Reason | Lower Incidence |
| 5 | Marketing and or Research Objectives | Determine the level of interest and conversion opportunities among pompotitive smokers. receiving a Direct Mail offer for Newport Lights |
| 6 | Research Design | Group 1= Best redeeming customers (2+ paid coupons): n= 750 Group 2= Paid redeoming customers 1 paid coupon) n= 750 Group 3= Non- redeeming customers (no redemption) n= 750 |
| 7 | Respondent Incidence | 38% revised from 70% |
| 8 | Screener Questionnaire | 5 minutes |
| 9 | Research Firm | A & G Research |
| 10 | Cost Estimate | $100 600 |
| 11 | Revised From | $76 600 |
| 12 | Prepared by | S. R. Benson |
| 13 | Fieldwork Schedule | Start Field w/o 11 /13 /95 |
| 14 | Reporting Schedule | Topline w/o 12 /18 /95 Final Report 12/ 31/ 95 |
| 15 | Date | January 18, 1996 |
| 16 | Department | MARKET PLANNING AND INFORMATION DEPARTMENT |
| 17 | Document type | PROJECT APPROVAL |
| 18 | Research type selected | Consumer Research (checked with X), Sales Analysis (unchecked) |
| 19 | Revision number | # 1 |
| 20 | Interview Length | 10 minutes |
| 21 | 1995 Cost Estimate by Month total | $100,600 in December |
| 22 | Approved by signatures | Group Manager A. Pasheluk, MPIO Director [signature], Product Manager [signature], Group Product Manager [blank] |
| 23 | Handwritten name at top | Scott |
| 24 | Document control number | 803108404 |
| 25 | Total sample size and age requirement | 2,250 total sample size, all smokers 21+ years of age |


### Example 8 — 13 turns on one image

![case8](samples/case8.png)

| # | question | answer |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Client Name | Borriston Laboratories, Inc |
| 2 | Client Study No | 1419A |
| 3 | Study Director | Dr. William O. Iverson Pathologist Dr. Charley E. Gilmore |
| 4 | Study Title | Bioassay of Cigarette Smoke Condensates for potential Tumorigenic Activity on Mouse Skin (Revised Pathology Report) |
| 5 | Test Article | Multiple |
| 6 | Species | Mice |
| 7 | What is the full company name and abbreviation at the top of the document? | EPL (Experimental Pathology Laboratories, Inc.) |
| 8 | What type of document is this? | Quality Assurance Report Certification |
| 9 | When was the pathology phase reviewed by the Quality Assurance Unit? | March 2 - June 8, 1983 |
| 10 | Who signed the document and when? | Janet Milazzo on 6/8/83 |
| 11 | What does the certification state about findings reporting? | All findings were reported to the Study Director and Management |
| 12 | What is the document number in the bottom right corner? | 89386032 |
| 13 | What study phase was reviewed? | The pathology phase, including the final report |


### Example 9 — 15 turns on one image

![case9](samples/case9.png)

| # | question | answer |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | PROMOTIONAL PERIOD | May- June 1992 |
| 2 | CONSUMER OFFER | $3 Off Store Redeemable Carton Coupon |
| 3 | DISPLAY BRANDS | TRUE |
| 4 | DISPLAY AGREEMENT | Lorillard Representative will supply all display materials and assemble display. Display containing deals will be placed on a self- service basis for a two- week period |
| 5 | DATE | FROM |
| 6 | What is the full title of this promotion document? | TRUE $3.00 CARTON COUPON PROMOTION |
| 7 | What types of display are listed under AUTHORIZATION FOR PLACEMENT? | COUNTER, FLOOR, POSTER |
| 8 | What packings of TRUE cartons must be available for the Lorillard Sales Representative? | FILTER K.S., FILTER 100's, BOX 80's (WHERE AVAILABLE), MENTHOL K.S., MENTHOL 100's, BOX 100's (WHERE AVAILABLE) |
| 9 | What does the form indicate about merchandise shipping? | Two options: 'WILL BE ARBITRARILY SHIPPED TO STORE' or 'ORDER THROUGH YOUR SUPPLIER' (checkbox/blank line format) |
| 10 | What fields are present at the top of the form for routing? | TO, DATE, FROM |
| 11 | What is the note next to POSTER under TYPE DISPLAY? | (✓ if approved) |
| 12 | What is required at the bottom of the form for authorization? | Authorized by: ______ Date: ______ |
| 13 | What is the purpose of the NO. CARTONS column? | To specify the number of cartons for each display type (COUNTER, FLOOR, POSTER) |
| 14 | What is stated about the availability requirement for TRUE cartons? | 'THE FOLLOWING QUANTITY OF TRUE CARTONS MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR THE LORILLARD SALES REPRESENTATIVE TO ASSEMBLE THE DISPLAY ON THE DATE INDICATED ABOVE.' |
| 15 | What is the field for stores participating? | STORES PARTICIPATING: ______ (with multiple blank lines) |


### Example 10 — 26 turns on one image

![case10](samples/case10.png)

| # | question | answer |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | FROM | JESSICA ARATO |
| 2 | TO | VINCE LOSITO |
| 3 | CC | K. AUGUSTYN. L. GIORDANO, M. McGLYNN, S. RAPISARLDI |
| 4 | BRANDS (S) APPLICABLE | All Kent Family Packings |
| 5 | Magazines | People, Rolling Stone, Cosmopolitan, |
| 6 | Newspaper | Village Voice |
| 7 | ISSUE FREQUENCY/ YEAR | September |
| 8 | Newspapers | 1/ 2 B/ W |
| 9 | COUPON ISSUE DATE | September 1, 1992 |
| 10 | COUPON EXPIRATION DATE | December 31, 1992 |
| 11 | CIRCULATION | 1, 221, 000 |
| 12 | GEOGFIAPHICAL AREA(S) | Tier |
| 13 | COUPON VALUE | Free Pack |
| 14 | PACK AND OR/ CARTON | Pack |
| 15 | ADVERTISING CREATIVE THEME | Rebecca |
| 16 | DATE INITIATED | May 14, 1992 |
| 17 | CODE ASSIGNED | 221782 |
| 18 | JOB NUMBER | 414 |
| 19 | EST. REDEMPTION | 3 % |
| 20 | What is the title of this document? | COUPON CODE REGISTRATION FORM |
| 21 | What is the SPACE/COLOR for Magazines? | P 4/C |
| 22 | What is the full MEDIA information? | Magazines: People, Rolling Stone, Cosmopolitan, Mademoiselle, New York Magazine; Newspaper: Village Voice |
| 23 | Is there a SIGNATURE OF INITIATOR on the form? | No, the SIGNATURE OF INITIATOR field is blank |
| 24 | What does the FOR CONTROL USE ONLY section contain? | CODE ASSIGNED: 221782, JOB NUMBER: 414, EST. REDEMPTION: 3% |
| 25 | What is the document number in the bottom right corner? | 93351929 |
| 26 | What is the full header information including FROM, TO, and CC? | FROM: JESSICA ARATO; TO: VINCE LOSITO; CC: K. AUGUSTYN, L. GIORDANO, M. McGLYNN, S. RAPISARLDI |