Curriculum Learning 🤝 DSPy: Optimization

In Part 1 we carved the ConvFinQA corpus into curriculum-aware difficulty tiers through some EDA. Part 2 turned that insight into zero-shot baselines, pitting several LLMs against each tier. The hard bucket still hurt, which is proof that smarter prompting, not bigger models, is our next lever.

In this installment, instead of fine-tunes we’ll use DSPy’s programmatic prompt optimizers to lift accuracy beyond the Part 2 ceiling. We’ll iterate over the shortlisted models:

• o4-mini,
• o3
• gemini-2.5-flash (this couldn’t be completed due to rate limits unfortunately)

We feed each model curriculum-ordered exemplars, and let DSPy search the prompt space under tight token and latency caps.

Setup

Baseline recap

• Zero-shot baselines from Part 2 (https://shubhamg.in/posts/2025-09-01-cl-dspy-modelling/) established a ceiling on Medium/Hard tiers.
• Shortlisted models: o4-mini, o3, gemini-2.5-flash.
• Common failure modes: multi-op arithmetic chains, cross-turn dependencies, long-context/table lookups.
• Objective here: improve Medium/Hard without finetuning via DSPy prompt optimizers, comparing against Part 2 metrics.

Let’s copy over some of the code from the previous notebook here, before we start optimising our models!

import mlflow

mlflow.set_tracking_uri("http://localhost:5000")
mlflow.dspy.autolog(log_compiles=True, log_evals=True, log_traces_from_compile=True)
mlflow.set_experiment("DSPy Optimization")

<Experiment: artifact_location='mlflow-artifacts:/3', creation_time=1753708026551, experiment_id='3', last_update_time=1753708026551, lifecycle_stage='active', name='DSPy Optimization', tags={}>

import os

import dotenv
import dspy

dotenv.load_dotenv("../.env")
MAX_TOKENS = 20_000

lm_oai_gpt_4_1 = dspy.LM(
    "openai/gpt-4.1-2025-04-14",
    api_key=os.environ["OPENAI_API_KEY"],
    max_tokens=MAX_TOKENS,
)
lm_oai_gpt_4_1_mini = dspy.LM(
    "openai/gpt-4.1-mini-2025-04-14",
    api_key=os.environ["OPENAI_API_KEY"],
    max_tokens=MAX_TOKENS,
)

lm_oai_o4_mini = dspy.LM(
    "openai/o4-mini-2025-04-16",
    api_key=os.environ["OPENAI_API_KEY"],
    temperature=1.0,
    max_tokens=MAX_TOKENS,
)
lm_oai_gpt_5 = dspy.LM(
    "openai/gpt-5-2025-08-07",
    api_key=os.environ["OPENAI_API_KEY"],
    temperature=1.0,
    max_tokens=MAX_TOKENS,
)
lm_oai_gpt_5_mini = dspy.LM(
    "openai/gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07",
    api_key=os.environ["OPENAI_API_KEY"],
    temperature=1.0,
    max_tokens=MAX_TOKENS,
)
lm_oai_gpt_5_nano = dspy.LM(
    "openai/gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07",
    api_key=os.environ["OPENAI_API_KEY"],
    temperature=1.0,
    max_tokens=MAX_TOKENS,
)
lm_anthropic_sonnet_4_0 = dspy.LM(
    "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-20250514",
    api_key=os.environ["ANTHROPIC_API_KEY"],
    max_tokens=MAX_TOKENS,
)
lm_gemini_flash_2_5 = dspy.LM(
    "gemini/gemini-2.5-flash",
    api_key=os.environ["GEMINI_API_KEY"],
    max_tokens=MAX_TOKENS,
)
lm_gemini_flash_2_5_lite = dspy.LM(
    "gemini/gemini-2.5-flash-lite",
    api_key=os.environ["GEMINI_API_KEY"],
    max_tokens=MAX_TOKENS,
)

lm_oai_o3 = dspy.LM(
    "openai/o3-2025-04-16",
    api_key=os.environ["OPENAI_API_KEY"],
    temperature=1.0,
    max_tokens=MAX_TOKENS,
)
lm_anthropic_opus_4_0 = dspy.LM(
    "anthropic/claude-opus-4-20250514",
    api_key=os.environ["ANTHROPIC_API_KEY"],
    max_tokens=MAX_TOKENS,
)
lm_gemini_pro_2_5 = dspy.LM(
    "gemini/gemini-2.5-pro",
    api_key=os.environ["GEMINI_API_KEY"],
    max_tokens=MAX_TOKENS,
)

lm_qwen3_32b = dspy.LM(
    "ollama/qwen3:32b",
    api_base="http://localhost:11434",
    api_key="",
    max_tokens=MAX_TOKENS,
)

import dspy

llms = [
    lm_oai_gpt_4_1,
    lm_oai_gpt_4_1_mini,
    lm_oai_o4_mini,
    lm_anthropic_sonnet_4_0,
    lm_gemini_flash_2_5,
    lm_gemini_flash_2_5_lite,
    lm_oai_o3,
    lm_anthropic_opus_4_0,
    lm_gemini_pro_2_5,
    lm_qwen3_32b,
]

import json

data = json.load(open("../data/convfinqa_dataset.json"))

DSPy Modules

class SolveTurnWithoutReasoning(dspy.Signature):
    conversation_context: str = dspy.InputField(desc="Conversation so far")
    evidence_snippets: str = dspy.InputField(
        desc="Snippets of evidence surrounding the table"
    )
    table: str = dspy.InputField(desc="Input financial table with metrics")
    question: str = dspy.InputField(desc="Question to answer")

    ops: str = dspy.OutputField(
        desc="Comma-separated ConvFinQA DSL program. Allowed ops: add(x, y), subtract(x, y), multiply(x, y), divide(x, y), exp(x, y), greater(x, y). Args may be constants (e.g., const_100), numbers (int or float), or prior step refs (#0, #1…). Order always follows the pattern x <op> y—pick x and y deliberately. Example: subtract(const_100, 42), divide(#0, 3.14). Convert to percentages only if explicitly asked in the question."
    )
    answer: str = dspy.OutputField(
        desc="Final answer. This will be a single number, or a boolean string(yes/no)"
    )


class SolveTurnWithReasoning(dspy.Signature):
    conversation_context: str = dspy.InputField(desc="Conversation so far")
    evidence_snippets: str = dspy.InputField(
        desc="Snippets of evidence surrounding the table"
    )
    table: str = dspy.InputField(desc="Input financial table with metrics")
    question: str = dspy.InputField(desc="Question to answer")

    reasoning: str = dspy.OutputField(
        desc="Reasoning behind the answer. Carefully analyze the conversation_context, and especially the evidence_snippets and table for the given question, and generate your reasoning before generating the ops and answer."
    )
    ops: str = dspy.OutputField(
        desc="Comma-separated ConvFinQA DSL program. Allowed ops: add(x, y), subtract(x, y), multiply(x, y), divide(x, y), exp(x, y), greater(x, y). Args may be constants (e.g., const_100), numbers (int or float), or prior step refs (#0, #1…). Order always follows the pattern x <op> y—pick x and y deliberately. Example: subtract(const_100, 42), divide(#0, 3.14). Convert to percentages only if explicitly asked in the question."
    )
    answer: str = dspy.OutputField(
        desc="Final answer. This will be a single number, or a boolean string(yes/no)"
    )


class TurnSolver(dspy.Module):
    """
    In the context of this series of interconnected finance-related queries and the additional information provided by the pretext, table data, and posttext from a company's financial filings, please provide a response to the final question. This may require extracting information from the context and performing mathematical calculations. Please take into account the information provided in the preceding questions and their answers when formulating your response: \n\n
    """

    def __init__(self, reasoning_lm=False):
        super().__init__()
        # if reasoning_lm:
        #     self.pred = dspy.ChainOfThought(SolveTurnWithReasoning)
        # else:
        #     self.pred = dspy.Predict(SolveTurnWithoutReasoning)
        self.pred = dspy.ChainOfThought(SolveTurnWithReasoning)

    def forward(self, conversation_context, evidence_snippets, table, question):
        """
        Run the model to solve a single turn.

        Args:
            conversation_context (str): Conversation so far.
            evidence_snippets (str): Evidence text around the table.
            table (str): Financial table in markdown.
            question (str): Question to answer.

        Returns:
            dspy.Prediction: Model output with reasoning, ops, and answer.
        """
        return self.pred(
            conversation_context=conversation_context,
            evidence_snippets=evidence_snippets,
            table=table,
            question=question,
        )

def norm_ans(x):
    """
    Normalize an answer for comparison.

    Converts input to string, strips whitespace, removes percent signs,
    and attempts to cast to float. If conversion fails, returns the cleaned string.

    Args:
        x: The answer to normalize (str, float, or int).

    Returns:
        float or str: Normalized float if possible, else cleaned string.
    """
    s = str(x).strip().replace("%", "")
    try:
        return float(s)
    except Exception:
        return s


def _table_md(table_dict: dict, max_cols: int | None = None) -> str:
    """
    Convert a dictionarised table to compact GitHub-markdown.

    Accepted shapes
    1) {row_name: {col_name: value, …}, …}   # regular 2-level mapping
    2) {col_name: value, …}                  # flat → coerced to single row

    Guarantees
    • Original row order is kept.
    • Column headers are kept in *first-seen* order; NO deduplication.
    • max_cols (if given) truncates *after* enumeration, duplicates included.
    • None → "" and everything else is str()-ed.
    """
    if not table_dict:
        return ""

    if all(not isinstance(v, dict) for v in table_dict.values()):
        # flat mapping → one anonymous row
        table_dict = {"": dict(table_dict)}
    else:
        # ensure every value is a dict
        table_dict = {
            r: (v if isinstance(v, dict) else {"": v}) for r, v in table_dict.items()
        }

    row_ids = list(table_dict.keys())  # preserve caller order

    cols: list = []
    for r in row_ids:
        cols.extend(table_dict[r].keys())
    if max_cols is not None:
        cols = cols[:max_cols]

    header = "| Row | " + " | ".join(map(str, cols)) + " |"
    sep = "|" + "---|" * (len(cols) + 1)
    lines = [header, sep]

    for r in row_ids:
        vals = [str(table_dict[r].get(c, "")) for c in cols]
        lines.append("| " + str(r) + " | " + " | ".join(vals) + " |")

    return "\n".join(lines)


def build_inputs_from_row(
    row,
    turn_idx,
    *,
    history_mode: str = "teacher",
    state: dict | None = None,
    max_table_cols: int = 100,
):
    """
    history_mode: 'teacher' | 'model' | 'none'
    state: carries model predictions across turns when history_mode='model'
           expected keys: {'pred_answers': list[str|float]}
    evidence_builder: optional callable(row, turn_idx)->str; if None, use simple truncation.
    """
    qs = row["dialogue_conv_questions"]
    gold = row["dialogue_executed_answers"]

    # ---- history ----
    history_lines = []
    for t in range(turn_idx):
        history_lines.append(f"Q{t + 1}: {qs[t]}")
        if history_mode == "teacher":
            history_lines.append(f"A{t + 1}: {gold[t]}")
        elif (
            history_mode == "model" and state and len(state.get("pred_answers", [])) > t
        ):
            history_lines.append(f"A{t + 1}: {state['pred_answers'][t]}")
        elif history_mode == "none":
            pass  # only questions
    conversation_context = "\n".join(history_lines) if history_lines else "None"

    evidence_snippets = (
        f"[PRE]\n{row['doc_pre_text']}\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n{row['doc_post_text']}\n[/POST]"
    )
    table_md = _table_md(row.get("doc_table", {}) or {}, max_cols=max_table_cols)

    return dict(
        conversation_context=conversation_context,
        evidence_snippets=evidence_snippets,
        table=table_md,
        question=qs[turn_idx],
        ops=row["dialogue_turn_program"][turn_idx],
        **row,
    )

def evaluate_dialogues(model, df):
    """
    Evaluate a dialogue model on a DataFrame of conversations.

    Args:
        model: Callable that takes unpacked input dict and returns an object with at least `.answer` (and optionally `.ops`).
        df: pd.DataFrame with columns:
            - "dialogue_conv_questions": list of str, all questions in the conversation
            - "dialogue_executed_answers": list of str/float, all executed answers so far
            - (other columns as needed by evidence_builder)

    Returns:
        dict with:
            - "turn_em_micro": float, micro-averaged exact match over all turns
            - "dlg_mean_em_macro": float, macro-averaged mean EM per dialogue
            - "joint_em": float, fraction of dialogues with all turns correct
            - "final_turn_em": float, EM on the final turn of each dialogue
            - "n_dialogues": int, number of dialogues
            - "n_turns": int, total number of turns
    """
    turn_hits = 0
    turn_tot = 0
    # exec_hits = 0
    dlg_mean_ems = []
    dlg_joint_hits = 0
    final_hits = 0

    for _, row in df.iterrows():
        qs = row["dialogue_conv_questions"]
        gold = row["dialogue_executed_answers"]
        ems = []
        exec_flags = []
        for t in range(len(qs)):
            inp = build_inputs_from_row(row, t)
            out = model(**inp)
            pa = norm_ans(out.answer)
            ga = norm_ans(gold[t])
            em = float(pa == ga)
            ems.append(em)
            turn_hits += em
            turn_tot += 1

        dlg_mean_ems.append(sum(ems) / len(ems))
        if all(v == 1.0 for v in ems):
            dlg_joint_hits += 1
        final_hits += ems[-1]

    return {
        "turn_em_micro": turn_hits / max(1, turn_tot),
        "dlg_mean_em_macro": sum(dlg_mean_ems) / max(1, len(dlg_mean_ems)),
        "joint_em": dlg_joint_hits / max(1, len(dlg_mean_ems)),
        "final_turn_em": final_hits / max(1, len(dlg_mean_ems)),
        "n_dialogues": len(dlg_mean_ems),
        "n_turns": turn_tot,
    }

def turn_em_metric(example, pred, trace=None):
    """
    Compute turn-level exact match (EM) metric for a single example/prediction pair.

    Args:
        example: dict-like, must contain "gold_answer" key.
        pred: object with an "answer" attribute.

    Returns:
        float: 1.0 if normalized prediction matches normalized gold answer (with tolerance for floats), else 0.0.
    """
    from dspy.evaluate.metrics import answer_exact_match

    pa = norm_ans(pred.answer)
    ga = norm_ans(example["answer"])
    if isinstance(pa, float) and isinstance(ga, float):
        return float(abs(pa - ga) <= 1e-2)
    else:
        # exact_match in DSPy needs the inputs to be in string format
        # due to the normalisations DSPy performs internally.
        ground_truth = dspy.Prediction(answer=str(example.answer))
        pred_answer = dspy.Prediction(answer=str(pred.answer))
        return float(answer_exact_match(ground_truth, pred_answer))

def to_turn_examples(df, history_mode="teacher"):
    examples = []
    for _, row in df.iterrows():
        qs = row["dialogue_conv_questions"]
        gold = row["dialogue_executed_answers"]
        for t in range(len(qs)):
            inp = build_inputs_from_row(row, t, history_mode=history_mode)
            ex = dict(**inp, answer=gold[t])
            examples.append(
                dspy.Example(**ex).with_inputs(
                    "conversation_context",
                    "evidence_snippets",
                    "table",
                    "question",
                )
            )
    return examples

Preparing Datasets

We will aim to use the splits as follows: - train: Used primarily for the optimisation phase. This will be discussed shortly. - valid: Used to evaluate the performance of an LM on an optimised model trained using the train dataset. - test: Used to evaluate the performance of an LM on a held-out dataset. This will determine the overall stage performance.

import pandas as pd

train_df = pd.DataFrame(data["train"])
test_df = pd.DataFrame(data["dev"])

# Flatten features to remove the indexing gymnastics
train_flat_df = pd.concat(
    [
        train_df.drop(["doc", "dialogue", "features"], axis=1),
        train_df["doc"].apply(pd.Series).add_prefix("doc_"),
        train_df["dialogue"].apply(pd.Series).add_prefix("dialogue_"),
        train_df["features"].apply(pd.Series).add_prefix("features_"),
    ],
    axis=1,
)

test_flat_df = pd.concat(
    [
        test_df.drop(["doc", "dialogue", "features"], axis=1),
        test_df["doc"].apply(pd.Series).add_prefix("doc_"),
        test_df["dialogue"].apply(pd.Series).add_prefix("dialogue_"),
        test_df["features"].apply(pd.Series).add_prefix("features_"),
    ],
    axis=1,
)

train_flat_df.head()

	id	doc_pre_text	doc_post_text	doc_table	dialogue_conv_questions	dialogue_conv_answers	dialogue_turn_program	dialogue_executed_answers	dialogue_qa_split	features_num_dialogue_turns	features_has_type2_question	features_has_duplicate_columns	features_has_non_numeric_values
0	Single_JKHY/2009/page_28.pdf-3	26 | 2009 annual report in fiscal 2008 , reven...	year ended june 30 , cash provided by operatio...	{'Year ended June 30, 2009': {'net income': 10...	[what is the net cash from operating activitie...	[206588, 181001, 25587, 14.1%]	[206588, 181001, subtract(206588, 181001), sub...	[206588.0, 181001.0, 25587.0, 0.14136]	[False, False, False, False]	4	False	False	False
1	Single_RSG/2008/page_114.pdf-2	substantially all of the goodwill and other in...	the above unaudited pro forma financial inform...	{'year ended december 31 2008 ( unaudited )': ...	[what were revenues in 2008?, what were they i...	[9362.2, 9244.9, 117.3, 1.3%]	[9362.2, 9244.9, subtract(9362.2, 9244.9), sub...	[9362.2, 9244.9, 117.3, 0.01269]	[False, False, False, False]	4	False	False	False
2	Single_AAPL/2002/page_23.pdf-1	in a new business model such as the retail seg...	.	{'2002': {'net sales': 5742.0, 'cost of sales'...	[what was the total of net sales in 2001?, and...	[5363, 7983, -2620, -32%]	[5363, 7983, subtract(5363, 7983), subtract(53...	[5363.0, 7983.0, -2620.0, -0.3282]	[False, False, False, False]	4	False	False	False
3	Single_UPS/2009/page_33.pdf-2	( 1 ) includes shares repurchased through our ...	.	{'12/31/04': {'united parcel service inc .': 1...	[what was the change in the performance of the...	[-24.05, -24.05%, 102.11, 2.11, 2.11%, -26.16%]	[subtract(75.95, const_100), subtract(75.95, c...	[-24.05, -0.2405, 102.11, 2.11, 0.0211, -0.2616]	[False, False, False, False, False, False]	6	False	False	False
4	Double_UPS/2009/page_33.pdf	( 1 ) includes shares repurchased through our ...	.	{'12/31/04': {'united parcel service inc .': 1...	[what was the fluctuation of the performance p...	[-8.94, -8.9%, -24.05, -24.05%, 2.11, 2.11%, -...	[subtract(91.06, const_100), subtract(91.06, c...	[-8.94, -0.0894, -24.05, -0.2405, 2.11, 0.0211...	[False, False, True, True, True, True, True]	7	True	False	False

easy_train_ids = pd.read_json("./splits/easy_train.jsonl", lines=True)
easy_valid_ids = pd.read_json("./splits/easy_valid.jsonl", lines=True)
easy_test_ids = pd.read_json("./splits/easy_test.jsonl", lines=True)

medium_train_ids = pd.read_json("./splits/medium_train.jsonl", lines=True)
medium_valid_ids = pd.read_json("./splits/medium_valid.jsonl", lines=True)
medium_test_ids = pd.read_json("./splits/medium_test.jsonl", lines=True)

hard_train_ids = pd.read_json("./splits/hard_train.jsonl", lines=True)
hard_valid_ids = pd.read_json("./splits/hard_valid.jsonl", lines=True)
hard_test_ids = pd.read_json("./splits/hard_test.jsonl", lines=True)

easy_train_df = train_flat_df[train_flat_df["id"].isin(easy_train_ids["id"])].copy()
easy_valid_df = train_flat_df[train_flat_df["id"].isin(easy_valid_ids["id"])].copy()
easy_test_df = test_flat_df[test_flat_df["id"].isin(easy_test_ids["id"])].copy()

medium_train_df = train_flat_df[train_flat_df["id"].isin(medium_train_ids["id"])].copy()
medium_valid_df = train_flat_df[train_flat_df["id"].isin(medium_valid_ids["id"])].copy()
medium_test_df = test_flat_df[test_flat_df["id"].isin(medium_test_ids["id"])].copy()

hard_train_df = train_flat_df[train_flat_df["id"].isin(hard_train_ids["id"])].copy()
hard_valid_df = train_flat_df[train_flat_df["id"].isin(hard_valid_ids["id"])].copy()
hard_test_df = test_flat_df[test_flat_df["id"].isin(hard_test_ids["id"])].copy()

assert easy_train_ids.shape[0] == easy_train_df.shape[0]
assert easy_valid_ids.shape[0] == easy_valid_df.shape[0]
assert easy_test_ids.shape[0] == easy_test_df.shape[0]
assert medium_train_ids.shape[0] == medium_train_df.shape[0]
assert medium_valid_ids.shape[0] == medium_valid_df.shape[0]
assert medium_test_ids.shape[0] == medium_test_df.shape[0]
assert hard_train_ids.shape[0] == hard_train_df.shape[0]
assert hard_valid_ids.shape[0] == hard_valid_df.shape[0]
assert hard_test_ids.shape[0] == hard_test_df.shape[0]

easy_train_examples = to_turn_examples(easy_train_df)
easy_valid_examples = to_turn_examples(easy_valid_df)
easy_test_examples = to_turn_examples(easy_test_df)

medium_train_examples = to_turn_examples(medium_train_df)
medium_valid_examples = to_turn_examples(medium_valid_df)
medium_test_examples = to_turn_examples(medium_test_df)

hard_train_examples = to_turn_examples(hard_train_df)
hard_valid_examples = to_turn_examples(hard_valid_df)
hard_test_examples = to_turn_examples(hard_test_df)

DSPy Optimization

We aim to optimize prompts with dspy because:

• Hand-tuned prompts plateau fast and break when the data distribution drifts.
  
• Brute-force prompt crafting doesn’t scale; automated search + distillation does.
  
• DSPy acts as a compiler: give it a spec + metric, get back a better program.

DSPy has a few inbuilt methods to do prompt optimization, as shown in the docs. Due to time and cost contraints, we will focus on a few key approaches:

• BootstrapFewShotWithRandomSearch – LM proposes demos, keep the ones that pass metric.
  • Uses a teacher module (which defaults to your program) to generate complete demonstrations for every stage of your program, along with labeled examples in trainset. Parameters include max_labeled_demos (the number of demonstrations randomly selected from the trainset) and max_bootstrapped_demos (the number of additional examples generated by the teacher). The bootstrapping process employs the metric to validate demonstrations, including only those that pass the metric in the “compiled” prompt.
  • RandomSearch applies the above several times with random search over generated demonstrations, and selects the best program over the optimization.
• MIPROv2 – Bayes-opt over instructions and demos (can stay 0-shot).
  • Generates instructions and few-shot examples in each step. The instruction generation is data-aware and demonstration-aware. Uses Bayesian Optimization to effectively search over the space of generation instructions/demonstrations across your modules.
• BootstrapFinetune – distill the compiled prompt into weight updates. We might use this to improve the performance of a smaller and cheaper model to match the perform of a larger model!
  • The output is a DSPy program that has the same steps, but where each step is conducted by a finetuned model instead of a prompted LM.

Optimisation Methods

In the previous notebook, on the “gate” dataset, we had the following results:

LLM	Evaluation Score
openai/gpt-4.1-2025-04-14	80.0
openai/gpt-4.1-mini-2025-04-14	50.0
openai/o4-mini-2025-04-16	60.0
anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-20250514	60.0
gemini/gemini-2.5-flash	70.0
gemini/gemini-2.5-flash-lite	70.0
openai/o3-2025-04-16	80.0
anthropic/claude-opus-4-20250514	70.0
gemini/gemini-2.5-pro	80.0
ollama/qwen3:32b	70.0

Compared to the frontier model o3, we had relatively poor performance with o4-mini and gemini-2.5-flash.

Let’s try to see if we can improve the performance here. Specifically, we will do the first stage of optimisation on the easy dataset, using the BootstrapFewShot metric.

For the easy dataset, we will restrict the number of few shot examples to 5.

BootstrapFewShotWithRandomSearch

selected_llms = [lm_oai_o4_mini, lm_gemini_flash_2_5, lm_oai_o3]

len(easy_train_examples)

679

The official documentation for BootstrapFewShotWithRandomSearch recommends to use 50 or more examples. Due to time and cost constraints, we will randomly sample 70 examples from the easy train set, and use them to optimize our program.

import random

random.seed(42)

bootstrap_rs_random_easy_subset = random.sample(easy_train_examples, 70)

import re

import litellm
from dspy.teleprompt import BootstrapFewShotWithRandomSearch

# Config needed to prevent the optimizer from using _unsupported_ temperature
# for reasoning models.
litellm.drop_params = True


config = dict(
    max_bootstrapped_demos=3,
    max_labeled_demos=2,
    num_candidate_programs=5,
    num_threads=32,
    max_rounds=1,
)

bootstrap_rs_easy_compiled_programs = []

with mlflow.start_run(run_name="bootstrap_few_shot_rs_easy"):
    for candidate_lm in selected_llms:
        run_name = f"bootstrap_few_shot_rs_{candidate_lm.model.replace('/', '_')}"
        sanitized_run_name = re.sub(r"[^a-zA-Z0-9_\-]", "_", run_name)
        with mlflow.start_run(run_name=sanitized_run_name, nested=True):
            with dspy.context(lm=candidate_lm) as ctx:
                teleprompter = BootstrapFewShotWithRandomSearch(
                    metric=turn_em_metric, **config
                )
                optimized_program = teleprompter.compile(
                    dspy.ChainOfThought(SolveTurnWithReasoning),
                    trainset=bootstrap_rs_random_easy_subset,
                )
                bootstrap_rs_easy_compiled_programs.append(optimized_program)

Going to sample between 1 and 3 traces per predictor.
Will attempt to bootstrap 5 candidate sets.
Average Metric: 45.00 / 70 (64.3%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:00<00:00, 87.74it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/fcce9b07d50e41609bc04c3d9c2235c7
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 64.29 for seed -3
Scores so far: [64.29]
Best score so far: 64.29
  0%|          | 0/70 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 26.00 / 38 (68.4%):  53%|█████▎    | 37/70 [00:00<00:00, 82.89it/s]Average Metric: 46.00 / 70 (65.7%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:00<00:00, 76.35it/s]
🏃 View run eval_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/7575401319f442499f871ca8d849bfd1
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 65.71 for seed -2
Scores so far: [64.29, 65.71]
Best score so far: 65.71
Bootstrapped 3 full traces after 6 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 6 attempts.
Average Metric: 47.00 / 70 (67.1%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 62.67it/s]
🏃 View run eval_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/3406309f3f0a4041a580021eaf5eff13
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 67.14 for seed -1
Scores so far: [64.29, 65.71, 67.14]
Best score so far: 67.14
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
Average Metric: 48.00 / 70 (68.6%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 52.08it/s]
🏃 View run eval_3 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/8cad7a93fb494289a4d6691d5796f84e
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 68.57 for seed 0
Scores so far: [64.29, 65.71, 67.14, 68.57]
Best score so far: 68.57
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 46.00 / 70 (65.7%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 54.10it/s]
🏃 View run eval_4 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/ab8c076e18394080bbf9634eeff7af35
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [64.29, 65.71, 67.14, 68.57, 65.71]
Best score so far: 68.57
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 45.00 / 70 (64.3%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 44.09it/s]
🏃 View run eval_5 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/679c914720674946a877f4a6a91665ee
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [64.29, 65.71, 67.14, 68.57, 65.71, 64.29]
Best score so far: 68.57
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 47.00 / 70 (67.1%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 61.09it/s]
🏃 View run eval_6 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/ab818ec11652430b9bd68e17dc197665
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [64.29, 65.71, 67.14, 68.57, 65.71, 64.29, 67.14]
Best score so far: 68.57
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 51.00 / 70 (72.9%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 51.33it/s]
🏃 View run eval_7 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/f9f17e61c1334a9ea6903ae3a1105fd8
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 72.86 for seed 4
Scores so far: [64.29, 65.71, 67.14, 68.57, 65.71, 64.29, 67.14, 72.86]
Best score so far: 72.86
8 candidate programs found.
🏃 View run bootstrap_few_shot_rs_openai_o4-mini-2025-04-16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/b08500752c9041d5acccbc261bd33931
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Going to sample between 1 and 3 traces per predictor.
Will attempt to bootstrap 5 candidate sets.
  0%|          | 0/70 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 43.00 / 70 (61.4%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 48.03it/s]
🏃 View run eval_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/578a2f04172f4ecbb41d04350201b2d5
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 61.43 for seed -3
Scores so far: [61.43]
Best score so far: 61.43
  0%|          | 0/70 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 29.00 / 42 (69.0%):  59%|█████▊    | 41/70 [00:01<00:00, 32.19it/s]Average Metric: 35.00 / 51 (68.6%):  71%|███████▏  | 50/70 [00:01<00:00, 42.39it/s]Average Metric: 47.00 / 70 (67.1%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 43.35it/s]
🏃 View run eval_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/cf868ddb4c5945149422186e878e4ee8
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 67.14 for seed -2
Scores so far: [61.43, 67.14]
Best score so far: 67.14
Bootstrapped 3 full traces after 6 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 6 attempts.
Average Metric: 46.00 / 70 (65.7%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 65.12it/s]
🏃 View run eval_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/a83ba7facae34ee2b495fd0bcb478044
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [61.43, 67.14, 65.71]
Best score so far: 67.14
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
Average Metric: 46.00 / 70 (65.7%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 36.63it/s]
🏃 View run eval_3 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/343b2f8e893044da9a9bee74f6be8853
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [61.43, 67.14, 65.71, 65.71]
Best score so far: 67.14
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 45.00 / 70 (64.3%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 37.96it/s]
🏃 View run eval_4 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/3ad1f0eea05b4d7b88e7c47e2c0c29ab
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [61.43, 67.14, 65.71, 65.71, 64.29]
Best score so far: 67.14
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 47.00 / 70 (67.1%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 35.34it/s]
🏃 View run eval_5 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/29b7cf7738bc47d89e81309a65595be0
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [61.43, 67.14, 65.71, 65.71, 64.29, 67.14]
Best score so far: 67.14
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 48.00 / 70 (68.6%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:02<00:00, 31.53it/s]
🏃 View run eval_6 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/d3a6322d0555421784dbb34087099455
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 68.57 for seed 3
Scores so far: [61.43, 67.14, 65.71, 65.71, 64.29, 67.14, 68.57]
Best score so far: 68.57
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 60.00 / 70 (85.7%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:02<00:00, 28.22it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_7 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/93c1cafdbb6b440699788970eb6ffa88
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 85.71 for seed 4
Scores so far: [61.43, 67.14, 65.71, 65.71, 64.29, 67.14, 68.57, 85.71]
Best score so far: 85.71
8 candidate programs found.
🏃 View run bootstrap_few_shot_rs_gemini_gemini-2_5-flash at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/621ba195ed244875a4370e2050418a06
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Going to sample between 1 and 3 traces per predictor.
Will attempt to bootstrap 5 candidate sets.
  0%|          | 0/70 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 22.00 / 29 (75.9%):  40%|████      | 28/70 [00:00<00:00, 71.01it/s]Average Metric: 36.00 / 49 (73.5%):  69%|██████▊   | 48/70 [00:01<00:00, 69.84it/s]Average Metric: 52.00 / 70 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 37.98it/s]
🏃 View run eval_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/377a453f2e0745e38fc89508f7ab1d26
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 74.29 for seed -3
Scores so far: [74.29]
Best score so far: 74.29
  0%|          | 0/70 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 1.00 / 4 (25.0%):   4%|▍         | 3/70 [00:00<00:17,  3.91it/s] Average Metric: 5.00 / 8 (62.5%):  10%|█         | 7/70 [00:00<00:16,  3.91it/s]Average Metric: 13.00 / 16 (81.2%):  23%|██▎       | 16/70 [00:00<00:01, 39.80it/s]Average Metric: 30.00 / 41 (73.2%):  57%|█████▋    | 40/70 [00:01<00:01, 17.35it/s]Average Metric: 33.00 / 44 (75.0%):  61%|██████▏   | 43/70 [00:01<00:01, 17.35it/s]Average Metric: 52.00 / 70 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 36.77it/s]
🏃 View run eval_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/d9e37616e88748d8890de6056370f801
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [74.29, 74.29]
Best score so far: 74.29
Bootstrapped 3 full traces after 4 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 4 attempts.
Average Metric: 52.00 / 70 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 35.80it/s]
🏃 View run eval_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/7bfc22c9728f4862931e5bb8bf4d379e
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [74.29, 74.29, 74.29]
Best score so far: 74.29
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
Average Metric: 43.00 / 53 (81.1%):  76%|███████▌  | 53/70 [00:22<00:09,  1.74it/s] Average Metric: 50.00 / 68 (73.5%):  97%|█████████▋| 68/70 [00:55<00:04,  2.16s/it]Average Metric: 51.00 / 70 (72.9%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [01:56<00:00,  1.66s/it]
🏃 View run eval_3 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/7cc38c776c8c40ad983a78690454b768
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [74.29, 74.29, 74.29, 72.86]
Best score so far: 74.29
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 34.00 / 37 (91.9%):  53%|█████▎    | 37/70 [00:16<00:15,  2.18it/s] Average Metric: 49.00 / 62 (79.0%):  89%|████████▊ | 62/70 [00:33<00:07,  1.03it/s]Average Metric: 52.00 / 70 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:52<00:00,  1.34it/s]
🏃 View run eval_4 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/3d4799840b5145f38c55cd04a510b4eb
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [74.29, 74.29, 74.29, 72.86, 74.29]
Best score so far: 74.29
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 53.00 / 70 (75.7%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:49<00:00,  1.41it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_5 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/826af9f09c4e4410b2b21424430e67f1
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 75.71 for seed 2
Scores so far: [74.29, 74.29, 74.29, 72.86, 74.29, 75.71]
Best score so far: 75.71
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 44.00 / 48 (91.7%):  69%|██████▊   | 48/70 [00:18<00:08,  2.53it/s] Average Metric: 53.00 / 70 (75.7%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [01:02<00:00,  1.13it/s]
🏃 View run eval_6 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/a029e23cfbe14b92a2ba6ce26146642b
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [74.29, 74.29, 74.29, 72.86, 74.29, 75.71, 75.71]
Best score so far: 75.71
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 56.00 / 70 (80.0%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:44<00:00,  1.58it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_7 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/861f0c753b754e6a8eb3372287edd9bc
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 80.0 for seed 4
Scores so far: [74.29, 74.29, 74.29, 72.86, 74.29, 75.71, 75.71, 80.0]
Best score so far: 80.0
8 candidate programs found.
🏃 View run bootstrap_few_shot_rs_openai_o3-2025-04-16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/8576b067ea60468ebc37cda1a17be1dc
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run bootstrap_few_shot_rs_easy at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/b5f08a070a634f74888fb8c42f24bfa3
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3

2025/07/29 01:03:08 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 45.0 / 70 (64.3%)
2025/07/29 01:03:08 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:08 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:09 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 46.0 / 70 (65.7%)
  4%|▍         | 3/70 [00:00<00:04, 13.83it/s]2025/07/29 01:03:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
  9%|▊         | 6/70 [00:00<00:03, 16.05it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:11 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 47.0 / 70 (67.1%)
  3%|▎         | 2/70 [00:00<00:02, 32.62it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:12 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 48.0 / 70 (68.6%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:03, 18.44it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:15 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 46.0 / 70 (65.7%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:02, 24.59it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:17 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 45.0 / 70 (64.3%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:12,  5.70it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:19 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 47.0 / 70 (67.1%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:02, 28.38it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:21 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 51.0 / 70 (72.9%)
2025/07/29 01:03:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:22 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 43.0 / 70 (61.4%)
2025/07/29 01:03:23 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:24 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:24 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:24 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 47.0 / 70 (67.1%)
  9%|▊         | 6/70 [00:00<00:03, 16.98it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:27 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 46.0 / 70 (65.7%)
  3%|▎         | 2/70 [00:00<00:03, 21.93it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:30 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 46.0 / 70 (65.7%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:02, 28.87it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:32 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 45.0 / 70 (64.3%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:02, 25.21it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:34 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 47.0 / 70 (67.1%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:10,  6.34it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:38 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 48.0 / 70 (68.6%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:05, 13.59it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:41 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 60.0 / 70 (85.7%)
2025/07/29 01:03:42 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:42 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:42 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:43 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:43 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:44 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:44 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 52.0 / 70 (74.3%)
2025/07/29 01:03:44 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:45 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:45 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:45 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:46 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:46 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:46 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 52.0 / 70 (74.3%)
  6%|▌         | 4/70 [00:00<00:04, 15.37it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:49 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 52.0 / 70 (74.3%)
  3%|▎         | 2/70 [00:12<06:55,  6.11s/it]
2025/07/29 01:04:25 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:05:26 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:05:59 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 51.0 / 70 (72.9%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:05<06:47,  5.90s/it]
2025/07/29 01:06:22 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:06:40 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:06:57 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 52.0 / 70 (74.3%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:03<04:04,  3.55s/it]
2025/07/29 01:07:51 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 53.0 / 70 (75.7%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:05<06:22,  5.54s/it]
2025/07/29 01:08:16 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:08:59 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 53.0 / 70 (75.7%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:04<04:43,  4.11s/it]
2025/07/29 01:09:48 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 56.0 / 70 (80.0%)

From the logs, and in the MLFlow UI, we see the following performances for each model:

Model	Candidate Scores	Best Score
o4-mini	64.29, 65.71, 67.14, 68.57, 65.71, 64.29, 67.14, 72.86	72.86
gemini-2.5-flash	61.43, 67.14, 65.71, 65.71, 64.29, 67.14, 68.57, 85.71	85.71
o3	74.29, 74.29, 74.29, 72.86, 74.29, 75.71, 75.71, 80.0	80.0

Surprisingly, the best model is gemini-2.5-flash, on this small random subset of the easy dataset.

We can also look at the prompt generated for the model:

bootstrap_rs_easy_compiled_programs[1].inspect_history(n=1)

[2025-07-29T01:03:41.268360]

System message:

Your input fields are:
1. `conversation_context` (str): Conversation so far
2. `evidence_snippets` (str): Snippets of evidence surrounding the table
3. `table` (str): Input financial table with metrics
4. `question` (str): Question to answer
Your output fields are:
1. `reasoning` (str): Reasoning behind the answer. Carefully analyze the conversation_context, and especially the evidence_snippets and table for the given question, and generate your reasoning before generating the ops and answer.
2. `ops` (str): Comma-separated ConvFinQA DSL program. Allowed ops: add(x, y), subtract(x, y), multiply(x, y), divide(x, y), exp(x, y), greater(x, y). Args may be constants (e.g., const_100), numbers (int or float), or prior step refs (#0, #1…). Order always follows the pattern x <op> y—pick x and y deliberately. Example: subtract(const_100, 42), divide(#0, 3.14). Convert to percentages only if explicitly asked in the question.
3. `answer` (str): Final answer. This will be a single number, or a boolean string(yes/no)
All interactions will be structured in the following way, with the appropriate values filled in.

[[ ## conversation_context ## ]]
{conversation_context}

[[ ## evidence_snippets ## ]]
{evidence_snippets}

[[ ## table ## ]]
{table}

[[ ## question ## ]]
{question}

[[ ## reasoning ## ]]
{reasoning}

[[ ## ops ## ]]
{ops}

[[ ## answer ## ]]
{answer}

[[ ## completed ## ]]
In adhering to this structure, your objective is: 
        Given the fields `conversation_context`, `evidence_snippets`, `table`, `question`, produce the fields `reasoning`, `ops`, `answer`.


User message:

This is an example of the task, though some input or output fields are not supplied.

[[ ## conversation_context ## ]]
Q1: what was the expected dividend yield in 2006?
A1: 3.24
Q2: what was the expected yield in 2005?
A2: 3.29
Q3: what is the net difference?
A3: -0.05

[[ ## evidence_snippets ## ]]
[PRE]
eastman notes to the audited consolidated financial statements stock option awards option awards are granted to non-employee directors on an annual basis and to employees who meet certain eligibility requirements . a single annual option grant is usually awarded to eligible employees in the fourth quarter of each year , if and when granted by the compensation and management development committee of the board of directors , and occasional individual grants are awarded to eligible employees throughout the year . option awards have an exercise price equal to the closing price of the company's stock on the date of grant . the term of options is ten years with vesting periods that vary up to three years . vesting usually occurs ratably or at the end of the vesting period . sfas no . 123 ( r ) requires that stock option awards be valued at fair value determined by market price , if actively traded in a public market or , if not , calculated using an option pricing financial model . the fair value of the company's options cannot be determined by market value as they are not traded in an open market . accordingly , a financial pricing model is utilized to determine fair value . the company utilizes the black scholes merton ( "bsm" ) model which relies on certain assumptions to estimate an option's fair value . the weighted average assumptions used in the determination of fair value for stock options awarded in 2006 , 2005 and 2004 are provided in the table below: .
[/PRE]
[POST]
prior to adoption of sfas no . 123 ( r ) , the company calculated the expected term of stock options of six years . effective with the fourth quarter 2005 annual option award , the company analyzed historical annual grant transactions over a ten year period comprising exercises , post-vesting cancellations and expirations to determine the expected term . the company expects to execute this analysis each year preceding the annual option grant to ensure that all assumptions based upon internal data reflect the most reasonable expectations for fair value determination . the weighted average expected term of 4.4 years for 2006 reflects the impact of this annual analysis and the weighting of option swap and reload grants which may have much shorter expected terms than new option grants . the volatility rate of grants is derived from historical company common stock volatility over the same time period as the expected term . the company uses a weekly high closing stock price based upon daily closing prices in the week . the volatility rate is derived by mathematical formula utilizing the weekly high closing price data . for the periods presented above , the expected dividend yield is derived by mathematical formula which uses the expected company annual dividend amount over the expected term divided by the fair market value of the company's common stock at the grant date . the average risk-free interest rate is derived from united states department of treasury published interest rates of daily yield curves for the same time period as the expected term . prior to adoption of sfas no . 123 ( r ) , the company did not estimate forfeitures and recognized them as they occurred for proforma disclosure of share-based compensation expense . with adoption of sfas no . 123 ( r ) , estimated forfeitures must be considered in recording share-based compensation expense . estimated forfeiture rates vary with each type of award affected by several factors , one of which is the varying composition and characteristics of the award participants . estimated forfeitures for the company's share-based awards historically range from 0.75 percent to 10.0 percent with the estimated forfeitures for options at 0.75 percent. .
[/POST]

[[ ## table ## ]]
| Row | expected volatility rate | expected dividend yield | average risk-free interest rate | expected forfeiture rate | expected term years | expected volatility rate | expected dividend yield | average risk-free interest rate | expected forfeiture rate | expected term years | expected volatility rate | expected dividend yield | average risk-free interest rate | expected forfeiture rate | expected term years |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | -21.4 | -3.24 | -4.62 | -0.75 | 4.4 | -21.4 | -3.24 | -4.62 | -0.75 | 4.4 | -21.4 | -3.24 | -4.62 | -0.75 | 4.4 |
| 2005 | -22.9 | -3.29 | -4.48 | actual | 5.0 | -22.9 | -3.29 | -4.48 | actual | 5.0 | -22.9 | -3.29 | -4.48 | actual | 5.0 |
| 2004 | -28.0 | -3.8 | -3.46 | actual | 6.0 | -28.0 | -3.8 | -3.46 | actual | 6.0 | -28.0 | -3.8 | -3.46 | actual | 6.0 |

[[ ## question ## ]]
what is the percent change?


Assistant message:

[[ ## reasoning ## ]]
Not supplied for this particular example. 

[[ ## ops ## ]]
subtract(3.24, 3.29), divide(#0, 3.29)

[[ ## answer ## ]]
-0.0152


User message:

[[ ## conversation_context ## ]]
None

[[ ## evidence_snippets ## ]]
[PRE]
the company granted 1020 performance shares . the vesting of these shares is contingent on meeting stated goals over a performance period . beginning with restricted stock grants in september 2010 , dividends are accrued on restricted class a common stock and restricted stock units and are paid once the restricted stock vests . the following table summarizes restricted stock and performance shares activity for 2010 : number of shares weighted average grant date fair value .
[/PRE]
[POST]
the total fair value of restricted stock that vested during the years ended december 31 , 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , was $ 10.3 million , $ 6.2 million and $ 2.5 million , respectively . eligible employees may acquire shares of cme group 2019s class a common stock using after-tax payroll deductions made during consecutive offering periods of approximately six months in duration . shares are purchased at the end of each offering period at a price of 90% ( 90 % ) of the closing price of the class a common stock as reported on the nasdaq . compensation expense is recognized on the dates of purchase for the discount from the closing price . in 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , a total of 4371 , 4402 and 5600 shares , respectively , of class a common stock were issued to participating employees . these shares are subject to a six-month holding period . annual expense of $ 0.1 million for the purchase discount was recognized in 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , respectively . non-executive directors receive an annual award of class a common stock with a value equal to $ 75000 . non-executive directors may also elect to receive some or all of the cash portion of their annual stipend , up to $ 25000 , in shares of stock based on the closing price at the date of distribution . as a result , 7470 , 11674 and 5509 shares of class a common stock were issued to non-executive directors during 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , respectively . these shares are not subject to any vesting restrictions . expense of $ 2.4 million , $ 2.5 million and $ 2.4 million related to these stock-based payments was recognized for the years ended december 31 , 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , respectively. .
[/POST]

[[ ## table ## ]]
| Row | outstanding at december 31 2009 | granted | vested | cancelled | outstanding at december 31 2010 | outstanding at december 31 2009 | granted | vested | cancelled | outstanding at december 31 2010 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| number of shares | 116677.0 | 134245.0 | -34630.0 | -19830.0 | 196462.0 | 116677.0 | 134245.0 | -34630.0 | -19830.0 | 196462.0 |
| weighted average grant date fair value | 280.0 | 275.0 | 257.0 | 260.0 | 283.0 | 280.0 | 275.0 | 257.0 | 260.0 | 283.0 |

[[ ## question ## ]]
what was the change in number of shares from 2009 to 2010?


Assistant message:

[[ ## reasoning ## ]]
To find the change in the number of shares from 2009 to 2010, I need to identify the 'number of shares' outstanding at December 31, 2009, and the 'number of shares' outstanding at December 31, 2010, from the table. Then, I will subtract the 2009 value from the 2010 value.

From the table:
- Number of shares outstanding at December 31, 2009: 116677.0
- Number of shares outstanding at December 31, 2010: 196462.0

The change is 196462.0 - 116677.0.

[[ ## ops ## ]]
subtract(196462.0, 116677.0)

[[ ## answer ## ]]
79785.0


User message:

[[ ## conversation_context ## ]]
Q1: what is the increase in value of an investment in delphi automotive plc from 2011 to 2013?
A1: 185.81

[[ ## evidence_snippets ## ]]
[PRE]
stock performance graph * $ 100 invested on 11/17/11 in our stock or 10/31/11 in the relevant index , including reinvestment of dividends . fiscal year ending december 31 , 2013 . ( 1 ) delphi automotive plc ( 2 ) s&p 500 2013 standard & poor 2019s 500 total return index ( 3 ) automotive supplier peer group 2013 russell 3000 auto parts index , including american axle & manufacturing , borgwarner inc. , cooper tire & rubber company , dana holding corp. , delphi automotive plc , dorman products inc. , federal-mogul corp. , ford motor co. , fuel systems solutions inc. , general motors co. , gentex corp. , gentherm inc. , genuine parts co. , johnson controls inc. , lkq corp. , lear corp. , meritor inc. , remy international inc. , standard motor products inc. , stoneridge inc. , superior industries international , trw automotive holdings corp. , tenneco inc. , tesla motors inc. , the goodyear tire & rubber co. , tower international inc. , visteon corp. , and wabco holdings inc . company index november 17 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 .
[/PRE]
[POST]
dividends on february 26 , 2013 , the board of directors approved the initiation of dividend payments on the company's ordinary shares . the board of directors declared a regular quarterly cash dividend of $ 0.17 per ordinary share that was paid in each quarter of 2013 . in addition , in january 2014 , the board of directors declared a regular quarterly cash dividend of $ 0.25 per ordinary share , payable on february 27 , 2014 to shareholders of record at the close of business on february 18 , 2014 . in october 2011 , the board of managers of delphi automotive llp approved a distribution of approximately $ 95 million , which was paid on december 5 , 2011 , principally in respect of taxes , to members of delphi automotive llp who held membership interests as of the close of business on october 31 , 2011. .
[/POST]

[[ ## table ## ]]
| Row | delphi automotive plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive supplier peer group ( 3 ) | delphi automotive plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive supplier peer group ( 3 ) | delphi automotive plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive supplier peer group ( 3 ) | delphi automotive plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive supplier peer group ( 3 ) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| november 17 2011 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
| december 31 2011 | 100.98 | 100.8 | 89.27 | 100.98 | 100.8 | 89.27 | 100.98 | 100.8 | 89.27 | 100.98 | 100.8 | 89.27 |
| december 31 2012 | 179.33 | 116.93 | 110.41 | 179.33 | 116.93 | 110.41 | 179.33 | 116.93 | 110.41 | 179.33 | 116.93 | 110.41 |
| december 31 2013 | 285.81 | 154.8 | 166.46 | 285.81 | 154.8 | 166.46 | 285.81 | 154.8 | 166.46 | 285.81 | 154.8 | 166.46 |

[[ ## question ## ]]
what return rate does this represent?

Respond with the corresponding output fields, starting with the field `[[ ## reasoning ## ]]`, then `[[ ## ops ## ]]`, then `[[ ## answer ## ]]`, and then ending with the marker for `[[ ## completed ## ]]`.


Response:

[[ ## reasoning ## ]]
The previous question (Q1) asked for the increase in value, which was calculated as 185.81. This value represents the difference between the investment value in 2013 (285.81) and the initial investment value in 2011 (100.0). To find the return rate, I need to divide this increase by the initial investment value. The initial investment value for Delphi Automotive PLC on November 17, 2011, was 100.0.

Therefore, the return rate is the increase (185.81) divided by the initial value (100.0).

[[ ## ops ## ]]
divide(185.81, 100.0)

[[ ## answer ## ]]
1.8581

As we can see, the above prompt has a good collection of few-shot examples, which have helped improve the model’s performance.

The optimised programs can also be saved to disk, so that we can re-use them later.

for id, oc in enumerate(bootstrap_rs_easy_compiled_programs):
    model_name = selected_llms[id].model
    sanitized_model_name = re.sub(r"[-/\.]", "_", model_name)
    oc.save(f"./programs/{sanitized_model_name}_bootstrap_rs_easy/", save_program=True)

Evaluation

While the models work well on our randomly sampled subset, to compare them fairly to the zero-shot versions, we need to run the evaluation on the validation sets, similar to what we did in the modelling notebook.

import pandas as pd

gate_ids = pd.read_json("validation_datasets/gate_ids.jsonl", lines=True)

probe_medium_ids = pd.read_json(
    "validation_datasets/probe_medium_ids.jsonl", lines=True
)
probe_hard_ids = pd.read_json("validation_datasets/probe_hard_ids.jsonl", lines=True)

gate_df = easy_valid_df[easy_valid_df["id"].isin(gate_ids["id"])].copy()
probe_df = pd.concat(
    [
        medium_valid_df[medium_valid_df["id"].isin(probe_medium_ids["id"])],
        hard_valid_df[hard_valid_df["id"].isin(probe_hard_ids["id"])],
    ]
).copy()

assert gate_df.shape[0] == gate_ids.shape[0]
assert probe_df.shape[0] == probe_medium_ids.shape[0] + probe_hard_ids.shape[0]

gate_examples = to_turn_examples(gate_df, history_mode="teacher")
probe_examples = to_turn_examples(probe_df, history_mode="teacher")

import re

from dspy.evaluate import Evaluate

bootstrap_rs_gate_valid_results = []

with mlflow.start_run(run_name="gate_dataset_results") as parent_ctx:
    for idx, candidate_lm in enumerate(selected_llms):
        run_name = f"bootstrap_rs_gate_valid_{candidate_lm.model.replace('/', '_')}"
        sanitized_run_name = re.sub(r"[^a-zA-Z0-9_\-]", "_", run_name)
        with mlflow.start_run(run_name=sanitized_run_name, nested=True):
            current_evaluator = Evaluate(
                devset=gate_examples,
                num_threads=32,
                display_progress=True,
                # display_table=True,
                # provide_traceback=True,
                return_all_scores=True,
                return_outputs=True,
            )
            with dspy.context(lm=candidate_lm) as ctx:
                current_result = current_evaluator(
                    bootstrap_rs_easy_compiled_programs[idx], metric=turn_em_metric
                )
                bootstrap_rs_gate_valid_results.append(current_result)

Average Metric: 108.00 / 151 (71.5%): 100%|██████████| 151/151 [00:05<00:00, 28.47it/s]
🏃 View run eval at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/f51f5cb2ef784fee83e3c8d90d36c810
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run bootstrap_rs_gate_valid_openai_o4-mini-2025-04-16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/11ab97c789e74ad49817a6ff42545b71
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 114.00 / 149 (76.5%):  99%|█████████▊| 149/151 [00:18<00:01,  1.52it/s]Average Metric: 116.00 / 151 (76.8%): 100%|██████████| 151/151 [00:41<00:00,  3.66it/s]
🏃 View run eval at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/5a57d19652fd4d6a880884e40699fdd5
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run bootstrap_rs_gate_valid_gemini_gemini-2_5-flash at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/d891bd8d7c3b4821aa26db2022a64a24
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 95.00 / 121 (78.5%):  79%|███████▉  | 120/151 [00:58<00:16,  1.93it/s]Average Metric: 115.00 / 151 (76.2%): 100%|██████████| 151/151 [02:26<00:00,  1.03it/s]
🏃 View run eval at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/433a6fdf11784f72873b1a7bad0ef77e
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run bootstrap_rs_gate_valid_openai_o3-2025-04-16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/17100ffb6cf14e75a5c506a12c057379
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run gate_dataset_results at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/f4729686037d43a6b6d9fe671a289c6a
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3

2025/07/29 01:43:06 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 108.0 / 151 (71.5%)
2025/07/29 01:43:30 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:43:48 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 116.0 / 151 (76.8%)
2025/07/29 01:44:47 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:46:14 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 115.0 / 151 (76.2%)

print(bootstrap_rs_gate_valid_results[0][0])
print(bootstrap_rs_gate_valid_results[1][0])
print(bootstrap_rs_gate_valid_results[2][0])

71.52
76.82
76.16

We have the following results:

model_name	zero_shot_perform	bootstrapfewshotwithrandomsearch	pct_change_vs_zero_shot
o4-mini	60.0	71.52	+19.2%
gemini-2.5-flash	70	76.82	+9.7%
o3	80	76.16	-4.8%

We see the small reasoning models have significant gains in performance, especially o4-mini which now has a total score of 71.52% on the gate dataset.

However, we also see a slight reduction in the performance of o3. This could be because the few shot are acting as distractors, likely because they are noisy(as seen in our previous notebook).

We will explore another method before moving on!

MIPROv2

The previous method, BootstrapFewShotWithRandomSearch, was able to generate a good collection of few-shot examples, which have helped improve the model’s performance. However, we see that the prompt instructions themselves were not optimised for the model, and could be improved.

MIPROv2 aims to be the best of both worlds: It will jointly optimise both the selected few-shot examples, as well as the instructions, using Bayesion Optimisation. Internally, it will just ask the LLMs for a better prompt, a technique called metaprompting, first released by Anthropic.

MIPROv2 has 3 optimisation modes: light, medium, heavy, which map well to our existing curriculum learning approach of splitting the datasets.

Setup

While MIPROv2 gives the best results with large data, due to time and cost constraints, we will evaluate it on micro datasets.

Specifically, from our existing curriculum of easy, medium, and hard datasets, we will select a small subset for train and validation.

Once we’ve finished the optimisation for all stages, we will run the final evaluation on the full test dataset i.e easy_test + medium_test + hard_test.

micro_easy_train_df = easy_train_df.sample(n=120, random_state=42)
micro_easy_valid_df = easy_valid_df.sample(n=30, random_state=42)

micro_medium_train_df = medium_train_df.sample(n=200, random_state=42)
micro_medium_valid_df = medium_valid_df.sample(n=50, random_state=42)

micro_hard_train_df = hard_train_df.sample(n=200, random_state=42)
micro_hard_valid_df = hard_valid_df.sample(n=60, random_state=42)


micro_easy_train_examples = to_turn_examples(
    micro_easy_train_df, history_mode="teacher"
)
micro_easy_valid_examples = to_turn_examples(
    micro_easy_valid_df, history_mode="teacher"
)
micro_medium_train_examples = to_turn_examples(
    micro_medium_train_df, history_mode="teacher"
)
micro_medium_valid_examples = to_turn_examples(
    micro_medium_valid_df, history_mode="teacher"
)
micro_hard_train_examples = to_turn_examples(
    micro_hard_train_df, history_mode="teacher"
)
micro_hard_valid_examples = to_turn_examples(
    micro_hard_valid_df, history_mode="teacher"
)

To save further costs, we will run MIPROv2 on only the smaller reasoning models

• o4-mini
• gemini-2.5-flash

mipro_llms = [lm_oai_o4_mini, lm_gemini_flash_2_5]

Curriculum Learning: Easy

Since we have a new validation set for MIPROv2, we first need to establish a baseline performance.

import re

from dspy.evaluate import Evaluate

baseline_results = []

with mlflow.start_run(run_name="baseline_micro_easy") as parent_ctx:
    for candidate_lm in mipro_llms:
        run_name = f"baseline_{candidate_lm.model.replace('/', '_')}"
        sanitized_run_name = re.sub(r"[^a-zA-Z0-9_\-]", "_", run_name)
        with mlflow.start_run(run_name=sanitized_run_name, nested=True):
            current_evaluator = Evaluate(
                devset=micro_easy_valid_examples,
                num_threads=32,
                display_progress=True,
                # display_table=True,
                # provide_traceback=True,
                return_all_scores=True,
                return_outputs=True,
            )
            with dspy.context(lm=candidate_lm) as ctx:
                current_result = current_evaluator(
                    TurnSolver(reasoning_lm=True), metric=turn_em_metric
                )
                baseline_results.append(current_result)

Average Metric: 11.00 / 21 (52.4%):  22%|██▏       | 21/95 [00:00<00:01, 50.20it/s]Average Metric: 34.00 / 62 (54.8%):  64%|██████▍   | 61/95 [00:01<00:00, 81.06it/s]Average Metric: 36.00 / 64 (56.2%):  66%|██████▋   | 63/95 [00:01<00:00, 81.06it/s]Average Metric: 60.00 / 95 (63.2%): 100%|██████████| 95/95 [00:01<00:00, 74.14it/s] 
🏃 View run eval at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/12c628a13fc142ee96326609276a54a9
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run baseline_openai_o4-mini-2025-04-16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/5513481dbf01461a8ec13a2d0eacc092
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
  0%|          | 0/95 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 13.00 / 27 (48.1%):  27%|██▋       | 26/95 [00:00<00:01, 64.03it/s]Average Metric: 15.00 / 30 (50.0%):  31%|███       | 29/95 [00:00<00:00, 83.93it/s]Average Metric: 15.00 / 32 (46.9%):  33%|███▎      | 31/95 [00:00<00:00, 83.93it/s]Average Metric: 35.00 / 60 (58.3%):  63%|██████▎   | 60/95 [00:00<00:00, 70.00it/s]Average Metric: 61.00 / 95 (64.2%): 100%|██████████| 95/95 [00:01<00:00, 70.65it/s]
🏃 View run eval at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/b5b73d83e38b4d8fbbd95028ebae8235
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run baseline_gemini_gemini-2_5-flash at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/7cc513a8b9984d72b2e3f30f4e5077f5
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run baseline_micro_easy at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/abc5ef019c22431787cda0209e31529c
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3

2025/07/29 11:49:25 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:49:25 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:49:25 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:49:26 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 60.0 / 95 (63.2%)
2025/07/29 11:49:26 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:49:26 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:49:26 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:49:26 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:49:26 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:49:26 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:49:26 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:49:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:49:27 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 61.0 / 95 (64.2%)

The results are as follows:

model_name	micro_easy_valid_set em_metric
o4-mini	63.16
gemini-2.5-flash	64.21

We will now aim to improve the performance of each of these models, using the MIPROv2 optimiser.

import re

import litellm
from dspy.teleprompt import MIPROv2

# Config needed to prevent the optimizer from using _unsupported_ temperature
# for reasoning models.
litellm.drop_params = True


config = dict(
    max_bootstrapped_demos=2,
    max_labeled_demos=2,
    auto="light",
    log_dir="./mipro_micro_logs",
    num_threads=32,
)

mipro_micro_easy_compiled_programs = []

with mlflow.start_run(run_name="mipro_micro_easy"):
    for candidate_lm in mipro_llms:
        run_name = f"mipro_{candidate_lm.model.replace('/', '_')}"
        sanitized_run_name = re.sub(r"[^a-zA-Z0-9_\-]", "_", run_name)
        with mlflow.start_run(run_name=sanitized_run_name, nested=True):
            with dspy.context(lm=candidate_lm) as ctx:
                teleprompter = MIPROv2(metric=turn_em_metric, **config)
                optimized_program = teleprompter.compile(
                    dspy.ChainOfThought(SolveTurnWithReasoning),
                    trainset=micro_easy_train_examples,
                    valset=micro_easy_valid_examples,
                    requires_permission_to_run=False,
                )
                mipro_micro_easy_compiled_programs.append(optimized_program)

2025/07/29 11:49:54 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
RUNNING WITH THE FOLLOWING LIGHT AUTO RUN SETTINGS:
num_trials: 10
minibatch: True
num_fewshot_candidates: 6
num_instruct_candidates: 3
valset size: 95

2025/07/29 11:49:54 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
==> STEP 1: BOOTSTRAP FEWSHOT EXAMPLES <==
2025/07/29 11:49:54 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: These will be used as few-shot example candidates for our program and for creating instructions.

2025/07/29 11:49:54 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Bootstrapping N=6 sets of demonstrations...
  1%|          | 2/350 [00:00<00:11, 30.06it/s]
  1%|          | 2/350 [00:00<00:12, 28.92it/s]
  1%|          | 3/350 [00:00<00:10, 32.53it/s]
  1%|          | 2/350 [00:00<00:12, 28.96it/s]
2025/07/29 11:49:56 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
==> STEP 2: PROPOSE INSTRUCTION CANDIDATES <==
2025/07/29 11:49:56 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: We will use the few-shot examples from the previous step, a generated dataset summary, a summary of the program code, and a randomly selected prompting tip to propose instructions.
2025/07/29 11:49:57 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
Proposing N=3 instructions...

2025/07/29 11:49:57 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Proposed Instructions for Predictor 0:

2025/07/29 11:49:57 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 0: Given the fields `conversation_context`, `evidence_snippets`, `table`, `question`, produce the fields `reasoning`, `ops`, `answer`.

2025/07/29 11:49:57 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 1: You are a financial analyst AI specializing in conversational question answering over corporate financial tables. Given the following inputs:

Conversation Context: {conversation_context}  
Evidence Snippets: {evidence_snippets}  
Table: {table}  
Question: {question}  

Produce exactly three output sections:

1. Reasoning: A clear, step-by-step natural-language analysis showing how you locate numbers in the table or snippets and how you plan to compute the answer.  
2. Ops: A comma-separated ConvFinQA DSL program (using only add(x,y), subtract(x,y), multiply(x,y), divide(x,y), exp(x,y), greater(x,y)) that implements your reasoning. Reference constants or prior steps (#0, #1, …) in the form “op(arg1,arg2)”. Only convert to percentages if explicitly asked.  
3. Answer: The final result as a single number or “yes”/“no”.  

Use the prefixes “Reasoning:”, “Ops:”, and “Answer:” exactly, and do not include any additional sections or commentary.

2025/07/29 11:49:57 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 2: You are the chief financial analyst preparing a critical report for senior executives and regulatory review. Any miscalculation could lead to major financial losses or legal penalties. For each query, carefully analyze the `conversation_context`, `evidence_snippets`, and `table`, then output exactly three sections:

1. Reasoning: A clear, step-by-step explanation of how you arrived at the result, referencing the relevant table rows and evidence snippets.
2. Ops: A concise, comma-separated ConvFinQA DSL program (using only add(x, y), subtract(x, y), multiply(x, y), divide(x, y), exp(x, y), greater(x, y), with constants or step references like #0).
3. Answer: The final numeric value or “yes”/“no.”

Prefix each section with “Reasoning:”, “Ops:”, and “Answer:” respectively. Do not include any additional text. Ensure absolute precision—regulators and executives will hold you accountable.

2025/07/29 11:49:57 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 11:49:57 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==> STEP 3: FINDING OPTIMAL PROMPT PARAMETERS <==
2025/07/29 11:49:57 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: We will evaluate the program over a series of trials with different combinations of instructions and few-shot examples to find the optimal combination using Bayesian Optimization.

2025/07/29 11:49:57 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 1 / 13 - Full Evaluation of Default Program ==
2025/07/29 11:49:58 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:49:58 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:49:58 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:49:59 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 60.0 / 95 (63.2%)
2025/07/29 11:49:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Default program score: 63.16

  warnings.warn(
2025/07/29 11:49:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 2 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:49:59 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 26.0 / 35 (74.3%)
2025/07/29 11:50:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 74.29 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 3'].
2025/07/29 11:50:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [74.29]
2025/07/29 11:50:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [63.16]
2025/07/29 11:50:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 63.16
2025/07/29 11:50:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 3 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:00 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:50:00 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 22.0 / 35 (62.9%)
2025/07/29 11:50:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 62.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 0'].
2025/07/29 11:50:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [74.29, 62.86]
2025/07/29 11:50:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [63.16]
2025/07/29 11:50:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 63.16
2025/07/29 11:50:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 4 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:01 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 29.0 / 35 (82.9%)
2025/07/29 11:50:01 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 82.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 11:50:01 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [74.29, 62.86, 82.86]
2025/07/29 11:50:01 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [63.16]
2025/07/29 11:50:01 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 63.16
2025/07/29 11:50:01 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:01 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 5 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:02 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 22.0 / 35 (62.9%)
2025/07/29 11:50:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 62.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 2'].
2025/07/29 11:50:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [74.29, 62.86, 82.86, 62.86]
2025/07/29 11:50:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [63.16]
2025/07/29 11:50:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 63.16
2025/07/29 11:50:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 6 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:03 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 22.0 / 35 (62.9%)
2025/07/29 11:50:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 62.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 0', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 11:50:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [74.29, 62.86, 82.86, 62.86, 62.86]
2025/07/29 11:50:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [63.16]
2025/07/29 11:50:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 63.16
2025/07/29 11:50:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 7 / 13 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 11:50:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 82.86) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 11:50:05 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 64.0 / 95 (67.4%)
2025/07/29 11:50:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: New best full eval score! Score: 67.37
2025/07/29 11:50:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [63.16, 67.37]
2025/07/29 11:50:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 67.37
2025/07/29 11:50:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 11:50:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 11:50:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 8 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:05 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 23.0 / 35 (65.7%)
2025/07/29 11:50:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 65.71 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 0'].
2025/07/29 11:50:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [74.29, 62.86, 82.86, 62.86, 62.86, 65.71]
2025/07/29 11:50:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [63.16, 67.37]
2025/07/29 11:50:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 67.37
2025/07/29 11:50:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 9 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:06 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 24.0 / 35 (68.6%)
2025/07/29 11:50:06 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 68.57 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 11:50:06 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [74.29, 62.86, 82.86, 62.86, 62.86, 65.71, 68.57]
2025/07/29 11:50:06 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [63.16, 67.37]
2025/07/29 11:50:06 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 67.37
2025/07/29 11:50:06 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:06 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 10 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:07 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 23.0 / 35 (65.7%)
2025/07/29 11:50:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 65.71 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 4'].
2025/07/29 11:50:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [74.29, 62.86, 82.86, 62.86, 62.86, 65.71, 68.57, 65.71]
2025/07/29 11:50:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [63.16, 67.37]
2025/07/29 11:50:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 67.37
2025/07/29 11:50:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 11 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:08 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 26.0 / 35 (74.3%)
2025/07/29 11:50:08 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 74.29 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 11:50:08 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [74.29, 62.86, 82.86, 62.86, 62.86, 65.71, 68.57, 65.71, 74.29]
2025/07/29 11:50:08 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [63.16, 67.37]
2025/07/29 11:50:08 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 67.37
2025/07/29 11:50:08 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:08 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 12 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:09 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 27.0 / 35 (77.1%)
2025/07/29 11:50:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 77.14 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 3'].
2025/07/29 11:50:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [74.29, 62.86, 82.86, 62.86, 62.86, 65.71, 68.57, 65.71, 74.29, 77.14]
2025/07/29 11:50:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [63.16, 67.37]
2025/07/29 11:50:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 67.37
2025/07/29 11:50:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 13 / 13 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 11:50:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 75.715) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 11:50:11 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 71.0 / 95 (74.7%)
2025/07/29 11:50:11 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: New best full eval score! Score: 74.74
2025/07/29 11:50:11 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [63.16, 67.37, 74.74]
2025/07/29 11:50:11 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 74.74
2025/07/29 11:50:11 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 11:50:11 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 11:50:11 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Returning best identified program with score 74.74!
2025/07/29 11:50:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
RUNNING WITH THE FOLLOWING LIGHT AUTO RUN SETTINGS:
num_trials: 10
minibatch: True
num_fewshot_candidates: 6
num_instruct_candidates: 3
valset size: 95

2025/07/29 11:50:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
==> STEP 1: BOOTSTRAP FEWSHOT EXAMPLES <==
2025/07/29 11:50:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: These will be used as few-shot example candidates for our program and for creating instructions.

2025/07/29 11:50:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Bootstrapping N=6 sets of demonstrations...
  1%|          | 2/350 [00:00<00:10, 33.51it/s]
  1%|          | 2/350 [00:00<00:08, 40.18it/s]
  1%|          | 4/350 [00:00<00:10, 31.98it/s]
  1%|          | 2/350 [00:00<00:10, 33.27it/s]
2025/07/29 11:50:15 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
==> STEP 2: PROPOSE INSTRUCTION CANDIDATES <==
2025/07/29 11:50:15 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: We will use the few-shot examples from the previous step, a generated dataset summary, a summary of the program code, and a randomly selected prompting tip to propose instructions.
2025/07/29 11:50:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
Proposing N=3 instructions...

2025/07/29 11:50:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Proposed Instructions for Predictor 0:

2025/07/29 11:50:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 0: Given the fields `conversation_context`, `evidence_snippets`, `table`, `question`, produce the fields `reasoning`, `ops`, `answer`.

2025/07/29 11:50:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 1: You are a financial AI assistant specialized in analyzing financial documents and answering complex numerical questions. Given the `conversation_context` for multi-turn interactions, `evidence_snippets` for textual context, a `table` containing financial data, and the current `question`, your task is to first generate a detailed `reasoning` that explains the logical steps to derive the answer. Then, translate this reasoning into a precise sequence of `ops` using the ConvFinQA DSL, ensuring correct operations and references. Finally, provide the computed `answer` as a single number or a boolean.

2025/07/29 11:50:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 2: You are a highly skilled financial AI assistant, operating in a high-stakes environment where precision is paramount. Your analyses directly influence critical investment decisions, risk management, and regulatory compliance for multi-million dollar portfolios. Errors are unacceptable and could lead to severe financial and legal repercussions.

Given the `conversation_context`, `evidence_snippets`, `table`, and `question`, you must meticulously:

1.  Generate `reasoning` that clearly explains your analytical process, synthesizing information from all inputs and resolving any conversational references.
2.  Produce a precise `ops` program in ConvFinQA DSL that computationally derives the answer. Ensure every step is accurate and logically sound.
3.  Provide the final `answer`, which must be a single numerical value or a boolean string, directly resulting from the `ops` program.

Your output must be flawless to ensure the integrity of financial decisions.

2025/07/29 11:50:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 11:50:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==> STEP 3: FINDING OPTIMAL PROMPT PARAMETERS <==
2025/07/29 11:50:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: We will evaluate the program over a series of trials with different combinations of instructions and few-shot examples to find the optimal combination using Bayesian Optimization.

2025/07/29 11:50:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 1 / 13 - Full Evaluation of Default Program ==
2025/07/29 11:50:16 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:50:16 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:50:16 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:50:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:50:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:50:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:50:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:50:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:50:18 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 61.0 / 95 (64.2%)
2025/07/29 11:50:18 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Default program score: 64.21

  warnings.warn(
2025/07/29 11:50:18 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 2 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:19 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 27.0 / 35 (77.1%)
2025/07/29 11:50:19 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 77.14 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 3'].
2025/07/29 11:50:19 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14]
2025/07/29 11:50:19 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [64.21]
2025/07/29 11:50:19 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 64.21
2025/07/29 11:50:19 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:19 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 3 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:19 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 19.0 / 35 (54.3%)
2025/07/29 11:50:20 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 54.29 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 0'].
2025/07/29 11:50:20 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 54.29]
2025/07/29 11:50:20 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [64.21]
2025/07/29 11:50:20 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 64.21
2025/07/29 11:50:20 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:20 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 4 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:20 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 28.0 / 35 (80.0%)
2025/07/29 11:50:20 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 80.0 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 11:50:20 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 54.29, 80.0]
2025/07/29 11:50:20 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [64.21]
2025/07/29 11:50:20 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 64.21
2025/07/29 11:50:20 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:20 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 5 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:21 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 21.0 / 35 (60.0%)
2025/07/29 11:50:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 60.0 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 2'].
2025/07/29 11:50:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 54.29, 80.0, 60.0]
2025/07/29 11:50:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [64.21]
2025/07/29 11:50:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 64.21
2025/07/29 11:50:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 6 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:22 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 24.0 / 35 (68.6%)
2025/07/29 11:50:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 68.57 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 0', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 11:50:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 54.29, 80.0, 60.0, 68.57]
2025/07/29 11:50:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [64.21]
2025/07/29 11:50:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 64.21
2025/07/29 11:50:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 7 / 13 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 11:50:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 80.0) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 11:50:23 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 11:50:24 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 63.0 / 95 (66.3%)
2025/07/29 11:50:24 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: New best full eval score! Score: 66.32
2025/07/29 11:50:24 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [64.21, 66.32]
2025/07/29 11:50:24 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 66.32
2025/07/29 11:50:24 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 11:50:24 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 11:50:24 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 8 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:25 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 22.0 / 35 (62.9%)
2025/07/29 11:50:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 62.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 0'].
2025/07/29 11:50:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 54.29, 80.0, 60.0, 68.57, 62.86]
2025/07/29 11:50:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [64.21, 66.32]
2025/07/29 11:50:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 66.32
2025/07/29 11:50:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 9 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:26 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 22.0 / 35 (62.9%)
2025/07/29 11:50:26 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 62.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 11:50:26 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 54.29, 80.0, 60.0, 68.57, 62.86, 62.86]
2025/07/29 11:50:26 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [64.21, 66.32]
2025/07/29 11:50:26 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 66.32
2025/07/29 11:50:26 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:26 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 10 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:27 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 24.0 / 35 (68.6%)
2025/07/29 11:50:27 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 68.57 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 4'].
2025/07/29 11:50:27 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 54.29, 80.0, 60.0, 68.57, 62.86, 62.86, 68.57]
2025/07/29 11:50:27 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [64.21, 66.32]
2025/07/29 11:50:27 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 66.32
2025/07/29 11:50:27 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:27 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 11 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:28 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 25.0 / 35 (71.4%)
2025/07/29 11:50:28 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 71.43 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 11:50:28 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 54.29, 80.0, 60.0, 68.57, 62.86, 62.86, 68.57, 71.43]
2025/07/29 11:50:28 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [64.21, 66.32]
2025/07/29 11:50:28 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 66.32
2025/07/29 11:50:28 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:28 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 12 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 11:50:29 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 24.0 / 35 (68.6%)
2025/07/29 11:50:29 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 68.57 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 3'].
2025/07/29 11:50:29 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 54.29, 80.0, 60.0, 68.57, 62.86, 62.86, 68.57, 71.43, 68.57]
2025/07/29 11:50:29 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [64.21, 66.32]
2025/07/29 11:50:29 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 66.32
2025/07/29 11:50:29 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 11:50:29 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 13 / 13 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 11:50:29 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 72.85499999999999) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 11:50:31 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 68.0 / 95 (71.6%)
2025/07/29 11:50:31 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: New best full eval score! Score: 71.58
2025/07/29 11:50:31 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [64.21, 66.32, 71.58]
2025/07/29 11:50:31 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 71.58
2025/07/29 11:50:31 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 11:50:31 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 11:50:31 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Returning best identified program with score 71.58!

Bootstrapping set 1/6
Bootstrapping set 2/6
Bootstrapping set 3/6
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 4/6
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 5/6
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 3 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 3 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 6/6
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
Average Metric: 16.00 / 28 (57.1%):  28%|██▊       | 27/95 [00:00<00:00, 76.45it/s]Average Metric: 18.00 / 31 (58.1%):  32%|███▏      | 30/95 [00:00<00:00, 76.45it/s]Average Metric: 18.00 / 33 (54.5%):  34%|███▎      | 32/95 [00:00<00:00, 76.45it/s]Average Metric: 60.00 / 95 (63.2%): 100%|██████████| 95/95 [00:01<00:00, 70.45it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/ee09b25282d84f8b8830d5a4f6e03a20
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 26.00 / 35 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 66.79it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/3f02f1536c5a4f0d940f358bb5420d1e
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
  0%|          | 0/35 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 22.00 / 35 (62.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 74.26it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/cceebc80eaa64ece8b37638254bbaae1
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 29.00 / 35 (82.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 57.53it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/5fb33cf7eb64434a83505a7a62bbbba9
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 22.00 / 35 (62.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 67.85it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_3 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/22900308afac40c1b1b31fb4de989cee
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 22.00 / 35 (62.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 67.54it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_4 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/f28fd00878ac44aca8ae1e7f6f95071d
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 64.00 / 95 (67.4%): 100%|██████████| 95/95 [00:01<00:00, 52.02it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/d461dd74492842b9bdb3695b4520958c
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 23.00 / 35 (65.7%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 68.00it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_5 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/aadbdb04864e43fb87cbfd6ed2f9fd1a
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 24.00 / 35 (68.6%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 45.00it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_6 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/17b0db2c10194bffae2f42a2b743a6cf
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 23.00 / 35 (65.7%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 50.02it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_7 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/4d2069845d81431c87feacb5b8fcaa50
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 26.00 / 35 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 53.32it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_8 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/c0dc3d52d4e240d3a17cb620b1c96d1b
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 27.00 / 35 (77.1%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:01<00:00, 33.25it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_9 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/558bea6538dd4c88a5d3920e75a53c46
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 71.00 / 95 (74.7%): 100%|██████████| 95/95 [00:01<00:00, 58.38it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/e36c121cd68d4ef8b7ac375ce1dda70a
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run mipro_openai_o4-mini-2025-04-16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/99dddd5163ff4adba6c21ab4ee5241e9
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Bootstrapping set 1/6
Bootstrapping set 2/6
Bootstrapping set 3/6
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 4/6
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 5/6
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 4 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 4 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 6/6
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
  0%|          | 0/95 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 2.00 / 3 (66.7%):   2%|▏         | 2/95 [00:00<01:07,  1.38it/s] Average Metric: 13.00 / 25 (52.0%):  25%|██▌       | 24/95 [00:00<00:02, 28.01it/s]Average Metric: 18.00 / 31 (58.1%):  32%|███▏      | 30/95 [00:01<00:01, 43.22it/s]Average Metric: 29.00 / 46 (63.0%):  47%|████▋     | 45/95 [00:01<00:00, 51.64it/s]Average Metric: 41.00 / 67 (61.2%):  69%|██████▉   | 66/95 [00:01<00:00, 64.31it/s]Average Metric: 61.00 / 95 (64.2%): 100%|██████████| 95/95 [00:02<00:00, 45.82it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/4ecedf9143e742569580fb04ff31e900
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 27.00 / 35 (77.1%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 84.19it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/20190f2fc3234b2982c44024caf7a091
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 19.00 / 35 (54.3%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 60.91it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/d226aa8addb04a44b6291cb28038213a
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 28.00 / 35 (80.0%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 76.95it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/7fdbc14650e94f878f90e7086ea59725
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 21.00 / 35 (60.0%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 63.03it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_3 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/74ee65e8b2594b2d890e1e2bfb6b2b64
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 24.00 / 35 (68.6%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 80.92it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_4 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/d35e1f6ec29941b1b948ea862d8d65f8
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 20.00 / 32 (62.5%):  33%|███▎      | 31/95 [00:01<00:02, 23.12it/s]Average Metric: 63.00 / 95 (66.3%): 100%|██████████| 95/95 [00:02<00:00, 47.49it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/7c59f72ca0054dac82b914b59e7f40f6
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 22.00 / 35 (62.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:01<00:00, 31.54it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_5 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/447da88ad32b4e8fbde22f5282383725
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 22.00 / 35 (62.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 68.97it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_6 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/4c822c4bf190422ca84f6b5f17ff07f3
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 24.00 / 35 (68.6%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 41.03it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_7 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/66147846e75348908217c5b05d84f2ca
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 25.00 / 35 (71.4%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 78.04it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_8 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/4153d9cb3677418fa0669c63eea8f1c5
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 24.00 / 35 (68.6%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 51.11it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_9 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/f3d0baa286e44dd0ac89a74cb40bab4d
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 68.00 / 95 (71.6%): 100%|██████████| 95/95 [00:01<00:00, 50.05it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/ac451990c09c4c75829c70a7509aa3ad
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run mipro_gemini_gemini-2_5-flash at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/6c45778f57f3403dbed48facd43d9240
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run mipro_micro_easy at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/94952a4430d948679def7185323e94d1
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3

We now have the following results:

model_name	em_metric before optimisation	em_metric after MIPROv2	% increase
o4-mini	63.16	74.74	18.3%
gemini-2.5-flash	64.21	71.58	11.5%

We see significant improvement in performance for both models, with o4-mini getting the best result at 74.74%. Looking at the prompt

mipro_micro_easy_compiled_programs[0].inspect_history(n=1)

[2025-07-29T11:50:11.459861]

System message:

Your input fields are:
1. `conversation_context` (str): Conversation so far
2. `evidence_snippets` (str): Snippets of evidence surrounding the table
3. `table` (str): Input financial table with metrics
4. `question` (str): Question to answer
Your output fields are:
1. `reasoning` (str): Reasoning behind the answer. Carefully analyze the conversation_context, and especially the evidence_snippets and table for the given question, and generate your reasoning before generating the ops and answer.
2. `ops` (str): Comma-separated ConvFinQA DSL program. Allowed ops: add(x, y), subtract(x, y), multiply(x, y), divide(x, y), exp(x, y), greater(x, y). Args may be constants (e.g., const_100), numbers (int or float), or prior step refs (#0, #1…). Order always follows the pattern x <op> y—pick x and y deliberately. Example: subtract(const_100, 42), divide(#0, 3.14). Convert to percentages only if explicitly asked in the question.
3. `answer` (str): Final answer. This will be a single number, or a boolean string(yes/no)
All interactions will be structured in the following way, with the appropriate values filled in.

[[ ## conversation_context ## ]]
{conversation_context}

[[ ## evidence_snippets ## ]]
{evidence_snippets}

[[ ## table ## ]]
{table}

[[ ## question ## ]]
{question}

[[ ## reasoning ## ]]
{reasoning}

[[ ## ops ## ]]
{ops}

[[ ## answer ## ]]
{answer}

[[ ## completed ## ]]
In adhering to this structure, your objective is: 
        You are a financial analyst AI specializing in conversational question answering over corporate financial tables. Given the following inputs:
        
        Conversation Context: {conversation_context}  
        Evidence Snippets: {evidence_snippets}  
        Table: {table}  
        Question: {question}  
        
        Produce exactly three output sections:
        
        1. Reasoning: A clear, step-by-step natural-language analysis showing how you locate numbers in the table or snippets and how you plan to compute the answer.  
        2. Ops: A comma-separated ConvFinQA DSL program (using only add(x,y), subtract(x,y), multiply(x,y), divide(x,y), exp(x,y), greater(x,y)) that implements your reasoning. Reference constants or prior steps (#0, #1, …) in the form “op(arg1,arg2)”. Only convert to percentages if explicitly asked.  
        3. Answer: The final result as a single number or “yes”/“no”.  
        
        Use the prefixes “Reasoning:”, “Ops:”, and “Answer:” exactly, and do not include any additional sections or commentary.


User message:

[[ ## conversation_context ## ]]
Q1: what was the net change in value of ars investments from 2008 to 2009?
A1: -12.0
Q2: what was the 2008 value?
A2: 192.0

[[ ## evidence_snippets ## ]]
[PRE]
mastercard incorporated notes to consolidated financial statements 2014continued the municipal bond portfolio is comprised of tax exempt bonds and is diversified across states and sectors . the portfolio has an average credit quality of double-a . the short-term bond funds invest in fixed income securities , including corporate bonds , mortgage-backed securities and asset-backed securities . the company holds investments in ars . interest on these securities is exempt from u.s . federal income tax and the interest rate on the securities typically resets every 35 days . the securities are fully collateralized by student loans with guarantees , ranging from approximately 95% ( 95 % ) to 98% ( 98 % ) of principal and interest , by the u.s . government via the department of education . beginning on february 11 , 2008 , the auction mechanism that normally provided liquidity to the ars investments began to fail . since mid-february 2008 , all investment positions in the company 2019s ars investment portfolio have experienced failed auctions . the securities for which auctions have failed have continued to pay interest in accordance with the contractual terms of such instruments and will continue to accrue interest and be auctioned at each respective reset date until the auction succeeds , the issuer redeems the securities or they mature . during 2008 , ars were reclassified as level 3 from level 2 . as of december 31 , 2010 , the ars market remained illiquid , but issuer call and redemption activity in the ars student loan sector has occurred periodically since the auctions began to fail . during 2010 and 2009 , the company did not sell any ars in the auction market , but there were calls at par . the table below includes a roll-forward of the company 2019s ars investments from january 1 , 2009 to december 31 , 2010 . significant unobservable inputs ( level 3 ) ( in millions ) .
[/PRE]
[POST]
the company evaluated the estimated impairment of its ars portfolio to determine if it was other-than- temporary . the company considered several factors including , but not limited to , the following : ( 1 ) the reasons for the decline in value ( changes in interest rates , credit event , or market fluctuations ) ; ( 2 ) assessments as to whether it is more likely than not that it will hold and not be required to sell the investments for a sufficient period of time to allow for recovery of the cost basis ; ( 3 ) whether the decline is substantial ; and ( 4 ) the historical and anticipated duration of the events causing the decline in value . the evaluation for other-than-temporary impairments is a quantitative and qualitative process , which is subject to various risks and uncertainties . the risks and uncertainties include changes in credit quality , market liquidity , timing and amounts of issuer calls and interest rates . as of december 31 , 2010 , the company believed that the unrealized losses on the ars were not related to credit quality but rather due to the lack of liquidity in the market . the company believes that it is more .
[/POST]

[[ ## table ## ]]
| Row | fair value december 31 2008 | calls at par | recovery of unrealized losses due to issuer calls | increase in fair value | fair value december 31 2009 | fair value december 31 2010 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| significant unobservable inputs ( level 3 ) ( in millions ) | 192.0 | -94.0 | 13.0 | 7.0 | 180.0 | 106.0 |

[[ ## question ## ]]
what is the net change divided by the 2008 value?


Assistant message:

[[ ## reasoning ## ]]
From the table, the fair value at December 31, 2008 was 192.0 and at December 31, 2009 was 180.0.  
Net change = 180.0 − 192.0 = −12.0.  
Divide the net change by the 2008 value: −12.0 ÷ 192.0 = −0.0625.

[[ ## ops ## ]]
subtract(180.0,192.0), divide(#0,192.0)

[[ ## answer ## ]]
-0.0625


User message:

[[ ## conversation_context ## ]]
Q1: what was the expense of class a common stock issued to non-executive directors in 2010?
A1: 2.4

[[ ## evidence_snippets ## ]]
[PRE]
the company granted 1020 performance shares . the vesting of these shares is contingent on meeting stated goals over a performance period . beginning with restricted stock grants in september 2010 , dividends are accrued on restricted class a common stock and restricted stock units and are paid once the restricted stock vests . the following table summarizes restricted stock and performance shares activity for 2010 : number of shares weighted average grant date fair value .
[/PRE]
[POST]
the total fair value of restricted stock that vested during the years ended december 31 , 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , was $ 10.3 million , $ 6.2 million and $ 2.5 million , respectively . eligible employees may acquire shares of cme group 2019s class a common stock using after-tax payroll deductions made during consecutive offering periods of approximately six months in duration . shares are purchased at the end of each offering period at a price of 90% ( 90 % ) of the closing price of the class a common stock as reported on the nasdaq . compensation expense is recognized on the dates of purchase for the discount from the closing price . in 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , a total of 4371 , 4402 and 5600 shares , respectively , of class a common stock were issued to participating employees . these shares are subject to a six-month holding period . annual expense of $ 0.1 million for the purchase discount was recognized in 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , respectively . non-executive directors receive an annual award of class a common stock with a value equal to $ 75000 . non-executive directors may also elect to receive some or all of the cash portion of their annual stipend , up to $ 25000 , in shares of stock based on the closing price at the date of distribution . as a result , 7470 , 11674 and 5509 shares of class a common stock were issued to non-executive directors during 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , respectively . these shares are not subject to any vesting restrictions . expense of $ 2.4 million , $ 2.5 million and $ 2.4 million related to these stock-based payments was recognized for the years ended december 31 , 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , respectively. .
[/POST]

[[ ## table ## ]]
| Row | outstanding at december 31 2009 | granted | vested | cancelled | outstanding at december 31 2010 | outstanding at december 31 2009 | granted | vested | cancelled | outstanding at december 31 2010 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| number of shares | 116677.0 | 134245.0 | -34630.0 | -19830.0 | 196462.0 | 116677.0 | 134245.0 | -34630.0 | -19830.0 | 196462.0 |
| weighted average grant date fair value | 280.0 | 275.0 | 257.0 | 260.0 | 283.0 | 280.0 | 275.0 | 257.0 | 260.0 | 283.0 |

[[ ## question ## ]]
what is that times 1000000?


Assistant message:

[[ ## reasoning ## ]]
The expense of class A common stock issued to non-executive directors in 2010 was $2.4 million. Multiplying that by 1,000,000 converts millions to units: 2.4 × 1,000,000 = 2,400,000.

[[ ## ops ## ]]
multiply(const_2.4,const_1000000)

[[ ## answer ## ]]
2400000


User message:

[[ ## conversation_context ## ]]
Q1: what is the increase in the total expense related to the defined contribution plan for non-u.s.employees from 2010 to 2011?
A1: 9.7
Q2: what is the total expense related to the defined contribution plan for non-u.s.employees in 2010?
A2: 11.7

[[ ## evidence_snippets ## ]]
[PRE]
the following is a schedule of future minimum rental payments required under long-term operating leases at october 29 , 2011 : fiscal years operating leases .
[/PRE]
[POST]
12 . commitments and contingencies from time to time in the ordinary course of the company 2019s business , various claims , charges and litigation are asserted or commenced against the company arising from , or related to , contractual matters , patents , trademarks , personal injury , environmental matters , product liability , insurance coverage and personnel and employment disputes . as to such claims and litigation , the company can give no assurance that it will prevail . the company does not believe that any current legal matters will have a material adverse effect on the company 2019s financial position , results of operations or cash flows . 13 . retirement plans the company and its subsidiaries have various savings and retirement plans covering substantially all employees . the company maintains a defined contribution plan for the benefit of its eligible u.s . employees . this plan provides for company contributions of up to 5% ( 5 % ) of each participant 2019s total eligible compensation . in addition , the company contributes an amount equal to each participant 2019s pre-tax contribution , if any , up to a maximum of 3% ( 3 % ) of each participant 2019s total eligible compensation . the total expense related to the defined contribution plan for u.s . employees was $ 21.9 million in fiscal 2011 , $ 20.5 million in fiscal 2010 and $ 21.5 million in fiscal 2009 . the company also has various defined benefit pension and other retirement plans for certain non-u.s . employees that are consistent with local statutory requirements and practices . the total expense related to the various defined benefit pension and other retirement plans for certain non-u.s . employees was $ 21.4 million in fiscal 2011 , $ 11.7 million in fiscal 2010 and $ 10.9 million in fiscal 2009 . non-u.s . plan disclosures the company 2019s funding policy for its foreign defined benefit pension plans is consistent with the local requirements of each country . the plans 2019 assets consist primarily of u.s . and non-u.s . equity securities , bonds , property and cash . the benefit obligations and related assets under these plans have been measured at october 29 , 2011 and october 30 , 2010 . analog devices , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) .
[/POST]

[[ ## table ## ]]
| Row | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | later years | total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| operating leases | 17590.0 | 12724.0 | 6951.0 | 5649.0 | 3669.0 | 19472.0 | 66055.0 |

[[ ## question ## ]]
what growth rate does this represent?

Respond with the corresponding output fields, starting with the field `[[ ## reasoning ## ]]`, then `[[ ## ops ## ]]`, then `[[ ## answer ## ]]`, and then ending with the marker for `[[ ## completed ## ]]`.


Response:

[[ ## reasoning ## ]]
The expense for non-U.S. employees was $11.7 million in 2010 and $21.4 million in 2011, an increase of $9.7 million. The growth rate is the increase divided by the 2010 base: 9.7 / 11.7 ≈ 0.8291.

[[ ## ops ## ]]
divide(const_9.7,const_11.7)

[[ ## answer ## ]]
0.8291

[[ ## completed ## ]]

We see a super-detailed prompt, complete with both few-shot examples and detailed instructions on the role of the model and the expected output. All of this was achevied without prompting by hand!!

We’ll also save this programs to disk, for future reference.

for id, oc in enumerate(mipro_micro_easy_compiled_programs):
    model_name = selected_llms[id].model
    sanitized_model_name = re.sub(r"[-/\.]", "_", model_name)
    oc.save(f"./programs/{sanitized_model_name}_mipro_micro_easy/", save_program=True)

Next, we will use these compiled programs as the starting point, and optimise the upcoming stages i.e finally do curriculum learning!

Curriculum Learning: Medium

We will just re-run the same loop as above, with the compiled programs as the starting point, and the datasets changed to the medium stage.

First, let’s benchmark the optimised programns from the easy stage on the medium validation set

baseline_medium_results = []

with mlflow.start_run(run_name="baseline_micro_medium") as parent_ctx:
    for idx, candidate_lm in enumerate(mipro_llms):
        run_name = f"baseline_{candidate_lm.model.replace('/', '_')}"
        sanitized_run_name = re.sub(r"[^a-zA-Z0-9_\-]", "_", run_name)
        with mlflow.start_run(run_name=sanitized_run_name, nested=True):
            current_evaluator = Evaluate(
                devset=micro_medium_valid_examples,
                num_threads=32,
                display_progress=True,
                return_all_scores=True,
                return_outputs=True,
            )
            with dspy.context(lm=candidate_lm) as ctx:
                current_result = current_evaluator(
                    mipro_micro_easy_compiled_programs[idx], metric=turn_em_metric
                )
                baseline_medium_results.append(current_result)

Average Metric: 153.00 / 194 (78.9%): 100%|██████████| 194/194 [01:11<00:00,  2.71it/s]
🏃 View run eval at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/d329a74cf0d348a5bc0cef64cf208e43
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run baseline_openai_o4-mini-2025-04-16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/0f2a019e21524ae4ae71ff96d4f1c8a6
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 150.00 / 194 (77.3%): 100%|██████████| 194/194 [00:45<00:00,  4.23it/s]
🏃 View run eval at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/1137bcdb00824fa8bed994f464c903e6
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run baseline_gemini_gemini-2_5-flash at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/2db710ec2ad44542b84f3d13bae2566c
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run baseline_micro_medium at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/25cae29dfdc242478bae535c60e644e1
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3

2025/07/29 12:04:59 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 153.0 / 194 (78.9%)
2025/07/29 12:05:45 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 150.0 / 194 (77.3%)

The results are as follows:

model_name	micro_medium_valid_set em_metric
o4-mini	78.9%
gemini-2.5-flash	77.30%

We will now aim to improve the performance of each of these models, using the MIPROv2 optimiser.

config = dict(
    max_bootstrapped_demos=2,
    max_labeled_demos=3,
    auto="light",  # Still keeping this as light as this is computationally expensive
    log_dir="./mipro_micro_logs",
    num_threads=32,
)

mipro_micro_medium_compiled_programs = []

with mlflow.start_run(run_name="mipro_micro_medium"):
    for idx, candidate_lm in enumerate(mipro_llms):
        run_name = f"mipro_{candidate_lm.model.replace('/', '_')}"
        sanitized_run_name = re.sub(r"[^a-zA-Z0-9_\-]", "_", run_name)
        with mlflow.start_run(run_name=sanitized_run_name, nested=True):
            with dspy.context(lm=candidate_lm) as ctx:
                teleprompter = MIPROv2(metric=turn_em_metric, **config)
                optimized_program = teleprompter.compile(
                    mipro_micro_easy_compiled_programs[idx],
                    trainset=micro_medium_train_examples,
                    valset=micro_medium_valid_examples,
                    requires_permission_to_run=False,
                )
                mipro_micro_medium_compiled_programs.append(optimized_program)

2025/07/29 12:07:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
RUNNING WITH THE FOLLOWING LIGHT AUTO RUN SETTINGS:
num_trials: 10
minibatch: True
num_fewshot_candidates: 6
num_instruct_candidates: 3
valset size: 100

2025/07/29 12:07:52 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
==> STEP 1: BOOTSTRAP FEWSHOT EXAMPLES <==
2025/07/29 12:07:52 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: These will be used as few-shot example candidates for our program and for creating instructions.

2025/07/29 12:07:52 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Bootstrapping N=6 sets of demonstrations...
  0%|          | 2/739 [00:11<1:10:56,  5.77s/it]
  0%|          | 3/739 [00:17<1:10:22,  5.74s/it]
  0%|          | 3/739 [00:23<1:38:04,  8.00s/it]
  0%|          | 1/739 [00:08<1:47:03,  8.70s/it]
2025/07/29 12:09:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
==> STEP 2: PROPOSE INSTRUCTION CANDIDATES <==
2025/07/29 12:09:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: We will use the few-shot examples from the previous step, a generated dataset summary, a summary of the program code, and a randomly selected prompting tip to propose instructions.
2025/07/29 12:11:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
Proposing N=3 instructions...

2025/07/29 12:12:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Proposed Instructions for Predictor 0:

2025/07/29 12:12:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 0: You are a financial analyst AI specializing in conversational question answering over corporate financial tables. Given the following inputs:

Conversation Context: {conversation_context}  
Evidence Snippets: {evidence_snippets}  
Table: {table}  
Question: {question}  

Produce exactly three output sections:

1. Reasoning: A clear, step-by-step natural-language analysis showing how you locate numbers in the table or snippets and how you plan to compute the answer.  
2. Ops: A comma-separated ConvFinQA DSL program (using only add(x,y), subtract(x,y), multiply(x,y), divide(x,y), exp(x,y), greater(x,y)) that implements your reasoning. Reference constants or prior steps (#0, #1, …) in the form “op(arg1,arg2)”. Only convert to percentages if explicitly asked.  
3. Answer: The final result as a single number or “yes”/“no”.  

Use the prefixes “Reasoning:”, “Ops:”, and “Answer:” exactly, and do not include any additional sections or commentary.

2025/07/29 12:12:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 1: You are a seasoned financial analyst AI specializing in precise question answering over corporate financial tables. Given the inputs:

Conversation Context: {conversation_context}  
Evidence Snippets: {evidence_snippets}  
Table: {table}  
Question: {question}  

Follow these guidelines to formulate your response:
1. Reasoning: Write a concise, step-by-step explanation of how you identify the relevant table cells or snippet values, and describe any intermediate calculation logic in plain English.  
2. Ops: Provide a ConvFinQA DSL expression using only add(x,y), subtract(x,y), multiply(x,y), divide(x,y), exp(x,y), greater(x,y). Use numeric literals for constants and refer to intermediate results with “#0”, “#1”, etc. If the query requires a percentage, include an explicit multiply(...,100) step.  
3. Answer: Give the final numeric result (or “yes”/“no” when appropriate) with no extra commentary.

Label each section exactly as “Reasoning:”, “Ops:”, and “Answer:”. Do not include any other sections or formatting.

2025/07/29 12:12:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 2: You are a conversational financial QA engine. For each query, you must ingest:
- Conversation Context
- Evidence Snippets
- A JSON-style numeric table
- The user’s Question

Then output exactly three labeled sections:
1. Reasoning: Cite specific table row/column names and snippet locations, in natural language, describing how you retrieved values and planned any arithmetic.
2. Ops: List the minimal ConvFinQA DSL steps to perform those operations in sequence. Use only add(x,y), subtract(x,y), multiply(x,y), divide(x,y), exp(x,y), greater(x,y). Number each intermediate result (#0, #1, …). For percent-change questions, explicitly show divide(old, new) then multiply(result, 100).
3. Answer: A single raw number (or “yes”/“no”) matching the question’s requirement.

Strictly adhere to:
- No extra sections or commentary
- Exact prefixes: “Reasoning:”, “Ops:”, “Answer:”
- Direct lookups produce a single literal in Ops (no operations)
- Use decimal fractions or integers only as needed

This instruction ensures precise, interpretable outputs for automated evaluation.

2025/07/29 12:12:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 12:12:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==> STEP 3: FINDING OPTIMAL PROMPT PARAMETERS <==
2025/07/29 12:12:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: We will evaluate the program over a series of trials with different combinations of instructions and few-shot examples to find the optimal combination using Bayesian Optimization.

2025/07/29 12:12:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 1 / 13 - Full Evaluation of Default Program ==
2025/07/29 12:12:50 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 81.0 / 100 (81.0%)
2025/07/29 12:12:50 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Default program score: 81.0

  warnings.warn(
2025/07/29 12:12:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 2 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:15:02 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 29.0 / 35 (82.9%)
2025/07/29 12:15:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 82.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 3'].
2025/07/29 12:15:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [82.86]
2025/07/29 12:15:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0]
2025/07/29 12:15:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:15:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 12:15:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 3 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:15:23 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 24.0 / 35 (68.6%)
2025/07/29 12:15:23 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 68.57 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 0'].
2025/07/29 12:15:23 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [82.86, 68.57]
2025/07/29 12:15:23 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0]
2025/07/29 12:15:23 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:15:23 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 12:15:23 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 4 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:15:42 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 23.0 / 35 (65.7%)
2025/07/29 12:15:42 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 65.71 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 12:15:42 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [82.86, 68.57, 65.71]
2025/07/29 12:15:42 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0]
2025/07/29 12:15:42 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:15:42 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 12:15:42 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 5 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:16:02 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 25.0 / 35 (71.4%)
2025/07/29 12:16:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 71.43 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 2'].
2025/07/29 12:16:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [82.86, 68.57, 65.71, 71.43]
2025/07/29 12:16:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0]
2025/07/29 12:16:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:16:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 12:16:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 6 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:16:46 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 27.0 / 35 (77.1%)
2025/07/29 12:16:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 77.14 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 0', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 12:16:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [82.86, 68.57, 65.71, 71.43, 77.14]
2025/07/29 12:16:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0]
2025/07/29 12:16:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:16:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 12:16:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 7 / 13 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 12:16:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 82.86) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 12:17:14 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 80.0 / 100 (80.0%)
2025/07/29 12:17:15 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0, 80.0]
2025/07/29 12:17:15 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:17:15 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 12:17:15 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 12:17:15 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 8 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:17:43 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 27.0 / 35 (77.1%)
2025/07/29 12:17:43 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 77.14 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 0'].
2025/07/29 12:17:43 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [82.86, 68.57, 65.71, 71.43, 77.14, 77.14]
2025/07/29 12:17:43 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0, 80.0]
2025/07/29 12:17:43 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:17:43 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 12:17:43 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 9 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:18:24 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 27.0 / 35 (77.1%)
2025/07/29 12:18:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 77.14 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 12:18:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [82.86, 68.57, 65.71, 71.43, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14]
2025/07/29 12:18:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0, 80.0]
2025/07/29 12:18:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:18:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 12:18:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 10 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:19:06 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 30.0 / 35 (85.7%)
2025/07/29 12:19:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 85.71 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 4'].
2025/07/29 12:19:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [82.86, 68.57, 65.71, 71.43, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 85.71]
2025/07/29 12:19:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0, 80.0]
2025/07/29 12:19:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:19:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 12:19:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 11 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:19:40 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 30.0 / 35 (85.7%)
2025/07/29 12:19:40 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 85.71 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 4'].
2025/07/29 12:19:40 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [82.86, 68.57, 65.71, 71.43, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 85.71, 85.71]
2025/07/29 12:19:40 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0, 80.0]
2025/07/29 12:19:40 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:19:40 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 12:19:40 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 12 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:19:59 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 24.0 / 35 (68.6%)
2025/07/29 12:19:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 68.57 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 4'].
2025/07/29 12:19:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [82.86, 68.57, 65.71, 71.43, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 85.71, 85.71, 68.57]
2025/07/29 12:19:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0, 80.0]
2025/07/29 12:19:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:19:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 12:19:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 13 / 13 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 12:19:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 79.99666666666666) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 12:20:21 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 80.0 / 100 (80.0%)
2025/07/29 12:20:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0, 80.0, 80.0]
2025/07/29 12:20:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:20:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 12:20:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 12:20:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Returning best identified program with score 81.0!
2025/07/29 12:20:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
RUNNING WITH THE FOLLOWING LIGHT AUTO RUN SETTINGS:
num_trials: 10
minibatch: True
num_fewshot_candidates: 6
num_instruct_candidates: 3
valset size: 100

2025/07/29 12:20:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
==> STEP 1: BOOTSTRAP FEWSHOT EXAMPLES <==
2025/07/29 12:20:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: These will be used as few-shot example candidates for our program and for creating instructions.

2025/07/29 12:20:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Bootstrapping N=6 sets of demonstrations...
  0%|          | 2/739 [00:02<16:40,  1.36s/it]
  0%|          | 3/739 [00:03<15:47,  1.29s/it]
  0%|          | 3/739 [00:08<35:13,  2.87s/it]
  0%|          | 1/739 [00:01<21:03,  1.71s/it]
2025/07/29 12:20:49 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
==> STEP 2: PROPOSE INSTRUCTION CANDIDATES <==
2025/07/29 12:20:49 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: We will use the few-shot examples from the previous step, a generated dataset summary, a summary of the program code, and a randomly selected prompting tip to propose instructions.
2025/07/29 12:23:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
Proposing N=3 instructions...

2025/07/29 12:24:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:24:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Proposed Instructions for Predictor 0:

2025/07/29 12:24:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 0: You are a financial AI assistant specialized in analyzing financial documents and answering complex numerical questions. Given the `conversation_context` for multi-turn interactions, `evidence_snippets` for textual context, a `table` containing financial data, and the current `question`, your task is to first generate a detailed `reasoning` that explains the logical steps to derive the answer. Then, translate this reasoning into a precise sequence of `ops` using the ConvFinQA DSL, ensuring correct operations and references. Finally, provide the computed `answer` as a single number or a boolean.

2025/07/29 12:24:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 1: You are an expert financial AI assistant specialized in analyzing financial documents and answering complex numerical questions. Your primary goal is to accurately extract and compute information from both structured tables and unstructured text, even when answers depend on chained operations or require robust state management across multiple dialogue turns. You must also correctly interpret numerical values, including implicit units and signs, and format outputs appropriately for human-readable results.

Given the `conversation_context` for multi-turn interactions, `evidence_snippets` for textual context, a `table` containing financial data, and the current `question`, your task is to:
1.  First, generate a detailed `reasoning` that explains the logical steps to derive the answer, considering all relevant information from the context, snippets, and table.
2.  Then, translate this reasoning into a precise sequence of `ops` using the ConvFinQA DSL, ensuring correct operations, references, and handling of numerical semantics.
3.  Finally, provide the computed `answer` as a single number or a boolean.

2025/07/29 12:24:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 2: You are a highly specialized financial AI assistant, adept at analyzing complex financial documents and engaging in multi-turn conversational question answering. Your task is to accurately extract information from both structured tables and unstructured text, perform complex, multi-step numerical computations, and manage conversational state to answer questions. You must also correctly interpret numerical values, including implicit units and signs, and apply appropriate formatting.

Given the `conversation_context` (for multi-turn interactions), `evidence_snippets` (textual context), a `table` (structured financial data), and the current `question`:

1.  **Generate Reasoning**: First, provide a detailed, step-by-step `reasoning` that explains the logical process to derive the answer. This reasoning must clearly articulate how information is extracted from both the `evidence_snippets` and the `table`, how numerical values are interpreted (including implicit units or signs), and how previous dialogue turns in the `conversation_context` are leveraged for chained operations or to infer missing context.
2.  **Generate Operations (Ops)**: Next, translate your `reasoning` into a precise sequence of operations using the ConvFinQA Domain Specific Language (DSL). Ensure that the operations are correct, reference the appropriate data points, and accurately reflect the numerical computations and state management described in your reasoning.
3.  **Compute Answer**: Finally, provide the computed `answer` as a single numerical value or a boolean, derived from executing the generated `ops`. Ensure the answer is formatted correctly for human readability.

Your final output must be a JSON object with the following fields in order: `reasoning`, `ops`, `answer`.

2025/07/29 12:24:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 12:24:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==> STEP 3: FINDING OPTIMAL PROMPT PARAMETERS <==
2025/07/29 12:24:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: We will evaluate the program over a series of trials with different combinations of instructions and few-shot examples to find the optimal combination using Bayesian Optimization.

2025/07/29 12:24:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 1 / 13 - Full Evaluation of Default Program ==
2025/07/29 12:24:14 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 81.0 / 100 (81.0%)
2025/07/29 12:24:14 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Default program score: 81.0

  warnings.warn(
2025/07/29 12:24:14 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 2 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:24:28 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 28.0 / 35 (80.0%)
2025/07/29 12:24:28 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 80.0 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 3'].
2025/07/29 12:24:28 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0]
2025/07/29 12:24:28 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0]
2025/07/29 12:24:28 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:24:28 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 12:24:28 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 3 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:24:41 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 26.0 / 35 (74.3%)
2025/07/29 12:24:41 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 74.29 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 0'].
2025/07/29 12:24:41 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 74.29]
2025/07/29 12:24:41 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0]
2025/07/29 12:24:41 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:24:41 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 12:24:41 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 4 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:24:48 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 28.0 / 35 (80.0%)
2025/07/29 12:24:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 80.0 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 12:24:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 74.29, 80.0]
2025/07/29 12:24:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0]
2025/07/29 12:24:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:24:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 12:24:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 5 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:25:03 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 25.0 / 35 (71.4%)
2025/07/29 12:25:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 71.43 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 2'].
2025/07/29 12:25:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 74.29, 80.0, 71.43]
2025/07/29 12:25:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0]
2025/07/29 12:25:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:25:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 12:25:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 6 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:25:09 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 30.0 / 35 (85.7%)
2025/07/29 12:25:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 85.71 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 0', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 12:25:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 74.29, 80.0, 71.43, 85.71]
2025/07/29 12:25:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0]
2025/07/29 12:25:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:25:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 12:25:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 7 / 13 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 12:25:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 85.71) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 12:25:16 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:16 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:16 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:16 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:18 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:20 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: how many shares are subject to outstanding awards is under the 2009 global incentive plan?\nA1: 2530454.0\nQ2: what about under the 2004 stock incentive plan?\nA2: 5923147.0\nQ3: how many total shares are subject to outstanding awards?\nA3: 8453601.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ntax returns for 2001 and beyond are open for examination under statute . currently , unrecognized tax benefits are not expected to change significantly over the next 12 months . 19 . stock-based and other management compensation plans in april 2009 , the company approved a global incentive plan which replaces the company 2019s 2004 stock incentive plan . the 2009 global incentive plan ( 201cgip 201d ) enables the compensation committee of the board of directors to award incentive and nonqualified stock options , stock appreciation rights , shares of series a common stock , restricted stock , restricted stock units ( 201crsus 201d ) and incentive bonuses ( which may be paid in cash or stock or a combination thereof ) , any of which may be performance-based , with vesting and other award provisions that provide effective incentive to company employees ( including officers ) , non-management directors and other service providers . under the 2009 gip , the company no longer can grant rsus with the right to participate in dividends or dividend equivalents . the maximum number of shares that may be issued under the 2009 gip is equal to 5350000 shares plus ( a ) any shares of series a common stock that remain available for issuance under the 2004 stock incentive plan ( 201csip 201d ) ( not including any shares of series a common stock that are subject to outstanding awards under the 2004 sip or any shares of series a common stock that were issued pursuant to awards under the 2004 sip ) and ( b ) any awards under the 2004 stock incentive plan that remain outstanding that cease for any reason to be subject to such awards ( other than by reason of exercise or settlement of the award to the extent that such award is exercised for or settled in vested and non-forfeitable shares ) . as of december 31 , 2010 , total shares available for awards and total shares subject to outstanding awards are as follows : shares available for awards shares subject to outstanding awards .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nupon the termination of a participant 2019s employment with the company by reason of death or disability or by the company without cause ( as defined in the respective award agreements ) , an award in amount equal to ( i ) the value of the award granted multiplied by ( ii ) a fraction , ( x ) the numerator of which is the number of full months between grant date and the date of such termination , and ( y ) the denominator of which is the term of the award , such product to be rounded down to the nearest whole number , and reduced by ( iii ) the value of any award that previously vested , shall immediately vest and become payable to the participant . upon the termination of a participant 2019s employment with the company for any other reason , any unvested portion of the award shall be forfeited and cancelled without consideration . there was $ 19 million and $ 0 million of tax benefit realized from stock option exercises and vesting of rsus during the years ended december 31 , 2010 and 2009 , respectively . during the year ended december 31 , 2008 the company reversed $ 8 million of the $ 19 million tax benefit that was realized during the year ended december 31 , 2007 . deferred compensation in april 2007 , certain participants in the company 2019s 2004 deferred compensation plan elected to participate in a revised program , which includes both cash awards and restricted stock units ( see restricted stock units below ) . based on participation in the revised program , the company expensed $ 9 million , $ 10 million and $ 8 million during the years ended december 31 , 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , respectively , related to the revised program and made payments of $ 4 million during the year ended december 31 , 2010 to participants who left the company and $ 28 million to active employees during december 2010 . as of december 31 , 2010 , $ 1 million remains to be paid during 2011 under the revised program . as of december 31 , 2009 , there was no deferred compensation payable remaining associated with the 2004 deferred compensation plan . the company recorded expense related to participants continuing in the 2004 deferred %%transmsg*** transmitting job : d77691 pcn : 132000000 ***%%pcmsg|132 |00011|yes|no|02/09/2011 18:22|0|0|page is valid , no graphics -- color : n| .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2009 global incentive plan | 2004 stock incentive plan | 2009 global incentive plan | 2004 stock incentive plan |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| shares available for awards | 2322450.0 | - | 2322450.0 | - |\n| shares subject to outstanding awards | 2530454.0 | 5923147.0 | 2530454.0 | 5923147.0 |', 'question': 'what about under the 2004 stock incentive plan?', 'ops': '5923147', 'id': 'Single_CE/2010/page_134.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'tax returns for 2001 and beyond are open for examination under statute . currently , unrecognized tax benefits are not expected to change significantly over the next 12 months . 19 . stock-based and other management compensation plans in april 2009 , the company approved a global incentive plan which replaces the company 2019s 2004 stock incentive plan . the 2009 global incentive plan ( 201cgip 201d ) enables the compensation committee of the board of directors to award incentive and nonqualified stock options , stock appreciation rights , shares of series a common stock , restricted stock , restricted stock units ( 201crsus 201d ) and incentive bonuses ( which may be paid in cash or stock or a combination thereof ) , any of which may be performance-based , with vesting and other award provisions that provide effective incentive to company employees ( including officers ) , non-management directors and other service providers . under the 2009 gip , the company no longer can grant rsus with the right to participate in dividends or dividend equivalents . the maximum number of shares that may be issued under the 2009 gip is equal to 5350000 shares plus ( a ) any shares of series a common stock that remain available for issuance under the 2004 stock incentive plan ( 201csip 201d ) ( not including any shares of series a common stock that are subject to outstanding awards under the 2004 sip or any shares of series a common stock that were issued pursuant to awards under the 2004 sip ) and ( b ) any awards under the 2004 stock incentive plan that remain outstanding that cease for any reason to be subject to such awards ( other than by reason of exercise or settlement of the award to the extent that such award is exercised for or settled in vested and non-forfeitable shares ) . as of december 31 , 2010 , total shares available for awards and total shares subject to outstanding awards are as follows : shares available for awards shares subject to outstanding awards .', 'doc_post_text': 'upon the termination of a participant 2019s employment with the company by reason of death or disability or by the company without cause ( as defined in the respective award agreements ) , an award in amount equal to ( i ) the value of the award granted multiplied by ( ii ) a fraction , ( x ) the numerator of which is the number of full months between grant date and the date of such termination , and ( y ) the denominator of which is the term of the award , such product to be rounded down to the nearest whole number , and reduced by ( iii ) the value of any award that previously vested , shall immediately vest and become payable to the participant . upon the termination of a participant 2019s employment with the company for any other reason , any unvested portion of the award shall be forfeited and cancelled without consideration . there was $ 19 million and $ 0 million of tax benefit realized from stock option exercises and vesting of rsus during the years ended december 31 , 2010 and 2009 , respectively . during the year ended december 31 , 2008 the company reversed $ 8 million of the $ 19 million tax benefit that was realized during the year ended december 31 , 2007 . deferred compensation in april 2007 , certain participants in the company 2019s 2004 deferred compensation plan elected to participate in a revised program , which includes both cash awards and restricted stock units ( see restricted stock units below ) . based on participation in the revised program , the company expensed $ 9 million , $ 10 million and $ 8 million during the years ended december 31 , 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , respectively , related to the revised program and made payments of $ 4 million during the year ended december 31 , 2010 to participants who left the company and $ 28 million to active employees during december 2010 . as of december 31 , 2010 , $ 1 million remains to be paid during 2011 under the revised program . as of december 31 , 2009 , there was no deferred compensation payable remaining associated with the 2004 deferred compensation plan . the company recorded expense related to participants continuing in the 2004 deferred %%transmsg*** transmitting job : d77691 pcn : 132000000 ***%%pcmsg|132 |00011|yes|no|02/09/2011 18:22|0|0|page is valid , no graphics -- color : n| .', 'doc_table': {'shares available for awards': {'2009 global incentive plan': 2322450.0, '2004 stock incentive plan': '-'}, 'shares subject to outstanding awards': {'2009 global incentive plan': 2530454.0, '2004 stock incentive plan': 5923147.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['how many shares are subject to outstanding awards is under the 2009 global incentive plan?', 'what about under the 2004 stock incentive plan?', 'how many total shares are subject to outstanding awards?', 'what about under the 2004 stock incentive plan?', 'what proportion does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['2530454', '5923147', '8453601', '5923147', '70.1%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['2530454', '5923147', 'add(2530454, 5923147)', '5923147', 'add(2530454, 5923147), divide(5923147, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [2530454.0, 5923147.0, 8453601.0, 5923147.0, 0.70067], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 5923147.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "39s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 12:25:21 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nchallenging investment environment with $ 15.0 billion , or 95% ( 95 % ) , of net inflows coming from institutional clients , with the remaining $ 0.8 billion , or 5% ( 5 % ) , generated by retail and hnw clients . defined contribution plans of institutional clients remained a significant driver of flows . this client group added $ 13.1 billion of net new business in 2012 . during the year , americas net inflows of $ 18.5 billion were partially offset by net outflows of $ 2.6 billion collectively from emea and asia-pacific clients . the company 2019s multi-asset strategies include the following : 2022 asset allocation and balanced products represented 52% ( 52 % ) , or $ 140.2 billion , of multi-asset class aum at year-end , up $ 14.1 billion , with growth in aum driven by net new business of $ 1.6 billion and $ 12.4 billion in market and foreign exchange gains . these strategies combine equity , fixed income and alternative components for investors seeking a tailored solution relative to a specific benchmark and within a risk budget . in certain cases , these strategies seek to minimize downside risk through diversification , derivatives strategies and tactical asset allocation decisions . 2022 target date and target risk products ended the year at $ 69.9 billion , up $ 20.8 billion , or 42% ( 42 % ) , since december 31 , 2011 . growth in aum was driven by net new business of $ 14.5 billion , a year-over-year organic growth rate of 30% ( 30 % ) . institutional investors represented 90% ( 90 % ) of target date and target risk aum , with defined contribution plans accounting for over 80% ( 80 % ) of aum . the remaining 10% ( 10 % ) of target date and target risk aum consisted of retail client investments . flows were driven by defined contribution investments in our lifepath and lifepath retirement income ae offerings , which are qualified investment options under the pension protection act of 2006 . these products utilize a proprietary asset allocation model that seeks to balance risk and return over an investment horizon based on the investor 2019s expected retirement timing . 2022 fiduciary management services accounted for 22% ( 22 % ) , or $ 57.7 billion , of multi-asset aum at december 31 , 2012 and increased $ 7.7 billion during the year due to market and foreign exchange gains . these are complex mandates in which pension plan sponsors retain blackrock to assume responsibility for some or all aspects of plan management . these customized services require strong partnership with the clients 2019 investment staff and trustees in order to tailor investment strategies to meet client-specific risk budgets and return objectives . alternatives component changes in alternatives aum ( dollar amounts in millions ) 12/31/2011 net new business acquired market /fx app ( dep ) 12/31/2012 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nalternatives aum totaled $ 109.8 billion at year-end 2012 , up $ 4.8 billion , or 5% ( 5 % ) , reflecting $ 3.3 billion in portfolio valuation gains and $ 7.0 billion in new assets related to the acquisitions of srpep , which deepened our alternatives footprint in the european and asian markets , and claymore . core alternative outflows of $ 3.9 billion were driven almost exclusively by return of capital to clients . currency net outflows of $ 5.0 billion were partially offset by net inflows of $ 3.5 billion into ishares commodity funds . we continued to make significant investments in our alternatives platform as demonstrated by our acquisition of srpep , successful closes on the renewable power initiative and our build out of an alternatives retail platform , which now stands at nearly $ 10.0 billion in aum . we believe that as alternatives become more conventional and investors adapt their asset allocation strategies to best meet their investment objectives , they will further increase their use of alternative investments to complement core holdings . institutional investors represented 69% ( 69 % ) , or $ 75.8 billion , of alternatives aum with retail and hnw investors comprising an additional 9% ( 9 % ) , or $ 9.7 billion , at year-end 2012 . ishares commodity products accounted for the remaining $ 24.3 billion , or 22% ( 22 % ) , of aum at year-end . alternative clients are geographically diversified with 56% ( 56 % ) , 26% ( 26 % ) , and 18% ( 18 % ) of clients located in the americas , emea and asia-pacific , respectively . the blackrock alternative investors ( 201cbai 201d ) group coordinates our alternative investment efforts , including .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | core | currency and commodities | alternatives | core | currency and commodities | alternatives | core | currency and commodities | alternatives | core | currency and commodities | alternatives | core | currency and commodities | alternatives |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 12/31/2011 | 63647.0 | 41301.0 | 104948.0 | 63647.0 | 41301.0 | 104948.0 | 63647.0 | 41301.0 | 104948.0 | 63647.0 | 41301.0 | 104948.0 | 63647.0 | 41301.0 | 104948.0 |\n| net new business | -3922.0 | -1547.0 | -5469.0 | -3922.0 | -1547.0 | -5469.0 | -3922.0 | -1547.0 | -5469.0 | -3922.0 | -1547.0 | -5469.0 | -3922.0 | -1547.0 | -5469.0 |\n| net acquired | 6166.0 | 860.0 | 7026.0 | 6166.0 | 860.0 | 7026.0 | 6166.0 | 860.0 | 7026.0 | 6166.0 | 860.0 | 7026.0 | 6166.0 | 860.0 | 7026.0 |\n| market /fx app ( dep ) | 2476.0 | 814.0 | 3290.0 | 2476.0 | 814.0 | 3290.0 | 2476.0 | 814.0 | 3290.0 | 2476.0 | 814.0 | 3290.0 | 2476.0 | 814.0 | 3290.0 |\n| 12/31/2012 | 68367.0 | 41428.0 | 109795.0 | 68367.0 | 41428.0 | 109795.0 | 68367.0 | 41428.0 | 109795.0 | 68367.0 | 41428.0 | 109795.0 | 68367.0 | 41428.0 | 109795.0 |', 'question': 'what is the value of alternative assets in 2012?', 'ops': '109795', 'id': 'Single_BLK/2012/page_32.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'challenging investment environment with $ 15.0 billion , or 95% ( 95 % ) , of net inflows coming from institutional clients , with the remaining $ 0.8 billion , or 5% ( 5 % ) , generated by retail and hnw clients . defined contribution plans of institutional clients remained a significant driver of flows . this client group added $ 13.1 billion of net new business in 2012 . during the year , americas net inflows of $ 18.5 billion were partially offset by net outflows of $ 2.6 billion collectively from emea and asia-pacific clients . the company 2019s multi-asset strategies include the following : 2022 asset allocation and balanced products represented 52% ( 52 % ) , or $ 140.2 billion , of multi-asset class aum at year-end , up $ 14.1 billion , with growth in aum driven by net new business of $ 1.6 billion and $ 12.4 billion in market and foreign exchange gains . these strategies combine equity , fixed income and alternative components for investors seeking a tailored solution relative to a specific benchmark and within a risk budget . in certain cases , these strategies seek to minimize downside risk through diversification , derivatives strategies and tactical asset allocation decisions . 2022 target date and target risk products ended the year at $ 69.9 billion , up $ 20.8 billion , or 42% ( 42 % ) , since december 31 , 2011 . growth in aum was driven by net new business of $ 14.5 billion , a year-over-year organic growth rate of 30% ( 30 % ) . institutional investors represented 90% ( 90 % ) of target date and target risk aum , with defined contribution plans accounting for over 80% ( 80 % ) of aum . the remaining 10% ( 10 % ) of target date and target risk aum consisted of retail client investments . flows were driven by defined contribution investments in our lifepath and lifepath retirement income ae offerings , which are qualified investment options under the pension protection act of 2006 . these products utilize a proprietary asset allocation model that seeks to balance risk and return over an investment horizon based on the investor 2019s expected retirement timing . 2022 fiduciary management services accounted for 22% ( 22 % ) , or $ 57.7 billion , of multi-asset aum at december 31 , 2012 and increased $ 7.7 billion during the year due to market and foreign exchange gains . these are complex mandates in which pension plan sponsors retain blackrock to assume responsibility for some or all aspects of plan management . these customized services require strong partnership with the clients 2019 investment staff and trustees in order to tailor investment strategies to meet client-specific risk budgets and return objectives . alternatives component changes in alternatives aum ( dollar amounts in millions ) 12/31/2011 net new business acquired market /fx app ( dep ) 12/31/2012 .', 'doc_post_text': 'alternatives aum totaled $ 109.8 billion at year-end 2012 , up $ 4.8 billion , or 5% ( 5 % ) , reflecting $ 3.3 billion in portfolio valuation gains and $ 7.0 billion in new assets related to the acquisitions of srpep , which deepened our alternatives footprint in the european and asian markets , and claymore . core alternative outflows of $ 3.9 billion were driven almost exclusively by return of capital to clients . currency net outflows of $ 5.0 billion were partially offset by net inflows of $ 3.5 billion into ishares commodity funds . we continued to make significant investments in our alternatives platform as demonstrated by our acquisition of srpep , successful closes on the renewable power initiative and our build out of an alternatives retail platform , which now stands at nearly $ 10.0 billion in aum . we believe that as alternatives become more conventional and investors adapt their asset allocation strategies to best meet their investment objectives , they will further increase their use of alternative investments to complement core holdings . institutional investors represented 69% ( 69 % ) , or $ 75.8 billion , of alternatives aum with retail and hnw investors comprising an additional 9% ( 9 % ) , or $ 9.7 billion , at year-end 2012 . ishares commodity products accounted for the remaining $ 24.3 billion , or 22% ( 22 % ) , of aum at year-end . alternative clients are geographically diversified with 56% ( 56 % ) , 26% ( 26 % ) , and 18% ( 18 % ) of clients located in the americas , emea and asia-pacific , respectively . the blackrock alternative investors ( 201cbai 201d ) group coordinates our alternative investment efforts , including .', 'doc_table': {'12/31/2011': {'core': 63647.0, 'currency and commodities': 41301.0, 'alternatives': 104948.0}, 'net new business': {'core': -3922.0, 'currency and commodities': -1547.0, 'alternatives': -5469.0}, 'net acquired': {'core': 6166.0, 'currency and commodities': 860.0, 'alternatives': 7026.0}, 'market /fx app ( dep )': {'core': 2476.0, 'currency and commodities': 814.0, 'alternatives': 3290.0}, '12/31/2012': {'core': 68367.0, 'currency and commodities': 41428.0, 'alternatives': 109795.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the value of alternative assets in 2012?', 'what is the value in 2011?', 'what is the net change in value?', 'what was the 2011 value?', 'what is the net change over that value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['109795', '104948', '4847', '104948', '4.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['109795', '104948', 'subtract(109795, 104948)', '104948', 'subtract(109795, 104948), divide(#0, 104948)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [109795.0, 104948.0, 4847.0, 104948.0, 0.04618], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 109795.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "38s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 12:25:21 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the value of alternative assets in 2012?\nA1: 109795.0\nQ2: what is the value in 2011?\nA2: 104948.0\nQ3: what is the net change in value?\nA3: 4847.0\nQ4: what was the 2011 value?\nA4: 104948.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nchallenging investment environment with $ 15.0 billion , or 95% ( 95 % ) , of net inflows coming from institutional clients , with the remaining $ 0.8 billion , or 5% ( 5 % ) , generated by retail and hnw clients . defined contribution plans of institutional clients remained a significant driver of flows . this client group added $ 13.1 billion of net new business in 2012 . during the year , americas net inflows of $ 18.5 billion were partially offset by net outflows of $ 2.6 billion collectively from emea and asia-pacific clients . the company 2019s multi-asset strategies include the following : 2022 asset allocation and balanced products represented 52% ( 52 % ) , or $ 140.2 billion , of multi-asset class aum at year-end , up $ 14.1 billion , with growth in aum driven by net new business of $ 1.6 billion and $ 12.4 billion in market and foreign exchange gains . these strategies combine equity , fixed income and alternative components for investors seeking a tailored solution relative to a specific benchmark and within a risk budget . in certain cases , these strategies seek to minimize downside risk through diversification , derivatives strategies and tactical asset allocation decisions . 2022 target date and target risk products ended the year at $ 69.9 billion , up $ 20.8 billion , or 42% ( 42 % ) , since december 31 , 2011 . growth in aum was driven by net new business of $ 14.5 billion , a year-over-year organic growth rate of 30% ( 30 % ) . institutional investors represented 90% ( 90 % ) of target date and target risk aum , with defined contribution plans accounting for over 80% ( 80 % ) of aum . the remaining 10% ( 10 % ) of target date and target risk aum consisted of retail client investments . flows were driven by defined contribution investments in our lifepath and lifepath retirement income ae offerings , which are qualified investment options under the pension protection act of 2006 . these products utilize a proprietary asset allocation model that seeks to balance risk and return over an investment horizon based on the investor 2019s expected retirement timing . 2022 fiduciary management services accounted for 22% ( 22 % ) , or $ 57.7 billion , of multi-asset aum at december 31 , 2012 and increased $ 7.7 billion during the year due to market and foreign exchange gains . these are complex mandates in which pension plan sponsors retain blackrock to assume responsibility for some or all aspects of plan management . these customized services require strong partnership with the clients 2019 investment staff and trustees in order to tailor investment strategies to meet client-specific risk budgets and return objectives . alternatives component changes in alternatives aum ( dollar amounts in millions ) 12/31/2011 net new business acquired market /fx app ( dep ) 12/31/2012 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nalternatives aum totaled $ 109.8 billion at year-end 2012 , up $ 4.8 billion , or 5% ( 5 % ) , reflecting $ 3.3 billion in portfolio valuation gains and $ 7.0 billion in new assets related to the acquisitions of srpep , which deepened our alternatives footprint in the european and asian markets , and claymore . core alternative outflows of $ 3.9 billion were driven almost exclusively by return of capital to clients . currency net outflows of $ 5.0 billion were partially offset by net inflows of $ 3.5 billion into ishares commodity funds . we continued to make significant investments in our alternatives platform as demonstrated by our acquisition of srpep , successful closes on the renewable power initiative and our build out of an alternatives retail platform , which now stands at nearly $ 10.0 billion in aum . we believe that as alternatives become more conventional and investors adapt their asset allocation strategies to best meet their investment objectives , they will further increase their use of alternative investments to complement core holdings . institutional investors represented 69% ( 69 % ) , or $ 75.8 billion , of alternatives aum with retail and hnw investors comprising an additional 9% ( 9 % ) , or $ 9.7 billion , at year-end 2012 . ishares commodity products accounted for the remaining $ 24.3 billion , or 22% ( 22 % ) , of aum at year-end . alternative clients are geographically diversified with 56% ( 56 % ) , 26% ( 26 % ) , and 18% ( 18 % ) of clients located in the americas , emea and asia-pacific , respectively . the blackrock alternative investors ( 201cbai 201d ) group coordinates our alternative investment efforts , including .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | core | currency and commodities | alternatives | core | currency and commodities | alternatives | core | currency and commodities | alternatives | core | currency and commodities | alternatives | core | currency and commodities | alternatives |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 12/31/2011 | 63647.0 | 41301.0 | 104948.0 | 63647.0 | 41301.0 | 104948.0 | 63647.0 | 41301.0 | 104948.0 | 63647.0 | 41301.0 | 104948.0 | 63647.0 | 41301.0 | 104948.0 |\n| net new business | -3922.0 | -1547.0 | -5469.0 | -3922.0 | -1547.0 | -5469.0 | -3922.0 | -1547.0 | -5469.0 | -3922.0 | -1547.0 | -5469.0 | -3922.0 | -1547.0 | -5469.0 |\n| net acquired | 6166.0 | 860.0 | 7026.0 | 6166.0 | 860.0 | 7026.0 | 6166.0 | 860.0 | 7026.0 | 6166.0 | 860.0 | 7026.0 | 6166.0 | 860.0 | 7026.0 |\n| market /fx app ( dep ) | 2476.0 | 814.0 | 3290.0 | 2476.0 | 814.0 | 3290.0 | 2476.0 | 814.0 | 3290.0 | 2476.0 | 814.0 | 3290.0 | 2476.0 | 814.0 | 3290.0 |\n| 12/31/2012 | 68367.0 | 41428.0 | 109795.0 | 68367.0 | 41428.0 | 109795.0 | 68367.0 | 41428.0 | 109795.0 | 68367.0 | 41428.0 | 109795.0 | 68367.0 | 41428.0 | 109795.0 |', 'question': 'what is the net change over that value?', 'ops': 'subtract(109795, 104948), divide(#0, 104948)', 'id': 'Single_BLK/2012/page_32.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'challenging investment environment with $ 15.0 billion , or 95% ( 95 % ) , of net inflows coming from institutional clients , with the remaining $ 0.8 billion , or 5% ( 5 % ) , generated by retail and hnw clients . defined contribution plans of institutional clients remained a significant driver of flows . this client group added $ 13.1 billion of net new business in 2012 . during the year , americas net inflows of $ 18.5 billion were partially offset by net outflows of $ 2.6 billion collectively from emea and asia-pacific clients . the company 2019s multi-asset strategies include the following : 2022 asset allocation and balanced products represented 52% ( 52 % ) , or $ 140.2 billion , of multi-asset class aum at year-end , up $ 14.1 billion , with growth in aum driven by net new business of $ 1.6 billion and $ 12.4 billion in market and foreign exchange gains . these strategies combine equity , fixed income and alternative components for investors seeking a tailored solution relative to a specific benchmark and within a risk budget . in certain cases , these strategies seek to minimize downside risk through diversification , derivatives strategies and tactical asset allocation decisions . 2022 target date and target risk products ended the year at $ 69.9 billion , up $ 20.8 billion , or 42% ( 42 % ) , since december 31 , 2011 . growth in aum was driven by net new business of $ 14.5 billion , a year-over-year organic growth rate of 30% ( 30 % ) . institutional investors represented 90% ( 90 % ) of target date and target risk aum , with defined contribution plans accounting for over 80% ( 80 % ) of aum . the remaining 10% ( 10 % ) of target date and target risk aum consisted of retail client investments . flows were driven by defined contribution investments in our lifepath and lifepath retirement income ae offerings , which are qualified investment options under the pension protection act of 2006 . these products utilize a proprietary asset allocation model that seeks to balance risk and return over an investment horizon based on the investor 2019s expected retirement timing . 2022 fiduciary management services accounted for 22% ( 22 % ) , or $ 57.7 billion , of multi-asset aum at december 31 , 2012 and increased $ 7.7 billion during the year due to market and foreign exchange gains . these are complex mandates in which pension plan sponsors retain blackrock to assume responsibility for some or all aspects of plan management . these customized services require strong partnership with the clients 2019 investment staff and trustees in order to tailor investment strategies to meet client-specific risk budgets and return objectives . alternatives component changes in alternatives aum ( dollar amounts in millions ) 12/31/2011 net new business acquired market /fx app ( dep ) 12/31/2012 .', 'doc_post_text': 'alternatives aum totaled $ 109.8 billion at year-end 2012 , up $ 4.8 billion , or 5% ( 5 % ) , reflecting $ 3.3 billion in portfolio valuation gains and $ 7.0 billion in new assets related to the acquisitions of srpep , which deepened our alternatives footprint in the european and asian markets , and claymore . core alternative outflows of $ 3.9 billion were driven almost exclusively by return of capital to clients . currency net outflows of $ 5.0 billion were partially offset by net inflows of $ 3.5 billion into ishares commodity funds . we continued to make significant investments in our alternatives platform as demonstrated by our acquisition of srpep , successful closes on the renewable power initiative and our build out of an alternatives retail platform , which now stands at nearly $ 10.0 billion in aum . we believe that as alternatives become more conventional and investors adapt their asset allocation strategies to best meet their investment objectives , they will further increase their use of alternative investments to complement core holdings . institutional investors represented 69% ( 69 % ) , or $ 75.8 billion , of alternatives aum with retail and hnw investors comprising an additional 9% ( 9 % ) , or $ 9.7 billion , at year-end 2012 . ishares commodity products accounted for the remaining $ 24.3 billion , or 22% ( 22 % ) , of aum at year-end . alternative clients are geographically diversified with 56% ( 56 % ) , 26% ( 26 % ) , and 18% ( 18 % ) of clients located in the americas , emea and asia-pacific , respectively . the blackrock alternative investors ( 201cbai 201d ) group coordinates our alternative investment efforts , including .', 'doc_table': {'12/31/2011': {'core': 63647.0, 'currency and commodities': 41301.0, 'alternatives': 104948.0}, 'net new business': {'core': -3922.0, 'currency and commodities': -1547.0, 'alternatives': -5469.0}, 'net acquired': {'core': 6166.0, 'currency and commodities': 860.0, 'alternatives': 7026.0}, 'market /fx app ( dep )': {'core': 2476.0, 'currency and commodities': 814.0, 'alternatives': 3290.0}, '12/31/2012': {'core': 68367.0, 'currency and commodities': 41428.0, 'alternatives': 109795.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the value of alternative assets in 2012?', 'what is the value in 2011?', 'what is the net change in value?', 'what was the 2011 value?', 'what is the net change over that value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['109795', '104948', '4847', '104948', '4.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['109795', '104948', 'subtract(109795, 104948)', '104948', 'subtract(109795, 104948), divide(#0, 104948)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [109795.0, 104948.0, 4847.0, 104948.0, 0.04618], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.04618}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "38s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 12:25:21 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfinancial assurance we must provide financial assurance to governmental agencies and a variety of other entities under applicable environmental regulations relating to our landfill operations for capping , closure and post-closure costs , and related to our performance under certain collection , landfill and transfer station contracts . we satisfy these financial assurance requirements by providing surety bonds , letters of credit , or insurance policies ( financial assurance instruments ) , or trust deposits , which are included in restricted cash and marketable securities and other assets in our consolidated balance sheets . the amount of the financial assurance requirements for capping , closure and post-closure costs is determined by applicable state environmental regulations . the financial assurance requirements for capping , closure and post-closure costs may be associated with a portion of the landfill or the entire landfill . generally , states require a third-party engineering specialist to determine the estimated capping , closure and post-closure costs that are used to determine the required amount of financial assurance for a landfill . the amount of financial assurance required can , and generally will , differ from the obligation determined and recorded under u.s . gaap . the amount of the financial assurance requirements related to contract performance varies by contract . additionally , we must provide financial assurance for our insurance program and collateral for certain performance obligations . we do not expect a material increase in financial assurance requirements during 2018 , although the mix of financial assurance instruments may change . these financial assurance instruments are issued in the normal course of business and are not considered indebtedness . because we currently have no liability for the financial assurance instruments , they are not reflected in our consolidated balance sheets ; however , we record capping , closure and post-closure liabilities and insurance liabilities as they are incurred . off-balance sheet arrangements we have no off-balance sheet debt or similar obligations , other than operating leases and financial assurances , which are not classified as debt . we have no transactions or obligations with related parties that are not disclosed , consolidated into or reflected in our reported financial position or results of operations . we have not guaranteed any third-party debt . free cash flow we define free cash flow , which is not a measure determined in accordance with u.s . gaap , as cash provided by operating activities less purchases of property and equipment , plus proceeds from sales of property and equipment , as presented in our consolidated statements of cash flows . the following table calculates our free cash flow for the years ended december 31 , 2017 , 2016 and 2015 ( in millions of dollars ) : .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nfor a discussion of the changes in the components of free cash flow , see our discussion regarding cash flows provided by operating activities and cash flows used in investing activities contained elsewhere in this management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash provided by operating activities | purchases of property and equipment | proceeds from sales of property and equipment | free cash flow | cash provided by operating activities | purchases of property and equipment | proceeds from sales of property and equipment | free cash flow | cash provided by operating activities | purchases of property and equipment | proceeds from sales of property and equipment | free cash flow |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2017 | 1910.7 | -989.8 | 6.1 | 927.0 | 1910.7 | -989.8 | 6.1 | 927.0 | 1910.7 | -989.8 | 6.1 | 927.0 |\n| 2016 | 1847.8 | -927.8 | 9.8 | 929.8 | 1847.8 | -927.8 | 9.8 | 929.8 | 1847.8 | -927.8 | 9.8 | 929.8 |\n| 2015 | 1679.7 | -945.6 | 21.2 | 755.3 | 1679.7 | -945.6 | 21.2 | 755.3 | 1679.7 | -945.6 | 21.2 | 755.3 |', 'question': 'what was the total free cash flow in 2016?', 'ops': '929.8', 'id': 'Single_RSG/2017/page_74.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'financial assurance we must provide financial assurance to governmental agencies and a variety of other entities under applicable environmental regulations relating to our landfill operations for capping , closure and post-closure costs , and related to our performance under certain collection , landfill and transfer station contracts . we satisfy these financial assurance requirements by providing surety bonds , letters of credit , or insurance policies ( financial assurance instruments ) , or trust deposits , which are included in restricted cash and marketable securities and other assets in our consolidated balance sheets . the amount of the financial assurance requirements for capping , closure and post-closure costs is determined by applicable state environmental regulations . the financial assurance requirements for capping , closure and post-closure costs may be associated with a portion of the landfill or the entire landfill . generally , states require a third-party engineering specialist to determine the estimated capping , closure and post-closure costs that are used to determine the required amount of financial assurance for a landfill . the amount of financial assurance required can , and generally will , differ from the obligation determined and recorded under u.s . gaap . the amount of the financial assurance requirements related to contract performance varies by contract . additionally , we must provide financial assurance for our insurance program and collateral for certain performance obligations . we do not expect a material increase in financial assurance requirements during 2018 , although the mix of financial assurance instruments may change . these financial assurance instruments are issued in the normal course of business and are not considered indebtedness . because we currently have no liability for the financial assurance instruments , they are not reflected in our consolidated balance sheets ; however , we record capping , closure and post-closure liabilities and insurance liabilities as they are incurred . off-balance sheet arrangements we have no off-balance sheet debt or similar obligations , other than operating leases and financial assurances , which are not classified as debt . we have no transactions or obligations with related parties that are not disclosed , consolidated into or reflected in our reported financial position or results of operations . we have not guaranteed any third-party debt . free cash flow we define free cash flow , which is not a measure determined in accordance with u.s . gaap , as cash provided by operating activities less purchases of property and equipment , plus proceeds from sales of property and equipment , as presented in our consolidated statements of cash flows . the following table calculates our free cash flow for the years ended december 31 , 2017 , 2016 and 2015 ( in millions of dollars ) : .', 'doc_post_text': 'for a discussion of the changes in the components of free cash flow , see our discussion regarding cash flows provided by operating activities and cash flows used in investing activities contained elsewhere in this management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations. .', 'doc_table': {'2017': {'cash provided by operating activities': 1910.7, 'purchases of property and equipment': -989.8, 'proceeds from sales of property and equipment': 6.1, 'free cash flow': 927.0}, '2016': {'cash provided by operating activities': 1847.8, 'purchases of property and equipment': -927.8, 'proceeds from sales of property and equipment': 9.8, 'free cash flow': 929.8}, '2015': {'cash provided by operating activities': 1679.7, 'purchases of property and equipment': -945.6, 'proceeds from sales of property and equipment': 21.2, 'free cash flow': 755.3}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total free cash flow in 2016?', 'and what was it in 2015?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the free cash flow in 2015, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['929.8', '755.3', '174.5', '23.1%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['929.8', '755.3', 'subtract(929.8, 755.3)', 'subtract(929.8, 755.3), divide(#0, 755.3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [929.8, 755.3, 174.5, 0.23103], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 929.8}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "38s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 12:25:22 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total number of properties subject to triple-net leases and seniors housing operating housing?\nA1: 1016.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nitem 7 . management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations the following discussion and analysis is based primarily on the consolidated financial statements of welltower inc . presented in conformity with u.s . generally accepted accounting principles ( 201cu.s . gaap 201d ) for the periods presented and should be read together with the notes thereto contained in this annual report on form 10-k . other important factors are identified in 201citem 1 2014 business 201d and 201citem 1a 2014 risk factors 201d above . executive summary company overview welltower inc . ( nyse:well ) , an s&p 500 company headquartered in toledo , ohio , is driving the transformation of health care infrastructure . the company invests with leading seniors housing operators , post- acute providers and health systems to fund the real estate and infrastructure needed to scale innovative care delivery models and improve people 2019s wellness and overall health care experience . welltowertm , a real estate investment trust ( 201creit 201d ) , owns interests in properties concentrated in major , high-growth markets in the united states ( 201cu.s . 201d ) , canada and the united kingdom ( 201cu.k . 201d ) , consisting of seniors housing and post-acute communities and outpatient medical properties . our capital programs , when combined with comprehensive planning , development and property management services , make us a single-source solution for acquiring , planning , developing , managing , repositioning and monetizing real estate assets . the following table summarizes our consolidated portfolio for the year ended december 31 , 2017 ( dollars in thousands ) : type of property noi ( 1 ) percentage of number of properties .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( 1 ) represents consolidated noi and excludes our share of investments in unconsolidated entities . entities in which we have a joint venture with a minority partner are shown at 100% ( 100 % ) of the joint venture amount . see non-gaap financial measures for additional information and reconciliation . business strategy our primary objectives are to protect stockholder capital and enhance stockholder value . we seek to pay consistent cash dividends to stockholders and create opportunities to increase dividend payments to stockholders as a result of annual increases in net operating income and portfolio growth . to meet these objectives , we invest across the full spectrum of seniors housing and health care real estate and diversify our investment portfolio by property type , relationship and geographic location . substantially all of our revenues are derived from operating lease rentals , resident fees/services , and interest earned on outstanding loans receivable . these items represent our primary sources of liquidity to fund distributions and depend upon the continued ability of our obligors to make contractual rent and interest payments to us and the profitability of our operating properties . to the extent that our obligors/partners experience operating difficulties and become unable to generate sufficient cash to make payments or operating distributions to us , there could be a material adverse impact on our consolidated results of operations , liquidity and/or financial condition . to mitigate this risk , we monitor our investments through a variety of methods determined by the type of property . our asset management process for seniors housing properties generally includes review of monthly financial statements and other operating data for each property , review of obligor/ partner creditworthiness , property inspections , and review of covenant compliance relating to licensure , real estate taxes , letters of credit and other collateral . our internal property management division manages and monitors the outpatient medical portfolio with a comprehensive process including review of tenant relations .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | triple-net | seniors housing operating | outpatient medical | totals | triple-net | seniors housing operating | outpatient medical | totals | triple-net | seniors housing operating | outpatient medical | totals |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| noi ( 1 ) | 967084.0 | 880026.0 | 384068.0 | 2231178.0 | 967084.0 | 880026.0 | 384068.0 | 2231178.0 | 967084.0 | 880026.0 | 384068.0 | 2231178.0 |\n| percentage of noi | -43.3 | -39.5 | -17.2 | -100.0 | -43.3 | -39.5 | -17.2 | -100.0 | -43.3 | -39.5 | -17.2 | -100.0 |\n| number of properties | 573.0 | 443.0 | 270.0 | 1286.0 | 573.0 | 443.0 | 270.0 | 1286.0 | 573.0 | 443.0 | 270.0 | 1286.0 |', 'question': 'what was the portion of the total number of properties is related to triple-net?', 'ops': 'divide(573, 1286)', 'id': 'Double_WELL/2017/page_48.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'item 7 . management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations the following discussion and analysis is based primarily on the consolidated financial statements of welltower inc . presented in conformity with u.s . generally accepted accounting principles ( 201cu.s . gaap 201d ) for the periods presented and should be read together with the notes thereto contained in this annual report on form 10-k . other important factors are identified in 201citem 1 2014 business 201d and 201citem 1a 2014 risk factors 201d above . executive summary company overview welltower inc . ( nyse:well ) , an s&p 500 company headquartered in toledo , ohio , is driving the transformation of health care infrastructure . the company invests with leading seniors housing operators , post- acute providers and health systems to fund the real estate and infrastructure needed to scale innovative care delivery models and improve people 2019s wellness and overall health care experience . welltowertm , a real estate investment trust ( 201creit 201d ) , owns interests in properties concentrated in major , high-growth markets in the united states ( 201cu.s . 201d ) , canada and the united kingdom ( 201cu.k . 201d ) , consisting of seniors housing and post-acute communities and outpatient medical properties . our capital programs , when combined with comprehensive planning , development and property management services , make us a single-source solution for acquiring , planning , developing , managing , repositioning and monetizing real estate assets . the following table summarizes our consolidated portfolio for the year ended december 31 , 2017 ( dollars in thousands ) : type of property noi ( 1 ) percentage of number of properties .', 'doc_post_text': '( 1 ) represents consolidated noi and excludes our share of investments in unconsolidated entities . entities in which we have a joint venture with a minority partner are shown at 100% ( 100 % ) of the joint venture amount . see non-gaap financial measures for additional information and reconciliation . business strategy our primary objectives are to protect stockholder capital and enhance stockholder value . we seek to pay consistent cash dividends to stockholders and create opportunities to increase dividend payments to stockholders as a result of annual increases in net operating income and portfolio growth . to meet these objectives , we invest across the full spectrum of seniors housing and health care real estate and diversify our investment portfolio by property type , relationship and geographic location . substantially all of our revenues are derived from operating lease rentals , resident fees/services , and interest earned on outstanding loans receivable . these items represent our primary sources of liquidity to fund distributions and depend upon the continued ability of our obligors to make contractual rent and interest payments to us and the profitability of our operating properties . to the extent that our obligors/partners experience operating difficulties and become unable to generate sufficient cash to make payments or operating distributions to us , there could be a material adverse impact on our consolidated results of operations , liquidity and/or financial condition . to mitigate this risk , we monitor our investments through a variety of methods determined by the type of property . our asset management process for seniors housing properties generally includes review of monthly financial statements and other operating data for each property , review of obligor/ partner creditworthiness , property inspections , and review of covenant compliance relating to licensure , real estate taxes , letters of credit and other collateral . our internal property management division manages and monitors the outpatient medical portfolio with a comprehensive process including review of tenant relations .', 'doc_table': {'noi ( 1 )': {'triple-net': 967084.0, 'seniors housing operating': 880026.0, 'outpatient medical': 384068.0, 'totals': 2231178.0}, 'percentage of noi': {'triple-net': -43.3, 'seniors housing operating': -39.5, 'outpatient medical': -17.2, 'totals': -100.0}, 'number of properties': {'triple-net': 573.0, 'seniors housing operating': 443.0, 'outpatient medical': 270.0, 'totals': 1286.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total number of properties subject to triple-net leases and seniors housing operating housing?', 'what was the portion of the total number of properties is related to triple-net?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1016', '44.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(573, 443)', 'divide(573, 1286)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1016.0, 0.44557], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.44557}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "38s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 12:25:22 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the net revenue in 2018?\nA1: 8250.0\nQ2: what about in 2017?\nA2: 7238.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nthe goldman sachs group , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s discussion and analysis net revenues in equities were $ 6.60 billion , 4% ( 4 % ) lower than 2016 , primarily due to lower commissions and fees , reflecting a decline in our listed cash equity volumes in the u.s . market volumes in the u.s . also declined . in addition , net revenues in equities client execution were lower , reflecting lower net revenues in derivatives , partially offset by higher net revenues in cash products . net revenues in securities services were essentially unchanged . operating expenses were $ 9.69 billion for 2017 , essentially unchanged compared with 2016 , due to decreased compensation and benefits expenses , reflecting lower net revenues , largely offset by increased technology expenses , reflecting higher expenses related to cloud-based services and software depreciation , and increased consulting costs . pre-tax earnings were $ 2.21 billion in 2017 , 54% ( 54 % ) lower than 2016 . investing & lending investing & lending includes our investing activities and the origination of loans , including our relationship lending activities , to provide financing to clients . these investments and loans are typically longer-term in nature . we make investments , some of which are consolidated , including through our merchant banking business and our special situations group , in debt securities and loans , public and private equity securities , infrastructure and real estate entities . some of these investments are made indirectly through funds that we manage . we also make unsecured loans through our digital platform , marcus : by goldman sachs and secured loans through our digital platform , goldman sachs private bank select . the table below presents the operating results of our investing & lending segment. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\noperating environment . during 2018 , our investments in private equities benefited from company-specific events , including sales , and strong corporate performance , while investments in public equities reflected losses , as global equity prices generally decreased . results for our investments in debt securities and loans reflected continued growth in loans receivables , resulting in higher net interest income . if macroeconomic concerns negatively affect corporate performance or the origination of loans , or if global equity prices continue to decline , net revenues in investing & lending would likely be negatively impacted . during 2017 , generally higher global equity prices and tighter credit spreads contributed to a favorable environment for our equity and debt investments . results also reflected net gains from company-specific events , including sales , and corporate performance . 2018 versus 2017 . net revenues in investing & lending were $ 8.25 billion for 2018 , 14% ( 14 % ) higher than 2017 . net revenues in equity securities were $ 4.46 billion , 3% ( 3 % ) lower than 2017 , reflecting net losses from investments in public equities ( 2018 included $ 183 million of net losses ) compared with net gains in the prior year , partially offset by significantly higher net gains from investments in private equities ( 2018 included $ 4.64 billion of net gains ) , driven by company-specific events , including sales , and corporate performance . for 2018 , 60% ( 60 % ) of the net revenues in equity securities were generated from corporate investments and 40% ( 40 % ) were generated from real estate . net revenues in debt securities and loans were $ 3.80 billion , 43% ( 43 % ) higher than 2017 , primarily driven by significantly higher net interest income . 2018 included net interest income of approximately $ 2.70 billion compared with approximately $ 1.80 billion in 2017 . provision for credit losses was $ 674 million for 2018 , compared with $ 657 million for 2017 , as the higher provision for credit losses primarily related to consumer loan growth in 2018 was partially offset by an impairment of approximately $ 130 million on a secured loan in 2017 . operating expenses were $ 3.37 billion for 2018 , 20% ( 20 % ) higher than 2017 , primarily due to increased expenses related to consolidated investments and our digital lending and deposit platform , and increased compensation and benefits expenses , reflecting higher net revenues . pre-tax earnings were $ 4.21 billion in 2018 , 11% ( 11 % ) higher than 2017 versus 2016 . net revenues in investing & lending were $ 7.24 billion for 2017 , 70% ( 70 % ) higher than 2016 . net revenues in equity securities were $ 4.58 billion , 78% ( 78 % ) higher than 2016 , primarily reflecting a significant increase in net gains from private equities ( 2017 included $ 3.82 billion of net gains ) , which were positively impacted by company-specific events and corporate performance . in addition , net gains from public equities ( 2017 included $ 762 million of net gains ) were significantly higher , as global equity prices increased during the year . for 2017 , 64% ( 64 % ) of the net revenues in equity securities were generated from corporate investments and 36% ( 36 % ) were generated from real estate . net revenues in debt securities and loans were $ 2.66 billion , 57% ( 57 % ) higher than 2016 , reflecting significantly higher net interest income ( 2017 included approximately $ 1.80 billion of net interest income ) . 60 goldman sachs 2018 form 10-k .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | equity securities | debt securities and loans | total net revenues | provision for credit losses | operating expenses | pre-taxearnings | equity securities | debt securities and loans | total net revenues | provision for credit losses | operating expenses | pre-taxearnings | equity securities | debt securities and loans | total net revenues | provision for credit losses | operating expenses | pre-taxearnings |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| year ended december 2018 | 4455.0 | 3795.0 | 8250.0 | 674.0 | 3365.0 | 4211.0 | 4455.0 | 3795.0 | 8250.0 | 674.0 | 3365.0 | 4211.0 | 4455.0 | 3795.0 | 8250.0 | 674.0 | 3365.0 | 4211.0 |\n| year ended december 2017 | 4578.0 | 2660.0 | 7238.0 | 657.0 | 2796.0 | 3785.0 | 4578.0 | 2660.0 | 7238.0 | 657.0 | 2796.0 | 3785.0 | 4578.0 | 2660.0 | 7238.0 | 657.0 | 2796.0 | 3785.0 |\n| year ended december 2016 | 2573.0 | 1689.0 | 4262.0 | 182.0 | 2386.0 | 1694.0 | 2573.0 | 1689.0 | 4262.0 | 182.0 | 2386.0 | 1694.0 | 2573.0 | 1689.0 | 4262.0 | 182.0 | 2386.0 | 1694.0 |', 'question': 'what is the net change in revenue?', 'ops': 'subtract(8250, 7238)', 'id': 'Single_GS/2018/page_76.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'the goldman sachs group , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s discussion and analysis net revenues in equities were $ 6.60 billion , 4% ( 4 % ) lower than 2016 , primarily due to lower commissions and fees , reflecting a decline in our listed cash equity volumes in the u.s . market volumes in the u.s . also declined . in addition , net revenues in equities client execution were lower , reflecting lower net revenues in derivatives , partially offset by higher net revenues in cash products . net revenues in securities services were essentially unchanged . operating expenses were $ 9.69 billion for 2017 , essentially unchanged compared with 2016 , due to decreased compensation and benefits expenses , reflecting lower net revenues , largely offset by increased technology expenses , reflecting higher expenses related to cloud-based services and software depreciation , and increased consulting costs . pre-tax earnings were $ 2.21 billion in 2017 , 54% ( 54 % ) lower than 2016 . investing & lending investing & lending includes our investing activities and the origination of loans , including our relationship lending activities , to provide financing to clients . these investments and loans are typically longer-term in nature . we make investments , some of which are consolidated , including through our merchant banking business and our special situations group , in debt securities and loans , public and private equity securities , infrastructure and real estate entities . some of these investments are made indirectly through funds that we manage . we also make unsecured loans through our digital platform , marcus : by goldman sachs and secured loans through our digital platform , goldman sachs private bank select . the table below presents the operating results of our investing & lending segment. .', 'doc_post_text': 'operating environment . during 2018 , our investments in private equities benefited from company-specific events , including sales , and strong corporate performance , while investments in public equities reflected losses , as global equity prices generally decreased . results for our investments in debt securities and loans reflected continued growth in loans receivables , resulting in higher net interest income . if macroeconomic concerns negatively affect corporate performance or the origination of loans , or if global equity prices continue to decline , net revenues in investing & lending would likely be negatively impacted . during 2017 , generally higher global equity prices and tighter credit spreads contributed to a favorable environment for our equity and debt investments . results also reflected net gains from company-specific events , including sales , and corporate performance . 2018 versus 2017 . net revenues in investing & lending were $ 8.25 billion for 2018 , 14% ( 14 % ) higher than 2017 . net revenues in equity securities were $ 4.46 billion , 3% ( 3 % ) lower than 2017 , reflecting net losses from investments in public equities ( 2018 included $ 183 million of net losses ) compared with net gains in the prior year , partially offset by significantly higher net gains from investments in private equities ( 2018 included $ 4.64 billion of net gains ) , driven by company-specific events , including sales , and corporate performance . for 2018 , 60% ( 60 % ) of the net revenues in equity securities were generated from corporate investments and 40% ( 40 % ) were generated from real estate . net revenues in debt securities and loans were $ 3.80 billion , 43% ( 43 % ) higher than 2017 , primarily driven by significantly higher net interest income . 2018 included net interest income of approximately $ 2.70 billion compared with approximately $ 1.80 billion in 2017 . provision for credit losses was $ 674 million for 2018 , compared with $ 657 million for 2017 , as the higher provision for credit losses primarily related to consumer loan growth in 2018 was partially offset by an impairment of approximately $ 130 million on a secured loan in 2017 . operating expenses were $ 3.37 billion for 2018 , 20% ( 20 % ) higher than 2017 , primarily due to increased expenses related to consolidated investments and our digital lending and deposit platform , and increased compensation and benefits expenses , reflecting higher net revenues . pre-tax earnings were $ 4.21 billion in 2018 , 11% ( 11 % ) higher than 2017 versus 2016 . net revenues in investing & lending were $ 7.24 billion for 2017 , 70% ( 70 % ) higher than 2016 . net revenues in equity securities were $ 4.58 billion , 78% ( 78 % ) higher than 2016 , primarily reflecting a significant increase in net gains from private equities ( 2017 included $ 3.82 billion of net gains ) , which were positively impacted by company-specific events and corporate performance . in addition , net gains from public equities ( 2017 included $ 762 million of net gains ) were significantly higher , as global equity prices increased during the year . for 2017 , 64% ( 64 % ) of the net revenues in equity securities were generated from corporate investments and 36% ( 36 % ) were generated from real estate . net revenues in debt securities and loans were $ 2.66 billion , 57% ( 57 % ) higher than 2016 , reflecting significantly higher net interest income ( 2017 included approximately $ 1.80 billion of net interest income ) . 60 goldman sachs 2018 form 10-k .', 'doc_table': {'year ended december 2018': {'equity securities': 4455.0, 'debt securities and loans': 3795.0, 'total net revenues': 8250.0, 'provision for credit losses': 674.0, 'operating expenses': 3365.0, 'pre-taxearnings': 4211.0}, 'year ended december 2017': {'equity securities': 4578.0, 'debt securities and loans': 2660.0, 'total net revenues': 7238.0, 'provision for credit losses': 657.0, 'operating expenses': 2796.0, 'pre-taxearnings': 3785.0}, 'year ended december 2016': {'equity securities': 2573.0, 'debt securities and loans': 1689.0, 'total net revenues': 4262.0, 'provision for credit losses': 182.0, 'operating expenses': 2386.0, 'pre-taxearnings': 1694.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net revenue in 2018?', 'what about in 2017?', 'what is the net change in revenue?', 'what is the net revenue in 2017?', 'what growth rate does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['8250', '7238', '1012', '7238', '14.0%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['8250', '7238', 'subtract(8250, 7238)', '7238', 'subtract(8250, 7238), divide(#0, 7238)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [8250.0, 7238.0, 1012.0, 7238.0, 0.13982], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1012.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "38s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 12:25:22 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value of loews common stock in 2012?\nA1: 108.91', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nitem 5 . market for the registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following graph compares annual total return of our common stock , the standard & poor 2019s 500 composite stock index ( 201cs&p 500 index 201d ) and our peer group ( 201cloews peer group 201d ) for the five years ended december 31 , 2016 . the graph assumes that the value of the investment in our common stock , the s&p 500 index and the loews peer group was $ 100 on december 31 , 2011 and that all dividends were reinvested. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( a ) the loews peer group consists of the following companies that are industry competitors of our principal operating subsidiaries : chubb limited ( name change from ace limited after it acquired the chubb corporation on january 15 , 2016 ) , w.r . berkley corporation , the chubb corporation ( included through january 15 , 2016 when it was acquired by ace limited ) , energy transfer partners l.p. , ensco plc , the hartford financial services group , inc. , kinder morgan energy partners , l.p . ( included through november 26 , 2014 when it was acquired by kinder morgan inc. ) , noble corporation , spectra energy corp , transocean ltd . and the travelers companies , inc . dividend information we have paid quarterly cash dividends in each year since 1967 . regular dividends of $ 0.0625 per share of loews common stock were paid in each calendar quarter of 2016 and 2015. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | loews common stock | s&p 500 index | loews peer group ( a ) | loews common stock | s&p 500 index | loews peer group ( a ) | loews common stock | s&p 500 index | loews peer group ( a ) | loews common stock | s&p 500 index | loews peer group ( a ) | loews common stock | s&p 500 index | loews peer group ( a ) | loews common stock | s&p 500 index | loews peer group ( a ) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2011 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| 2012 | 108.91 | 116.0 | 113.39 | 108.91 | 116.0 | 113.39 | 108.91 | 116.0 | 113.39 | 108.91 | 116.0 | 113.39 | 108.91 | 116.0 | 113.39 | 108.91 | 116.0 | 113.39 |\n| 2013 | 129.64 | 153.57 | 142.85 | 129.64 | 153.57 | 142.85 | 129.64 | 153.57 | 142.85 | 129.64 | 153.57 | 142.85 | 129.64 | 153.57 | 142.85 | 129.64 | 153.57 | 142.85 |\n| 2014 | 113.59 | 174.6 | 150.44 | 113.59 | 174.6 | 150.44 | 113.59 | 174.6 | 150.44 | 113.59 | 174.6 | 150.44 | 113.59 | 174.6 | 150.44 | 113.59 | 174.6 | 150.44 |\n| 2015 | 104.47 | 177.01 | 142.44 | 104.47 | 177.01 | 142.44 | 104.47 | 177.01 | 142.44 | 104.47 | 177.01 | 142.44 | 104.47 | 177.01 | 142.44 | 104.47 | 177.01 | 142.44 |\n| 2016 | 128.19 | 198.18 | 165.34 | 128.19 | 198.18 | 165.34 | 128.19 | 198.18 | 165.34 | 128.19 | 198.18 | 165.34 | 128.19 | 198.18 | 165.34 | 128.19 | 198.18 | 165.34 |', 'question': 'what is that less 100?', 'ops': 'subtract(108.91, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_L/2016/page_62.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'item 5 . market for the registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following graph compares annual total return of our common stock , the standard & poor 2019s 500 composite stock index ( 201cs&p 500 index 201d ) and our peer group ( 201cloews peer group 201d ) for the five years ended december 31 , 2016 . the graph assumes that the value of the investment in our common stock , the s&p 500 index and the loews peer group was $ 100 on december 31 , 2011 and that all dividends were reinvested. .', 'doc_post_text': '( a ) the loews peer group consists of the following companies that are industry competitors of our principal operating subsidiaries : chubb limited ( name change from ace limited after it acquired the chubb corporation on january 15 , 2016 ) , w.r . berkley corporation , the chubb corporation ( included through january 15 , 2016 when it was acquired by ace limited ) , energy transfer partners l.p. , ensco plc , the hartford financial services group , inc. , kinder morgan energy partners , l.p . ( included through november 26 , 2014 when it was acquired by kinder morgan inc. ) , noble corporation , spectra energy corp , transocean ltd . and the travelers companies , inc . dividend information we have paid quarterly cash dividends in each year since 1967 . regular dividends of $ 0.0625 per share of loews common stock were paid in each calendar quarter of 2016 and 2015. .', 'doc_table': {'2011': {'loews common stock': 100.0, 's&p 500 index': 100.0, 'loews peer group ( a )': 100.0}, '2012': {'loews common stock': 108.91, 's&p 500 index': 116.0, 'loews peer group ( a )': 113.39}, '2013': {'loews common stock': 129.64, 's&p 500 index': 153.57, 'loews peer group ( a )': 142.85}, '2014': {'loews common stock': 113.59, 's&p 500 index': 174.6, 'loews peer group ( a )': 150.44}, '2015': {'loews common stock': 104.47, 's&p 500 index': 177.01, 'loews peer group ( a )': 142.44}, '2016': {'loews common stock': 128.19, 's&p 500 index': 198.18, 'loews peer group ( a )': 165.34}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of loews common stock in 2012?', 'what is that less 100?', 'what is the change divided by 100?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['108.91', '8.91', '8.9%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['108.91', 'subtract(108.91, const_100)', 'subtract(108.91, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [108.91, 8.91, 0.0891], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 8.91}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "38s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 12:25:22 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: in 2006, what was the amount acquired by the company of intangible assets, in thousands?\nA1: 6000.0\nQ2: and how much did this amount represent in relation to the total purchase price in that year?\nA2: 0.26604', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nnote 3 . business combinations purchase combinations . during the fiscal years presented , the company made a number of purchase acquisitions . for each acquisition , the excess of the purchase price over the estimated value of the net tangible assets acquired was allocated to various intangible assets , consisting primarily of developed technology , customer and contract-related assets and goodwill . the values assigned to developed technologies related to each acquisition were based upon future discounted cash flows related to the existing products 2019 projected income streams . goodwill , representing the excess of the purchase consideration over the fair value of tangible and identifiable intangible assets acquired in the acquisitions , will not to be amortized . goodwill is not deductible for tax purposes . the amounts allocated to purchased in-process research and developments were determined through established valuation techniques in the high-technology industry and were expensed upon acquisition because technological feasibility had not been established and no future alternative uses existed . the consolidated financial statements include the operating results of each business from the date of acquisition . the company does not consider these acquisitions to be material to its results of operations and is therefore not presenting pro forma statements of operations for the fiscal years ended october 31 , 2006 , 2005 and 2004 . fiscal 2006 acquisitions sigma-c software ag ( sigma-c ) the company acquired sigma-c on august 16 , 2006 in an all-cash transaction . reasons for the acquisition . sigma-c provides simulation software that allows semiconductor manufacturers and their suppliers to develop and optimize process sequences for optical lithography , e-beam lithography and next-generation lithography technologies . the company believes the acquisition will enable a tighter integration between design and manufacturing tools , allowing the company 2019s customers to perform more accurate design layout analysis with 3d lithography simulation and better understand issues that affect ic wafer yields . purchase price . the company paid $ 20.5 million in cash for the outstanding shares and shareholder notes of which $ 2.05 million was deposited with an escrow agent and will be paid per the escrow agreement . the company believes that the escrow amount will be paid . the total purchase consideration consisted of: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nacquisition-related costs of $ 2.1 million consist primarily of legal , tax and accounting fees , estimated facilities closure costs and employee termination costs . as of october 31 , 2006 , the company had paid $ 0.9 million of the acquisition-related costs . the $ 1.2 million balance remaining at october 31 , 2006 primarily consists of legal , tax and accounting fees , estimated facilities closure costs and employee termination costs . assets acquired . the company performed a preliminary valuation and allocated the total purchase consideration to assets and liabilities . the company acquired $ 6.0 million of intangible assets consisting of $ 3.9 million in existing technology , $ 1.9 million in customer relationships and $ 0.2 million in trade names to be amortized over five years . the company also acquired assets of $ 3.9 million and assumed liabilities of $ 5.1 million as result of this transaction . goodwill , representing the excess of the purchase price over the .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash paid | acquisition-related costs | total purchase price |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| ( in thousands ) | 20500.0 | 2053.0 | 22553.0 |', 'question': 'considering that same amount of intangible assets, what percentage of it was for customer relationships?', 'ops': 'divide(1.9, const_6)', 'id': 'Double_SNPS/2006/page_67.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'note 3 . business combinations purchase combinations . during the fiscal years presented , the company made a number of purchase acquisitions . for each acquisition , the excess of the purchase price over the estimated value of the net tangible assets acquired was allocated to various intangible assets , consisting primarily of developed technology , customer and contract-related assets and goodwill . the values assigned to developed technologies related to each acquisition were based upon future discounted cash flows related to the existing products 2019 projected income streams . goodwill , representing the excess of the purchase consideration over the fair value of tangible and identifiable intangible assets acquired in the acquisitions , will not to be amortized . goodwill is not deductible for tax purposes . the amounts allocated to purchased in-process research and developments were determined through established valuation techniques in the high-technology industry and were expensed upon acquisition because technological feasibility had not been established and no future alternative uses existed . the consolidated financial statements include the operating results of each business from the date of acquisition . the company does not consider these acquisitions to be material to its results of operations and is therefore not presenting pro forma statements of operations for the fiscal years ended october 31 , 2006 , 2005 and 2004 . fiscal 2006 acquisitions sigma-c software ag ( sigma-c ) the company acquired sigma-c on august 16 , 2006 in an all-cash transaction . reasons for the acquisition . sigma-c provides simulation software that allows semiconductor manufacturers and their suppliers to develop and optimize process sequences for optical lithography , e-beam lithography and next-generation lithography technologies . the company believes the acquisition will enable a tighter integration between design and manufacturing tools , allowing the company 2019s customers to perform more accurate design layout analysis with 3d lithography simulation and better understand issues that affect ic wafer yields . purchase price . the company paid $ 20.5 million in cash for the outstanding shares and shareholder notes of which $ 2.05 million was deposited with an escrow agent and will be paid per the escrow agreement . the company believes that the escrow amount will be paid . the total purchase consideration consisted of: .', 'doc_post_text': 'acquisition-related costs of $ 2.1 million consist primarily of legal , tax and accounting fees , estimated facilities closure costs and employee termination costs . as of october 31 , 2006 , the company had paid $ 0.9 million of the acquisition-related costs . the $ 1.2 million balance remaining at october 31 , 2006 primarily consists of legal , tax and accounting fees , estimated facilities closure costs and employee termination costs . assets acquired . the company performed a preliminary valuation and allocated the total purchase consideration to assets and liabilities . the company acquired $ 6.0 million of intangible assets consisting of $ 3.9 million in existing technology , $ 1.9 million in customer relationships and $ 0.2 million in trade names to be amortized over five years . the company also acquired assets of $ 3.9 million and assumed liabilities of $ 5.1 million as result of this transaction . goodwill , representing the excess of the purchase price over the .', 'doc_table': {'( in thousands )': {'cash paid': 20500.0, 'acquisition-related costs': 2053.0, 'total purchase price': 22553.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['in 2006, what was the amount acquired by the company of intangible assets, in thousands?', 'and how much did this amount represent in relation to the total purchase price in that year?', 'considering that same amount of intangible assets, what percentage of it was for customer relationships?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['6000', '27%', '32%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(const_6, const_1000)', 'multiply(const_6, const_1000), divide(#0, 22553)', 'divide(1.9, const_6)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [6000.0, 0.26604, 0.31667], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.31667}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "38s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 12:25:22 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the change in value of comprehensive income attributable to nbc universal from 2014 to 2015?\nA1: 389.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nnbcuniversal media , llc consolidated statement of comprehensive income .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nsee accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements . 147 comcast 2015 annual report on form 10-k .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net income | deferred gains ( losses ) on cash flow hedges net | employee benefit obligations net | currency translation adjustments net | comprehensive income | net ( income ) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests | other comprehensive ( income ) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests | comprehensive income attributable to nbcuniversal | net income | deferred gains ( losses ) on cash flow hedges net | employee benefit obligations net | currency translation adjustments net | comprehensive income | net ( income ) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests | other comprehensive ( income ) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests | comprehensive income attributable to nbcuniversal | net income | deferred gains ( losses ) on cash flow hedges net | employee benefit obligations net | currency translation adjustments net | comprehensive income | net ( income ) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests | other comprehensive ( income ) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests | comprehensive income attributable to nbcuniversal |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2015 | 3624.0 | -21.0 | 60.0 | -121.0 | 3542.0 | -210.0 | 29.0 | 3361.0 | 3624.0 | -21.0 | 60.0 | -121.0 | 3542.0 | -210.0 | 29.0 | 3361.0 | 3624.0 | -21.0 | 60.0 | -121.0 | 3542.0 | -210.0 | 29.0 | 3361.0 |\n| 2014 | 3297.0 | 25.0 | -106.0 | -62.0 | 3154.0 | -182.0 | 2014.0 | 2972.0 | 3297.0 | 25.0 | -106.0 | -62.0 | 3154.0 | -182.0 | 2014.0 | 2972.0 | 3297.0 | 25.0 | -106.0 | -62.0 | 3154.0 | -182.0 | 2014.0 | 2972.0 |\n| 2013 | 2122.0 | -5.0 | 95.0 | -41.0 | 2171.0 | -154.0 | 2014.0 | 2017.0 | 2122.0 | -5.0 | 95.0 | -41.0 | 2171.0 | -154.0 | 2014.0 | 2017.0 | 2122.0 | -5.0 | 95.0 | -41.0 | 2171.0 | -154.0 | 2014.0 | 2017.0 |', 'question': 'what is the percent change for the year?', 'ops': 'subtract(3361, 2972), divide(#0, 2972)', 'id': 'Single_CMCSA/2015/page_150.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'nbcuniversal media , llc consolidated statement of comprehensive income .', 'doc_post_text': 'see accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements . 147 comcast 2015 annual report on form 10-k .', 'doc_table': {'2015': {'net income': 3624.0, 'deferred gains ( losses ) on cash flow hedges net': -21.0, 'employee benefit obligations net': 60.0, 'currency translation adjustments net': -121.0, 'comprehensive income': 3542.0, 'net ( income ) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests': -210.0, 'other comprehensive ( income ) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests': 29.0, 'comprehensive income attributable to nbcuniversal': 3361.0}, '2014': {'net income': 3297.0, 'deferred gains ( losses ) on cash flow hedges net': 25.0, 'employee benefit obligations net': -106.0, 'currency translation adjustments net': -62.0, 'comprehensive income': 3154.0, 'net ( income ) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests': -182.0, 'other comprehensive ( income ) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests': 2014.0, 'comprehensive income attributable to nbcuniversal': 2972.0}, '2013': {'net income': 2122.0, 'deferred gains ( losses ) on cash flow hedges net': -5.0, 'employee benefit obligations net': 95.0, 'currency translation adjustments net': -41.0, 'comprehensive income': 2171.0, 'net ( income ) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests': -154.0, 'other comprehensive ( income ) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests': 2014.0, 'comprehensive income attributable to nbcuniversal': 2017.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the change in value of comprehensive income attributable to nbc universal from 2014 to 2015?', 'what is the percent change for the year?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['389', '13%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(3361, 2972)', 'subtract(3361, 2972), divide(#0, 2972)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [389.0, 0.13089], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.13089}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "37s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 12:25:22 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the number of electric customers in 2007?\nA1: 132000.0\nQ2: and what was it in 2006?\nA2: 95000.0\nQ3: what was, then, the change over the year?\nA3: 37000.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis 2007 compared to 2006 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2007 to 2006 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe fuel recovery variance is due to the inclusion of grand gulf costs in fuel recoveries effective july 1 , 2006 . in june 2006 , the city council approved the recovery of grand gulf costs through the fuel adjustment clause , without a corresponding change in base rates ( a significant portion of grand gulf costs was previously recovered through base rates ) . the volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2007 compared to the same period in 2006 . the first quarter 2006 was affected by customer losses following hurricane katrina . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers have returned and are taking service as of december 31 , 2007 , compared to approximately 95000 electric customers and 65000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2006 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 540 gwh compared to the same period in 2006 , an increase of 14% ( 14 % ) . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the net wholesale revenue variance is due to more energy available for resale in 2006 due to the decrease in retail usage caused by customer losses following hurricane katrina . in addition , 2006 revenue includes the sales into the wholesale market of entergy new orleans' share of the output of grand gulf , pursuant to city council approval of measures proposed by entergy new orleans to address the reduction in entergy new orleans' retail customer usage caused by hurricane katrina and to provide revenue support for the costs of entergy new orleans' share of grand other income statement variances 2008 compared to 2007 other operation and maintenance expenses decreased primarily due to : a provision for storm-related bad debts of $ 11 million recorded in 2007 ; a decrease of $ 6.2 million in legal and professional fees ; a decrease of $ 3.4 million in employee benefit expenses ; and a decrease of $ 1.9 million in gas operations spending due to higher labor and material costs for reliability work in 2007. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2006 net revenue | fuel recovery | volume/weather | rider revenue | net wholesale revenue | other | 2007 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 192.2 | 42.6 | 25.6 | 8.5 | -41.2 | 3.3 | 231.0 |', 'question': 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2006 number, in percentage?', 'ops': 'subtract(132000, 95000), divide(#0, 95000)', 'id': 'Double_ETR/2008/page_356.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis 2007 compared to 2006 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2007 to 2006 . amount ( in millions ) .", 'doc_post_text': "the fuel recovery variance is due to the inclusion of grand gulf costs in fuel recoveries effective july 1 , 2006 . in june 2006 , the city council approved the recovery of grand gulf costs through the fuel adjustment clause , without a corresponding change in base rates ( a significant portion of grand gulf costs was previously recovered through base rates ) . the volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2007 compared to the same period in 2006 . the first quarter 2006 was affected by customer losses following hurricane katrina . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers have returned and are taking service as of december 31 , 2007 , compared to approximately 95000 electric customers and 65000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2006 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 540 gwh compared to the same period in 2006 , an increase of 14% ( 14 % ) . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the net wholesale revenue variance is due to more energy available for resale in 2006 due to the decrease in retail usage caused by customer losses following hurricane katrina . in addition , 2006 revenue includes the sales into the wholesale market of entergy new orleans' share of the output of grand gulf , pursuant to city council approval of measures proposed by entergy new orleans to address the reduction in entergy new orleans' retail customer usage caused by hurricane katrina and to provide revenue support for the costs of entergy new orleans' share of grand other income statement variances 2008 compared to 2007 other operation and maintenance expenses decreased primarily due to : a provision for storm-related bad debts of $ 11 million recorded in 2007 ; a decrease of $ 6.2 million in legal and professional fees ; a decrease of $ 3.4 million in employee benefit expenses ; and a decrease of $ 1.9 million in gas operations spending due to higher labor and material costs for reliability work in 2007. .", 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2006 net revenue': 192.2, 'fuel recovery': 42.6, 'volume/weather': 25.6, 'rider revenue': 8.5, 'net wholesale revenue': -41.2, 'other': 3.3, '2007 net revenue': 231.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the number of electric customers in 2007?', 'and what was it in 2006?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2006 number, in percentage?', 'in that same period, what was the net change in the revenue?', 'and what percentage did it represent in relation to the revenue in 2010?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['132000', '95000', '37000', '38.9%', '38.8', '109%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['132000', '95000', 'subtract(132000, 95000)', 'subtract(132000, 95000), divide(#0, 95000)', 'subtract(231.0, 192.2)', 'subtract(231.0, 192.2), divide(42.6, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [132000.0, 95000.0, 37000.0, 0.38947, 38.8, 1.09794], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.38947}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "37s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 12:25:22 WARNING dspy.utils.parallelizer: Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.
2025/07/29 12:25:22 ERROR dspy.teleprompt.utils: An exception occurred during evaluation
Traceback (most recent call last):
    return evaluate(candidate_program, devset=trainset, return_all_scores=return_all_scores, callback_metadata={"metric_key": "eval_full"})
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    patch_function(call_original, *args, **kwargs)
    return original(self, *args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    return call_original_fn_with_event_logging(_original_fn, og_args, og_kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    original_fn_result = original_fn(*og_args, **og_kwargs)
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    original_result = original(*_og_args, **_og_kwargs)
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    raise exception
    results = fn(instance, *args, **kwargs)
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    results = executor.execute(process_item, devset)
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    return self._execute_parallel(wrapped, data)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    raise Exception("Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.")
Exception: Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.
2025/07/29 12:25:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0, 0.0]
2025/07/29 12:25:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:25:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 12:25:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 12:25:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 8 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:25:22 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the value of an investment in s&p500 in 2011?\nA1: 102.1', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nperformance graph the graph below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on pmi's common stock with the cumulative total return for the same period of pmi's compensation survey group and the s&p 500 index . the graph assumes the investment of $ 100 as of december 31 , 2010 , in pmi common stock ( at prices quoted on the new york stock exchange ) and each of the indices as of the market close and reinvestment of dividends on a quarterly basis . date pmi pmi compensation survey group ( 12 ) s&p 500 index .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( 1 ) the pmi compensation survey group consists of the following companies with substantial global sales that are direct competitors ; or have similar market capitalization ; or are primarily focused on consumer products ( excluding high technology and financial services ) ; and are companies for which comparative executive compensation data are readily available : bayer ag , british american tobacco p.l.c. , the coca-cola company , diageo plc , glaxosmithkline , heineken n.v. , imperial brands plc ( formerly , imperial tobacco group plc ) , johnson & johnson , mcdonald's corp. , international , inc. , nestl e9 s.a. , novartis ag , pepsico , inc. , pfizer inc. , roche holding ag , unilever nv and plc and vodafone group plc . ( 2 ) on october 1 , 2012 , international , inc . ( nasdaq : mdlz ) , formerly kraft foods inc. , announced that it had completed the spin-off of its north american grocery business , kraft foods group , inc . ( nasdaq : krft ) . international , inc . was retained in the pmi compensation survey group index because of its global footprint . the pmi compensation survey group index total cumulative return calculation weights international , inc.'s total shareholder return at 65% ( 65 % ) of historical kraft foods inc.'s market capitalization on december 31 , 2010 , based on international , inc.'s initial market capitalization relative to the combined market capitalization of international , inc . and kraft foods group , inc . on october 2 , 2012 . note : figures are rounded to the nearest $ 0.10. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | december 31 2010 | december 31 2011 | december 31 2012 | december 31 2013 | december 31 2014 | december 31 2015 | december 31 2010 | december 31 2011 | december 31 2012 | december 31 2013 | december 31 2014 | december 31 2015 | december 31 2010 | december 31 2011 | december 31 2012 | december 31 2013 | december 31 2014 | december 31 2015 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| pmi | 100.0 | 139.8 | 154.6 | 167.7 | 164.2 | 186.2 | 100.0 | 139.8 | 154.6 | 167.7 | 164.2 | 186.2 | 100.0 | 139.8 | 154.6 | 167.7 | 164.2 | 186.2 |\n| pmi compensation survey group ( 12 ) | 100.0 | 114.1 | 128.0 | 163.6 | 170.1 | 179.2 | 100.0 | 114.1 | 128.0 | 163.6 | 170.1 | 179.2 | 100.0 | 114.1 | 128.0 | 163.6 | 170.1 | 179.2 |\n| s&p 500 index | 100.0 | 102.1 | 118.5 | 156.8 | 178.3 | 180.8 | 100.0 | 102.1 | 118.5 | 156.8 | 178.3 | 180.8 | 100.0 | 102.1 | 118.5 | 156.8 | 178.3 | 180.8 |', 'question': 'what is the change in the value of this investment from 2010 to 2011?', 'ops': 'subtract(102.10, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_PM/2015/page_32.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': "performance graph the graph below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on pmi's common stock with the cumulative total return for the same period of pmi's compensation survey group and the s&p 500 index . the graph assumes the investment of $ 100 as of december 31 , 2010 , in pmi common stock ( at prices quoted on the new york stock exchange ) and each of the indices as of the market close and reinvestment of dividends on a quarterly basis . date pmi pmi compensation survey group ( 12 ) s&p 500 index .", 'doc_post_text': "( 1 ) the pmi compensation survey group consists of the following companies with substantial global sales that are direct competitors ; or have similar market capitalization ; or are primarily focused on consumer products ( excluding high technology and financial services ) ; and are companies for which comparative executive compensation data are readily available : bayer ag , british american tobacco p.l.c. , the coca-cola company , diageo plc , glaxosmithkline , heineken n.v. , imperial brands plc ( formerly , imperial tobacco group plc ) , johnson & johnson , mcdonald's corp. , international , inc. , nestl e9 s.a. , novartis ag , pepsico , inc. , pfizer inc. , roche holding ag , unilever nv and plc and vodafone group plc . ( 2 ) on october 1 , 2012 , international , inc . ( nasdaq : mdlz ) , formerly kraft foods inc. , announced that it had completed the spin-off of its north american grocery business , kraft foods group , inc . ( nasdaq : krft ) . international , inc . was retained in the pmi compensation survey group index because of its global footprint . the pmi compensation survey group index total cumulative return calculation weights international , inc.'s total shareholder return at 65% ( 65 % ) of historical kraft foods inc.'s market capitalization on december 31 , 2010 , based on international , inc.'s initial market capitalization relative to the combined market capitalization of international , inc . and kraft foods group , inc . on october 2 , 2012 . note : figures are rounded to the nearest $ 0.10. .", 'doc_table': {'pmi': {'december 31 2010': 100.0, 'december 31 2011': 139.8, 'december 31 2012': 154.6, 'december 31 2013': 167.7, 'december 31 2014': 164.2, 'december 31 2015': 186.2}, 'pmi compensation survey group ( 12 )': {'december 31 2010': 100.0, 'december 31 2011': 114.1, 'december 31 2012': 128.0, 'december 31 2013': 163.6, 'december 31 2014': 170.1, 'december 31 2015': 179.2}, 's&p 500 index': {'december 31 2010': 100.0, 'december 31 2011': 102.1, 'december 31 2012': 118.5, 'december 31 2013': 156.8, 'december 31 2014': 178.3, 'december 31 2015': 180.8}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the value of an investment in s&p500 in 2011?', 'what is the change in the value of this investment from 2010 to 2011?', 'what roi does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['102.10', '2.1', '2.1%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['102.10', 'subtract(102.10, const_100)', 'subtract(102.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [102.1, 2.1, 0.021], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 2.1}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "37s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 12:25:23 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the average value of de@r in 2002?\nA1: 10.8\nQ2: what was the average value of de@r in 2001?\nA2: 6.4\nQ3: what is the difference?\nA3: 4.4', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nentergy corporation and subsidiaries management's financial discussion and analysis annually , beginning in 2006 , if power market prices drop below the ppa prices . accordingly , because the price is not fixed , the table above does not report power from that plant as sold forward after 2005 . under the ppas with nypa for the output of power from indian point 3 and fitzpatrick , the non-utility nuclear business is obligated to produce at an average capacity factor of 85% ( 85 % ) with a financial true-up payment to nypa should nypa's cost to purchase power due to an output shortfall be higher than the ppas' price . the calculation of any true-up payments is based on two two-year periods . for the first period , which ran through november 20 , 2002 , indian point 3 and fitzpatrick operated at 95% ( 95 % ) and 97% ( 97 % ) , respectively , under the true-up formula . credits of up to 5% ( 5 % ) reflecting period one generation above 85% ( 85 % ) can be used to offset any output shortfalls in the second period , which runs through the end of the ppas on december 31 , 2004 . entergy continually monitors industry trends in order to determine whether asset impairments or other losses could result from a decline in value , or cancellation , of merchant power projects , and records provisions for impairments and losses accordingly . marketing and trading the earnings of entergy's energy commodity services segment are exposed to commodity price market risks primarily through entergy's 50%-owned , unconsolidated investment in entergy-koch . entergy-koch trading ( ekt ) uses value-at-risk models as one measure of the market risk of a loss in fair value for ekt's natural gas and power trading portfolio . actual future gains and losses in portfolios will differ from those estimated based upon actual fluctuations in market rates , operating exposures , and the timing thereof , and changes in the portfolio of derivative financial instruments during the year . to manage its portfolio , ekt enters into various derivative and contractual transactions in accordance with the policy approved by the trading committee of the governing board of entergy-koch . the trading portfolio consists of physical and financial natural gas and power as well as other energy and weather-related contracts . these contracts take many forms , including futures , forwards , swaps , and options . characteristics of ekt's value-at-risk method and the use of that method are as follows : fffd value-at-risk is used in conjunction with stress testing , position reporting , and profit and loss reporting in order to measure and control the risk inherent in the trading and mark-to-market portfolios . fffd ekt estimates its value-at-risk using a model based on j.p . morgan's risk metrics methodology combined with a monte carlo simulation approach . fffd ekt estimates its daily value-at-risk for natural gas and power using a 97.5% ( 97.5 % ) confidence level . ekt's daily value-at-risk is a measure that indicates that , if prices moved against the positions , the loss in neutralizing the portfolio would not be expected to exceed the calculated value-at-risk . fffd ekt seeks to limit the daily value-at-risk on any given day to a certain dollar amount approved by the trading committee . ekt's value-at-risk measures , which it calls daily earnings at risk ( de@r ) , for its trading portfolio were as follows: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nekt's de@r increased in 2002 compared to 2001 as a result of an increase in the size of the position held and an increase in the volatility of natural gas prices in the latter part of the year . for all derivative and contractual transactions , ekt is exposed to losses in the event of nonperformance by counterparties to these transactions . relevant considerations when assessing ekt's credit risk exposure include: .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | de@r at end of period | average de@r for the period | de@r at end of period | average de@r for the period |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2002 | 15.2 | 10.8 | 15.2 | 10.8 |\n| 2001 | 5.5 | 6.4 | 5.5 | 6.4 |', 'question': 'what was the average value of de@r in 2001?', 'ops': '6.4', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2002/page_38.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy corporation and subsidiaries management's financial discussion and analysis annually , beginning in 2006 , if power market prices drop below the ppa prices . accordingly , because the price is not fixed , the table above does not report power from that plant as sold forward after 2005 . under the ppas with nypa for the output of power from indian point 3 and fitzpatrick , the non-utility nuclear business is obligated to produce at an average capacity factor of 85% ( 85 % ) with a financial true-up payment to nypa should nypa's cost to purchase power due to an output shortfall be higher than the ppas' price . the calculation of any true-up payments is based on two two-year periods . for the first period , which ran through november 20 , 2002 , indian point 3 and fitzpatrick operated at 95% ( 95 % ) and 97% ( 97 % ) , respectively , under the true-up formula . credits of up to 5% ( 5 % ) reflecting period one generation above 85% ( 85 % ) can be used to offset any output shortfalls in the second period , which runs through the end of the ppas on december 31 , 2004 . entergy continually monitors industry trends in order to determine whether asset impairments or other losses could result from a decline in value , or cancellation , of merchant power projects , and records provisions for impairments and losses accordingly . marketing and trading the earnings of entergy's energy commodity services segment are exposed to commodity price market risks primarily through entergy's 50%-owned , unconsolidated investment in entergy-koch . entergy-koch trading ( ekt ) uses value-at-risk models as one measure of the market risk of a loss in fair value for ekt's natural gas and power trading portfolio . actual future gains and losses in portfolios will differ from those estimated based upon actual fluctuations in market rates , operating exposures , and the timing thereof , and changes in the portfolio of derivative financial instruments during the year . to manage its portfolio , ekt enters into various derivative and contractual transactions in accordance with the policy approved by the trading committee of the governing board of entergy-koch . the trading portfolio consists of physical and financial natural gas and power as well as other energy and weather-related contracts . these contracts take many forms , including futures , forwards , swaps , and options . characteristics of ekt's value-at-risk method and the use of that method are as follows : fffd value-at-risk is used in conjunction with stress testing , position reporting , and profit and loss reporting in order to measure and control the risk inherent in the trading and mark-to-market portfolios . fffd ekt estimates its value-at-risk using a model based on j.p . morgan's risk metrics methodology combined with a monte carlo simulation approach . fffd ekt estimates its daily value-at-risk for natural gas and power using a 97.5% ( 97.5 % ) confidence level . ekt's daily value-at-risk is a measure that indicates that , if prices moved against the positions , the loss in neutralizing the portfolio would not be expected to exceed the calculated value-at-risk . fffd ekt seeks to limit the daily value-at-risk on any given day to a certain dollar amount approved by the trading committee . ekt's value-at-risk measures , which it calls daily earnings at risk ( de@r ) , for its trading portfolio were as follows: .", 'doc_post_text': "ekt's de@r increased in 2002 compared to 2001 as a result of an increase in the size of the position held and an increase in the volatility of natural gas prices in the latter part of the year . for all derivative and contractual transactions , ekt is exposed to losses in the event of nonperformance by counterparties to these transactions . relevant considerations when assessing ekt's credit risk exposure include: .", 'doc_table': {'2002': {'de@r at end of period': 15.2, 'average de@r for the period': 10.8}, '2001': {'de@r at end of period': 5.5, 'average de@r for the period': 6.4}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the average value of de@r in 2002?', 'what was the average value of de@r in 2001?', 'what is the difference?', 'what was the average value of de@r in 2001?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['10.8', '6.4', '4.4', '6.4', '68.8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['10.8', '6.4', 'subtract(10.8, 6.4)', '6.4', 'subtract(10.8, 6.4), divide(#0, 6.4)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [10.8, 6.4, 4.4, 6.4, 0.6875], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 6.4}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "37s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 12:25:23 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the number of shares purchased by employees in 2009?\nA1: 77509.0\nQ2: what was the average price paid per share?\nA2: 23.91', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\namerican tower corporation and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements as of december 31 , 2010 , total unrecognized compensation expense related to unvested restricted stock units granted under the 2007 plan was $ 57.5 million and is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately two years . employee stock purchase plan 2014the company maintains an employee stock purchase plan ( 201cespp 201d ) for all eligible employees . under the espp , shares of the company 2019s common stock may be purchased during bi-annual offering periods at 85% ( 85 % ) of the lower of the fair market value on the first or the last day of each offering period . employees may purchase shares having a value not exceeding 15% ( 15 % ) of their gross compensation during an offering period and may not purchase more than $ 25000 worth of stock in a calendar year ( based on market values at the beginning of each offering period ) . the offering periods run from june 1 through november 30 and from december 1 through may 31 of each year . during the 2010 , 2009 and 2008 offering periods employees purchased 75354 , 77509 and 55764 shares , respectively , at weighted average prices per share of $ 34.16 , $ 23.91 and $ 30.08 , respectively . the fair value of the espp offerings is estimated on the offering period commencement date using a black-scholes pricing model with the expense recognized over the expected life , which is the six month offering period over which employees accumulate payroll deductions to purchase the company 2019s common stock . the weighted average fair value for the espp shares purchased during 2010 , 2009 and 2008 was $ 9.43 , $ 6.65 and $ 7.89 , respectively . at december 31 , 2010 , 8.7 million shares remain reserved for future issuance under the plan . key assumptions used to apply this pricing model for the years ended december 31 , are as follows: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n13 . stockholders 2019 equity warrants 2014in august 2005 , the company completed its merger with spectrasite , inc . and assumed outstanding warrants to purchase shares of spectrasite , inc . common stock . as of the merger completion date , each warrant was exercisable for two shares of spectrasite , inc . common stock at an exercise price of $ 32 per warrant . upon completion of the merger , each warrant to purchase shares of spectrasite , inc . common stock automatically converted into a warrant to purchase shares of the company 2019s common stock , such that upon exercise of each warrant , the holder has a right to receive 3.575 shares of the company 2019s common stock in lieu of each share of spectrasite , inc . common stock that would have been receivable under each assumed warrant prior to the merger . upon completion of the company 2019s merger with spectrasite , inc. , these warrants were exercisable for approximately 6.8 million shares of common stock . of these warrants , warrants to purchase approximately none and 1.7 million shares of common stock remained outstanding as of december 31 , 2010 and 2009 , respectively . these warrants expired on february 10 , 2010 . stock repurchase program 2014during the year ended december 31 , 2010 , the company repurchased an aggregate of approximately 9.3 million shares of its common stock for an aggregate of $ 420.8 million , including commissions and fees , of which $ 418.6 million was paid in cash prior to december 31 , 2010 and $ 2.2 million was included in accounts payable and accrued expenses in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet as of december 31 , 2010 , pursuant to its publicly announced stock repurchase program , as described below. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | range of risk-free interest rate | weighted average risk-free interest rate | expected life of shares | range of expected volatility of underlying stock price | weighted average expected volatility of underlying stock price | expected annual dividends | range of risk-free interest rate | weighted average risk-free interest rate | expected life of shares | range of expected volatility of underlying stock price | weighted average expected volatility of underlying stock price | expected annual dividends | range of risk-free interest rate | weighted average risk-free interest rate | expected life of shares | range of expected volatility of underlying stock price | weighted average expected volatility of underlying stock price | expected annual dividends |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2010 | -0.22 | -0.22 | 6.0 | -35.26 | -35.26 | n/a | -0.22 | -0.22 | 6.0 | -35.26 | -35.26 | n/a | -0.22 | -0.22 | 6.0 | -35.26 | -35.26 | n/a |\n| 2009 | -0.29 | -0.38 | 6.0 | -35.31 | -35.83 | n/a | -0.29 | -0.38 | 6.0 | -35.31 | -35.83 | n/a | -0.29 | -0.38 | 6.0 | -35.31 | -35.83 | n/a |\n| 2008 | -1.99 | -2.58 | 6.0 | -27.85 | -28.51 | n/a | -1.99 | -2.58 | 6.0 | -27.85 | -28.51 | n/a | -1.99 | -2.58 | 6.0 | -27.85 | -28.51 | n/a |', 'question': 'what is the total value of shares purchased by employees in 2009?', 'ops': 'multiply(77509, 23.91)', 'id': 'Single_AMT/2010/page_115.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'american tower corporation and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements as of december 31 , 2010 , total unrecognized compensation expense related to unvested restricted stock units granted under the 2007 plan was $ 57.5 million and is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately two years . employee stock purchase plan 2014the company maintains an employee stock purchase plan ( 201cespp 201d ) for all eligible employees . under the espp , shares of the company 2019s common stock may be purchased during bi-annual offering periods at 85% ( 85 % ) of the lower of the fair market value on the first or the last day of each offering period . employees may purchase shares having a value not exceeding 15% ( 15 % ) of their gross compensation during an offering period and may not purchase more than $ 25000 worth of stock in a calendar year ( based on market values at the beginning of each offering period ) . the offering periods run from june 1 through november 30 and from december 1 through may 31 of each year . during the 2010 , 2009 and 2008 offering periods employees purchased 75354 , 77509 and 55764 shares , respectively , at weighted average prices per share of $ 34.16 , $ 23.91 and $ 30.08 , respectively . the fair value of the espp offerings is estimated on the offering period commencement date using a black-scholes pricing model with the expense recognized over the expected life , which is the six month offering period over which employees accumulate payroll deductions to purchase the company 2019s common stock . the weighted average fair value for the espp shares purchased during 2010 , 2009 and 2008 was $ 9.43 , $ 6.65 and $ 7.89 , respectively . at december 31 , 2010 , 8.7 million shares remain reserved for future issuance under the plan . key assumptions used to apply this pricing model for the years ended december 31 , are as follows: .', 'doc_post_text': '13 . stockholders 2019 equity warrants 2014in august 2005 , the company completed its merger with spectrasite , inc . and assumed outstanding warrants to purchase shares of spectrasite , inc . common stock . as of the merger completion date , each warrant was exercisable for two shares of spectrasite , inc . common stock at an exercise price of $ 32 per warrant . upon completion of the merger , each warrant to purchase shares of spectrasite , inc . common stock automatically converted into a warrant to purchase shares of the company 2019s common stock , such that upon exercise of each warrant , the holder has a right to receive 3.575 shares of the company 2019s common stock in lieu of each share of spectrasite , inc . common stock that would have been receivable under each assumed warrant prior to the merger . upon completion of the company 2019s merger with spectrasite , inc. , these warrants were exercisable for approximately 6.8 million shares of common stock . of these warrants , warrants to purchase approximately none and 1.7 million shares of common stock remained outstanding as of december 31 , 2010 and 2009 , respectively . these warrants expired on february 10 , 2010 . stock repurchase program 2014during the year ended december 31 , 2010 , the company repurchased an aggregate of approximately 9.3 million shares of its common stock for an aggregate of $ 420.8 million , including commissions and fees , of which $ 418.6 million was paid in cash prior to december 31 , 2010 and $ 2.2 million was included in accounts payable and accrued expenses in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet as of december 31 , 2010 , pursuant to its publicly announced stock repurchase program , as described below. .', 'doc_table': {'2010': {'range of risk-free interest rate': -0.22, 'weighted average risk-free interest rate': -0.22, 'expected life of shares': 6.0, 'range of expected volatility of underlying stock price': -35.26, 'weighted average expected volatility of underlying stock price': -35.26, 'expected annual dividends': 'n/a'}, '2009': {'range of risk-free interest rate': -0.29, 'weighted average risk-free interest rate': -0.38, 'expected life of shares': 6.0, 'range of expected volatility of underlying stock price': -35.31, 'weighted average expected volatility of underlying stock price': -35.83, 'expected annual dividends': 'n/a'}, '2008': {'range of risk-free interest rate': -1.99, 'weighted average risk-free interest rate': -2.58, 'expected life of shares': 6.0, 'range of expected volatility of underlying stock price': -27.85, 'weighted average expected volatility of underlying stock price': -28.51, 'expected annual dividends': 'n/a'}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the number of shares purchased by employees in 2009?', 'what was the average price paid per share?', 'what is the total value of shares purchased by employees in 2009?', 'what is that value divided by 1,000,000?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['77509', '23.91', '1853240.19', '1.9'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['77509', '23.91', 'multiply(77509, 23.91)', 'multiply(77509, 23.91), divide(#0, const_1000000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [77509.0, 23.91, 1853240.19, 1.85324], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 1853240.19}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "37s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 12:25:23 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nthe goldman sachs group , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s discussion and analysis net revenues in equities were $ 6.60 billion , 4% ( 4 % ) lower than 2016 , primarily due to lower commissions and fees , reflecting a decline in our listed cash equity volumes in the u.s . market volumes in the u.s . also declined . in addition , net revenues in equities client execution were lower , reflecting lower net revenues in derivatives , partially offset by higher net revenues in cash products . net revenues in securities services were essentially unchanged . operating expenses were $ 9.69 billion for 2017 , essentially unchanged compared with 2016 , due to decreased compensation and benefits expenses , reflecting lower net revenues , largely offset by increased technology expenses , reflecting higher expenses related to cloud-based services and software depreciation , and increased consulting costs . pre-tax earnings were $ 2.21 billion in 2017 , 54% ( 54 % ) lower than 2016 . investing & lending investing & lending includes our investing activities and the origination of loans , including our relationship lending activities , to provide financing to clients . these investments and loans are typically longer-term in nature . we make investments , some of which are consolidated , including through our merchant banking business and our special situations group , in debt securities and loans , public and private equity securities , infrastructure and real estate entities . some of these investments are made indirectly through funds that we manage . we also make unsecured loans through our digital platform , marcus : by goldman sachs and secured loans through our digital platform , goldman sachs private bank select . the table below presents the operating results of our investing & lending segment. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\noperating environment . during 2018 , our investments in private equities benefited from company-specific events , including sales , and strong corporate performance , while investments in public equities reflected losses , as global equity prices generally decreased . results for our investments in debt securities and loans reflected continued growth in loans receivables , resulting in higher net interest income . if macroeconomic concerns negatively affect corporate performance or the origination of loans , or if global equity prices continue to decline , net revenues in investing & lending would likely be negatively impacted . during 2017 , generally higher global equity prices and tighter credit spreads contributed to a favorable environment for our equity and debt investments . results also reflected net gains from company-specific events , including sales , and corporate performance . 2018 versus 2017 . net revenues in investing & lending were $ 8.25 billion for 2018 , 14% ( 14 % ) higher than 2017 . net revenues in equity securities were $ 4.46 billion , 3% ( 3 % ) lower than 2017 , reflecting net losses from investments in public equities ( 2018 included $ 183 million of net losses ) compared with net gains in the prior year , partially offset by significantly higher net gains from investments in private equities ( 2018 included $ 4.64 billion of net gains ) , driven by company-specific events , including sales , and corporate performance . for 2018 , 60% ( 60 % ) of the net revenues in equity securities were generated from corporate investments and 40% ( 40 % ) were generated from real estate . net revenues in debt securities and loans were $ 3.80 billion , 43% ( 43 % ) higher than 2017 , primarily driven by significantly higher net interest income . 2018 included net interest income of approximately $ 2.70 billion compared with approximately $ 1.80 billion in 2017 . provision for credit losses was $ 674 million for 2018 , compared with $ 657 million for 2017 , as the higher provision for credit losses primarily related to consumer loan growth in 2018 was partially offset by an impairment of approximately $ 130 million on a secured loan in 2017 . operating expenses were $ 3.37 billion for 2018 , 20% ( 20 % ) higher than 2017 , primarily due to increased expenses related to consolidated investments and our digital lending and deposit platform , and increased compensation and benefits expenses , reflecting higher net revenues . pre-tax earnings were $ 4.21 billion in 2018 , 11% ( 11 % ) higher than 2017 versus 2016 . net revenues in investing & lending were $ 7.24 billion for 2017 , 70% ( 70 % ) higher than 2016 . net revenues in equity securities were $ 4.58 billion , 78% ( 78 % ) higher than 2016 , primarily reflecting a significant increase in net gains from private equities ( 2017 included $ 3.82 billion of net gains ) , which were positively impacted by company-specific events and corporate performance . in addition , net gains from public equities ( 2017 included $ 762 million of net gains ) were significantly higher , as global equity prices increased during the year . for 2017 , 64% ( 64 % ) of the net revenues in equity securities were generated from corporate investments and 36% ( 36 % ) were generated from real estate . net revenues in debt securities and loans were $ 2.66 billion , 57% ( 57 % ) higher than 2016 , reflecting significantly higher net interest income ( 2017 included approximately $ 1.80 billion of net interest income ) . 60 goldman sachs 2018 form 10-k .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | equity securities | debt securities and loans | total net revenues | provision for credit losses | operating expenses | pre-taxearnings | equity securities | debt securities and loans | total net revenues | provision for credit losses | operating expenses | pre-taxearnings | equity securities | debt securities and loans | total net revenues | provision for credit losses | operating expenses | pre-taxearnings |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| year ended december 2018 | 4455.0 | 3795.0 | 8250.0 | 674.0 | 3365.0 | 4211.0 | 4455.0 | 3795.0 | 8250.0 | 674.0 | 3365.0 | 4211.0 | 4455.0 | 3795.0 | 8250.0 | 674.0 | 3365.0 | 4211.0 |\n| year ended december 2017 | 4578.0 | 2660.0 | 7238.0 | 657.0 | 2796.0 | 3785.0 | 4578.0 | 2660.0 | 7238.0 | 657.0 | 2796.0 | 3785.0 | 4578.0 | 2660.0 | 7238.0 | 657.0 | 2796.0 | 3785.0 |\n| year ended december 2016 | 2573.0 | 1689.0 | 4262.0 | 182.0 | 2386.0 | 1694.0 | 2573.0 | 1689.0 | 4262.0 | 182.0 | 2386.0 | 1694.0 | 2573.0 | 1689.0 | 4262.0 | 182.0 | 2386.0 | 1694.0 |', 'question': 'what is the net revenue in 2018?', 'ops': '8250', 'id': 'Single_GS/2018/page_76.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'the goldman sachs group , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s discussion and analysis net revenues in equities were $ 6.60 billion , 4% ( 4 % ) lower than 2016 , primarily due to lower commissions and fees , reflecting a decline in our listed cash equity volumes in the u.s . market volumes in the u.s . also declined . in addition , net revenues in equities client execution were lower , reflecting lower net revenues in derivatives , partially offset by higher net revenues in cash products . net revenues in securities services were essentially unchanged . operating expenses were $ 9.69 billion for 2017 , essentially unchanged compared with 2016 , due to decreased compensation and benefits expenses , reflecting lower net revenues , largely offset by increased technology expenses , reflecting higher expenses related to cloud-based services and software depreciation , and increased consulting costs . pre-tax earnings were $ 2.21 billion in 2017 , 54% ( 54 % ) lower than 2016 . investing & lending investing & lending includes our investing activities and the origination of loans , including our relationship lending activities , to provide financing to clients . these investments and loans are typically longer-term in nature . we make investments , some of which are consolidated , including through our merchant banking business and our special situations group , in debt securities and loans , public and private equity securities , infrastructure and real estate entities . some of these investments are made indirectly through funds that we manage . we also make unsecured loans through our digital platform , marcus : by goldman sachs and secured loans through our digital platform , goldman sachs private bank select . the table below presents the operating results of our investing & lending segment. .', 'doc_post_text': 'operating environment . during 2018 , our investments in private equities benefited from company-specific events , including sales , and strong corporate performance , while investments in public equities reflected losses , as global equity prices generally decreased . results for our investments in debt securities and loans reflected continued growth in loans receivables , resulting in higher net interest income . if macroeconomic concerns negatively affect corporate performance or the origination of loans , or if global equity prices continue to decline , net revenues in investing & lending would likely be negatively impacted . during 2017 , generally higher global equity prices and tighter credit spreads contributed to a favorable environment for our equity and debt investments . results also reflected net gains from company-specific events , including sales , and corporate performance . 2018 versus 2017 . net revenues in investing & lending were $ 8.25 billion for 2018 , 14% ( 14 % ) higher than 2017 . net revenues in equity securities were $ 4.46 billion , 3% ( 3 % ) lower than 2017 , reflecting net losses from investments in public equities ( 2018 included $ 183 million of net losses ) compared with net gains in the prior year , partially offset by significantly higher net gains from investments in private equities ( 2018 included $ 4.64 billion of net gains ) , driven by company-specific events , including sales , and corporate performance . for 2018 , 60% ( 60 % ) of the net revenues in equity securities were generated from corporate investments and 40% ( 40 % ) were generated from real estate . net revenues in debt securities and loans were $ 3.80 billion , 43% ( 43 % ) higher than 2017 , primarily driven by significantly higher net interest income . 2018 included net interest income of approximately $ 2.70 billion compared with approximately $ 1.80 billion in 2017 . provision for credit losses was $ 674 million for 2018 , compared with $ 657 million for 2017 , as the higher provision for credit losses primarily related to consumer loan growth in 2018 was partially offset by an impairment of approximately $ 130 million on a secured loan in 2017 . operating expenses were $ 3.37 billion for 2018 , 20% ( 20 % ) higher than 2017 , primarily due to increased expenses related to consolidated investments and our digital lending and deposit platform , and increased compensation and benefits expenses , reflecting higher net revenues . pre-tax earnings were $ 4.21 billion in 2018 , 11% ( 11 % ) higher than 2017 versus 2016 . net revenues in investing & lending were $ 7.24 billion for 2017 , 70% ( 70 % ) higher than 2016 . net revenues in equity securities were $ 4.58 billion , 78% ( 78 % ) higher than 2016 , primarily reflecting a significant increase in net gains from private equities ( 2017 included $ 3.82 billion of net gains ) , which were positively impacted by company-specific events and corporate performance . in addition , net gains from public equities ( 2017 included $ 762 million of net gains ) were significantly higher , as global equity prices increased during the year . for 2017 , 64% ( 64 % ) of the net revenues in equity securities were generated from corporate investments and 36% ( 36 % ) were generated from real estate . net revenues in debt securities and loans were $ 2.66 billion , 57% ( 57 % ) higher than 2016 , reflecting significantly higher net interest income ( 2017 included approximately $ 1.80 billion of net interest income ) . 60 goldman sachs 2018 form 10-k .', 'doc_table': {'year ended december 2018': {'equity securities': 4455.0, 'debt securities and loans': 3795.0, 'total net revenues': 8250.0, 'provision for credit losses': 674.0, 'operating expenses': 3365.0, 'pre-taxearnings': 4211.0}, 'year ended december 2017': {'equity securities': 4578.0, 'debt securities and loans': 2660.0, 'total net revenues': 7238.0, 'provision for credit losses': 657.0, 'operating expenses': 2796.0, 'pre-taxearnings': 3785.0}, 'year ended december 2016': {'equity securities': 2573.0, 'debt securities and loans': 1689.0, 'total net revenues': 4262.0, 'provision for credit losses': 182.0, 'operating expenses': 2386.0, 'pre-taxearnings': 1694.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net revenue in 2018?', 'what about in 2017?', 'what is the net change in revenue?', 'what is the net revenue in 2017?', 'what growth rate does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['8250', '7238', '1012', '7238', '14.0%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['8250', '7238', 'subtract(8250, 7238)', '7238', 'subtract(8250, 7238), divide(#0, 7238)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [8250.0, 7238.0, 1012.0, 7238.0, 0.13982], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 8250.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "36s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 12:25:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:29 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 12:25:32 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 26.0 / 35 (74.3%)
2025/07/29 12:25:32 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 74.29 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 0'].
2025/07/29 12:25:32 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 74.29, 80.0, 71.43, 85.71, 74.29]
2025/07/29 12:25:32 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0, 0.0]
2025/07/29 12:25:32 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:25:32 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 12:25:32 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 9 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:25:38 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 26.0 / 35 (74.3%)
2025/07/29 12:25:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 74.29 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 12:25:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 74.29, 80.0, 71.43, 85.71, 74.29, 74.29]
2025/07/29 12:25:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0, 0.0]
2025/07/29 12:25:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:25:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 12:25:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 10 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:25:50 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 33.0 / 35 (94.3%)
2025/07/29 12:25:50 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 94.29 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 4'].
2025/07/29 12:25:50 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 74.29, 80.0, 71.43, 85.71, 74.29, 74.29, 94.29]
2025/07/29 12:25:50 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0, 0.0]
2025/07/29 12:25:50 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:25:50 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 12:25:50 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 11 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:25:56 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 32.0 / 35 (91.4%)
2025/07/29 12:25:56 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 91.43 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 4'].
2025/07/29 12:25:56 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 74.29, 80.0, 71.43, 85.71, 74.29, 74.29, 94.29, 91.43]
2025/07/29 12:25:56 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0, 0.0]
2025/07/29 12:25:56 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:25:56 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 12:25:56 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 12 / 13 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 12:26:01 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 31.0 / 35 (88.6%)
2025/07/29 12:26:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 88.57 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 4'].
2025/07/29 12:26:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 74.29, 80.0, 71.43, 85.71, 74.29, 74.29, 94.29, 91.43, 88.57]
2025/07/29 12:26:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0, 0.0]
2025/07/29 12:26:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 81.0
2025/07/29 12:26:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 12:26:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 13 / 13 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 12:26:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 91.43) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 12:26:15 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 91.0 / 100 (91.0%)
2025/07/29 12:26:15 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: New best full eval score! Score: 91.0
2025/07/29 12:26:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [81.0, 0.0, 91.0]
2025/07/29 12:26:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 91.0
2025/07/29 12:26:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 12:26:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 12:26:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Returning best identified program with score 91.0!

Bootstrapping set 1/6
Bootstrapping set 2/6
Bootstrapping set 3/6
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 4/6
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 3 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 3 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 5/6
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 3 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 3 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 6/6
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Error getting source code: unhashable type: 'dict'.

Running without program aware proposer.
Average Metric: 81.00 / 100 (81.0%): 100%|██████████| 100/100 [00:01<00:00, 81.23it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/764d13341fe043a0ad20764463579b67
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 29.00 / 35 (82.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [02:11<00:00,  3.75s/it] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/7877f453c541472fba289ef07092bca6
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 24.00 / 35 (68.6%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:19<00:00,  1.79it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/1fc7489a981a4bca820c6c08d2e6ec9f
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 23.00 / 35 (65.7%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:18<00:00,  1.90it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/33e032c093ff420ebd5fa91a3f526e8c
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 25.00 / 35 (71.4%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:20<00:00,  1.75it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_3 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/40866b927b304935b1788435c87689e7
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 27.00 / 35 (77.1%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:42<00:00,  1.21s/it]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_4 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/956355d9172d462b920705825884a5e8
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 80.00 / 100 (80.0%): 100%|██████████| 100/100 [00:27<00:00,  3.59it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/256f6c8dd8b54e5c9aef9ae7c622c1a2
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 27.00 / 35 (77.1%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:28<00:00,  1.23it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_5 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/41a1275dce9f436ab4667d1b06ccb972
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 27.00 / 35 (77.1%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:40<00:00,  1.16s/it] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_6 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/d37a6a5099d74e348b1490a25a491577
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 30.00 / 35 (85.7%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:40<00:00,  1.17s/it]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_7 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/084480bd079e44b88393802dee023ecd
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 30.00 / 35 (85.7%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:32<00:00,  1.08it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_8 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/dd8cb4b75c504173a5c567c17e49047e
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 24.00 / 35 (68.6%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:18<00:00,  1.94it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_9 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/f9a07c22bb93404dac9a33ba5c27c35b
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 80.00 / 100 (80.0%): 100%|██████████| 100/100 [00:22<00:00,  4.48it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/37b987364d9d4e3c9ccaf77b37cb4cd4
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run mipro_openai_o4-mini-2025-04-16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/f3d38023717a48cdb8dccf59b1651bdc
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Bootstrapping set 1/6
Bootstrapping set 2/6
Bootstrapping set 3/6
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 4/6
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 3 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 3 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 5/6
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 3 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 3 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 6/6
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Error getting source code: unhashable type: 'dict'.

Running without program aware proposer.
Average Metric: 81.00 / 100 (81.0%): 100%|██████████| 100/100 [00:01<00:00, 78.23it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/b0fc3df2e37f42998e51e6162bd73072
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 28.00 / 35 (80.0%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:13<00:00,  2.54it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/3f14f704d0b345599180f8de4f0acb68
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 26.00 / 35 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:12<00:00,  2.80it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/f1d0b952c1d048828c228d95b9b0ec69
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 28.00 / 35 (80.0%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:06<00:00,  5.62it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/1e6442db8dcd4031bf911cdfa1af82a7
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 25.00 / 35 (71.4%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:14<00:00,  2.42it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_3 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/feeb0fd5181e4d4994b9b8861f6348b0
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 30.00 / 35 (85.7%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:04<00:00,  8.40it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_4 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/4678d51f12d14a4ebae7bc45f7358582
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 72.00 / 85 (84.7%):  85%|████████▌ | 85/100 [00:05<00:02,  7.03it/s]Average Metric: 72.00 / 86 (83.7%):  85%|████████▌ | 85/100 [00:07<00:02,  7.03it/s]Average Metric: 72.00 / 86 (83.7%):  87%|████████▋ | 87/100 [00:10<00:08,  1.52it/s]Average Metric: 72.00 / 86 (83.7%):  88%|████████▊ | 88/100 [00:11<00:07,  1.59it/s]Average Metric: 72.00 / 86 (83.7%):  89%|████████▉ | 89/100 [00:11<00:06,  1.73it/s]Average Metric: 72.00 / 86 (83.7%):  90%|█████████ | 90/100 [00:11<00:04,  2.00it/s]Average Metric: 72.00 / 86 (83.7%):  91%|█████████ | 91/100 [00:12<00:04,  2.24it/s]Average Metric: 72.00 / 86 (83.7%):  91%|█████████ | 91/100 [00:12<00:04,  2.24it/s]Average Metric: 72.00 / 86 (83.7%):  92%|█████████▏| 92/100 [00:12<00:03,  2.24it/s]Average Metric: 72.00 / 86 (83.7%):  93%|█████████▎| 93/100 [00:12<00:03,  2.24it/s]Average Metric: 72.00 / 86 (83.7%):  95%|█████████▌| 95/100 [00:12<00:01,  3.62it/s]Average Metric: 72.00 / 86 (83.7%):  96%|█████████▌| 96/100 [00:12<00:00,  7.63it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/4a7128d081c94c8e9fd14620f92df5c4
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
  0%|          | 0/35 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 4.00 / 5 (80.0%):  11%|█▏        | 4/35 [00:00<00:08,  3.45it/s]Average Metric: 11.00 / 14 (78.6%):  37%|███▋      | 13/35 [00:00<00:06,  3.45it/s]Average Metric: 26.00 / 35 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:09<00:00,  3.62it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_5 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/d185bb0b19ce47bf9f8393b0b44add2b
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 26.00 / 35 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:05<00:00,  6.25it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_6 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/dbe1b835143f45fdafa6f062e75cf04d
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 33.00 / 35 (94.3%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:11<00:00,  3.03it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_7 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/6cebcd4bbe1542a0b80ab82a4da41fdb
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 32.00 / 35 (91.4%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:04<00:00,  7.28it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_8 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/07df35bb23044c6d8329c1167fe8c733
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 31.00 / 35 (88.6%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:05<00:00,  6.39it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_9 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/3c2ff3cf0a6e43a09128158d25215b7e
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 91.00 / 100 (91.0%): 100%|██████████| 100/100 [00:12<00:00,  7.84it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/6390215385304cff8297d122dd799027
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run mipro_gemini_gemini-2_5-flash at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/bfa8a54582554fad9a20ad3c1bcb0e98
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run mipro_micro_medium at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/4c01dc5b8ebc463ead87e69fd8ab5c67
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3

We now have the following results: We now have the following results:

model_name	em_metric before optimisation	em_metric after MIPROv2	% increase
o4-mini	78.90	80.00	1.4%
gemini-2.5-flash	77.30	91.00	17.7%

Aha! We see significant improvement gemini-2.5-flash, and break the 90% accuracy barrier!

Looking at the prompt for the gemini-model:

mipro_micro_medium_compiled_programs[1].inspect_history(n=1)

[2025-07-29T12:26:14.956939]

System message:

Your input fields are:
1. `conversation_context` (str): Conversation so far
2. `evidence_snippets` (str): Snippets of evidence surrounding the table
3. `table` (str): Input financial table with metrics
4. `question` (str): Question to answer
Your output fields are:
1. `reasoning` (str): Reasoning behind the answer. Carefully analyze the conversation_context, and especially the evidence_snippets and table for the given question, and generate your reasoning before generating the ops and answer.
2. `ops` (str): Comma-separated ConvFinQA DSL program. Allowed ops: add(x, y), subtract(x, y), multiply(x, y), divide(x, y), exp(x, y), greater(x, y). Args may be constants (e.g., const_100), numbers (int or float), or prior step refs (#0, #1…). Order always follows the pattern x <op> y—pick x and y deliberately. Example: subtract(const_100, 42), divide(#0, 3.14). Convert to percentages only if explicitly asked in the question.
3. `answer` (str): Final answer. This will be a single number, or a boolean string(yes/no)
All interactions will be structured in the following way, with the appropriate values filled in.

[[ ## conversation_context ## ]]
{conversation_context}

[[ ## evidence_snippets ## ]]
{evidence_snippets}

[[ ## table ## ]]
{table}

[[ ## question ## ]]
{question}

[[ ## reasoning ## ]]
{reasoning}

[[ ## ops ## ]]
{ops}

[[ ## answer ## ]]
{answer}

[[ ## completed ## ]]
In adhering to this structure, your objective is: 
        You are an expert financial AI assistant specialized in analyzing financial documents and answering complex numerical questions. Your primary goal is to accurately extract and compute information from both structured tables and unstructured text, even when answers depend on chained operations or require robust state management across multiple dialogue turns. You must also correctly interpret numerical values, including implicit units and signs, and format outputs appropriately for human-readable results.
        
        Given the `conversation_context` for multi-turn interactions, `evidence_snippets` for textual context, a `table` containing financial data, and the current `question`, your task is to:
        1.  First, generate a detailed `reasoning` that explains the logical steps to derive the answer, considering all relevant information from the context, snippets, and table.
        2.  Then, translate this reasoning into a precise sequence of `ops` using the ConvFinQA DSL, ensuring correct operations, references, and handling of numerical semantics.
        3.  Finally, provide the computed `answer` as a single number or a boolean.


User message:

This is an example of the task, though some input or output fields are not supplied.

[[ ## conversation_context ## ]]
Q1: as of april 3, 2010, what was the amount of doors in the wholesale segment in the europe geography?
A1: 4421.0
Q2: and what was the total amount of doors?
A2: 8940.0
Q3: what percentage, then, of this total did that amount in europe represent?
A3: 0.49452

[[ ## evidence_snippets ## ]]
[PRE]
table of contents worldwide distribution channels the following table presents the number of doors by geographic location , in which ralph lauren-branded products distributed by our wholesale segment were sold to consumers in our primary channels of distribution as of april 3 , 2010 : number of location doors ( a ) .
[/PRE]
[POST]
( a ) in asia-pacific , our products are primarily distributed through concessions-based sales arrangements . in addition , american living and chaps-branded products distributed by our wholesale segment were sold domestically through approximately 1700 doors as of april 3 , 2010 . we have five key department-store customers that generate significant sales volume . for fiscal 2010 , these customers in the aggregate accounted for approximately 45% ( 45 % ) of all wholesale revenues , with macy 2019s , inc . representing approximately 18% ( 18 % ) of these revenues . our product brands are sold primarily through their own sales forces . our wholesale segment maintains its primary showrooms in new york city . in addition , we maintain regional showrooms in atlanta , chicago , dallas , milan , paris , london , munich , madrid and stockholm . shop-within-shops . as a critical element of our distribution to department stores , we and our licensing partners utilize shop- within-shops to enhance brand recognition , to permit more complete merchandising of our lines by the department stores and to differentiate the presentation of products . shop-within-shops fixed assets primarily include items such as customized freestanding fixtures , wall cases and components , decorative items and flooring . as of april 3 , 2010 , we had approximately 14000 shop-within-shops dedicated to our ralph lauren-branded wholesale products worldwide . excluding significantly larger shop-within-shops in key department store locations , the size of our shop-within-shops typically ranges from approximately 300 to 6000 square feet . we normally share in the cost of these shop-within-shops with our wholesale customers . basic stock replenishment program . basic products such as knit shirts , chino pants and oxford cloth shirts can be ordered at any time through our basic stock replenishment programs . we generally ship these products within three-to-five days of order receipt . our retail segment as of april 3 , 2010 , our retail segment consisted of 179 full-price retail stores and 171 factory stores worldwide , totaling approximately 2.6 million square feet , 281 concessions-based shop-within-shops and two e-commerce websites . the extension of our direct-to-consumer reach is a primary long-term strategic goal . full-price retail stores our full-price retail stores reinforce the luxury image and distinct sensibility of our brands and feature exclusive lines that are not sold in domestic department stores . we opened 3 new full-price stores and closed 3 full-price stores in fiscal 2010 . in addition , we assumed 16 full-price stores in connection with the asia-pacific .
[/POST]

[[ ## table ## ]]
| Row | united states and canada | europe | japan | total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| number of doors ( a ) | 4402.0 | 4421.0 | 117.0 | 8940.0 |

[[ ## question ## ]]
and what percentage of the total did the amount of doors in united states and canada represent?


Assistant message:

[[ ## reasoning ## ]]
Not supplied for this particular example. 

[[ ## ops ## ]]
divide(4402, 8940)

[[ ## answer ## ]]
0.49239


User message:

[[ ## conversation_context ## ]]
None

[[ ## evidence_snippets ## ]]
[PRE]
part i the following table details the growth in global weighted average berths and the global , north american and european cruise guests over the past five years : weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) royal caribbean cruises ltd . total berths global cruise guests ( 1 ) north american cruise guests ( 2 ) european cruise guests ( 3 ) .
[/PRE]
[POST]
( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally are based on a com- bination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources including seatrade insider , cruise industry news and cruise line international association ( 201cclia 201d ) . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) source : cruise line international association based on cruise guests carried for at least two consecutive nights for years 2009 through 2012 . year 2013 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . includes the united states of america and canada . ( 3 ) source : clia europe , formerly european cruise council , for years 2009 through 2012 . year 2013 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . north america the majority of cruise guests are sourced from north america , which represented approximately 56% ( 56 % ) of global cruise guests in 2013 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 3.2% ( 3.2 % ) from 2009 to 2013 . europe cruise guests sourced from europe represented approximately 30% ( 30 % ) of global cruise guests in 2013 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 6.0% ( 6.0 % ) from 2009 to 2013 . other markets in addition to expected industry growth in north america and europe , we expect the asia/pacific region to demonstrate an even higher growth rate in the near term , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america and europe . based on industry data , cruise guests sourced from the asia/pacific region represented approximately 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) of global cruise guests in 2013 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 15% ( 15 % ) from 2011 to 2013 . competition we compete with a number of cruise lines . our princi- pal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise lines , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , iberocruceros , p&o cruises and princess cruises ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; norwegian cruise line and oceania cruises . cruise lines compete with other vacation alternatives such as land-based resort hotels and sightseeing destinations for consumers 2019 leisure time . demand for such activities is influenced by political and general economic conditions . com- panies within the vacation market are dependent on consumer discretionary spending . operating strategies our principal operating strategies are to : and employees and protect the environment in which our vessels and organization operate , to better serve our global guest base and grow our business , order to enhance our revenues , our brands globally , expenditures and ensure adequate cash and liquid- ity , with the overall goal of maximizing our return on invested capital and long-term shareholder value , ization and maintenance of existing ships and the transfer of key innovations across each brand , while prudently expanding our fleet with new state-of- the-art cruise ships , ships by deploying them into those markets and itineraries that provide opportunities to optimize returns , while continuing our focus on existing key markets , service customer preferences and expectations in an innovative manner , while supporting our strategic focus on profitability , and .
[/POST]

[[ ## table ## ]]
| Row | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 ) | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 |
| royal caribbean cruises ltd . total berths | 84050.0 | 92300.0 | 92650.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 84050.0 | 92300.0 | 92650.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 84050.0 | 92300.0 | 92650.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 84050.0 | 92300.0 | 92650.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 84050.0 | 92300.0 | 92650.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 |
| globalcruiseguests ( 1 ) | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 20898000.0 | 21300000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 20898000.0 | 21300000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 20898000.0 | 21300000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 20898000.0 | 21300000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 20898000.0 | 21300000.0 |
| north americancruiseguests ( 2 ) | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 11640000.0 | 11816000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 11640000.0 | 11816000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 11640000.0 | 11816000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 11640000.0 | 11816000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 11640000.0 | 11816000.0 |
| europeancruiseguests ( 3 ) | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 6139000.0 | 6399000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 6139000.0 | 6399000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 6139000.0 | 6399000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 6139000.0 | 6399000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 6139000.0 | 6399000.0 |

[[ ## question ## ]]
what is the total global cruise guests are from north america or europe?


Assistant message:

[[ ## reasoning ## ]]
The question asks for the total number of global cruise guests that are from North America or Europe. I need to find the number of North American cruise guests and European cruise guests for a specific year and sum them up. The evidence snippets provide percentages for 2013 for North America (56%) and Europe (30%) of global cruise guests. The table also provides the absolute numbers for North American cruise guests and European cruise guests for 2013. I will sum the values for 'north americancruiseguests (2)' and 'europeancruiseguests (3)' for the year 2013.

North American cruise guests in 2013 = 11,816,000
European cruise guests in 2013 = 6,399,000
Total = 11,816,000 + 6,399,000 = 18,215,000.

[[ ## ops ## ]]
add(11816000.0, 6399000.0)

[[ ## answer ## ]]
18215000.0


User message:

[[ ## conversation_context ## ]]
Q1: what was the net change in value of net income from 2012 to 2013?
A1: 41.8

[[ ## evidence_snippets ## ]]
[PRE]
other expense , net : the company's other expense consists of the following: .
[/PRE]
[POST]
income tax provision : the company recorded income tax expense of $ 77.2 million and had income before income taxes of $ 322.5 million for the year ended december 31 , 2013 , representing an effective tax rate of 23.9% ( 23.9 % ) . during the year ended december 31 , 2012 , the company recorded income tax expense of $ 90.1 million and had income before income taxes of $ 293.5 million , representing an effective tax rate of 30.7% ( 30.7 % ) . in december 2013 , the company received notice from the irs that the joint committee on taxation took no exception to the company's tax returns that were filed for 2009 and 2010 . an $ 11.0 million tax benefit was recognized in the company's 2013 financial results as the company had effectively settled uncertainty regarding the realization of refund claims filed in connection with the 2009 and 2010 returns . in the u.s. , which is the largest jurisdiction where the company receives such a tax credit , the availability of the research and development credit expired at the end of the 2011 tax year . in january 2013 , the u.s . congress passed legislation that reinstated the research and development credit retroactive to 2012 . the income tax provision for the year ended december 31 , 2013 includes approximately $ 2.3 million related to the reinstated research and development credit for 2012 activity . the decrease in the effective tax rate from the prior year is primarily due to the release of an uncertain tax position mentioned above , the reinstatement of the u.s . research and development credit mentioned above , and cash repatriation activities . when compared to the federal and state combined statutory rate , the effective tax rates for the years ended december 31 , 2013 and 2012 were favorably impacted by lower statutory tax rates in many of the company 2019s foreign jurisdictions , the domestic manufacturing deduction and tax benefits associated with the merger of the company 2019s japan subsidiaries in 2010 . net income : the company 2019s net income for the year ended december 31 , 2013 was $ 245.3 million as compared to net income of $ 203.5 million for the year ended december 31 , 2012 . diluted earnings per share was $ 2.58 for the year ended december 31 , 2013 and $ 2.14 for the year ended december 31 , 2012 . the weighted average shares used in computing diluted earnings per share were 95.1 million and 95.0 million for the years ended december 31 , 2013 and 2012 , respectively . table of contents .
[/POST]

[[ ## table ## ]]
| Row | foreign currency losses net | other income ( expense ) net | total other expense net | foreign currency losses net | other income ( expense ) net | total other expense net |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| year ended december 31 , 2013 | -1115.0 | 69.0 | -1046.0 | -1115.0 | 69.0 | -1046.0 |
| year ended december 31 , 2012 | -1401.0 | -4.0 | -1405.0 | -1401.0 | -4.0 | -1405.0 |

[[ ## question ## ]]
what was net income in 2012?


Assistant message:

[[ ## reasoning ## ]]
The question asks for the net income in 2012. I will locate this information in the provided evidence snippets. The evidence states that "the company 2019s net income for the year ended december 31 , 2013 was $ 245.3 million as compared to net income of $ 203.5 million for the year ended december 31 , 2012". Therefore, the net income in 2012 was $203.5 million.

[[ ## ops ## ]]
203.5

[[ ## answer ## ]]
203.5


User message:

[[ ## conversation_context ## ]]
Q1: in 2017, what was the number of granted performance shares?
A1: 203298.0
Q2: and what was the total number of granted shares?
A2: 650942.0
Q3: what percentage, then, of this total did that performance shares number represent?
A3: 0.31231
Q4: and from 2016 to that year, what was the total of compensation expense attributable to directors?
A4: 4.9

[[ ## evidence_snippets ## ]]
[PRE]
in 2017 , the company granted 440076 shares of restricted class a common stock and 7568 shares of restricted stock units . restricted common stock and restricted stock units generally have a vesting period of two to four years . the fair value related to these grants was $ 58.7 million , which is recognized as compensation expense on an accelerated basis over the vesting period . dividends are accrued on restricted class a common stock and restricted stock units and are paid once the restricted stock vests . in 2017 , the company also granted 203298 performance shares . the fair value related to these grants was $ 25.3 million , which is recognized as compensation expense on an accelerated and straight-lined basis over the vesting period . the vesting of these shares is contingent on meeting stated performance or market conditions . the following table summarizes restricted stock , restricted stock units , and performance shares activity for 2017 : number of shares weighted average grant date fair value .
[/PRE]
[POST]
the total fair value of restricted stock , restricted stock units , and performance shares that vested during 2017 , 2016 and 2015 was $ 66.0 million , $ 59.8 million and $ 43.3 million , respectively . under the espp , eligible employees may acquire shares of class a common stock using after-tax payroll deductions made during consecutive offering periods of approximately six months in duration . shares are purchased at the end of each offering period at a price of 90% ( 90 % ) of the closing price of the class a common stock as reported on the nasdaq global select market . compensation expense is recognized on the dates of purchase for the discount from the closing price . in 2017 , 2016 and 2015 , a total of 19936 , 19858 and 19756 shares , respectively , of class a common stock were issued to participating employees . these shares are subject to a six-month holding period . annual expense of $ 0.3 million for the purchase discount was recognized in 2017 , and $ 0.2 million was recognized in both 2016 and 2015 . non-executive directors receive an annual award of class a common stock with a value equal to $ 100000 . non-executive directors may also elect to receive some or all of the cash portion of their annual stipend , up to $ 60000 , in shares of stock based on the closing price at the date of distribution . as a result , 19736 shares , 26439 shares and 25853 shares of class a common stock were issued to non-executive directors during 2017 , 2016 and 2015 , respectively . these shares are not subject to any vesting restrictions . expense of $ 2.5 million , $ 2.4 million and $ 2.5 million related to these stock-based payments was recognized for the years ended december 31 , 2017 , 2016 and 2015 , respectively. .
[/POST]

[[ ## table ## ]]
| Row | outstanding at december 31 2016 | granted | vested | cancelled | outstanding at december 31 2017 | outstanding at december 31 2016 | granted | vested | cancelled | outstanding at december 31 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| number of shares | 1820578.0 | 650942.0 | -510590.0 | -401699.0 | 1559231.0 | 1820578.0 | 650942.0 | -510590.0 | -401699.0 | 1559231.0 |
| weightedaveragegrant datefair value | 98.0 | 129.0 | 87.0 | 95.0 | 116.0 | 98.0 | 129.0 | 87.0 | 95.0 | 116.0 |

[[ ## question ## ]]
including 2015, what becomes that total of compensation expense?

Respond with the corresponding output fields, starting with the field `[[ ## reasoning ## ]]`, then `[[ ## ops ## ]]`, then `[[ ## answer ## ]]`, and then ending with the marker for `[[ ## completed ## ]]`.


Response:

[[ ## reasoning ## ]]
The question asks for the total compensation expense, including the year 2015. I need to sum up all explicitly stated compensation expenses for the years 2015, 2016, and 2017 from the evidence snippets.

From the snippets:
**For 2017:**
1.  Compensation expense for restricted class A common stock and restricted stock units: $58.7 million.
2.  Compensation expense for performance shares: $25.3 million.
3.  Annual expense for ESPP purchase discount: $0.3 million.
4.  Expense related to non-executive directors' stock-based payments: $2.5 million.
Total for 2017 = 58.7 + 25.3 + 0.3 + 2.5 = 86.8 million.

**For 2016:**
1.  Annual expense for ESPP purchase discount: $0.2 million.
2.  Expense related to non-executive directors' stock-based payments: $2.4 million.
Total for 2016 = 0.2 + 2.4 = 2.6 million.

**For 2015:**
1.  Annual expense for ESPP purchase discount: $0.2 million.
2.  Expense related to non-executive directors' stock-based payments: $2.5 million.
Total for 2015 = 0.2 + 2.5 = 2.7 million.

Finally, sum the total compensation expenses for 2015, 2016, and 2017.
Total compensation expense = Total 2017 + Total 2016 + Total 2015
Total compensation expense = 86.8 + 2.6 + 2.7 = 92.1 million.

[[ ## ops ## ]]
add(58.7, 25.3, 0.3, 2.5, 0.2, 2.4, 0.2, 2.5)

[[ ## answer ## ]]
92.1

We see that a few more examples have been added from the medium stage, which has helped significantly improve the model’s performance.

Let’s also save the programs to disk.

for id, oc in enumerate(mipro_micro_medium_compiled_programs):
    model_name = selected_llms[id].model
    sanitized_model_name = re.sub(r"[-/\.]", "_", model_name)
    oc.save(f"./programs/{sanitized_model_name}_mipro_micro_medium/", save_program=True)

Next, we will optimise for the hard problem

Curriculum Learning: Hard

First, let’s benchmark the optimised programns from the medium stage on the hard validation set

baseline_hard_results = []

with mlflow.start_run(run_name="baseline_micro_hard") as parent_ctx:
    for idx, candidate_lm in enumerate(mipro_llms):
        run_name = f"baseline_{candidate_lm.model.replace('/', '_')}"
        sanitized_run_name = re.sub(r"[^a-zA-Z0-9_\-]", "_", run_name)
        with mlflow.start_run(run_name=sanitized_run_name, nested=True):
            current_evaluator = Evaluate(
                devset=micro_hard_valid_examples,
                num_threads=32,
                display_progress=True,
                return_all_scores=True,
                return_outputs=True,
            )
            with dspy.context(lm=candidate_lm) as ctx:
                current_result = current_evaluator(
                    mipro_micro_medium_compiled_programs[idx], metric=turn_em_metric
                )
                baseline_hard_results.append(current_result)

Average Metric: 208.00 / 266 (78.2%): 100%|██████████| 266/266 [00:03<00:00, 73.06it/s]
🏃 View run eval at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/0572758d7b8544d99f6dd52028e67409
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run baseline_openai_o4-mini-2025-04-16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/2d9c84100b6b4c3688cf42d5eba881f2
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 226.00 / 266 (85.0%): 100%|██████████| 266/266 [00:34<00:00,  7.81it/s]
🏃 View run eval at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/fc410ce0954c4281975199a4fa6d7c04
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run baseline_gemini_gemini-2_5-flash at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/4e9533e7df14490181999627414fc61e
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run baseline_micro_hard at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/bf12642f5c1b4cc8828b89f2599a2b0e
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3

2025/07/29 13:06:41 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 208.0 / 266 (78.2%)
2025/07/29 13:07:15 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 226.0 / 266 (85.0%)

The baseline results are as follows:

model_name	micro_hard_valid_set em_metric
o4-mini	78.2%
gemini-2.5-flash	85.0%

import time

for i in range(10):
    print(f"Waiting... {i + 1}/10 minutes elapsed")
    time.sleep(60)

print("10 minutes have passed.")

Waiting... 1/10 minutes elapsed
Waiting... 2/10 minutes elapsed
Waiting... 3/10 minutes elapsed
Waiting... 4/10 minutes elapsed
Waiting... 5/10 minutes elapsed
Waiting... 6/10 minutes elapsed
Waiting... 7/10 minutes elapsed
Waiting... 8/10 minutes elapsed
Waiting... 9/10 minutes elapsed
Waiting... 10/10 minutes elapsed
10 minutes have passed.

config = dict(
    max_bootstrapped_demos=3,
    max_labeled_demos=3,
    auto="medium",
    log_dir="./mipro_micro_logs",
    num_threads=64,
)

mipro_micro_hard_compiled_programs = []

with mlflow.start_run(run_name="mipro_micro_hard"):
    for idx, candidate_lm in enumerate(mipro_llms):
        run_name = f"mipro_{candidate_lm.model.replace('/', '_')}"
        sanitized_run_name = re.sub(r"[^a-zA-Z0-9_\-]", "_", run_name)
        with mlflow.start_run(run_name=sanitized_run_name, nested=True):
            with dspy.context(lm=candidate_lm) as ctx:
                teleprompter = MIPROv2(metric=turn_em_metric, **config)
                optimized_program = teleprompter.compile(
                    mipro_micro_medium_compiled_programs[idx],
                    trainset=micro_hard_train_examples,
                    valset=micro_hard_valid_examples,
                    requires_permission_to_run=False,
                )
                mipro_micro_hard_compiled_programs.append(optimized_program)

2025/07/29 13:18:39 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
RUNNING WITH THE FOLLOWING MEDIUM AUTO RUN SETTINGS:
num_trials: 18
minibatch: True
num_fewshot_candidates: 12
num_instruct_candidates: 6
valset size: 266

2025/07/29 13:18:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
==> STEP 1: BOOTSTRAP FEWSHOT EXAMPLES <==
2025/07/29 13:18:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: These will be used as few-shot example candidates for our program and for creating instructions.

2025/07/29 13:18:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Bootstrapping N=12 sets of demonstrations...
  0%|          | 4/974 [00:36<2:28:30,  9.19s/it]
  0%|          | 1/974 [00:04<1:10:37,  4.36s/it]
  0%|          | 1/974 [00:04<1:20:09,  4.94s/it]
  0%|          | 3/974 [00:23<2:08:07,  7.92s/it]
  1%|          | 6/974 [00:59<2:40:46,  9.97s/it]
  1%|          | 5/974 [00:58<3:09:39, 11.74s/it]
  0%|          | 2/974 [06:00<48:36:05, 180.01s/it]
  0%|          | 1/974 [00:06<1:48:53,  6.71s/it]
  0%|          | 3/974 [00:25<2:18:44,  8.57s/it]
  0%|          | 1/974 [00:13<3:36:34, 13.36s/it]
2025/07/29 13:34:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
==> STEP 2: PROPOSE INSTRUCTION CANDIDATES <==
2025/07/29 13:34:48 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: We will use the few-shot examples from the previous step, a generated dataset summary, a summary of the program code, and a randomly selected prompting tip to propose instructions.
2025/07/29 13:37:05 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
Proposing N=6 instructions...

2025/07/29 13:37:55 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Proposed Instructions for Predictor 0:

2025/07/29 13:37:55 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 0: You are a financial analyst AI specializing in conversational question answering over corporate financial tables. Given the following inputs:

Conversation Context: {conversation_context}  
Evidence Snippets: {evidence_snippets}  
Table: {table}  
Question: {question}  

Produce exactly three output sections:

1. Reasoning: A clear, step-by-step natural-language analysis showing how you locate numbers in the table or snippets and how you plan to compute the answer.  
2. Ops: A comma-separated ConvFinQA DSL program (using only add(x,y), subtract(x,y), multiply(x,y), divide(x,y), exp(x,y), greater(x,y)) that implements your reasoning. Reference constants or prior steps (#0, #1, …) in the form “op(arg1,arg2)”. Only convert to percentages if explicitly asked.  
3. Answer: The final result as a single number or “yes”/“no”.  

Use the prefixes “Reasoning:”, “Ops:”, and “Answer:” exactly, and do not include any additional sections or commentary.

2025/07/29 13:37:55 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 1: You are a senior financial AI advisor whose precise analysis will determine a multi-billion-dollar corporate acquisition. In this high-stakes scenario, every calculation must be flawless. Given these inputs:

Conversation Context: {conversation_context}  
Evidence Snippets: {evidence_snippets}  
Table: {table}  
Question: {question}  

Produce exactly three output sections, with no additional commentary:

1. Reasoning: A clear, step-by-step natural-language explanation of how you locate values in the table or snippets and plan the computation.  
2. Ops: A comma-separated ConvFinQA DSL program (using only add(x,y), subtract(x,y), multiply(x,y), divide(x,y), exp(x,y), greater(x,y)), referencing constants or prior steps (#0, #1, …). Compute percentages only if explicitly requested.  
3. Answer: The final result as a single number or “yes”/“no.”  

Use the exact prefixes “Reasoning:”, “Ops:”, and “Answer:” for each section.

2025/07/29 13:37:55 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 2: You are a finance‐domain conversational QA system that answers multi‐turn questions over corporate‐filings tables. Given the four inputs:

Conversation Context: {conversation_context}  
Evidence Snippets: {evidence_snippets}  
Table: {table}  
Question: {question}  

Produce exactly three labeled sections:

1. Reasoning: A concise, step-by-step natural-language explanation of how you locate the relevant table cell(s) or snippet(s), what values you extract, and how you plan to compute the answer.  
2. Ops: A comma-separated ConvFinQA DSL program using only the functions add(x,y), subtract(x,y), multiply(x,y), divide(x,y), exp(x,y), greater(x,y), and numeric constants. Reference intermediate results as #0, #1, … in the order computed. Only perform percentage calculations if the user explicitly asks for a percentage.  
3. Answer: The final result, as a single number (or “yes”/“no” for boolean questions).  

Use the exact prefixes “Reasoning:”, “Ops:”, and “Answer:” with no extra commentary or sections.

2025/07/29 13:37:55 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 3: You are a high-stakes financial‐reporting AI whose precise answers will feed directly into a regulatory audit and a critical investor briefing. Under intense accuracy and timeliness constraints, you must analyze corporate financial tables and dialog context to compute numeric results with zero error. 

Given these inputs:

Conversation Context: {conversation_context}  
Evidence Snippets: {evidence_snippets}  
Table: {table}  
Question: {question}  

Produce exactly three output sections in this order, with no additional commentary:

1. Reasoning: A clear, step-by-step natural-language breakdown of how you locate the required values in the table or snippets and how you plan to compute the result.  
2. Ops: A comma-separated ConvFinQA DSL program (using only add(x,y), subtract(x,y), multiply(x,y), divide(x,y), exp(x,y), greater(x,y)) that executes your reasoning. Reference any intermediate results as (#0, #1, …).  
3. Answer: The final numeric result or “yes”/“no” as a single value.  

Use the exact prefixes “Reasoning:”, “Ops:”, and “Answer:” and nothing else.

2025/07/29 13:37:55 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 4: You are a financial analyst AI specializing in conversational QA over corporate financial tables. You will be given:
Conversation Context: {conversation_context}  
Evidence Snippets: {evidence_snippets}  
Table: {table}  
Question: {question}  

Produce exactly three sections in your response:

1. Reasoning: A step-by-step natural‐language explanation of how you locate values in the table or snippets and plan any calculation.  
2. Ops: A comma‐separated ConvFinQA DSL program (using only add(x,y), subtract(x,y), multiply(x,y), divide(x,y), exp(x,y), greater(x,y)) that implements the calculation. Reference constants or previous steps (#0, #1, etc.).  
3. Answer: The final result, as a single number (or “yes”/“no” if appropriate).  

Use the prefixes “Reasoning:”, “Ops:”, and “Answer:” exactly, and do not include any additional text or sections.

2025/07/29 13:37:55 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 5: You are the lead financial analyst AI at a top‐tier hedge fund and every answer you provide will directly influence multi‐million dollar trading decisions. Given the following inputs:

Conversation Context: {conversation_context}  
Evidence Snippets: {evidence_snippets}  
Table: {table}  
Question: {question}  

Produce exactly three output sections, with no additional commentary:

1. Reasoning: A clear, step‐by‐step natural‐language analysis showing how you locate the relevant numbers in the snippets or table and how you plan to compute the final answer.  
2. Ops: A comma‐separated ConvFinQA DSL program (using only add(x,y), subtract(x,y), multiply(x,y), divide(x,y), exp(x,y), greater(x,y)) that implements your reasoning. Reference any intermediate results as #0, #1, etc., or constants directly.    
3. Answer: The final result as a single number (or “yes”/“no” if applicable).

Use the exact prefixes “Reasoning:”, “Ops:”, and “Answer:” for each section.

2025/07/29 13:37:55 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 13:37:55 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==> STEP 3: FINDING OPTIMAL PROMPT PARAMETERS <==
2025/07/29 13:37:55 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: We will evaluate the program over a series of trials with different combinations of instructions and few-shot examples to find the optimal combination using Bayesian Optimization.

2025/07/29 13:37:55 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 1 / 23 - Full Evaluation of Default Program ==
2025/07/29 13:37:59 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 208.0 / 266 (78.2%)
2025/07/29 13:37:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Default program score: 78.2

  warnings.warn(
2025/07/29 13:38:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 2 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:38:57 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 28.0 / 35 (80.0%)
2025/07/29 13:39:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 80.0 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 6'].
2025/07/29 13:39:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0]
2025/07/29 13:39:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2]
2025/07/29 13:39:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 78.2
2025/07/29 13:39:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 13:39:02 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 3 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:39:32 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 31.0 / 35 (88.6%)
2025/07/29 13:39:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 88.57 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 4', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 2'].
2025/07/29 13:39:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57]
2025/07/29 13:39:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2]
2025/07/29 13:39:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 78.2
2025/07/29 13:39:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 13:39:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 4 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:40:20 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 29.0 / 35 (82.9%)
2025/07/29 13:40:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 82.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 0', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 6'].
2025/07/29 13:40:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86]
2025/07/29 13:40:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2]
2025/07/29 13:40:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 78.2
2025/07/29 13:40:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 13:40:25 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 5 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:40:50 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 30.0 / 35 (85.7%)
2025/07/29 13:41:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 85.71 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 4'].
2025/07/29 13:41:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71]
2025/07/29 13:41:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2]
2025/07/29 13:41:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 78.2
2025/07/29 13:41:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 13:41:07 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 6 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:41:38 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 29.0 / 35 (82.9%)
2025/07/29 13:41:44 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 82.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 3', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 13:41:44 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71, 82.86]
2025/07/29 13:41:44 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2]
2025/07/29 13:41:44 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 78.2
2025/07/29 13:41:44 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 13:41:44 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 7 / 23 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 13:41:44 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 88.57) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 13:42:40 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 226.0 / 266 (85.0%)
2025/07/29 13:42:40 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: New best full eval score! Score: 84.96
2025/07/29 13:43:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96]
2025/07/29 13:43:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 13:43:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 13:43:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 13:43:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 8 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:43:34 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 27.0 / 35 (77.1%)
2025/07/29 13:43:39 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 77.14 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 4', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 6'].
2025/07/29 13:43:39 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71, 82.86, 77.14]
2025/07/29 13:43:39 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96]
2025/07/29 13:43:39 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 13:43:39 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 13:43:39 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 9 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:44:08 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 29.0 / 35 (82.9%)
2025/07/29 13:44:30 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 82.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 5', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 1'].
2025/07/29 13:44:30 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71, 82.86, 77.14, 82.86]
2025/07/29 13:44:30 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96]
2025/07/29 13:44:30 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 13:44:30 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 13:44:30 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 10 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:45:29 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 26.0 / 35 (74.3%)
2025/07/29 13:45:35 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 74.29 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 3', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 3'].
2025/07/29 13:45:35 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71, 82.86, 77.14, 82.86, 74.29]
2025/07/29 13:45:35 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96]
2025/07/29 13:45:35 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 13:45:35 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 13:45:35 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 11 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:45:40 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 29.0 / 35 (82.9%)
2025/07/29 13:45:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 82.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 4', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 2'].
2025/07/29 13:45:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71, 82.86, 77.14, 82.86, 74.29, 82.86]
2025/07/29 13:45:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96]
2025/07/29 13:45:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 13:45:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 13:45:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 12 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:46:43 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 31.0 / 35 (88.6%)
2025/07/29 13:46:49 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 88.57 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 4'].
2025/07/29 13:46:49 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71, 82.86, 77.14, 82.86, 74.29, 82.86, 88.57]
2025/07/29 13:46:49 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96]
2025/07/29 13:46:49 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 13:46:49 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 13:46:49 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 13 / 23 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 13:46:49 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 87.13999999999999) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 13:48:01 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 215.0 / 266 (80.8%)
2025/07/29 13:48:01 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96, 80.83]
2025/07/29 13:48:01 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 13:48:01 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 13:48:01 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 13:48:01 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 14 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:48:22 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 32.0 / 35 (91.4%)
2025/07/29 13:48:27 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 91.43 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 9'].
2025/07/29 13:48:27 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71, 82.86, 77.14, 82.86, 74.29, 82.86, 88.57, 91.43]
2025/07/29 13:48:27 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96, 80.83]
2025/07/29 13:48:27 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 13:48:27 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 13:48:27 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 15 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:48:57 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 32.0 / 35 (91.4%)
2025/07/29 13:49:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 91.43 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 9'].
2025/07/29 13:49:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71, 82.86, 77.14, 82.86, 74.29, 82.86, 88.57, 91.43, 91.43]
2025/07/29 13:49:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96, 80.83]
2025/07/29 13:49:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 13:49:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 13:49:03 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 16 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:50:03 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 30.0 / 35 (85.7%)
2025/07/29 13:50:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 85.71 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 9'].
2025/07/29 13:50:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71, 82.86, 77.14, 82.86, 74.29, 82.86, 88.57, 91.43, 91.43, 85.71]
2025/07/29 13:50:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96, 80.83]
2025/07/29 13:50:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 13:50:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 13:50:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 17 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:50:32 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 31.0 / 35 (88.6%)
2025/07/29 13:50:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 88.57 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 5', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 9'].
2025/07/29 13:50:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71, 82.86, 77.14, 82.86, 74.29, 82.86, 88.57, 91.43, 91.43, 85.71, 88.57]
2025/07/29 13:50:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96, 80.83]
2025/07/29 13:50:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 13:50:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 13:50:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 18 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:51:08 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 27.0 / 35 (77.1%)
2025/07/29 13:51:13 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 77.14 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 9'].
2025/07/29 13:51:13 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71, 82.86, 77.14, 82.86, 74.29, 82.86, 88.57, 91.43, 91.43, 85.71, 88.57, 77.14]
2025/07/29 13:51:13 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96, 80.83]
2025/07/29 13:51:13 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 13:51:13 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 13:51:13 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 19 / 23 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 13:51:13 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 88.57) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 13:52:31 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 228.0 / 266 (85.7%)
2025/07/29 13:52:31 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: New best full eval score! Score: 85.71
2025/07/29 13:52:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96, 80.83, 85.71]
2025/07/29 13:52:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 85.71
2025/07/29 13:52:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 13:52:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 13:52:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 20 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:53:03 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 30.0 / 35 (85.7%)
2025/07/29 13:53:40 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 85.71 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 3', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 9'].
2025/07/29 13:53:40 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71, 82.86, 77.14, 82.86, 74.29, 82.86, 88.57, 91.43, 91.43, 85.71, 88.57, 77.14, 85.71]
2025/07/29 13:53:40 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96, 80.83, 85.71]
2025/07/29 13:53:40 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 85.71
2025/07/29 13:53:40 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 13:53:40 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 21 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:54:11 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 31.0 / 35 (88.6%)
2025/07/29 13:54:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 88.57 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 7'].
2025/07/29 13:54:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71, 82.86, 77.14, 82.86, 74.29, 82.86, 88.57, 91.43, 91.43, 85.71, 88.57, 77.14, 85.71, 88.57]
2025/07/29 13:54:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96, 80.83, 85.71]
2025/07/29 13:54:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 85.71
2025/07/29 13:54:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 13:54:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 22 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 13:54:46 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 29.0 / 35 (82.9%)
2025/07/29 13:54:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 82.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 4', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 10'].
2025/07/29 13:54:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [80.0, 88.57, 82.86, 85.71, 82.86, 77.14, 82.86, 74.29, 82.86, 88.57, 91.43, 91.43, 85.71, 88.57, 77.14, 85.71, 88.57, 82.86]
2025/07/29 13:54:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96, 80.83, 85.71]
2025/07/29 13:54:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 85.71
2025/07/29 13:54:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 13:54:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 23 / 23 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 13:54:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 88.57) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 13:56:06 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 230.0 / 266 (86.5%)
2025/07/29 13:56:06 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: New best full eval score! Score: 86.47
2025/07/29 13:56:11 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [78.2, 84.96, 80.83, 85.71, 86.47]
2025/07/29 13:56:11 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 86.47
2025/07/29 13:56:11 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 13:56:11 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 13:56:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Returning best identified program with score 86.47!
2025/07/29 13:56:14 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
RUNNING WITH THE FOLLOWING MEDIUM AUTO RUN SETTINGS:
num_trials: 18
minibatch: True
num_fewshot_candidates: 12
num_instruct_candidates: 6
valset size: 266

2025/07/29 13:56:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
==> STEP 1: BOOTSTRAP FEWSHOT EXAMPLES <==
2025/07/29 13:56:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: These will be used as few-shot example candidates for our program and for creating instructions.

2025/07/29 13:56:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Bootstrapping N=12 sets of demonstrations...
  0%|          | 4/974 [00:09<39:00,  2.41s/it]
  0%|          | 1/974 [00:01<30:48,  1.90s/it]
  0%|          | 1/974 [00:01<23:14,  1.43s/it]
  0%|          | 3/974 [00:04<26:58,  1.67s/it]
  1%|          | 6/974 [00:26<1:12:18,  4.48s/it]
  1%|          | 6/974 [00:21<56:47,  3.52s/it]  
  0%|          | 1/974 [00:01<31:27,  1.94s/it]
  0%|          | 3/974 [00:07<41:49,  2.58s/it]
  0%|          | 3/974 [00:06<33:12,  2.05s/it]
  0%|          | 1/974 [00:02<44:28,  2.74s/it]
2025/07/29 14:03:36 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
==> STEP 2: PROPOSE INSTRUCTION CANDIDATES <==
2025/07/29 14:03:36 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: We will use the few-shot examples from the previous step, a generated dataset summary, a summary of the program code, and a randomly selected prompting tip to propose instructions.
2025/07/29 14:06:53 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 
Proposing N=6 instructions...

2025/07/29 14:07:12 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:07:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Proposed Instructions for Predictor 0:

2025/07/29 14:07:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 0: You are an expert financial AI assistant specialized in analyzing financial documents and answering complex numerical questions. Your primary goal is to accurately extract and compute information from both structured tables and unstructured text, even when answers depend on chained operations or require robust state management across multiple dialogue turns. You must also correctly interpret numerical values, including implicit units and signs, and format outputs appropriately for human-readable results.

Given the `conversation_context` for multi-turn interactions, `evidence_snippets` for textual context, a `table` containing financial data, and the current `question`, your task is to:
1.  First, generate a detailed `reasoning` that explains the logical steps to derive the answer, considering all relevant information from the context, snippets, and table.
2.  Then, translate this reasoning into a precise sequence of `ops` using the ConvFinQA DSL, ensuring correct operations, references, and handling of numerical semantics.
3.  Finally, provide the computed `answer` as a single number or a boolean.

2025/07/29 14:07:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 1: You are an expert financial AI assistant specialized in analyzing financial documents and answering complex numerical questions. Your primary goal is to accurately extract and compute information from both structured tables and unstructured text, even when answers depend on chained operations or require robust state management across multiple dialogue turns. Your responses directly influence critical investment decisions for a major financial institution, where even minor inaccuracies could lead to significant financial losses or severe regulatory consequences. Therefore, precision, logical consistency, and complete adherence to financial best practices are paramount. You must also correctly interpret numerical values, including implicit units and signs, and format outputs appropriately for human-readable results.

Given the `conversation_context` for multi-turn interactions, `evidence_snippets` for textual context, a `table` containing financial data, and the current `question`, your task is to:
1.  First, generate a detailed `reasoning` that explains the logical steps to derive the answer, considering all relevant information from the context, snippets, and table.
2.  Then, translate this reasoning into a precise sequence of `ops` using the ConvFinQA DSL, ensuring correct operations, references, and handling of numerical semantics.
3.  Finally, provide the computed `answer` as a single number or a boolean.

2025/07/29 14:07:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 2: You are an expert financial AI assistant specialized in conversational numerical reasoning over financial documents. Your goal is to precisely answer complex numerical questions by extracting and processing data from structured tables and unstructured text snippets. You must perform multi-step calculations, including unit conversions and chained operations, while maintaining full conversational context across dialogue turns. Pay close attention to interpreting numerical values, implicit units, and complex table structures like time-series data or cross-referenced annotations.

For each query, you will be provided with `conversation_context` (previous turns), `evidence_snippets` (relevant text), a `table` (structured data), and the current `question`.

Your response must be a JSON object containing three fields:
1.  **reasoning**: A detailed, step-by-step explanation of how you arrived at the answer, explicitly referencing values from the `table` and `evidence_snippets`, and considering the `conversation_context` for multi-turn questions.
2.  **ops**: A precise sequence of operations expressed in the ConvFinQA DSL that directly translates your reasoning into a computable plan. Ensure correct operations, numerical references, and semantic handling.
3.  **answer**: The final computed numerical or boolean result of the `ops`, presented as a single raw number or boolean value.

2025/07/29 14:07:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 3: You are an elite financial AI analyst, the cornerstone of a leading global investment firm. Your work directly informs multi-billion dollar investment decisions, making **unwavering accuracy and precision paramount**. Any miscalculation or misinterpretation could lead to catastrophic financial losses, severe regulatory penalties, and irreversible damage to our firm's reputation and client trust. There is zero tolerance for error.

Your mission is to meticulously analyze complex financial documents, extracting and processing critical numerical data from both structured tables and nuanced unstructured text snippets. You must demonstrate exceptional numerical reasoning, executing multi-step calculations, including intricate unit conversions and chained operations, while flawlessly maintaining conversational context across multiple dialogue turns. You are also expected to deftly navigate and interpret challenging table structures, such as time-series data, cross-referenced annotations, and non-numeric placeholders, always ensuring precise numerical values are used.

Given the `conversation_context` for multi-turn interactions, `evidence_snippets` for textual context, a `table` containing financial data, and the current `question`, your task is to:
1.  First, generate a detailed `reasoning` that explains the logical steps to derive the answer, considering all relevant information from the context, snippets, and table. This reasoning must be robust and transparent, as it forms the basis for critical financial decisions.
2.  Then, translate this reasoning into a precise sequence of `ops` using the ConvFinQA DSL, ensuring correct operations, references, and handling of all numerical semantics. This operational sequence must be executable and verifiable.
3.  Finally, provide the computed `answer` as a single number or a boolean. This final answer must be the definitive, unimpeachable result.

2025/07/29 14:07:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 4: You are an expert financial AI assistant specialized in numerical reasoning over financial documents. Your task is to answer complex questions by extracting and computing information from provided `evidence_snippets` (unstructured text) and a `table` (structured data).

Crucially, you must maintain and leverage the `conversation_context` to handle multi-turn questions, where answers may depend on previous turns. Pay close attention to numerical values, including implicit units and signs, and perform multi-step calculations, unit conversions, and chained operations as required.

For each `question`, first provide a detailed `reasoning` explaining your logical steps. Then, translate this reasoning into a precise sequence of `ops` using the ConvFinQA DSL. Finally, output the computed `answer` as a single numerical value or boolean. Ensure your output is accurate and follows the specified format.

2025/07/29 14:07:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 5: You are an expert financial AI assistant specialized in analyzing financial documents and answering complex numerical questions. Your analysis is the sole basis for multi-billion dollar investment decisions, critical regulatory compliance reports, or the evaluation of a company's solvency for a major acquisition. A single computational error, misinterpretation of a financial term, or oversight of a conversational nuance could lead to catastrophic financial losses, regulatory penalties, or the collapse of a deal. Precision is not just a goal; it is an absolute necessity to prevent severe financial repercussions.

Your primary goal is to accurately extract and compute information from both structured tables and unstructured text, even when answers depend on chained operations or require robust state management across multiple dialogue turns. You must also correctly interpret numerical values, including implicit units and signs, and format outputs appropriately for human-readable results.

Given the `conversation_context` for multi-turn interactions, `evidence_snippets` for textual context, a `table` containing financial data, and the current `question`, your task is to:
1.  First, generate a detailed `reasoning` that explains the logical steps to derive the answer, considering all relevant information from the context, snippets, and table.
2.  Then, translate this reasoning into a precise sequence of `ops` using the ConvFinQA DSL, ensuring correct operations, references, and handling of numerical semantics.
3.  Finally, provide the computed `answer` as a single number or a boolean.

2025/07/29 14:07:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 14:07:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==> STEP 3: FINDING OPTIMAL PROMPT PARAMETERS <==
2025/07/29 14:07:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: We will evaluate the program over a series of trials with different combinations of instructions and few-shot examples to find the optimal combination using Bayesian Optimization.

2025/07/29 14:07:38 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 1 / 23 - Full Evaluation of Default Program ==
2025/07/29 14:07:42 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 226.0 / 266 (85.0%)
2025/07/29 14:07:42 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Default program score: 84.96

  warnings.warn(
2025/07/29 14:07:52 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 2 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:08:06 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:08:13 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 27.0 / 35 (77.1%)
2025/07/29 14:08:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 77.14 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 6'].
2025/07/29 14:08:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14]
2025/07/29 14:08:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96]
2025/07/29 14:08:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:08:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 14:08:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 3 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:08:29 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 29.0 / 35 (82.9%)
2025/07/29 14:08:33 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 82.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 4', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 2'].
2025/07/29 14:08:33 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86]
2025/07/29 14:08:33 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96]
2025/07/29 14:08:33 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:08:33 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 14:08:33 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 4 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:09:03 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 28.0 / 35 (80.0%)
2025/07/29 14:09:50 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 80.0 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 0', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 6'].
2025/07/29 14:09:50 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0]
2025/07/29 14:09:50 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96]
2025/07/29 14:09:50 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:09:50 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 14:09:50 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 5 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:10:14 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 27.0 / 35 (77.1%)
2025/07/29 14:10:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 77.14 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 4'].
2025/07/29 14:10:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14]
2025/07/29 14:10:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96]
2025/07/29 14:10:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:10:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 14:10:17 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 6 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:10:49 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 27.0 / 35 (77.1%)
2025/07/29 14:10:52 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 77.14 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 3', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 5'].
2025/07/29 14:10:52 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14, 77.14]
2025/07/29 14:10:52 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96]
2025/07/29 14:10:52 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:10:52 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 14:10:52 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 7 / 23 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 14:10:52 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 82.86) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 14:11:01 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:01 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:01 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:01 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:05 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:05 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:06 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:06 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:06 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:06 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:06 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:06 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the variation in the r&d expenses from 2016 to 2017?\nA1: 12.0\nQ2: and what percentage did this change represent in relation to those expenses in 2016?\nA2: 0.06349', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n13 . rentals and leases the company leases sales and administrative office facilities , distribution centers , research and manufacturing facilities , as well as vehicles and other equipment under operating leases . total rental expense under the company 2019s operating leases was $ 239 million in 2017 and $ 221 million in both 2016 and 2015 . as of december 31 , 2017 , identifiable future minimum payments with non-cancelable terms in excess of one year were : ( millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company enters into operating leases for vehicles whose non-cancelable terms are one year or less in duration with month-to-month renewal options . these leases have been excluded from the table above . the company estimates payments under such leases will approximate $ 62 million in 2018 . these vehicle leases have guaranteed residual values that have historically been satisfied by the proceeds on the sale of the vehicles . 14 . research and development expenditures research expenditures that relate to the development of new products and processes , including significant improvements and refinements to existing products , are expensed as incurred . such costs were $ 201 million in 2017 , $ 189 million in 2016 and $ 191 million in 2015 . the company did not participate in any material customer sponsored research during 2017 , 2016 or 2015 . 15 . commitments and contingencies the company is subject to various claims and contingencies related to , among other things , workers 2019 compensation , general liability ( including product liability ) , automobile claims , health care claims , environmental matters and lawsuits . the company is also subject to various claims and contingencies related to income taxes , which are discussed in note 12 . the company also has contractual obligations including lease commitments , which are discussed in note 13 . the company records liabilities where a contingent loss is probable and can be reasonably estimated . if the reasonable estimate of a probable loss is a range , the company records the most probable estimate of the loss or the minimum amount when no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount . the company discloses a contingent liability even if the liability is not probable or the amount is not estimable , or both , if there is a reasonable possibility that a material loss may have been incurred . insurance globally , the company has insurance policies with varying deductibility levels for property and casualty losses . the company is insured for losses in excess of these deductibles , subject to policy terms and conditions and has recorded both a liability and an offsetting receivable for amounts in excess of these deductibles . the company is self-insured for health care claims for eligible participating employees , subject to certain deductibles and limitations . the company determines its liabilities for claims on an actuarial basis . litigation and environmental matters the company and certain subsidiaries are party to various lawsuits , claims and environmental actions that have arisen in the ordinary course of business . these include from time to time antitrust , commercial , patent infringement , product liability and wage hour lawsuits , as well as possible obligations to investigate and mitigate the effects on the environment of the disposal or release of certain chemical substances at various sites , such as superfund sites and other operating or closed facilities . the company has established accruals for certain lawsuits , claims and environmental matters . the company currently believes that there is not a reasonably possible risk of material loss in excess of the amounts accrued related to these legal matters . because litigation is inherently uncertain , and unfavorable rulings or developments could occur , there can be no certainty that the company may not ultimately incur charges in excess of recorded liabilities . a future adverse ruling , settlement or unfavorable development could result in future charges that could have a material adverse effect on the company 2019s results of operations or cash flows in the period in which they are recorded . the company currently believes that such future charges related to suits and legal claims , if any , would not have a material adverse effect on the company 2019s consolidated financial position . environmental matters the company is currently participating in environmental assessments and remediation at approximately 45 locations , the majority of which are in the u.s. , and environmental liabilities have been accrued reflecting management 2019s best estimate of future costs . potential insurance reimbursements are not anticipated in the company 2019s accruals for environmental liabilities. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | thereafter | total |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 131 | 115.0 | 96.0 | 86.0 | 74.0 | 115.0 | 617.0 |', 'question': 'and over the next year, from 2017 to 2018, what was the change in the total rental expense under the company 2019s operating leases?', 'ops': 'subtract(131, 239)', 'id': 'Double_ECL/2017/page_96.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': '13 . rentals and leases the company leases sales and administrative office facilities , distribution centers , research and manufacturing facilities , as well as vehicles and other equipment under operating leases . total rental expense under the company 2019s operating leases was $ 239 million in 2017 and $ 221 million in both 2016 and 2015 . as of december 31 , 2017 , identifiable future minimum payments with non-cancelable terms in excess of one year were : ( millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company enters into operating leases for vehicles whose non-cancelable terms are one year or less in duration with month-to-month renewal options . these leases have been excluded from the table above . the company estimates payments under such leases will approximate $ 62 million in 2018 . these vehicle leases have guaranteed residual values that have historically been satisfied by the proceeds on the sale of the vehicles . 14 . research and development expenditures research expenditures that relate to the development of new products and processes , including significant improvements and refinements to existing products , are expensed as incurred . such costs were $ 201 million in 2017 , $ 189 million in 2016 and $ 191 million in 2015 . the company did not participate in any material customer sponsored research during 2017 , 2016 or 2015 . 15 . commitments and contingencies the company is subject to various claims and contingencies related to , among other things , workers 2019 compensation , general liability ( including product liability ) , automobile claims , health care claims , environmental matters and lawsuits . the company is also subject to various claims and contingencies related to income taxes , which are discussed in note 12 . the company also has contractual obligations including lease commitments , which are discussed in note 13 . the company records liabilities where a contingent loss is probable and can be reasonably estimated . if the reasonable estimate of a probable loss is a range , the company records the most probable estimate of the loss or the minimum amount when no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount . the company discloses a contingent liability even if the liability is not probable or the amount is not estimable , or both , if there is a reasonable possibility that a material loss may have been incurred . insurance globally , the company has insurance policies with varying deductibility levels for property and casualty losses . the company is insured for losses in excess of these deductibles , subject to policy terms and conditions and has recorded both a liability and an offsetting receivable for amounts in excess of these deductibles . the company is self-insured for health care claims for eligible participating employees , subject to certain deductibles and limitations . the company determines its liabilities for claims on an actuarial basis . litigation and environmental matters the company and certain subsidiaries are party to various lawsuits , claims and environmental actions that have arisen in the ordinary course of business . these include from time to time antitrust , commercial , patent infringement , product liability and wage hour lawsuits , as well as possible obligations to investigate and mitigate the effects on the environment of the disposal or release of certain chemical substances at various sites , such as superfund sites and other operating or closed facilities . the company has established accruals for certain lawsuits , claims and environmental matters . the company currently believes that there is not a reasonably possible risk of material loss in excess of the amounts accrued related to these legal matters . because litigation is inherently uncertain , and unfavorable rulings or developments could occur , there can be no certainty that the company may not ultimately incur charges in excess of recorded liabilities . a future adverse ruling , settlement or unfavorable development could result in future charges that could have a material adverse effect on the company 2019s results of operations or cash flows in the period in which they are recorded . the company currently believes that such future charges related to suits and legal claims , if any , would not have a material adverse effect on the company 2019s consolidated financial position . environmental matters the company is currently participating in environmental assessments and remediation at approximately 45 locations , the majority of which are in the u.s. , and environmental liabilities have been accrued reflecting management 2019s best estimate of future costs . potential insurance reimbursements are not anticipated in the company 2019s accruals for environmental liabilities. .', 'doc_table': {'$ 131': {'2019': 115.0, '2020': 96.0, '2021': 86.0, '2022': 74.0, 'thereafter': 115.0, 'total': 617.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the variation in the r&d expenses from 2016 to 2017?', 'and what percentage did this change represent in relation to those expenses in 2016?', 'and over the next year, from 2017 to 2018, what was the change in the total rental expense under the company 2019s operating leases?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['12', '6.3%', '-108'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(201, 189)', 'subtract(201, 189), divide(#0, 189)', 'subtract(131, 239)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [12.0, 0.06349, -108.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -108.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "53s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:06 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amount of fixed-to-floating rate non-cumulative preferred stock, series cc issued by the company, in billions?\nA1: 1.3\nQ2: and what was the initial dividend rate of that amount?\nA2: 0.04625\nQ3: what is, then, the value, in billions, from that amount, that is represented by this rate?\nA3: 0.06012', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\njpmorgan chase & co./2017 annual report 89 the table below reflects the firm 2019s assessed level of capital allocated to each line of business as of the dates indicated . line of business equity ( allocated capital ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nplanning and stress testing comprehensive capital analysis and review the federal reserve requires large bank holding companies , including the firm , to submit a capital plan on an annual basis . the federal reserve uses the ccar and dodd-frank act stress test processes to ensure that large bhcs have sufficient capital during periods of economic and financial stress , and have robust , forward-looking capital assessment and planning processes in place that address each bhc 2019s unique risks to enable it to absorb losses under certain stress scenarios . through the ccar , the federal reserve evaluates each bhc 2019s capital adequacy and internal capital adequacy assessment processes ( 201cicaap 201d ) , as well as its plans to make capital distributions , such as dividend payments or stock repurchases . on june 28 , 2017 , the federal reserve informed the firm that it did not object , on either a quantitative or qualitative basis , to the firm 2019s 2017 capital plan . for information on actions taken by the firm 2019s board of directors following the 2017 ccar results , see capital actions on pages 89-90 . the firm 2019s ccar process is integrated into and employs the same methodologies utilized in the firm 2019s icaap process , as discussed below . internal capital adequacy assessment process semiannually , the firm completes the icaap , which provides management with a view of the impact of severe and unexpected events on earnings , balance sheet positions , reserves and capital . the firm 2019s icaap integrates stress testing protocols with capital planning . the process assesses the potential impact of alternative economic and business scenarios on the firm 2019s earnings and capital . economic scenarios , and the parameters underlying those scenarios , are defined centrally and applied uniformly across the businesses . these scenarios are articulated in terms of macroeconomic factors , which are key drivers of business results ; global market shocks , which generate short-term but severe trading losses ; and idiosyncratic operational risk events . the scenarios are intended to capture and stress key vulnerabilities and idiosyncratic risks facing the firm . however , when defining a broad range of scenarios , actual events can always be worse . accordingly , management considers additional stresses outside these scenarios , as necessary . icaap results are reviewed by management and the audit committee . capital actions preferred stock preferred stock dividends declared were $ 1.7 billion for the year ended december 31 , 2017 . on october 20 , 2017 , the firm issued $ 1.3 billion of fixed- to-floating rate non-cumulative preferred stock , series cc , with an initial dividend rate of 4.625% ( 4.625 % ) . on december 1 , 2017 , the firm redeemed all $ 1.3 billion of its outstanding 5.50% ( 5.50 % ) non-cumulative preferred stock , series o . for additional information on the firm 2019s preferred stock , see note 20 . trust preferred securities on december 18 , 2017 , the delaware trusts that issued seven series of outstanding trust preferred securities were liquidated , $ 1.6 billion of trust preferred and $ 56 million of common securities originally issued by those trusts were cancelled , and the junior subordinated debentures previously held by each trust issuer were distributed pro rata to the holders of the corresponding series of trust preferred and common securities . the firm redeemed $ 1.6 billion of trust preferred securities in the year ended december 31 , 2016 . common stock dividends the firm 2019s common stock dividend policy reflects jpmorgan chase 2019s earnings outlook , desired dividend payout ratio , capital objectives , and alternative investment opportunities . on september 19 , 2017 , the firm announced that its board of directors increased the quarterly common stock dividend to $ 0.56 per share , effective with the dividend paid on october 31 , 2017 . the firm 2019s dividends are subject to the board of directors 2019 approval on a quarterly basis . for information regarding dividend restrictions , see note 20 and note 25. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | consumer & community banking | corporate & investment bank | commercial banking | asset & wealth management | corporate | total common stockholders 2019 equity | consumer & community banking | corporate & investment bank | commercial banking | asset & wealth management | corporate | total common stockholders 2019 equity | consumer & community banking | corporate & investment bank | commercial banking | asset & wealth management | corporate | total common stockholders 2019 equity |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| january 12018 | 51.0 | 70.0 | 20.0 | 9.0 | 79.6 | 229.6 | 51.0 | 70.0 | 20.0 | 9.0 | 79.6 | 229.6 | 51.0 | 70.0 | 20.0 | 9.0 | 79.6 | 229.6 |\n| december 31 , 2017 | 51.0 | 70.0 | 20.0 | 9.0 | 79.6 | 229.6 | 51.0 | 70.0 | 20.0 | 9.0 | 79.6 | 229.6 | 51.0 | 70.0 | 20.0 | 9.0 | 79.6 | 229.6 |\n| december 31 , 2016 | 51.0 | 64.0 | 16.0 | 9.0 | 88.1 | 228.1 | 51.0 | 64.0 | 16.0 | 9.0 | 88.1 | 228.1 | 51.0 | 64.0 | 16.0 | 9.0 | 88.1 | 228.1 |', 'question': 'and how much is that, in millions?', 'ops': 'multiply(1.3, 4.625%), multiply(#0, const_1000)', 'id': 'Single_JPM/2017/page_119.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'jpmorgan chase & co./2017 annual report 89 the table below reflects the firm 2019s assessed level of capital allocated to each line of business as of the dates indicated . line of business equity ( allocated capital ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'planning and stress testing comprehensive capital analysis and review the federal reserve requires large bank holding companies , including the firm , to submit a capital plan on an annual basis . the federal reserve uses the ccar and dodd-frank act stress test processes to ensure that large bhcs have sufficient capital during periods of economic and financial stress , and have robust , forward-looking capital assessment and planning processes in place that address each bhc 2019s unique risks to enable it to absorb losses under certain stress scenarios . through the ccar , the federal reserve evaluates each bhc 2019s capital adequacy and internal capital adequacy assessment processes ( 201cicaap 201d ) , as well as its plans to make capital distributions , such as dividend payments or stock repurchases . on june 28 , 2017 , the federal reserve informed the firm that it did not object , on either a quantitative or qualitative basis , to the firm 2019s 2017 capital plan . for information on actions taken by the firm 2019s board of directors following the 2017 ccar results , see capital actions on pages 89-90 . the firm 2019s ccar process is integrated into and employs the same methodologies utilized in the firm 2019s icaap process , as discussed below . internal capital adequacy assessment process semiannually , the firm completes the icaap , which provides management with a view of the impact of severe and unexpected events on earnings , balance sheet positions , reserves and capital . the firm 2019s icaap integrates stress testing protocols with capital planning . the process assesses the potential impact of alternative economic and business scenarios on the firm 2019s earnings and capital . economic scenarios , and the parameters underlying those scenarios , are defined centrally and applied uniformly across the businesses . these scenarios are articulated in terms of macroeconomic factors , which are key drivers of business results ; global market shocks , which generate short-term but severe trading losses ; and idiosyncratic operational risk events . the scenarios are intended to capture and stress key vulnerabilities and idiosyncratic risks facing the firm . however , when defining a broad range of scenarios , actual events can always be worse . accordingly , management considers additional stresses outside these scenarios , as necessary . icaap results are reviewed by management and the audit committee . capital actions preferred stock preferred stock dividends declared were $ 1.7 billion for the year ended december 31 , 2017 . on october 20 , 2017 , the firm issued $ 1.3 billion of fixed- to-floating rate non-cumulative preferred stock , series cc , with an initial dividend rate of 4.625% ( 4.625 % ) . on december 1 , 2017 , the firm redeemed all $ 1.3 billion of its outstanding 5.50% ( 5.50 % ) non-cumulative preferred stock , series o . for additional information on the firm 2019s preferred stock , see note 20 . trust preferred securities on december 18 , 2017 , the delaware trusts that issued seven series of outstanding trust preferred securities were liquidated , $ 1.6 billion of trust preferred and $ 56 million of common securities originally issued by those trusts were cancelled , and the junior subordinated debentures previously held by each trust issuer were distributed pro rata to the holders of the corresponding series of trust preferred and common securities . the firm redeemed $ 1.6 billion of trust preferred securities in the year ended december 31 , 2016 . common stock dividends the firm 2019s common stock dividend policy reflects jpmorgan chase 2019s earnings outlook , desired dividend payout ratio , capital objectives , and alternative investment opportunities . on september 19 , 2017 , the firm announced that its board of directors increased the quarterly common stock dividend to $ 0.56 per share , effective with the dividend paid on october 31 , 2017 . the firm 2019s dividends are subject to the board of directors 2019 approval on a quarterly basis . for information regarding dividend restrictions , see note 20 and note 25. .', 'doc_table': {'january 12018': {'consumer & community banking': 51.0, 'corporate & investment bank': 70.0, 'commercial banking': 20.0, 'asset & wealth management': 9.0, 'corporate': 79.6, 'total common stockholders 2019 equity': 229.6}, 'december 31 , 2017': {'consumer & community banking': 51.0, 'corporate & investment bank': 70.0, 'commercial banking': 20.0, 'asset & wealth management': 9.0, 'corporate': 79.6, 'total common stockholders 2019 equity': 229.6}, 'december 31 , 2016': {'consumer & community banking': 51.0, 'corporate & investment bank': 64.0, 'commercial banking': 16.0, 'asset & wealth management': 9.0, 'corporate': 88.1, 'total common stockholders 2019 equity': 228.1}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amount of fixed-to-floating rate non-cumulative preferred stock, series cc issued by the company, in billions?', 'and what was the initial dividend rate of that amount?', 'what is, then, the value, in billions, from that amount, that is represented by this rate?', 'and how much is that, in millions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1.3', '4.625%', '.060125', '60.1'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1.3', '4.625%', 'multiply(1.3, 4.625%)', 'multiply(1.3, 4.625%), multiply(#0, const_1000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1.3, 0.04625, 0.06012, 60.125], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 60.125}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "53s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:06 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:07 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:07 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the long-term debt in 2015?\nA1: 1610.3\nQ2: and what was it in 2014?\nA2: 1612.9\nQ3: what was, then, the total long-term debt for those two years combined?\nA3: 3223.2\nQ4: and what was the total debt in that same period?\nA4: 3484.5', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2013 ( continued ) ( amounts in millions , except per share amounts ) financing activities net cash used in financing activities during 2015 primarily related to the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we repurchased 13.6 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 285.2 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 195.5 on our common stock . net cash used in financing activities during 2014 primarily related to the purchase of long-term debt , the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we redeemed all $ 350.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 6.25% ( 6.25 % ) notes , repurchased 14.9 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 275.1 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 159.0 on our common stock . this was offset by the issuance of $ 500.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 4.20% ( 4.20 % ) notes . foreign exchange rate changes the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 156.1 in 2015 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar , euro and south african rand as of december 31 , 2015 compared to december 31 , 2014 . the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 101.0 in 2014 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar and euro as of december 31 , 2014 compared to december 31 , 2013. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nliquidity outlook we expect our cash flow from operations , cash and cash equivalents to be sufficient to meet our anticipated operating requirements at a minimum for the next twelve months . we also have a committed corporate credit facility as well as uncommitted facilities available to support our operating needs . we continue to maintain a disciplined approach to managing liquidity , with flexibility over significant uses of cash , including our capital expenditures , cash used for new acquisitions , our common stock repurchase program and our common stock dividends . from time to time , we evaluate market conditions and financing alternatives for opportunities to raise additional funds or otherwise improve our liquidity profile , enhance our financial flexibility and manage market risk . our ability to access the capital markets depends on a number of factors , which include those specific to us , such as our credit rating , and those related to the financial markets , such as the amount or terms of available credit . there can be no guarantee that we would be able to access new sources of liquidity on commercially reasonable terms , or at all . funding requirements our most significant funding requirements include our operations , non-cancelable operating lease obligations , capital expenditures , acquisitions , common stock dividends , taxes , debt service and contributions to pension and postretirement plans . additionally , we may be required to make payments to minority shareholders in certain subsidiaries if they exercise their options to sell us their equity interests. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash cash equivalents and marketable securities | short-term borrowings | current portion of long-term debt | long-term debt | total debt | cash cash equivalents and marketable securities | short-term borrowings | current portion of long-term debt | long-term debt | total debt |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| december 31 , 2015 | 1509.7 | 150.1 | 1.9 | 1610.3 | 1762.3 | 1509.7 | 150.1 | 1.9 | 1610.3 | 1762.3 |\n| december 31 , 2014 | 1667.2 | 107.2 | 2.1 | 1612.9 | 1722.2 | 1667.2 | 107.2 | 2.1 | 1612.9 | 1722.2 |', 'question': 'how much, then, does the long-term debt represent in relation to this total debt, in the two year period?', 'ops': 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2), divide(#0, #1)', 'id': 'Single_IPG/2015/page_38.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2013 ( continued ) ( amounts in millions , except per share amounts ) financing activities net cash used in financing activities during 2015 primarily related to the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we repurchased 13.6 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 285.2 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 195.5 on our common stock . net cash used in financing activities during 2014 primarily related to the purchase of long-term debt , the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we redeemed all $ 350.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 6.25% ( 6.25 % ) notes , repurchased 14.9 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 275.1 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 159.0 on our common stock . this was offset by the issuance of $ 500.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 4.20% ( 4.20 % ) notes . foreign exchange rate changes the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 156.1 in 2015 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar , euro and south african rand as of december 31 , 2015 compared to december 31 , 2014 . the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 101.0 in 2014 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar and euro as of december 31 , 2014 compared to december 31 , 2013. .', 'doc_post_text': 'liquidity outlook we expect our cash flow from operations , cash and cash equivalents to be sufficient to meet our anticipated operating requirements at a minimum for the next twelve months . we also have a committed corporate credit facility as well as uncommitted facilities available to support our operating needs . we continue to maintain a disciplined approach to managing liquidity , with flexibility over significant uses of cash , including our capital expenditures , cash used for new acquisitions , our common stock repurchase program and our common stock dividends . from time to time , we evaluate market conditions and financing alternatives for opportunities to raise additional funds or otherwise improve our liquidity profile , enhance our financial flexibility and manage market risk . our ability to access the capital markets depends on a number of factors , which include those specific to us , such as our credit rating , and those related to the financial markets , such as the amount or terms of available credit . there can be no guarantee that we would be able to access new sources of liquidity on commercially reasonable terms , or at all . funding requirements our most significant funding requirements include our operations , non-cancelable operating lease obligations , capital expenditures , acquisitions , common stock dividends , taxes , debt service and contributions to pension and postretirement plans . additionally , we may be required to make payments to minority shareholders in certain subsidiaries if they exercise their options to sell us their equity interests. .', 'doc_table': {'december 31 , 2015': {'cash cash equivalents and marketable securities': 1509.7, 'short-term borrowings': 150.1, 'current portion of long-term debt': 1.9, 'long-term debt': 1610.3, 'total debt': 1762.3}, 'december 31 , 2014': {'cash cash equivalents and marketable securities': 1667.2, 'short-term borrowings': 107.2, 'current portion of long-term debt': 2.1, 'long-term debt': 1612.9, 'total debt': 1722.2}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the long-term debt in 2015?', 'and what was it in 2014?', 'what was, then, the total long-term debt for those two years combined?', 'and what was the total debt in that same period?', 'how much, then, does the long-term debt represent in relation to this total debt, in the two year period?', 'and how much is that in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1610.3', '1612.9', '3223.2', '3484.5', '0.925', '92.5'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1610.3', '1612.9', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9)', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2)', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2), divide(#0, #1)', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2), divide(#0, #1), multiply(#2, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1610.3, 1612.9, 3223.2, 3484.5, 0.92501, 92.50108], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.92501}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "53s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:07 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:07 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the net change in value of an investment in s&p500 from 2010 to 2011?\nA1: 8.09\nQ2: what is the initial value?\nA2: 100.0\nQ3: what rate of return does this represent?\nA3: 0.0809\nQ4: what is the quarterly cash dividends for the first three quarters?\nA4: 0.3\nQ5: what about the fourth quarter?\nA5: 0.09\nQ6: what is the total dividends in 2013?\nA6: 0.39', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nperformance graph the performance graph below shows the five-year cumulative total stockholder return on applied common stock during the period from october 31 , 2010 through october 25 , 2015 . this is compared with the cumulative total return of the standard & poor 2019s 500 stock index and the rdg semiconductor composite index over the same period . the comparison assumes $ 100 was invested on october 31 , 2010 in applied common stock and in each of the foregoing indices and assumes reinvestment of dividends , if any . dollar amounts in the graph are rounded to the nearest whole dollar . the performance shown in the graph represents past performance and should not be considered an indication of future performance . comparison of 5 year cumulative total return* among applied materials , inc. , the s&p 500 index and the rdg semiconductor composite index *assumes $ 100 invested on 10/31/10 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . indexes calculated on month-end basis . 201cs&p 201d is a registered trademark of standard & poor 2019s financial services llc , a subsidiary of the mcgraw-hill companies , inc. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ndividends during each of fiscal 2015 and 2014 , applied's board of directors declared four quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share . during fiscal 2013 , applied 2019s board of directors declared three quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share and one quarterly cash dividend of $ 0.09 per share . dividends paid during fiscal 2015 , 2014 and 2013 amounted to $ 487 million , $ 485 million and $ 456 million , respectively . applied currently anticipates that cash dividends will continue to be paid on a quarterly basis , although the declaration of any future cash dividend is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on applied 2019s financial condition , results of operations , capital requirements , business conditions and other factors , as well as a determination by the board of directors that cash dividends are in the best interests of applied 2019s stockholders . 104 136 10/31/10 10/30/11 10/28/12 10/27/13 10/26/14 10/25/15 applied materials , inc . s&p 500 rdg semiconductor composite .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 10/31/2010 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| 10/30/2011 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 |\n| 10/28/2012 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 |\n| 10/27/2013 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 |\n| 10/26/2014 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 |\n| 10/25/2015 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 |', 'question': 'how many shares received this dividend in 2013?', 'ops': 'multiply(0.10, const_3), add(#0, 0.09), divide(487, #1)', 'id': 'Double_AMAT/2015/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'performance graph the performance graph below shows the five-year cumulative total stockholder return on applied common stock during the period from october 31 , 2010 through october 25 , 2015 . this is compared with the cumulative total return of the standard & poor 2019s 500 stock index and the rdg semiconductor composite index over the same period . the comparison assumes $ 100 was invested on october 31 , 2010 in applied common stock and in each of the foregoing indices and assumes reinvestment of dividends , if any . dollar amounts in the graph are rounded to the nearest whole dollar . the performance shown in the graph represents past performance and should not be considered an indication of future performance . comparison of 5 year cumulative total return* among applied materials , inc. , the s&p 500 index and the rdg semiconductor composite index *assumes $ 100 invested on 10/31/10 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . indexes calculated on month-end basis . 201cs&p 201d is a registered trademark of standard & poor 2019s financial services llc , a subsidiary of the mcgraw-hill companies , inc. .', 'doc_post_text': "dividends during each of fiscal 2015 and 2014 , applied's board of directors declared four quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share . during fiscal 2013 , applied 2019s board of directors declared three quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share and one quarterly cash dividend of $ 0.09 per share . dividends paid during fiscal 2015 , 2014 and 2013 amounted to $ 487 million , $ 485 million and $ 456 million , respectively . applied currently anticipates that cash dividends will continue to be paid on a quarterly basis , although the declaration of any future cash dividend is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on applied 2019s financial condition , results of operations , capital requirements , business conditions and other factors , as well as a determination by the board of directors that cash dividends are in the best interests of applied 2019s stockholders . 104 136 10/31/10 10/30/11 10/28/12 10/27/13 10/26/14 10/25/15 applied materials , inc . s&p 500 rdg semiconductor composite .", 'doc_table': {'10/31/2010': {'applied materials': 100.0, 's&p 500 index': 100.0, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 100.0}, '10/30/2011': {'applied materials': 104.54, 's&p 500 index': 108.09, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 110.04}, '10/28/2012': {'applied materials': 90.88, 's&p 500 index': 124.52, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 104.07}, '10/27/2013': {'applied materials': 155.43, 's&p 500 index': 158.36, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 136.15}, '10/26/2014': {'applied materials': 188.13, 's&p 500 index': 185.71, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 172.41}, '10/25/2015': {'applied materials': 150.26, 's&p 500 index': 195.37, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 170.4}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in value of an investment in s&p500 from 2010 to 2011?', 'what is the initial value?', 'what rate of return does this represent?', 'what is the quarterly cash dividends for the first three quarters?', 'what about the fourth quarter?', 'what is the total dividends in 2013?', 'how many shares received this dividend in 2013?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['8.09', '100', '8.1%', '0.3', '0.09', '0.39', '1248.7'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(108.09, 100)', '100', 'subtract(108.09, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'multiply(0.10, const_3)', '0.09', 'multiply(0.10, const_3), add(#0, 0.09)', 'multiply(0.10, const_3), add(#0, 0.09), divide(487, #1)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [8.09, 100.0, 0.0809, 0.3, 0.09, 0.39, 1248.71795], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1248.71795}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "52s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:07 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nlockheed martin corporation management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations december 31 , 2002 space systems space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2002 2001 2000 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnet sales for space systems increased by 8% ( 8 % ) in 2002 compared to 2001 . the increase in sales for 2002 resulted from higher volume in government space of $ 370 million and commercial space of $ 180 million . in government space , increases of $ 470 million in government satellite programs and $ 130 million in ground systems activities more than offset volume declines of $ 175 million on government launch vehi- cles and $ 55 million on strategic missile programs . the increase in commercial space sales is primarily attributable to an increase in launch vehicle activities , with nine commercial launches during 2002 compared to six in 2001 . net sales for the segment decreased by 7% ( 7 % ) in 2001 com- pared to 2000 . the decrease in sales for 2001 resulted from volume declines in commercial space of $ 560 million , which more than offset increases in government space of $ 60 million . in commercial space , sales declined due to volume reductions of $ 480 million in commercial launch vehicle activities and $ 80 million in satellite programs . there were six launches in 2001 compared to 14 launches in 2000 . the increase in gov- ernment space resulted from a combined increase of $ 230 mil- lion related to higher volume on government satellite programs and ground systems activities . these increases were partially offset by a $ 110 million decrease related to volume declines in government launch vehicle activity , primarily due to program maturities , and by $ 50 million due to the absence in 2001 of favorable adjustments recorded on the titan iv pro- gram in 2000 . operating profit for the segment increased 23% ( 23 % ) in 2002 as compared to 2001 , mainly driven by the commercial space business . reduced losses in commercial space during 2002 resulted in increased operating profit of $ 90 million when compared to 2001 . commercial satellite manufacturing losses declined $ 100 million in 2002 as operating performance improved and satellite deliveries increased . in the first quarter of 2001 , a $ 40 million loss provision was recorded on certain commercial satellite manufacturing contracts . due to the industry-wide oversupply and deterioration of pricing in the commercial launch market , financial results on commercial launch vehicles continue to be challenging . during 2002 , this trend led to a decline in operating profit of $ 10 million on commercial launch vehicles when compared to 2001 . this decrease was primarily due to lower profitability of $ 55 mil- lion on the three additional launches in the current year , addi- tional charges of $ 60 million ( net of a favorable contract adjustment of $ 20 million ) for market and pricing pressures and included the adverse effect of a $ 35 million adjustment for commercial launch vehicle contract settlement costs . the 2001 results also included charges for market and pricing pressures , which reduced that year 2019s operating profit by $ 145 million . the $ 10 million decrease in government space 2019s operating profit for the year is primarily due to the reduced volume on government launch vehicles and strategic missile programs , which combined to decrease operating profit by $ 80 million , partially offset by increases of $ 40 million in government satellite programs and $ 30 million in ground systems activities . operating profit for the segment increased by 4% ( 4 % ) in 2001 compared to 2000 . operating profit increased in 2001 due to a $ 35 million increase in government space partially offset by higher year-over-year losses of $ 20 million in commercial space . in government space , operating profit increased due to the impact of higher volume and improved performance in ground systems and government satellite programs . the year- to-year comparison of operating profit was not affected by the $ 50 million favorable titan iv adjustment recorded in 2000 discussed above , due to a $ 55 million charge related to a more conservative assessment of government launch vehi- cle programs that was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2000 . in commercial space , decreased operating profit of $ 15 mil- lion on launch vehicles more than offset lower losses on satel- lite manufacturing activities . the commercial launch vehicle operating results included $ 60 million in higher charges for market and pricing pressures when compared to 2000 . these negative adjustments were partially offset by $ 50 million of favorable contract adjustments on certain launch vehicle con- tracts . commercial satellite manufacturing losses decreased slightly from 2000 and included the adverse impact of a $ 40 million loss provision recorded in the first quarter of 2001 for certain commercial satellite contracts related to schedule and technical issues. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net sales | operating profit | net sales | operating profit | net sales | operating profit |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2002 | 7384.0 | 443.0 | 7384.0 | 443.0 | 7384.0 | 443.0 |\n| 2001 | 6836.0 | 360.0 | 6836.0 | 360.0 | 6836.0 | 360.0 |\n| 2000 | 7339.0 | 345.0 | 7339.0 | 345.0 | 7339.0 | 345.0 |', 'question': 'what was the profit margin for lockheed martin in 2002?', 'ops': 'divide(443, 7384)', 'id': 'Double_LMT/2002/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'lockheed martin corporation management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations december 31 , 2002 space systems space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2002 2001 2000 .', 'doc_post_text': 'net sales for space systems increased by 8% ( 8 % ) in 2002 compared to 2001 . the increase in sales for 2002 resulted from higher volume in government space of $ 370 million and commercial space of $ 180 million . in government space , increases of $ 470 million in government satellite programs and $ 130 million in ground systems activities more than offset volume declines of $ 175 million on government launch vehi- cles and $ 55 million on strategic missile programs . the increase in commercial space sales is primarily attributable to an increase in launch vehicle activities , with nine commercial launches during 2002 compared to six in 2001 . net sales for the segment decreased by 7% ( 7 % ) in 2001 com- pared to 2000 . the decrease in sales for 2001 resulted from volume declines in commercial space of $ 560 million , which more than offset increases in government space of $ 60 million . in commercial space , sales declined due to volume reductions of $ 480 million in commercial launch vehicle activities and $ 80 million in satellite programs . there were six launches in 2001 compared to 14 launches in 2000 . the increase in gov- ernment space resulted from a combined increase of $ 230 mil- lion related to higher volume on government satellite programs and ground systems activities . these increases were partially offset by a $ 110 million decrease related to volume declines in government launch vehicle activity , primarily due to program maturities , and by $ 50 million due to the absence in 2001 of favorable adjustments recorded on the titan iv pro- gram in 2000 . operating profit for the segment increased 23% ( 23 % ) in 2002 as compared to 2001 , mainly driven by the commercial space business . reduced losses in commercial space during 2002 resulted in increased operating profit of $ 90 million when compared to 2001 . commercial satellite manufacturing losses declined $ 100 million in 2002 as operating performance improved and satellite deliveries increased . in the first quarter of 2001 , a $ 40 million loss provision was recorded on certain commercial satellite manufacturing contracts . due to the industry-wide oversupply and deterioration of pricing in the commercial launch market , financial results on commercial launch vehicles continue to be challenging . during 2002 , this trend led to a decline in operating profit of $ 10 million on commercial launch vehicles when compared to 2001 . this decrease was primarily due to lower profitability of $ 55 mil- lion on the three additional launches in the current year , addi- tional charges of $ 60 million ( net of a favorable contract adjustment of $ 20 million ) for market and pricing pressures and included the adverse effect of a $ 35 million adjustment for commercial launch vehicle contract settlement costs . the 2001 results also included charges for market and pricing pressures , which reduced that year 2019s operating profit by $ 145 million . the $ 10 million decrease in government space 2019s operating profit for the year is primarily due to the reduced volume on government launch vehicles and strategic missile programs , which combined to decrease operating profit by $ 80 million , partially offset by increases of $ 40 million in government satellite programs and $ 30 million in ground systems activities . operating profit for the segment increased by 4% ( 4 % ) in 2001 compared to 2000 . operating profit increased in 2001 due to a $ 35 million increase in government space partially offset by higher year-over-year losses of $ 20 million in commercial space . in government space , operating profit increased due to the impact of higher volume and improved performance in ground systems and government satellite programs . the year- to-year comparison of operating profit was not affected by the $ 50 million favorable titan iv adjustment recorded in 2000 discussed above , due to a $ 55 million charge related to a more conservative assessment of government launch vehi- cle programs that was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2000 . in commercial space , decreased operating profit of $ 15 mil- lion on launch vehicles more than offset lower losses on satel- lite manufacturing activities . the commercial launch vehicle operating results included $ 60 million in higher charges for market and pricing pressures when compared to 2000 . these negative adjustments were partially offset by $ 50 million of favorable contract adjustments on certain launch vehicle con- tracts . commercial satellite manufacturing losses decreased slightly from 2000 and included the adverse impact of a $ 40 million loss provision recorded in the first quarter of 2001 for certain commercial satellite contracts related to schedule and technical issues. .', 'doc_table': {'2002': {'net sales': 7384.0, 'operating profit': 443.0}, '2001': {'net sales': 6836.0, 'operating profit': 360.0}, '2000': {'net sales': 7339.0, 'operating profit': 345.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the profit margin for lockheed martin in 2002?', 'what was the total operating profit in 2002 and 2001?', 'and including the value for 2003?', 'so what was the average value during this time?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['6%', '803', '1148', '382.7'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['divide(443, 7384)', 'add(443, 360)', 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345)', 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345), divide(#1, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [0.05999, 803.0, 1148.0, 382.66667], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.05999}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "52s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:07 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:07 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the difference in price for apple between 2008 and 2013?\nA1: 331.0\nQ2: and the percentage growth?\nA2: 3.31\nQ3: and the difference for the s&p computer hardware index over the same period?\nA3: 97.0\nQ4: and the starting price for the index?\nA4: 100.0\nQ5: so what was the percentage growth?\nA5: 0.97', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ntable of contents company stock performance the following graph shows a five-year comparison of cumulative total shareholder return , calculated on a dividend reinvested basis , for the company , the s&p 500 index , the s&p computer hardware index , and the dow jones u.s . technology supersector index . the graph assumes $ 100 was invested in each of the company 2019s common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p computer hardware index , and the dow jones u.s . technology supersector index as of the market close on september 30 , 2008 . data points on the graph are annual . note that historic stock price performance is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance . fiscal year ending september 30 . copyright 2013 s&p , a division of the mcgraw-hill companies inc . all rights reserved . copyright 2013 dow jones & co . all rights reserved . *$ 100 invested on 9/30/08 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| september 30 2008 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| september 30 2009 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 |\n| september 30 2010 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 |\n| september 30 2011 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 |\n| september 30 2012 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 |\n| september 30 2013 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 |', 'question': 'and the difference between these two growth rates?', 'ops': 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(197, 100), divide(#2, 100), subtract(#1, #3)', 'id': 'Single_AAPL/2013/page_27.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'table of contents company stock performance the following graph shows a five-year comparison of cumulative total shareholder return , calculated on a dividend reinvested basis , for the company , the s&p 500 index , the s&p computer hardware index , and the dow jones u.s . technology supersector index . the graph assumes $ 100 was invested in each of the company 2019s common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p computer hardware index , and the dow jones u.s . technology supersector index as of the market close on september 30 , 2008 . data points on the graph are annual . note that historic stock price performance is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance . fiscal year ending september 30 . copyright 2013 s&p , a division of the mcgraw-hill companies inc . all rights reserved . copyright 2013 dow jones & co . all rights reserved . *$ 100 invested on 9/30/08 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'september 30 2008': {'apple inc .': 100.0, 's&p 500 index': 100.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 100.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 100.0}, 'september 30 2009': {'apple inc .': 163.0, 's&p 500 index': 93.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 118.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 111.0}, 'september 30 2010': {'apple inc .': 250.0, 's&p 500 index': 103.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 140.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 124.0}, 'september 30 2011': {'apple inc .': 335.0, 's&p 500 index': 104.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 159.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 128.0}, 'september 30 2012': {'apple inc .': 589.0, 's&p 500 index': 135.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 255.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 166.0}, 'september 30 2013': {'apple inc .': 431.0, 's&p 500 index': 161.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 197.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 175.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the difference in price for apple between 2008 and 2013?', 'and the percentage growth?', 'and the difference for the s&p computer hardware index over the same period?', 'and the starting price for the index?', 'so what was the percentage growth?', 'and the difference between these two growth rates?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['331', '331%', '97', '100', '97%', '270%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(431, 100)', 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(197, 100)', '100', 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(197, 100), divide(#2, 100)', 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(197, 100), divide(#2, 100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [331.0, 3.31, 97.0, 100.0, 0.97, 2.34], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 2.34}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "52s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:08 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value of the aptiv plc in 2018?\nA1: 130.8\nQ2: what was, then, the change in its value, considering 2018 and the original amount invested in it in 2013?\nA2: 30.8\nQ3: and what was the change in the value of the automotive peer group, considering the 2018 one and the original amount invested in it in 2013?\nA3: 6.89\nQ4: how much does the change in the value of the aptiv plc represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?\nA4: 0.308', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities our ordinary shares have been publicly traded since november 17 , 2011 when our ordinary shares were listed and began trading on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) under the symbol 201cdlph . 201d on december 4 , 2017 , following the spin-off of delphi technologies , the company changed its name to aptiv plc and its nyse symbol to 201captv . 201d as of january 25 , 2019 , there were 2 shareholders of record of our ordinary shares . the following graph reflects the comparative changes in the value from december 31 , 2013 through december 31 , 2018 , assuming an initial investment of $ 100 and the reinvestment of dividends , if any in ( 1 ) our ordinary shares , ( 2 ) the s&p 500 index and ( 3 ) the automotive peer group . historical share prices of our ordinary shares have been adjusted to reflect the separation . historical performance may not be indicative of future shareholder returns . stock performance graph * $ 100 invested on december 31 , 2013 in our stock or in the relevant index , including reinvestment of dividends . fiscal year ended december 31 , 2018 . ( 1 ) aptiv plc , adjusted for the distribution of delphi technologies on december 4 , 2017 ( 2 ) s&p 500 2013 standard & poor 2019s 500 total return index ( 3 ) automotive peer group 2013 adient plc , american axle & manufacturing holdings inc , aptiv plc , borgwarner inc , cooper tire & rubber co , cooper- standard holdings inc , dana inc , dorman products inc , ford motor co , garrett motion inc. , general motors co , gentex corp , gentherm inc , genuine parts co , goodyear tire & rubber co , lear corp , lkq corp , meritor inc , motorcar parts of america inc , standard motor products inc , stoneridge inc , superior industries international inc , tenneco inc , tesla inc , tower international inc , visteon corp , wabco holdings inc company index december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| december 31 2013 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| december 31 2014 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 |\n| december 31 2015 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 |\n| december 31 2016 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 |\n| december 31 2017 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 |\n| december 31 2018 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 |', 'question': 'and how much does the change in the value of the automotive peer group represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?', 'ops': 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), divide(#1, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_APTV/2018/page_36.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'part ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities our ordinary shares have been publicly traded since november 17 , 2011 when our ordinary shares were listed and began trading on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) under the symbol 201cdlph . 201d on december 4 , 2017 , following the spin-off of delphi technologies , the company changed its name to aptiv plc and its nyse symbol to 201captv . 201d as of january 25 , 2019 , there were 2 shareholders of record of our ordinary shares . the following graph reflects the comparative changes in the value from december 31 , 2013 through december 31 , 2018 , assuming an initial investment of $ 100 and the reinvestment of dividends , if any in ( 1 ) our ordinary shares , ( 2 ) the s&p 500 index and ( 3 ) the automotive peer group . historical share prices of our ordinary shares have been adjusted to reflect the separation . historical performance may not be indicative of future shareholder returns . stock performance graph * $ 100 invested on december 31 , 2013 in our stock or in the relevant index , including reinvestment of dividends . fiscal year ended december 31 , 2018 . ( 1 ) aptiv plc , adjusted for the distribution of delphi technologies on december 4 , 2017 ( 2 ) s&p 500 2013 standard & poor 2019s 500 total return index ( 3 ) automotive peer group 2013 adient plc , american axle & manufacturing holdings inc , aptiv plc , borgwarner inc , cooper tire & rubber co , cooper- standard holdings inc , dana inc , dorman products inc , ford motor co , garrett motion inc. , general motors co , gentex corp , gentherm inc , genuine parts co , goodyear tire & rubber co , lear corp , lkq corp , meritor inc , motorcar parts of america inc , standard motor products inc , stoneridge inc , superior industries international inc , tenneco inc , tesla inc , tower international inc , visteon corp , wabco holdings inc company index december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'december 31 2013': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 100.0, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 100.0, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 100.0}, 'december 31 2014': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 122.75, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 113.69, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 107.96}, 'december 31 2015': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 146.49, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 115.26, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 108.05}, 'december 31 2016': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 117.11, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 129.05, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 107.72}, 'december 31 2017': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 178.46, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 157.22, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 134.04}, 'december 31 2018': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 130.8, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 150.33, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 106.89}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of the aptiv plc in 2018?', 'what was, then, the change in its value, considering 2018 and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'and what was the change in the value of the automotive peer group, considering the 2018 one and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'how much does the change in the value of the aptiv plc represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?', 'and how much does the change in the value of the automotive peer group represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?', 'what is, then, the difference between the percentage change of the aptiv plc and the automotive peer group one?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['130.80', '30.8', '6.89', '30.8%', '6.89%', '23.91%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['130.80', 'subtract(130.80, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), divide(#1, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), divide(#1, const_100), subtract(#2, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [130.8, 30.8, 6.89, 0.308, 0.0689, 0.2391], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.0689}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "52s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:08 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the 2015 value of priceline less 100?\nA1: 219.1', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmeasurement point december 31 the priceline group nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| the priceline group inc . | 100.0 | 117.06 | 155.27 | 290.93 | 285.37 | 319.1 | 100.0 | 117.06 | 155.27 | 290.93 | 285.37 | 319.1 | 100.0 | 117.06 | 155.27 | 290.93 | 285.37 | 319.1 | 100.0 | 117.06 | 155.27 | 290.93 | 285.37 | 319.1 |\n| nasdaqcomposite index | 100.0 | 100.53 | 116.92 | 166.19 | 188.78 | 199.95 | 100.0 | 100.53 | 116.92 | 166.19 | 188.78 | 199.95 | 100.0 | 100.53 | 116.92 | 166.19 | 188.78 | 199.95 | 100.0 | 100.53 | 116.92 | 166.19 | 188.78 | 199.95 |\n| s&p 500index | 100.0 | 102.11 | 118.45 | 156.82 | 178.29 | 180.75 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 118.45 | 156.82 | 178.29 | 180.75 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 118.45 | 156.82 | 178.29 | 180.75 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 118.45 | 156.82 | 178.29 | 180.75 |\n| rdg internetcomposite | 100.0 | 102.11 | 122.23 | 199.42 | 195.42 | 267.25 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 122.23 | 199.42 | 195.42 | 267.25 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 122.23 | 199.42 | 195.42 | 267.25 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 122.23 | 199.42 | 195.42 | 267.25 |', 'question': 'what is the percent change?', 'ops': 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_BKNG/2015/page_38.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'measurement point december 31 the priceline group nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'the priceline group inc .': {'2010': 100.0, '2011': 117.06, '2012': 155.27, '2013': 290.93, '2014': 285.37, '2015': 319.1}, 'nasdaqcomposite index': {'2010': 100.0, '2011': 100.53, '2012': 116.92, '2013': 166.19, '2014': 188.78, '2015': 199.95}, 's&p 500index': {'2010': 100.0, '2011': 102.11, '2012': 118.45, '2013': 156.82, '2014': 178.29, '2015': 180.75}, 'rdg internetcomposite': {'2010': 100.0, '2011': 102.11, '2012': 122.23, '2013': 199.42, '2014': 195.42, '2015': 267.25}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the 2015 value of priceline less 100?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what is the value of the s&p 500 index in 2015?', 'what is that less 100?', 'what is the difference divided by 100?', 'what is the difference in percent changes?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['219.1', '219.1%', '180.75', '80.75', '80.75%', '138.35%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(319.10, const_100)', 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', '180.75', 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(180.75, const_100)', 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(180.75, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(180.75, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [219.1, 2.191, 180.75, 80.75, 0.8075, 1.3835], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 2.191}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "52s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:08 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the net change in value of an investment in s&p500 from 2010 to 2011?\nA1: 8.09\nQ2: what is the initial value?\nA2: 100.0\nQ3: what rate of return does this represent?\nA3: 0.0809', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nperformance graph the performance graph below shows the five-year cumulative total stockholder return on applied common stock during the period from october 31 , 2010 through october 25 , 2015 . this is compared with the cumulative total return of the standard & poor 2019s 500 stock index and the rdg semiconductor composite index over the same period . the comparison assumes $ 100 was invested on october 31 , 2010 in applied common stock and in each of the foregoing indices and assumes reinvestment of dividends , if any . dollar amounts in the graph are rounded to the nearest whole dollar . the performance shown in the graph represents past performance and should not be considered an indication of future performance . comparison of 5 year cumulative total return* among applied materials , inc. , the s&p 500 index and the rdg semiconductor composite index *assumes $ 100 invested on 10/31/10 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . indexes calculated on month-end basis . 201cs&p 201d is a registered trademark of standard & poor 2019s financial services llc , a subsidiary of the mcgraw-hill companies , inc. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ndividends during each of fiscal 2015 and 2014 , applied's board of directors declared four quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share . during fiscal 2013 , applied 2019s board of directors declared three quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share and one quarterly cash dividend of $ 0.09 per share . dividends paid during fiscal 2015 , 2014 and 2013 amounted to $ 487 million , $ 485 million and $ 456 million , respectively . applied currently anticipates that cash dividends will continue to be paid on a quarterly basis , although the declaration of any future cash dividend is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on applied 2019s financial condition , results of operations , capital requirements , business conditions and other factors , as well as a determination by the board of directors that cash dividends are in the best interests of applied 2019s stockholders . 104 136 10/31/10 10/30/11 10/28/12 10/27/13 10/26/14 10/25/15 applied materials , inc . s&p 500 rdg semiconductor composite .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 10/31/2010 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| 10/30/2011 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 |\n| 10/28/2012 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 |\n| 10/27/2013 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 |\n| 10/26/2014 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 |\n| 10/25/2015 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 |', 'question': 'what is the quarterly cash dividends for the first three quarters?', 'ops': 'multiply(0.10, const_3)', 'id': 'Double_AMAT/2015/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'performance graph the performance graph below shows the five-year cumulative total stockholder return on applied common stock during the period from october 31 , 2010 through october 25 , 2015 . this is compared with the cumulative total return of the standard & poor 2019s 500 stock index and the rdg semiconductor composite index over the same period . the comparison assumes $ 100 was invested on october 31 , 2010 in applied common stock and in each of the foregoing indices and assumes reinvestment of dividends , if any . dollar amounts in the graph are rounded to the nearest whole dollar . the performance shown in the graph represents past performance and should not be considered an indication of future performance . comparison of 5 year cumulative total return* among applied materials , inc. , the s&p 500 index and the rdg semiconductor composite index *assumes $ 100 invested on 10/31/10 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . indexes calculated on month-end basis . 201cs&p 201d is a registered trademark of standard & poor 2019s financial services llc , a subsidiary of the mcgraw-hill companies , inc. .', 'doc_post_text': "dividends during each of fiscal 2015 and 2014 , applied's board of directors declared four quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share . during fiscal 2013 , applied 2019s board of directors declared three quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share and one quarterly cash dividend of $ 0.09 per share . dividends paid during fiscal 2015 , 2014 and 2013 amounted to $ 487 million , $ 485 million and $ 456 million , respectively . applied currently anticipates that cash dividends will continue to be paid on a quarterly basis , although the declaration of any future cash dividend is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on applied 2019s financial condition , results of operations , capital requirements , business conditions and other factors , as well as a determination by the board of directors that cash dividends are in the best interests of applied 2019s stockholders . 104 136 10/31/10 10/30/11 10/28/12 10/27/13 10/26/14 10/25/15 applied materials , inc . s&p 500 rdg semiconductor composite .", 'doc_table': {'10/31/2010': {'applied materials': 100.0, 's&p 500 index': 100.0, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 100.0}, '10/30/2011': {'applied materials': 104.54, 's&p 500 index': 108.09, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 110.04}, '10/28/2012': {'applied materials': 90.88, 's&p 500 index': 124.52, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 104.07}, '10/27/2013': {'applied materials': 155.43, 's&p 500 index': 158.36, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 136.15}, '10/26/2014': {'applied materials': 188.13, 's&p 500 index': 185.71, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 172.41}, '10/25/2015': {'applied materials': 150.26, 's&p 500 index': 195.37, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 170.4}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in value of an investment in s&p500 from 2010 to 2011?', 'what is the initial value?', 'what rate of return does this represent?', 'what is the quarterly cash dividends for the first three quarters?', 'what about the fourth quarter?', 'what is the total dividends in 2013?', 'how many shares received this dividend in 2013?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['8.09', '100', '8.1%', '0.3', '0.09', '0.39', '1248.7'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(108.09, 100)', '100', 'subtract(108.09, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'multiply(0.10, const_3)', '0.09', 'multiply(0.10, const_3), add(#0, 0.09)', 'multiply(0.10, const_3), add(#0, 0.09), divide(487, #1)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [8.09, 100.0, 0.0809, 0.3, 0.09, 0.39, 1248.71795], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.3}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "52s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:08 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nthe following table details the growth in global weighted average berths and the global , north american , european and asia/pacific cruise guests over the past five years ( in thousands , except berth data ) : weighted- average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 ) global cruise guests ( 1 ) american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 ) european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 ) asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n_______________________________________________________________________________ ( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources . we use data obtained from seatrade insider , cruise industry news and company press releases to estimate weighted-average supply of berths and clia and g.p . wild to estimate cruise guest information . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) total berths include our berths related to our global brands and partner brands . ( 3 ) our estimates include the united states and canada . ( 4 ) our estimates include european countries relevant to the industry ( e.g. , nordics , germany , france , italy , spain and the united kingdom ) . ( 5 ) our estimates include the southeast asia ( e.g. , singapore , thailand and the philippines ) , east asia ( e.g. , china and japan ) , south asia ( e.g. , india and pakistan ) and oceanian ( e.g. , australia and fiji islands ) regions . north america the majority of industry cruise guests are sourced from north america , which represented approximately 52% ( 52 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 2% ( 2 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . europe industry cruise guests sourced from europe represented approximately 27% ( 27 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 1% ( 1 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . asia/pacific industry cruise guests sourced from the asia/pacific region represented approximately 15% ( 15 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 25% ( 25 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . the asia/pacific region is experiencing the highest growth rate of the major regions , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america . competition we compete with a number of cruise lines . our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise line , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , p&o cruises , princess cruises and seabourn ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; and norwegian cruise line holdings ltd , which owns norwegian cruise line , oceania cruises and regent seven seas cruises . cruise lines compete with .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 ) | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 |\n| royal caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 ) | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 |\n| globalcruiseguests ( 1 ) | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 |\n| north american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 ) | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 |\n| european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 ) | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 |\n| asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 ) | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 |', 'question': 'what is the net change in weighted-average supply of berths market ed globally from 2012 to 2016?', 'ops': 'subtract(493000, 425000)', 'id': 'Single_RCL/2016/page_7.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': 'the following table details the growth in global weighted average berths and the global , north american , european and asia/pacific cruise guests over the past five years ( in thousands , except berth data ) : weighted- average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 ) global cruise guests ( 1 ) american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 ) european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 ) asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 ) .', 'doc_post_text': '_______________________________________________________________________________ ( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources . we use data obtained from seatrade insider , cruise industry news and company press releases to estimate weighted-average supply of berths and clia and g.p . wild to estimate cruise guest information . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) total berths include our berths related to our global brands and partner brands . ( 3 ) our estimates include the united states and canada . ( 4 ) our estimates include european countries relevant to the industry ( e.g. , nordics , germany , france , italy , spain and the united kingdom ) . ( 5 ) our estimates include the southeast asia ( e.g. , singapore , thailand and the philippines ) , east asia ( e.g. , china and japan ) , south asia ( e.g. , india and pakistan ) and oceanian ( e.g. , australia and fiji islands ) regions . north america the majority of industry cruise guests are sourced from north america , which represented approximately 52% ( 52 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 2% ( 2 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . europe industry cruise guests sourced from europe represented approximately 27% ( 27 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 1% ( 1 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . asia/pacific industry cruise guests sourced from the asia/pacific region represented approximately 15% ( 15 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 25% ( 25 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . the asia/pacific region is experiencing the highest growth rate of the major regions , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america . competition we compete with a number of cruise lines . our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise line , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , p&o cruises , princess cruises and seabourn ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; and norwegian cruise line holdings ltd , which owns norwegian cruise line , oceania cruises and regent seven seas cruises . cruise lines compete with .', 'doc_table': {'weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 )': {'2012': 425000.0, '2013': 432000.0, '2014': 448000.0, '2015': 469000.0, '2016': 493000.0}, 'royal caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 )': {'2012': 98650.0, '2013': 98750.0, '2014': 105750.0, '2015': 112700.0, '2016': 123270.0}, 'globalcruiseguests ( 1 )': {'2012': 20813.0, '2013': 21343.0, '2014': 22039.0, '2015': 23000.0, '2016': 24000.0}, 'north american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 )': {'2012': 11641.0, '2013': 11710.0, '2014': 12269.0, '2015': 12004.0, '2016': 12581.0}, 'european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 )': {'2012': 6225.0, '2013': 6430.0, '2014': 6387.0, '2015': 6587.0, '2016': 6542.0}, 'asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 )': {'2012': 1474.0, '2013': 2045.0, '2014': 2382.0, '2015': 3129.0, '2016': 3636.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in weighted-average supply of berths market ed globally from 2012 to 2016?', 'what percentage change does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['68000', '16%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(493000, 425000)', 'subtract(493000, 425000), divide(#0, 425000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [68000.0, 0.16], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 68000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:08 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nliquidity the primary source of our liquidity is cash flow from operations . over the most recent two-year period , our operations have generated $ 5.6 billion in cash . a substantial portion of this operating cash flow has been returned to shareholders through share repurchases and dividends . we also use cash from operations to fund our capital expenditures and acquisitions . we typically use a combination of cash , notes payable , and long-term debt , and occasionally issue shares of stock , to finance significant acquisitions . as of may 26 , 2019 , we had $ 399 million of cash and cash equivalents held in foreign jurisdictions . as a result of the tcja , the historic undistributed earnings of our foreign subsidiaries were taxed in the u.s . via the one-time repatriation tax in fiscal 2018 . we have re-evaluated our assertion and have concluded that although earnings prior to fiscal 2018 will remain permanently reinvested , we will no longer make a permanent reinvestment assertion beginning with our fiscal 2018 earnings . as part of the accounting for the tcja , we recorded local country withholding taxes related to certain entities from which we began repatriating undistributed earnings and will continue to record local country withholding taxes on all future earnings . as a result of the transition tax , we may repatriate our cash and cash equivalents held by our foreign subsidiaries without such funds being subject to further u.s . income tax liability ( please see note 14 to the consolidated financial statements in item 8 of this report for additional information ) . cash flows from operations .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nduring fiscal 2019 , cash provided by operations was $ 2807 million compared to $ 2841 million in the same period last year . the $ 34 million decrease was primarily driven by a $ 377 million decrease in net earnings and a $ 550 million change in current assets and liabilities , partially offset by a $ 598 million change in deferred income taxes . the $ 550 million change in current assets and liabilities was primarily driven by a $ 413 million change in the timing of accounts payable , including the impact of longer payment terms implemented in prior fiscal years . the change in deferred income taxes was primarily related to the $ 638 million provisional benefit from revaluing our net u.s . deferred tax liabilities to reflect the new u.s . corporate tax rate as a result of the tcja in fiscal we strive to grow core working capital at or below the rate of growth in our net sales . for fiscal 2019 , core working capital decreased 34 percent , compared to a net sales increase of 7 percent . as of may 26 , 2019 , our core working capital balance totaled $ 385 million , down 34 percent versus last year , this is primarily driven by continued benefits from our payment terms extension program and lower inventory balances . in fiscal 2018 , core working capital decreased 27 percent , compared to a net sales increase of 1 percent. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net earnings including earnings attributable to redeemable and noncontrollinginterests | depreciation and amortization | after-taxearnings from joint ventures | distributions of earnings from joint ventures | stock-based compensation | deferred income taxes | pension and other postretirement benefit plan contributions | pension and other postretirement benefit plan costs | divestitures loss | restructuring impairment and other exit costs | changes in current assets and liabilities excluding the effects of acquisitions anddivestitures | other net | net cash provided by operating activities | net earnings including earnings attributable to redeemable and noncontrollinginterests | depreciation and amortization | after-taxearnings from joint ventures | distributions of earnings from joint ventures | stock-based compensation | deferred income taxes | pension and other postretirement benefit plan contributions | pension and other postretirement benefit plan costs | divestitures loss | restructuring impairment and other exit costs | changes in current assets and liabilities excluding the effects of acquisitions anddivestitures | other net | net cash provided by operating activities |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| fiscal year 2019 | 1786.2 | 620.1 | -72.0 | 86.7 | 84.9 | 93.5 | -28.8 | 6.1 | 30.0 | 235.7 | -7.5 | -27.9 | 2807.0 | 1786.2 | 620.1 | -72.0 | 86.7 | 84.9 | 93.5 | -28.8 | 6.1 | 30.0 | 235.7 | -7.5 | -27.9 | 2807.0 |\n| fiscal year 2018 | 2163.0 | 618.8 | -84.7 | 113.2 | 77.0 | -504.3 | -31.8 | 4.6 | - | 126.0 | 542.1 | -182.9 | 2841.0 | 2163.0 | 618.8 | -84.7 | 113.2 | 77.0 | -504.3 | -31.8 | 4.6 | - | 126.0 | 542.1 | -182.9 | 2841.0 |', 'question': 'what was the change in the cash provided by operations from 2018 to 2019?', 'ops': 'subtract(2807, 2841)', 'id': 'Single_GIS/2019/page_33.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'liquidity the primary source of our liquidity is cash flow from operations . over the most recent two-year period , our operations have generated $ 5.6 billion in cash . a substantial portion of this operating cash flow has been returned to shareholders through share repurchases and dividends . we also use cash from operations to fund our capital expenditures and acquisitions . we typically use a combination of cash , notes payable , and long-term debt , and occasionally issue shares of stock , to finance significant acquisitions . as of may 26 , 2019 , we had $ 399 million of cash and cash equivalents held in foreign jurisdictions . as a result of the tcja , the historic undistributed earnings of our foreign subsidiaries were taxed in the u.s . via the one-time repatriation tax in fiscal 2018 . we have re-evaluated our assertion and have concluded that although earnings prior to fiscal 2018 will remain permanently reinvested , we will no longer make a permanent reinvestment assertion beginning with our fiscal 2018 earnings . as part of the accounting for the tcja , we recorded local country withholding taxes related to certain entities from which we began repatriating undistributed earnings and will continue to record local country withholding taxes on all future earnings . as a result of the transition tax , we may repatriate our cash and cash equivalents held by our foreign subsidiaries without such funds being subject to further u.s . income tax liability ( please see note 14 to the consolidated financial statements in item 8 of this report for additional information ) . cash flows from operations .', 'doc_post_text': 'during fiscal 2019 , cash provided by operations was $ 2807 million compared to $ 2841 million in the same period last year . the $ 34 million decrease was primarily driven by a $ 377 million decrease in net earnings and a $ 550 million change in current assets and liabilities , partially offset by a $ 598 million change in deferred income taxes . the $ 550 million change in current assets and liabilities was primarily driven by a $ 413 million change in the timing of accounts payable , including the impact of longer payment terms implemented in prior fiscal years . the change in deferred income taxes was primarily related to the $ 638 million provisional benefit from revaluing our net u.s . deferred tax liabilities to reflect the new u.s . corporate tax rate as a result of the tcja in fiscal we strive to grow core working capital at or below the rate of growth in our net sales . for fiscal 2019 , core working capital decreased 34 percent , compared to a net sales increase of 7 percent . as of may 26 , 2019 , our core working capital balance totaled $ 385 million , down 34 percent versus last year , this is primarily driven by continued benefits from our payment terms extension program and lower inventory balances . in fiscal 2018 , core working capital decreased 27 percent , compared to a net sales increase of 1 percent. .', 'doc_table': {'fiscal year 2019': {'net earnings including earnings attributable to redeemable and noncontrollinginterests': 1786.2, 'depreciation and amortization': 620.1, 'after-taxearnings from joint ventures': -72.0, 'distributions of earnings from joint ventures': 86.7, 'stock-based compensation': 84.9, 'deferred income taxes': 93.5, 'pension and other postretirement benefit plan contributions': -28.8, 'pension and other postretirement benefit plan costs': 6.1, 'divestitures loss': 30.0, 'restructuring impairment and other exit costs': 235.7, 'changes in current assets and liabilities excluding the effects of acquisitions anddivestitures': -7.5, 'other net': -27.9, 'net cash provided by operating activities': 2807.0}, 'fiscal year 2018': {'net earnings including earnings attributable to redeemable and noncontrollinginterests': 2163.0, 'depreciation and amortization': 618.8, 'after-taxearnings from joint ventures': -84.7, 'distributions of earnings from joint ventures': 113.2, 'stock-based compensation': 77.0, 'deferred income taxes': -504.3, 'pension and other postretirement benefit plan contributions': -31.8, 'pension and other postretirement benefit plan costs': 4.6, 'divestitures loss': '-', 'restructuring impairment and other exit costs': 126.0, 'changes in current assets and liabilities excluding the effects of acquisitions anddivestitures': 542.1, 'other net': -182.9, 'net cash provided by operating activities': 2841.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in the cash provided by operations from 2018 to 2019?', 'and what was that cash in 2018?', 'how much, then, does that change represent in relation to this 2018 cash provided by operations, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['-34', '2841', '-1.2%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(2807, 2841)', '2841', 'subtract(2807, 2841), divide(#0, 2841)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [-34.0, 2841.0, -0.01197], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': -34.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:08 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: in the year of 2007, what was the number of granted shares?\nA1: 852353.0\nQ2: and what was it for vested ones?\nA2: 51206.0\nQ3: how much, then, did the granted number represent in relation to the vested one?\nA3: 16.64557\nQ4: and in that same year, what was the fair value of these vested shares, in millions?\nA4: 3.4', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nhumana inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during 2007 was $ 133.9 million , compared with $ 133.7 million during 2006 and $ 57.8 million during 2005 . cash received from stock option exercises for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 totaled $ 62.7 million , $ 49.2 million , and $ 36.4 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested options not yet recognized was $ 23.6 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.6 years . restricted stock awards restricted stock awards are granted with a fair value equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant . compensation expense is recorded straight-line over the vesting period , generally three years from the date of grant . the weighted average grant date fair value of our restricted stock awards was $ 63.59 , $ 54.36 , and $ 32.81 for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 , respectively . activity for our restricted stock awards was as follows for the year ended december 31 , 2007 : shares weighted average grant-date fair value .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe fair value of shares vested during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 was $ 3.4 million , $ 2.3 million , and $ 0.6 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock awards not yet recognized was $ 44.7 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.4 years . there are no other contractual terms covering restricted stock awards once vested. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006 | granted | vested | forfeited | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007 | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006 | granted | vested | forfeited | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| shares | 1107455.0 | 852353.0 | -51206.0 | -63624.0 | 1844978.0 | 1107455.0 | 852353.0 | -51206.0 | -63624.0 | 1844978.0 |\n| weighted average grant-date fair value | 45.86 | 63.59 | 56.93 | 49.65 | 53.61 | 45.86 | 63.59 | 56.93 | 49.65 | 53.61 |', 'question': 'what was it for 2005?', 'ops': '0.6', 'id': 'Double_HUM/2007/page_96.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'humana inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during 2007 was $ 133.9 million , compared with $ 133.7 million during 2006 and $ 57.8 million during 2005 . cash received from stock option exercises for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 totaled $ 62.7 million , $ 49.2 million , and $ 36.4 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested options not yet recognized was $ 23.6 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.6 years . restricted stock awards restricted stock awards are granted with a fair value equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant . compensation expense is recorded straight-line over the vesting period , generally three years from the date of grant . the weighted average grant date fair value of our restricted stock awards was $ 63.59 , $ 54.36 , and $ 32.81 for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 , respectively . activity for our restricted stock awards was as follows for the year ended december 31 , 2007 : shares weighted average grant-date fair value .', 'doc_post_text': 'the fair value of shares vested during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 was $ 3.4 million , $ 2.3 million , and $ 0.6 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock awards not yet recognized was $ 44.7 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.4 years . there are no other contractual terms covering restricted stock awards once vested. .', 'doc_table': {'shares': {'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006': 1107455.0, 'granted': 852353.0, 'vested': -51206.0, 'forfeited': -63624.0, 'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007': 1844978.0}, 'weighted average grant-date fair value': {'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006': 45.86, 'granted': 63.59, 'vested': 56.93, 'forfeited': 49.65, 'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007': 53.61}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['in the year of 2007, what was the number of granted shares?', 'and what was it for vested ones?', 'how much, then, did the granted number represent in relation to the vested one?', 'and in that same year, what was the fair value of these vested shares, in millions?', 'what was it for 2005?', 'what was, then, the total combined fair value for both years, in millions?', 'including 2006, what becomes this total?', 'and what was, in millions, the average between the three years?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['852353', '51206', '16.65', '3.4', '0.6', '4', '6.3', '2.1'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['852353', '51206', 'divide(852353, 51206)', '3.4', '0.6', 'add(3.4, 0.6)', 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3)', 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3), divide(#1, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [852353.0, 51206.0, 16.64557, 3.4, 0.6, 4.0, 6.3, 2.1], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.6}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:08 WARNING dspy.utils.parallelizer: Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.
2025/07/29 14:11:08 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2011?\nA1: 78.0\nQ2: and what was that of 2010?\nA2: 71.0\nQ3: what was the change in value over the year?\nA3: 7.0\nQ4: what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2010?\nA4: 71.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nkorea engineering plastics co. , ltd . founded in 1987 , kepco is the leading producer of pom in south korea . kepco is a venture between celanese's ticona business ( 50% ( 50 % ) ) , mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . ( 40% ( 40 % ) ) and mitsubishi corporation ( 10% ( 10 % ) ) . kepco has polyacetal production facilities in ulsan , south korea , compounding facilities for pbt and nylon in pyongtaek , south korea , and participates with polyplastics and mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . in a world-scale pom facility in nantong , china . polyplastics co. , ltd . polyplastics is a leading supplier of engineered plastics in the asia-pacific region and is a venture between daicel chemical industries ltd. , japan ( 55% ( 55 % ) ) , and celanese's ticona business ( 45% ( 45 % ) ) . established in 1964 , polyplastics is a producer and marketer of pom and lcp in the asia-pacific region , with principal production facilities located in japan , taiwan , malaysia and china . fortron industries llc . fortron is a leading global producer of polyphenylene sulfide ( 201cpps 201d ) , sold under the fortron ae brand , which is used in a wide variety of automotive and other applications , especially those requiring heat and/or chemical resistance . established in 1992 , fortron is a limited liability company whose members are ticona fortron inc . ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of cna holdings , llc ) and kureha corporation ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of kureha chemical industry co. , ltd . of japan ) . fortron's facility is located in wilmington , north carolina . this venture combines the sales , marketing , distribution , compounding and manufacturing expertise of celanese with the pps polymer technology expertise of kureha . china acetate strategic ventures . we hold an approximate 30% ( 30 % ) ownership interest in three separate acetate production ventures in china . these include the nantong cellulose fibers co . ltd. , kunming cellulose fibers co . ltd . and zhuhai cellulose fibers co . ltd . the china national tobacco corporation , the chinese state-owned tobacco entity , controls the remaining ownership interest in each of these ventures . with an estimated 30% ( 30 % ) share of the world's cigarette production and consumption , china is the world's largest and fastest growing area for acetate tow products according to the 2009 stanford research institute international chemical economics handbook . combined , these ventures are a leader in chinese domestic acetate production and are well positioned to supply chinese cigarette producers . in december 2009 , we announced plans with china national tobacco to expand our acetate flake and tow capacity at our venture's nantong facility and we received formal approval for the expansions , each by 30000 tons , during 2010 . since their inception in 1986 , the china acetate ventures have completed 12 expansions , leading to earnings growth and increased dividends . our chinese acetate ventures fund their operations using operating cash flow . during 2011 , we made contributions of $ 8 million related to the capacity expansions in nantong and have committed contributions of $ 9 million in 2012 . in 2010 , we made contributions of $ 12 million . our chinese acetate ventures pay a dividend in the second quarter of each fiscal year , based on the ventures' performance for the preceding year . in 2011 , 2010 and 2009 , we received cash dividends of $ 78 million , $ 71 million and $ 56 million , respectively . although our ownership interest in each of our china acetate ventures exceeds 20% ( 20 % ) , we account for these investments using the cost method of accounting because we determined that we cannot exercise significant influence over these entities due to local government investment in and influence over these entities , limitations on our involvement in the day-to-day operations and the present inability of the entities to provide timely financial information prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the united states ( 201cus gaap 201d ) . 2022 other equity method investments infraservs . we hold indirect ownership interests in several infraserv groups in germany that own and develop industrial parks and provide on-site general and administrative support to tenants . the table below represents our equity investments in infraserv ventures as of december 31 , 2011: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | infraserv gmbh & co . gendorf kg | infraserv gmbh & co . knapsack kg | infraserv gmbh & co . hoechst kg |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| ownership % (  % ) | 39.0 | 27.0 | 32.0 |', 'question': 'how much does that change represent in relation to the this amount?', 'ops': 'subtract(78, 71), divide(#0, 71)', 'id': 'Single_CE/2011/page_17.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': "korea engineering plastics co. , ltd . founded in 1987 , kepco is the leading producer of pom in south korea . kepco is a venture between celanese's ticona business ( 50% ( 50 % ) ) , mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . ( 40% ( 40 % ) ) and mitsubishi corporation ( 10% ( 10 % ) ) . kepco has polyacetal production facilities in ulsan , south korea , compounding facilities for pbt and nylon in pyongtaek , south korea , and participates with polyplastics and mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . in a world-scale pom facility in nantong , china . polyplastics co. , ltd . polyplastics is a leading supplier of engineered plastics in the asia-pacific region and is a venture between daicel chemical industries ltd. , japan ( 55% ( 55 % ) ) , and celanese's ticona business ( 45% ( 45 % ) ) . established in 1964 , polyplastics is a producer and marketer of pom and lcp in the asia-pacific region , with principal production facilities located in japan , taiwan , malaysia and china . fortron industries llc . fortron is a leading global producer of polyphenylene sulfide ( 201cpps 201d ) , sold under the fortron ae brand , which is used in a wide variety of automotive and other applications , especially those requiring heat and/or chemical resistance . established in 1992 , fortron is a limited liability company whose members are ticona fortron inc . ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of cna holdings , llc ) and kureha corporation ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of kureha chemical industry co. , ltd . of japan ) . fortron's facility is located in wilmington , north carolina . this venture combines the sales , marketing , distribution , compounding and manufacturing expertise of celanese with the pps polymer technology expertise of kureha . china acetate strategic ventures . we hold an approximate 30% ( 30 % ) ownership interest in three separate acetate production ventures in china . these include the nantong cellulose fibers co . ltd. , kunming cellulose fibers co . ltd . and zhuhai cellulose fibers co . ltd . the china national tobacco corporation , the chinese state-owned tobacco entity , controls the remaining ownership interest in each of these ventures . with an estimated 30% ( 30 % ) share of the world's cigarette production and consumption , china is the world's largest and fastest growing area for acetate tow products according to the 2009 stanford research institute international chemical economics handbook . combined , these ventures are a leader in chinese domestic acetate production and are well positioned to supply chinese cigarette producers . in december 2009 , we announced plans with china national tobacco to expand our acetate flake and tow capacity at our venture's nantong facility and we received formal approval for the expansions , each by 30000 tons , during 2010 . since their inception in 1986 , the china acetate ventures have completed 12 expansions , leading to earnings growth and increased dividends . our chinese acetate ventures fund their operations using operating cash flow . during 2011 , we made contributions of $ 8 million related to the capacity expansions in nantong and have committed contributions of $ 9 million in 2012 . in 2010 , we made contributions of $ 12 million . our chinese acetate ventures pay a dividend in the second quarter of each fiscal year , based on the ventures' performance for the preceding year . in 2011 , 2010 and 2009 , we received cash dividends of $ 78 million , $ 71 million and $ 56 million , respectively . although our ownership interest in each of our china acetate ventures exceeds 20% ( 20 % ) , we account for these investments using the cost method of accounting because we determined that we cannot exercise significant influence over these entities due to local government investment in and influence over these entities , limitations on our involvement in the day-to-day operations and the present inability of the entities to provide timely financial information prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the united states ( 201cus gaap 201d ) . 2022 other equity method investments infraservs . we hold indirect ownership interests in several infraserv groups in germany that own and develop industrial parks and provide on-site general and administrative support to tenants . the table below represents our equity investments in infraserv ventures as of december 31 , 2011: .", 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'ownership % (  % )': {'infraserv gmbh & co . gendorf kg': 39.0, 'infraserv gmbh & co . knapsack kg': 27.0, 'infraserv gmbh & co . hoechst kg': 32.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2011?', 'and what was that of 2010?', 'what was the change in value over the year?', 'what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2010?', 'how much does that change represent in relation to the this amount?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['78', '71', '7', '71', '9.9%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['78', '71', 'subtract(78, 71)', '71', 'subtract(78, 71), divide(#0, 71)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [78.0, 71.0, 7.0, 71.0, 0.09859], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.09859}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:09 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the total long-term debt?\nA1: 5413606.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n39 annual report 2010 duke realty corporation | | related party transactions we provide property and asset management , leasing , construction and other tenant related services to unconsolidated companies in which we have equity interests . for the years ended december 31 , 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , respectively , we earned management fees of $ 7.6 million , $ 8.4 million and $ 7.8 million , leasing fees of $ 2.7 million , $ 4.2 million and $ 2.8 million and construction and development fees of $ 10.3 million , $ 10.2 million and $ 12.7 million from these companies . we recorded these fees based on contractual terms that approximate market rates for these types of services , and we have eliminated our ownership percentages of these fees in the consolidated financial statements . commitments and contingencies we have guaranteed the repayment of $ 95.4 million of economic development bonds issued by various municipalities in connection with certain commercial developments . we will be required to make payments under our guarantees to the extent that incremental taxes from specified developments are not sufficient to pay the bond debt service . management does not believe that it is probable that we will be required to make any significant payments in satisfaction of these guarantees . we also have guaranteed the repayment of secured and unsecured loans of six of our unconsolidated subsidiaries . at december 31 , 2010 , the maximum guarantee exposure for these loans was approximately $ 245.4 million . with the exception of the guarantee of the debt of 3630 peachtree joint venture , for which we recorded a contingent liability in 2009 of $ 36.3 million , management believes it probable that we will not be required to satisfy these guarantees . we lease certain land positions with terms extending to december 2080 , with a total obligation of $ 103.6 million . no payments on these ground leases are material in any individual year . we are subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business . in the opinion of management , the amount of any ultimate liability with respect to these actions will not materially affect our consolidated financial statements or results of operations . contractual obligations at december 31 , 2010 , we were subject to certain contractual payment obligations as described in the table below: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( 1 ) our long-term debt consists of both secured and unsecured debt and includes both principal and interest . interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rates as of december 31 , 2010 . ( 2 ) our unsecured lines of credit consist of an operating line of credit that matures february 2013 and the line of credit of a consolidated subsidiary that matures july 2011 . interest expense for our unsecured lines of credit was calculated using the most recent stated interest rates that were in effect . ( 3 ) our share of unconsolidated joint venture debt includes both principal and interest . interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rate at december 31 , 2010 . ( 4 ) represents estimated remaining costs on the completion of owned development projects and third-party construction projects. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) total | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2011 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2012 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2013 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2014 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2015 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) thereafter | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 |', 'question': 'what are the total contractual obligations?', 'ops': '6704679', 'id': 'Single_DRE/2010/page_41.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': '39 annual report 2010 duke realty corporation | | related party transactions we provide property and asset management , leasing , construction and other tenant related services to unconsolidated companies in which we have equity interests . for the years ended december 31 , 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , respectively , we earned management fees of $ 7.6 million , $ 8.4 million and $ 7.8 million , leasing fees of $ 2.7 million , $ 4.2 million and $ 2.8 million and construction and development fees of $ 10.3 million , $ 10.2 million and $ 12.7 million from these companies . we recorded these fees based on contractual terms that approximate market rates for these types of services , and we have eliminated our ownership percentages of these fees in the consolidated financial statements . commitments and contingencies we have guaranteed the repayment of $ 95.4 million of economic development bonds issued by various municipalities in connection with certain commercial developments . we will be required to make payments under our guarantees to the extent that incremental taxes from specified developments are not sufficient to pay the bond debt service . management does not believe that it is probable that we will be required to make any significant payments in satisfaction of these guarantees . we also have guaranteed the repayment of secured and unsecured loans of six of our unconsolidated subsidiaries . at december 31 , 2010 , the maximum guarantee exposure for these loans was approximately $ 245.4 million . with the exception of the guarantee of the debt of 3630 peachtree joint venture , for which we recorded a contingent liability in 2009 of $ 36.3 million , management believes it probable that we will not be required to satisfy these guarantees . we lease certain land positions with terms extending to december 2080 , with a total obligation of $ 103.6 million . no payments on these ground leases are material in any individual year . we are subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business . in the opinion of management , the amount of any ultimate liability with respect to these actions will not materially affect our consolidated financial statements or results of operations . contractual obligations at december 31 , 2010 , we were subject to certain contractual payment obligations as described in the table below: .', 'doc_post_text': '( 1 ) our long-term debt consists of both secured and unsecured debt and includes both principal and interest . interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rates as of december 31 , 2010 . ( 2 ) our unsecured lines of credit consist of an operating line of credit that matures february 2013 and the line of credit of a consolidated subsidiary that matures july 2011 . interest expense for our unsecured lines of credit was calculated using the most recent stated interest rates that were in effect . ( 3 ) our share of unconsolidated joint venture debt includes both principal and interest . interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rate at december 31 , 2010 . ( 4 ) represents estimated remaining costs on the completion of owned development projects and third-party construction projects. .', 'doc_table': {'payments due by period ( in thousands ) total': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 5413606.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': 214225.0, 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 447573.0, 'ground leases': 103563.0, 'operating leases': 2704.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 521041.0, 'other': 1967.0, 'total contractual obligations': 6704679.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2011': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 629781.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': 28046.0, 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 87602.0, 'ground leases': 2199.0, 'operating leases': 840.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 476314.0, 'other': 1015.0, 'total contractual obligations': 1225797.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2012': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 548966.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': 9604.0, 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 27169.0, 'ground leases': 2198.0, 'operating leases': 419.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 44727.0, 'other': 398.0, 'total contractual obligations': 633481.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2013': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 725060.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': 176575.0, 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 93663.0, 'ground leases': 2169.0, 'operating leases': 395.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': '-', 'other': 229.0, 'total contractual obligations': 998091.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2014': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 498912.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': '-', 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 34854.0, 'ground leases': 2192.0, 'operating leases': 380.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': '-', 'other': 90.0, 'total contractual obligations': 536428.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2015': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 473417.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': '-', 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 65847.0, 'ground leases': 2202.0, 'operating leases': 370.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': '-', 'other': 54.0, 'total contractual obligations': 541890.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) thereafter': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 2537470.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': '-', 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 138438.0, 'ground leases': 92603.0, 'operating leases': 300.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': '-', 'other': 181.0, 'total contractual obligations': 2768992.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the total long-term debt?', 'what are the total contractual obligations?', 'what fraction of total contractual obligations is long-term debt?', 'what percentage does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['5413606', '6704679', '0.807', '80.7%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['5413606', '6704679', 'divide(5413606, 6704679)', 'divide(5413606, 6704679), multiply(#0, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [5413606.0, 6704679.0, 0.80744, 80.7437], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 6704679.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:09 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in 2010?\nA1: 7274.0\nQ2: and what were the net sales in 2009?\nA2: 8654.0\nQ3: and what was the operating profit in that year?\nA3: 972.0\nQ4: what is, then, the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in that year?\nA4: 7682.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\noperating profit for the segment decreased by 1% ( 1 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . for the year , operating profit declines in defense more than offset an increase in civil , while operating profit at intelligence essentially was unchanged . the $ 27 million decrease in operating profit at defense primarily was attributable to a decrease in the level of favorable performance adjustments on mission and combat systems activities in 2010 . the $ 19 million increase in civil principally was due to higher volume on enterprise civilian services . operating profit for the segment decreased by 3% ( 3 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . operating profit declines in civil and intelligence partially were offset by growth in defense . the decrease of $ 29 million in civil 2019s operating profit primarily was attributable to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on enterprise civilian services programs in 2009 compared to 2008 . the decrease in operating profit of $ 27 million at intelligence mainly was due to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on security solution activities in 2009 compared to 2008 . the increase in defense 2019s operating profit of $ 29 million mainly was due to volume and improved performance in mission and combat systems . the decrease in backlog during 2010 compared to 2009 mainly was due to higher sales volume on enterprise civilian service programs at civil , including volume associated with the dris 2010 program , and mission and combat system programs at defense . backlog decreased in 2009 compared to 2008 due to u.s . government 2019s exercise of the termination for convenience clause on the tsat mission operations system ( tmos ) contract at defense , which resulted in a $ 1.6 billion reduction in orders . this decline more than offset increased orders on enterprise civilian services programs at civil . we expect is&gs will experience a low single digit percentage decrease in sales for 2011 as compared to 2010 . this decline primarily is due to completion of most of the work associated with the dris 2010 program . operating profit in 2011 is expected to decline in relationship to the decline in sales volume , while operating margins are expected to be comparable between the years . space systems our space systems business segment is engaged in the design , research and development , engineering , and production of satellites , strategic and defensive missile systems , and space transportation systems , including activities related to the planned replacement of the space shuttle . government satellite programs include the advanced extremely high frequency ( aehf ) system , the mobile user objective system ( muos ) , the global positioning satellite iii ( gps iii ) system , the space-based infrared system ( sbirs ) , and the geostationary operational environmental satellite r-series ( goes-r ) . strategic and missile defense programs include the targets and countermeasures program and the fleet ballistic missile program . space transportation includes the nasa orion program and , through ownership interests in two joint ventures , expendable launch services ( united launch alliance , or ula ) and space shuttle processing activities for the u.s . government ( united space alliance , or usa ) . the space shuttle is expected to complete its final flight mission in 2011 and our involvement with its launch and processing activities will end at that time . space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2010 2009 2008 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnet sales for space systems decreased by 5% ( 5 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . sales declined in all three lines of business during the year . the $ 253 million decrease in space transportation principally was due to lower volume on the space shuttle external tank , commercial launch vehicle activity and other human space flight programs , which partially were offset by higher volume on the orion program . there were no commercial launches in 2010 compared to one commercial launch in 2009 . strategic & defensive missile systems ( s&dms ) sales declined $ 147 million principally due to lower volume on defensive missile programs . the $ 8 million sales decline in satellites primarily was attributable to lower volume on commercial satellites , which partially were offset by higher volume on government satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2010 and one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 . net sales for space systems increased 8% ( 8 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . during the year , sales growth at satellites and space transportation offset a decline in s&dms . the sales growth of $ 707 million in satellites was due to higher volume in government satellite activities , which partially was offset by lower volume in commercial satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 and two deliveries in 2008 . the increase in sales of $ 21 million in space transportation primarily was due to higher volume on the orion program , which more than offset a decline in the space shuttle 2019s external tank program . there was one commercial launch in both 2009 and 2008 . s&dms 2019 sales decreased by $ 102 million mainly due to lower volume on defensive missile programs , which more than offset growth in strategic missile programs. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2010 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 |\n| 2009 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 |\n| 2008 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 |', 'question': 'and what is the change in that difference from 2009 to 2010?', 'ops': 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972), subtract(#0, #1)', 'id': 'Single_LMT/2010/page_39.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'operating profit for the segment decreased by 1% ( 1 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . for the year , operating profit declines in defense more than offset an increase in civil , while operating profit at intelligence essentially was unchanged . the $ 27 million decrease in operating profit at defense primarily was attributable to a decrease in the level of favorable performance adjustments on mission and combat systems activities in 2010 . the $ 19 million increase in civil principally was due to higher volume on enterprise civilian services . operating profit for the segment decreased by 3% ( 3 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . operating profit declines in civil and intelligence partially were offset by growth in defense . the decrease of $ 29 million in civil 2019s operating profit primarily was attributable to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on enterprise civilian services programs in 2009 compared to 2008 . the decrease in operating profit of $ 27 million at intelligence mainly was due to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on security solution activities in 2009 compared to 2008 . the increase in defense 2019s operating profit of $ 29 million mainly was due to volume and improved performance in mission and combat systems . the decrease in backlog during 2010 compared to 2009 mainly was due to higher sales volume on enterprise civilian service programs at civil , including volume associated with the dris 2010 program , and mission and combat system programs at defense . backlog decreased in 2009 compared to 2008 due to u.s . government 2019s exercise of the termination for convenience clause on the tsat mission operations system ( tmos ) contract at defense , which resulted in a $ 1.6 billion reduction in orders . this decline more than offset increased orders on enterprise civilian services programs at civil . we expect is&gs will experience a low single digit percentage decrease in sales for 2011 as compared to 2010 . this decline primarily is due to completion of most of the work associated with the dris 2010 program . operating profit in 2011 is expected to decline in relationship to the decline in sales volume , while operating margins are expected to be comparable between the years . space systems our space systems business segment is engaged in the design , research and development , engineering , and production of satellites , strategic and defensive missile systems , and space transportation systems , including activities related to the planned replacement of the space shuttle . government satellite programs include the advanced extremely high frequency ( aehf ) system , the mobile user objective system ( muos ) , the global positioning satellite iii ( gps iii ) system , the space-based infrared system ( sbirs ) , and the geostationary operational environmental satellite r-series ( goes-r ) . strategic and missile defense programs include the targets and countermeasures program and the fleet ballistic missile program . space transportation includes the nasa orion program and , through ownership interests in two joint ventures , expendable launch services ( united launch alliance , or ula ) and space shuttle processing activities for the u.s . government ( united space alliance , or usa ) . the space shuttle is expected to complete its final flight mission in 2011 and our involvement with its launch and processing activities will end at that time . space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2010 2009 2008 .', 'doc_post_text': 'net sales for space systems decreased by 5% ( 5 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . sales declined in all three lines of business during the year . the $ 253 million decrease in space transportation principally was due to lower volume on the space shuttle external tank , commercial launch vehicle activity and other human space flight programs , which partially were offset by higher volume on the orion program . there were no commercial launches in 2010 compared to one commercial launch in 2009 . strategic & defensive missile systems ( s&dms ) sales declined $ 147 million principally due to lower volume on defensive missile programs . the $ 8 million sales decline in satellites primarily was attributable to lower volume on commercial satellites , which partially were offset by higher volume on government satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2010 and one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 . net sales for space systems increased 8% ( 8 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . during the year , sales growth at satellites and space transportation offset a decline in s&dms . the sales growth of $ 707 million in satellites was due to higher volume in government satellite activities , which partially was offset by lower volume in commercial satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 and two deliveries in 2008 . the increase in sales of $ 21 million in space transportation primarily was due to higher volume on the orion program , which more than offset a decline in the space shuttle 2019s external tank program . there was one commercial launch in both 2009 and 2008 . s&dms 2019 sales decreased by $ 102 million mainly due to lower volume on defensive missile programs , which more than offset growth in strategic missile programs. .', 'doc_table': {'2010': {'net sales': 8246.0, 'operating profit': 972.0, 'operating margin': -11.8, 'backlog at year-end': 17800.0}, '2009': {'net sales': 8654.0, 'operating profit': 972.0, 'operating margin': -11.2, 'backlog at year-end': 16800.0}, '2008': {'net sales': 8027.0, 'operating profit': 953.0, 'operating margin': -11.9, 'backlog at year-end': 17900.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in 2010?', 'and what were the net sales in 2009?', 'and what was the operating profit in that year?', 'what is, then, the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in that year?', 'and what is the change in that difference from 2009 to 2010?', 'how much does this change represent in relation to the 2009 difference?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['7274', '8654', '972', '7682', '-408', '-5.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(8246, 972)', '8654', '972', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972)', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972), subtract(#0, #1)', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972), subtract(#0, #1), divide(#2, #1)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [7274.0, 8654.0, 972.0, 7682.0, -408.0, -0.05311], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -408.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:09 ERROR dspy.teleprompt.utils: An exception occurred during evaluation
Traceback (most recent call last):
    return evaluate(candidate_program, devset=trainset, return_all_scores=return_all_scores, callback_metadata={"metric_key": "eval_full"})
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    patch_function(call_original, *args, **kwargs)
    return original(self, *args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    return call_original_fn_with_event_logging(_original_fn, og_args, og_kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    original_fn_result = original_fn(*og_args, **og_kwargs)
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    original_result = original(*_og_args, **_og_kwargs)
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    raise exception
    results = fn(instance, *args, **kwargs)
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    results = executor.execute(process_item, devset)
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    return self._execute_parallel(wrapped, data)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    raise Exception("Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.")
Exception: Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.
2025/07/29 14:11:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0]
2025/07/29 14:11:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:11:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 14:11:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 14:11:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 8 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:11:09 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ngeneral market conditions affecting trust asset performance , future discount rates based on average yields of high quality corporate bonds and our decisions regarding certain elective provisions of the we currently project that we will make total u.s . and foreign benefit plan contributions in 2014 of approximately $ 57 million . actual 2014 contributions could be different from our current projections , as influenced by our decision to undertake discretionary funding of our benefit trusts versus other competing investment priorities , future changes in government requirements , trust asset performance , renewals of union contracts , or higher-than-expected health care claims cost experience . we measure cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities reduced by expenditures for property additions . we use this non-gaap financial measure of cash flow to focus management and investors on the amount of cash available for debt repayment , dividend distributions , acquisition opportunities , and share repurchases . our cash flow metric is reconciled to the most comparable gaap measure , as follows: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nyear-over-year change ( 4.5 ) % (  % ) 22.4% ( 22.4 % ) the decrease in cash flow ( as defined ) in 2013 compared to 2012 was due primarily to higher capital expenditures . the increase in cash flow in 2012 compared to 2011 was driven by improved performance in working capital resulting from the one-time benefit derived from the pringles acquisition , as well as changes in the level of capital expenditures during the three-year period . investing activities our net cash used in investing activities for 2013 amounted to $ 641 million , a decrease of $ 2604 million compared with 2012 primarily attributable to the $ 2668 million acquisition of pringles in 2012 . capital spending in 2013 included investments in our supply chain infrastructure , and to support capacity requirements in certain markets , including pringles . in addition , we continued the investment in our information technology infrastructure related to the reimplementation and upgrade of our sap platform . net cash used in investing activities of $ 3245 million in 2012 increased by $ 2658 million compared with 2011 , due to the acquisition of pringles in 2012 . cash paid for additions to properties as a percentage of net sales has increased to 4.3% ( 4.3 % ) in 2013 , from 3.8% ( 3.8 % ) in 2012 , which was a decrease from 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) in financing activities our net cash used by financing activities was $ 1141 million for 2013 , compared to net cash provided by financing activities of $ 1317 million for 2012 and net cash used in financing activities of $ 957 million for 2011 . the increase in cash provided from financing activities in 2012 compared to 2013 and 2011 , was primarily due to the issuance of debt related to the acquisition of pringles . total debt was $ 7.4 billion at year-end 2013 and $ 7.9 billion at year-end 2012 . in february 2013 , we issued $ 250 million of two-year floating-rate u.s . dollar notes , and $ 400 million of ten-year 2.75% ( 2.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 645 million . the proceeds from these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including , together with cash on hand , repayment of the $ 750 million aggregate principal amount of our 4.25% ( 4.25 % ) u.s . dollar notes due march 2013 . in may 2012 , we issued $ 350 million of three-year 1.125% ( 1.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , $ 400 million of five-year 1.75% ( 1.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes and $ 700 million of ten-year 3.125% ( 3.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 1.442 billion . the proceeds of these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including financing a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in may 2012 , we issued cdn . $ 300 million of two-year 2.10% ( 2.10 % ) fixed rate canadian dollar notes , using the proceeds from these notes for general corporate purposes , which included repayment of intercompany debt . this repayment resulted in cash available to be used for a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in december 2012 , we repaid $ 750 million five-year 5.125% ( 5.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in april 2011 , we repaid $ 945 million ten-year 6.60% ( 6.60 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in may 2011 , we issued $ 400 million of seven-year 3.25% ( 3.25 % ) fixed rate u.s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 397 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper . in november 2011 , we issued $ 500 million of five-year 1.875% ( 1.875 % ) fixed rate u . s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 498 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2013 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 |\n| 2012 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 |\n| 2011 | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  |', 'question': 'what was the value of cash provided by operations in 2013?', 'ops': '1807', 'id': 'Single_K/2013/page_27.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'general market conditions affecting trust asset performance , future discount rates based on average yields of high quality corporate bonds and our decisions regarding certain elective provisions of the we currently project that we will make total u.s . and foreign benefit plan contributions in 2014 of approximately $ 57 million . actual 2014 contributions could be different from our current projections , as influenced by our decision to undertake discretionary funding of our benefit trusts versus other competing investment priorities , future changes in government requirements , trust asset performance , renewals of union contracts , or higher-than-expected health care claims cost experience . we measure cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities reduced by expenditures for property additions . we use this non-gaap financial measure of cash flow to focus management and investors on the amount of cash available for debt repayment , dividend distributions , acquisition opportunities , and share repurchases . our cash flow metric is reconciled to the most comparable gaap measure , as follows: .', 'doc_post_text': 'year-over-year change ( 4.5 ) % (  % ) 22.4% ( 22.4 % ) the decrease in cash flow ( as defined ) in 2013 compared to 2012 was due primarily to higher capital expenditures . the increase in cash flow in 2012 compared to 2011 was driven by improved performance in working capital resulting from the one-time benefit derived from the pringles acquisition , as well as changes in the level of capital expenditures during the three-year period . investing activities our net cash used in investing activities for 2013 amounted to $ 641 million , a decrease of $ 2604 million compared with 2012 primarily attributable to the $ 2668 million acquisition of pringles in 2012 . capital spending in 2013 included investments in our supply chain infrastructure , and to support capacity requirements in certain markets , including pringles . in addition , we continued the investment in our information technology infrastructure related to the reimplementation and upgrade of our sap platform . net cash used in investing activities of $ 3245 million in 2012 increased by $ 2658 million compared with 2011 , due to the acquisition of pringles in 2012 . cash paid for additions to properties as a percentage of net sales has increased to 4.3% ( 4.3 % ) in 2013 , from 3.8% ( 3.8 % ) in 2012 , which was a decrease from 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) in financing activities our net cash used by financing activities was $ 1141 million for 2013 , compared to net cash provided by financing activities of $ 1317 million for 2012 and net cash used in financing activities of $ 957 million for 2011 . the increase in cash provided from financing activities in 2012 compared to 2013 and 2011 , was primarily due to the issuance of debt related to the acquisition of pringles . total debt was $ 7.4 billion at year-end 2013 and $ 7.9 billion at year-end 2012 . in february 2013 , we issued $ 250 million of two-year floating-rate u.s . dollar notes , and $ 400 million of ten-year 2.75% ( 2.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 645 million . the proceeds from these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including , together with cash on hand , repayment of the $ 750 million aggregate principal amount of our 4.25% ( 4.25 % ) u.s . dollar notes due march 2013 . in may 2012 , we issued $ 350 million of three-year 1.125% ( 1.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , $ 400 million of five-year 1.75% ( 1.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes and $ 700 million of ten-year 3.125% ( 3.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 1.442 billion . the proceeds of these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including financing a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in may 2012 , we issued cdn . $ 300 million of two-year 2.10% ( 2.10 % ) fixed rate canadian dollar notes , using the proceeds from these notes for general corporate purposes , which included repayment of intercompany debt . this repayment resulted in cash available to be used for a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in december 2012 , we repaid $ 750 million five-year 5.125% ( 5.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in april 2011 , we repaid $ 945 million ten-year 6.60% ( 6.60 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in may 2011 , we issued $ 400 million of seven-year 3.25% ( 3.25 % ) fixed rate u.s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 397 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper . in november 2011 , we issued $ 500 million of five-year 1.875% ( 1.875 % ) fixed rate u . s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 498 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper. .', 'doc_table': {'2013': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1807.0, 'additions to properties': -637.0, 'cash flow': 1170.0, 'year-over-year change': -4.5}, '2012': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1758.0, 'additions to properties': -533.0, 'cash flow': 1225.0, 'year-over-year change': -22.4}, '2011': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1595.0, 'additions to properties': -594.0, 'cash flow': 1001.0, 'year-over-year change': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of cash provided by operations in 2013?', 'what was the value in 2011?', 'what is the net change in value?', 'what was the 2011 value?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1807', '1595', '212', '1595', '.1329'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1807', '1595', 'subtract(1807, 1595)', '1595', 'subtract(1807, 1595), divide(#0, 1595)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1807.0, 1595.0, 212.0, 1595.0, 0.13292], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 1807.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:09 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amount of receivables collected by the railroad in 2011, in billions?\nA1: 18.8', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nthe railroad collected approximately $ 18.8 billion and $ 16.3 billion of receivables during the years ended december 31 , 2011 and 2010 , respectively . upri used certain of these proceeds to purchase new receivables under the facility . the costs of the receivables securitization facility include interest , which will vary based on prevailing commercial paper rates , program fees paid to banks , commercial paper issuing costs , and fees for unused commitment availability . the costs of the receivables securitization facility are included in interest expense and were $ 4 million and $ 6 million for 2011 and 2010 , respectively . prior to adoption of the new accounting standard , the costs of the receivables securitization facility were included in other income and were $ 9 million for 2009 . the investors have no recourse to the railroad 2019s other assets , except for customary warranty and indemnity claims . creditors of the railroad do not have recourse to the assets of upri . in august 2011 , the receivables securitization facility was renewed for an additional 364-day period at comparable terms and conditions . contractual obligations and commercial commitments as described in the notes to the consolidated financial statements and as referenced in the tables below , we have contractual obligations and commercial commitments that may affect our financial condition . based on our assessment of the underlying provisions and circumstances of our contractual obligations and commercial commitments , including material sources of off-balance sheet and structured finance arrangements , other than the risks that we and other similarly situated companies face with respect to the condition of the capital markets ( as described in item 1a of part ii of this report ) , there is no known trend , demand , commitment , event , or uncertainty that is reasonably likely to occur that would have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations , financial condition , or liquidity . in addition , our commercial obligations , financings , and commitments are customary transactions that are similar to those of other comparable corporations , particularly within the transportation industry . the following tables identify material obligations and commitments as of december 31 , 2011 : payments due by december 31 , contractual obligations after millions total 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2016 other .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n[a] excludes capital lease obligations of $ 1874 million and unamortized discount of $ 364 million . includes an interest component of $ 5120 million . [b] includes leases for locomotives , freight cars , other equipment , and real estate . [c] represents total obligations , including interest component of $ 685 million . [d] purchase obligations include locomotive maintenance contracts ; purchase commitments for fuel purchases , locomotives , ties , ballast , and rail ; and agreements to purchase other goods and services . for amounts where we cannot reasonably estimate the year of settlement , they are reflected in the other column . [e] includes estimated other post retirement , medical , and life insurance payments and payments made under the unfunded pension plan for the next ten years . no amounts are included for funded pension obligations as no contributions are currently required . [f] future cash flows for income tax contingencies reflect the recorded liability for unrecognized tax benefits , including interest and penalties , as of december 31 , 2011 . where we can reasonably estimate the years in which these liabilities may be settled , this is shown in the table . for amounts where we cannot reasonably estimate the year of settlement , they are reflected in the other column. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| total | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 |\n| payments due by december 31 2012 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 |\n| payments due by december 31 2013 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 |\n| payments due by december 31 2014 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 |\n| payments due by december 31 2015 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 |\n| payments due by december 31 2016 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 |\n| payments due by december 31 after 2016 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 |\n| payments due by december 31 other | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 |', 'question': 'if there were 4 inventory turns per year, what would be the 2012 cash flow from the balance of these receivables, also in billions?', 'ops': 'divide(18.8, 4)', 'id': 'Double_UNP/2011/page_40.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'the railroad collected approximately $ 18.8 billion and $ 16.3 billion of receivables during the years ended december 31 , 2011 and 2010 , respectively . upri used certain of these proceeds to purchase new receivables under the facility . the costs of the receivables securitization facility include interest , which will vary based on prevailing commercial paper rates , program fees paid to banks , commercial paper issuing costs , and fees for unused commitment availability . the costs of the receivables securitization facility are included in interest expense and were $ 4 million and $ 6 million for 2011 and 2010 , respectively . prior to adoption of the new accounting standard , the costs of the receivables securitization facility were included in other income and were $ 9 million for 2009 . the investors have no recourse to the railroad 2019s other assets , except for customary warranty and indemnity claims . creditors of the railroad do not have recourse to the assets of upri . in august 2011 , the receivables securitization facility was renewed for an additional 364-day period at comparable terms and conditions . contractual obligations and commercial commitments as described in the notes to the consolidated financial statements and as referenced in the tables below , we have contractual obligations and commercial commitments that may affect our financial condition . based on our assessment of the underlying provisions and circumstances of our contractual obligations and commercial commitments , including material sources of off-balance sheet and structured finance arrangements , other than the risks that we and other similarly situated companies face with respect to the condition of the capital markets ( as described in item 1a of part ii of this report ) , there is no known trend , demand , commitment , event , or uncertainty that is reasonably likely to occur that would have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations , financial condition , or liquidity . in addition , our commercial obligations , financings , and commitments are customary transactions that are similar to those of other comparable corporations , particularly within the transportation industry . the following tables identify material obligations and commitments as of december 31 , 2011 : payments due by december 31 , contractual obligations after millions total 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2016 other .', 'doc_post_text': '[a] excludes capital lease obligations of $ 1874 million and unamortized discount of $ 364 million . includes an interest component of $ 5120 million . [b] includes leases for locomotives , freight cars , other equipment , and real estate . [c] represents total obligations , including interest component of $ 685 million . [d] purchase obligations include locomotive maintenance contracts ; purchase commitments for fuel purchases , locomotives , ties , ballast , and rail ; and agreements to purchase other goods and services . for amounts where we cannot reasonably estimate the year of settlement , they are reflected in the other column . [e] includes estimated other post retirement , medical , and life insurance payments and payments made under the unfunded pension plan for the next ten years . no amounts are included for funded pension obligations as no contributions are currently required . [f] future cash flows for income tax contingencies reflect the recorded liability for unrecognized tax benefits , including interest and penalties , as of december 31 , 2011 . where we can reasonably estimate the years in which these liabilities may be settled , this is shown in the table . for amounts where we cannot reasonably estimate the year of settlement , they are reflected in the other column. .', 'doc_table': {'total': {'debt [a]': 12516.0, 'operating leases [b]': 4528.0, 'capital lease obligations [c]': 2559.0, 'purchase obligations [d]': 5137.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': 249.0, 'income tax contingencies [f]': 107.0, 'total contractualobligations': 25096.0}, 'payments due by december 31 2012': {'debt [a]': 538.0, 'operating leases [b]': 525.0, 'capital lease obligations [c]': 297.0, 'purchase obligations [d]': 2598.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': 26.0, 'income tax contingencies [f]': 31.0, 'total contractualobligations': 4015.0}, 'payments due by december 31 2013': {'debt [a]': 852.0, 'operating leases [b]': 489.0, 'capital lease obligations [c]': 269.0, 'purchase obligations [d]': 568.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': 26.0, 'income tax contingencies [f]': '-', 'total contractualobligations': 2204.0}, 'payments due by december 31 2014': {'debt [a]': 887.0, 'operating leases [b]': 415.0, 'capital lease obligations [c]': 276.0, 'purchase obligations [d]': 560.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': 26.0, 'income tax contingencies [f]': '-', 'total contractualobligations': 2164.0}, 'payments due by december 31 2015': {'debt [a]': 615.0, 'operating leases [b]': 372.0, 'capital lease obligations [c]': 276.0, 'purchase obligations [d]': 276.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': 26.0, 'income tax contingencies [f]': '-', 'total contractualobligations': 1565.0}, 'payments due by december 31 2016': {'debt [a]': 652.0, 'operating leases [b]': 347.0, 'capital lease obligations [c]': 262.0, 'purchase obligations [d]': 245.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': 26.0, 'income tax contingencies [f]': '-', 'total contractualobligations': 1532.0}, 'payments due by december 31 after 2016': {'debt [a]': 8972.0, 'operating leases [b]': 2380.0, 'capital lease obligations [c]': 1179.0, 'purchase obligations [d]': 858.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': 119.0, 'income tax contingencies [f]': '-', 'total contractualobligations': 13508.0}, 'payments due by december 31 other': {'debt [a]': '$ -', 'operating leases [b]': '-', 'capital lease obligations [c]': '-', 'purchase obligations [d]': 32.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': '-', 'income tax contingencies [f]': 76.0, 'total contractualobligations': 108.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amount of receivables collected by the railroad in 2011, in billions?', 'if there were 4 inventory turns per year, what would be the 2012 cash flow from the balance of these receivables, also in billions?', 'and for the receivables collected in 2010, what would be, in billions, the cash flow in 2011 for their balance?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['18.8', '4.7', '5.4'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['18.8', 'divide(18.8, 4)', 'divide(16.3, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [18.8, 4.7, 5.43333], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 4.7}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:10 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: combined, what were the additions in 2006 and 207?\nA1: 197775.0\nQ2: and in 2008?\nA2: 103.698\nQ3: and converting this value into millions?\nA3: 103698.0\nQ4: now combined with the values from 2006 and 2007?\nA4: 301473.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfederal realty investment trust schedule iii summary of real estate and accumulated depreciation 2014continued three years ended december 31 , 2009 reconciliation of accumulated depreciation and amortization ( in thousands ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | additions during period 2014depreciation and amortization expense | deductions during period 2014disposition and retirements of property | balance december 31 2007 | balance december 31 2008 | balance december 31 2009 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 740507 | 103.698 | -11869.0 | 756703.0 | 846258.0 | 938087.0 |', 'question': 'so what is the average of these values?', 'ops': 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698), add(#0, #1), divide(#2, const_3)', 'id': 'Single_FRT/2009/page_124.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'federal realty investment trust schedule iii summary of real estate and accumulated depreciation 2014continued three years ended december 31 , 2009 reconciliation of accumulated depreciation and amortization ( in thousands ) .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'$ 740507': {'additions during period 2014depreciation and amortization expense': 103.698, 'deductions during period 2014disposition and retirements of property': -11869.0, 'balance december 31 2007': 756703.0, 'balance december 31 2008': 846258.0, 'balance december 31 2009': 938087.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['combined, what were the additions in 2006 and 207?', 'and in 2008?', 'and converting this value into millions?', 'now combined with the values from 2006 and 2007?', 'so what is the average of these values?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['197775', '103.698', '103698', '301473', '100491'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(96454, 101321)', '103.698', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698)', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698), add(#0, #1)', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698), add(#0, #1), divide(#2, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [197775.0, 103.698, 103698.0, 301473.0, 100491.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 100491.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:11 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nintangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives or on an accelerated method of amortization that is expected to reflect the estimated pattern of economic use . the remaining amortization expense will be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 0.9 years . amortization expense from continuing operations , related to intangibles was $ 7.4 million , $ 9.3 million and $ 9.2 million in fiscal 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . the company expects annual amortization expense for these intangible assets to be: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ng . grant accounting certain of the company 2019s foreign subsidiaries have received various grants from governmental agencies . these grants include capital , employment and research and development grants . capital grants for the acquisition of property and equipment are netted against the related capital expenditures and amortized as a credit to depreciation expense over the useful life of the related asset . employment grants , which relate to employee hiring and training , and research and development grants are recognized in earnings in the period in which the related expenditures are incurred by the company . h . translation of foreign currencies the functional currency for the company 2019s foreign sales and research and development operations is the applicable local currency . gains and losses resulting from translation of these foreign currencies into u.s . dollars are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income . transaction gains and losses and remeasurement of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities are included in income currently , including those at the company 2019s principal foreign manufacturing operations where the functional currency is the u.s . dollar . foreign currency transaction gains or losses included in other expenses , net , were not material in fiscal 2009 , 2008 or 2007 . i . derivative instruments and hedging agreements foreign exchange exposure management 2014 the company enters into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to offset certain operational and balance sheet exposures from the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates . such exposures result from the portion of the company 2019s operations , assets and liabilities that are denominated in currencies other than the u.s . dollar , primarily the euro ; other exposures include the philippine peso and the british pound . these foreign currency exchange contracts are entered into to support transactions made in the normal course of business , and accordingly , are not speculative in nature . the contracts are for periods consistent with the terms of the underlying transactions , generally one year or less . hedges related to anticipated transactions are designated and documented at the inception of the respective hedges as cash flow hedges and are evaluated for effectiveness monthly . derivative instruments are employed to eliminate or minimize certain foreign currency exposures that can be confidently identified and quantified . as the terms of the contract and the underlying transaction are matched at inception , forward contract effectiveness is calculated by comparing the change in fair value of the contract to the change in the forward value of the anticipated transaction , with the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income ( oci ) in shareholders 2019 equity and reclassified into earnings in the same period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings . any residual change in fair value of the instruments , or ineffectiveness , is recognized immediately in other income/expense . additionally , the company enters into forward foreign currency contracts that economically hedge the gains and losses generated by the remeasurement of certain recorded assets and liabilities in a non-functional currency . changes in the fair value of these undesignated hedges are recognized in other income/expense immediately as an offset to the changes in the fair value of the asset or liability being hedged . analog devices , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 |\n|---|---|---|\n| amortization expense | 5425.0 | 1430.0 |', 'question': 'what was the amortization expense in 2009?', 'ops': '7.4', 'id': 'Double_ADI/2009/page_59.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives or on an accelerated method of amortization that is expected to reflect the estimated pattern of economic use . the remaining amortization expense will be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 0.9 years . amortization expense from continuing operations , related to intangibles was $ 7.4 million , $ 9.3 million and $ 9.2 million in fiscal 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . the company expects annual amortization expense for these intangible assets to be: .', 'doc_post_text': 'g . grant accounting certain of the company 2019s foreign subsidiaries have received various grants from governmental agencies . these grants include capital , employment and research and development grants . capital grants for the acquisition of property and equipment are netted against the related capital expenditures and amortized as a credit to depreciation expense over the useful life of the related asset . employment grants , which relate to employee hiring and training , and research and development grants are recognized in earnings in the period in which the related expenditures are incurred by the company . h . translation of foreign currencies the functional currency for the company 2019s foreign sales and research and development operations is the applicable local currency . gains and losses resulting from translation of these foreign currencies into u.s . dollars are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income . transaction gains and losses and remeasurement of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities are included in income currently , including those at the company 2019s principal foreign manufacturing operations where the functional currency is the u.s . dollar . foreign currency transaction gains or losses included in other expenses , net , were not material in fiscal 2009 , 2008 or 2007 . i . derivative instruments and hedging agreements foreign exchange exposure management 2014 the company enters into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to offset certain operational and balance sheet exposures from the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates . such exposures result from the portion of the company 2019s operations , assets and liabilities that are denominated in currencies other than the u.s . dollar , primarily the euro ; other exposures include the philippine peso and the british pound . these foreign currency exchange contracts are entered into to support transactions made in the normal course of business , and accordingly , are not speculative in nature . the contracts are for periods consistent with the terms of the underlying transactions , generally one year or less . hedges related to anticipated transactions are designated and documented at the inception of the respective hedges as cash flow hedges and are evaluated for effectiveness monthly . derivative instruments are employed to eliminate or minimize certain foreign currency exposures that can be confidently identified and quantified . as the terms of the contract and the underlying transaction are matched at inception , forward contract effectiveness is calculated by comparing the change in fair value of the contract to the change in the forward value of the anticipated transaction , with the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income ( oci ) in shareholders 2019 equity and reclassified into earnings in the same period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings . any residual change in fair value of the instruments , or ineffectiveness , is recognized immediately in other income/expense . additionally , the company enters into forward foreign currency contracts that economically hedge the gains and losses generated by the remeasurement of certain recorded assets and liabilities in a non-functional currency . changes in the fair value of these undesignated hedges are recognized in other income/expense immediately as an offset to the changes in the fair value of the asset or liability being hedged . analog devices , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) .', 'doc_table': {'amortization expense': {'2010': 5425.0, '2011': 1430.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amortization expense in 2009?', 'and what was it in 2008?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2008 amortization expense?', 'and in 2010, what was this amortization expense, in millions?', 'what was, then, the change since 2009?', 'and what is this change as a portion of the 2009 amortization expense?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['7.4', '9.3', '-1.9', '-20.4%', '5.4', '-2', '-27.0%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['7.4', '9.3', 'subtract(7.4, 9.3)', 'subtract(7.4, 9.3), divide(#0, 9.3)', 'divide(5425, const_1000)', 'divide(5425, const_1000), subtract(#0, 7.4)', 'divide(5425, const_1000), subtract(#0, 7.4), divide(#1, 7.4)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [7.4, 9.3, -1.9, -0.2043, 5.425, -1.975, -0.26689], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 7.4}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:11 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in value for booking holding inc. in 2018, assuming a $100 initial investment?\nA1: 48.18', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmeasurement point december 31 booking holdings nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| booking holdings inc . | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 |\n| nasdaqcomposite index | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 |\n| s&p 500index | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 |\n| rdg internetcomposite | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 |', 'question': 'what is the percent change?', 'ops': 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_BKNG/2018/page_34.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': 'measurement point december 31 booking holdings nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'booking holdings inc .': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 98.09, '2015': 109.68, '2016': 126.12, '2017': 149.5, '2018': 148.18}, 'nasdaqcomposite index': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 114.62, '2015': 122.81, '2016': 133.19, '2017': 172.11, '2018': 165.84}, 's&p 500index': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 113.69, '2015': 115.26, '2016': 129.05, '2017': 157.22, '2018': 150.33}, 'rdg internetcomposite': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 96.39, '2015': 133.2, '2016': 140.23, '2017': 202.15, '2018': 201.16}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in value for booking holding inc. in 2018, assuming a $100 initial investment?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what was the nasdaq composite value in 2018?', 'what is the net change also assuming a $100 initial investment?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what was the difference in the percent changes?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['48.18', '48.18%', '165.84', '65.84', '65.84%', '17.66%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(148.18, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', '165.84', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [48.18, 0.4818, 165.84, 65.84, 0.6584, -0.1766], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.4818}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:12 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the other income in 2006?\nA1: 118.0\nQ2: what about in 2005?\nA2: 145.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nincreased over 4% ( 4 % ) in 2005 , costs for trucking services provided by intermodal carriers remained flat as we substantially reduced expenses associated with network inefficiencies . higher diesel fuel prices increased sales and use taxes in 2005 , which resulted in higher state and local taxes . other contract expenses for equipment maintenance and other services increased in 2005 . the 2005 january west coast storm and hurricanes katrina and rita also contributed to higher expenses in 2005 ( net of insurance settlements received ) . partially offsetting these increases was a reduction in relocation expenses as we incurred higher relocation costs associated with moving support personnel to omaha , nebraska during 2004 . non-operating items millions of dollars 2006 2005 2004 % (  % ) change 2006 v 2005 % (  % ) change 2005 v 2004 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nother income 2013 lower net gains from non-operating asset sales and higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program resulted in a reduction in other income in 2006 , which was partially offset by higher rental income for the use of our right-of-way ( including 2006 settlements of rate disputes from prior years ) and cash investment returns due to higher interest rates . in 2005 , other income increased largely as a result of higher gains from real estate sales partially offset by higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program . interest expense 2013 lower interest expense in 2006 and 2005 was primarily due to declining weighted-average debt levels of $ 7.1 billion , $ 7.8 billion , and $ 8.1 billion in 2006 , 2005 , and 2004 , respectively . a higher effective interest rate of 6.7% ( 6.7 % ) in 2006 , compared to 6.5% ( 6.5 % ) in both 2005 and 2004 , partially offset the effects of the declining debt level . income taxes 2013 income tax expense was $ 509 million higher in 2006 than 2005 . higher pre-tax income resulted in additional taxes of $ 414 million and $ 118 million of the increase resulted from the one-time reduction in 2005 described below . our effective tax rate was 36.4% ( 36.4 % ) and 28.6% ( 28.6 % ) in 2006 and 2005 , respectively . income taxes were greater in 2005 than 2004 due to higher pre-tax income partially offset by a previously reported reduction in income tax expense . in our quarterly report on form 10-q for the quarter ended june 30 , 2005 , we reported that the corporation analyzed the impact that final settlements of pre-1995 tax years had on previously recorded estimates of deferred tax assets and liabilities . the completed analysis of the final settlements for pre-1995 tax years , along with internal revenue service examination reports for tax years 1995 through 2002 were considered , among other things , in a review and re-evaluation of the corporation 2019s estimated deferred tax assets and liabilities as of september 30 , 2005 , resulting in an income tax expense reduction of $ 118 million in .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2006 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 |\n| 2005 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 |\n| 2004 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 |\n| % (  % ) change 2006 v 2005 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 |\n| % (  % ) change 2005 v 2004 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 |', 'question': 'what is the sum for these two years?', 'ops': 'add(118, 145)', 'id': 'Double_UNP/2006/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'increased over 4% ( 4 % ) in 2005 , costs for trucking services provided by intermodal carriers remained flat as we substantially reduced expenses associated with network inefficiencies . higher diesel fuel prices increased sales and use taxes in 2005 , which resulted in higher state and local taxes . other contract expenses for equipment maintenance and other services increased in 2005 . the 2005 january west coast storm and hurricanes katrina and rita also contributed to higher expenses in 2005 ( net of insurance settlements received ) . partially offsetting these increases was a reduction in relocation expenses as we incurred higher relocation costs associated with moving support personnel to omaha , nebraska during 2004 . non-operating items millions of dollars 2006 2005 2004 % (  % ) change 2006 v 2005 % (  % ) change 2005 v 2004 .', 'doc_post_text': 'other income 2013 lower net gains from non-operating asset sales and higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program resulted in a reduction in other income in 2006 , which was partially offset by higher rental income for the use of our right-of-way ( including 2006 settlements of rate disputes from prior years ) and cash investment returns due to higher interest rates . in 2005 , other income increased largely as a result of higher gains from real estate sales partially offset by higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program . interest expense 2013 lower interest expense in 2006 and 2005 was primarily due to declining weighted-average debt levels of $ 7.1 billion , $ 7.8 billion , and $ 8.1 billion in 2006 , 2005 , and 2004 , respectively . a higher effective interest rate of 6.7% ( 6.7 % ) in 2006 , compared to 6.5% ( 6.5 % ) in both 2005 and 2004 , partially offset the effects of the declining debt level . income taxes 2013 income tax expense was $ 509 million higher in 2006 than 2005 . higher pre-tax income resulted in additional taxes of $ 414 million and $ 118 million of the increase resulted from the one-time reduction in 2005 described below . our effective tax rate was 36.4% ( 36.4 % ) and 28.6% ( 28.6 % ) in 2006 and 2005 , respectively . income taxes were greater in 2005 than 2004 due to higher pre-tax income partially offset by a previously reported reduction in income tax expense . in our quarterly report on form 10-q for the quarter ended june 30 , 2005 , we reported that the corporation analyzed the impact that final settlements of pre-1995 tax years had on previously recorded estimates of deferred tax assets and liabilities . the completed analysis of the final settlements for pre-1995 tax years , along with internal revenue service examination reports for tax years 1995 through 2002 were considered , among other things , in a review and re-evaluation of the corporation 2019s estimated deferred tax assets and liabilities as of september 30 , 2005 , resulting in an income tax expense reduction of $ 118 million in .', 'doc_table': {'2006': {'other income': 118.0, 'interest expense': -477.0, 'income taxes': -919.0}, '2005': {'other income': 145.0, 'interest expense': -504.0, 'income taxes': -410.0}, '2004': {'other income': 88.0, 'interest expense': -527.0, 'income taxes': -252.0}, '% (  % ) change 2006 v 2005': {'other income': -19.0, 'interest expense': -5.0, 'income taxes': 124.0}, '% (  % ) change 2005 v 2004': {'other income': -65.0, 'interest expense': -4.0, 'income taxes': 63.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the other income in 2006?', 'what about in 2005?', 'what is the sum for these two years?', 'what about in 2004?', 'what is the total for three years?', 'what is the average for these three years?', 'what is the net change in other income from 2004 to 2005?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['118', '145', '263', '88', '351', '117', '57'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['118', '145', 'add(118, 145)', '88', 'add(118, 145), add(#0, 88)', 'add(118, 145), add(#0, 88), divide(#1, const_3)', 'subtract(145, 88)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [118.0, 145.0, 263.0, 88.0, 351.0, 117.0, 57.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 263.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:13 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the number of shares available under the 2014 incentive plan?\nA1: 29045044.0\nQ2: and what is it for the the 2009 one?\nA2: 12181214.0\nQ3: what is, then, the total number of shares available under both plans?\nA3: 41226258.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\npart iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | equity compensation plans approved by security holders | equity compensation plans not approved by security holders | equity compensation plans approved by security holders | equity compensation plans not approved by security holders | equity compensation plans approved by security holders | equity compensation plans not approved by security holders |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options warrants and rights ( a ) 123 | 15563666.0 | none | 15563666.0 | none | 15563666.0 | none |\n| weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options ( b ) | 9.7 |  | 9.7 |  | 9.7 |  |\n| number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) ( c ) 4 | 41661517.0 |  | 41661517.0 |  | 41661517.0 |  |', 'question': 'and including the 2006 employee stock purchase plan, what becomes this total?', 'ops': 'add(29045044, 12181214), add(#0, 435259)', 'id': 'Double_IPG/2014/page_95.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'part iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .', 'doc_post_text': 'part iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .', 'doc_table': {'number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options warrants and rights ( a ) 123': {'equity compensation plans approved by security holders': 15563666.0, 'equity compensation plans not approved by security holders': 'none'}, 'weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options ( b )': {'equity compensation plans approved by security holders': 9.7, 'equity compensation plans not approved by security holders': ''}, 'number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) ( c ) 4': {'equity compensation plans approved by security holders': 41661517.0, 'equity compensation plans not approved by security holders': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the number of shares available under the 2014 incentive plan?', 'and what is it for the the 2009 one?', 'what is, then, the total number of shares available under both plans?', 'and including the 2006 employee stock purchase plan, what becomes this total?', 'and from this total, what is the number of shares to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options warrants and right?', 'what is value of each of those shares?', 'what is, then, the total value of all of those shares?', 'and how much is that in millions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['29045044', '12181214', '41226258', '41661517', '15563666', '9.70', '150967560.2', '151.0'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['29045044', '12181214', 'add(29045044, 12181214)', 'add(29045044, 12181214), add(#0, 435259)', '15563666', '9.70', 'multiply(15563666, 9.70)', 'multiply(15563666, 9.70), divide(#0, const_1000000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [29045044.0, 12181214.0, 41226258.0, 41661517.0, 15563666.0, 9.7, 150967560.2, 150.96756], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 41661517.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:14 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the profit margin for lockheed martin in 2002?\nA1: 0.05999', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nlockheed martin corporation management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations december 31 , 2002 space systems space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2002 2001 2000 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnet sales for space systems increased by 8% ( 8 % ) in 2002 compared to 2001 . the increase in sales for 2002 resulted from higher volume in government space of $ 370 million and commercial space of $ 180 million . in government space , increases of $ 470 million in government satellite programs and $ 130 million in ground systems activities more than offset volume declines of $ 175 million on government launch vehi- cles and $ 55 million on strategic missile programs . the increase in commercial space sales is primarily attributable to an increase in launch vehicle activities , with nine commercial launches during 2002 compared to six in 2001 . net sales for the segment decreased by 7% ( 7 % ) in 2001 com- pared to 2000 . the decrease in sales for 2001 resulted from volume declines in commercial space of $ 560 million , which more than offset increases in government space of $ 60 million . in commercial space , sales declined due to volume reductions of $ 480 million in commercial launch vehicle activities and $ 80 million in satellite programs . there were six launches in 2001 compared to 14 launches in 2000 . the increase in gov- ernment space resulted from a combined increase of $ 230 mil- lion related to higher volume on government satellite programs and ground systems activities . these increases were partially offset by a $ 110 million decrease related to volume declines in government launch vehicle activity , primarily due to program maturities , and by $ 50 million due to the absence in 2001 of favorable adjustments recorded on the titan iv pro- gram in 2000 . operating profit for the segment increased 23% ( 23 % ) in 2002 as compared to 2001 , mainly driven by the commercial space business . reduced losses in commercial space during 2002 resulted in increased operating profit of $ 90 million when compared to 2001 . commercial satellite manufacturing losses declined $ 100 million in 2002 as operating performance improved and satellite deliveries increased . in the first quarter of 2001 , a $ 40 million loss provision was recorded on certain commercial satellite manufacturing contracts . due to the industry-wide oversupply and deterioration of pricing in the commercial launch market , financial results on commercial launch vehicles continue to be challenging . during 2002 , this trend led to a decline in operating profit of $ 10 million on commercial launch vehicles when compared to 2001 . this decrease was primarily due to lower profitability of $ 55 mil- lion on the three additional launches in the current year , addi- tional charges of $ 60 million ( net of a favorable contract adjustment of $ 20 million ) for market and pricing pressures and included the adverse effect of a $ 35 million adjustment for commercial launch vehicle contract settlement costs . the 2001 results also included charges for market and pricing pressures , which reduced that year 2019s operating profit by $ 145 million . the $ 10 million decrease in government space 2019s operating profit for the year is primarily due to the reduced volume on government launch vehicles and strategic missile programs , which combined to decrease operating profit by $ 80 million , partially offset by increases of $ 40 million in government satellite programs and $ 30 million in ground systems activities . operating profit for the segment increased by 4% ( 4 % ) in 2001 compared to 2000 . operating profit increased in 2001 due to a $ 35 million increase in government space partially offset by higher year-over-year losses of $ 20 million in commercial space . in government space , operating profit increased due to the impact of higher volume and improved performance in ground systems and government satellite programs . the year- to-year comparison of operating profit was not affected by the $ 50 million favorable titan iv adjustment recorded in 2000 discussed above , due to a $ 55 million charge related to a more conservative assessment of government launch vehi- cle programs that was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2000 . in commercial space , decreased operating profit of $ 15 mil- lion on launch vehicles more than offset lower losses on satel- lite manufacturing activities . the commercial launch vehicle operating results included $ 60 million in higher charges for market and pricing pressures when compared to 2000 . these negative adjustments were partially offset by $ 50 million of favorable contract adjustments on certain launch vehicle con- tracts . commercial satellite manufacturing losses decreased slightly from 2000 and included the adverse impact of a $ 40 million loss provision recorded in the first quarter of 2001 for certain commercial satellite contracts related to schedule and technical issues. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net sales | operating profit | net sales | operating profit | net sales | operating profit |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2002 | 7384.0 | 443.0 | 7384.0 | 443.0 | 7384.0 | 443.0 |\n| 2001 | 6836.0 | 360.0 | 6836.0 | 360.0 | 6836.0 | 360.0 |\n| 2000 | 7339.0 | 345.0 | 7339.0 | 345.0 | 7339.0 | 345.0 |', 'question': 'what was the total operating profit in 2002 and 2001?', 'ops': 'add(443, 360)', 'id': 'Double_LMT/2002/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'lockheed martin corporation management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations december 31 , 2002 space systems space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2002 2001 2000 .', 'doc_post_text': 'net sales for space systems increased by 8% ( 8 % ) in 2002 compared to 2001 . the increase in sales for 2002 resulted from higher volume in government space of $ 370 million and commercial space of $ 180 million . in government space , increases of $ 470 million in government satellite programs and $ 130 million in ground systems activities more than offset volume declines of $ 175 million on government launch vehi- cles and $ 55 million on strategic missile programs . the increase in commercial space sales is primarily attributable to an increase in launch vehicle activities , with nine commercial launches during 2002 compared to six in 2001 . net sales for the segment decreased by 7% ( 7 % ) in 2001 com- pared to 2000 . the decrease in sales for 2001 resulted from volume declines in commercial space of $ 560 million , which more than offset increases in government space of $ 60 million . in commercial space , sales declined due to volume reductions of $ 480 million in commercial launch vehicle activities and $ 80 million in satellite programs . there were six launches in 2001 compared to 14 launches in 2000 . the increase in gov- ernment space resulted from a combined increase of $ 230 mil- lion related to higher volume on government satellite programs and ground systems activities . these increases were partially offset by a $ 110 million decrease related to volume declines in government launch vehicle activity , primarily due to program maturities , and by $ 50 million due to the absence in 2001 of favorable adjustments recorded on the titan iv pro- gram in 2000 . operating profit for the segment increased 23% ( 23 % ) in 2002 as compared to 2001 , mainly driven by the commercial space business . reduced losses in commercial space during 2002 resulted in increased operating profit of $ 90 million when compared to 2001 . commercial satellite manufacturing losses declined $ 100 million in 2002 as operating performance improved and satellite deliveries increased . in the first quarter of 2001 , a $ 40 million loss provision was recorded on certain commercial satellite manufacturing contracts . due to the industry-wide oversupply and deterioration of pricing in the commercial launch market , financial results on commercial launch vehicles continue to be challenging . during 2002 , this trend led to a decline in operating profit of $ 10 million on commercial launch vehicles when compared to 2001 . this decrease was primarily due to lower profitability of $ 55 mil- lion on the three additional launches in the current year , addi- tional charges of $ 60 million ( net of a favorable contract adjustment of $ 20 million ) for market and pricing pressures and included the adverse effect of a $ 35 million adjustment for commercial launch vehicle contract settlement costs . the 2001 results also included charges for market and pricing pressures , which reduced that year 2019s operating profit by $ 145 million . the $ 10 million decrease in government space 2019s operating profit for the year is primarily due to the reduced volume on government launch vehicles and strategic missile programs , which combined to decrease operating profit by $ 80 million , partially offset by increases of $ 40 million in government satellite programs and $ 30 million in ground systems activities . operating profit for the segment increased by 4% ( 4 % ) in 2001 compared to 2000 . operating profit increased in 2001 due to a $ 35 million increase in government space partially offset by higher year-over-year losses of $ 20 million in commercial space . in government space , operating profit increased due to the impact of higher volume and improved performance in ground systems and government satellite programs . the year- to-year comparison of operating profit was not affected by the $ 50 million favorable titan iv adjustment recorded in 2000 discussed above , due to a $ 55 million charge related to a more conservative assessment of government launch vehi- cle programs that was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2000 . in commercial space , decreased operating profit of $ 15 mil- lion on launch vehicles more than offset lower losses on satel- lite manufacturing activities . the commercial launch vehicle operating results included $ 60 million in higher charges for market and pricing pressures when compared to 2000 . these negative adjustments were partially offset by $ 50 million of favorable contract adjustments on certain launch vehicle con- tracts . commercial satellite manufacturing losses decreased slightly from 2000 and included the adverse impact of a $ 40 million loss provision recorded in the first quarter of 2001 for certain commercial satellite contracts related to schedule and technical issues. .', 'doc_table': {'2002': {'net sales': 7384.0, 'operating profit': 443.0}, '2001': {'net sales': 6836.0, 'operating profit': 360.0}, '2000': {'net sales': 7339.0, 'operating profit': 345.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the profit margin for lockheed martin in 2002?', 'what was the total operating profit in 2002 and 2001?', 'and including the value for 2003?', 'so what was the average value during this time?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['6%', '803', '1148', '382.7'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['divide(443, 7384)', 'add(443, 360)', 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345)', 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345), divide(#1, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [0.05999, 803.0, 1148.0, 382.66667], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 803.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: in the year of 2008, what was the income from continuing operations available to common stockholders?\nA1: 285.7\nQ2: and what were the basic earnings per share?\nA2: 0.76', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nsubstantially all of the goodwill and other intangible assets recorded related to the acquisition of allied are not deductible for tax purposes . pro forma information the consolidated financial statements presented for republic include the operating results of allied from the date of the acquisition . the following pro forma information is presented assuming the merger had been completed as of january 1 , 2007 . the unaudited pro forma information presented below has been prepared for illustrative purposes and is not intended to be indicative of the results of operations that would have actually occurred had the acquisition been consummated at the beginning of the periods presented or of future results of the combined operations ( in millions , except share and per share amounts ) . year ended december 31 , year ended december 31 , ( unaudited ) ( unaudited ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe above unaudited pro forma financial information includes adjustments for amortization of identifiable intangible assets , accretion of discounts to fair value associated with debt , environmental , self-insurance and other liabilities , accretion of capping , closure and post-closure obligations and amortization of the related assets , and provision for income taxes . assets held for sale as a condition of the merger with allied in december 2008 , we reached a settlement with the doj requiring us to divest of certain operations serving fifteen metropolitan areas including los angeles , ca ; san francisco , ca ; denver , co ; atlanta , ga ; northwestern indiana ; lexington , ky ; flint , mi ; cape girardeau , mo ; charlotte , nc ; cleveland , oh ; philadelphia , pa ; greenville-spartanburg , sc ; and fort worth , houston and lubbock , tx . the settlement requires us to divest 87 commercial waste collection routes , nine landfills and ten transfer stations , together with ancillary assets and , in three cases , access to landfill disposal capacity . we have classified the assets and liabilities we expect to divest ( including accounts receivable , property and equipment , goodwill , and accrued landfill and environmental costs ) as assets held for sale in our consolidated balance sheet at december 31 , 2008 . the assets held for sale related to operations that were republic 2019s prior to the merger with allied have been adjusted to the lower of their carrying amounts or estimated fair values less costs to sell , which resulted in us recognizing an asset impairment loss of $ 6.1 million in our consolidated statement of income for the year ended december 31 , 2008 . the assets held for sale related to operations that were allied 2019s prior to the merger are recorded at their estimated fair values in our consolidated balance sheet as of december 31 , 2008 in accordance with the purchase method of accounting . in february 2009 , we entered into an agreement to divest certain assets to waste connections , inc . the assets covered by the agreement include six municipal solid waste landfills , six collection operations and three transfer stations across the following seven markets : los angeles , ca ; denver , co ; houston , tx ; lubbock , tx ; greenville-spartanburg , sc ; charlotte , nc ; and flint , mi . the transaction with waste connections is subject to closing conditions regarding due diligence , regulatory approval and other customary matters . closing is expected to occur in the second quarter of 2009 . republic services , inc . and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements %%transmsg*** transmitting job : p14076 pcn : 106000000 ***%%pcmsg|104 |00046|yes|no|02/28/2009 21:07|0|0|page is valid , no graphics -- color : d| .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | revenue | income from continuing operations available to common stockholders | basic earnings per share | diluted earnings per share | revenue | income from continuing operations available to common stockholders | basic earnings per share | diluted earnings per share |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| year ended december 31 2008 ( unaudited ) | 9362.2 | 285.7 | 76.0 | 75.0 | 9362.2 | 285.7 | 76.0 | 75.0 |\n| year ended december 31 2007 ( unaudited ) | 9244.9 | 423.2 | 1.1 | 1.09 | 9244.9 | 423.2 | 1.1 | 1.09 |', 'question': 'what, then, can be concluded to be the number of shares available?', 'ops': 'divide(285.7, .76)', 'id': 'Double_RSG/2008/page_114.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'substantially all of the goodwill and other intangible assets recorded related to the acquisition of allied are not deductible for tax purposes . pro forma information the consolidated financial statements presented for republic include the operating results of allied from the date of the acquisition . the following pro forma information is presented assuming the merger had been completed as of january 1 , 2007 . the unaudited pro forma information presented below has been prepared for illustrative purposes and is not intended to be indicative of the results of operations that would have actually occurred had the acquisition been consummated at the beginning of the periods presented or of future results of the combined operations ( in millions , except share and per share amounts ) . year ended december 31 , year ended december 31 , ( unaudited ) ( unaudited ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the above unaudited pro forma financial information includes adjustments for amortization of identifiable intangible assets , accretion of discounts to fair value associated with debt , environmental , self-insurance and other liabilities , accretion of capping , closure and post-closure obligations and amortization of the related assets , and provision for income taxes . assets held for sale as a condition of the merger with allied in december 2008 , we reached a settlement with the doj requiring us to divest of certain operations serving fifteen metropolitan areas including los angeles , ca ; san francisco , ca ; denver , co ; atlanta , ga ; northwestern indiana ; lexington , ky ; flint , mi ; cape girardeau , mo ; charlotte , nc ; cleveland , oh ; philadelphia , pa ; greenville-spartanburg , sc ; and fort worth , houston and lubbock , tx . the settlement requires us to divest 87 commercial waste collection routes , nine landfills and ten transfer stations , together with ancillary assets and , in three cases , access to landfill disposal capacity . we have classified the assets and liabilities we expect to divest ( including accounts receivable , property and equipment , goodwill , and accrued landfill and environmental costs ) as assets held for sale in our consolidated balance sheet at december 31 , 2008 . the assets held for sale related to operations that were republic 2019s prior to the merger with allied have been adjusted to the lower of their carrying amounts or estimated fair values less costs to sell , which resulted in us recognizing an asset impairment loss of $ 6.1 million in our consolidated statement of income for the year ended december 31 , 2008 . the assets held for sale related to operations that were allied 2019s prior to the merger are recorded at their estimated fair values in our consolidated balance sheet as of december 31 , 2008 in accordance with the purchase method of accounting . in february 2009 , we entered into an agreement to divest certain assets to waste connections , inc . the assets covered by the agreement include six municipal solid waste landfills , six collection operations and three transfer stations across the following seven markets : los angeles , ca ; denver , co ; houston , tx ; lubbock , tx ; greenville-spartanburg , sc ; charlotte , nc ; and flint , mi . the transaction with waste connections is subject to closing conditions regarding due diligence , regulatory approval and other customary matters . closing is expected to occur in the second quarter of 2009 . republic services , inc . and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements %%transmsg*** transmitting job : p14076 pcn : 106000000 ***%%pcmsg|104 |00046|yes|no|02/28/2009 21:07|0|0|page is valid , no graphics -- color : d| .', 'doc_table': {'year ended december 31 2008 ( unaudited )': {'revenue': 9362.2, 'income from continuing operations available to common stockholders': 285.7, 'basic earnings per share': 76.0, 'diluted earnings per share': 75.0}, 'year ended december 31 2007 ( unaudited )': {'revenue': 9244.9, 'income from continuing operations available to common stockholders': 423.2, 'basic earnings per share': 1.1, 'diluted earnings per share': 1.09}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['in the year of 2008, what was the income from continuing operations available to common stockholders?', 'and what were the basic earnings per share?', 'what, then, can be concluded to be the number of shares available?', 'in that same year, what was the revenue?', 'and what was it in 2007?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'and what is this change as a percentage of the 2007 revenue?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['285.7', '.76', '375.9', '9362.2', '9244.9', '117.3', '1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['285.7', '.76', 'divide(285.7, .76)', '9362.2', '9244.9', 'subtract(9362.2, 9244.9)', 'subtract(9362.2, 9244.9), divide(#0, 9244.9)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [285.7, 0.76, 375.92105, 9362.2, 9244.9, 117.3, 0.01269], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 375.92105}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "50s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel, in millions?\nA1: 213.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nour digital media business consists of our websites and mobile and video-on-demand ( 201cvod 201d ) services . our websites include network branded websites such as discovery.com , tlc.com and animalplanet.com , and other websites such as howstuffworks.com , an online source of explanations of how the world actually works ; treehugger.com , a comprehensive source for 201cgreen 201d news , solutions and product information ; and petfinder.com , a leading pet adoption destination . together , these websites attracted an average of 24 million cumulative unique monthly visitors , according to comscore , inc . in 2011 . international networks our international networks segment principally consists of national and pan-regional television networks . this segment generates revenues primarily from fees charged to operators who distribute our networks , which primarily include cable and dth satellite service providers , and from advertising sold on our television networks and websites . discovery channel , animal planet and tlc lead the international networks 2019 portfolio of television networks , which are distributed in virtually every pay-television market in the world through an infrastructure that includes operational centers in london , singapore and miami . international networks has one of the largest international distribution platforms of networks with one to twelve networks in more than 200 countries and territories around the world . at december 31 , 2011 , international networks operated over 150 unique distribution feeds in over 40 languages with channel feeds customized according to language needs and advertising sales opportunities . our international networks segment owns and operates the following television networks which reached the following number of subscribers as of december 31 , 2011 : education and other our education and other segment primarily includes the sale of curriculum-based product and service offerings and postproduction audio services . this segment generates revenues primarily from subscriptions charged to k-12 schools for access to an online suite of curriculum-based vod tools , professional development services , and to a lesser extent student assessment and publication of hardcopy curriculum-based content . our education business also participates in corporate partnerships , global brand and content licensing business with leading non-profits , foundations and trade associations . other businesses primarily include postproduction audio services that are provided to major motion picture studios , independent producers , broadcast networks , cable channels , advertising agencies , and interactive producers . content development our content development strategy is designed to increase viewership , maintain innovation and quality leadership , and provide value for our network distributors and advertising customers . substantially all content is sourced from a wide range of third-party producers , which includes some of the world 2019s leading nonfiction production companies with which we have developed long-standing relationships , as well as independent producers . our production arrangements fall into three categories : produced , coproduced and licensed . substantially all produced content includes programming which we engage third parties to develop and produce while we retain editorial control and own most or all of the rights in exchange for paying all development and production costs . coproduced content refers to program rights acquired that we have collaborated with third parties to finance and develop . coproduced programs are typically high-cost projects for which neither we nor our coproducers wish to bear the entire cost or productions in which the producer has already taken on an international broadcast partner . licensed content is comprised of films or series that have been previously produced by third parties . global networks international subscribers ( millions ) regional networks international subscribers ( millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| international subscribers ( millions ) 213 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 |\n| regional networks dmax | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  |\n| international subscribers ( millions ) 47 | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  |', 'question': 'and what is it for animal planet, also in millions?', 'ops': '166', 'id': 'Single_DISCA/2011/page_35.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'our digital media business consists of our websites and mobile and video-on-demand ( 201cvod 201d ) services . our websites include network branded websites such as discovery.com , tlc.com and animalplanet.com , and other websites such as howstuffworks.com , an online source of explanations of how the world actually works ; treehugger.com , a comprehensive source for 201cgreen 201d news , solutions and product information ; and petfinder.com , a leading pet adoption destination . together , these websites attracted an average of 24 million cumulative unique monthly visitors , according to comscore , inc . in 2011 . international networks our international networks segment principally consists of national and pan-regional television networks . this segment generates revenues primarily from fees charged to operators who distribute our networks , which primarily include cable and dth satellite service providers , and from advertising sold on our television networks and websites . discovery channel , animal planet and tlc lead the international networks 2019 portfolio of television networks , which are distributed in virtually every pay-television market in the world through an infrastructure that includes operational centers in london , singapore and miami . international networks has one of the largest international distribution platforms of networks with one to twelve networks in more than 200 countries and territories around the world . at december 31 , 2011 , international networks operated over 150 unique distribution feeds in over 40 languages with channel feeds customized according to language needs and advertising sales opportunities . our international networks segment owns and operates the following television networks which reached the following number of subscribers as of december 31 , 2011 : education and other our education and other segment primarily includes the sale of curriculum-based product and service offerings and postproduction audio services . this segment generates revenues primarily from subscriptions charged to k-12 schools for access to an online suite of curriculum-based vod tools , professional development services , and to a lesser extent student assessment and publication of hardcopy curriculum-based content . our education business also participates in corporate partnerships , global brand and content licensing business with leading non-profits , foundations and trade associations . other businesses primarily include postproduction audio services that are provided to major motion picture studios , independent producers , broadcast networks , cable channels , advertising agencies , and interactive producers . content development our content development strategy is designed to increase viewership , maintain innovation and quality leadership , and provide value for our network distributors and advertising customers . substantially all content is sourced from a wide range of third-party producers , which includes some of the world 2019s leading nonfiction production companies with which we have developed long-standing relationships , as well as independent producers . our production arrangements fall into three categories : produced , coproduced and licensed . substantially all produced content includes programming which we engage third parties to develop and produce while we retain editorial control and own most or all of the rights in exchange for paying all development and production costs . coproduced content refers to program rights acquired that we have collaborated with third parties to finance and develop . coproduced programs are typically high-cost projects for which neither we nor our coproducers wish to bear the entire cost or productions in which the producer has already taken on an international broadcast partner . licensed content is comprised of films or series that have been previously produced by third parties . global networks international subscribers ( millions ) regional networks international subscribers ( millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'international subscribers ( millions ) 213': {'animal planet': 166.0, 'tlc real time and travel & living': 150.0, 'discovery science': 66.0, 'discovery home & health': 48.0, 'turbo': 37.0, 'discovery world': 27.0, 'investigation discovery': 23.0, 'hd services': 17.0}, 'regional networks dmax': {'animal planet': 'discovery kids', 'tlc real time and travel & living': 'liv', 'discovery science': 'quest', 'discovery home & health': 'discovery history', 'turbo': 'shed', 'discovery world': 'discovery en espanol ( u.s. )', 'investigation discovery': 'discovery famillia ( u.s. )', 'hd services': ''}, 'international subscribers ( millions ) 47': {'animal planet': 37.0, 'tlc real time and travel & living': 29.0, 'discovery science': 23.0, 'discovery home & health': 13.0, 'turbo': 12.0, 'discovery world': 5.0, 'investigation discovery': 4.0, 'hd services': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel, in millions?', 'and what is it for animal planet, also in millions?', 'what is, then, the difference between the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel and for animal planet?', 'and how much does this difference represent in relation to the animal planet number of subscribers?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['213', '166', '47', '28%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['213', '166', 'subtract(213, 166)', 'subtract(213, 166), divide(#0, 166)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [213.0, 166.0, 47.0, 0.28313], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 166.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "50s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the proportion of long-term debt to total contractual obligations in 2017?\nA1: 0.36415', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n.\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( 1 ) our long-term debt consists of both secured and unsecured debt and includes both principal and interest . interest payments for variable rate debt were calculated using the interest rates as of december 31 , 2016 . repayment of our $ 250.0 million variable rate term note , which has a contractual maturity date in january 2019 , is reflected as a 2020 obligation in the table above based on the ability to exercise a one-year extension , which we may exercise at our discretion . ( 2 ) our unsecured line of credit has a contractual maturity date in january 2019 , but is reflected as a 2020 obligation in the table above based on the ability to exercise a one-year extension , which we may exercise at our discretion . interest payments for our unsecured line of credit were calculated using the most recent stated interest rate that was in effect.ff ( 3 ) our share of unconsolidated joint venture debt includes both principal and interest . interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rate at december 31 , 2016 . ( 4 ) represents estimated remaining costs on the completion of owned development projects and third-party construction projects . related party y transactionstt we provide property and asset management , leasing , construction and other tenant-related services to ww unconsolidated companies in which we have equity interests . for the years ended december 31 , 2016 , 2015 and 2014 we earned management fees of $ 4.5 million , $ 6.8 million and $ 8.5 million , leasing fees of $ 2.4 million , $ 3.0 million and $ 3.4 million and construction and development fees of $ 8.0 million , $ 6.1 million and $ 5.8 million , respectively , from these companies , prior to elimination of our ownership percentage . yy we recorded these fees based ww on contractual terms that approximate market rates for these types of services and have eliminated our ownership percentages of these fees in the consolidated financial statements . commitments and contingenciesg the partnership has guaranteed the repayment of $ 32.9 million of economic development bonds issued by various municipalities in connection with certain commercial developments . we will be required to make payments under ww our guarantees to the extent that incremental taxes from specified developments are not sufficient to pay the bond ff debt service . management does not believe that it is probable that we will be required to make any significant payments in satisfaction of these guarantees . the partnership also has guaranteed the repayment of an unsecured loan of one of our unconsolidated subsidiaries . at december 31 , 2016 , the maximum guarantee exposure for this loan was approximately $ 52.1 million . we lease certain land positions with terms extending toww march 2114 , with a total future payment obligation of $ 311.1 million . the payments on these ground leases , which are classified as operating leases , are not material in any individual year . in addition to ground leases , we are party to other operating leases as part of conducting our business , including leases of office space from third parties , with a total future payment obligation of ff $ 43.4 million at december 31 , 2016 . no future payments on these leases are material in any individual year . we are subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business . in the opinion ww of management , the amount of any ultimate liability with respect to these actions is not expected to materially affect ff our consolidated financial statements or results of operations . we own certain parcels of land that are subject to special property tax assessments levied by quasi municipalww entities . to the extent that such special assessments are fixed and determinable , the discounted value of the fulltt .\n[/POST]', 'table': "| Row | long-term debt ( 1 ) | line of credit ( 2 ) | share of unconsolidated joint ventures' debt ( 3 ) | ground leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | line of credit ( 2 ) | share of unconsolidated joint ventures' debt ( 3 ) | ground leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | line of credit ( 2 ) | share of unconsolidated joint ventures' debt ( 3 ) | ground leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | line of credit ( 2 ) | share of unconsolidated joint ventures' debt ( 3 ) | ground leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | line of credit ( 2 ) | share of unconsolidated joint ventures' debt ( 3 ) | ground leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | line of credit ( 2 ) | share of unconsolidated joint ventures' debt ( 3 ) | ground leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | line of credit ( 2 ) | share of unconsolidated joint ventures' debt ( 3 ) | ground leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) total | 3508789.0 | 56127.0 | 91235.0 | 311120.0 | 344700.0 | 43357.0 | 4355328.0 | 3508789.0 | 56127.0 | 91235.0 | 311120.0 | 344700.0 | 43357.0 | 4355328.0 | 3508789.0 | 56127.0 | 91235.0 | 311120.0 | 344700.0 | 43357.0 | 4355328.0 | 3508789.0 | 56127.0 | 91235.0 | 311120.0 | 344700.0 | 43357.0 | 4355328.0 | 3508789.0 | 56127.0 | 91235.0 | 311120.0 | 344700.0 | 43357.0 | 4355328.0 | 3508789.0 | 56127.0 | 91235.0 | 311120.0 | 344700.0 | 43357.0 | 4355328.0 | 3508789.0 | 56127.0 | 91235.0 | 311120.0 | 344700.0 | 43357.0 | 4355328.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2017 | 203244.0 | 2650.0 | 2444.0 | 10745.0 | 331553.0 | 7502.0 | 558138.0 | 203244.0 | 2650.0 | 2444.0 | 10745.0 | 331553.0 | 7502.0 | 558138.0 | 203244.0 | 2650.0 | 2444.0 | 10745.0 | 331553.0 | 7502.0 | 558138.0 | 203244.0 | 2650.0 | 2444.0 | 10745.0 | 331553.0 | 7502.0 | 558138.0 | 203244.0 | 2650.0 | 2444.0 | 10745.0 | 331553.0 | 7502.0 | 558138.0 | 203244.0 | 2650.0 | 2444.0 | 10745.0 | 331553.0 | 7502.0 | 558138.0 | 203244.0 | 2650.0 | 2444.0 | 10745.0 | 331553.0 | 7502.0 | 558138.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2018 | 409257.0 | 2650.0 | 28466.0 | 5721.0 | 13147.0 | 7342.0 | 466583.0 | 409257.0 | 2650.0 | 28466.0 | 5721.0 | 13147.0 | 7342.0 | 466583.0 | 409257.0 | 2650.0 | 28466.0 | 5721.0 | 13147.0 | 7342.0 | 466583.0 | 409257.0 | 2650.0 | 28466.0 | 5721.0 | 13147.0 | 7342.0 | 466583.0 | 409257.0 | 2650.0 | 28466.0 | 5721.0 | 13147.0 | 7342.0 | 466583.0 | 409257.0 | 2650.0 | 28466.0 | 5721.0 | 13147.0 | 7342.0 | 466583.0 | 409257.0 | 2650.0 | 28466.0 | 5721.0 | 13147.0 | 7342.0 | 466583.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2019 | 366456.0 | 2650.0 | 5737.0 | 5758.0 | 2014.0 | 5801.0 | 386402.0 | 366456.0 | 2650.0 | 5737.0 | 5758.0 | 2014.0 | 5801.0 | 386402.0 | 366456.0 | 2650.0 | 5737.0 | 5758.0 | 2014.0 | 5801.0 | 386402.0 | 366456.0 | 2650.0 | 5737.0 | 5758.0 | 2014.0 | 5801.0 | 386402.0 | 366456.0 | 2650.0 | 5737.0 | 5758.0 | 2014.0 | 5801.0 | 386402.0 | 366456.0 | 2650.0 | 5737.0 | 5758.0 | 2014.0 | 5801.0 | 386402.0 | 366456.0 | 2650.0 | 5737.0 | 5758.0 | 2014.0 | 5801.0 | 386402.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2020 | 461309.0 | 48177.0 | 11598.0 | 5793.0 | 2014.0 | 4326.0 | 531203.0 | 461309.0 | 48177.0 | 11598.0 | 5793.0 | 2014.0 | 4326.0 | 531203.0 | 461309.0 | 48177.0 | 11598.0 | 5793.0 | 2014.0 | 4326.0 | 531203.0 | 461309.0 | 48177.0 | 11598.0 | 5793.0 | 2014.0 | 4326.0 | 531203.0 | 461309.0 | 48177.0 | 11598.0 | 5793.0 | 2014.0 | 4326.0 | 531203.0 | 461309.0 | 48177.0 | 11598.0 | 5793.0 | 2014.0 | 4326.0 | 531203.0 | 461309.0 | 48177.0 | 11598.0 | 5793.0 | 2014.0 | 4326.0 | 531203.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2021 | 329339.0 | 2014.0 | 1236.0 | 5822.0 | 2014.0 | 3906.0 | 340303.0 | 329339.0 | 2014.0 | 1236.0 | 5822.0 | 2014.0 | 3906.0 | 340303.0 | 329339.0 | 2014.0 | 1236.0 | 5822.0 | 2014.0 | 3906.0 | 340303.0 | 329339.0 | 2014.0 | 1236.0 | 5822.0 | 2014.0 | 3906.0 | 340303.0 | 329339.0 | 2014.0 | 1236.0 | 5822.0 | 2014.0 | 3906.0 | 340303.0 | 329339.0 | 2014.0 | 1236.0 | 5822.0 | 2014.0 | 3906.0 | 340303.0 | 329339.0 | 2014.0 | 1236.0 | 5822.0 | 2014.0 | 3906.0 | 340303.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) thereafter | 1739184.0 | 2014.0 | 41754.0 | 277281.0 | 2014.0 | 14480.0 | 2072699.0 | 1739184.0 | 2014.0 | 41754.0 | 277281.0 | 2014.0 | 14480.0 | 2072699.0 | 1739184.0 | 2014.0 | 41754.0 | 277281.0 | 2014.0 | 14480.0 | 2072699.0 | 1739184.0 | 2014.0 | 41754.0 | 277281.0 | 2014.0 | 14480.0 | 2072699.0 | 1739184.0 | 2014.0 | 41754.0 | 277281.0 | 2014.0 | 14480.0 | 2072699.0 | 1739184.0 | 2014.0 | 41754.0 | 277281.0 | 2014.0 | 14480.0 | 2072699.0 | 1739184.0 | 2014.0 | 41754.0 | 277281.0 | 2014.0 | 14480.0 | 2072699.0 |", 'question': 'and as a percentage?', 'ops': 'divide(203244, 558138), multiply(#0, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_DRE/2016/page_64.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': '.', 'doc_post_text': '( 1 ) our long-term debt consists of both secured and unsecured debt and includes both principal and interest . interest payments for variable rate debt were calculated using the interest rates as of december 31 , 2016 . repayment of our $ 250.0 million variable rate term note , which has a contractual maturity date in january 2019 , is reflected as a 2020 obligation in the table above based on the ability to exercise a one-year extension , which we may exercise at our discretion . ( 2 ) our unsecured line of credit has a contractual maturity date in january 2019 , but is reflected as a 2020 obligation in the table above based on the ability to exercise a one-year extension , which we may exercise at our discretion . interest payments for our unsecured line of credit were calculated using the most recent stated interest rate that was in effect.ff ( 3 ) our share of unconsolidated joint venture debt includes both principal and interest . interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rate at december 31 , 2016 . ( 4 ) represents estimated remaining costs on the completion of owned development projects and third-party construction projects . related party y transactionstt we provide property and asset management , leasing , construction and other tenant-related services to ww unconsolidated companies in which we have equity interests . for the years ended december 31 , 2016 , 2015 and 2014 we earned management fees of $ 4.5 million , $ 6.8 million and $ 8.5 million , leasing fees of $ 2.4 million , $ 3.0 million and $ 3.4 million and construction and development fees of $ 8.0 million , $ 6.1 million and $ 5.8 million , respectively , from these companies , prior to elimination of our ownership percentage . yy we recorded these fees based ww on contractual terms that approximate market rates for these types of services and have eliminated our ownership percentages of these fees in the consolidated financial statements . commitments and contingenciesg the partnership has guaranteed the repayment of $ 32.9 million of economic development bonds issued by various municipalities in connection with certain commercial developments . we will be required to make payments under ww our guarantees to the extent that incremental taxes from specified developments are not sufficient to pay the bond ff debt service . management does not believe that it is probable that we will be required to make any significant payments in satisfaction of these guarantees . the partnership also has guaranteed the repayment of an unsecured loan of one of our unconsolidated subsidiaries . at december 31 , 2016 , the maximum guarantee exposure for this loan was approximately $ 52.1 million . we lease certain land positions with terms extending toww march 2114 , with a total future payment obligation of $ 311.1 million . the payments on these ground leases , which are classified as operating leases , are not material in any individual year . in addition to ground leases , we are party to other operating leases as part of conducting our business , including leases of office space from third parties , with a total future payment obligation of ff $ 43.4 million at december 31 , 2016 . no future payments on these leases are material in any individual year . we are subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business . in the opinion ww of management , the amount of any ultimate liability with respect to these actions is not expected to materially affect ff our consolidated financial statements or results of operations . we own certain parcels of land that are subject to special property tax assessments levied by quasi municipalww entities . to the extent that such special assessments are fixed and determinable , the discounted value of the fulltt .', 'doc_table': {'payments due by period ( in thousands ) total': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 3508789.0, 'line of credit ( 2 )': 56127.0, "share of unconsolidated joint ventures' debt ( 3 )": 91235.0, 'ground leases': 311120.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 344700.0, 'other': 43357.0, 'total contractual obligations': 4355328.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2017': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 203244.0, 'line of credit ( 2 )': 2650.0, "share of unconsolidated joint ventures' debt ( 3 )": 2444.0, 'ground leases': 10745.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 331553.0, 'other': 7502.0, 'total contractual obligations': 558138.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2018': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 409257.0, 'line of credit ( 2 )': 2650.0, "share of unconsolidated joint ventures' debt ( 3 )": 28466.0, 'ground leases': 5721.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 13147.0, 'other': 7342.0, 'total contractual obligations': 466583.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2019': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 366456.0, 'line of credit ( 2 )': 2650.0, "share of unconsolidated joint ventures' debt ( 3 )": 5737.0, 'ground leases': 5758.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 2014.0, 'other': 5801.0, 'total contractual obligations': 386402.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2020': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 461309.0, 'line of credit ( 2 )': 48177.0, "share of unconsolidated joint ventures' debt ( 3 )": 11598.0, 'ground leases': 5793.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 2014.0, 'other': 4326.0, 'total contractual obligations': 531203.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2021': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 329339.0, 'line of credit ( 2 )': 2014.0, "share of unconsolidated joint ventures' debt ( 3 )": 1236.0, 'ground leases': 5822.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 2014.0, 'other': 3906.0, 'total contractual obligations': 340303.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) thereafter': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 1739184.0, 'line of credit ( 2 )': 2014.0, "share of unconsolidated joint ventures' debt ( 3 )": 41754.0, 'ground leases': 277281.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 2014.0, 'other': 14480.0, 'total contractual obligations': 2072699.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the proportion of long-term debt to total contractual obligations in 2017?', 'and as a percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['0.364', '36.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['divide(203244, 558138)', 'divide(203244, 558138), multiply(#0, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [0.36415, 36.41465], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 36.41465}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "50s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the 2015 value of priceline less 100?\nA1: 219.1\nQ2: what is the percent change?\nA2: 2.191\nQ3: what is the value of the s&p 500 index in 2015?\nA3: 180.75\nQ4: what is that less 100?\nA4: 80.75', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmeasurement point december 31 the priceline group nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| the priceline group inc . | 100.0 | 117.06 | 155.27 | 290.93 | 285.37 | 319.1 | 100.0 | 117.06 | 155.27 | 290.93 | 285.37 | 319.1 | 100.0 | 117.06 | 155.27 | 290.93 | 285.37 | 319.1 | 100.0 | 117.06 | 155.27 | 290.93 | 285.37 | 319.1 |\n| nasdaqcomposite index | 100.0 | 100.53 | 116.92 | 166.19 | 188.78 | 199.95 | 100.0 | 100.53 | 116.92 | 166.19 | 188.78 | 199.95 | 100.0 | 100.53 | 116.92 | 166.19 | 188.78 | 199.95 | 100.0 | 100.53 | 116.92 | 166.19 | 188.78 | 199.95 |\n| s&p 500index | 100.0 | 102.11 | 118.45 | 156.82 | 178.29 | 180.75 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 118.45 | 156.82 | 178.29 | 180.75 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 118.45 | 156.82 | 178.29 | 180.75 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 118.45 | 156.82 | 178.29 | 180.75 |\n| rdg internetcomposite | 100.0 | 102.11 | 122.23 | 199.42 | 195.42 | 267.25 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 122.23 | 199.42 | 195.42 | 267.25 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 122.23 | 199.42 | 195.42 | 267.25 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 122.23 | 199.42 | 195.42 | 267.25 |', 'question': 'what is the difference divided by 100?', 'ops': 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(180.75, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_BKNG/2015/page_38.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'measurement point december 31 the priceline group nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'the priceline group inc .': {'2010': 100.0, '2011': 117.06, '2012': 155.27, '2013': 290.93, '2014': 285.37, '2015': 319.1}, 'nasdaqcomposite index': {'2010': 100.0, '2011': 100.53, '2012': 116.92, '2013': 166.19, '2014': 188.78, '2015': 199.95}, 's&p 500index': {'2010': 100.0, '2011': 102.11, '2012': 118.45, '2013': 156.82, '2014': 178.29, '2015': 180.75}, 'rdg internetcomposite': {'2010': 100.0, '2011': 102.11, '2012': 122.23, '2013': 199.42, '2014': 195.42, '2015': 267.25}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the 2015 value of priceline less 100?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what is the value of the s&p 500 index in 2015?', 'what is that less 100?', 'what is the difference divided by 100?', 'what is the difference in percent changes?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['219.1', '219.1%', '180.75', '80.75', '80.75%', '138.35%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(319.10, const_100)', 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', '180.75', 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(180.75, const_100)', 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(180.75, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(180.75, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [219.1, 2.191, 180.75, 80.75, 0.8075, 1.3835], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.8075}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "50s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?\nA1: 68.4', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfor intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | revenue | net loss | revenue | net loss |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| year endedfebruary 12008 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 |\n| year endedfebruary 22007 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 |', 'question': 'including the year of 2011, what would it then be?', 'ops': 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9)', 'id': 'Single_DG/2008/page_86.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'for intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .', 'doc_post_text': 'the pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .', 'doc_table': {'year endedfebruary 12008': {'revenue': 9495246.0, 'net loss': -57939.0}, 'year endedfebruary 22007': {'revenue': 9169822.0, 'net loss': -156188.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?', 'including the year of 2011, what would it then be?', 'including now the year of 2012 in the amount, what would the total estimated aggregate amortization expense be, in millions?', 'what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense in 2013, in millions?', 'including 2013, what would now be the total sum in estimated aggregate amortization expense over those five years, in millions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['68.4', '89.3', '106.3', '12.0', '118.3'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(41.1, 27.3)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0)', '12.0', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0), add(#2, 12.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [68.4, 89.3, 106.3, 12.0, 118.3], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 89.3}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "46s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in the value of a o smith corp from 2002 to 2007?\nA1: 42.72\nQ2: and how much does that change represent in relation to the original value in 2002?\nA2: 0.4272\nQ3: what was the value of the s&p 600 electrical equipment in 2007?\nA3: 253.33\nQ4: and what was the change in that value between 2002 and 2007?\nA4: 153.33', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nthe graph below shows a five-year comparison of the cumulative shareholder return on the company's common stock with the cumulative total return of the s&p smallcap 600 index and the s&p 600 electrical equipment index , all of which are published indices . comparison of five-year cumulative total return from december 31 , 2002 to december 31 , 2007 assumes $ 100 invested with reinvestment of dividends period indexed returns .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n12/31/02 12/31/03 12/31/04 12/31/05 12/31/06 12/31/07 smith ( a o ) corp s&p smallcap 600 index s&p 600 electrical equipment .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| baseperiod 12/31/02 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/03 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/04 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/05 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/06 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 |\n| 12/31/07 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 |', 'question': 'how much, then, does this change represent in relation to the original value of that stock in 2002?', 'ops': 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_AOS/2007/page_17.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': "the graph below shows a five-year comparison of the cumulative shareholder return on the company's common stock with the cumulative total return of the s&p smallcap 600 index and the s&p 600 electrical equipment index , all of which are published indices . comparison of five-year cumulative total return from december 31 , 2002 to december 31 , 2007 assumes $ 100 invested with reinvestment of dividends period indexed returns .", 'doc_post_text': '12/31/02 12/31/03 12/31/04 12/31/05 12/31/06 12/31/07 smith ( a o ) corp s&p smallcap 600 index s&p 600 electrical equipment .', 'doc_table': {'baseperiod 12/31/02': {'a o smith corp': 100.0, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 100.0, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 100.0}, 'baseperiod 12/31/03': {'a o smith corp': 132.23, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 138.79, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 126.12}, 'baseperiod 12/31/04': {'a o smith corp': 115.36, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 170.22, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 152.18}, 'baseperiod 12/31/05': {'a o smith corp': 138.2, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 183.3, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 169.07}, 'baseperiod 12/31/06': {'a o smith corp': 150.26, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 211.01, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 228.83}, '12/31/07': {'a o smith corp': 142.72, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 210.39, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 253.33}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in the value of a o smith corp from 2002 to 2007?', 'and how much does that change represent in relation to the original value in 2002?', 'what was the value of the s&p 600 electrical equipment in 2007?', 'and what was the change in that value between 2002 and 2007?', 'how much, then, does this change represent in relation to the original value of that stock in 2002?', 'and what was the difference between the return (or the change representation) of the a o smith corp and the one of the s&p 600 electrical equipment?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['42.72', '42.72%', '253.33', '153.33', '153.33%', '-110.61%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(142.72, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', '253.33', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [42.72, 0.4272, 253.33, 153.33, 1.5333, -1.1061], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1.5333}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "50s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: combined, what were the additions in 2006 and 207?\nA1: 197775.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfederal realty investment trust schedule iii summary of real estate and accumulated depreciation 2014continued three years ended december 31 , 2009 reconciliation of accumulated depreciation and amortization ( in thousands ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | additions during period 2014depreciation and amortization expense | deductions during period 2014disposition and retirements of property | balance december 31 2007 | balance december 31 2008 | balance december 31 2009 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 740507 | 103.698 | -11869.0 | 756703.0 | 846258.0 | 938087.0 |', 'question': 'and in 2008?', 'ops': '103.698', 'id': 'Single_FRT/2009/page_124.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'federal realty investment trust schedule iii summary of real estate and accumulated depreciation 2014continued three years ended december 31 , 2009 reconciliation of accumulated depreciation and amortization ( in thousands ) .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'$ 740507': {'additions during period 2014depreciation and amortization expense': 103.698, 'deductions during period 2014disposition and retirements of property': -11869.0, 'balance december 31 2007': 756703.0, 'balance december 31 2008': 846258.0, 'balance december 31 2009': 938087.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['combined, what were the additions in 2006 and 207?', 'and in 2008?', 'and converting this value into millions?', 'now combined with the values from 2006 and 2007?', 'so what is the average of these values?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['197775', '103.698', '103698', '301473', '100491'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(96454, 101321)', '103.698', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698)', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698), add(#0, #1)', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698), add(#0, #1), divide(#2, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [197775.0, 103.698, 103698.0, 301473.0, 100491.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 103.698}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "50s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: how many shares were purchased during october 2012?\nA1: 13566.0\nQ2: what about the total number of shares purchased during the fourth quarter of 2012?\nA2: 14156696.0\nQ3: what fraction of fourth quarter purchases occurred during october?\nA3: 0.00096\nQ4: what about in percentage terms?\nA4: 0.09583\nQ5: what is the number of repurchased shares during october 2012?\nA5: 13566.0\nQ6: what about repurchased shares during fourth quarter of 2012?\nA6: 22944.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nrepurchase of equity securities the following table provides information regarding our purchases of our equity securities during the period from october 1 , 2012 to december 31 , 2012 . total number of shares ( or units ) purchased 1 average price paid per share ( or unit ) 2 total number of shares ( or units ) purchased as part of publicly announced plans or programs 3 maximum number ( or approximate dollar value ) of shares ( or units ) that may yet be purchased under the plans or programs 3 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n1 includes shares of our common stock , par value $ 0.10 per share , withheld under the terms of grants under employee stock-based compensation plans to offset tax withholding obligations that occurred upon vesting and release of restricted shares ( the 201cwithheld shares 201d ) . we repurchased 13566 withheld shares in october 2012 , 1419 withheld shares in november 2012 and 7959 withheld shares in december 2012 , for a total of 22944 withheld shares during the three-month period . 2 the average price per share for each of the months in the fiscal quarter and for the three-month period was calculated by dividing the sum of the applicable period of the aggregate value of the tax withholding obligations and the aggregate amount we paid for shares acquired under our stock repurchase program , described in note 5 to the consolidated financial statements , by the sum of the number of withheld shares and the number of shares acquired in our stock repurchase program . 3 on february 24 , 2012 , we announced in a press release that our board had approved a share repurchase program to repurchase from time to time up to $ 300.0 million of our common stock ( the 201c2012 share repurchase program 201d ) , in addition to amounts available on existing authorizations . on november 20 , 2012 , we announced in a press release that our board had authorized an increase in our 2012 share repurchase program to $ 400.0 million of our common stock . on february 22 , 2013 , we announced that our board had approved a new share repurchase program to repurchase from time to time up to $ 300.0 million of our common stock . the new authorization is in addition to any amounts remaining available for repurchase under the 2012 share repurchase program . there is no expiration date associated with the share repurchase programs. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | october 1 - 31 | november 1 - 30 | december 1 - 31 | total | october 1 - 31 | november 1 - 30 | december 1 - 31 | total | october 1 - 31 | november 1 - 30 | december 1 - 31 | total | october 1 - 31 | november 1 - 30 | december 1 - 31 | total |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| total number ofshares ( or units ) purchased1 | 13566.0 | 5345171.0 | 8797959.0 | 14156696.0 | 13566.0 | 5345171.0 | 8797959.0 | 14156696.0 | 13566.0 | 5345171.0 | 8797959.0 | 14156696.0 | 13566.0 | 5345171.0 | 8797959.0 | 14156696.0 |\n| average price paidper share ( or unit ) 2 | 10.26 | 9.98 | 10.87 | 10.53 | 10.26 | 9.98 | 10.87 | 10.53 | 10.26 | 9.98 | 10.87 | 10.53 | 10.26 | 9.98 | 10.87 | 10.53 |\n| total number ofshares ( or units ) purchased as part ofpublicly announcedplans or programs3 | 0.0 | 5343752.0 | 8790000.0 | 14133752.0 | 0.0 | 5343752.0 | 8790000.0 | 14133752.0 | 0.0 | 5343752.0 | 8790000.0 | 14133752.0 | 0.0 | 5343752.0 | 8790000.0 | 14133752.0 |\n| maximum number ( or approximate dollar value ) of shares ( or units ) that mayyet be purchased under theplans or programs3 | 148858924.0 | 195551133.0 | 99989339.0 |  | 148858924.0 | 195551133.0 | 99989339.0 |  | 148858924.0 | 195551133.0 | 99989339.0 |  | 148858924.0 | 195551133.0 | 99989339.0 |  |', 'question': 'what proportion does this represent?', 'ops': 'divide(13566, 22944)', 'id': 'Double_IPG/2012/page_21.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'repurchase of equity securities the following table provides information regarding our purchases of our equity securities during the period from october 1 , 2012 to december 31 , 2012 . total number of shares ( or units ) purchased 1 average price paid per share ( or unit ) 2 total number of shares ( or units ) purchased as part of publicly announced plans or programs 3 maximum number ( or approximate dollar value ) of shares ( or units ) that may yet be purchased under the plans or programs 3 .', 'doc_post_text': '1 includes shares of our common stock , par value $ 0.10 per share , withheld under the terms of grants under employee stock-based compensation plans to offset tax withholding obligations that occurred upon vesting and release of restricted shares ( the 201cwithheld shares 201d ) . we repurchased 13566 withheld shares in october 2012 , 1419 withheld shares in november 2012 and 7959 withheld shares in december 2012 , for a total of 22944 withheld shares during the three-month period . 2 the average price per share for each of the months in the fiscal quarter and for the three-month period was calculated by dividing the sum of the applicable period of the aggregate value of the tax withholding obligations and the aggregate amount we paid for shares acquired under our stock repurchase program , described in note 5 to the consolidated financial statements , by the sum of the number of withheld shares and the number of shares acquired in our stock repurchase program . 3 on february 24 , 2012 , we announced in a press release that our board had approved a share repurchase program to repurchase from time to time up to $ 300.0 million of our common stock ( the 201c2012 share repurchase program 201d ) , in addition to amounts available on existing authorizations . on november 20 , 2012 , we announced in a press release that our board had authorized an increase in our 2012 share repurchase program to $ 400.0 million of our common stock . on february 22 , 2013 , we announced that our board had approved a new share repurchase program to repurchase from time to time up to $ 300.0 million of our common stock . the new authorization is in addition to any amounts remaining available for repurchase under the 2012 share repurchase program . there is no expiration date associated with the share repurchase programs. .', 'doc_table': {'total number ofshares ( or units ) purchased1': {'october 1 - 31': 13566.0, 'november 1 - 30': 5345171.0, 'december 1 - 31': 8797959.0, 'total': 14156696.0}, 'average price paidper share ( or unit ) 2': {'october 1 - 31': 10.26, 'november 1 - 30': 9.98, 'december 1 - 31': 10.87, 'total': 10.53}, 'total number ofshares ( or units ) purchased as part ofpublicly announcedplans or programs3': {'october 1 - 31': 0.0, 'november 1 - 30': 5343752.0, 'december 1 - 31': 8790000.0, 'total': 14133752.0}, 'maximum number ( or approximate dollar value ) of shares ( or units ) that mayyet be purchased under theplans or programs3': {'october 1 - 31': 148858924.0, 'november 1 - 30': 195551133.0, 'december 1 - 31': 99989339.0, 'total': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['how many shares were purchased during october 2012?', 'what about the total number of shares purchased during the fourth quarter of 2012?', 'what fraction of fourth quarter purchases occurred during october?', 'what about in percentage terms?', 'what is the number of repurchased shares during october 2012?', 'what about repurchased shares during fourth quarter of 2012?', 'what proportion does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['13566', '14156696', '0.000958', '0.0958', '13566', '22944', '59.1%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['13566', '14156696', 'divide(13566, 14156696)', 'divide(13566, 14156696), multiply(#0, const_100)', '13566', '22944', 'divide(13566, 22944)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [13566.0, 14156696.0, 0.00096, 0.09583, 13566.0, 22944.0, 0.59127], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 0.59127}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "48s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the other income in 2006?\nA1: 118.0\nQ2: what about in 2005?\nA2: 145.0\nQ3: what is the sum for these two years?\nA3: 263.0\nQ4: what about in 2004?\nA4: 88.0\nQ5: what is the total for three years?\nA5: 351.0\nQ6: what is the average for these three years?\nA6: 117.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nincreased over 4% ( 4 % ) in 2005 , costs for trucking services provided by intermodal carriers remained flat as we substantially reduced expenses associated with network inefficiencies . higher diesel fuel prices increased sales and use taxes in 2005 , which resulted in higher state and local taxes . other contract expenses for equipment maintenance and other services increased in 2005 . the 2005 january west coast storm and hurricanes katrina and rita also contributed to higher expenses in 2005 ( net of insurance settlements received ) . partially offsetting these increases was a reduction in relocation expenses as we incurred higher relocation costs associated with moving support personnel to omaha , nebraska during 2004 . non-operating items millions of dollars 2006 2005 2004 % (  % ) change 2006 v 2005 % (  % ) change 2005 v 2004 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nother income 2013 lower net gains from non-operating asset sales and higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program resulted in a reduction in other income in 2006 , which was partially offset by higher rental income for the use of our right-of-way ( including 2006 settlements of rate disputes from prior years ) and cash investment returns due to higher interest rates . in 2005 , other income increased largely as a result of higher gains from real estate sales partially offset by higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program . interest expense 2013 lower interest expense in 2006 and 2005 was primarily due to declining weighted-average debt levels of $ 7.1 billion , $ 7.8 billion , and $ 8.1 billion in 2006 , 2005 , and 2004 , respectively . a higher effective interest rate of 6.7% ( 6.7 % ) in 2006 , compared to 6.5% ( 6.5 % ) in both 2005 and 2004 , partially offset the effects of the declining debt level . income taxes 2013 income tax expense was $ 509 million higher in 2006 than 2005 . higher pre-tax income resulted in additional taxes of $ 414 million and $ 118 million of the increase resulted from the one-time reduction in 2005 described below . our effective tax rate was 36.4% ( 36.4 % ) and 28.6% ( 28.6 % ) in 2006 and 2005 , respectively . income taxes were greater in 2005 than 2004 due to higher pre-tax income partially offset by a previously reported reduction in income tax expense . in our quarterly report on form 10-q for the quarter ended june 30 , 2005 , we reported that the corporation analyzed the impact that final settlements of pre-1995 tax years had on previously recorded estimates of deferred tax assets and liabilities . the completed analysis of the final settlements for pre-1995 tax years , along with internal revenue service examination reports for tax years 1995 through 2002 were considered , among other things , in a review and re-evaluation of the corporation 2019s estimated deferred tax assets and liabilities as of september 30 , 2005 , resulting in an income tax expense reduction of $ 118 million in .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2006 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 |\n| 2005 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 |\n| 2004 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 |\n| % (  % ) change 2006 v 2005 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 |\n| % (  % ) change 2005 v 2004 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 |', 'question': 'what is the net change in other income from 2004 to 2005?', 'ops': 'subtract(145, 88)', 'id': 'Double_UNP/2006/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'increased over 4% ( 4 % ) in 2005 , costs for trucking services provided by intermodal carriers remained flat as we substantially reduced expenses associated with network inefficiencies . higher diesel fuel prices increased sales and use taxes in 2005 , which resulted in higher state and local taxes . other contract expenses for equipment maintenance and other services increased in 2005 . the 2005 january west coast storm and hurricanes katrina and rita also contributed to higher expenses in 2005 ( net of insurance settlements received ) . partially offsetting these increases was a reduction in relocation expenses as we incurred higher relocation costs associated with moving support personnel to omaha , nebraska during 2004 . non-operating items millions of dollars 2006 2005 2004 % (  % ) change 2006 v 2005 % (  % ) change 2005 v 2004 .', 'doc_post_text': 'other income 2013 lower net gains from non-operating asset sales and higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program resulted in a reduction in other income in 2006 , which was partially offset by higher rental income for the use of our right-of-way ( including 2006 settlements of rate disputes from prior years ) and cash investment returns due to higher interest rates . in 2005 , other income increased largely as a result of higher gains from real estate sales partially offset by higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program . interest expense 2013 lower interest expense in 2006 and 2005 was primarily due to declining weighted-average debt levels of $ 7.1 billion , $ 7.8 billion , and $ 8.1 billion in 2006 , 2005 , and 2004 , respectively . a higher effective interest rate of 6.7% ( 6.7 % ) in 2006 , compared to 6.5% ( 6.5 % ) in both 2005 and 2004 , partially offset the effects of the declining debt level . income taxes 2013 income tax expense was $ 509 million higher in 2006 than 2005 . higher pre-tax income resulted in additional taxes of $ 414 million and $ 118 million of the increase resulted from the one-time reduction in 2005 described below . our effective tax rate was 36.4% ( 36.4 % ) and 28.6% ( 28.6 % ) in 2006 and 2005 , respectively . income taxes were greater in 2005 than 2004 due to higher pre-tax income partially offset by a previously reported reduction in income tax expense . in our quarterly report on form 10-q for the quarter ended june 30 , 2005 , we reported that the corporation analyzed the impact that final settlements of pre-1995 tax years had on previously recorded estimates of deferred tax assets and liabilities . the completed analysis of the final settlements for pre-1995 tax years , along with internal revenue service examination reports for tax years 1995 through 2002 were considered , among other things , in a review and re-evaluation of the corporation 2019s estimated deferred tax assets and liabilities as of september 30 , 2005 , resulting in an income tax expense reduction of $ 118 million in .', 'doc_table': {'2006': {'other income': 118.0, 'interest expense': -477.0, 'income taxes': -919.0}, '2005': {'other income': 145.0, 'interest expense': -504.0, 'income taxes': -410.0}, '2004': {'other income': 88.0, 'interest expense': -527.0, 'income taxes': -252.0}, '% (  % ) change 2006 v 2005': {'other income': -19.0, 'interest expense': -5.0, 'income taxes': 124.0}, '% (  % ) change 2005 v 2004': {'other income': -65.0, 'interest expense': -4.0, 'income taxes': 63.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the other income in 2006?', 'what about in 2005?', 'what is the sum for these two years?', 'what about in 2004?', 'what is the total for three years?', 'what is the average for these three years?', 'what is the net change in other income from 2004 to 2005?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['118', '145', '263', '88', '351', '117', '57'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['118', '145', 'add(118, 145)', '88', 'add(118, 145), add(#0, 88)', 'add(118, 145), add(#0, 88), divide(#1, const_3)', 'subtract(145, 88)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [118.0, 145.0, 263.0, 88.0, 351.0, 117.0, 57.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 57.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "47s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfor intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | revenue | net loss | revenue | net loss |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| year endedfebruary 12008 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 |\n| year endedfebruary 22007 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 |', 'question': 'what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?', 'ops': 'add(41.1, 27.3)', 'id': 'Single_DG/2008/page_86.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'for intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .', 'doc_post_text': 'the pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .', 'doc_table': {'year endedfebruary 12008': {'revenue': 9495246.0, 'net loss': -57939.0}, 'year endedfebruary 22007': {'revenue': 9169822.0, 'net loss': -156188.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?', 'including the year of 2011, what would it then be?', 'including now the year of 2012 in the amount, what would the total estimated aggregate amortization expense be, in millions?', 'what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense in 2013, in millions?', 'including 2013, what would now be the total sum in estimated aggregate amortization expense over those five years, in millions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['68.4', '89.3', '106.3', '12.0', '118.3'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(41.1, 27.3)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0)', '12.0', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0), add(#2, 12.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [68.4, 89.3, 106.3, 12.0, 118.3], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 68.4}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "46s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nthe goldman sachs group , inc . and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements the table below presents a summary of level 3 financial assets. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nlevel 3 financial assets as of december 2018 increased compared with december 2017 , primarily reflecting an increase in level 3 cash instruments . see notes 6 through 8 for further information about level 3 financial assets ( including information about unrealized gains and losses related to level 3 financial assets and financial liabilities , and transfers in and out of level 3 ) . note 6 . cash instruments cash instruments include u.s . government and agency obligations , non-u.s . government and agency obligations , mortgage-backed loans and securities , corporate debt instruments , equity securities , investments in funds at nav , and other non-derivative financial instruments owned and financial instruments sold , but not yet purchased . see below for the types of cash instruments included in each level of the fair value hierarchy and the valuation techniques and significant inputs used to determine their fair values . see note 5 for an overview of the firm 2019s fair value measurement policies . level 1 cash instruments level 1 cash instruments include certain money market instruments , u.s . government obligations , most non-u.s . government obligations , certain government agency obligations , certain corporate debt instruments and actively traded listed equities . these instruments are valued using quoted prices for identical unrestricted instruments in active markets . the firm defines active markets for equity instruments based on the average daily trading volume both in absolute terms and relative to the market capitalization for the instrument . the firm defines active markets for debt instruments based on both the average daily trading volume and the number of days with trading activity . level 2 cash instruments level 2 cash instruments include most money market instruments , most government agency obligations , certain non-u.s . government obligations , most mortgage-backed loans and securities , most corporate debt instruments , most state and municipal obligations , most other debt obligations , restricted or less liquid listed equities , commodities and certain lending commitments . valuations of level 2 cash instruments can be verified to quoted prices , recent trading activity for identical or similar instruments , broker or dealer quotations or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency . consideration is given to the nature of the quotations ( e.g. , indicative or firm ) and the relationship of recent market activity to the prices provided from alternative pricing sources . valuation adjustments are typically made to level 2 cash instruments ( i ) if the cash instrument is subject to transfer restrictions and/or ( ii ) for other premiums and liquidity discounts that a market participant would require to arrive at fair value . valuation adjustments are generally based on market evidence . level 3 cash instruments level 3 cash instruments have one or more significant valuation inputs that are not observable . absent evidence to the contrary , level 3 cash instruments are initially valued at transaction price , which is considered to be the best initial estimate of fair value . subsequently , the firm uses other methodologies to determine fair value , which vary based on the type of instrument . valuation inputs and assumptions are changed when corroborated by substantive observable evidence , including values realized on sales . valuation techniques and significant inputs of level 3 cash instruments valuation techniques of level 3 cash instruments vary by instrument , but are generally based on discounted cash flow techniques . the valuation techniques and the nature of significant inputs used to determine the fair values of each type of level 3 cash instrument are described below : loans and securities backed by commercial real estate . loans and securities backed by commercial real estate are directly or indirectly collateralized by a single commercial real estate property or a portfolio of properties , and may include tranches of varying levels of subordination . significant inputs are generally determined based on relative value analyses and include : 2030 market yields implied by transactions of similar or related assets and/or current levels and changes in market indices such as the cmbx ( an index that tracks the performance of commercial mortgage bonds ) ; 118 goldman sachs 2018 form 10-k .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash instruments | derivatives | other financial assets | total | cash instruments | derivatives | other financial assets | total |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| as of december 2018 | 17227.0 | 4948.0 | 6.0 | 22181.0 | 17227.0 | 4948.0 | 6.0 | 22181.0 |\n| as of december 2017 | 15395.0 | 3802.0 | 4.0 | 19201.0 | 15395.0 | 3802.0 | 4.0 | 19201.0 |', 'question': 'what was the change in cash instruments from 2017 to 2018, in millions?', 'ops': 'subtract(17227, 15395)', 'id': 'Single_GS/2018/page_134.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'the goldman sachs group , inc . and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements the table below presents a summary of level 3 financial assets. .', 'doc_post_text': 'level 3 financial assets as of december 2018 increased compared with december 2017 , primarily reflecting an increase in level 3 cash instruments . see notes 6 through 8 for further information about level 3 financial assets ( including information about unrealized gains and losses related to level 3 financial assets and financial liabilities , and transfers in and out of level 3 ) . note 6 . cash instruments cash instruments include u.s . government and agency obligations , non-u.s . government and agency obligations , mortgage-backed loans and securities , corporate debt instruments , equity securities , investments in funds at nav , and other non-derivative financial instruments owned and financial instruments sold , but not yet purchased . see below for the types of cash instruments included in each level of the fair value hierarchy and the valuation techniques and significant inputs used to determine their fair values . see note 5 for an overview of the firm 2019s fair value measurement policies . level 1 cash instruments level 1 cash instruments include certain money market instruments , u.s . government obligations , most non-u.s . government obligations , certain government agency obligations , certain corporate debt instruments and actively traded listed equities . these instruments are valued using quoted prices for identical unrestricted instruments in active markets . the firm defines active markets for equity instruments based on the average daily trading volume both in absolute terms and relative to the market capitalization for the instrument . the firm defines active markets for debt instruments based on both the average daily trading volume and the number of days with trading activity . level 2 cash instruments level 2 cash instruments include most money market instruments , most government agency obligations , certain non-u.s . government obligations , most mortgage-backed loans and securities , most corporate debt instruments , most state and municipal obligations , most other debt obligations , restricted or less liquid listed equities , commodities and certain lending commitments . valuations of level 2 cash instruments can be verified to quoted prices , recent trading activity for identical or similar instruments , broker or dealer quotations or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency . consideration is given to the nature of the quotations ( e.g. , indicative or firm ) and the relationship of recent market activity to the prices provided from alternative pricing sources . valuation adjustments are typically made to level 2 cash instruments ( i ) if the cash instrument is subject to transfer restrictions and/or ( ii ) for other premiums and liquidity discounts that a market participant would require to arrive at fair value . valuation adjustments are generally based on market evidence . level 3 cash instruments level 3 cash instruments have one or more significant valuation inputs that are not observable . absent evidence to the contrary , level 3 cash instruments are initially valued at transaction price , which is considered to be the best initial estimate of fair value . subsequently , the firm uses other methodologies to determine fair value , which vary based on the type of instrument . valuation inputs and assumptions are changed when corroborated by substantive observable evidence , including values realized on sales . valuation techniques and significant inputs of level 3 cash instruments valuation techniques of level 3 cash instruments vary by instrument , but are generally based on discounted cash flow techniques . the valuation techniques and the nature of significant inputs used to determine the fair values of each type of level 3 cash instrument are described below : loans and securities backed by commercial real estate . loans and securities backed by commercial real estate are directly or indirectly collateralized by a single commercial real estate property or a portfolio of properties , and may include tranches of varying levels of subordination . significant inputs are generally determined based on relative value analyses and include : 2030 market yields implied by transactions of similar or related assets and/or current levels and changes in market indices such as the cmbx ( an index that tracks the performance of commercial mortgage bonds ) ; 118 goldman sachs 2018 form 10-k .', 'doc_table': {'as of december 2018': {'cash instruments': 17227.0, 'derivatives': 4948.0, 'other financial assets': 6.0, 'total': 22181.0}, 'as of december 2017': {'cash instruments': 15395.0, 'derivatives': 3802.0, 'other financial assets': 4.0, 'total': 19201.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in cash instruments from 2017 to 2018, in millions?', 'and what was the total of cash instruments in 2017, in millions?', 'how much does that change represent, in percentage, in relation to this 2017 total?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1832', '15395', '11.9%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(17227, 15395)', '15395', 'subtract(17227, 15395), divide(#0, 15395)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1832.0, 15395.0, 0.119], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1832.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "49s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what were the number of berths in 2011?\nA1: 155000.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart i berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 34000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the north american cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . europe in europe , cruising represents a smaller but growing sector of the vacation industry . it has experienced a compound annual growth rate in cruise guests of approximately 9.6% ( 9.6 % ) from 2007 to 2011 and we believe this market has significant continued growth poten- tial . we estimate that europe was served by 104 ships with approximately 100000 berths at the beginning of 2007 and by 121 ships with approximately 155000 berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 28000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the european cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . the following table details the growth in the global , north american and european cruise markets in terms of cruise guests and estimated weighted-average berths over the past five years : global cruise guests ( 1 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) north american cruise guests ( 2 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in north america ( 1 ) european cruise guests ( 3 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in europe ( 1 ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests , and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally , in north america and europe are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources including seatrade insider and cruise line international association . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) source : cruise line international association based on cruise guests carried for at least two consecutive nights for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . ( 3 ) source : european cruise council for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . other markets in addition to expected industry growth in north america and europe as discussed above , we expect the asia/pacific region to demonstrate an even higher growth rate in the near term , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america and europe . we compete with a number of cruise lines ; however , our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise lines , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , iberocruceros , p&o cruises and princess cruises ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; norwegian cruise line and oceania cruises . cruise lines compete with other vacation alternatives such as land-based resort hotels and sightseeing destinations for consum- ers 2019 leisure time . demand for such activities is influ- enced by political and general economic conditions . companies within the vacation market are dependent on consumer discretionary spending . operating strategies our principal operating strategies are to : and employees and protect the environment in which our vessels and organization operate , to better serve our global guest base and grow our business , order to enhance our revenues while continuing to expand and diversify our guest mix through interna- tional guest sourcing , and ensure adequate cash and liquidity , with the overall goal of maximizing our return on invested capital and long-term shareholder value , our brands throughout the world , revitalization of existing ships and the transfer of key innovations across each brand , while expanding our fleet with the new state-of-the-art cruise ships recently delivered and on order , by deploying them into those markets and itineraries that provide opportunities to optimize returns , while continuing our focus on existing key markets , support ongoing operations and initiatives , and the principal industry distribution channel , while enhancing our consumer outreach programs. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| global cruiseguests ( 1 ) | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 |\n| weighted-averagesupplyofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 ) | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 |\n| northamericancruiseguests ( 2 ) | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 |\n| weighted-average supply ofberths marketedin northamerica ( 1 ) | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 |\n| europeancruiseguests | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 |\n| weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketed ineurope ( 1 ) | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 |', 'question': 'what were the number of berths in 2007?', 'ops': '100000', 'id': 'Single_RCL/2011/page_16.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'part i berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 34000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the north american cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . europe in europe , cruising represents a smaller but growing sector of the vacation industry . it has experienced a compound annual growth rate in cruise guests of approximately 9.6% ( 9.6 % ) from 2007 to 2011 and we believe this market has significant continued growth poten- tial . we estimate that europe was served by 104 ships with approximately 100000 berths at the beginning of 2007 and by 121 ships with approximately 155000 berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 28000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the european cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . the following table details the growth in the global , north american and european cruise markets in terms of cruise guests and estimated weighted-average berths over the past five years : global cruise guests ( 1 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) north american cruise guests ( 2 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in north america ( 1 ) european cruise guests ( 3 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in europe ( 1 ) .', 'doc_post_text': '( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests , and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally , in north america and europe are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources including seatrade insider and cruise line international association . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) source : cruise line international association based on cruise guests carried for at least two consecutive nights for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . ( 3 ) source : european cruise council for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . other markets in addition to expected industry growth in north america and europe as discussed above , we expect the asia/pacific region to demonstrate an even higher growth rate in the near term , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america and europe . we compete with a number of cruise lines ; however , our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise lines , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , iberocruceros , p&o cruises and princess cruises ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; norwegian cruise line and oceania cruises . cruise lines compete with other vacation alternatives such as land-based resort hotels and sightseeing destinations for consum- ers 2019 leisure time . demand for such activities is influ- enced by political and general economic conditions . companies within the vacation market are dependent on consumer discretionary spending . operating strategies our principal operating strategies are to : and employees and protect the environment in which our vessels and organization operate , to better serve our global guest base and grow our business , order to enhance our revenues while continuing to expand and diversify our guest mix through interna- tional guest sourcing , and ensure adequate cash and liquidity , with the overall goal of maximizing our return on invested capital and long-term shareholder value , our brands throughout the world , revitalization of existing ships and the transfer of key innovations across each brand , while expanding our fleet with the new state-of-the-art cruise ships recently delivered and on order , by deploying them into those markets and itineraries that provide opportunities to optimize returns , while continuing our focus on existing key markets , support ongoing operations and initiatives , and the principal industry distribution channel , while enhancing our consumer outreach programs. .', 'doc_table': {'global cruiseguests ( 1 )': {'2007': 16586000.0, '2008': 17184000.0, '2009': 17340000.0, '2010': 18800000.0, '2011': 20227000.0}, 'weighted-averagesupplyofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 )': {'2007': 327000.0, '2008': 347000.0, '2009': 363000.0, '2010': 391000.0, '2011': 412000.0}, 'northamericancruiseguests ( 2 )': {'2007': 10247000.0, '2008': 10093000.0, '2009': 10198000.0, '2010': 10781000.0, '2011': 11625000.0}, 'weighted-average supply ofberths marketedin northamerica ( 1 )': {'2007': 212000.0, '2008': 219000.0, '2009': 222000.0, '2010': 232000.0, '2011': 245000.0}, 'europeancruiseguests': {'2007': 4080000.0, '2008': 4500000.0, '2009': 5000000.0, '2010': 5540000.0, '2011': 5894000.0}, 'weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketed ineurope ( 1 )': {'2007': 105000.0, '2008': 120000.0, '2009': 131000.0, '2010': 143000.0, '2011': 149000.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what were the number of berths in 2011?', 'what were the number of berths in 2007?', 'what is the net change in berths?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what is that as a percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['155000', '100000', '55000', '0.55', '55'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['155000', '100000', 'subtract(155000, 100000)', 'subtract(155000, 100000), divide(#0, 100000)', 'subtract(155000, 100000), divide(#0, 100000), multiply(#1, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [155000.0, 100000.0, 55000.0, 0.55, 55.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 100000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nschlumberger limited and subsidiaries shares of common stock issued in treasury shares outstanding ( stated in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nsee the notes to consolidated financial statements part ii , item 8 .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | balance january 1 2008 | shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged | shares issued under employee stock purchase plan | stock repurchase program | issued on conversions of debentures | balance december 31 2008 | vesting of restricted stock | balance december 31 2009 | acquisition of smith international inc . | balance december 31 2010 | balance january 1 2008 | shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged | shares issued under employee stock purchase plan | stock repurchase program | issued on conversions of debentures | balance december 31 2008 | vesting of restricted stock | balance december 31 2009 | acquisition of smith international inc . | balance december 31 2010 | balance january 1 2008 | shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged | shares issued under employee stock purchase plan | stock repurchase program | issued on conversions of debentures | balance december 31 2008 | vesting of restricted stock | balance december 31 2009 | acquisition of smith international inc . | balance december 31 2010 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| issued | 1334.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 1334.0 | 2013.0 | 1334.0 | 100.0 | 1434.0 | 1334.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 1334.0 | 2013.0 | 1334.0 | 100.0 | 1434.0 | 1334.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 1334.0 | 2013.0 | 1334.0 | 100.0 | 1434.0 |\n| in treasury | -138.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | -27.0 | 8.0 | -140.0 | 1.0 | -139.0 | 76.0 | -73.0 | -138.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | -27.0 | 8.0 | -140.0 | 1.0 | -139.0 | 76.0 | -73.0 | -138.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | -27.0 | 8.0 | -140.0 | 1.0 | -139.0 | 76.0 | -73.0 |\n| shares outstanding | 1196.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | -27.0 | 8.0 | 1194.0 | 1.0 | 1195.0 | 176.0 | 1361.0 | 1196.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | -27.0 | 8.0 | 1194.0 | 1.0 | 1195.0 | 176.0 | 1361.0 | 1196.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | -27.0 | 8.0 | 1194.0 | 1.0 | 1195.0 | 176.0 | 1361.0 |', 'question': 'combined, what was the shares outstanding for 12/31/10 and 12/31/09?', 'ops': 'add(1361, 1195)', 'id': 'Single_SLB/2010/page_58.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'schlumberger limited and subsidiaries shares of common stock issued in treasury shares outstanding ( stated in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'see the notes to consolidated financial statements part ii , item 8 .', 'doc_table': {'issued': {'balance january 1 2008': 1334.0, 'shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged': 2013.0, 'shares issued under employee stock purchase plan': 2013.0, 'stock repurchase program': 2013.0, 'issued on conversions of debentures': 2013.0, 'balance december 31 2008': 1334.0, 'vesting of restricted stock': 2013.0, 'balance december 31 2009': 1334.0, 'acquisition of smith international inc .': 100.0, 'balance december 31 2010': 1434.0}, 'in treasury': {'balance january 1 2008': -138.0, 'shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged': 6.0, 'shares issued under employee stock purchase plan': 3.0, 'stock repurchase program': -27.0, 'issued on conversions of debentures': 8.0, 'balance december 31 2008': -140.0, 'vesting of restricted stock': 1.0, 'balance december 31 2009': -139.0, 'acquisition of smith international inc .': 76.0, 'balance december 31 2010': -73.0}, 'shares outstanding': {'balance january 1 2008': 1196.0, 'shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged': 6.0, 'shares issued under employee stock purchase plan': 3.0, 'stock repurchase program': -27.0, 'issued on conversions of debentures': 8.0, 'balance december 31 2008': 1194.0, 'vesting of restricted stock': 1.0, 'balance december 31 2009': 1195.0, 'acquisition of smith international inc .': 176.0, 'balance december 31 2010': 1361.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['combined, what was the shares outstanding for 12/31/10 and 12/31/09?', 'so what was the average of these values?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['2556.0', '1278'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(1361, 1195)', 'add(1361, 1195), divide(#0, const_2)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [2556.0, 1278.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 2556.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the difference between the price of masco in 2010 and the starting value as of 12/31/05?\nA1: -48.49', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nperformance graph the table below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on our common stock with the cumulative total return of ( i ) the standard & poor 2019s 500 composite stock index ( 201cs&p 500 index 201d ) , ( ii ) the standard & poor 2019s industrials index ( 201cs&p industrials index 201d ) and ( iii ) the standard & poor 2019s consumer durables & apparel index ( 201cs&p consumer durables & apparel index 201d ) , from december 31 , 2005 through december 31 , 2010 , when the closing price of our common stock was $ 12.66 . the graph assumes investments of $ 100 on december 31 , 2005 in our common stock and in each of the three indices and the reinvestment of dividends . performance graph 201020092008200720062005 s&p 500 index s&p industrials index s&p consumer durables & apparel index the table below sets forth the value , as of december 31 for each of the years indicated , of a $ 100 investment made on december 31 , 2005 in each of our common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p industrials index and the s&p consumer durables & apparel index and includes the reinvestment of dividends. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin july 2007 , our board of directors authorized the purchase of up to 50 million shares of our common stock in open-market transactions or otherwise . at december 31 , 2010 , we had remaining authorization to repurchase up to 27 million shares . during 2010 , we repurchased and retired three million shares of our common stock , for cash aggregating $ 45 million to offset the dilutive impact of the 2010 grant of three million shares of long-term stock awards . we did not purchase any shares during the three months ended december 31 , 2010. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2006 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 |\n| 2007 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 |\n| 2008 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 |\n| 2009 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 |\n| 2010 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 |', 'question': 'so what was the percentage growth during that time?', 'ops': 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'id': 'Single_MAS/2010/page_29.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': 'performance graph the table below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on our common stock with the cumulative total return of ( i ) the standard & poor 2019s 500 composite stock index ( 201cs&p 500 index 201d ) , ( ii ) the standard & poor 2019s industrials index ( 201cs&p industrials index 201d ) and ( iii ) the standard & poor 2019s consumer durables & apparel index ( 201cs&p consumer durables & apparel index 201d ) , from december 31 , 2005 through december 31 , 2010 , when the closing price of our common stock was $ 12.66 . the graph assumes investments of $ 100 on december 31 , 2005 in our common stock and in each of the three indices and the reinvestment of dividends . performance graph 201020092008200720062005 s&p 500 index s&p industrials index s&p consumer durables & apparel index the table below sets forth the value , as of december 31 for each of the years indicated , of a $ 100 investment made on december 31 , 2005 in each of our common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p industrials index and the s&p consumer durables & apparel index and includes the reinvestment of dividends. .', 'doc_post_text': 'in july 2007 , our board of directors authorized the purchase of up to 50 million shares of our common stock in open-market transactions or otherwise . at december 31 , 2010 , we had remaining authorization to repurchase up to 27 million shares . during 2010 , we repurchased and retired three million shares of our common stock , for cash aggregating $ 45 million to offset the dilutive impact of the 2010 grant of three million shares of long-term stock awards . we did not purchase any shares during the three months ended december 31 , 2010. .', 'doc_table': {'2006': {'masco': 101.79, 's&p 500 index': 115.61, 's&p industrials index': 113.16, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 106.16}, '2007': {'masco': 76.74, 's&p 500 index': 121.95, 's&p industrials index': 126.72, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 84.5}, '2008': {'masco': 42.81, 's&p 500 index': 77.38, 's&p industrials index': 76.79, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 56.13}, '2009': {'masco': 54.89, 's&p 500 index': 97.44, 's&p industrials index': 92.3, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 76.51}, '2010': {'masco': 51.51, 's&p 500 index': 111.89, 's&p industrials index': 116.64, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 99.87}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the difference between the price of masco in 2010 and the starting value as of 12/31/05?', 'so what was the percentage growth during that time?', 'what was the difference between the price of the s&p 500 in 2010 and the starting value as of 12/31/05?', 'and the original investment again?', 'so what was the growth rate of s&p 500 during this time?', 'what was the difference between the two growth rates?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['-48.49', '-48.49%', '11.89', '100', '11.89%', '-60.38%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(51.51, 100)', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(111.89, 100)', '100', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(111.89, 100), divide(#2, 100)', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(111.89, 100), divide(#2, 100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [-48.49, -0.4849, 11.89, 100.0, 0.1189, -0.6038], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -0.4849}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "47s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in value for booking holding inc. in 2018, assuming a $100 initial investment?\nA1: 48.18\nQ2: what is the percent change?\nA2: 0.4818', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmeasurement point december 31 booking holdings nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| booking holdings inc . | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 |\n| nasdaqcomposite index | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 |\n| s&p 500index | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 |\n| rdg internetcomposite | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 |', 'question': 'what was the nasdaq composite value in 2018?', 'ops': '165.84', 'id': 'Single_BKNG/2018/page_34.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': 'measurement point december 31 booking holdings nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'booking holdings inc .': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 98.09, '2015': 109.68, '2016': 126.12, '2017': 149.5, '2018': 148.18}, 'nasdaqcomposite index': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 114.62, '2015': 122.81, '2016': 133.19, '2017': 172.11, '2018': 165.84}, 's&p 500index': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 113.69, '2015': 115.26, '2016': 129.05, '2017': 157.22, '2018': 150.33}, 'rdg internetcomposite': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 96.39, '2015': 133.2, '2016': 140.23, '2017': 202.15, '2018': 201.16}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in value for booking holding inc. in 2018, assuming a $100 initial investment?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what was the nasdaq composite value in 2018?', 'what is the net change also assuming a $100 initial investment?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what was the difference in the percent changes?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['48.18', '48.18%', '165.84', '65.84', '65.84%', '17.66%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(148.18, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', '165.84', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [48.18, 0.4818, 165.84, 65.84, 0.6584, -0.1766], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 165.84}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nour digital media business consists of our websites and mobile and video-on-demand ( 201cvod 201d ) services . our websites include network branded websites such as discovery.com , tlc.com and animalplanet.com , and other websites such as howstuffworks.com , an online source of explanations of how the world actually works ; treehugger.com , a comprehensive source for 201cgreen 201d news , solutions and product information ; and petfinder.com , a leading pet adoption destination . together , these websites attracted an average of 24 million cumulative unique monthly visitors , according to comscore , inc . in 2011 . international networks our international networks segment principally consists of national and pan-regional television networks . this segment generates revenues primarily from fees charged to operators who distribute our networks , which primarily include cable and dth satellite service providers , and from advertising sold on our television networks and websites . discovery channel , animal planet and tlc lead the international networks 2019 portfolio of television networks , which are distributed in virtually every pay-television market in the world through an infrastructure that includes operational centers in london , singapore and miami . international networks has one of the largest international distribution platforms of networks with one to twelve networks in more than 200 countries and territories around the world . at december 31 , 2011 , international networks operated over 150 unique distribution feeds in over 40 languages with channel feeds customized according to language needs and advertising sales opportunities . our international networks segment owns and operates the following television networks which reached the following number of subscribers as of december 31 , 2011 : education and other our education and other segment primarily includes the sale of curriculum-based product and service offerings and postproduction audio services . this segment generates revenues primarily from subscriptions charged to k-12 schools for access to an online suite of curriculum-based vod tools , professional development services , and to a lesser extent student assessment and publication of hardcopy curriculum-based content . our education business also participates in corporate partnerships , global brand and content licensing business with leading non-profits , foundations and trade associations . other businesses primarily include postproduction audio services that are provided to major motion picture studios , independent producers , broadcast networks , cable channels , advertising agencies , and interactive producers . content development our content development strategy is designed to increase viewership , maintain innovation and quality leadership , and provide value for our network distributors and advertising customers . substantially all content is sourced from a wide range of third-party producers , which includes some of the world 2019s leading nonfiction production companies with which we have developed long-standing relationships , as well as independent producers . our production arrangements fall into three categories : produced , coproduced and licensed . substantially all produced content includes programming which we engage third parties to develop and produce while we retain editorial control and own most or all of the rights in exchange for paying all development and production costs . coproduced content refers to program rights acquired that we have collaborated with third parties to finance and develop . coproduced programs are typically high-cost projects for which neither we nor our coproducers wish to bear the entire cost or productions in which the producer has already taken on an international broadcast partner . licensed content is comprised of films or series that have been previously produced by third parties . global networks international subscribers ( millions ) regional networks international subscribers ( millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| international subscribers ( millions ) 213 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 |\n| regional networks dmax | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  |\n| international subscribers ( millions ) 47 | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  |', 'question': 'what is the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel, in millions?', 'ops': '213', 'id': 'Single_DISCA/2011/page_35.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'our digital media business consists of our websites and mobile and video-on-demand ( 201cvod 201d ) services . our websites include network branded websites such as discovery.com , tlc.com and animalplanet.com , and other websites such as howstuffworks.com , an online source of explanations of how the world actually works ; treehugger.com , a comprehensive source for 201cgreen 201d news , solutions and product information ; and petfinder.com , a leading pet adoption destination . together , these websites attracted an average of 24 million cumulative unique monthly visitors , according to comscore , inc . in 2011 . international networks our international networks segment principally consists of national and pan-regional television networks . this segment generates revenues primarily from fees charged to operators who distribute our networks , which primarily include cable and dth satellite service providers , and from advertising sold on our television networks and websites . discovery channel , animal planet and tlc lead the international networks 2019 portfolio of television networks , which are distributed in virtually every pay-television market in the world through an infrastructure that includes operational centers in london , singapore and miami . international networks has one of the largest international distribution platforms of networks with one to twelve networks in more than 200 countries and territories around the world . at december 31 , 2011 , international networks operated over 150 unique distribution feeds in over 40 languages with channel feeds customized according to language needs and advertising sales opportunities . our international networks segment owns and operates the following television networks which reached the following number of subscribers as of december 31 , 2011 : education and other our education and other segment primarily includes the sale of curriculum-based product and service offerings and postproduction audio services . this segment generates revenues primarily from subscriptions charged to k-12 schools for access to an online suite of curriculum-based vod tools , professional development services , and to a lesser extent student assessment and publication of hardcopy curriculum-based content . our education business also participates in corporate partnerships , global brand and content licensing business with leading non-profits , foundations and trade associations . other businesses primarily include postproduction audio services that are provided to major motion picture studios , independent producers , broadcast networks , cable channels , advertising agencies , and interactive producers . content development our content development strategy is designed to increase viewership , maintain innovation and quality leadership , and provide value for our network distributors and advertising customers . substantially all content is sourced from a wide range of third-party producers , which includes some of the world 2019s leading nonfiction production companies with which we have developed long-standing relationships , as well as independent producers . our production arrangements fall into three categories : produced , coproduced and licensed . substantially all produced content includes programming which we engage third parties to develop and produce while we retain editorial control and own most or all of the rights in exchange for paying all development and production costs . coproduced content refers to program rights acquired that we have collaborated with third parties to finance and develop . coproduced programs are typically high-cost projects for which neither we nor our coproducers wish to bear the entire cost or productions in which the producer has already taken on an international broadcast partner . licensed content is comprised of films or series that have been previously produced by third parties . global networks international subscribers ( millions ) regional networks international subscribers ( millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'international subscribers ( millions ) 213': {'animal planet': 166.0, 'tlc real time and travel & living': 150.0, 'discovery science': 66.0, 'discovery home & health': 48.0, 'turbo': 37.0, 'discovery world': 27.0, 'investigation discovery': 23.0, 'hd services': 17.0}, 'regional networks dmax': {'animal planet': 'discovery kids', 'tlc real time and travel & living': 'liv', 'discovery science': 'quest', 'discovery home & health': 'discovery history', 'turbo': 'shed', 'discovery world': 'discovery en espanol ( u.s. )', 'investigation discovery': 'discovery famillia ( u.s. )', 'hd services': ''}, 'international subscribers ( millions ) 47': {'animal planet': 37.0, 'tlc real time and travel & living': 29.0, 'discovery science': 23.0, 'discovery home & health': 13.0, 'turbo': 12.0, 'discovery world': 5.0, 'investigation discovery': 4.0, 'hd services': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel, in millions?', 'and what is it for animal planet, also in millions?', 'what is, then, the difference between the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel and for animal planet?', 'and how much does this difference represent in relation to the animal planet number of subscribers?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['213', '166', '47', '28%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['213', '166', 'subtract(213, 166)', 'subtract(213, 166), divide(#0, 166)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [213.0, 166.0, 47.0, 0.28313], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 213.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the fair market value of plan assets of the benefit pension plans in 2015?\nA1: 3916.4\nQ2: and what was it in 2014?\nA2: 4114.6\nQ3: what was, then, the change over the year?\nA3: -198.2\nQ4: what was the fair market value of plan assets of the benefit pension plans in 2014?\nA4: 4114.6', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nunconditional purchase obligations approximately $ 390 of our long-term unconditional purchase obligations relate to feedstock supply for numerous hyco ( hydrogen , carbon monoxide , and syngas ) facilities . the price of feedstock supply is principally related to the price of natural gas . however , long-term take-or-pay sales contracts to hyco customers are generally matched to the term of the feedstock supply obligations and provide recovery of price increases in the feedstock supply . due to the matching of most long-term feedstock supply obligations to customer sales contracts , we do not believe these purchase obligations would have a material effect on our financial condition or results of operations . refer to note 17 , commitments and contingencies , to the consolidated financial statements for additional information on our unconditional purchase obligations . the unconditional purchase obligations also include other product supply and purchase commitments and electric power and natural gas supply purchase obligations , which are primarily pass-through contracts with our customers . in addition , purchase commitments to spend approximately $ 540 for additional plant and equipment are included in the unconditional purchase obligations in 2016 . we also purchase materials , energy , capital equipment , supplies , and services as part of the ordinary course of business under arrangements that are not unconditional purchase obligations . the majority of such purchases are for raw materials and energy , which are obtained under requirements-type contracts at market prices . obligation for future contribution to an equity affiliate on 19 april 2015 , a joint venture between air products and acwa holding entered into a 20-year oxygen and nitrogen supply agreement to supply saudi aramco 2019s oil refinery and power plant being built in jazan , saudi arabia . air products owns 25% ( 25 % ) of the joint venture and guarantees the repayment of its share of an equity bridge loan . in total , we expect to invest approximately $ 100 in this joint venture . as of 30 september 2015 , we recorded a noncurrent liability of $ 67.5 for our obligation to make future equity contributions based on advances received by the joint venture under the loan . income tax liabilities noncurrent deferred income tax liabilities as of 30 september 2015 were $ 903.3 . tax liabilities related to unrecognized tax benefits as of 30 september 2015 were $ 97.5 . these tax liabilities were excluded from the contractual obligations table , as it is impractical to determine a cash impact by year given that payments will vary according to changes in tax laws , tax rates , and our operating results . in addition , there are uncertainties in timing of the effective settlement of our uncertain tax positions with respective taxing authorities . refer to note 23 , income taxes , to the consolidated financial statements for additional information . pension benefits the company sponsors defined benefit pension plans and defined contribution plans that cover a substantial portion of its worldwide employees . the principal defined benefit pension plans 2014the u.s . salaried pension plan and the u.k . pension plan 2014were closed to new participants in 2005 and were replaced with defined contribution plans . over the long run , the shift to defined contribution plans is expected to reduce volatility of both plan expense and contributions . the fair market value of plan assets for our defined benefit pension plans as of the 30 september 2015 measurement date decreased to $ 3916.4 from $ 4114.6 at the end of fiscal year 2014 . the projected benefit obligation for these plans was $ 4787.8 and $ 4738.6 at the end of the fiscal years 2015 and 2014 , respectively . refer to note 16 , retirement benefits , to the consolidated financial statements for comprehensive and detailed disclosures on our postretirement benefits . pension expense .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | pension expense | special terminations settlements and curtailments ( included above ) | weighted average discount rate | weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets | weighted average expected rate of compensation increase | pension expense | special terminations settlements and curtailments ( included above ) | weighted average discount rate | weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets | weighted average expected rate of compensation increase | pension expense | special terminations settlements and curtailments ( included above ) | weighted average discount rate | weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets | weighted average expected rate of compensation increase |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2015 | 135.6 | 35.2 | -4.0 | -7.4 | -3.5 | 135.6 | 35.2 | -4.0 | -7.4 | -3.5 | 135.6 | 35.2 | -4.0 | -7.4 | -3.5 |\n| 2014 | 135.9 | 5.8 | -4.6 | -7.7 | -3.9 | 135.9 | 5.8 | -4.6 | -7.7 | -3.9 | 135.9 | 5.8 | -4.6 | -7.7 | -3.9 |\n| 2013 | 169.7 | 19.8 | -4.0 | -7.7 | -3.8 | 169.7 | 19.8 | -4.0 | -7.7 | -3.8 | 169.7 | 19.8 | -4.0 | -7.7 | -3.8 |', 'question': 'and how much does that change represent in relation to this 2014 fair market value?', 'ops': 'subtract(3916.4, 4114.6), divide(#0, 4114.6)', 'id': 'Single_APD/2015/page_54.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'unconditional purchase obligations approximately $ 390 of our long-term unconditional purchase obligations relate to feedstock supply for numerous hyco ( hydrogen , carbon monoxide , and syngas ) facilities . the price of feedstock supply is principally related to the price of natural gas . however , long-term take-or-pay sales contracts to hyco customers are generally matched to the term of the feedstock supply obligations and provide recovery of price increases in the feedstock supply . due to the matching of most long-term feedstock supply obligations to customer sales contracts , we do not believe these purchase obligations would have a material effect on our financial condition or results of operations . refer to note 17 , commitments and contingencies , to the consolidated financial statements for additional information on our unconditional purchase obligations . the unconditional purchase obligations also include other product supply and purchase commitments and electric power and natural gas supply purchase obligations , which are primarily pass-through contracts with our customers . in addition , purchase commitments to spend approximately $ 540 for additional plant and equipment are included in the unconditional purchase obligations in 2016 . we also purchase materials , energy , capital equipment , supplies , and services as part of the ordinary course of business under arrangements that are not unconditional purchase obligations . the majority of such purchases are for raw materials and energy , which are obtained under requirements-type contracts at market prices . obligation for future contribution to an equity affiliate on 19 april 2015 , a joint venture between air products and acwa holding entered into a 20-year oxygen and nitrogen supply agreement to supply saudi aramco 2019s oil refinery and power plant being built in jazan , saudi arabia . air products owns 25% ( 25 % ) of the joint venture and guarantees the repayment of its share of an equity bridge loan . in total , we expect to invest approximately $ 100 in this joint venture . as of 30 september 2015 , we recorded a noncurrent liability of $ 67.5 for our obligation to make future equity contributions based on advances received by the joint venture under the loan . income tax liabilities noncurrent deferred income tax liabilities as of 30 september 2015 were $ 903.3 . tax liabilities related to unrecognized tax benefits as of 30 september 2015 were $ 97.5 . these tax liabilities were excluded from the contractual obligations table , as it is impractical to determine a cash impact by year given that payments will vary according to changes in tax laws , tax rates , and our operating results . in addition , there are uncertainties in timing of the effective settlement of our uncertain tax positions with respective taxing authorities . refer to note 23 , income taxes , to the consolidated financial statements for additional information . pension benefits the company sponsors defined benefit pension plans and defined contribution plans that cover a substantial portion of its worldwide employees . the principal defined benefit pension plans 2014the u.s . salaried pension plan and the u.k . pension plan 2014were closed to new participants in 2005 and were replaced with defined contribution plans . over the long run , the shift to defined contribution plans is expected to reduce volatility of both plan expense and contributions . the fair market value of plan assets for our defined benefit pension plans as of the 30 september 2015 measurement date decreased to $ 3916.4 from $ 4114.6 at the end of fiscal year 2014 . the projected benefit obligation for these plans was $ 4787.8 and $ 4738.6 at the end of the fiscal years 2015 and 2014 , respectively . refer to note 16 , retirement benefits , to the consolidated financial statements for comprehensive and detailed disclosures on our postretirement benefits . pension expense .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'2015': {'pension expense': 135.6, 'special terminations settlements and curtailments ( included above )': 35.2, 'weighted average discount rate': -4.0, 'weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets': -7.4, 'weighted average expected rate of compensation increase': -3.5}, '2014': {'pension expense': 135.9, 'special terminations settlements and curtailments ( included above )': 5.8, 'weighted average discount rate': -4.6, 'weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets': -7.7, 'weighted average expected rate of compensation increase': -3.9}, '2013': {'pension expense': 169.7, 'special terminations settlements and curtailments ( included above )': 19.8, 'weighted average discount rate': -4.0, 'weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets': -7.7, 'weighted average expected rate of compensation increase': -3.8}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the fair market value of plan assets of the benefit pension plans in 2015?', 'and what was it in 2014?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'what was the fair market value of plan assets of the benefit pension plans in 2014?', 'and how much does that change represent in relation to this 2014 fair market value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3916.4', '4114.6', '-198.2', '4114.6', '-4.81%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3916.4', '4114.6', 'subtract(3916.4, 4114.6)', '4114.6', 'subtract(3916.4, 4114.6), divide(#0, 4114.6)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3916.4, 4114.6, -198.2, 4114.6, -0.04817], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -0.04817}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "50s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: in the year of 2007, what was the number of granted shares?\nA1: 852353.0\nQ2: and what was it for vested ones?\nA2: 51206.0\nQ3: how much, then, did the granted number represent in relation to the vested one?\nA3: 16.64557\nQ4: and in that same year, what was the fair value of these vested shares, in millions?\nA4: 3.4\nQ5: what was it for 2005?\nA5: 0.6\nQ6: what was, then, the total combined fair value for both years, in millions?\nA6: 4.0\nQ7: including 2006, what becomes this total?\nA7: 6.3', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nhumana inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during 2007 was $ 133.9 million , compared with $ 133.7 million during 2006 and $ 57.8 million during 2005 . cash received from stock option exercises for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 totaled $ 62.7 million , $ 49.2 million , and $ 36.4 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested options not yet recognized was $ 23.6 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.6 years . restricted stock awards restricted stock awards are granted with a fair value equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant . compensation expense is recorded straight-line over the vesting period , generally three years from the date of grant . the weighted average grant date fair value of our restricted stock awards was $ 63.59 , $ 54.36 , and $ 32.81 for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 , respectively . activity for our restricted stock awards was as follows for the year ended december 31 , 2007 : shares weighted average grant-date fair value .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe fair value of shares vested during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 was $ 3.4 million , $ 2.3 million , and $ 0.6 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock awards not yet recognized was $ 44.7 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.4 years . there are no other contractual terms covering restricted stock awards once vested. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006 | granted | vested | forfeited | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007 | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006 | granted | vested | forfeited | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| shares | 1107455.0 | 852353.0 | -51206.0 | -63624.0 | 1844978.0 | 1107455.0 | 852353.0 | -51206.0 | -63624.0 | 1844978.0 |\n| weighted average grant-date fair value | 45.86 | 63.59 | 56.93 | 49.65 | 53.61 | 45.86 | 63.59 | 56.93 | 49.65 | 53.61 |', 'question': 'and what was, in millions, the average between the three years?', 'ops': 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3), divide(#1, const_3)', 'id': 'Double_HUM/2007/page_96.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'humana inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during 2007 was $ 133.9 million , compared with $ 133.7 million during 2006 and $ 57.8 million during 2005 . cash received from stock option exercises for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 totaled $ 62.7 million , $ 49.2 million , and $ 36.4 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested options not yet recognized was $ 23.6 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.6 years . restricted stock awards restricted stock awards are granted with a fair value equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant . compensation expense is recorded straight-line over the vesting period , generally three years from the date of grant . the weighted average grant date fair value of our restricted stock awards was $ 63.59 , $ 54.36 , and $ 32.81 for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 , respectively . activity for our restricted stock awards was as follows for the year ended december 31 , 2007 : shares weighted average grant-date fair value .', 'doc_post_text': 'the fair value of shares vested during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 was $ 3.4 million , $ 2.3 million , and $ 0.6 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock awards not yet recognized was $ 44.7 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.4 years . there are no other contractual terms covering restricted stock awards once vested. .', 'doc_table': {'shares': {'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006': 1107455.0, 'granted': 852353.0, 'vested': -51206.0, 'forfeited': -63624.0, 'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007': 1844978.0}, 'weighted average grant-date fair value': {'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006': 45.86, 'granted': 63.59, 'vested': 56.93, 'forfeited': 49.65, 'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007': 53.61}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['in the year of 2007, what was the number of granted shares?', 'and what was it for vested ones?', 'how much, then, did the granted number represent in relation to the vested one?', 'and in that same year, what was the fair value of these vested shares, in millions?', 'what was it for 2005?', 'what was, then, the total combined fair value for both years, in millions?', 'including 2006, what becomes this total?', 'and what was, in millions, the average between the three years?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['852353', '51206', '16.65', '3.4', '0.6', '4', '6.3', '2.1'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['852353', '51206', 'divide(852353, 51206)', '3.4', '0.6', 'add(3.4, 0.6)', 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3)', 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3), divide(#1, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [852353.0, 51206.0, 16.64557, 3.4, 0.6, 4.0, 6.3, 2.1], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 2.1}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value of the aptiv plc in 2018?\nA1: 130.8\nQ2: what was, then, the change in its value, considering 2018 and the original amount invested in it in 2013?\nA2: 30.8', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities our ordinary shares have been publicly traded since november 17 , 2011 when our ordinary shares were listed and began trading on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) under the symbol 201cdlph . 201d on december 4 , 2017 , following the spin-off of delphi technologies , the company changed its name to aptiv plc and its nyse symbol to 201captv . 201d as of january 25 , 2019 , there were 2 shareholders of record of our ordinary shares . the following graph reflects the comparative changes in the value from december 31 , 2013 through december 31 , 2018 , assuming an initial investment of $ 100 and the reinvestment of dividends , if any in ( 1 ) our ordinary shares , ( 2 ) the s&p 500 index and ( 3 ) the automotive peer group . historical share prices of our ordinary shares have been adjusted to reflect the separation . historical performance may not be indicative of future shareholder returns . stock performance graph * $ 100 invested on december 31 , 2013 in our stock or in the relevant index , including reinvestment of dividends . fiscal year ended december 31 , 2018 . ( 1 ) aptiv plc , adjusted for the distribution of delphi technologies on december 4 , 2017 ( 2 ) s&p 500 2013 standard & poor 2019s 500 total return index ( 3 ) automotive peer group 2013 adient plc , american axle & manufacturing holdings inc , aptiv plc , borgwarner inc , cooper tire & rubber co , cooper- standard holdings inc , dana inc , dorman products inc , ford motor co , garrett motion inc. , general motors co , gentex corp , gentherm inc , genuine parts co , goodyear tire & rubber co , lear corp , lkq corp , meritor inc , motorcar parts of america inc , standard motor products inc , stoneridge inc , superior industries international inc , tenneco inc , tesla inc , tower international inc , visteon corp , wabco holdings inc company index december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| december 31 2013 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| december 31 2014 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 |\n| december 31 2015 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 |\n| december 31 2016 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 |\n| december 31 2017 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 |\n| december 31 2018 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 |', 'question': 'and what was the change in the value of the automotive peer group, considering the 2018 one and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'ops': 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_APTV/2018/page_36.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'part ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities our ordinary shares have been publicly traded since november 17 , 2011 when our ordinary shares were listed and began trading on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) under the symbol 201cdlph . 201d on december 4 , 2017 , following the spin-off of delphi technologies , the company changed its name to aptiv plc and its nyse symbol to 201captv . 201d as of january 25 , 2019 , there were 2 shareholders of record of our ordinary shares . the following graph reflects the comparative changes in the value from december 31 , 2013 through december 31 , 2018 , assuming an initial investment of $ 100 and the reinvestment of dividends , if any in ( 1 ) our ordinary shares , ( 2 ) the s&p 500 index and ( 3 ) the automotive peer group . historical share prices of our ordinary shares have been adjusted to reflect the separation . historical performance may not be indicative of future shareholder returns . stock performance graph * $ 100 invested on december 31 , 2013 in our stock or in the relevant index , including reinvestment of dividends . fiscal year ended december 31 , 2018 . ( 1 ) aptiv plc , adjusted for the distribution of delphi technologies on december 4 , 2017 ( 2 ) s&p 500 2013 standard & poor 2019s 500 total return index ( 3 ) automotive peer group 2013 adient plc , american axle & manufacturing holdings inc , aptiv plc , borgwarner inc , cooper tire & rubber co , cooper- standard holdings inc , dana inc , dorman products inc , ford motor co , garrett motion inc. , general motors co , gentex corp , gentherm inc , genuine parts co , goodyear tire & rubber co , lear corp , lkq corp , meritor inc , motorcar parts of america inc , standard motor products inc , stoneridge inc , superior industries international inc , tenneco inc , tesla inc , tower international inc , visteon corp , wabco holdings inc company index december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'december 31 2013': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 100.0, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 100.0, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 100.0}, 'december 31 2014': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 122.75, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 113.69, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 107.96}, 'december 31 2015': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 146.49, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 115.26, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 108.05}, 'december 31 2016': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 117.11, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 129.05, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 107.72}, 'december 31 2017': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 178.46, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 157.22, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 134.04}, 'december 31 2018': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 130.8, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 150.33, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 106.89}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of the aptiv plc in 2018?', 'what was, then, the change in its value, considering 2018 and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'and what was the change in the value of the automotive peer group, considering the 2018 one and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'how much does the change in the value of the aptiv plc represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?', 'and how much does the change in the value of the automotive peer group represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?', 'what is, then, the difference between the percentage change of the aptiv plc and the automotive peer group one?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['130.80', '30.8', '6.89', '30.8%', '6.89%', '23.91%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['130.80', 'subtract(130.80, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), divide(#1, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), divide(#1, const_100), subtract(#2, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [130.8, 30.8, 6.89, 0.308, 0.0689, 0.2391], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 6.89}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "51s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the net change in weighted-average supply of berths market ed globally from 2012 to 2016?\nA1: 68000.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nthe following table details the growth in global weighted average berths and the global , north american , european and asia/pacific cruise guests over the past five years ( in thousands , except berth data ) : weighted- average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 ) global cruise guests ( 1 ) american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 ) european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 ) asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n_______________________________________________________________________________ ( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources . we use data obtained from seatrade insider , cruise industry news and company press releases to estimate weighted-average supply of berths and clia and g.p . wild to estimate cruise guest information . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) total berths include our berths related to our global brands and partner brands . ( 3 ) our estimates include the united states and canada . ( 4 ) our estimates include european countries relevant to the industry ( e.g. , nordics , germany , france , italy , spain and the united kingdom ) . ( 5 ) our estimates include the southeast asia ( e.g. , singapore , thailand and the philippines ) , east asia ( e.g. , china and japan ) , south asia ( e.g. , india and pakistan ) and oceanian ( e.g. , australia and fiji islands ) regions . north america the majority of industry cruise guests are sourced from north america , which represented approximately 52% ( 52 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 2% ( 2 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . europe industry cruise guests sourced from europe represented approximately 27% ( 27 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 1% ( 1 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . asia/pacific industry cruise guests sourced from the asia/pacific region represented approximately 15% ( 15 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 25% ( 25 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . the asia/pacific region is experiencing the highest growth rate of the major regions , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america . competition we compete with a number of cruise lines . our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise line , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , p&o cruises , princess cruises and seabourn ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; and norwegian cruise line holdings ltd , which owns norwegian cruise line , oceania cruises and regent seven seas cruises . cruise lines compete with .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 ) | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 |\n| royal caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 ) | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 |\n| globalcruiseguests ( 1 ) | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 |\n| north american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 ) | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 |\n| european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 ) | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 |\n| asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 ) | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 |', 'question': 'what percentage change does this represent?', 'ops': 'subtract(493000, 425000), divide(#0, 425000)', 'id': 'Single_RCL/2016/page_7.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': 'the following table details the growth in global weighted average berths and the global , north american , european and asia/pacific cruise guests over the past five years ( in thousands , except berth data ) : weighted- average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 ) global cruise guests ( 1 ) american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 ) european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 ) asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 ) .', 'doc_post_text': '_______________________________________________________________________________ ( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources . we use data obtained from seatrade insider , cruise industry news and company press releases to estimate weighted-average supply of berths and clia and g.p . wild to estimate cruise guest information . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) total berths include our berths related to our global brands and partner brands . ( 3 ) our estimates include the united states and canada . ( 4 ) our estimates include european countries relevant to the industry ( e.g. , nordics , germany , france , italy , spain and the united kingdom ) . ( 5 ) our estimates include the southeast asia ( e.g. , singapore , thailand and the philippines ) , east asia ( e.g. , china and japan ) , south asia ( e.g. , india and pakistan ) and oceanian ( e.g. , australia and fiji islands ) regions . north america the majority of industry cruise guests are sourced from north america , which represented approximately 52% ( 52 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 2% ( 2 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . europe industry cruise guests sourced from europe represented approximately 27% ( 27 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 1% ( 1 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . asia/pacific industry cruise guests sourced from the asia/pacific region represented approximately 15% ( 15 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 25% ( 25 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . the asia/pacific region is experiencing the highest growth rate of the major regions , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america . competition we compete with a number of cruise lines . our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise line , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , p&o cruises , princess cruises and seabourn ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; and norwegian cruise line holdings ltd , which owns norwegian cruise line , oceania cruises and regent seven seas cruises . cruise lines compete with .', 'doc_table': {'weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 )': {'2012': 425000.0, '2013': 432000.0, '2014': 448000.0, '2015': 469000.0, '2016': 493000.0}, 'royal caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 )': {'2012': 98650.0, '2013': 98750.0, '2014': 105750.0, '2015': 112700.0, '2016': 123270.0}, 'globalcruiseguests ( 1 )': {'2012': 20813.0, '2013': 21343.0, '2014': 22039.0, '2015': 23000.0, '2016': 24000.0}, 'north american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 )': {'2012': 11641.0, '2013': 11710.0, '2014': 12269.0, '2015': 12004.0, '2016': 12581.0}, 'european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 )': {'2012': 6225.0, '2013': 6430.0, '2014': 6387.0, '2015': 6587.0, '2016': 6542.0}, 'asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 )': {'2012': 1474.0, '2013': 2045.0, '2014': 2382.0, '2015': 3129.0, '2016': 3636.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in weighted-average supply of berths market ed globally from 2012 to 2016?', 'what percentage change does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['68000', '16%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(493000, 425000)', 'subtract(493000, 425000), divide(#0, 425000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [68000.0, 0.16], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.16}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "47s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the north american industrial packaging net sales in 2012?\nA1: 11.6\nQ2: and converted to the thousands?\nA2: 11600.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n( $ 125 million ) and higher maintenance outage costs ( $ 18 million ) . additionally , operating profits in 2012 include costs of $ 184 million associated with the acquisition and integration of temple-inland , mill divestiture costs of $ 91 million , costs associated with the restructuring of our european packaging busi- ness of $ 17 million and a $ 3 million gain for other items , while operating costs in 2011 included costs associated with signing an agreement to acquire temple-inland of $ 20 million and a gain of $ 7 million for other items . industrial packaging .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnorth american industr ia l packaging net sales were $ 11.6 billion in 2012 compared with $ 8.6 billion in 2011 and $ 8.4 billion in 2010 . operating profits in 2012 were $ 1.0 billion ( $ 1.3 billion exclud- ing costs associated with the acquisition and integration of temple-inland and mill divestiture costs ) compared with $ 1.1 billion ( both including and excluding costs associated with signing an agree- ment to acquire temple-inland ) in 2011 and $ 763 million ( $ 776 million excluding facility closure costs ) in 2010 . sales volumes for the legacy business were about flat in 2012 compared with 2011 . average sales price was lower mainly due to export containerboard sales prices which bottomed out in the first quarter but climbed steadily the rest of the year . input costs were lower for recycled fiber , wood and natural gas , but higher for starch . freight costs also increased . plan- ned maintenance downtime costs were higher than in 2011 . operating costs were higher largely due to routine inventory valuation adjustments operating profits in 2012 benefited from $ 235 million of temple-inland synergies . market-related downtime in 2012 was about 570000 tons compared with about 380000 tons in 2011 . operating profits in 2012 included $ 184 million of costs associated with the acquisition and integration of temple-inland and $ 91 million of costs associated with the divestiture of three containerboard mills . operating profits in 2011 included charges of $ 20 million for costs associated with the signing of the agreement to acquire temple- inland . looking ahead to 2013 , sales volumes in the first quarter compared with the fourth quarter of 2012 are expected to increase slightly for boxes due to a higher number of shipping days . average sales price realizations are expected to reflect the pass-through to box customers of a containerboard price increase implemented in 2012 . input costs are expected to be higher for recycled fiber , wood and starch . planned maintenance downtime costs are expected to be about $ 26 million higher with outages scheduled at eight mills compared with six mills in the 2012 fourth quarter . manufacturing operating costs are expected to be lower . european industr ia l packaging net sales were $ 1.0 billion in 2012 compared with $ 1.1 billion in 2011 and $ 990 million in 2010 . operating profits in 2012 were $ 53 million ( $ 72 million excluding restructuring costs ) compared with $ 66 million ( $ 61 million excluding a gain for a bargain purchase price adjustment on an acquisition by our joint venture in turkey and costs associated with the closure of our etienne mill in france in 2009 ) in 2011 and $ 70 mil- lion ( $ 73 million before closure costs for our etienne mill ) in 2010 . sales volumes in 2012 were lower than in 2011 reflecting decreased demand for packaging in the industrial market due to a weaker overall economic environment in southern europe . demand for pack- aging in the agricultural markets was about flat year- over-year . average sales margins increased due to sales price increases implemented during 2011 and 2012 and lower board costs . other input costs were higher , primarily for energy and distribution . operat- ing profits in 2012 included a net gain of $ 10 million for an insurance settlement , partially offset by addi- tional operating costs , related to the earthquakes in northern italy in may which affected our san felice box plant . entering the first quarter of 2013 , sales volumes are expected to be stable reflecting a seasonal decrease in market demand in agricultural markets offset by an increase in industrial markets . average sales margins are expected to improve due to lower input costs for containerboard . other input costs should be about flat . operating costs are expected to be higher reflecting the absence of the earthquake insurance settlement that was received in the 2012 fourth quar- asian industr ia l packaging net sales and operating profits include the results of sca pack- aging since the acquisition on june 30 , 2010 , includ- ing the impact of incremental integration costs . net sales for the packaging operations were $ 400 million in 2012 compared with $ 410 million in 2011 and $ 255 million in 2010 . operating profits for the packaging operations were $ 2 million in 2012 compared with $ 2 million in 2011 and a loss of $ 7 million ( a loss of $ 4 million excluding facility closure costs ) in 2010 . operating profits were favorably impacted by higher average sales margins in 2012 compared with 2011 , but this benefit was offset by lower sales volumes and higher raw material costs and operating costs . looking ahead to the first quarter of 2013 , sales volumes and average sales margins are expected to decrease due to seasonality . net sales for the distribution operations were $ 260 million in 2012 compared with $ 285 million in 2011 and $ 240 million in 2010 . operating profits were $ 3 million in 2012 compared with $ 3 million in 2011 and about breakeven in 2010. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | sales | operating profit | sales | operating profit | sales | operating profit |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2012 | 13280.0 | 1066.0 | 13280.0 | 1066.0 | 13280.0 | 1066.0 |\n| 2011 | 10430.0 | 1147.0 | 10430.0 | 1147.0 | 10430.0 | 1147.0 |\n| 2010 | 9840.0 | 826.0 | 9840.0 | 826.0 | 9840.0 | 826.0 |', 'question': 'so what was the percentage of north american industrial packaging net sales to industrial packaging sales during this year?', 'ops': 'multiply(11.6, const_1000), divide(#0, 13280)', 'id': 'Single_IP/2012/page_55.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': '( $ 125 million ) and higher maintenance outage costs ( $ 18 million ) . additionally , operating profits in 2012 include costs of $ 184 million associated with the acquisition and integration of temple-inland , mill divestiture costs of $ 91 million , costs associated with the restructuring of our european packaging busi- ness of $ 17 million and a $ 3 million gain for other items , while operating costs in 2011 included costs associated with signing an agreement to acquire temple-inland of $ 20 million and a gain of $ 7 million for other items . industrial packaging .', 'doc_post_text': 'north american industr ia l packaging net sales were $ 11.6 billion in 2012 compared with $ 8.6 billion in 2011 and $ 8.4 billion in 2010 . operating profits in 2012 were $ 1.0 billion ( $ 1.3 billion exclud- ing costs associated with the acquisition and integration of temple-inland and mill divestiture costs ) compared with $ 1.1 billion ( both including and excluding costs associated with signing an agree- ment to acquire temple-inland ) in 2011 and $ 763 million ( $ 776 million excluding facility closure costs ) in 2010 . sales volumes for the legacy business were about flat in 2012 compared with 2011 . average sales price was lower mainly due to export containerboard sales prices which bottomed out in the first quarter but climbed steadily the rest of the year . input costs were lower for recycled fiber , wood and natural gas , but higher for starch . freight costs also increased . plan- ned maintenance downtime costs were higher than in 2011 . operating costs were higher largely due to routine inventory valuation adjustments operating profits in 2012 benefited from $ 235 million of temple-inland synergies . market-related downtime in 2012 was about 570000 tons compared with about 380000 tons in 2011 . operating profits in 2012 included $ 184 million of costs associated with the acquisition and integration of temple-inland and $ 91 million of costs associated with the divestiture of three containerboard mills . operating profits in 2011 included charges of $ 20 million for costs associated with the signing of the agreement to acquire temple- inland . looking ahead to 2013 , sales volumes in the first quarter compared with the fourth quarter of 2012 are expected to increase slightly for boxes due to a higher number of shipping days . average sales price realizations are expected to reflect the pass-through to box customers of a containerboard price increase implemented in 2012 . input costs are expected to be higher for recycled fiber , wood and starch . planned maintenance downtime costs are expected to be about $ 26 million higher with outages scheduled at eight mills compared with six mills in the 2012 fourth quarter . manufacturing operating costs are expected to be lower . european industr ia l packaging net sales were $ 1.0 billion in 2012 compared with $ 1.1 billion in 2011 and $ 990 million in 2010 . operating profits in 2012 were $ 53 million ( $ 72 million excluding restructuring costs ) compared with $ 66 million ( $ 61 million excluding a gain for a bargain purchase price adjustment on an acquisition by our joint venture in turkey and costs associated with the closure of our etienne mill in france in 2009 ) in 2011 and $ 70 mil- lion ( $ 73 million before closure costs for our etienne mill ) in 2010 . sales volumes in 2012 were lower than in 2011 reflecting decreased demand for packaging in the industrial market due to a weaker overall economic environment in southern europe . demand for pack- aging in the agricultural markets was about flat year- over-year . average sales margins increased due to sales price increases implemented during 2011 and 2012 and lower board costs . other input costs were higher , primarily for energy and distribution . operat- ing profits in 2012 included a net gain of $ 10 million for an insurance settlement , partially offset by addi- tional operating costs , related to the earthquakes in northern italy in may which affected our san felice box plant . entering the first quarter of 2013 , sales volumes are expected to be stable reflecting a seasonal decrease in market demand in agricultural markets offset by an increase in industrial markets . average sales margins are expected to improve due to lower input costs for containerboard . other input costs should be about flat . operating costs are expected to be higher reflecting the absence of the earthquake insurance settlement that was received in the 2012 fourth quar- asian industr ia l packaging net sales and operating profits include the results of sca pack- aging since the acquisition on june 30 , 2010 , includ- ing the impact of incremental integration costs . net sales for the packaging operations were $ 400 million in 2012 compared with $ 410 million in 2011 and $ 255 million in 2010 . operating profits for the packaging operations were $ 2 million in 2012 compared with $ 2 million in 2011 and a loss of $ 7 million ( a loss of $ 4 million excluding facility closure costs ) in 2010 . operating profits were favorably impacted by higher average sales margins in 2012 compared with 2011 , but this benefit was offset by lower sales volumes and higher raw material costs and operating costs . looking ahead to the first quarter of 2013 , sales volumes and average sales margins are expected to decrease due to seasonality . net sales for the distribution operations were $ 260 million in 2012 compared with $ 285 million in 2011 and $ 240 million in 2010 . operating profits were $ 3 million in 2012 compared with $ 3 million in 2011 and about breakeven in 2010. .', 'doc_table': {'2012': {'sales': 13280.0, 'operating profit': 1066.0}, '2011': {'sales': 10430.0, 'operating profit': 1147.0}, '2010': {'sales': 9840.0, 'operating profit': 826.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the north american industrial packaging net sales in 2012?', 'and converted to the thousands?', 'so what was the percentage of north american industrial packaging net sales to industrial packaging sales during this year?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['11.6', '11600', '87%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['11.6', 'multiply(11.6, const_1000)', 'multiply(11.6, const_1000), divide(#0, 13280)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [11.6, 11600.0, 0.87349], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.87349}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total of benefit payments in 2012?\nA1: 3369.0\nQ2: and what was that in 2011?\nA2: 3028.0\nQ3: how much, then, does the 2012 total represent in relation to this 2011 one?\nA3: 1.11262\nQ4: and what is this value without the portion equivalent to the 2011 total?\nA4: 0.11262\nQ5: and concerning the the incremental severance expense, what was the amount of the one related to the severance plan in 2009?\nA5: 3471.0\nQ6: what was the total severance expense in that year?\nA6: 135113.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmastercard incorporated notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) ( in thousands , except percent and per share data ) the company does not make any contributions to its postretirement plan other than funding benefits payments . the following table summarizes expected net benefit payments from the company 2019s general assets through 2019 : benefit payments expected subsidy receipts benefit payments .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company provides limited postemployment benefits to eligible former u.s . employees , primarily severance under a formal severance plan ( the 201cseverance plan 201d ) . the company accounts for severance expense by accruing the expected cost of the severance benefits expected to be provided to former employees after employment over their relevant service periods . the company updates the assumptions in determining the severance accrual by evaluating the actual severance activity and long-term trends underlying the assumptions . as a result of updating the assumptions , the company recorded incremental severance expense ( benefit ) related to the severance plan of $ 3471 , $ 2643 and $ ( 3418 ) , respectively , during the years 2009 , 2008 and 2007 . these amounts were part of total severance expenses of $ 135113 , $ 32997 and $ 21284 in 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively , included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations . note 14 . debt on april 28 , 2008 , the company extended its committed unsecured revolving credit facility , dated as of april 28 , 2006 ( the 201ccredit facility 201d ) , for an additional year . the new expiration date of the credit facility is april 26 , 2011 . the available funding under the credit facility will remain at $ 2500000 through april 27 , 2010 and then decrease to $ 2000000 during the final year of the credit facility agreement . other terms and conditions in the credit facility remain unchanged . the company 2019s option to request that each lender under the credit facility extend its commitment was provided pursuant to the original terms of the credit facility agreement . borrowings under the facility are available to provide liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by mastercard international customers and , subject to a limit of $ 500000 , for general corporate purposes . the facility fee and borrowing cost are contingent upon the company 2019s credit rating . at december 31 , 2009 , the facility fee was 7 basis points on the total commitment , or approximately $ 1774 annually . interest on borrowings under the credit facility would be charged at the london interbank offered rate ( libor ) plus an applicable margin of 28 basis points or an alternative base rate , and a utilization fee of 10 basis points would be charged if outstanding borrowings under the facility exceed 50% ( 50 % ) of commitments . at the inception of the credit facility , the company also agreed to pay upfront fees of $ 1250 and administrative fees of $ 325 , which are being amortized over five years . facility and other fees associated with the credit facility totaled $ 2222 , $ 2353 and $ 2477 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . mastercard was in compliance with the covenants of the credit facility and had no borrowings under the credit facility at december 31 , 2009 or december 31 , 2008 . the majority of credit facility lenders are members or affiliates of members of mastercard international . in june 1998 , mastercard international issued ten-year unsecured , subordinated notes ( the 201cnotes 201d ) paying a fixed interest rate of 6.67% ( 6.67 % ) per annum . mastercard repaid the entire principal amount of $ 80000 on june 30 , 2008 pursuant to the terms of the notes . the interest expense on the notes was $ 2668 and $ 5336 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| benefit payments | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 |\n| expected subsidy receipts | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 |\n| net benefit payments | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 |', 'question': 'what percentage, then, of this total expense does that amount represent?', 'ops': 'divide(3471, 135113)', 'id': 'Double_MA/2009/page_115.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'mastercard incorporated notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) ( in thousands , except percent and per share data ) the company does not make any contributions to its postretirement plan other than funding benefits payments . the following table summarizes expected net benefit payments from the company 2019s general assets through 2019 : benefit payments expected subsidy receipts benefit payments .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company provides limited postemployment benefits to eligible former u.s . employees , primarily severance under a formal severance plan ( the 201cseverance plan 201d ) . the company accounts for severance expense by accruing the expected cost of the severance benefits expected to be provided to former employees after employment over their relevant service periods . the company updates the assumptions in determining the severance accrual by evaluating the actual severance activity and long-term trends underlying the assumptions . as a result of updating the assumptions , the company recorded incremental severance expense ( benefit ) related to the severance plan of $ 3471 , $ 2643 and $ ( 3418 ) , respectively , during the years 2009 , 2008 and 2007 . these amounts were part of total severance expenses of $ 135113 , $ 32997 and $ 21284 in 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively , included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations . note 14 . debt on april 28 , 2008 , the company extended its committed unsecured revolving credit facility , dated as of april 28 , 2006 ( the 201ccredit facility 201d ) , for an additional year . the new expiration date of the credit facility is april 26 , 2011 . the available funding under the credit facility will remain at $ 2500000 through april 27 , 2010 and then decrease to $ 2000000 during the final year of the credit facility agreement . other terms and conditions in the credit facility remain unchanged . the company 2019s option to request that each lender under the credit facility extend its commitment was provided pursuant to the original terms of the credit facility agreement . borrowings under the facility are available to provide liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by mastercard international customers and , subject to a limit of $ 500000 , for general corporate purposes . the facility fee and borrowing cost are contingent upon the company 2019s credit rating . at december 31 , 2009 , the facility fee was 7 basis points on the total commitment , or approximately $ 1774 annually . interest on borrowings under the credit facility would be charged at the london interbank offered rate ( libor ) plus an applicable margin of 28 basis points or an alternative base rate , and a utilization fee of 10 basis points would be charged if outstanding borrowings under the facility exceed 50% ( 50 % ) of commitments . at the inception of the credit facility , the company also agreed to pay upfront fees of $ 1250 and administrative fees of $ 325 , which are being amortized over five years . facility and other fees associated with the credit facility totaled $ 2222 , $ 2353 and $ 2477 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . mastercard was in compliance with the covenants of the credit facility and had no borrowings under the credit facility at december 31 , 2009 or december 31 , 2008 . the majority of credit facility lenders are members or affiliates of members of mastercard international . in june 1998 , mastercard international issued ten-year unsecured , subordinated notes ( the 201cnotes 201d ) paying a fixed interest rate of 6.67% ( 6.67 % ) per annum . mastercard repaid the entire principal amount of $ 80000 on june 30 , 2008 pursuant to the terms of the notes . the interest expense on the notes was $ 2668 and $ 5336 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively. .', 'doc_table': {'benefit payments': {'2010': 2714.0, '2011': 3028.0, '2012': 3369.0, '2013': 3660.0, '2014': 4019.0, '2015 2013 2019': 22686.0}, 'expected subsidy receipts': {'2010': 71.0, '2011': 91.0, '2012': 111.0, '2013': 134.0, '2014': 151.0, '2015 2013 2019': 1071.0}, 'net benefit payments': {'2010': 2643.0, '2011': 2937.0, '2012': 3258.0, '2013': 3526.0, '2014': 3868.0, '2015 2013 2019': 21615.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total of benefit payments in 2012?', 'and what was that in 2011?', 'how much, then, does the 2012 total represent in relation to this 2011 one?', 'and what is this value without the portion equivalent to the 2011 total?', 'and concerning the the incremental severance expense, what was the amount of the one related to the severance plan in 2009?', 'what was the total severance expense in that year?', 'what percentage, then, of this total expense does that amount represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3369', '3028', '1.1126', '11.26%', '3471', '135113', '2.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3369', '3028', 'divide(3369, 3028)', 'divide(3369, 3028), subtract(#0, const_1)', '3471', '135113', 'divide(3471, 135113)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3369.0, 3028.0, 1.11262, 0.11262, 3471.0, 135113.0, 0.02569], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.02569}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "46s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: in the year of 2007, what was the number of granted shares?\nA1: 852353.0\nQ2: and what was it for vested ones?\nA2: 51206.0\nQ3: how much, then, did the granted number represent in relation to the vested one?\nA3: 16.64557\nQ4: and in that same year, what was the fair value of these vested shares, in millions?\nA4: 3.4\nQ5: what was it for 2005?\nA5: 0.6', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nhumana inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during 2007 was $ 133.9 million , compared with $ 133.7 million during 2006 and $ 57.8 million during 2005 . cash received from stock option exercises for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 totaled $ 62.7 million , $ 49.2 million , and $ 36.4 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested options not yet recognized was $ 23.6 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.6 years . restricted stock awards restricted stock awards are granted with a fair value equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant . compensation expense is recorded straight-line over the vesting period , generally three years from the date of grant . the weighted average grant date fair value of our restricted stock awards was $ 63.59 , $ 54.36 , and $ 32.81 for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 , respectively . activity for our restricted stock awards was as follows for the year ended december 31 , 2007 : shares weighted average grant-date fair value .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe fair value of shares vested during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 was $ 3.4 million , $ 2.3 million , and $ 0.6 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock awards not yet recognized was $ 44.7 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.4 years . there are no other contractual terms covering restricted stock awards once vested. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006 | granted | vested | forfeited | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007 | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006 | granted | vested | forfeited | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| shares | 1107455.0 | 852353.0 | -51206.0 | -63624.0 | 1844978.0 | 1107455.0 | 852353.0 | -51206.0 | -63624.0 | 1844978.0 |\n| weighted average grant-date fair value | 45.86 | 63.59 | 56.93 | 49.65 | 53.61 | 45.86 | 63.59 | 56.93 | 49.65 | 53.61 |', 'question': 'what was, then, the total combined fair value for both years, in millions?', 'ops': 'add(3.4, 0.6)', 'id': 'Double_HUM/2007/page_96.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'humana inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during 2007 was $ 133.9 million , compared with $ 133.7 million during 2006 and $ 57.8 million during 2005 . cash received from stock option exercises for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 totaled $ 62.7 million , $ 49.2 million , and $ 36.4 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested options not yet recognized was $ 23.6 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.6 years . restricted stock awards restricted stock awards are granted with a fair value equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant . compensation expense is recorded straight-line over the vesting period , generally three years from the date of grant . the weighted average grant date fair value of our restricted stock awards was $ 63.59 , $ 54.36 , and $ 32.81 for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 , respectively . activity for our restricted stock awards was as follows for the year ended december 31 , 2007 : shares weighted average grant-date fair value .', 'doc_post_text': 'the fair value of shares vested during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 was $ 3.4 million , $ 2.3 million , and $ 0.6 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock awards not yet recognized was $ 44.7 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.4 years . there are no other contractual terms covering restricted stock awards once vested. .', 'doc_table': {'shares': {'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006': 1107455.0, 'granted': 852353.0, 'vested': -51206.0, 'forfeited': -63624.0, 'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007': 1844978.0}, 'weighted average grant-date fair value': {'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006': 45.86, 'granted': 63.59, 'vested': 56.93, 'forfeited': 49.65, 'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007': 53.61}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['in the year of 2007, what was the number of granted shares?', 'and what was it for vested ones?', 'how much, then, did the granted number represent in relation to the vested one?', 'and in that same year, what was the fair value of these vested shares, in millions?', 'what was it for 2005?', 'what was, then, the total combined fair value for both years, in millions?', 'including 2006, what becomes this total?', 'and what was, in millions, the average between the three years?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['852353', '51206', '16.65', '3.4', '0.6', '4', '6.3', '2.1'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['852353', '51206', 'divide(852353, 51206)', '3.4', '0.6', 'add(3.4, 0.6)', 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3)', 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3), divide(#1, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [852353.0, 51206.0, 16.64557, 3.4, 0.6, 4.0, 6.3, 2.1], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 4.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "46s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amortization expense in 2009?\nA1: 7.4\nQ2: and what was it in 2008?\nA2: 9.3\nQ3: what was, then, the change over the year?\nA3: -1.9\nQ4: and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2008 amortization expense?\nA4: -0.2043', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nintangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives or on an accelerated method of amortization that is expected to reflect the estimated pattern of economic use . the remaining amortization expense will be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 0.9 years . amortization expense from continuing operations , related to intangibles was $ 7.4 million , $ 9.3 million and $ 9.2 million in fiscal 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . the company expects annual amortization expense for these intangible assets to be: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ng . grant accounting certain of the company 2019s foreign subsidiaries have received various grants from governmental agencies . these grants include capital , employment and research and development grants . capital grants for the acquisition of property and equipment are netted against the related capital expenditures and amortized as a credit to depreciation expense over the useful life of the related asset . employment grants , which relate to employee hiring and training , and research and development grants are recognized in earnings in the period in which the related expenditures are incurred by the company . h . translation of foreign currencies the functional currency for the company 2019s foreign sales and research and development operations is the applicable local currency . gains and losses resulting from translation of these foreign currencies into u.s . dollars are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income . transaction gains and losses and remeasurement of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities are included in income currently , including those at the company 2019s principal foreign manufacturing operations where the functional currency is the u.s . dollar . foreign currency transaction gains or losses included in other expenses , net , were not material in fiscal 2009 , 2008 or 2007 . i . derivative instruments and hedging agreements foreign exchange exposure management 2014 the company enters into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to offset certain operational and balance sheet exposures from the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates . such exposures result from the portion of the company 2019s operations , assets and liabilities that are denominated in currencies other than the u.s . dollar , primarily the euro ; other exposures include the philippine peso and the british pound . these foreign currency exchange contracts are entered into to support transactions made in the normal course of business , and accordingly , are not speculative in nature . the contracts are for periods consistent with the terms of the underlying transactions , generally one year or less . hedges related to anticipated transactions are designated and documented at the inception of the respective hedges as cash flow hedges and are evaluated for effectiveness monthly . derivative instruments are employed to eliminate or minimize certain foreign currency exposures that can be confidently identified and quantified . as the terms of the contract and the underlying transaction are matched at inception , forward contract effectiveness is calculated by comparing the change in fair value of the contract to the change in the forward value of the anticipated transaction , with the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income ( oci ) in shareholders 2019 equity and reclassified into earnings in the same period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings . any residual change in fair value of the instruments , or ineffectiveness , is recognized immediately in other income/expense . additionally , the company enters into forward foreign currency contracts that economically hedge the gains and losses generated by the remeasurement of certain recorded assets and liabilities in a non-functional currency . changes in the fair value of these undesignated hedges are recognized in other income/expense immediately as an offset to the changes in the fair value of the asset or liability being hedged . analog devices , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 |\n|---|---|---|\n| amortization expense | 5425.0 | 1430.0 |', 'question': 'and in 2010, what was this amortization expense, in millions?', 'ops': 'divide(5425, const_1000)', 'id': 'Double_ADI/2009/page_59.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives or on an accelerated method of amortization that is expected to reflect the estimated pattern of economic use . the remaining amortization expense will be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 0.9 years . amortization expense from continuing operations , related to intangibles was $ 7.4 million , $ 9.3 million and $ 9.2 million in fiscal 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . the company expects annual amortization expense for these intangible assets to be: .', 'doc_post_text': 'g . grant accounting certain of the company 2019s foreign subsidiaries have received various grants from governmental agencies . these grants include capital , employment and research and development grants . capital grants for the acquisition of property and equipment are netted against the related capital expenditures and amortized as a credit to depreciation expense over the useful life of the related asset . employment grants , which relate to employee hiring and training , and research and development grants are recognized in earnings in the period in which the related expenditures are incurred by the company . h . translation of foreign currencies the functional currency for the company 2019s foreign sales and research and development operations is the applicable local currency . gains and losses resulting from translation of these foreign currencies into u.s . dollars are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income . transaction gains and losses and remeasurement of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities are included in income currently , including those at the company 2019s principal foreign manufacturing operations where the functional currency is the u.s . dollar . foreign currency transaction gains or losses included in other expenses , net , were not material in fiscal 2009 , 2008 or 2007 . i . derivative instruments and hedging agreements foreign exchange exposure management 2014 the company enters into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to offset certain operational and balance sheet exposures from the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates . such exposures result from the portion of the company 2019s operations , assets and liabilities that are denominated in currencies other than the u.s . dollar , primarily the euro ; other exposures include the philippine peso and the british pound . these foreign currency exchange contracts are entered into to support transactions made in the normal course of business , and accordingly , are not speculative in nature . the contracts are for periods consistent with the terms of the underlying transactions , generally one year or less . hedges related to anticipated transactions are designated and documented at the inception of the respective hedges as cash flow hedges and are evaluated for effectiveness monthly . derivative instruments are employed to eliminate or minimize certain foreign currency exposures that can be confidently identified and quantified . as the terms of the contract and the underlying transaction are matched at inception , forward contract effectiveness is calculated by comparing the change in fair value of the contract to the change in the forward value of the anticipated transaction , with the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income ( oci ) in shareholders 2019 equity and reclassified into earnings in the same period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings . any residual change in fair value of the instruments , or ineffectiveness , is recognized immediately in other income/expense . additionally , the company enters into forward foreign currency contracts that economically hedge the gains and losses generated by the remeasurement of certain recorded assets and liabilities in a non-functional currency . changes in the fair value of these undesignated hedges are recognized in other income/expense immediately as an offset to the changes in the fair value of the asset or liability being hedged . analog devices , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) .', 'doc_table': {'amortization expense': {'2010': 5425.0, '2011': 1430.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amortization expense in 2009?', 'and what was it in 2008?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2008 amortization expense?', 'and in 2010, what was this amortization expense, in millions?', 'what was, then, the change since 2009?', 'and what is this change as a portion of the 2009 amortization expense?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['7.4', '9.3', '-1.9', '-20.4%', '5.4', '-2', '-27.0%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['7.4', '9.3', 'subtract(7.4, 9.3)', 'subtract(7.4, 9.3), divide(#0, 9.3)', 'divide(5425, const_1000)', 'divide(5425, const_1000), subtract(#0, 7.4)', 'divide(5425, const_1000), subtract(#0, 7.4), divide(#1, 7.4)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [7.4, 9.3, -1.9, -0.2043, 5.425, -1.975, -0.26689], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 5.425}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "46s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the principal amount by the interest rate for unsecured notes issued in 2016?\nA1: 33.25\nQ2: what was the principal amount?\nA2: 700.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nnew term loan a facility , with the remaining unpaid principal amount of loans under the new term loan a facility due and payable in full at maturity on june 6 , 2021 . principal amounts outstanding under the new revolving loan facility are due and payable in full at maturity on june 6 , 2021 , subject to earlier repayment pursuant to the springing maturity date described above . in addition to paying interest on outstanding principal under the borrowings , we are obligated to pay a quarterly commitment fee at a rate determined by reference to a total leverage ratio , with a maximum commitment fee of 40% ( 40 % ) of the applicable margin for eurocurrency loans . in july 2016 , breakaway four , ltd. , as borrower , and nclc , as guarantor , entered into a supplemental agreement , which amended the breakaway four loan to , among other things , increase the aggregate principal amount of commitments under the multi-draw term loan credit facility from 20ac590.5 million to 20ac729.9 million . in june 2016 , we took delivery of seven seas explorer . to finance the payment due upon delivery , we had export credit financing in place for 80% ( 80 % ) of the contract price . the associated $ 373.6 million term loan bears interest at 3.43% ( 3.43 % ) with a maturity date of june 30 , 2028 . principal and interest payments shall be paid semiannually . in december 2016 , nclc issued $ 700.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.750% ( 4.750 % ) senior unsecured notes due december 2021 ( the 201cnotes 201d ) in a private offering ( the 201coffering 201d ) at par . nclc used the net proceeds from the offering , after deducting the initial purchasers 2019 discount and estimated fees and expenses , together with cash on hand , to purchase its outstanding 5.25% ( 5.25 % ) senior notes due 2019 having an aggregate outstanding principal amount of $ 680 million . the redemption of the 5.25% ( 5.25 % ) senior notes due 2019 was completed in january 2017 . nclc will pay interest on the notes at 4.750% ( 4.750 % ) per annum , semiannually on june 15 and december 15 of each year , commencing on june 15 , 2017 , to holders of record at the close of business on the immediately preceding june 1 and december 1 , respectively . nclc may redeem the notes , in whole or part , at any time prior to december 15 , 2018 , at a price equal to 100% ( 100 % ) of the principal amount of the notes redeemed plus accrued and unpaid interest to , but not including , the redemption date and a 201cmake-whole premium . 201d nclc may redeem the notes , in whole or in part , on or after december 15 , 2018 , at the redemption prices set forth in the indenture governing the notes . at any time ( which may be more than once ) on or prior to december 15 , 2018 , nclc may choose to redeem up to 40% ( 40 % ) of the aggregate principal amount of the notes at a redemption price equal to 104.750% ( 104.750 % ) of the face amount thereof with an amount equal to the net proceeds of one or more equity offerings , so long as at least 60% ( 60 % ) of the aggregate principal amount of the notes issued remains outstanding following such redemption . the indenture governing the notes contains covenants that limit nclc 2019s ability ( and its restricted subsidiaries 2019 ability ) to , among other things : ( i ) incur or guarantee additional indebtedness or issue certain preferred shares ; ( ii ) pay dividends and make certain other restricted payments ; ( iii ) create restrictions on the payment of dividends or other distributions to nclc from its restricted subsidiaries ; ( iv ) create liens on certain assets to secure debt ; ( v ) make certain investments ; ( vi ) engage in transactions with affiliates ; ( vii ) engage in sales of assets and subsidiary stock ; and ( viii ) transfer all or substantially all of its assets or enter into merger or consolidation transactions . the indenture governing the notes also provides for events of default , which , if any of them occurs , would permit or require the principal , premium ( if any ) , interest and other monetary obligations on all of the then-outstanding notes to become due and payable immediately . interest expense , net for the year ended december 31 , 2016 was $ 276.9 million which included $ 34.7 million of amortization of deferred financing fees and a $ 27.7 million loss on extinguishment of debt . interest expense , net for the year ended december 31 , 2015 was $ 221.9 million which included $ 36.7 million of amortization of deferred financing fees and a $ 12.7 million loss on extinguishment of debt . interest expense , net for the year ended december 31 , 2014 was $ 151.8 million which included $ 32.3 million of amortization of deferred financing fees and $ 15.4 million of expenses related to financing transactions in connection with the acquisition of prestige . certain of our debt agreements contain covenants that , among other things , require us to maintain a minimum level of liquidity , as well as limit our net funded debt-to-capital ratio , maintain certain other ratios and restrict our ability to pay dividends . substantially all of our ships and other property and equipment are pledged as collateral for certain of our debt . we believe we were in compliance with these covenants as of december 31 , 2016 . the following are scheduled principal repayments on long-term debt including capital lease obligations as of december 31 , 2016 for each of the next five years ( in thousands ) : .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nwe had an accrued interest liability of $ 32.5 million and $ 34.2 million as of december 31 , 2016 and 2015 , respectively. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | thereafter | total |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount | 560193.0 | 554846.0 | 561687.0 | 1153733.0 | 2193823.0 | 1490322.0 | 6514604.0 |', 'question': 'what is the prior product plus the principal value?', 'ops': 'multiply(700.0, 4.750%), add(#0, 700.0)', 'id': 'Single_NCLH/2016/page_84.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'new term loan a facility , with the remaining unpaid principal amount of loans under the new term loan a facility due and payable in full at maturity on june 6 , 2021 . principal amounts outstanding under the new revolving loan facility are due and payable in full at maturity on june 6 , 2021 , subject to earlier repayment pursuant to the springing maturity date described above . in addition to paying interest on outstanding principal under the borrowings , we are obligated to pay a quarterly commitment fee at a rate determined by reference to a total leverage ratio , with a maximum commitment fee of 40% ( 40 % ) of the applicable margin for eurocurrency loans . in july 2016 , breakaway four , ltd. , as borrower , and nclc , as guarantor , entered into a supplemental agreement , which amended the breakaway four loan to , among other things , increase the aggregate principal amount of commitments under the multi-draw term loan credit facility from 20ac590.5 million to 20ac729.9 million . in june 2016 , we took delivery of seven seas explorer . to finance the payment due upon delivery , we had export credit financing in place for 80% ( 80 % ) of the contract price . the associated $ 373.6 million term loan bears interest at 3.43% ( 3.43 % ) with a maturity date of june 30 , 2028 . principal and interest payments shall be paid semiannually . in december 2016 , nclc issued $ 700.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.750% ( 4.750 % ) senior unsecured notes due december 2021 ( the 201cnotes 201d ) in a private offering ( the 201coffering 201d ) at par . nclc used the net proceeds from the offering , after deducting the initial purchasers 2019 discount and estimated fees and expenses , together with cash on hand , to purchase its outstanding 5.25% ( 5.25 % ) senior notes due 2019 having an aggregate outstanding principal amount of $ 680 million . the redemption of the 5.25% ( 5.25 % ) senior notes due 2019 was completed in january 2017 . nclc will pay interest on the notes at 4.750% ( 4.750 % ) per annum , semiannually on june 15 and december 15 of each year , commencing on june 15 , 2017 , to holders of record at the close of business on the immediately preceding june 1 and december 1 , respectively . nclc may redeem the notes , in whole or part , at any time prior to december 15 , 2018 , at a price equal to 100% ( 100 % ) of the principal amount of the notes redeemed plus accrued and unpaid interest to , but not including , the redemption date and a 201cmake-whole premium . 201d nclc may redeem the notes , in whole or in part , on or after december 15 , 2018 , at the redemption prices set forth in the indenture governing the notes . at any time ( which may be more than once ) on or prior to december 15 , 2018 , nclc may choose to redeem up to 40% ( 40 % ) of the aggregate principal amount of the notes at a redemption price equal to 104.750% ( 104.750 % ) of the face amount thereof with an amount equal to the net proceeds of one or more equity offerings , so long as at least 60% ( 60 % ) of the aggregate principal amount of the notes issued remains outstanding following such redemption . the indenture governing the notes contains covenants that limit nclc 2019s ability ( and its restricted subsidiaries 2019 ability ) to , among other things : ( i ) incur or guarantee additional indebtedness or issue certain preferred shares ; ( ii ) pay dividends and make certain other restricted payments ; ( iii ) create restrictions on the payment of dividends or other distributions to nclc from its restricted subsidiaries ; ( iv ) create liens on certain assets to secure debt ; ( v ) make certain investments ; ( vi ) engage in transactions with affiliates ; ( vii ) engage in sales of assets and subsidiary stock ; and ( viii ) transfer all or substantially all of its assets or enter into merger or consolidation transactions . the indenture governing the notes also provides for events of default , which , if any of them occurs , would permit or require the principal , premium ( if any ) , interest and other monetary obligations on all of the then-outstanding notes to become due and payable immediately . interest expense , net for the year ended december 31 , 2016 was $ 276.9 million which included $ 34.7 million of amortization of deferred financing fees and a $ 27.7 million loss on extinguishment of debt . interest expense , net for the year ended december 31 , 2015 was $ 221.9 million which included $ 36.7 million of amortization of deferred financing fees and a $ 12.7 million loss on extinguishment of debt . interest expense , net for the year ended december 31 , 2014 was $ 151.8 million which included $ 32.3 million of amortization of deferred financing fees and $ 15.4 million of expenses related to financing transactions in connection with the acquisition of prestige . certain of our debt agreements contain covenants that , among other things , require us to maintain a minimum level of liquidity , as well as limit our net funded debt-to-capital ratio , maintain certain other ratios and restrict our ability to pay dividends . substantially all of our ships and other property and equipment are pledged as collateral for certain of our debt . we believe we were in compliance with these covenants as of december 31 , 2016 . the following are scheduled principal repayments on long-term debt including capital lease obligations as of december 31 , 2016 for each of the next five years ( in thousands ) : .', 'doc_post_text': 'we had an accrued interest liability of $ 32.5 million and $ 34.2 million as of december 31 , 2016 and 2015 , respectively. .', 'doc_table': {'amount': {'2017': 560193.0, '2018': 554846.0, '2019': 561687.0, '2020': 1153733.0, '2021': 2193823.0, 'thereafter': 1490322.0, 'total': 6514604.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the principal amount by the interest rate for unsecured notes issued in 2016?', 'what was the principal amount?', 'what is the prior product plus the principal value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['33.35', '700.0', '733.35'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(700.0, 4.750%)', '700.0', 'multiply(700.0, 4.750%), add(#0, 700.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [33.25, 700.0, 733.25], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 733.25}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "46s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value of the aptiv plc in 2018?\nA1: 130.8', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities our ordinary shares have been publicly traded since november 17 , 2011 when our ordinary shares were listed and began trading on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) under the symbol 201cdlph . 201d on december 4 , 2017 , following the spin-off of delphi technologies , the company changed its name to aptiv plc and its nyse symbol to 201captv . 201d as of january 25 , 2019 , there were 2 shareholders of record of our ordinary shares . the following graph reflects the comparative changes in the value from december 31 , 2013 through december 31 , 2018 , assuming an initial investment of $ 100 and the reinvestment of dividends , if any in ( 1 ) our ordinary shares , ( 2 ) the s&p 500 index and ( 3 ) the automotive peer group . historical share prices of our ordinary shares have been adjusted to reflect the separation . historical performance may not be indicative of future shareholder returns . stock performance graph * $ 100 invested on december 31 , 2013 in our stock or in the relevant index , including reinvestment of dividends . fiscal year ended december 31 , 2018 . ( 1 ) aptiv plc , adjusted for the distribution of delphi technologies on december 4 , 2017 ( 2 ) s&p 500 2013 standard & poor 2019s 500 total return index ( 3 ) automotive peer group 2013 adient plc , american axle & manufacturing holdings inc , aptiv plc , borgwarner inc , cooper tire & rubber co , cooper- standard holdings inc , dana inc , dorman products inc , ford motor co , garrett motion inc. , general motors co , gentex corp , gentherm inc , genuine parts co , goodyear tire & rubber co , lear corp , lkq corp , meritor inc , motorcar parts of america inc , standard motor products inc , stoneridge inc , superior industries international inc , tenneco inc , tesla inc , tower international inc , visteon corp , wabco holdings inc company index december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| december 31 2013 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| december 31 2014 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 |\n| december 31 2015 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 |\n| december 31 2016 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 |\n| december 31 2017 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 |\n| december 31 2018 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 |', 'question': 'what was, then, the change in its value, considering 2018 and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'ops': 'subtract(130.80, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_APTV/2018/page_36.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'part ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities our ordinary shares have been publicly traded since november 17 , 2011 when our ordinary shares were listed and began trading on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) under the symbol 201cdlph . 201d on december 4 , 2017 , following the spin-off of delphi technologies , the company changed its name to aptiv plc and its nyse symbol to 201captv . 201d as of january 25 , 2019 , there were 2 shareholders of record of our ordinary shares . the following graph reflects the comparative changes in the value from december 31 , 2013 through december 31 , 2018 , assuming an initial investment of $ 100 and the reinvestment of dividends , if any in ( 1 ) our ordinary shares , ( 2 ) the s&p 500 index and ( 3 ) the automotive peer group . historical share prices of our ordinary shares have been adjusted to reflect the separation . historical performance may not be indicative of future shareholder returns . stock performance graph * $ 100 invested on december 31 , 2013 in our stock or in the relevant index , including reinvestment of dividends . fiscal year ended december 31 , 2018 . ( 1 ) aptiv plc , adjusted for the distribution of delphi technologies on december 4 , 2017 ( 2 ) s&p 500 2013 standard & poor 2019s 500 total return index ( 3 ) automotive peer group 2013 adient plc , american axle & manufacturing holdings inc , aptiv plc , borgwarner inc , cooper tire & rubber co , cooper- standard holdings inc , dana inc , dorman products inc , ford motor co , garrett motion inc. , general motors co , gentex corp , gentherm inc , genuine parts co , goodyear tire & rubber co , lear corp , lkq corp , meritor inc , motorcar parts of america inc , standard motor products inc , stoneridge inc , superior industries international inc , tenneco inc , tesla inc , tower international inc , visteon corp , wabco holdings inc company index december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'december 31 2013': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 100.0, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 100.0, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 100.0}, 'december 31 2014': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 122.75, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 113.69, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 107.96}, 'december 31 2015': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 146.49, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 115.26, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 108.05}, 'december 31 2016': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 117.11, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 129.05, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 107.72}, 'december 31 2017': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 178.46, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 157.22, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 134.04}, 'december 31 2018': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 130.8, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 150.33, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 106.89}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of the aptiv plc in 2018?', 'what was, then, the change in its value, considering 2018 and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'and what was the change in the value of the automotive peer group, considering the 2018 one and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'how much does the change in the value of the aptiv plc represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?', 'and how much does the change in the value of the automotive peer group represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?', 'what is, then, the difference between the percentage change of the aptiv plc and the automotive peer group one?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['130.80', '30.8', '6.89', '30.8%', '6.89%', '23.91%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['130.80', 'subtract(130.80, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), divide(#1, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), divide(#1, const_100), subtract(#2, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [130.8, 30.8, 6.89, 0.308, 0.0689, 0.2391], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 30.8}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel, in millions?\nA1: 213.0\nQ2: and what is it for animal planet, also in millions?\nA2: 166.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nour digital media business consists of our websites and mobile and video-on-demand ( 201cvod 201d ) services . our websites include network branded websites such as discovery.com , tlc.com and animalplanet.com , and other websites such as howstuffworks.com , an online source of explanations of how the world actually works ; treehugger.com , a comprehensive source for 201cgreen 201d news , solutions and product information ; and petfinder.com , a leading pet adoption destination . together , these websites attracted an average of 24 million cumulative unique monthly visitors , according to comscore , inc . in 2011 . international networks our international networks segment principally consists of national and pan-regional television networks . this segment generates revenues primarily from fees charged to operators who distribute our networks , which primarily include cable and dth satellite service providers , and from advertising sold on our television networks and websites . discovery channel , animal planet and tlc lead the international networks 2019 portfolio of television networks , which are distributed in virtually every pay-television market in the world through an infrastructure that includes operational centers in london , singapore and miami . international networks has one of the largest international distribution platforms of networks with one to twelve networks in more than 200 countries and territories around the world . at december 31 , 2011 , international networks operated over 150 unique distribution feeds in over 40 languages with channel feeds customized according to language needs and advertising sales opportunities . our international networks segment owns and operates the following television networks which reached the following number of subscribers as of december 31 , 2011 : education and other our education and other segment primarily includes the sale of curriculum-based product and service offerings and postproduction audio services . this segment generates revenues primarily from subscriptions charged to k-12 schools for access to an online suite of curriculum-based vod tools , professional development services , and to a lesser extent student assessment and publication of hardcopy curriculum-based content . our education business also participates in corporate partnerships , global brand and content licensing business with leading non-profits , foundations and trade associations . other businesses primarily include postproduction audio services that are provided to major motion picture studios , independent producers , broadcast networks , cable channels , advertising agencies , and interactive producers . content development our content development strategy is designed to increase viewership , maintain innovation and quality leadership , and provide value for our network distributors and advertising customers . substantially all content is sourced from a wide range of third-party producers , which includes some of the world 2019s leading nonfiction production companies with which we have developed long-standing relationships , as well as independent producers . our production arrangements fall into three categories : produced , coproduced and licensed . substantially all produced content includes programming which we engage third parties to develop and produce while we retain editorial control and own most or all of the rights in exchange for paying all development and production costs . coproduced content refers to program rights acquired that we have collaborated with third parties to finance and develop . coproduced programs are typically high-cost projects for which neither we nor our coproducers wish to bear the entire cost or productions in which the producer has already taken on an international broadcast partner . licensed content is comprised of films or series that have been previously produced by third parties . global networks international subscribers ( millions ) regional networks international subscribers ( millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| international subscribers ( millions ) 213 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 |\n| regional networks dmax | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  |\n| international subscribers ( millions ) 47 | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  |', 'question': 'what is, then, the difference between the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel and for animal planet?', 'ops': 'subtract(213, 166)', 'id': 'Single_DISCA/2011/page_35.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'our digital media business consists of our websites and mobile and video-on-demand ( 201cvod 201d ) services . our websites include network branded websites such as discovery.com , tlc.com and animalplanet.com , and other websites such as howstuffworks.com , an online source of explanations of how the world actually works ; treehugger.com , a comprehensive source for 201cgreen 201d news , solutions and product information ; and petfinder.com , a leading pet adoption destination . together , these websites attracted an average of 24 million cumulative unique monthly visitors , according to comscore , inc . in 2011 . international networks our international networks segment principally consists of national and pan-regional television networks . this segment generates revenues primarily from fees charged to operators who distribute our networks , which primarily include cable and dth satellite service providers , and from advertising sold on our television networks and websites . discovery channel , animal planet and tlc lead the international networks 2019 portfolio of television networks , which are distributed in virtually every pay-television market in the world through an infrastructure that includes operational centers in london , singapore and miami . international networks has one of the largest international distribution platforms of networks with one to twelve networks in more than 200 countries and territories around the world . at december 31 , 2011 , international networks operated over 150 unique distribution feeds in over 40 languages with channel feeds customized according to language needs and advertising sales opportunities . our international networks segment owns and operates the following television networks which reached the following number of subscribers as of december 31 , 2011 : education and other our education and other segment primarily includes the sale of curriculum-based product and service offerings and postproduction audio services . this segment generates revenues primarily from subscriptions charged to k-12 schools for access to an online suite of curriculum-based vod tools , professional development services , and to a lesser extent student assessment and publication of hardcopy curriculum-based content . our education business also participates in corporate partnerships , global brand and content licensing business with leading non-profits , foundations and trade associations . other businesses primarily include postproduction audio services that are provided to major motion picture studios , independent producers , broadcast networks , cable channels , advertising agencies , and interactive producers . content development our content development strategy is designed to increase viewership , maintain innovation and quality leadership , and provide value for our network distributors and advertising customers . substantially all content is sourced from a wide range of third-party producers , which includes some of the world 2019s leading nonfiction production companies with which we have developed long-standing relationships , as well as independent producers . our production arrangements fall into three categories : produced , coproduced and licensed . substantially all produced content includes programming which we engage third parties to develop and produce while we retain editorial control and own most or all of the rights in exchange for paying all development and production costs . coproduced content refers to program rights acquired that we have collaborated with third parties to finance and develop . coproduced programs are typically high-cost projects for which neither we nor our coproducers wish to bear the entire cost or productions in which the producer has already taken on an international broadcast partner . licensed content is comprised of films or series that have been previously produced by third parties . global networks international subscribers ( millions ) regional networks international subscribers ( millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'international subscribers ( millions ) 213': {'animal planet': 166.0, 'tlc real time and travel & living': 150.0, 'discovery science': 66.0, 'discovery home & health': 48.0, 'turbo': 37.0, 'discovery world': 27.0, 'investigation discovery': 23.0, 'hd services': 17.0}, 'regional networks dmax': {'animal planet': 'discovery kids', 'tlc real time and travel & living': 'liv', 'discovery science': 'quest', 'discovery home & health': 'discovery history', 'turbo': 'shed', 'discovery world': 'discovery en espanol ( u.s. )', 'investigation discovery': 'discovery famillia ( u.s. )', 'hd services': ''}, 'international subscribers ( millions ) 47': {'animal planet': 37.0, 'tlc real time and travel & living': 29.0, 'discovery science': 23.0, 'discovery home & health': 13.0, 'turbo': 12.0, 'discovery world': 5.0, 'investigation discovery': 4.0, 'hd services': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel, in millions?', 'and what is it for animal planet, also in millions?', 'what is, then, the difference between the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel and for animal planet?', 'and how much does this difference represent in relation to the animal planet number of subscribers?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['213', '166', '47', '28%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['213', '166', 'subtract(213, 166)', 'subtract(213, 166), divide(#0, 166)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [213.0, 166.0, 47.0, 0.28313], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 47.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: how many shares were purchased during october 2012?\nA1: 13566.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nrepurchase of equity securities the following table provides information regarding our purchases of our equity securities during the period from october 1 , 2012 to december 31 , 2012 . total number of shares ( or units ) purchased 1 average price paid per share ( or unit ) 2 total number of shares ( or units ) purchased as part of publicly announced plans or programs 3 maximum number ( or approximate dollar value ) of shares ( or units ) that may yet be purchased under the plans or programs 3 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n1 includes shares of our common stock , par value $ 0.10 per share , withheld under the terms of grants under employee stock-based compensation plans to offset tax withholding obligations that occurred upon vesting and release of restricted shares ( the 201cwithheld shares 201d ) . we repurchased 13566 withheld shares in october 2012 , 1419 withheld shares in november 2012 and 7959 withheld shares in december 2012 , for a total of 22944 withheld shares during the three-month period . 2 the average price per share for each of the months in the fiscal quarter and for the three-month period was calculated by dividing the sum of the applicable period of the aggregate value of the tax withholding obligations and the aggregate amount we paid for shares acquired under our stock repurchase program , described in note 5 to the consolidated financial statements , by the sum of the number of withheld shares and the number of shares acquired in our stock repurchase program . 3 on february 24 , 2012 , we announced in a press release that our board had approved a share repurchase program to repurchase from time to time up to $ 300.0 million of our common stock ( the 201c2012 share repurchase program 201d ) , in addition to amounts available on existing authorizations . on november 20 , 2012 , we announced in a press release that our board had authorized an increase in our 2012 share repurchase program to $ 400.0 million of our common stock . on february 22 , 2013 , we announced that our board had approved a new share repurchase program to repurchase from time to time up to $ 300.0 million of our common stock . the new authorization is in addition to any amounts remaining available for repurchase under the 2012 share repurchase program . there is no expiration date associated with the share repurchase programs. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | october 1 - 31 | november 1 - 30 | december 1 - 31 | total | october 1 - 31 | november 1 - 30 | december 1 - 31 | total | october 1 - 31 | november 1 - 30 | december 1 - 31 | total | october 1 - 31 | november 1 - 30 | december 1 - 31 | total |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| total number ofshares ( or units ) purchased1 | 13566.0 | 5345171.0 | 8797959.0 | 14156696.0 | 13566.0 | 5345171.0 | 8797959.0 | 14156696.0 | 13566.0 | 5345171.0 | 8797959.0 | 14156696.0 | 13566.0 | 5345171.0 | 8797959.0 | 14156696.0 |\n| average price paidper share ( or unit ) 2 | 10.26 | 9.98 | 10.87 | 10.53 | 10.26 | 9.98 | 10.87 | 10.53 | 10.26 | 9.98 | 10.87 | 10.53 | 10.26 | 9.98 | 10.87 | 10.53 |\n| total number ofshares ( or units ) purchased as part ofpublicly announcedplans or programs3 | 0.0 | 5343752.0 | 8790000.0 | 14133752.0 | 0.0 | 5343752.0 | 8790000.0 | 14133752.0 | 0.0 | 5343752.0 | 8790000.0 | 14133752.0 | 0.0 | 5343752.0 | 8790000.0 | 14133752.0 |\n| maximum number ( or approximate dollar value ) of shares ( or units ) that mayyet be purchased under theplans or programs3 | 148858924.0 | 195551133.0 | 99989339.0 |  | 148858924.0 | 195551133.0 | 99989339.0 |  | 148858924.0 | 195551133.0 | 99989339.0 |  | 148858924.0 | 195551133.0 | 99989339.0 |  |', 'question': 'what about the total number of shares purchased during the fourth quarter of 2012?', 'ops': '14156696', 'id': 'Double_IPG/2012/page_21.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'repurchase of equity securities the following table provides information regarding our purchases of our equity securities during the period from october 1 , 2012 to december 31 , 2012 . total number of shares ( or units ) purchased 1 average price paid per share ( or unit ) 2 total number of shares ( or units ) purchased as part of publicly announced plans or programs 3 maximum number ( or approximate dollar value ) of shares ( or units ) that may yet be purchased under the plans or programs 3 .', 'doc_post_text': '1 includes shares of our common stock , par value $ 0.10 per share , withheld under the terms of grants under employee stock-based compensation plans to offset tax withholding obligations that occurred upon vesting and release of restricted shares ( the 201cwithheld shares 201d ) . we repurchased 13566 withheld shares in october 2012 , 1419 withheld shares in november 2012 and 7959 withheld shares in december 2012 , for a total of 22944 withheld shares during the three-month period . 2 the average price per share for each of the months in the fiscal quarter and for the three-month period was calculated by dividing the sum of the applicable period of the aggregate value of the tax withholding obligations and the aggregate amount we paid for shares acquired under our stock repurchase program , described in note 5 to the consolidated financial statements , by the sum of the number of withheld shares and the number of shares acquired in our stock repurchase program . 3 on february 24 , 2012 , we announced in a press release that our board had approved a share repurchase program to repurchase from time to time up to $ 300.0 million of our common stock ( the 201c2012 share repurchase program 201d ) , in addition to amounts available on existing authorizations . on november 20 , 2012 , we announced in a press release that our board had authorized an increase in our 2012 share repurchase program to $ 400.0 million of our common stock . on february 22 , 2013 , we announced that our board had approved a new share repurchase program to repurchase from time to time up to $ 300.0 million of our common stock . the new authorization is in addition to any amounts remaining available for repurchase under the 2012 share repurchase program . there is no expiration date associated with the share repurchase programs. .', 'doc_table': {'total number ofshares ( or units ) purchased1': {'october 1 - 31': 13566.0, 'november 1 - 30': 5345171.0, 'december 1 - 31': 8797959.0, 'total': 14156696.0}, 'average price paidper share ( or unit ) 2': {'october 1 - 31': 10.26, 'november 1 - 30': 9.98, 'december 1 - 31': 10.87, 'total': 10.53}, 'total number ofshares ( or units ) purchased as part ofpublicly announcedplans or programs3': {'october 1 - 31': 0.0, 'november 1 - 30': 5343752.0, 'december 1 - 31': 8790000.0, 'total': 14133752.0}, 'maximum number ( or approximate dollar value ) of shares ( or units ) that mayyet be purchased under theplans or programs3': {'october 1 - 31': 148858924.0, 'november 1 - 30': 195551133.0, 'december 1 - 31': 99989339.0, 'total': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['how many shares were purchased during october 2012?', 'what about the total number of shares purchased during the fourth quarter of 2012?', 'what fraction of fourth quarter purchases occurred during october?', 'what about in percentage terms?', 'what is the number of repurchased shares during october 2012?', 'what about repurchased shares during fourth quarter of 2012?', 'what proportion does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['13566', '14156696', '0.000958', '0.0958', '13566', '22944', '59.1%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['13566', '14156696', 'divide(13566, 14156696)', 'divide(13566, 14156696), multiply(#0, const_100)', '13566', '22944', 'divide(13566, 22944)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [13566.0, 14156696.0, 0.00096, 0.09583, 13566.0, 22944.0, 0.59127], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 14156696.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "46s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: as of december 31, 2009, what was the total of derivative receivables related to the netting adjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid?\nA1: 65468000000.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\njpmorgan chase & co./2009 annual report 181 the following table shows the current credit risk of derivative receivables after netting adjustments , and the current liquidity risk of derivative payables after netting adjustments , as of december 31 , 2009. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin addition to the collateral amounts reflected in the table above , at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received and posted liquid secu- rities collateral in the amount of $ 15.5 billion and $ 11.7 billion , respectively . the firm also receives and delivers collateral at the initiation of derivative transactions , which is available as security against potential exposure that could arise should the fair value of the transactions move in the firm 2019s or client 2019s favor , respectively . furthermore , the firm and its counterparties hold collateral related to contracts that have a non-daily call frequency for collateral to be posted , and collateral that the firm or a counterparty has agreed to return but has not yet settled as of the reporting date . at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received $ 16.9 billion and delivered $ 5.8 billion of such additional collateral . these amounts were not netted against the derivative receivables and payables in the table above , because , at an individual counterparty level , the collateral exceeded the fair value exposure at december 31 , 2009 . credit derivatives credit derivatives are financial instruments whose value is derived from the credit risk associated with the debt of a third-party issuer ( the reference entity ) and which allow one party ( the protection purchaser ) to transfer that risk to another party ( the protection seller ) . credit derivatives expose the protection purchaser to the creditworthiness of the protection seller , as the protection seller is required to make payments under the contract when the reference entity experiences a credit event , such as a bankruptcy , a failure to pay its obligation or a restructuring . the seller of credit protection receives a premium for providing protection but has the risk that the underlying instrument referenced in the contract will be subject to a credit event . the firm is both a purchaser and seller of protection in the credit derivatives market and uses these derivatives for two primary purposes . first , in its capacity as a market-maker in the dealer/client business , the firm actively risk manages a portfolio of credit derivatives by purchasing and selling credit protection , pre- dominantly on corporate debt obligations , to meet the needs of customers . as a seller of protection , the firm 2019s exposure to a given reference entity may be offset partially , or entirely , with a contract to purchase protection from another counterparty on the same or similar reference entity . second , the firm uses credit derivatives to mitigate credit risk associated with its overall derivative receivables and traditional commercial credit lending exposures ( loans and unfunded commitments ) as well as to manage its exposure to residential and commercial mortgages . see note 3 on pages 156--- 173 of this annual report for further information on the firm 2019s mortgage-related exposures . in accomplishing the above , the firm uses different types of credit derivatives . following is a summary of various types of credit derivatives . credit default swaps credit derivatives may reference the credit of either a single refer- ence entity ( 201csingle-name 201d ) or a broad-based index , as described further below . the firm purchases and sells protection on both single- name and index-reference obligations . single-name cds and index cds contracts are both otc derivative contracts . single- name cds are used to manage the default risk of a single reference entity , while cds index are used to manage credit risk associated with the broader credit markets or credit market segments . like the s&p 500 and other market indices , a cds index is comprised of a portfolio of cds across many reference entities . new series of cds indices are established approximately every six months with a new underlying portfolio of reference entities to reflect changes in the credit markets . if one of the reference entities in the index experi- ences a credit event , then the reference entity that defaulted is removed from the index . cds can also be referenced against spe- cific portfolios of reference names or against customized exposure levels based on specific client demands : for example , to provide protection against the first $ 1 million of realized credit losses in a $ 10 million portfolio of exposure . such structures are commonly known as tranche cds . for both single-name cds contracts and index cds , upon the occurrence of a credit event , under the terms of a cds contract neither party to the cds contract has recourse to the reference entity . the protection purchaser has recourse to the protection seller for the difference between the face value of the cds contract and the fair value of the reference obligation at the time of settling the credit derivative contract , also known as the recovery value . the protection purchaser does not need to hold the debt instrument of the underlying reference entity in order to receive amounts due under the cds contract when a credit event occurs . credit-linked notes a credit linked note ( 201ccln 201d ) is a funded credit derivative where the issuer of the cln purchases credit protection on a referenced entity from the note investor . under the contract , the investor pays the issuer par value of the note at the inception of the transaction , and in return , the issuer pays periodic payments to the investor , based on the credit risk of the referenced entity . the issuer also repays the investor the par value of the note at maturity unless the reference entity experiences a specified credit event . in that event , the issuer is not obligated to repay the par value of the note , but rather , the issuer pays the investor the difference between the par value of the note .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | gross derivative fair value | nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables | nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid | carrying value on consolidated balance sheets | gross derivative fair value | nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables | nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid | carrying value on consolidated balance sheets |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| derivative receivables | 1565518.0 | -1419840.0 | -65468.0 | 80210.0 | 1565518.0 | -1419840.0 | -65468.0 | 80210.0 |\n| derivative payables | 1519183.0 | -1419840.0 | -39218.0 | 60125.0 | 1519183.0 | -1419840.0 | -39218.0 | 60125.0 |', 'question': 'and what was the total of the liquid securities collateral received by the firm?', 'ops': 'multiply(65468, const_1000000), multiply(15.5, const_1000000), multiply(#1, const_1000)', 'id': 'Double_JPM/2009/page_183.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'jpmorgan chase & co./2009 annual report 181 the following table shows the current credit risk of derivative receivables after netting adjustments , and the current liquidity risk of derivative payables after netting adjustments , as of december 31 , 2009. .', 'doc_post_text': 'in addition to the collateral amounts reflected in the table above , at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received and posted liquid secu- rities collateral in the amount of $ 15.5 billion and $ 11.7 billion , respectively . the firm also receives and delivers collateral at the initiation of derivative transactions , which is available as security against potential exposure that could arise should the fair value of the transactions move in the firm 2019s or client 2019s favor , respectively . furthermore , the firm and its counterparties hold collateral related to contracts that have a non-daily call frequency for collateral to be posted , and collateral that the firm or a counterparty has agreed to return but has not yet settled as of the reporting date . at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received $ 16.9 billion and delivered $ 5.8 billion of such additional collateral . these amounts were not netted against the derivative receivables and payables in the table above , because , at an individual counterparty level , the collateral exceeded the fair value exposure at december 31 , 2009 . credit derivatives credit derivatives are financial instruments whose value is derived from the credit risk associated with the debt of a third-party issuer ( the reference entity ) and which allow one party ( the protection purchaser ) to transfer that risk to another party ( the protection seller ) . credit derivatives expose the protection purchaser to the creditworthiness of the protection seller , as the protection seller is required to make payments under the contract when the reference entity experiences a credit event , such as a bankruptcy , a failure to pay its obligation or a restructuring . the seller of credit protection receives a premium for providing protection but has the risk that the underlying instrument referenced in the contract will be subject to a credit event . the firm is both a purchaser and seller of protection in the credit derivatives market and uses these derivatives for two primary purposes . first , in its capacity as a market-maker in the dealer/client business , the firm actively risk manages a portfolio of credit derivatives by purchasing and selling credit protection , pre- dominantly on corporate debt obligations , to meet the needs of customers . as a seller of protection , the firm 2019s exposure to a given reference entity may be offset partially , or entirely , with a contract to purchase protection from another counterparty on the same or similar reference entity . second , the firm uses credit derivatives to mitigate credit risk associated with its overall derivative receivables and traditional commercial credit lending exposures ( loans and unfunded commitments ) as well as to manage its exposure to residential and commercial mortgages . see note 3 on pages 156--- 173 of this annual report for further information on the firm 2019s mortgage-related exposures . in accomplishing the above , the firm uses different types of credit derivatives . following is a summary of various types of credit derivatives . credit default swaps credit derivatives may reference the credit of either a single refer- ence entity ( 201csingle-name 201d ) or a broad-based index , as described further below . the firm purchases and sells protection on both single- name and index-reference obligations . single-name cds and index cds contracts are both otc derivative contracts . single- name cds are used to manage the default risk of a single reference entity , while cds index are used to manage credit risk associated with the broader credit markets or credit market segments . like the s&p 500 and other market indices , a cds index is comprised of a portfolio of cds across many reference entities . new series of cds indices are established approximately every six months with a new underlying portfolio of reference entities to reflect changes in the credit markets . if one of the reference entities in the index experi- ences a credit event , then the reference entity that defaulted is removed from the index . cds can also be referenced against spe- cific portfolios of reference names or against customized exposure levels based on specific client demands : for example , to provide protection against the first $ 1 million of realized credit losses in a $ 10 million portfolio of exposure . such structures are commonly known as tranche cds . for both single-name cds contracts and index cds , upon the occurrence of a credit event , under the terms of a cds contract neither party to the cds contract has recourse to the reference entity . the protection purchaser has recourse to the protection seller for the difference between the face value of the cds contract and the fair value of the reference obligation at the time of settling the credit derivative contract , also known as the recovery value . the protection purchaser does not need to hold the debt instrument of the underlying reference entity in order to receive amounts due under the cds contract when a credit event occurs . credit-linked notes a credit linked note ( 201ccln 201d ) is a funded credit derivative where the issuer of the cln purchases credit protection on a referenced entity from the note investor . under the contract , the investor pays the issuer par value of the note at the inception of the transaction , and in return , the issuer pays periodic payments to the investor , based on the credit risk of the referenced entity . the issuer also repays the investor the par value of the note at maturity unless the reference entity experiences a specified credit event . in that event , the issuer is not obligated to repay the par value of the note , but rather , the issuer pays the investor the difference between the par value of the note .', 'doc_table': {'derivative receivables': {'gross derivative fair value': 1565518.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables': -1419840.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid': -65468.0, 'carrying value on consolidated balance sheets': 80210.0}, 'derivative payables': {'gross derivative fair value': 1519183.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables': -1419840.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid': -39218.0, 'carrying value on consolidated balance sheets': 60125.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['as of december 31, 2009, what was the total of derivative receivables related to the netting adjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid?', 'and what was the total of the liquid securities collateral received by the firm?', 'what was, then, the combined total of both amounts as of that date?', 'and in that same year, how much did the gross derivative fair value receivables represent in relation to the payables one?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['65468000000', '15500000000', '80968000000', '1.03'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(65468, const_1000000)', 'multiply(65468, const_1000000), multiply(15.5, const_1000000), multiply(#1, const_1000)', 'multiply(65468, const_1000000), multiply(15.5, const_1000000), multiply(#1, const_1000), add(#2, #0)', 'divide(1565518, 1519183)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [65468000000.0, 15500000000.0, 80968000000.0, 1.0305], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 15500000000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "46s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the long-term debt in 2015?\nA1: 1610.3\nQ2: and what was it in 2014?\nA2: 1612.9\nQ3: what was, then, the total long-term debt for those two years combined?\nA3: 3223.2', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2013 ( continued ) ( amounts in millions , except per share amounts ) financing activities net cash used in financing activities during 2015 primarily related to the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we repurchased 13.6 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 285.2 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 195.5 on our common stock . net cash used in financing activities during 2014 primarily related to the purchase of long-term debt , the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we redeemed all $ 350.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 6.25% ( 6.25 % ) notes , repurchased 14.9 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 275.1 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 159.0 on our common stock . this was offset by the issuance of $ 500.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 4.20% ( 4.20 % ) notes . foreign exchange rate changes the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 156.1 in 2015 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar , euro and south african rand as of december 31 , 2015 compared to december 31 , 2014 . the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 101.0 in 2014 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar and euro as of december 31 , 2014 compared to december 31 , 2013. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nliquidity outlook we expect our cash flow from operations , cash and cash equivalents to be sufficient to meet our anticipated operating requirements at a minimum for the next twelve months . we also have a committed corporate credit facility as well as uncommitted facilities available to support our operating needs . we continue to maintain a disciplined approach to managing liquidity , with flexibility over significant uses of cash , including our capital expenditures , cash used for new acquisitions , our common stock repurchase program and our common stock dividends . from time to time , we evaluate market conditions and financing alternatives for opportunities to raise additional funds or otherwise improve our liquidity profile , enhance our financial flexibility and manage market risk . our ability to access the capital markets depends on a number of factors , which include those specific to us , such as our credit rating , and those related to the financial markets , such as the amount or terms of available credit . there can be no guarantee that we would be able to access new sources of liquidity on commercially reasonable terms , or at all . funding requirements our most significant funding requirements include our operations , non-cancelable operating lease obligations , capital expenditures , acquisitions , common stock dividends , taxes , debt service and contributions to pension and postretirement plans . additionally , we may be required to make payments to minority shareholders in certain subsidiaries if they exercise their options to sell us their equity interests. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash cash equivalents and marketable securities | short-term borrowings | current portion of long-term debt | long-term debt | total debt | cash cash equivalents and marketable securities | short-term borrowings | current portion of long-term debt | long-term debt | total debt |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| december 31 , 2015 | 1509.7 | 150.1 | 1.9 | 1610.3 | 1762.3 | 1509.7 | 150.1 | 1.9 | 1610.3 | 1762.3 |\n| december 31 , 2014 | 1667.2 | 107.2 | 2.1 | 1612.9 | 1722.2 | 1667.2 | 107.2 | 2.1 | 1612.9 | 1722.2 |', 'question': 'and what was the total debt in that same period?', 'ops': 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2)', 'id': 'Single_IPG/2015/page_38.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2013 ( continued ) ( amounts in millions , except per share amounts ) financing activities net cash used in financing activities during 2015 primarily related to the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we repurchased 13.6 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 285.2 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 195.5 on our common stock . net cash used in financing activities during 2014 primarily related to the purchase of long-term debt , the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we redeemed all $ 350.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 6.25% ( 6.25 % ) notes , repurchased 14.9 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 275.1 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 159.0 on our common stock . this was offset by the issuance of $ 500.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 4.20% ( 4.20 % ) notes . foreign exchange rate changes the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 156.1 in 2015 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar , euro and south african rand as of december 31 , 2015 compared to december 31 , 2014 . the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 101.0 in 2014 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar and euro as of december 31 , 2014 compared to december 31 , 2013. .', 'doc_post_text': 'liquidity outlook we expect our cash flow from operations , cash and cash equivalents to be sufficient to meet our anticipated operating requirements at a minimum for the next twelve months . we also have a committed corporate credit facility as well as uncommitted facilities available to support our operating needs . we continue to maintain a disciplined approach to managing liquidity , with flexibility over significant uses of cash , including our capital expenditures , cash used for new acquisitions , our common stock repurchase program and our common stock dividends . from time to time , we evaluate market conditions and financing alternatives for opportunities to raise additional funds or otherwise improve our liquidity profile , enhance our financial flexibility and manage market risk . our ability to access the capital markets depends on a number of factors , which include those specific to us , such as our credit rating , and those related to the financial markets , such as the amount or terms of available credit . there can be no guarantee that we would be able to access new sources of liquidity on commercially reasonable terms , or at all . funding requirements our most significant funding requirements include our operations , non-cancelable operating lease obligations , capital expenditures , acquisitions , common stock dividends , taxes , debt service and contributions to pension and postretirement plans . additionally , we may be required to make payments to minority shareholders in certain subsidiaries if they exercise their options to sell us their equity interests. .', 'doc_table': {'december 31 , 2015': {'cash cash equivalents and marketable securities': 1509.7, 'short-term borrowings': 150.1, 'current portion of long-term debt': 1.9, 'long-term debt': 1610.3, 'total debt': 1762.3}, 'december 31 , 2014': {'cash cash equivalents and marketable securities': 1667.2, 'short-term borrowings': 107.2, 'current portion of long-term debt': 2.1, 'long-term debt': 1612.9, 'total debt': 1722.2}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the long-term debt in 2015?', 'and what was it in 2014?', 'what was, then, the total long-term debt for those two years combined?', 'and what was the total debt in that same period?', 'how much, then, does the long-term debt represent in relation to this total debt, in the two year period?', 'and how much is that in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1610.3', '1612.9', '3223.2', '3484.5', '0.925', '92.5'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1610.3', '1612.9', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9)', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2)', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2), divide(#0, #1)', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2), divide(#0, #1), multiply(#2, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1610.3, 1612.9, 3223.2, 3484.5, 0.92501, 92.50108], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 3484.5}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "46s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value of pension plans for 2017?\nA1: 3856.0\nQ2: and total plan contributions for that year?\nA2: 16745.0\nQ3: so what was the percentage of pension plan contributions out of the total?\nA3: 0.23028', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n112 / sl green realty corp . 2017 annual report 20 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings as of december a031 , 2017 , the company and the operating partnership were not involved in any material litigation nor , to management 2019s knowledge , was any material litigation threat- ened against us or our portfolio which if adversely determined could have a material adverse impact on us . environmental matters our management believes that the properties are in compliance in all material respects with applicable federal , state and local ordinances and regulations regarding environmental issues . management is not aware of any environmental liability that it believes would have a materially adverse impact on our financial position , results of operations or cash flows . management is unaware of any instances in which it would incur significant envi- ronmental cost if any of our properties were sold . employment agreements we have entered into employment agreements with certain exec- utives , which expire between december a02018 and february a02020 . the minimum cash-based compensation , including base sal- ary and guaranteed bonus payments , associated with these employment agreements total $ 5.4 a0million for 2018 . in addition these employment agreements provide for deferred compen- sation awards based on our stock price and which were valued at $ 1.6 a0million on the grant date . the value of these awards may change based on fluctuations in our stock price . insurance we maintain 201call-risk 201d property and rental value coverage ( includ- ing coverage regarding the perils of flood , earthquake and terrorism , excluding nuclear , biological , chemical , and radiological terrorism ( 201cnbcr 201d ) ) , within three property insurance programs and liability insurance . separate property and liability coverage may be purchased on a stand-alone basis for certain assets , such as the development of one vanderbilt . additionally , our captive insurance company , belmont insurance company , or belmont , pro- vides coverage for nbcr terrorist acts above a specified trigger , although if belmont is required to pay a claim under our insur- ance policies , we would ultimately record the loss to the extent of belmont 2019s required payment . however , there is no assurance that in the future we will be able to procure coverage at a reasonable cost . further , if we experience losses that are uninsured or that exceed policy limits , we could lose the capital invested in the damaged properties as well as the anticipated future cash flows from those plan trustees adopted a rehabilitation plan consistent with this requirement . no surcharges have been paid to the pension plan as of december a031 , 2017 . for the pension plan years ended june a030 , 2017 , 2016 , and 2015 , the plan received contributions from employers totaling $ 257.8 a0million , $ 249.5 a0million , and $ 221.9 a0million . our contributions to the pension plan represent less than 5.0% ( 5.0 % ) of total contributions to the plan . the health plan was established under the terms of collective bargaining agreements between the union , the realty advisory board on labor relations , inc . and certain other employees . the health plan provides health and other benefits to eligible participants employed in the building service industry who are covered under collective bargaining agreements , or other writ- ten agreements , with the union . the health plan is administered by a board of trustees with equal representation by the employ- ers and the union and operates under employer identification number a013-2928869 . the health plan receives contributions in accordance with collective bargaining agreements or participa- tion agreements . generally , these agreements provide that the employers contribute to the health plan at a fixed rate on behalf of each covered employee . for the health plan years ended , june a030 , 2017 , 2016 , and 2015 , the plan received contributions from employers totaling $ 1.3 a0billion , $ 1.2 a0billion and $ 1.1 a0billion , respectively . our contributions to the health plan represent less than 5.0% ( 5.0 % ) of total contributions to the plan . contributions we made to the multi-employer plans for the years ended december a031 , 2017 , 2016 and 2015 are included in the table below ( in thousands ) : .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n401 ( k ) plan in august a01997 , we implemented a 401 ( k ) a0savings/retirement plan , or the 401 ( k ) a0plan , to cover eligible employees of ours , and any designated affiliate . the 401 ( k ) a0plan permits eligible employees to defer up to 15% ( 15 % ) of their annual compensation , subject to certain limitations imposed by the code . the employees 2019 elective deferrals are immediately vested and non-forfeitable upon contribution to the 401 ( k ) a0plan . during a02003 , we amended our 401 ( k ) a0plan to pro- vide for discretionary matching contributions only . for 2017 , 2016 and 2015 , a matching contribution equal to 50% ( 50 % ) of the first 6% ( 6 % ) of annual compensation was made . for the year ended december a031 , 2017 , we made a matching contribution of $ 728782 . for the years ended december a031 , 2016 and 2015 , we made matching contribu- tions of $ 566000 and $ 550000 , respectively. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | pension plan | health plan | other plans | total plan contributions | pension plan | health plan | other plans | total plan contributions | pension plan | health plan | other plans | total plan contributions |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2017 | 3856.0 | 11426.0 | 1463.0 | 16745.0 | 3856.0 | 11426.0 | 1463.0 | 16745.0 | 3856.0 | 11426.0 | 1463.0 | 16745.0 |\n| 2016 | 3979.0 | 11530.0 | 1583.0 | 17092.0 | 3979.0 | 11530.0 | 1583.0 | 17092.0 | 3979.0 | 11530.0 | 1583.0 | 17092.0 |\n| 2015 | 2732.0 | 8736.0 | 5716.0 | 17184.0 | 2732.0 | 8736.0 | 5716.0 | 17184.0 | 2732.0 | 8736.0 | 5716.0 | 17184.0 |', 'question': 'and converted to a percentage value?', 'ops': 'divide(3856, 16745), multiply(#0, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_SLG/2017/page_114.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': '112 / sl green realty corp . 2017 annual report 20 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings as of december a031 , 2017 , the company and the operating partnership were not involved in any material litigation nor , to management 2019s knowledge , was any material litigation threat- ened against us or our portfolio which if adversely determined could have a material adverse impact on us . environmental matters our management believes that the properties are in compliance in all material respects with applicable federal , state and local ordinances and regulations regarding environmental issues . management is not aware of any environmental liability that it believes would have a materially adverse impact on our financial position , results of operations or cash flows . management is unaware of any instances in which it would incur significant envi- ronmental cost if any of our properties were sold . employment agreements we have entered into employment agreements with certain exec- utives , which expire between december a02018 and february a02020 . the minimum cash-based compensation , including base sal- ary and guaranteed bonus payments , associated with these employment agreements total $ 5.4 a0million for 2018 . in addition these employment agreements provide for deferred compen- sation awards based on our stock price and which were valued at $ 1.6 a0million on the grant date . the value of these awards may change based on fluctuations in our stock price . insurance we maintain 201call-risk 201d property and rental value coverage ( includ- ing coverage regarding the perils of flood , earthquake and terrorism , excluding nuclear , biological , chemical , and radiological terrorism ( 201cnbcr 201d ) ) , within three property insurance programs and liability insurance . separate property and liability coverage may be purchased on a stand-alone basis for certain assets , such as the development of one vanderbilt . additionally , our captive insurance company , belmont insurance company , or belmont , pro- vides coverage for nbcr terrorist acts above a specified trigger , although if belmont is required to pay a claim under our insur- ance policies , we would ultimately record the loss to the extent of belmont 2019s required payment . however , there is no assurance that in the future we will be able to procure coverage at a reasonable cost . further , if we experience losses that are uninsured or that exceed policy limits , we could lose the capital invested in the damaged properties as well as the anticipated future cash flows from those plan trustees adopted a rehabilitation plan consistent with this requirement . no surcharges have been paid to the pension plan as of december a031 , 2017 . for the pension plan years ended june a030 , 2017 , 2016 , and 2015 , the plan received contributions from employers totaling $ 257.8 a0million , $ 249.5 a0million , and $ 221.9 a0million . our contributions to the pension plan represent less than 5.0% ( 5.0 % ) of total contributions to the plan . the health plan was established under the terms of collective bargaining agreements between the union , the realty advisory board on labor relations , inc . and certain other employees . the health plan provides health and other benefits to eligible participants employed in the building service industry who are covered under collective bargaining agreements , or other writ- ten agreements , with the union . the health plan is administered by a board of trustees with equal representation by the employ- ers and the union and operates under employer identification number a013-2928869 . the health plan receives contributions in accordance with collective bargaining agreements or participa- tion agreements . generally , these agreements provide that the employers contribute to the health plan at a fixed rate on behalf of each covered employee . for the health plan years ended , june a030 , 2017 , 2016 , and 2015 , the plan received contributions from employers totaling $ 1.3 a0billion , $ 1.2 a0billion and $ 1.1 a0billion , respectively . our contributions to the health plan represent less than 5.0% ( 5.0 % ) of total contributions to the plan . contributions we made to the multi-employer plans for the years ended december a031 , 2017 , 2016 and 2015 are included in the table below ( in thousands ) : .', 'doc_post_text': '401 ( k ) plan in august a01997 , we implemented a 401 ( k ) a0savings/retirement plan , or the 401 ( k ) a0plan , to cover eligible employees of ours , and any designated affiliate . the 401 ( k ) a0plan permits eligible employees to defer up to 15% ( 15 % ) of their annual compensation , subject to certain limitations imposed by the code . the employees 2019 elective deferrals are immediately vested and non-forfeitable upon contribution to the 401 ( k ) a0plan . during a02003 , we amended our 401 ( k ) a0plan to pro- vide for discretionary matching contributions only . for 2017 , 2016 and 2015 , a matching contribution equal to 50% ( 50 % ) of the first 6% ( 6 % ) of annual compensation was made . for the year ended december a031 , 2017 , we made a matching contribution of $ 728782 . for the years ended december a031 , 2016 and 2015 , we made matching contribu- tions of $ 566000 and $ 550000 , respectively. .', 'doc_table': {'2017': {'pension plan': 3856.0, 'health plan': 11426.0, 'other plans': 1463.0, 'total plan contributions': 16745.0}, '2016': {'pension plan': 3979.0, 'health plan': 11530.0, 'other plans': 1583.0, 'total plan contributions': 17092.0}, '2015': {'pension plan': 2732.0, 'health plan': 8736.0, 'other plans': 5716.0, 'total plan contributions': 17184.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of pension plans for 2017?', 'and total plan contributions for that year?', 'so what was the percentage of pension plan contributions out of the total?', 'and converted to a percentage value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3856', '16745', '0.23', '23'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3856', '16745', 'divide(3856, 16745)', 'divide(3856, 16745), multiply(#0, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3856.0, 16745.0, 0.23028, 23.02777], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 23.02777}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "46s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:16 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: from the beginning of 2009 to the end of 2011, what was the net increase in aro, in millions?\nA1: 22.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nexcept for long-term debt , the carrying amounts of the company 2019s other financial instruments are measured at fair value or approximate fair value due to the short-term nature of these instruments . asset retirement obligations 2014the company records all known asset retirement obligations within other current liabilities for which the liability 2019s fair value can be reasonably estimated , including certain asbestos removal , asset decommissioning and contractual lease restoration obligations . the changes in the asset retirement obligation carrying amounts during 2011 , 2010 and 2009 were as follows : ( $ in millions ) retirement obligations .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company also has known conditional asset retirement obligations related to assets currently in use , such as certain asbestos remediation and asset decommissioning activities to be performed in the future , that were not reasonably estimable as of december 31 , 2011 and 2010 , due to insufficient information about the timing and method of settlement of the obligation . accordingly , the fair value of these obligations has not been recorded in the consolidated financial statements . environmental remediation and/or asset decommissioning of the relevant facilities may be required when the company ceases to utilize these facilities . in addition , there may be conditional environmental asset retirement obligations that the company has not yet discovered . income taxes 2014income tax expense and other income tax related information contained in the financial statements for periods before the spin-off are presented as if the company filed its own tax returns on a stand-alone basis , while similar information for periods after the spin-off reflect the company 2019s positions to be filed in its own tax returns in the future . income tax expense and other related information are based on the prevailing statutory rates for u.s . federal income taxes and the composite state income tax rate for the company for each period presented . state and local income and franchise tax provisions are allocable to contracts in process and , accordingly , are included in general and administrative expenses . deferred income taxes are recorded when revenues and expenses are recognized in different periods for financial statement purposes than for tax return purposes . deferred tax asset or liability account balances are calculated at the balance sheet date using current tax laws and rates in effect . determinations of the expected realizability of deferred tax assets and the need for any valuation allowances against these deferred tax assets were evaluated based upon the stand-alone tax attributes of the company , and an $ 18 million valuation allowance was deemed necessary as of december 31 , 2011 . no valuation allowance was deemed necessary as of december 31 , 2010 . uncertain tax positions meeting the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold , based on the merits of the position , are recognized in the financial statements . we recognize the amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% ( 50 % ) likely to be realized upon ultimate settlement with the related tax authority . if a tax position does not meet the minimum statutory threshold to avoid payment of penalties , we recognize an expense for the amount of the penalty in the period the tax position is claimed or expected to be claimed in our tax return . penalties , if probable and reasonably estimable , are recognized as a component of income tax expense . we also recognize accrued interest related to uncertain tax positions in income tax expense . the timing and amount of accrued interest is determined by the applicable tax law associated with an underpayment of income taxes . see note 12 : income taxes . under existing gaap , changes in accruals associated with uncertainties are recorded in earnings in the period they are determined. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | balance at january 1 2009 | accretion expense | payment of asset retirement obligation | balance at december 31 2009 | obligation relating to the future retirement of a facility | balance at december 31 2010 | balance at december 31 2011 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| asset retirement obligations | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 20.0 | 25.0 |', 'question': 'and what portion of this increase was due to accretion?', 'ops': 'add(0, 0), add(#0, #0), subtract(25, 3), divide(#1, #2)', 'id': 'Double_HII/2011/page_86.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'except for long-term debt , the carrying amounts of the company 2019s other financial instruments are measured at fair value or approximate fair value due to the short-term nature of these instruments . asset retirement obligations 2014the company records all known asset retirement obligations within other current liabilities for which the liability 2019s fair value can be reasonably estimated , including certain asbestos removal , asset decommissioning and contractual lease restoration obligations . the changes in the asset retirement obligation carrying amounts during 2011 , 2010 and 2009 were as follows : ( $ in millions ) retirement obligations .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company also has known conditional asset retirement obligations related to assets currently in use , such as certain asbestos remediation and asset decommissioning activities to be performed in the future , that were not reasonably estimable as of december 31 , 2011 and 2010 , due to insufficient information about the timing and method of settlement of the obligation . accordingly , the fair value of these obligations has not been recorded in the consolidated financial statements . environmental remediation and/or asset decommissioning of the relevant facilities may be required when the company ceases to utilize these facilities . in addition , there may be conditional environmental asset retirement obligations that the company has not yet discovered . income taxes 2014income tax expense and other income tax related information contained in the financial statements for periods before the spin-off are presented as if the company filed its own tax returns on a stand-alone basis , while similar information for periods after the spin-off reflect the company 2019s positions to be filed in its own tax returns in the future . income tax expense and other related information are based on the prevailing statutory rates for u.s . federal income taxes and the composite state income tax rate for the company for each period presented . state and local income and franchise tax provisions are allocable to contracts in process and , accordingly , are included in general and administrative expenses . deferred income taxes are recorded when revenues and expenses are recognized in different periods for financial statement purposes than for tax return purposes . deferred tax asset or liability account balances are calculated at the balance sheet date using current tax laws and rates in effect . determinations of the expected realizability of deferred tax assets and the need for any valuation allowances against these deferred tax assets were evaluated based upon the stand-alone tax attributes of the company , and an $ 18 million valuation allowance was deemed necessary as of december 31 , 2011 . no valuation allowance was deemed necessary as of december 31 , 2010 . uncertain tax positions meeting the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold , based on the merits of the position , are recognized in the financial statements . we recognize the amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% ( 50 % ) likely to be realized upon ultimate settlement with the related tax authority . if a tax position does not meet the minimum statutory threshold to avoid payment of penalties , we recognize an expense for the amount of the penalty in the period the tax position is claimed or expected to be claimed in our tax return . penalties , if probable and reasonably estimable , are recognized as a component of income tax expense . we also recognize accrued interest related to uncertain tax positions in income tax expense . the timing and amount of accrued interest is determined by the applicable tax law associated with an underpayment of income taxes . see note 12 : income taxes . under existing gaap , changes in accruals associated with uncertainties are recorded in earnings in the period they are determined. .', 'doc_table': {'asset retirement obligations': {'balance at january 1 2009': 3.0, 'accretion expense': 0.0, 'payment of asset retirement obligation': 0.0, 'balance at december 31 2009': 3.0, 'obligation relating to the future retirement of a facility': 5.0, 'balance at december 31 2010': 20.0, 'balance at december 31 2011': 25.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['from the beginning of 2009 to the end of 2011, what was the net increase in aro, in millions?', 'and what portion of this increase was due to accretion?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['22', '0%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(25, 3)', 'add(0, 0), add(#0, #0), subtract(25, 3), divide(#1, #2)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [22.0, 0.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:16 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the profit margin for lockheed martin in 2002?\nA1: 0.05999\nQ2: what was the total operating profit in 2002 and 2001?\nA2: 803.0\nQ3: and including the value for 2003?\nA3: 1148.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nlockheed martin corporation management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations december 31 , 2002 space systems space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2002 2001 2000 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnet sales for space systems increased by 8% ( 8 % ) in 2002 compared to 2001 . the increase in sales for 2002 resulted from higher volume in government space of $ 370 million and commercial space of $ 180 million . in government space , increases of $ 470 million in government satellite programs and $ 130 million in ground systems activities more than offset volume declines of $ 175 million on government launch vehi- cles and $ 55 million on strategic missile programs . the increase in commercial space sales is primarily attributable to an increase in launch vehicle activities , with nine commercial launches during 2002 compared to six in 2001 . net sales for the segment decreased by 7% ( 7 % ) in 2001 com- pared to 2000 . the decrease in sales for 2001 resulted from volume declines in commercial space of $ 560 million , which more than offset increases in government space of $ 60 million . in commercial space , sales declined due to volume reductions of $ 480 million in commercial launch vehicle activities and $ 80 million in satellite programs . there were six launches in 2001 compared to 14 launches in 2000 . the increase in gov- ernment space resulted from a combined increase of $ 230 mil- lion related to higher volume on government satellite programs and ground systems activities . these increases were partially offset by a $ 110 million decrease related to volume declines in government launch vehicle activity , primarily due to program maturities , and by $ 50 million due to the absence in 2001 of favorable adjustments recorded on the titan iv pro- gram in 2000 . operating profit for the segment increased 23% ( 23 % ) in 2002 as compared to 2001 , mainly driven by the commercial space business . reduced losses in commercial space during 2002 resulted in increased operating profit of $ 90 million when compared to 2001 . commercial satellite manufacturing losses declined $ 100 million in 2002 as operating performance improved and satellite deliveries increased . in the first quarter of 2001 , a $ 40 million loss provision was recorded on certain commercial satellite manufacturing contracts . due to the industry-wide oversupply and deterioration of pricing in the commercial launch market , financial results on commercial launch vehicles continue to be challenging . during 2002 , this trend led to a decline in operating profit of $ 10 million on commercial launch vehicles when compared to 2001 . this decrease was primarily due to lower profitability of $ 55 mil- lion on the three additional launches in the current year , addi- tional charges of $ 60 million ( net of a favorable contract adjustment of $ 20 million ) for market and pricing pressures and included the adverse effect of a $ 35 million adjustment for commercial launch vehicle contract settlement costs . the 2001 results also included charges for market and pricing pressures , which reduced that year 2019s operating profit by $ 145 million . the $ 10 million decrease in government space 2019s operating profit for the year is primarily due to the reduced volume on government launch vehicles and strategic missile programs , which combined to decrease operating profit by $ 80 million , partially offset by increases of $ 40 million in government satellite programs and $ 30 million in ground systems activities . operating profit for the segment increased by 4% ( 4 % ) in 2001 compared to 2000 . operating profit increased in 2001 due to a $ 35 million increase in government space partially offset by higher year-over-year losses of $ 20 million in commercial space . in government space , operating profit increased due to the impact of higher volume and improved performance in ground systems and government satellite programs . the year- to-year comparison of operating profit was not affected by the $ 50 million favorable titan iv adjustment recorded in 2000 discussed above , due to a $ 55 million charge related to a more conservative assessment of government launch vehi- cle programs that was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2000 . in commercial space , decreased operating profit of $ 15 mil- lion on launch vehicles more than offset lower losses on satel- lite manufacturing activities . the commercial launch vehicle operating results included $ 60 million in higher charges for market and pricing pressures when compared to 2000 . these negative adjustments were partially offset by $ 50 million of favorable contract adjustments on certain launch vehicle con- tracts . commercial satellite manufacturing losses decreased slightly from 2000 and included the adverse impact of a $ 40 million loss provision recorded in the first quarter of 2001 for certain commercial satellite contracts related to schedule and technical issues. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net sales | operating profit | net sales | operating profit | net sales | operating profit |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2002 | 7384.0 | 443.0 | 7384.0 | 443.0 | 7384.0 | 443.0 |\n| 2001 | 6836.0 | 360.0 | 6836.0 | 360.0 | 6836.0 | 360.0 |\n| 2000 | 7339.0 | 345.0 | 7339.0 | 345.0 | 7339.0 | 345.0 |', 'question': 'so what was the average value during this time?', 'ops': 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345), divide(#1, const_3)', 'id': 'Double_LMT/2002/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'lockheed martin corporation management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations december 31 , 2002 space systems space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2002 2001 2000 .', 'doc_post_text': 'net sales for space systems increased by 8% ( 8 % ) in 2002 compared to 2001 . the increase in sales for 2002 resulted from higher volume in government space of $ 370 million and commercial space of $ 180 million . in government space , increases of $ 470 million in government satellite programs and $ 130 million in ground systems activities more than offset volume declines of $ 175 million on government launch vehi- cles and $ 55 million on strategic missile programs . the increase in commercial space sales is primarily attributable to an increase in launch vehicle activities , with nine commercial launches during 2002 compared to six in 2001 . net sales for the segment decreased by 7% ( 7 % ) in 2001 com- pared to 2000 . the decrease in sales for 2001 resulted from volume declines in commercial space of $ 560 million , which more than offset increases in government space of $ 60 million . in commercial space , sales declined due to volume reductions of $ 480 million in commercial launch vehicle activities and $ 80 million in satellite programs . there were six launches in 2001 compared to 14 launches in 2000 . the increase in gov- ernment space resulted from a combined increase of $ 230 mil- lion related to higher volume on government satellite programs and ground systems activities . these increases were partially offset by a $ 110 million decrease related to volume declines in government launch vehicle activity , primarily due to program maturities , and by $ 50 million due to the absence in 2001 of favorable adjustments recorded on the titan iv pro- gram in 2000 . operating profit for the segment increased 23% ( 23 % ) in 2002 as compared to 2001 , mainly driven by the commercial space business . reduced losses in commercial space during 2002 resulted in increased operating profit of $ 90 million when compared to 2001 . commercial satellite manufacturing losses declined $ 100 million in 2002 as operating performance improved and satellite deliveries increased . in the first quarter of 2001 , a $ 40 million loss provision was recorded on certain commercial satellite manufacturing contracts . due to the industry-wide oversupply and deterioration of pricing in the commercial launch market , financial results on commercial launch vehicles continue to be challenging . during 2002 , this trend led to a decline in operating profit of $ 10 million on commercial launch vehicles when compared to 2001 . this decrease was primarily due to lower profitability of $ 55 mil- lion on the three additional launches in the current year , addi- tional charges of $ 60 million ( net of a favorable contract adjustment of $ 20 million ) for market and pricing pressures and included the adverse effect of a $ 35 million adjustment for commercial launch vehicle contract settlement costs . the 2001 results also included charges for market and pricing pressures , which reduced that year 2019s operating profit by $ 145 million . the $ 10 million decrease in government space 2019s operating profit for the year is primarily due to the reduced volume on government launch vehicles and strategic missile programs , which combined to decrease operating profit by $ 80 million , partially offset by increases of $ 40 million in government satellite programs and $ 30 million in ground systems activities . operating profit for the segment increased by 4% ( 4 % ) in 2001 compared to 2000 . operating profit increased in 2001 due to a $ 35 million increase in government space partially offset by higher year-over-year losses of $ 20 million in commercial space . in government space , operating profit increased due to the impact of higher volume and improved performance in ground systems and government satellite programs . the year- to-year comparison of operating profit was not affected by the $ 50 million favorable titan iv adjustment recorded in 2000 discussed above , due to a $ 55 million charge related to a more conservative assessment of government launch vehi- cle programs that was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2000 . in commercial space , decreased operating profit of $ 15 mil- lion on launch vehicles more than offset lower losses on satel- lite manufacturing activities . the commercial launch vehicle operating results included $ 60 million in higher charges for market and pricing pressures when compared to 2000 . these negative adjustments were partially offset by $ 50 million of favorable contract adjustments on certain launch vehicle con- tracts . commercial satellite manufacturing losses decreased slightly from 2000 and included the adverse impact of a $ 40 million loss provision recorded in the first quarter of 2001 for certain commercial satellite contracts related to schedule and technical issues. .', 'doc_table': {'2002': {'net sales': 7384.0, 'operating profit': 443.0}, '2001': {'net sales': 6836.0, 'operating profit': 360.0}, '2000': {'net sales': 7339.0, 'operating profit': 345.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the profit margin for lockheed martin in 2002?', 'what was the total operating profit in 2002 and 2001?', 'and including the value for 2003?', 'so what was the average value during this time?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['6%', '803', '1148', '382.7'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['divide(443, 7384)', 'add(443, 360)', 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345)', 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345), divide(#1, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [0.05999, 803.0, 1148.0, 382.66667], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 382.66667}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:16 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amount of receivables in 2016?\nA1: 14215.0\nQ2: and what was it in 2015?\nA2: 15794.0\nQ3: what was, then, the total amount of receivables in both years?\nA3: 30009.0\nQ4: including 2014, what becomes this total?\nA4: 30451.0\nQ5: and including 2013, what then becomes the total for the four years?\nA5: 35188.0\nQ6: and concerning the city council unanimously approved settlement from june 2014, what was the percentage bandwidth of the midpoint target authorized return on common equity?\nA6: 0.4', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis entergy new orleans 2019s receivables from the money pool were as follows as of december 31 for each of the following years. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nsee note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool . entergy new orleans has a credit facility in the amount of $ 25 million scheduled to expire in november 2018 . the credit facility allows entergy new orleans to issue letters of credit against $ 10 million of the borrowing capacity of the facility . as of december 31 , 2016 , there were no cash borrowings and a $ 0.8 million letter of credit was outstanding under the facility . in addition , entergy new orleans is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations under miso . as of december 31 , 2016 , a $ 6.2 million letter of credit was outstanding under entergy new orleans 2019s letter of credit facility . see note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the credit facilities . entergy new orleans obtained authorization from the ferc through october 2017 for short-term borrowings not to exceed an aggregate amount of $ 100 million at any time outstanding . see note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of entergy new orleans 2019s short-term borrowing limits . the long-term securities issuances of entergy new orleans are limited to amounts authorized by the city council , and the current authorization extends through june 2018 . state and local rate regulation the rates that entergy new orleans charges for electricity and natural gas significantly influence its financial position , results of operations , and liquidity . entergy new orleans is regulated and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings . a governmental agency , the city council , is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers . retail rates see 201calgiers asset transfer 201d below for discussion of the transfer from entergy louisiana to entergy new orleans of certain assets that serve algiers customers . in march 2013 , entergy louisiana filed a rate case for the algiers area , which is in new orleans and is regulated by the city council . entergy louisiana requested a rate increase of $ 13 million over three years , including a 10.4% ( 10.4 % ) return on common equity and a formula rate plan mechanism identical to its lpsc request . in january 2014 the city council advisors filed direct testimony recommending a rate increase of $ 5.56 million over three years , including an 8.13% ( 8.13 % ) return on common equity . in june 2014 the city council unanimously approved a settlement that includes the following : 2022 a $ 9.3 million base rate revenue increase to be phased in on a levelized basis over four years ; 2022 recovery of an additional $ 853 thousand annually through a miso recovery rider ; and 2022 the adoption of a four-year formula rate plan requiring the filing of annual evaluation reports in may of each year , commencing may 2015 , with resulting rates being implemented in october of each year . the formula rate plan includes a midpoint target authorized return on common equity of 9.95% ( 9.95 % ) with a +/- 40 basis point bandwidth . the rate increase was effective with bills rendered on and after the first billing cycle of july 2014 . additional compliance filings were made with the city council in october 2014 for approval of the form of certain rate riders , including among others , a ninemile 6 non-fuel cost recovery interim rider , allowing for contemporaneous recovery of capacity .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | ( in thousands ) | $ 14215 | ( in thousands ) | $ 14215 | ( in thousands ) | $ 14215 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2015 | ( in thousands ) | 15794.0 | ( in thousands ) | 15794.0 | ( in thousands ) | 15794.0 |\n| 2014 | ( in thousands ) | 442.0 | ( in thousands ) | 442.0 | ( in thousands ) | 442.0 |\n| 2013 | ( in thousands ) | 4737.0 | ( in thousands ) | 4737.0 | ( in thousands ) | 4737.0 |', 'question': 'and what was that midpoint target authorized return?', 'ops': '9.95', 'id': 'Double_ETR/2016/page_403.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy new orleans , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis entergy new orleans 2019s receivables from the money pool were as follows as of december 31 for each of the following years. .', 'doc_post_text': 'see note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool . entergy new orleans has a credit facility in the amount of $ 25 million scheduled to expire in november 2018 . the credit facility allows entergy new orleans to issue letters of credit against $ 10 million of the borrowing capacity of the facility . as of december 31 , 2016 , there were no cash borrowings and a $ 0.8 million letter of credit was outstanding under the facility . in addition , entergy new orleans is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations under miso . as of december 31 , 2016 , a $ 6.2 million letter of credit was outstanding under entergy new orleans 2019s letter of credit facility . see note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the credit facilities . entergy new orleans obtained authorization from the ferc through october 2017 for short-term borrowings not to exceed an aggregate amount of $ 100 million at any time outstanding . see note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of entergy new orleans 2019s short-term borrowing limits . the long-term securities issuances of entergy new orleans are limited to amounts authorized by the city council , and the current authorization extends through june 2018 . state and local rate regulation the rates that entergy new orleans charges for electricity and natural gas significantly influence its financial position , results of operations , and liquidity . entergy new orleans is regulated and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings . a governmental agency , the city council , is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers . retail rates see 201calgiers asset transfer 201d below for discussion of the transfer from entergy louisiana to entergy new orleans of certain assets that serve algiers customers . in march 2013 , entergy louisiana filed a rate case for the algiers area , which is in new orleans and is regulated by the city council . entergy louisiana requested a rate increase of $ 13 million over three years , including a 10.4% ( 10.4 % ) return on common equity and a formula rate plan mechanism identical to its lpsc request . in january 2014 the city council advisors filed direct testimony recommending a rate increase of $ 5.56 million over three years , including an 8.13% ( 8.13 % ) return on common equity . in june 2014 the city council unanimously approved a settlement that includes the following : 2022 a $ 9.3 million base rate revenue increase to be phased in on a levelized basis over four years ; 2022 recovery of an additional $ 853 thousand annually through a miso recovery rider ; and 2022 the adoption of a four-year formula rate plan requiring the filing of annual evaluation reports in may of each year , commencing may 2015 , with resulting rates being implemented in october of each year . the formula rate plan includes a midpoint target authorized return on common equity of 9.95% ( 9.95 % ) with a +/- 40 basis point bandwidth . the rate increase was effective with bills rendered on and after the first billing cycle of july 2014 . additional compliance filings were made with the city council in october 2014 for approval of the form of certain rate riders , including among others , a ninemile 6 non-fuel cost recovery interim rider , allowing for contemporaneous recovery of capacity .', 'doc_table': {'2015': {'( in thousands )': '( in thousands )', '$ 14215': 15794.0}, '2014': {'( in thousands )': '( in thousands )', '$ 14215': 442.0}, '2013': {'( in thousands )': '( in thousands )', '$ 14215': 4737.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amount of receivables in 2016?', 'and what was it in 2015?', 'what was, then, the total amount of receivables in both years?', 'including 2014, what becomes this total?', 'and including 2013, what then becomes the total for the four years?', 'and concerning the city council unanimously approved settlement from june 2014, what was the percentage bandwidth of the midpoint target authorized return on common equity?', 'and what was that midpoint target authorized return?', 'what is, then, the maximum possible amount of this return?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['14215', '15794', '30009', '30451', '35188', '0.4', '9.95', '10.35'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['14215', '15794', 'add(14215, 15794)', 'add(14215, 15794), add(#0, 442)', 'add(14215, 15794), add(#0, 442), add(#1, 4737)', 'divide(40, const_100)', '9.95', 'divide(40, const_100), add(#0, 9.95)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [14215.0, 15794.0, 30009.0, 30451.0, 35188.0, 0.4, 9.95, 10.35], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 9.95}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "43s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:16 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:17 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in 2010?\nA1: 7274.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\noperating profit for the segment decreased by 1% ( 1 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . for the year , operating profit declines in defense more than offset an increase in civil , while operating profit at intelligence essentially was unchanged . the $ 27 million decrease in operating profit at defense primarily was attributable to a decrease in the level of favorable performance adjustments on mission and combat systems activities in 2010 . the $ 19 million increase in civil principally was due to higher volume on enterprise civilian services . operating profit for the segment decreased by 3% ( 3 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . operating profit declines in civil and intelligence partially were offset by growth in defense . the decrease of $ 29 million in civil 2019s operating profit primarily was attributable to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on enterprise civilian services programs in 2009 compared to 2008 . the decrease in operating profit of $ 27 million at intelligence mainly was due to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on security solution activities in 2009 compared to 2008 . the increase in defense 2019s operating profit of $ 29 million mainly was due to volume and improved performance in mission and combat systems . the decrease in backlog during 2010 compared to 2009 mainly was due to higher sales volume on enterprise civilian service programs at civil , including volume associated with the dris 2010 program , and mission and combat system programs at defense . backlog decreased in 2009 compared to 2008 due to u.s . government 2019s exercise of the termination for convenience clause on the tsat mission operations system ( tmos ) contract at defense , which resulted in a $ 1.6 billion reduction in orders . this decline more than offset increased orders on enterprise civilian services programs at civil . we expect is&gs will experience a low single digit percentage decrease in sales for 2011 as compared to 2010 . this decline primarily is due to completion of most of the work associated with the dris 2010 program . operating profit in 2011 is expected to decline in relationship to the decline in sales volume , while operating margins are expected to be comparable between the years . space systems our space systems business segment is engaged in the design , research and development , engineering , and production of satellites , strategic and defensive missile systems , and space transportation systems , including activities related to the planned replacement of the space shuttle . government satellite programs include the advanced extremely high frequency ( aehf ) system , the mobile user objective system ( muos ) , the global positioning satellite iii ( gps iii ) system , the space-based infrared system ( sbirs ) , and the geostationary operational environmental satellite r-series ( goes-r ) . strategic and missile defense programs include the targets and countermeasures program and the fleet ballistic missile program . space transportation includes the nasa orion program and , through ownership interests in two joint ventures , expendable launch services ( united launch alliance , or ula ) and space shuttle processing activities for the u.s . government ( united space alliance , or usa ) . the space shuttle is expected to complete its final flight mission in 2011 and our involvement with its launch and processing activities will end at that time . space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2010 2009 2008 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnet sales for space systems decreased by 5% ( 5 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . sales declined in all three lines of business during the year . the $ 253 million decrease in space transportation principally was due to lower volume on the space shuttle external tank , commercial launch vehicle activity and other human space flight programs , which partially were offset by higher volume on the orion program . there were no commercial launches in 2010 compared to one commercial launch in 2009 . strategic & defensive missile systems ( s&dms ) sales declined $ 147 million principally due to lower volume on defensive missile programs . the $ 8 million sales decline in satellites primarily was attributable to lower volume on commercial satellites , which partially were offset by higher volume on government satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2010 and one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 . net sales for space systems increased 8% ( 8 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . during the year , sales growth at satellites and space transportation offset a decline in s&dms . the sales growth of $ 707 million in satellites was due to higher volume in government satellite activities , which partially was offset by lower volume in commercial satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 and two deliveries in 2008 . the increase in sales of $ 21 million in space transportation primarily was due to higher volume on the orion program , which more than offset a decline in the space shuttle 2019s external tank program . there was one commercial launch in both 2009 and 2008 . s&dms 2019 sales decreased by $ 102 million mainly due to lower volume on defensive missile programs , which more than offset growth in strategic missile programs. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2010 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 |\n| 2009 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 |\n| 2008 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 |', 'question': 'and what were the net sales in 2009?', 'ops': '8654', 'id': 'Single_LMT/2010/page_39.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'operating profit for the segment decreased by 1% ( 1 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . for the year , operating profit declines in defense more than offset an increase in civil , while operating profit at intelligence essentially was unchanged . the $ 27 million decrease in operating profit at defense primarily was attributable to a decrease in the level of favorable performance adjustments on mission and combat systems activities in 2010 . the $ 19 million increase in civil principally was due to higher volume on enterprise civilian services . operating profit for the segment decreased by 3% ( 3 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . operating profit declines in civil and intelligence partially were offset by growth in defense . the decrease of $ 29 million in civil 2019s operating profit primarily was attributable to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on enterprise civilian services programs in 2009 compared to 2008 . the decrease in operating profit of $ 27 million at intelligence mainly was due to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on security solution activities in 2009 compared to 2008 . the increase in defense 2019s operating profit of $ 29 million mainly was due to volume and improved performance in mission and combat systems . the decrease in backlog during 2010 compared to 2009 mainly was due to higher sales volume on enterprise civilian service programs at civil , including volume associated with the dris 2010 program , and mission and combat system programs at defense . backlog decreased in 2009 compared to 2008 due to u.s . government 2019s exercise of the termination for convenience clause on the tsat mission operations system ( tmos ) contract at defense , which resulted in a $ 1.6 billion reduction in orders . this decline more than offset increased orders on enterprise civilian services programs at civil . we expect is&gs will experience a low single digit percentage decrease in sales for 2011 as compared to 2010 . this decline primarily is due to completion of most of the work associated with the dris 2010 program . operating profit in 2011 is expected to decline in relationship to the decline in sales volume , while operating margins are expected to be comparable between the years . space systems our space systems business segment is engaged in the design , research and development , engineering , and production of satellites , strategic and defensive missile systems , and space transportation systems , including activities related to the planned replacement of the space shuttle . government satellite programs include the advanced extremely high frequency ( aehf ) system , the mobile user objective system ( muos ) , the global positioning satellite iii ( gps iii ) system , the space-based infrared system ( sbirs ) , and the geostationary operational environmental satellite r-series ( goes-r ) . strategic and missile defense programs include the targets and countermeasures program and the fleet ballistic missile program . space transportation includes the nasa orion program and , through ownership interests in two joint ventures , expendable launch services ( united launch alliance , or ula ) and space shuttle processing activities for the u.s . government ( united space alliance , or usa ) . the space shuttle is expected to complete its final flight mission in 2011 and our involvement with its launch and processing activities will end at that time . space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2010 2009 2008 .', 'doc_post_text': 'net sales for space systems decreased by 5% ( 5 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . sales declined in all three lines of business during the year . the $ 253 million decrease in space transportation principally was due to lower volume on the space shuttle external tank , commercial launch vehicle activity and other human space flight programs , which partially were offset by higher volume on the orion program . there were no commercial launches in 2010 compared to one commercial launch in 2009 . strategic & defensive missile systems ( s&dms ) sales declined $ 147 million principally due to lower volume on defensive missile programs . the $ 8 million sales decline in satellites primarily was attributable to lower volume on commercial satellites , which partially were offset by higher volume on government satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2010 and one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 . net sales for space systems increased 8% ( 8 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . during the year , sales growth at satellites and space transportation offset a decline in s&dms . the sales growth of $ 707 million in satellites was due to higher volume in government satellite activities , which partially was offset by lower volume in commercial satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 and two deliveries in 2008 . the increase in sales of $ 21 million in space transportation primarily was due to higher volume on the orion program , which more than offset a decline in the space shuttle 2019s external tank program . there was one commercial launch in both 2009 and 2008 . s&dms 2019 sales decreased by $ 102 million mainly due to lower volume on defensive missile programs , which more than offset growth in strategic missile programs. .', 'doc_table': {'2010': {'net sales': 8246.0, 'operating profit': 972.0, 'operating margin': -11.8, 'backlog at year-end': 17800.0}, '2009': {'net sales': 8654.0, 'operating profit': 972.0, 'operating margin': -11.2, 'backlog at year-end': 16800.0}, '2008': {'net sales': 8027.0, 'operating profit': 953.0, 'operating margin': -11.9, 'backlog at year-end': 17900.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in 2010?', 'and what were the net sales in 2009?', 'and what was the operating profit in that year?', 'what is, then, the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in that year?', 'and what is the change in that difference from 2009 to 2010?', 'how much does this change represent in relation to the 2009 difference?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['7274', '8654', '972', '7682', '-408', '-5.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(8246, 972)', '8654', '972', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972)', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972), subtract(#0, #1)', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972), subtract(#0, #1), divide(#2, #1)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [7274.0, 8654.0, 972.0, 7682.0, -408.0, -0.05311], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 8654.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "43s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:17 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the net change in value of an investment in s&p500 from 2010 to 2011?\nA1: 8.09\nQ2: what is the initial value?\nA2: 100.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nperformance graph the performance graph below shows the five-year cumulative total stockholder return on applied common stock during the period from october 31 , 2010 through october 25 , 2015 . this is compared with the cumulative total return of the standard & poor 2019s 500 stock index and the rdg semiconductor composite index over the same period . the comparison assumes $ 100 was invested on october 31 , 2010 in applied common stock and in each of the foregoing indices and assumes reinvestment of dividends , if any . dollar amounts in the graph are rounded to the nearest whole dollar . the performance shown in the graph represents past performance and should not be considered an indication of future performance . comparison of 5 year cumulative total return* among applied materials , inc. , the s&p 500 index and the rdg semiconductor composite index *assumes $ 100 invested on 10/31/10 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . indexes calculated on month-end basis . 201cs&p 201d is a registered trademark of standard & poor 2019s financial services llc , a subsidiary of the mcgraw-hill companies , inc. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ndividends during each of fiscal 2015 and 2014 , applied's board of directors declared four quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share . during fiscal 2013 , applied 2019s board of directors declared three quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share and one quarterly cash dividend of $ 0.09 per share . dividends paid during fiscal 2015 , 2014 and 2013 amounted to $ 487 million , $ 485 million and $ 456 million , respectively . applied currently anticipates that cash dividends will continue to be paid on a quarterly basis , although the declaration of any future cash dividend is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on applied 2019s financial condition , results of operations , capital requirements , business conditions and other factors , as well as a determination by the board of directors that cash dividends are in the best interests of applied 2019s stockholders . 104 136 10/31/10 10/30/11 10/28/12 10/27/13 10/26/14 10/25/15 applied materials , inc . s&p 500 rdg semiconductor composite .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 10/31/2010 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| 10/30/2011 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 |\n| 10/28/2012 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 |\n| 10/27/2013 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 |\n| 10/26/2014 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 |\n| 10/25/2015 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 |', 'question': 'what rate of return does this represent?', 'ops': 'subtract(108.09, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'id': 'Double_AMAT/2015/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'performance graph the performance graph below shows the five-year cumulative total stockholder return on applied common stock during the period from october 31 , 2010 through october 25 , 2015 . this is compared with the cumulative total return of the standard & poor 2019s 500 stock index and the rdg semiconductor composite index over the same period . the comparison assumes $ 100 was invested on october 31 , 2010 in applied common stock and in each of the foregoing indices and assumes reinvestment of dividends , if any . dollar amounts in the graph are rounded to the nearest whole dollar . the performance shown in the graph represents past performance and should not be considered an indication of future performance . comparison of 5 year cumulative total return* among applied materials , inc. , the s&p 500 index and the rdg semiconductor composite index *assumes $ 100 invested on 10/31/10 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . indexes calculated on month-end basis . 201cs&p 201d is a registered trademark of standard & poor 2019s financial services llc , a subsidiary of the mcgraw-hill companies , inc. .', 'doc_post_text': "dividends during each of fiscal 2015 and 2014 , applied's board of directors declared four quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share . during fiscal 2013 , applied 2019s board of directors declared three quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share and one quarterly cash dividend of $ 0.09 per share . dividends paid during fiscal 2015 , 2014 and 2013 amounted to $ 487 million , $ 485 million and $ 456 million , respectively . applied currently anticipates that cash dividends will continue to be paid on a quarterly basis , although the declaration of any future cash dividend is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on applied 2019s financial condition , results of operations , capital requirements , business conditions and other factors , as well as a determination by the board of directors that cash dividends are in the best interests of applied 2019s stockholders . 104 136 10/31/10 10/30/11 10/28/12 10/27/13 10/26/14 10/25/15 applied materials , inc . s&p 500 rdg semiconductor composite .", 'doc_table': {'10/31/2010': {'applied materials': 100.0, 's&p 500 index': 100.0, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 100.0}, '10/30/2011': {'applied materials': 104.54, 's&p 500 index': 108.09, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 110.04}, '10/28/2012': {'applied materials': 90.88, 's&p 500 index': 124.52, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 104.07}, '10/27/2013': {'applied materials': 155.43, 's&p 500 index': 158.36, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 136.15}, '10/26/2014': {'applied materials': 188.13, 's&p 500 index': 185.71, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 172.41}, '10/25/2015': {'applied materials': 150.26, 's&p 500 index': 195.37, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 170.4}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in value of an investment in s&p500 from 2010 to 2011?', 'what is the initial value?', 'what rate of return does this represent?', 'what is the quarterly cash dividends for the first three quarters?', 'what about the fourth quarter?', 'what is the total dividends in 2013?', 'how many shares received this dividend in 2013?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['8.09', '100', '8.1%', '0.3', '0.09', '0.39', '1248.7'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(108.09, 100)', '100', 'subtract(108.09, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'multiply(0.10, const_3)', '0.09', 'multiply(0.10, const_3), add(#0, 0.09)', 'multiply(0.10, const_3), add(#0, 0.09), divide(487, #1)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [8.09, 100.0, 0.0809, 0.3, 0.09, 0.39, 1248.71795], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.0809}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "43s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:17 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?\nA1: 68.4\nQ2: including the year of 2011, what would it then be?\nA2: 89.3\nQ3: including now the year of 2012 in the amount, what would the total estimated aggregate amortization expense be, in millions?\nA3: 106.3\nQ4: what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense in 2013, in millions?\nA4: 12.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfor intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | revenue | net loss | revenue | net loss |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| year endedfebruary 12008 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 |\n| year endedfebruary 22007 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 |', 'question': 'including 2013, what would now be the total sum in estimated aggregate amortization expense over those five years, in millions?', 'ops': 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0), add(#2, 12.0)', 'id': 'Single_DG/2008/page_86.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'for intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .', 'doc_post_text': 'the pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .', 'doc_table': {'year endedfebruary 12008': {'revenue': 9495246.0, 'net loss': -57939.0}, 'year endedfebruary 22007': {'revenue': 9169822.0, 'net loss': -156188.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?', 'including the year of 2011, what would it then be?', 'including now the year of 2012 in the amount, what would the total estimated aggregate amortization expense be, in millions?', 'what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense in 2013, in millions?', 'including 2013, what would now be the total sum in estimated aggregate amortization expense over those five years, in millions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['68.4', '89.3', '106.3', '12.0', '118.3'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(41.1, 27.3)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0)', '12.0', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0), add(#2, 12.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [68.4, 89.3, 106.3, 12.0, 118.3], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 118.3}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "43s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:17 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n2322 t . r o w e p r i c e g r o u p a n n u a l r e p o r t 2 0 1 1 c o n t r a c t u a l o b l i g at i o n s the following table presents a summary of our future obligations ( in a0millions ) under the terms of existing operating leases and other contractual cash purchase commitments at december 31 , 2011 . other purchase commitments include contractual amounts that will be due for the purchase of goods or services to be used in our operations and may be cancelable at earlier times than those indicated , under certain conditions that may involve termination fees . because these obligations are generally of a normal recurring nature , we expect that we will fund them from future cash flows from operations . the information presented does not include operating expenses or capital expenditures that will be committed in the normal course of operations in 2012 and future years . the information also excludes the $ 4.7 a0million of uncertain tax positions discussed in note 9 to our consolidated financial statements because it is not possible to estimate the time period in which a payment might be made to the tax authorities. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nwe also have outstanding commitments to fund additional contributions to investment partnerships in which we have an existing investment totaling $ 42.5 a0million at december 31 , 2011 . c r i t i c a l a c c o u n t i n g p o l i c i e s the preparation of financial statements often requires the selection of specific accounting methods and policies from among several acceptable alternatives . further , significant estimates and judgments may be required in selecting and applying those methods and policies in the recognition of the assets and liabilities in our balance sheet , the revenues and expenses in our statement of income , and the information that is contained in our significant accounting policies and notes to consolidated financial statements . making these estimates and judgments requires the analysis of information concerning events that may not yet be complete and of facts and circumstances that may change over time . accordingly , actual amounts or future results can differ materially from those estimates that we include currently in our consolidated financial statements , significant accounting policies , and notes . we present those significant accounting policies used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements as an integral part of those statements within this 2011 annual report . in the following discussion , we highlight and explain further certain of those policies that are most critical to the preparation and understanding of our financial statements . other than temporary impairments of available-for-sale securities . we generally classify our investment holdings in sponsored mutual funds and the debt securities held for investment by our savings bank subsidiary as available-for-sale . at the end of each quarter , we mark the carrying amount of each investment holding to fair value and recognize an unrealized gain or loss as a component of comprehensive income within the statement of stockholders 2019 equity . we next review each individual security position that has an unrealized loss or impairment to determine if that impairment is other than temporary . in determining whether a mutual fund holding is other than temporarily impaired , we consider many factors , including the duration of time it has existed , the severity of the impairment , any subsequent changes in value , and our intent and ability to hold the security for a period of time sufficient for an anticipated recovery in fair value . subject to the other considerations noted above , with respect to duration of time , we believe a mutual fund holding with an unrealized loss that has persisted daily throughout the six months between quarter-ends is generally presumed to have an other than temporary impairment . we may also recognize an other than temporary loss of less than six months in our statement of income if the particular circumstances of the underlying investment do not warrant our belief that a near-term recovery is possible . an impaired debt security held by our savings bank subsidiary is considered to have an other than temporary loss that we will recognize in our statement of income if the impairment is caused by a change in credit quality that affects our ability to recover our amortized cost or if we intend to sell the security or believe that it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the security before recovering cost . minor impairments of 5% ( 5 % ) or less are generally considered temporary . other than temporary impairments of equity method investments . we evaluate our equity method investments , including our investment in uti , for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the investment exceeds its fair value , and the decline in fair value is other than temporary . goodwill . we internally conduct , manage and report our operations as one investment advisory business . we do not have distinct operating segments or components that separately constitute a business . accordingly , we attribute goodwill to a single reportable business segment and reporting unit 2014our investment advisory business . we evaluate the carrying amount of goodwill in our balance sheet for possible impairment on an annual basis in the third quarter of each year using a fair value approach . goodwill would be considered impaired whenever our historical carrying amount exceeds the fair value of our investment advisory business . our annual testing has demonstrated that the fair value of our investment advisory business ( our market capitalization ) exceeds our carrying amount ( our stockholders 2019 equity ) and , therefore , no impairment exists . should we reach a different conclusion in the future , additional work would be performed to ascertain the amount of the non-cash impairment charge to be recognized . we must also perform impairment testing at other times if an event or circumstance occurs indicating that it is more likely than not that an impairment has been incurred . the maximum future impairment of goodwill that we could incur is the amount recognized in our balance sheet , $ 665.7 a0million . stock options . we recognize stock option-based compensation expense in our consolidated statement of income using a fair value based method . fair value methods use a valuation model for shorter-term , market-traded financial instruments to theoretically value stock option grants even though they are not available for trading and are of longer duration . the black- scholes option-pricing model that we use includes the input of certain variables that are dependent on future expectations , including the expected lives of our options from grant date to exercise date , the volatility of our underlying common shares in the market over that time period , and the rate of dividends that we will pay during that time . our estimates of these variables are made for the purpose of using the valuation model to determine an expense for each reporting period and are not subsequently adjusted . unlike most of our expenses , the resulting charge to earnings using a fair value based method is a non-cash charge that is never measured by , or adjusted based on , a cash outflow . provision for income taxes . after compensation and related costs , our provision for income taxes on our earnings is our largest annual expense . we operate in numerous states and countries through our various subsidiaries , and must allocate our income , expenses , and earnings under the various laws and regulations of each of these taxing jurisdictions . accordingly , our provision for income taxes represents our total estimate of the liability that we have incurred in doing business each year in all of our locations . annually , we file tax returns that represent our filing positions with each jurisdiction and settle our return liabilities . each jurisdiction has the right to audit those returns and may take different positions with respect to income and expense allocations and taxable earnings determinations . from time to time , we may also provide for estimated liabilities associated with uncertain tax return filing positions that are subject to , or in the process of , being audited by various tax authorities . because the determination of our annual provision is subject to judgments and estimates , it is likely that actual results will vary from those recognized in our financial statements . as a result , we recognize additions to , or reductions of , income tax expense during a reporting period that pertain to prior period provisions as our estimated liabilities are revised and actual tax returns and tax audits are settled . we recognize any such prior period adjustment in the discrete quarterly period in which it is determined . n e w ly i s s u e d b u t n o t y e t a d o p t e d a c c o u n t i n g g u i d a n c e in may 2011 , the fasb issued amended guidance clarifying how to measure and disclose fair value . we do not believe the adoption of such amended guidance on january 1 , 2012 , will have a significant effect on our consolidated financial statements . we have also considered all other newly issued accounting guidance that is applicable to our operations and the preparation of our consolidated statements , including that which we have not yet adopted . we do not believe that any such guidance will have a material effect on our financial position or results of operation. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| total | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 |\n| 2012 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 |\n| 2013-14 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 |\n| 2015-16 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 |\n| later | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 |', 'question': 'as of december 31, 2011, what was the amount of noncancelable operating leases?', 'ops': '185', 'id': 'Double_TROW/2011/page_13.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': '2322 t . r o w e p r i c e g r o u p a n n u a l r e p o r t 2 0 1 1 c o n t r a c t u a l o b l i g at i o n s the following table presents a summary of our future obligations ( in a0millions ) under the terms of existing operating leases and other contractual cash purchase commitments at december 31 , 2011 . other purchase commitments include contractual amounts that will be due for the purchase of goods or services to be used in our operations and may be cancelable at earlier times than those indicated , under certain conditions that may involve termination fees . because these obligations are generally of a normal recurring nature , we expect that we will fund them from future cash flows from operations . the information presented does not include operating expenses or capital expenditures that will be committed in the normal course of operations in 2012 and future years . the information also excludes the $ 4.7 a0million of uncertain tax positions discussed in note 9 to our consolidated financial statements because it is not possible to estimate the time period in which a payment might be made to the tax authorities. .', 'doc_post_text': 'we also have outstanding commitments to fund additional contributions to investment partnerships in which we have an existing investment totaling $ 42.5 a0million at december 31 , 2011 . c r i t i c a l a c c o u n t i n g p o l i c i e s the preparation of financial statements often requires the selection of specific accounting methods and policies from among several acceptable alternatives . further , significant estimates and judgments may be required in selecting and applying those methods and policies in the recognition of the assets and liabilities in our balance sheet , the revenues and expenses in our statement of income , and the information that is contained in our significant accounting policies and notes to consolidated financial statements . making these estimates and judgments requires the analysis of information concerning events that may not yet be complete and of facts and circumstances that may change over time . accordingly , actual amounts or future results can differ materially from those estimates that we include currently in our consolidated financial statements , significant accounting policies , and notes . we present those significant accounting policies used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements as an integral part of those statements within this 2011 annual report . in the following discussion , we highlight and explain further certain of those policies that are most critical to the preparation and understanding of our financial statements . other than temporary impairments of available-for-sale securities . we generally classify our investment holdings in sponsored mutual funds and the debt securities held for investment by our savings bank subsidiary as available-for-sale . at the end of each quarter , we mark the carrying amount of each investment holding to fair value and recognize an unrealized gain or loss as a component of comprehensive income within the statement of stockholders 2019 equity . we next review each individual security position that has an unrealized loss or impairment to determine if that impairment is other than temporary . in determining whether a mutual fund holding is other than temporarily impaired , we consider many factors , including the duration of time it has existed , the severity of the impairment , any subsequent changes in value , and our intent and ability to hold the security for a period of time sufficient for an anticipated recovery in fair value . subject to the other considerations noted above , with respect to duration of time , we believe a mutual fund holding with an unrealized loss that has persisted daily throughout the six months between quarter-ends is generally presumed to have an other than temporary impairment . we may also recognize an other than temporary loss of less than six months in our statement of income if the particular circumstances of the underlying investment do not warrant our belief that a near-term recovery is possible . an impaired debt security held by our savings bank subsidiary is considered to have an other than temporary loss that we will recognize in our statement of income if the impairment is caused by a change in credit quality that affects our ability to recover our amortized cost or if we intend to sell the security or believe that it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the security before recovering cost . minor impairments of 5% ( 5 % ) or less are generally considered temporary . other than temporary impairments of equity method investments . we evaluate our equity method investments , including our investment in uti , for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the investment exceeds its fair value , and the decline in fair value is other than temporary . goodwill . we internally conduct , manage and report our operations as one investment advisory business . we do not have distinct operating segments or components that separately constitute a business . accordingly , we attribute goodwill to a single reportable business segment and reporting unit 2014our investment advisory business . we evaluate the carrying amount of goodwill in our balance sheet for possible impairment on an annual basis in the third quarter of each year using a fair value approach . goodwill would be considered impaired whenever our historical carrying amount exceeds the fair value of our investment advisory business . our annual testing has demonstrated that the fair value of our investment advisory business ( our market capitalization ) exceeds our carrying amount ( our stockholders 2019 equity ) and , therefore , no impairment exists . should we reach a different conclusion in the future , additional work would be performed to ascertain the amount of the non-cash impairment charge to be recognized . we must also perform impairment testing at other times if an event or circumstance occurs indicating that it is more likely than not that an impairment has been incurred . the maximum future impairment of goodwill that we could incur is the amount recognized in our balance sheet , $ 665.7 a0million . stock options . we recognize stock option-based compensation expense in our consolidated statement of income using a fair value based method . fair value methods use a valuation model for shorter-term , market-traded financial instruments to theoretically value stock option grants even though they are not available for trading and are of longer duration . the black- scholes option-pricing model that we use includes the input of certain variables that are dependent on future expectations , including the expected lives of our options from grant date to exercise date , the volatility of our underlying common shares in the market over that time period , and the rate of dividends that we will pay during that time . our estimates of these variables are made for the purpose of using the valuation model to determine an expense for each reporting period and are not subsequently adjusted . unlike most of our expenses , the resulting charge to earnings using a fair value based method is a non-cash charge that is never measured by , or adjusted based on , a cash outflow . provision for income taxes . after compensation and related costs , our provision for income taxes on our earnings is our largest annual expense . we operate in numerous states and countries through our various subsidiaries , and must allocate our income , expenses , and earnings under the various laws and regulations of each of these taxing jurisdictions . accordingly , our provision for income taxes represents our total estimate of the liability that we have incurred in doing business each year in all of our locations . annually , we file tax returns that represent our filing positions with each jurisdiction and settle our return liabilities . each jurisdiction has the right to audit those returns and may take different positions with respect to income and expense allocations and taxable earnings determinations . from time to time , we may also provide for estimated liabilities associated with uncertain tax return filing positions that are subject to , or in the process of , being audited by various tax authorities . because the determination of our annual provision is subject to judgments and estimates , it is likely that actual results will vary from those recognized in our financial statements . as a result , we recognize additions to , or reductions of , income tax expense during a reporting period that pertain to prior period provisions as our estimated liabilities are revised and actual tax returns and tax audits are settled . we recognize any such prior period adjustment in the discrete quarterly period in which it is determined . n e w ly i s s u e d b u t n o t y e t a d o p t e d a c c o u n t i n g g u i d a n c e in may 2011 , the fasb issued amended guidance clarifying how to measure and disclose fair value . we do not believe the adoption of such amended guidance on january 1 , 2012 , will have a significant effect on our consolidated financial statements . we have also considered all other newly issued accounting guidance that is applicable to our operations and the preparation of our consolidated statements , including that which we have not yet adopted . we do not believe that any such guidance will have a material effect on our financial position or results of operation. .', 'doc_table': {'total': {'noncancelable operating leases': 185.0, 'other purchase commitments': 160.0, 'total': 345.0}, '2012': {'noncancelable operating leases': 31.0, 'other purchase commitments': 112.0, 'total': 143.0}, '2013-14': {'noncancelable operating leases': 63.0, 'other purchase commitments': 38.0, 'total': 101.0}, '2015-16': {'noncancelable operating leases': 57.0, 'other purchase commitments': 10.0, 'total': 67.0}, 'later': {'noncancelable operating leases': 34.0, 'other purchase commitments': '-', 'total': 34.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['as of december 31, 2011, what was the amount of noncancelable operating leases?', 'and what was the total of future obligations?', 'what percentage, then, does that amount represent in relation to this total?', 'and what percentage do the other purchase commitments represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['185', '345', '0.53', '46%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['185', '345', 'divide(185, 345)', 'divide(160, 345)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [185.0, 345.0, 0.53623, 0.46377], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 185.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "42s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:18 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what were the number of berths in 2011?\nA1: 155000.0\nQ2: what were the number of berths in 2007?\nA2: 100000.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart i berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 34000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the north american cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . europe in europe , cruising represents a smaller but growing sector of the vacation industry . it has experienced a compound annual growth rate in cruise guests of approximately 9.6% ( 9.6 % ) from 2007 to 2011 and we believe this market has significant continued growth poten- tial . we estimate that europe was served by 104 ships with approximately 100000 berths at the beginning of 2007 and by 121 ships with approximately 155000 berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 28000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the european cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . the following table details the growth in the global , north american and european cruise markets in terms of cruise guests and estimated weighted-average berths over the past five years : global cruise guests ( 1 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) north american cruise guests ( 2 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in north america ( 1 ) european cruise guests ( 3 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in europe ( 1 ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests , and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally , in north america and europe are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources including seatrade insider and cruise line international association . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) source : cruise line international association based on cruise guests carried for at least two consecutive nights for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . ( 3 ) source : european cruise council for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . other markets in addition to expected industry growth in north america and europe as discussed above , we expect the asia/pacific region to demonstrate an even higher growth rate in the near term , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america and europe . we compete with a number of cruise lines ; however , our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise lines , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , iberocruceros , p&o cruises and princess cruises ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; norwegian cruise line and oceania cruises . cruise lines compete with other vacation alternatives such as land-based resort hotels and sightseeing destinations for consum- ers 2019 leisure time . demand for such activities is influ- enced by political and general economic conditions . companies within the vacation market are dependent on consumer discretionary spending . operating strategies our principal operating strategies are to : and employees and protect the environment in which our vessels and organization operate , to better serve our global guest base and grow our business , order to enhance our revenues while continuing to expand and diversify our guest mix through interna- tional guest sourcing , and ensure adequate cash and liquidity , with the overall goal of maximizing our return on invested capital and long-term shareholder value , our brands throughout the world , revitalization of existing ships and the transfer of key innovations across each brand , while expanding our fleet with the new state-of-the-art cruise ships recently delivered and on order , by deploying them into those markets and itineraries that provide opportunities to optimize returns , while continuing our focus on existing key markets , support ongoing operations and initiatives , and the principal industry distribution channel , while enhancing our consumer outreach programs. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| global cruiseguests ( 1 ) | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 |\n| weighted-averagesupplyofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 ) | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 |\n| northamericancruiseguests ( 2 ) | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 |\n| weighted-average supply ofberths marketedin northamerica ( 1 ) | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 |\n| europeancruiseguests | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 |\n| weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketed ineurope ( 1 ) | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 |', 'question': 'what is the net change in berths?', 'ops': 'subtract(155000, 100000)', 'id': 'Single_RCL/2011/page_16.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'part i berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 34000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the north american cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . europe in europe , cruising represents a smaller but growing sector of the vacation industry . it has experienced a compound annual growth rate in cruise guests of approximately 9.6% ( 9.6 % ) from 2007 to 2011 and we believe this market has significant continued growth poten- tial . we estimate that europe was served by 104 ships with approximately 100000 berths at the beginning of 2007 and by 121 ships with approximately 155000 berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 28000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the european cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . the following table details the growth in the global , north american and european cruise markets in terms of cruise guests and estimated weighted-average berths over the past five years : global cruise guests ( 1 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) north american cruise guests ( 2 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in north america ( 1 ) european cruise guests ( 3 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in europe ( 1 ) .', 'doc_post_text': '( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests , and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally , in north america and europe are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources including seatrade insider and cruise line international association . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) source : cruise line international association based on cruise guests carried for at least two consecutive nights for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . ( 3 ) source : european cruise council for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . other markets in addition to expected industry growth in north america and europe as discussed above , we expect the asia/pacific region to demonstrate an even higher growth rate in the near term , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america and europe . we compete with a number of cruise lines ; however , our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise lines , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , iberocruceros , p&o cruises and princess cruises ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; norwegian cruise line and oceania cruises . cruise lines compete with other vacation alternatives such as land-based resort hotels and sightseeing destinations for consum- ers 2019 leisure time . demand for such activities is influ- enced by political and general economic conditions . companies within the vacation market are dependent on consumer discretionary spending . operating strategies our principal operating strategies are to : and employees and protect the environment in which our vessels and organization operate , to better serve our global guest base and grow our business , order to enhance our revenues while continuing to expand and diversify our guest mix through interna- tional guest sourcing , and ensure adequate cash and liquidity , with the overall goal of maximizing our return on invested capital and long-term shareholder value , our brands throughout the world , revitalization of existing ships and the transfer of key innovations across each brand , while expanding our fleet with the new state-of-the-art cruise ships recently delivered and on order , by deploying them into those markets and itineraries that provide opportunities to optimize returns , while continuing our focus on existing key markets , support ongoing operations and initiatives , and the principal industry distribution channel , while enhancing our consumer outreach programs. .', 'doc_table': {'global cruiseguests ( 1 )': {'2007': 16586000.0, '2008': 17184000.0, '2009': 17340000.0, '2010': 18800000.0, '2011': 20227000.0}, 'weighted-averagesupplyofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 )': {'2007': 327000.0, '2008': 347000.0, '2009': 363000.0, '2010': 391000.0, '2011': 412000.0}, 'northamericancruiseguests ( 2 )': {'2007': 10247000.0, '2008': 10093000.0, '2009': 10198000.0, '2010': 10781000.0, '2011': 11625000.0}, 'weighted-average supply ofberths marketedin northamerica ( 1 )': {'2007': 212000.0, '2008': 219000.0, '2009': 222000.0, '2010': 232000.0, '2011': 245000.0}, 'europeancruiseguests': {'2007': 4080000.0, '2008': 4500000.0, '2009': 5000000.0, '2010': 5540000.0, '2011': 5894000.0}, 'weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketed ineurope ( 1 )': {'2007': 105000.0, '2008': 120000.0, '2009': 131000.0, '2010': 143000.0, '2011': 149000.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what were the number of berths in 2011?', 'what were the number of berths in 2007?', 'what is the net change in berths?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what is that as a percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['155000', '100000', '55000', '0.55', '55'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['155000', '100000', 'subtract(155000, 100000)', 'subtract(155000, 100000), divide(#0, 100000)', 'subtract(155000, 100000), divide(#0, 100000), multiply(#1, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [155000.0, 100000.0, 55000.0, 0.55, 55.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 55000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "42s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:18 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:18 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:18 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:18 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:18 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value of cash provided by operations in 2013?\nA1: 1807.0\nQ2: what was the value in 2011?\nA2: 1595.0\nQ3: what is the net change in value?\nA3: 212.0\nQ4: what was the 2011 value?\nA4: 1595.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ngeneral market conditions affecting trust asset performance , future discount rates based on average yields of high quality corporate bonds and our decisions regarding certain elective provisions of the we currently project that we will make total u.s . and foreign benefit plan contributions in 2014 of approximately $ 57 million . actual 2014 contributions could be different from our current projections , as influenced by our decision to undertake discretionary funding of our benefit trusts versus other competing investment priorities , future changes in government requirements , trust asset performance , renewals of union contracts , or higher-than-expected health care claims cost experience . we measure cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities reduced by expenditures for property additions . we use this non-gaap financial measure of cash flow to focus management and investors on the amount of cash available for debt repayment , dividend distributions , acquisition opportunities , and share repurchases . our cash flow metric is reconciled to the most comparable gaap measure , as follows: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nyear-over-year change ( 4.5 ) % (  % ) 22.4% ( 22.4 % ) the decrease in cash flow ( as defined ) in 2013 compared to 2012 was due primarily to higher capital expenditures . the increase in cash flow in 2012 compared to 2011 was driven by improved performance in working capital resulting from the one-time benefit derived from the pringles acquisition , as well as changes in the level of capital expenditures during the three-year period . investing activities our net cash used in investing activities for 2013 amounted to $ 641 million , a decrease of $ 2604 million compared with 2012 primarily attributable to the $ 2668 million acquisition of pringles in 2012 . capital spending in 2013 included investments in our supply chain infrastructure , and to support capacity requirements in certain markets , including pringles . in addition , we continued the investment in our information technology infrastructure related to the reimplementation and upgrade of our sap platform . net cash used in investing activities of $ 3245 million in 2012 increased by $ 2658 million compared with 2011 , due to the acquisition of pringles in 2012 . cash paid for additions to properties as a percentage of net sales has increased to 4.3% ( 4.3 % ) in 2013 , from 3.8% ( 3.8 % ) in 2012 , which was a decrease from 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) in financing activities our net cash used by financing activities was $ 1141 million for 2013 , compared to net cash provided by financing activities of $ 1317 million for 2012 and net cash used in financing activities of $ 957 million for 2011 . the increase in cash provided from financing activities in 2012 compared to 2013 and 2011 , was primarily due to the issuance of debt related to the acquisition of pringles . total debt was $ 7.4 billion at year-end 2013 and $ 7.9 billion at year-end 2012 . in february 2013 , we issued $ 250 million of two-year floating-rate u.s . dollar notes , and $ 400 million of ten-year 2.75% ( 2.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 645 million . the proceeds from these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including , together with cash on hand , repayment of the $ 750 million aggregate principal amount of our 4.25% ( 4.25 % ) u.s . dollar notes due march 2013 . in may 2012 , we issued $ 350 million of three-year 1.125% ( 1.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , $ 400 million of five-year 1.75% ( 1.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes and $ 700 million of ten-year 3.125% ( 3.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 1.442 billion . the proceeds of these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including financing a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in may 2012 , we issued cdn . $ 300 million of two-year 2.10% ( 2.10 % ) fixed rate canadian dollar notes , using the proceeds from these notes for general corporate purposes , which included repayment of intercompany debt . this repayment resulted in cash available to be used for a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in december 2012 , we repaid $ 750 million five-year 5.125% ( 5.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in april 2011 , we repaid $ 945 million ten-year 6.60% ( 6.60 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in may 2011 , we issued $ 400 million of seven-year 3.25% ( 3.25 % ) fixed rate u.s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 397 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper . in november 2011 , we issued $ 500 million of five-year 1.875% ( 1.875 % ) fixed rate u . s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 498 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2013 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 |\n| 2012 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 |\n| 2011 | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  |', 'question': 'what is the percent change?', 'ops': 'subtract(1807, 1595), divide(#0, 1595)', 'id': 'Single_K/2013/page_27.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'general market conditions affecting trust asset performance , future discount rates based on average yields of high quality corporate bonds and our decisions regarding certain elective provisions of the we currently project that we will make total u.s . and foreign benefit plan contributions in 2014 of approximately $ 57 million . actual 2014 contributions could be different from our current projections , as influenced by our decision to undertake discretionary funding of our benefit trusts versus other competing investment priorities , future changes in government requirements , trust asset performance , renewals of union contracts , or higher-than-expected health care claims cost experience . we measure cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities reduced by expenditures for property additions . we use this non-gaap financial measure of cash flow to focus management and investors on the amount of cash available for debt repayment , dividend distributions , acquisition opportunities , and share repurchases . our cash flow metric is reconciled to the most comparable gaap measure , as follows: .', 'doc_post_text': 'year-over-year change ( 4.5 ) % (  % ) 22.4% ( 22.4 % ) the decrease in cash flow ( as defined ) in 2013 compared to 2012 was due primarily to higher capital expenditures . the increase in cash flow in 2012 compared to 2011 was driven by improved performance in working capital resulting from the one-time benefit derived from the pringles acquisition , as well as changes in the level of capital expenditures during the three-year period . investing activities our net cash used in investing activities for 2013 amounted to $ 641 million , a decrease of $ 2604 million compared with 2012 primarily attributable to the $ 2668 million acquisition of pringles in 2012 . capital spending in 2013 included investments in our supply chain infrastructure , and to support capacity requirements in certain markets , including pringles . in addition , we continued the investment in our information technology infrastructure related to the reimplementation and upgrade of our sap platform . net cash used in investing activities of $ 3245 million in 2012 increased by $ 2658 million compared with 2011 , due to the acquisition of pringles in 2012 . cash paid for additions to properties as a percentage of net sales has increased to 4.3% ( 4.3 % ) in 2013 , from 3.8% ( 3.8 % ) in 2012 , which was a decrease from 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) in financing activities our net cash used by financing activities was $ 1141 million for 2013 , compared to net cash provided by financing activities of $ 1317 million for 2012 and net cash used in financing activities of $ 957 million for 2011 . the increase in cash provided from financing activities in 2012 compared to 2013 and 2011 , was primarily due to the issuance of debt related to the acquisition of pringles . total debt was $ 7.4 billion at year-end 2013 and $ 7.9 billion at year-end 2012 . in february 2013 , we issued $ 250 million of two-year floating-rate u.s . dollar notes , and $ 400 million of ten-year 2.75% ( 2.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 645 million . the proceeds from these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including , together with cash on hand , repayment of the $ 750 million aggregate principal amount of our 4.25% ( 4.25 % ) u.s . dollar notes due march 2013 . in may 2012 , we issued $ 350 million of three-year 1.125% ( 1.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , $ 400 million of five-year 1.75% ( 1.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes and $ 700 million of ten-year 3.125% ( 3.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 1.442 billion . the proceeds of these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including financing a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in may 2012 , we issued cdn . $ 300 million of two-year 2.10% ( 2.10 % ) fixed rate canadian dollar notes , using the proceeds from these notes for general corporate purposes , which included repayment of intercompany debt . this repayment resulted in cash available to be used for a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in december 2012 , we repaid $ 750 million five-year 5.125% ( 5.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in april 2011 , we repaid $ 945 million ten-year 6.60% ( 6.60 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in may 2011 , we issued $ 400 million of seven-year 3.25% ( 3.25 % ) fixed rate u.s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 397 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper . in november 2011 , we issued $ 500 million of five-year 1.875% ( 1.875 % ) fixed rate u . s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 498 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper. .', 'doc_table': {'2013': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1807.0, 'additions to properties': -637.0, 'cash flow': 1170.0, 'year-over-year change': -4.5}, '2012': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1758.0, 'additions to properties': -533.0, 'cash flow': 1225.0, 'year-over-year change': -22.4}, '2011': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1595.0, 'additions to properties': -594.0, 'cash flow': 1001.0, 'year-over-year change': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of cash provided by operations in 2013?', 'what was the value in 2011?', 'what is the net change in value?', 'what was the 2011 value?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1807', '1595', '212', '1595', '.1329'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1807', '1595', 'subtract(1807, 1595)', '1595', 'subtract(1807, 1595), divide(#0, 1595)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1807.0, 1595.0, 212.0, 1595.0, 0.13292], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 0.13292}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "41s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:19 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:19 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:20 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:20 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:20 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:20 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:22 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:22 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:22 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:22 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:22 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total of benefit payments in 2012?\nA1: 3369.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmastercard incorporated notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) ( in thousands , except percent and per share data ) the company does not make any contributions to its postretirement plan other than funding benefits payments . the following table summarizes expected net benefit payments from the company 2019s general assets through 2019 : benefit payments expected subsidy receipts benefit payments .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company provides limited postemployment benefits to eligible former u.s . employees , primarily severance under a formal severance plan ( the 201cseverance plan 201d ) . the company accounts for severance expense by accruing the expected cost of the severance benefits expected to be provided to former employees after employment over their relevant service periods . the company updates the assumptions in determining the severance accrual by evaluating the actual severance activity and long-term trends underlying the assumptions . as a result of updating the assumptions , the company recorded incremental severance expense ( benefit ) related to the severance plan of $ 3471 , $ 2643 and $ ( 3418 ) , respectively , during the years 2009 , 2008 and 2007 . these amounts were part of total severance expenses of $ 135113 , $ 32997 and $ 21284 in 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively , included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations . note 14 . debt on april 28 , 2008 , the company extended its committed unsecured revolving credit facility , dated as of april 28 , 2006 ( the 201ccredit facility 201d ) , for an additional year . the new expiration date of the credit facility is april 26 , 2011 . the available funding under the credit facility will remain at $ 2500000 through april 27 , 2010 and then decrease to $ 2000000 during the final year of the credit facility agreement . other terms and conditions in the credit facility remain unchanged . the company 2019s option to request that each lender under the credit facility extend its commitment was provided pursuant to the original terms of the credit facility agreement . borrowings under the facility are available to provide liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by mastercard international customers and , subject to a limit of $ 500000 , for general corporate purposes . the facility fee and borrowing cost are contingent upon the company 2019s credit rating . at december 31 , 2009 , the facility fee was 7 basis points on the total commitment , or approximately $ 1774 annually . interest on borrowings under the credit facility would be charged at the london interbank offered rate ( libor ) plus an applicable margin of 28 basis points or an alternative base rate , and a utilization fee of 10 basis points would be charged if outstanding borrowings under the facility exceed 50% ( 50 % ) of commitments . at the inception of the credit facility , the company also agreed to pay upfront fees of $ 1250 and administrative fees of $ 325 , which are being amortized over five years . facility and other fees associated with the credit facility totaled $ 2222 , $ 2353 and $ 2477 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . mastercard was in compliance with the covenants of the credit facility and had no borrowings under the credit facility at december 31 , 2009 or december 31 , 2008 . the majority of credit facility lenders are members or affiliates of members of mastercard international . in june 1998 , mastercard international issued ten-year unsecured , subordinated notes ( the 201cnotes 201d ) paying a fixed interest rate of 6.67% ( 6.67 % ) per annum . mastercard repaid the entire principal amount of $ 80000 on june 30 , 2008 pursuant to the terms of the notes . the interest expense on the notes was $ 2668 and $ 5336 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| benefit payments | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 |\n| expected subsidy receipts | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 |\n| net benefit payments | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 |', 'question': 'and what was that in 2011?', 'ops': '3028', 'id': 'Double_MA/2009/page_115.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'mastercard incorporated notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) ( in thousands , except percent and per share data ) the company does not make any contributions to its postretirement plan other than funding benefits payments . the following table summarizes expected net benefit payments from the company 2019s general assets through 2019 : benefit payments expected subsidy receipts benefit payments .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company provides limited postemployment benefits to eligible former u.s . employees , primarily severance under a formal severance plan ( the 201cseverance plan 201d ) . the company accounts for severance expense by accruing the expected cost of the severance benefits expected to be provided to former employees after employment over their relevant service periods . the company updates the assumptions in determining the severance accrual by evaluating the actual severance activity and long-term trends underlying the assumptions . as a result of updating the assumptions , the company recorded incremental severance expense ( benefit ) related to the severance plan of $ 3471 , $ 2643 and $ ( 3418 ) , respectively , during the years 2009 , 2008 and 2007 . these amounts were part of total severance expenses of $ 135113 , $ 32997 and $ 21284 in 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively , included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations . note 14 . debt on april 28 , 2008 , the company extended its committed unsecured revolving credit facility , dated as of april 28 , 2006 ( the 201ccredit facility 201d ) , for an additional year . the new expiration date of the credit facility is april 26 , 2011 . the available funding under the credit facility will remain at $ 2500000 through april 27 , 2010 and then decrease to $ 2000000 during the final year of the credit facility agreement . other terms and conditions in the credit facility remain unchanged . the company 2019s option to request that each lender under the credit facility extend its commitment was provided pursuant to the original terms of the credit facility agreement . borrowings under the facility are available to provide liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by mastercard international customers and , subject to a limit of $ 500000 , for general corporate purposes . the facility fee and borrowing cost are contingent upon the company 2019s credit rating . at december 31 , 2009 , the facility fee was 7 basis points on the total commitment , or approximately $ 1774 annually . interest on borrowings under the credit facility would be charged at the london interbank offered rate ( libor ) plus an applicable margin of 28 basis points or an alternative base rate , and a utilization fee of 10 basis points would be charged if outstanding borrowings under the facility exceed 50% ( 50 % ) of commitments . at the inception of the credit facility , the company also agreed to pay upfront fees of $ 1250 and administrative fees of $ 325 , which are being amortized over five years . facility and other fees associated with the credit facility totaled $ 2222 , $ 2353 and $ 2477 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . mastercard was in compliance with the covenants of the credit facility and had no borrowings under the credit facility at december 31 , 2009 or december 31 , 2008 . the majority of credit facility lenders are members or affiliates of members of mastercard international . in june 1998 , mastercard international issued ten-year unsecured , subordinated notes ( the 201cnotes 201d ) paying a fixed interest rate of 6.67% ( 6.67 % ) per annum . mastercard repaid the entire principal amount of $ 80000 on june 30 , 2008 pursuant to the terms of the notes . the interest expense on the notes was $ 2668 and $ 5336 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively. .', 'doc_table': {'benefit payments': {'2010': 2714.0, '2011': 3028.0, '2012': 3369.0, '2013': 3660.0, '2014': 4019.0, '2015 2013 2019': 22686.0}, 'expected subsidy receipts': {'2010': 71.0, '2011': 91.0, '2012': 111.0, '2013': 134.0, '2014': 151.0, '2015 2013 2019': 1071.0}, 'net benefit payments': {'2010': 2643.0, '2011': 2937.0, '2012': 3258.0, '2013': 3526.0, '2014': 3868.0, '2015 2013 2019': 21615.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total of benefit payments in 2012?', 'and what was that in 2011?', 'how much, then, does the 2012 total represent in relation to this 2011 one?', 'and what is this value without the portion equivalent to the 2011 total?', 'and concerning the the incremental severance expense, what was the amount of the one related to the severance plan in 2009?', 'what was the total severance expense in that year?', 'what percentage, then, of this total expense does that amount represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3369', '3028', '1.1126', '11.26%', '3471', '135113', '2.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3369', '3028', 'divide(3369, 3028)', 'divide(3369, 3028), subtract(#0, const_1)', '3471', '135113', 'divide(3471, 135113)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3369.0, 3028.0, 1.11262, 0.11262, 3471.0, 135113.0, 0.02569], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 3028.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "37s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:22 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:11:23 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amortization expense in 2009?\nA1: 7.4\nQ2: and what was it in 2008?\nA2: 9.3', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nintangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives or on an accelerated method of amortization that is expected to reflect the estimated pattern of economic use . the remaining amortization expense will be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 0.9 years . amortization expense from continuing operations , related to intangibles was $ 7.4 million , $ 9.3 million and $ 9.2 million in fiscal 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . the company expects annual amortization expense for these intangible assets to be: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ng . grant accounting certain of the company 2019s foreign subsidiaries have received various grants from governmental agencies . these grants include capital , employment and research and development grants . capital grants for the acquisition of property and equipment are netted against the related capital expenditures and amortized as a credit to depreciation expense over the useful life of the related asset . employment grants , which relate to employee hiring and training , and research and development grants are recognized in earnings in the period in which the related expenditures are incurred by the company . h . translation of foreign currencies the functional currency for the company 2019s foreign sales and research and development operations is the applicable local currency . gains and losses resulting from translation of these foreign currencies into u.s . dollars are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income . transaction gains and losses and remeasurement of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities are included in income currently , including those at the company 2019s principal foreign manufacturing operations where the functional currency is the u.s . dollar . foreign currency transaction gains or losses included in other expenses , net , were not material in fiscal 2009 , 2008 or 2007 . i . derivative instruments and hedging agreements foreign exchange exposure management 2014 the company enters into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to offset certain operational and balance sheet exposures from the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates . such exposures result from the portion of the company 2019s operations , assets and liabilities that are denominated in currencies other than the u.s . dollar , primarily the euro ; other exposures include the philippine peso and the british pound . these foreign currency exchange contracts are entered into to support transactions made in the normal course of business , and accordingly , are not speculative in nature . the contracts are for periods consistent with the terms of the underlying transactions , generally one year or less . hedges related to anticipated transactions are designated and documented at the inception of the respective hedges as cash flow hedges and are evaluated for effectiveness monthly . derivative instruments are employed to eliminate or minimize certain foreign currency exposures that can be confidently identified and quantified . as the terms of the contract and the underlying transaction are matched at inception , forward contract effectiveness is calculated by comparing the change in fair value of the contract to the change in the forward value of the anticipated transaction , with the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income ( oci ) in shareholders 2019 equity and reclassified into earnings in the same period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings . any residual change in fair value of the instruments , or ineffectiveness , is recognized immediately in other income/expense . additionally , the company enters into forward foreign currency contracts that economically hedge the gains and losses generated by the remeasurement of certain recorded assets and liabilities in a non-functional currency . changes in the fair value of these undesignated hedges are recognized in other income/expense immediately as an offset to the changes in the fair value of the asset or liability being hedged . analog devices , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 |\n|---|---|---|\n| amortization expense | 5425.0 | 1430.0 |', 'question': 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'ops': 'subtract(7.4, 9.3)', 'id': 'Double_ADI/2009/page_59.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives or on an accelerated method of amortization that is expected to reflect the estimated pattern of economic use . the remaining amortization expense will be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 0.9 years . amortization expense from continuing operations , related to intangibles was $ 7.4 million , $ 9.3 million and $ 9.2 million in fiscal 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . the company expects annual amortization expense for these intangible assets to be: .', 'doc_post_text': 'g . grant accounting certain of the company 2019s foreign subsidiaries have received various grants from governmental agencies . these grants include capital , employment and research and development grants . capital grants for the acquisition of property and equipment are netted against the related capital expenditures and amortized as a credit to depreciation expense over the useful life of the related asset . employment grants , which relate to employee hiring and training , and research and development grants are recognized in earnings in the period in which the related expenditures are incurred by the company . h . translation of foreign currencies the functional currency for the company 2019s foreign sales and research and development operations is the applicable local currency . gains and losses resulting from translation of these foreign currencies into u.s . dollars are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income . transaction gains and losses and remeasurement of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities are included in income currently , including those at the company 2019s principal foreign manufacturing operations where the functional currency is the u.s . dollar . foreign currency transaction gains or losses included in other expenses , net , were not material in fiscal 2009 , 2008 or 2007 . i . derivative instruments and hedging agreements foreign exchange exposure management 2014 the company enters into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to offset certain operational and balance sheet exposures from the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates . such exposures result from the portion of the company 2019s operations , assets and liabilities that are denominated in currencies other than the u.s . dollar , primarily the euro ; other exposures include the philippine peso and the british pound . these foreign currency exchange contracts are entered into to support transactions made in the normal course of business , and accordingly , are not speculative in nature . the contracts are for periods consistent with the terms of the underlying transactions , generally one year or less . hedges related to anticipated transactions are designated and documented at the inception of the respective hedges as cash flow hedges and are evaluated for effectiveness monthly . derivative instruments are employed to eliminate or minimize certain foreign currency exposures that can be confidently identified and quantified . as the terms of the contract and the underlying transaction are matched at inception , forward contract effectiveness is calculated by comparing the change in fair value of the contract to the change in the forward value of the anticipated transaction , with the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income ( oci ) in shareholders 2019 equity and reclassified into earnings in the same period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings . any residual change in fair value of the instruments , or ineffectiveness , is recognized immediately in other income/expense . additionally , the company enters into forward foreign currency contracts that economically hedge the gains and losses generated by the remeasurement of certain recorded assets and liabilities in a non-functional currency . changes in the fair value of these undesignated hedges are recognized in other income/expense immediately as an offset to the changes in the fair value of the asset or liability being hedged . analog devices , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) .', 'doc_table': {'amortization expense': {'2010': 5425.0, '2011': 1430.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amortization expense in 2009?', 'and what was it in 2008?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2008 amortization expense?', 'and in 2010, what was this amortization expense, in millions?', 'what was, then, the change since 2009?', 'and what is this change as a portion of the 2009 amortization expense?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['7.4', '9.3', '-1.9', '-20.4%', '5.4', '-2', '-27.0%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['7.4', '9.3', 'subtract(7.4, 9.3)', 'subtract(7.4, 9.3), divide(#0, 9.3)', 'divide(5425, const_1000)', 'divide(5425, const_1000), subtract(#0, 7.4)', 'divide(5425, const_1000), subtract(#0, 7.4), divide(#1, 7.4)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [7.4, 9.3, -1.9, -0.2043, 5.425, -1.975, -0.26689], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -1.9}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "36s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:23 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2011?\nA1: 78.0\nQ2: and what was that of 2010?\nA2: 71.0\nQ3: what was the change in value over the year?\nA3: 7.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nkorea engineering plastics co. , ltd . founded in 1987 , kepco is the leading producer of pom in south korea . kepco is a venture between celanese's ticona business ( 50% ( 50 % ) ) , mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . ( 40% ( 40 % ) ) and mitsubishi corporation ( 10% ( 10 % ) ) . kepco has polyacetal production facilities in ulsan , south korea , compounding facilities for pbt and nylon in pyongtaek , south korea , and participates with polyplastics and mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . in a world-scale pom facility in nantong , china . polyplastics co. , ltd . polyplastics is a leading supplier of engineered plastics in the asia-pacific region and is a venture between daicel chemical industries ltd. , japan ( 55% ( 55 % ) ) , and celanese's ticona business ( 45% ( 45 % ) ) . established in 1964 , polyplastics is a producer and marketer of pom and lcp in the asia-pacific region , with principal production facilities located in japan , taiwan , malaysia and china . fortron industries llc . fortron is a leading global producer of polyphenylene sulfide ( 201cpps 201d ) , sold under the fortron ae brand , which is used in a wide variety of automotive and other applications , especially those requiring heat and/or chemical resistance . established in 1992 , fortron is a limited liability company whose members are ticona fortron inc . ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of cna holdings , llc ) and kureha corporation ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of kureha chemical industry co. , ltd . of japan ) . fortron's facility is located in wilmington , north carolina . this venture combines the sales , marketing , distribution , compounding and manufacturing expertise of celanese with the pps polymer technology expertise of kureha . china acetate strategic ventures . we hold an approximate 30% ( 30 % ) ownership interest in three separate acetate production ventures in china . these include the nantong cellulose fibers co . ltd. , kunming cellulose fibers co . ltd . and zhuhai cellulose fibers co . ltd . the china national tobacco corporation , the chinese state-owned tobacco entity , controls the remaining ownership interest in each of these ventures . with an estimated 30% ( 30 % ) share of the world's cigarette production and consumption , china is the world's largest and fastest growing area for acetate tow products according to the 2009 stanford research institute international chemical economics handbook . combined , these ventures are a leader in chinese domestic acetate production and are well positioned to supply chinese cigarette producers . in december 2009 , we announced plans with china national tobacco to expand our acetate flake and tow capacity at our venture's nantong facility and we received formal approval for the expansions , each by 30000 tons , during 2010 . since their inception in 1986 , the china acetate ventures have completed 12 expansions , leading to earnings growth and increased dividends . our chinese acetate ventures fund their operations using operating cash flow . during 2011 , we made contributions of $ 8 million related to the capacity expansions in nantong and have committed contributions of $ 9 million in 2012 . in 2010 , we made contributions of $ 12 million . our chinese acetate ventures pay a dividend in the second quarter of each fiscal year , based on the ventures' performance for the preceding year . in 2011 , 2010 and 2009 , we received cash dividends of $ 78 million , $ 71 million and $ 56 million , respectively . although our ownership interest in each of our china acetate ventures exceeds 20% ( 20 % ) , we account for these investments using the cost method of accounting because we determined that we cannot exercise significant influence over these entities due to local government investment in and influence over these entities , limitations on our involvement in the day-to-day operations and the present inability of the entities to provide timely financial information prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the united states ( 201cus gaap 201d ) . 2022 other equity method investments infraservs . we hold indirect ownership interests in several infraserv groups in germany that own and develop industrial parks and provide on-site general and administrative support to tenants . the table below represents our equity investments in infraserv ventures as of december 31 , 2011: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | infraserv gmbh & co . gendorf kg | infraserv gmbh & co . knapsack kg | infraserv gmbh & co . hoechst kg |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| ownership % (  % ) | 39.0 | 27.0 | 32.0 |', 'question': 'what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2010?', 'ops': '71', 'id': 'Single_CE/2011/page_17.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': "korea engineering plastics co. , ltd . founded in 1987 , kepco is the leading producer of pom in south korea . kepco is a venture between celanese's ticona business ( 50% ( 50 % ) ) , mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . ( 40% ( 40 % ) ) and mitsubishi corporation ( 10% ( 10 % ) ) . kepco has polyacetal production facilities in ulsan , south korea , compounding facilities for pbt and nylon in pyongtaek , south korea , and participates with polyplastics and mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . in a world-scale pom facility in nantong , china . polyplastics co. , ltd . polyplastics is a leading supplier of engineered plastics in the asia-pacific region and is a venture between daicel chemical industries ltd. , japan ( 55% ( 55 % ) ) , and celanese's ticona business ( 45% ( 45 % ) ) . established in 1964 , polyplastics is a producer and marketer of pom and lcp in the asia-pacific region , with principal production facilities located in japan , taiwan , malaysia and china . fortron industries llc . fortron is a leading global producer of polyphenylene sulfide ( 201cpps 201d ) , sold under the fortron ae brand , which is used in a wide variety of automotive and other applications , especially those requiring heat and/or chemical resistance . established in 1992 , fortron is a limited liability company whose members are ticona fortron inc . ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of cna holdings , llc ) and kureha corporation ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of kureha chemical industry co. , ltd . of japan ) . fortron's facility is located in wilmington , north carolina . this venture combines the sales , marketing , distribution , compounding and manufacturing expertise of celanese with the pps polymer technology expertise of kureha . china acetate strategic ventures . we hold an approximate 30% ( 30 % ) ownership interest in three separate acetate production ventures in china . these include the nantong cellulose fibers co . ltd. , kunming cellulose fibers co . ltd . and zhuhai cellulose fibers co . ltd . the china national tobacco corporation , the chinese state-owned tobacco entity , controls the remaining ownership interest in each of these ventures . with an estimated 30% ( 30 % ) share of the world's cigarette production and consumption , china is the world's largest and fastest growing area for acetate tow products according to the 2009 stanford research institute international chemical economics handbook . combined , these ventures are a leader in chinese domestic acetate production and are well positioned to supply chinese cigarette producers . in december 2009 , we announced plans with china national tobacco to expand our acetate flake and tow capacity at our venture's nantong facility and we received formal approval for the expansions , each by 30000 tons , during 2010 . since their inception in 1986 , the china acetate ventures have completed 12 expansions , leading to earnings growth and increased dividends . our chinese acetate ventures fund their operations using operating cash flow . during 2011 , we made contributions of $ 8 million related to the capacity expansions in nantong and have committed contributions of $ 9 million in 2012 . in 2010 , we made contributions of $ 12 million . our chinese acetate ventures pay a dividend in the second quarter of each fiscal year , based on the ventures' performance for the preceding year . in 2011 , 2010 and 2009 , we received cash dividends of $ 78 million , $ 71 million and $ 56 million , respectively . although our ownership interest in each of our china acetate ventures exceeds 20% ( 20 % ) , we account for these investments using the cost method of accounting because we determined that we cannot exercise significant influence over these entities due to local government investment in and influence over these entities , limitations on our involvement in the day-to-day operations and the present inability of the entities to provide timely financial information prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the united states ( 201cus gaap 201d ) . 2022 other equity method investments infraservs . we hold indirect ownership interests in several infraserv groups in germany that own and develop industrial parks and provide on-site general and administrative support to tenants . the table below represents our equity investments in infraserv ventures as of december 31 , 2011: .", 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'ownership % (  % )': {'infraserv gmbh & co . gendorf kg': 39.0, 'infraserv gmbh & co . knapsack kg': 27.0, 'infraserv gmbh & co . hoechst kg': 32.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2011?', 'and what was that of 2010?', 'what was the change in value over the year?', 'what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2010?', 'how much does that change represent in relation to the this amount?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['78', '71', '7', '71', '9.9%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['78', '71', 'subtract(78, 71)', '71', 'subtract(78, 71), divide(#0, 71)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [78.0, 71.0, 7.0, 71.0, 0.09859], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 71.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "36s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:11:23 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: in the year of 2007, what was the number of granted shares?\nA1: 852353.0\nQ2: and what was it for vested ones?\nA2: 51206.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nhumana inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during 2007 was $ 133.9 million , compared with $ 133.7 million during 2006 and $ 57.8 million during 2005 . cash received from stock option exercises for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 totaled $ 62.7 million , $ 49.2 million , and $ 36.4 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested options not yet recognized was $ 23.6 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.6 years . restricted stock awards restricted stock awards are granted with a fair value equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant . compensation expense is recorded straight-line over the vesting period , generally three years from the date of grant . the weighted average grant date fair value of our restricted stock awards was $ 63.59 , $ 54.36 , and $ 32.81 for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 , respectively . activity for our restricted stock awards was as follows for the year ended december 31 , 2007 : shares weighted average grant-date fair value .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe fair value of shares vested during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 was $ 3.4 million , $ 2.3 million , and $ 0.6 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock awards not yet recognized was $ 44.7 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.4 years . there are no other contractual terms covering restricted stock awards once vested. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006 | granted | vested | forfeited | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007 | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006 | granted | vested | forfeited | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| shares | 1107455.0 | 852353.0 | -51206.0 | -63624.0 | 1844978.0 | 1107455.0 | 852353.0 | -51206.0 | -63624.0 | 1844978.0 |\n| weighted average grant-date fair value | 45.86 | 63.59 | 56.93 | 49.65 | 53.61 | 45.86 | 63.59 | 56.93 | 49.65 | 53.61 |', 'question': 'how much, then, did the granted number represent in relation to the vested one?', 'ops': 'divide(852353, 51206)', 'id': 'Double_HUM/2007/page_96.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'humana inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during 2007 was $ 133.9 million , compared with $ 133.7 million during 2006 and $ 57.8 million during 2005 . cash received from stock option exercises for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 totaled $ 62.7 million , $ 49.2 million , and $ 36.4 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested options not yet recognized was $ 23.6 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.6 years . restricted stock awards restricted stock awards are granted with a fair value equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant . compensation expense is recorded straight-line over the vesting period , generally three years from the date of grant . the weighted average grant date fair value of our restricted stock awards was $ 63.59 , $ 54.36 , and $ 32.81 for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 , respectively . activity for our restricted stock awards was as follows for the year ended december 31 , 2007 : shares weighted average grant-date fair value .', 'doc_post_text': 'the fair value of shares vested during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 was $ 3.4 million , $ 2.3 million , and $ 0.6 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock awards not yet recognized was $ 44.7 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.4 years . there are no other contractual terms covering restricted stock awards once vested. .', 'doc_table': {'shares': {'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006': 1107455.0, 'granted': 852353.0, 'vested': -51206.0, 'forfeited': -63624.0, 'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007': 1844978.0}, 'weighted average grant-date fair value': {'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006': 45.86, 'granted': 63.59, 'vested': 56.93, 'forfeited': 49.65, 'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007': 53.61}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['in the year of 2007, what was the number of granted shares?', 'and what was it for vested ones?', 'how much, then, did the granted number represent in relation to the vested one?', 'and in that same year, what was the fair value of these vested shares, in millions?', 'what was it for 2005?', 'what was, then, the total combined fair value for both years, in millions?', 'including 2006, what becomes this total?', 'and what was, in millions, the average between the three years?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['852353', '51206', '16.65', '3.4', '0.6', '4', '6.3', '2.1'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['852353', '51206', 'divide(852353, 51206)', '3.4', '0.6', 'add(3.4, 0.6)', 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3)', 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3), divide(#1, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [852353.0, 51206.0, 16.64557, 3.4, 0.6, 4.0, 6.3, 2.1], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 16.64557}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "36s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:12:18 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 27.0 / 35 (77.1%)
2025/07/29 14:12:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 77.14 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 4', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 6'].
2025/07/29 14:12:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14]
2025/07/29 14:12:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0]
2025/07/29 14:12:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:12:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 14:12:21 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 9 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:12:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:12:41 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 31.0 / 35 (88.6%)
2025/07/29 14:12:44 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 88.57 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 5', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 1'].
2025/07/29 14:12:44 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 88.57]
2025/07/29 14:12:44 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0]
2025/07/29 14:12:44 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:12:44 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =========================================


2025/07/29 14:12:44 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 10 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:13:26 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 24.0 / 35 (68.6%)
2025/07/29 14:13:30 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 68.57 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 3', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 3'].
2025/07/29 14:13:30 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 88.57, 68.57]
2025/07/29 14:13:30 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0]
2025/07/29 14:13:30 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:13:30 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 14:13:30 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 11 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:14:05 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 30.0 / 35 (85.7%)
2025/07/29 14:14:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 85.71 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 5', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 1'].
2025/07/29 14:14:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 88.57, 68.57, 85.71]
2025/07/29 14:14:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0]
2025/07/29 14:14:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:14:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 14:14:59 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 12 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:15:05 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:08 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 29.0 / 35 (82.9%)
2025/07/29 14:15:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 82.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 5', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 1'].
2025/07/29 14:15:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 88.57, 68.57, 85.71, 82.86]
2025/07/29 14:15:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0]
2025/07/29 14:15:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:15:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 14:15:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 13 / 23 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 14:15:12 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 85.71333333333332) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 14:15:12 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:15 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:16 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:20 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:22 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:22 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:22 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:15:56 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 209.0 / 266 (78.6%)
2025/07/29 14:15:56 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0, 78.57]
2025/07/29 14:15:56 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:15:56 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 14:15:56 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 14:15:56 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 14 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:16:05 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 29.0 / 35 (82.9%)
2025/07/29 14:16:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 82.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 5', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 10'].
2025/07/29 14:16:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 88.57, 68.57, 85.71, 82.86, 82.86]
2025/07/29 14:16:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0, 78.57]
2025/07/29 14:16:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:16:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 14:16:09 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 15 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:16:33 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 29.0 / 35 (82.9%)
2025/07/29 14:16:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 82.86 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 1', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 1'].
2025/07/29 14:16:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 88.57, 68.57, 85.71, 82.86, 82.86, 82.86]
2025/07/29 14:16:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0, 78.57]
2025/07/29 14:16:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:16:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 14:16:37 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 16 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:17:00 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:17:05 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 30.0 / 35 (85.7%)
2025/07/29 14:17:08 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 85.71 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 5', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 9'].
2025/07/29 14:17:08 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 88.57, 68.57, 85.71, 82.86, 82.86, 82.86, 85.71]
2025/07/29 14:17:08 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0, 78.57]
2025/07/29 14:17:08 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:17:08 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 14:17:08 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 17 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:17:44 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 26.0 / 35 (74.3%)
2025/07/29 14:17:47 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 74.29 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 2', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 1'].
2025/07/29 14:17:47 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 88.57, 68.57, 85.71, 82.86, 82.86, 82.86, 85.71, 74.29]
2025/07/29 14:17:47 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0, 78.57]
2025/07/29 14:17:47 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:17:47 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 14:17:47 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 18 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:17:56 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 24.0 / 35 (68.6%)
2025/07/29 14:18:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 68.57 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 5', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 8'].
2025/07/29 14:18:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 88.57, 68.57, 85.71, 82.86, 82.86, 82.86, 85.71, 74.29, 68.57]
2025/07/29 14:18:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0, 78.57]
2025/07/29 14:18:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:18:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 14:18:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 19 / 23 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 14:18:00 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 85.71) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 14:18:08 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:08 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:08 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:08 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:08 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:10 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:11 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:11 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:11 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:11 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:11 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:11 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:11 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:11 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:11 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:11 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:11 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:12 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:12 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:18:13 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\njpmorgan chase & co./2009 annual report 181 the following table shows the current credit risk of derivative receivables after netting adjustments , and the current liquidity risk of derivative payables after netting adjustments , as of december 31 , 2009. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin addition to the collateral amounts reflected in the table above , at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received and posted liquid secu- rities collateral in the amount of $ 15.5 billion and $ 11.7 billion , respectively . the firm also receives and delivers collateral at the initiation of derivative transactions , which is available as security against potential exposure that could arise should the fair value of the transactions move in the firm 2019s or client 2019s favor , respectively . furthermore , the firm and its counterparties hold collateral related to contracts that have a non-daily call frequency for collateral to be posted , and collateral that the firm or a counterparty has agreed to return but has not yet settled as of the reporting date . at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received $ 16.9 billion and delivered $ 5.8 billion of such additional collateral . these amounts were not netted against the derivative receivables and payables in the table above , because , at an individual counterparty level , the collateral exceeded the fair value exposure at december 31 , 2009 . credit derivatives credit derivatives are financial instruments whose value is derived from the credit risk associated with the debt of a third-party issuer ( the reference entity ) and which allow one party ( the protection purchaser ) to transfer that risk to another party ( the protection seller ) . credit derivatives expose the protection purchaser to the creditworthiness of the protection seller , as the protection seller is required to make payments under the contract when the reference entity experiences a credit event , such as a bankruptcy , a failure to pay its obligation or a restructuring . the seller of credit protection receives a premium for providing protection but has the risk that the underlying instrument referenced in the contract will be subject to a credit event . the firm is both a purchaser and seller of protection in the credit derivatives market and uses these derivatives for two primary purposes . first , in its capacity as a market-maker in the dealer/client business , the firm actively risk manages a portfolio of credit derivatives by purchasing and selling credit protection , pre- dominantly on corporate debt obligations , to meet the needs of customers . as a seller of protection , the firm 2019s exposure to a given reference entity may be offset partially , or entirely , with a contract to purchase protection from another counterparty on the same or similar reference entity . second , the firm uses credit derivatives to mitigate credit risk associated with its overall derivative receivables and traditional commercial credit lending exposures ( loans and unfunded commitments ) as well as to manage its exposure to residential and commercial mortgages . see note 3 on pages 156--- 173 of this annual report for further information on the firm 2019s mortgage-related exposures . in accomplishing the above , the firm uses different types of credit derivatives . following is a summary of various types of credit derivatives . credit default swaps credit derivatives may reference the credit of either a single refer- ence entity ( 201csingle-name 201d ) or a broad-based index , as described further below . the firm purchases and sells protection on both single- name and index-reference obligations . single-name cds and index cds contracts are both otc derivative contracts . single- name cds are used to manage the default risk of a single reference entity , while cds index are used to manage credit risk associated with the broader credit markets or credit market segments . like the s&p 500 and other market indices , a cds index is comprised of a portfolio of cds across many reference entities . new series of cds indices are established approximately every six months with a new underlying portfolio of reference entities to reflect changes in the credit markets . if one of the reference entities in the index experi- ences a credit event , then the reference entity that defaulted is removed from the index . cds can also be referenced against spe- cific portfolios of reference names or against customized exposure levels based on specific client demands : for example , to provide protection against the first $ 1 million of realized credit losses in a $ 10 million portfolio of exposure . such structures are commonly known as tranche cds . for both single-name cds contracts and index cds , upon the occurrence of a credit event , under the terms of a cds contract neither party to the cds contract has recourse to the reference entity . the protection purchaser has recourse to the protection seller for the difference between the face value of the cds contract and the fair value of the reference obligation at the time of settling the credit derivative contract , also known as the recovery value . the protection purchaser does not need to hold the debt instrument of the underlying reference entity in order to receive amounts due under the cds contract when a credit event occurs . credit-linked notes a credit linked note ( 201ccln 201d ) is a funded credit derivative where the issuer of the cln purchases credit protection on a referenced entity from the note investor . under the contract , the investor pays the issuer par value of the note at the inception of the transaction , and in return , the issuer pays periodic payments to the investor , based on the credit risk of the referenced entity . the issuer also repays the investor the par value of the note at maturity unless the reference entity experiences a specified credit event . in that event , the issuer is not obligated to repay the par value of the note , but rather , the issuer pays the investor the difference between the par value of the note .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | gross derivative fair value | nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables | nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid | carrying value on consolidated balance sheets | gross derivative fair value | nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables | nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid | carrying value on consolidated balance sheets |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| derivative receivables | 1565518.0 | -1419840.0 | -65468.0 | 80210.0 | 1565518.0 | -1419840.0 | -65468.0 | 80210.0 |\n| derivative payables | 1519183.0 | -1419840.0 | -39218.0 | 60125.0 | 1519183.0 | -1419840.0 | -39218.0 | 60125.0 |', 'question': 'as of december 31, 2009, what was the total of derivative receivables related to the netting adjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid?', 'ops': 'multiply(65468, const_1000000)', 'id': 'Double_JPM/2009/page_183.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'jpmorgan chase & co./2009 annual report 181 the following table shows the current credit risk of derivative receivables after netting adjustments , and the current liquidity risk of derivative payables after netting adjustments , as of december 31 , 2009. .', 'doc_post_text': 'in addition to the collateral amounts reflected in the table above , at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received and posted liquid secu- rities collateral in the amount of $ 15.5 billion and $ 11.7 billion , respectively . the firm also receives and delivers collateral at the initiation of derivative transactions , which is available as security against potential exposure that could arise should the fair value of the transactions move in the firm 2019s or client 2019s favor , respectively . furthermore , the firm and its counterparties hold collateral related to contracts that have a non-daily call frequency for collateral to be posted , and collateral that the firm or a counterparty has agreed to return but has not yet settled as of the reporting date . at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received $ 16.9 billion and delivered $ 5.8 billion of such additional collateral . these amounts were not netted against the derivative receivables and payables in the table above , because , at an individual counterparty level , the collateral exceeded the fair value exposure at december 31 , 2009 . credit derivatives credit derivatives are financial instruments whose value is derived from the credit risk associated with the debt of a third-party issuer ( the reference entity ) and which allow one party ( the protection purchaser ) to transfer that risk to another party ( the protection seller ) . credit derivatives expose the protection purchaser to the creditworthiness of the protection seller , as the protection seller is required to make payments under the contract when the reference entity experiences a credit event , such as a bankruptcy , a failure to pay its obligation or a restructuring . the seller of credit protection receives a premium for providing protection but has the risk that the underlying instrument referenced in the contract will be subject to a credit event . the firm is both a purchaser and seller of protection in the credit derivatives market and uses these derivatives for two primary purposes . first , in its capacity as a market-maker in the dealer/client business , the firm actively risk manages a portfolio of credit derivatives by purchasing and selling credit protection , pre- dominantly on corporate debt obligations , to meet the needs of customers . as a seller of protection , the firm 2019s exposure to a given reference entity may be offset partially , or entirely , with a contract to purchase protection from another counterparty on the same or similar reference entity . second , the firm uses credit derivatives to mitigate credit risk associated with its overall derivative receivables and traditional commercial credit lending exposures ( loans and unfunded commitments ) as well as to manage its exposure to residential and commercial mortgages . see note 3 on pages 156--- 173 of this annual report for further information on the firm 2019s mortgage-related exposures . in accomplishing the above , the firm uses different types of credit derivatives . following is a summary of various types of credit derivatives . credit default swaps credit derivatives may reference the credit of either a single refer- ence entity ( 201csingle-name 201d ) or a broad-based index , as described further below . the firm purchases and sells protection on both single- name and index-reference obligations . single-name cds and index cds contracts are both otc derivative contracts . single- name cds are used to manage the default risk of a single reference entity , while cds index are used to manage credit risk associated with the broader credit markets or credit market segments . like the s&p 500 and other market indices , a cds index is comprised of a portfolio of cds across many reference entities . new series of cds indices are established approximately every six months with a new underlying portfolio of reference entities to reflect changes in the credit markets . if one of the reference entities in the index experi- ences a credit event , then the reference entity that defaulted is removed from the index . cds can also be referenced against spe- cific portfolios of reference names or against customized exposure levels based on specific client demands : for example , to provide protection against the first $ 1 million of realized credit losses in a $ 10 million portfolio of exposure . such structures are commonly known as tranche cds . for both single-name cds contracts and index cds , upon the occurrence of a credit event , under the terms of a cds contract neither party to the cds contract has recourse to the reference entity . the protection purchaser has recourse to the protection seller for the difference between the face value of the cds contract and the fair value of the reference obligation at the time of settling the credit derivative contract , also known as the recovery value . the protection purchaser does not need to hold the debt instrument of the underlying reference entity in order to receive amounts due under the cds contract when a credit event occurs . credit-linked notes a credit linked note ( 201ccln 201d ) is a funded credit derivative where the issuer of the cln purchases credit protection on a referenced entity from the note investor . under the contract , the investor pays the issuer par value of the note at the inception of the transaction , and in return , the issuer pays periodic payments to the investor , based on the credit risk of the referenced entity . the issuer also repays the investor the par value of the note at maturity unless the reference entity experiences a specified credit event . in that event , the issuer is not obligated to repay the par value of the note , but rather , the issuer pays the investor the difference between the par value of the note .', 'doc_table': {'derivative receivables': {'gross derivative fair value': 1565518.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables': -1419840.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid': -65468.0, 'carrying value on consolidated balance sheets': 80210.0}, 'derivative payables': {'gross derivative fair value': 1519183.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables': -1419840.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid': -39218.0, 'carrying value on consolidated balance sheets': 60125.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['as of december 31, 2009, what was the total of derivative receivables related to the netting adjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid?', 'and what was the total of the liquid securities collateral received by the firm?', 'what was, then, the combined total of both amounts as of that date?', 'and in that same year, how much did the gross derivative fair value receivables represent in relation to the payables one?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['65468000000', '15500000000', '80968000000', '1.03'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(65468, const_1000000)', 'multiply(65468, const_1000000), multiply(15.5, const_1000000), multiply(#1, const_1000)', 'multiply(65468, const_1000000), multiply(15.5, const_1000000), multiply(#1, const_1000), add(#2, #0)', 'divide(1565518, 1519183)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [65468000000.0, 15500000000.0, 80968000000.0, 1.0305], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 65468000000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "46s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:14 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: in the year of 2007, what was the number of granted shares?\nA1: 852353.0\nQ2: and what was it for vested ones?\nA2: 51206.0\nQ3: how much, then, did the granted number represent in relation to the vested one?\nA3: 16.64557', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nhumana inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during 2007 was $ 133.9 million , compared with $ 133.7 million during 2006 and $ 57.8 million during 2005 . cash received from stock option exercises for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 totaled $ 62.7 million , $ 49.2 million , and $ 36.4 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested options not yet recognized was $ 23.6 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.6 years . restricted stock awards restricted stock awards are granted with a fair value equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant . compensation expense is recorded straight-line over the vesting period , generally three years from the date of grant . the weighted average grant date fair value of our restricted stock awards was $ 63.59 , $ 54.36 , and $ 32.81 for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 , respectively . activity for our restricted stock awards was as follows for the year ended december 31 , 2007 : shares weighted average grant-date fair value .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe fair value of shares vested during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 was $ 3.4 million , $ 2.3 million , and $ 0.6 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock awards not yet recognized was $ 44.7 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.4 years . there are no other contractual terms covering restricted stock awards once vested. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006 | granted | vested | forfeited | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007 | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006 | granted | vested | forfeited | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| shares | 1107455.0 | 852353.0 | -51206.0 | -63624.0 | 1844978.0 | 1107455.0 | 852353.0 | -51206.0 | -63624.0 | 1844978.0 |\n| weighted average grant-date fair value | 45.86 | 63.59 | 56.93 | 49.65 | 53.61 | 45.86 | 63.59 | 56.93 | 49.65 | 53.61 |', 'question': 'and in that same year, what was the fair value of these vested shares, in millions?', 'ops': '3.4', 'id': 'Double_HUM/2007/page_96.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'humana inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during 2007 was $ 133.9 million , compared with $ 133.7 million during 2006 and $ 57.8 million during 2005 . cash received from stock option exercises for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 totaled $ 62.7 million , $ 49.2 million , and $ 36.4 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested options not yet recognized was $ 23.6 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.6 years . restricted stock awards restricted stock awards are granted with a fair value equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant . compensation expense is recorded straight-line over the vesting period , generally three years from the date of grant . the weighted average grant date fair value of our restricted stock awards was $ 63.59 , $ 54.36 , and $ 32.81 for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 , respectively . activity for our restricted stock awards was as follows for the year ended december 31 , 2007 : shares weighted average grant-date fair value .', 'doc_post_text': 'the fair value of shares vested during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 was $ 3.4 million , $ 2.3 million , and $ 0.6 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock awards not yet recognized was $ 44.7 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.4 years . there are no other contractual terms covering restricted stock awards once vested. .', 'doc_table': {'shares': {'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006': 1107455.0, 'granted': 852353.0, 'vested': -51206.0, 'forfeited': -63624.0, 'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007': 1844978.0}, 'weighted average grant-date fair value': {'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006': 45.86, 'granted': 63.59, 'vested': 56.93, 'forfeited': 49.65, 'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007': 53.61}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['in the year of 2007, what was the number of granted shares?', 'and what was it for vested ones?', 'how much, then, did the granted number represent in relation to the vested one?', 'and in that same year, what was the fair value of these vested shares, in millions?', 'what was it for 2005?', 'what was, then, the total combined fair value for both years, in millions?', 'including 2006, what becomes this total?', 'and what was, in millions, the average between the three years?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['852353', '51206', '16.65', '3.4', '0.6', '4', '6.3', '2.1'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['852353', '51206', 'divide(852353, 51206)', '3.4', '0.6', 'add(3.4, 0.6)', 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3)', 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3), divide(#1, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [852353.0, 51206.0, 16.64557, 3.4, 0.6, 4.0, 6.3, 2.1], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 3.4}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "46s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:14 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the capital expenditures for operations in the industrial packaging business segment in 2018, in millions?\nA1: 1061.0\nQ2: and what was it in 2017, also in millions?\nA2: 836.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nthe company recorded equity earnings , net of taxes , related to ilim of $ 290 million in 2018 , compared with earnings of $ 183 million in 2017 , and $ 199 million in 2016 . operating results recorded in 2018 included an after-tax non-cash foreign exchange loss of $ 82 million , compared with an after-tax foreign exchange gain of $ 15 million in 2017 and an after-tax foreign exchange gain of $ 25 million in 2016 , primarily on the remeasurement of ilim's u.s . dollar denominated net debt . ilim delivered outstanding performance in 2018 , driven largely by higher price realization and strong demand . sales volumes for the joint venture increased year over year for shipments to china of softwood pulp and linerboard , but were offset by decreased sales of hardwood pulp to china . sales volumes in the russian market increased for softwood pulp and hardwood pulp , but decreased for linerboard . average sales price realizations were significantly higher in 2018 for sales of softwood pulp , hardwood pulp and linerboard to china and other export markets . average sales price realizations in russian markets increased year over year for all products . input costs were higher in 2018 , primarily for wood , fuel and chemicals . distribution costs were negatively impacted by tariffs and inflation . the company received cash dividends from the joint venture of $ 128 million in 2018 , $ 133 million in 2017 and $ 58 million in entering the first quarter of 2019 , sales volumes are expected to be lower than in the fourth quarter of 2018 , due to the seasonal slowdown in china and fewer trading days . based on pricing to date in the current quarter , average sales prices are expected to decrease for hardwood pulp , softwood pulp and linerboard to china . input costs are projected to be relatively flat , while distribution costs are expected to increase . equity earnings - gpip international paper recorded equity earnings of $ 46 million on its 20.5% ( 20.5 % ) ownership position in gpip in 2018 . the company received cash dividends from the investment of $ 25 million in 2018 . liquidity and capital resources overview a major factor in international paper 2019s liquidity and capital resource planning is its generation of operating cash flow , which is highly sensitive to changes in the pricing and demand for our major products . while changes in key cash operating costs , such as energy , raw material , mill outage and transportation costs , do have an effect on operating cash generation , we believe that our focus on pricing and cost controls has improved our cash flow generation over an operating cycle . cash uses during 2018 were primarily focused on working capital requirements , capital spending , debt reductions and returning cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases under the company's share repurchase program . cash provided by operating activities cash provided by operations , including discontinued operations , totaled $ 3.2 billion in 2018 , compared with $ 1.8 billion for 2017 , and $ 2.5 billion for 2016 . cash used by working capital components ( accounts receivable , contract assets and inventory less accounts payable and accrued liabilities , interest payable and other ) totaled $ 439 million in 2018 , compared with cash used by working capital components of $ 402 million in 2017 , and cash provided by working capital components of $ 71 million in 2016 . investment activities including discontinued operations , investment activities in 2018 increased from 2017 , as 2018 included higher capital spending . in 2016 , investment activity included the purchase of weyerhaeuser's pulp business for $ 2.2 billion in cash , the purchase of the holmen business for $ 57 million in cash , net of cash acquired , and proceeds from the sale of the asia packaging business of $ 108 million , net of cash divested . the company maintains an average capital spending target around depreciation and amortization levels , or modestly above , due to strategic plans over the course of an economic cycle . capital spending was $ 1.6 billion in 2018 , or 118% ( 118 % ) of depreciation and amortization , compared with $ 1.4 billion in 2017 , or 98% ( 98 % ) of depreciation and amortization , and $ 1.3 billion , or 110% ( 110 % ) of depreciation and amortization in 2016 . across our segments , capital spending as a percentage of depreciation and amortization ranged from 69.8% ( 69.8 % ) to 132.1% ( 132.1 % ) in 2018 . the following table shows capital spending for operations by business segment for the years ended december 31 , 2018 , 2017 and 2016 , excluding amounts related to discontinued operations of $ 111 million in 2017 and $ 107 million in 2016. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ncapital expenditures in 2019 are currently expected to be about $ 1.4 billion , or 104% ( 104 % ) of depreciation and amortization , including approximately $ 400 million of strategic investments. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | industrial packaging | global cellulose fibers | printing papers | subtotal | corporate and other | capital spending | industrial packaging | global cellulose fibers | printing papers | subtotal | corporate and other | capital spending | industrial packaging | global cellulose fibers | printing papers | subtotal | corporate and other | capital spending |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2018 | 1061.0 | 183.0 | 303.0 | 1547.0 | 25.0 | 1572.0 | 1061.0 | 183.0 | 303.0 | 1547.0 | 25.0 | 1572.0 | 1061.0 | 183.0 | 303.0 | 1547.0 | 25.0 | 1572.0 |\n| 2017 | 836.0 | 188.0 | 235.0 | 1259.0 | 21.0 | 1280.0 | 836.0 | 188.0 | 235.0 | 1259.0 | 21.0 | 1280.0 | 836.0 | 188.0 | 235.0 | 1259.0 | 21.0 | 1280.0 |\n| 2016 | 832.0 | 174.0 | 215.0 | 1221.0 | 20.0 | 1241.0 | 832.0 | 174.0 | 215.0 | 1221.0 | 20.0 | 1241.0 | 832.0 | 174.0 | 215.0 | 1221.0 | 20.0 | 1241.0 |', 'question': 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'ops': 'subtract(1061, 836)', 'id': 'Single_IP/2018/page_50.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': "the company recorded equity earnings , net of taxes , related to ilim of $ 290 million in 2018 , compared with earnings of $ 183 million in 2017 , and $ 199 million in 2016 . operating results recorded in 2018 included an after-tax non-cash foreign exchange loss of $ 82 million , compared with an after-tax foreign exchange gain of $ 15 million in 2017 and an after-tax foreign exchange gain of $ 25 million in 2016 , primarily on the remeasurement of ilim's u.s . dollar denominated net debt . ilim delivered outstanding performance in 2018 , driven largely by higher price realization and strong demand . sales volumes for the joint venture increased year over year for shipments to china of softwood pulp and linerboard , but were offset by decreased sales of hardwood pulp to china . sales volumes in the russian market increased for softwood pulp and hardwood pulp , but decreased for linerboard . average sales price realizations were significantly higher in 2018 for sales of softwood pulp , hardwood pulp and linerboard to china and other export markets . average sales price realizations in russian markets increased year over year for all products . input costs were higher in 2018 , primarily for wood , fuel and chemicals . distribution costs were negatively impacted by tariffs and inflation . the company received cash dividends from the joint venture of $ 128 million in 2018 , $ 133 million in 2017 and $ 58 million in entering the first quarter of 2019 , sales volumes are expected to be lower than in the fourth quarter of 2018 , due to the seasonal slowdown in china and fewer trading days . based on pricing to date in the current quarter , average sales prices are expected to decrease for hardwood pulp , softwood pulp and linerboard to china . input costs are projected to be relatively flat , while distribution costs are expected to increase . equity earnings - gpip international paper recorded equity earnings of $ 46 million on its 20.5% ( 20.5 % ) ownership position in gpip in 2018 . the company received cash dividends from the investment of $ 25 million in 2018 . liquidity and capital resources overview a major factor in international paper 2019s liquidity and capital resource planning is its generation of operating cash flow , which is highly sensitive to changes in the pricing and demand for our major products . while changes in key cash operating costs , such as energy , raw material , mill outage and transportation costs , do have an effect on operating cash generation , we believe that our focus on pricing and cost controls has improved our cash flow generation over an operating cycle . cash uses during 2018 were primarily focused on working capital requirements , capital spending , debt reductions and returning cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases under the company's share repurchase program . cash provided by operating activities cash provided by operations , including discontinued operations , totaled $ 3.2 billion in 2018 , compared with $ 1.8 billion for 2017 , and $ 2.5 billion for 2016 . cash used by working capital components ( accounts receivable , contract assets and inventory less accounts payable and accrued liabilities , interest payable and other ) totaled $ 439 million in 2018 , compared with cash used by working capital components of $ 402 million in 2017 , and cash provided by working capital components of $ 71 million in 2016 . investment activities including discontinued operations , investment activities in 2018 increased from 2017 , as 2018 included higher capital spending . in 2016 , investment activity included the purchase of weyerhaeuser's pulp business for $ 2.2 billion in cash , the purchase of the holmen business for $ 57 million in cash , net of cash acquired , and proceeds from the sale of the asia packaging business of $ 108 million , net of cash divested . the company maintains an average capital spending target around depreciation and amortization levels , or modestly above , due to strategic plans over the course of an economic cycle . capital spending was $ 1.6 billion in 2018 , or 118% ( 118 % ) of depreciation and amortization , compared with $ 1.4 billion in 2017 , or 98% ( 98 % ) of depreciation and amortization , and $ 1.3 billion , or 110% ( 110 % ) of depreciation and amortization in 2016 . across our segments , capital spending as a percentage of depreciation and amortization ranged from 69.8% ( 69.8 % ) to 132.1% ( 132.1 % ) in 2018 . the following table shows capital spending for operations by business segment for the years ended december 31 , 2018 , 2017 and 2016 , excluding amounts related to discontinued operations of $ 111 million in 2017 and $ 107 million in 2016. .", 'doc_post_text': 'capital expenditures in 2019 are currently expected to be about $ 1.4 billion , or 104% ( 104 % ) of depreciation and amortization , including approximately $ 400 million of strategic investments. .', 'doc_table': {'2018': {'industrial packaging': 1061.0, 'global cellulose fibers': 183.0, 'printing papers': 303.0, 'subtotal': 1547.0, 'corporate and other': 25.0, 'capital spending': 1572.0}, '2017': {'industrial packaging': 836.0, 'global cellulose fibers': 188.0, 'printing papers': 235.0, 'subtotal': 1259.0, 'corporate and other': 21.0, 'capital spending': 1280.0}, '2016': {'industrial packaging': 832.0, 'global cellulose fibers': 174.0, 'printing papers': 215.0, 'subtotal': 1221.0, 'corporate and other': 20.0, 'capital spending': 1241.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the capital expenditures for operations in the industrial packaging business segment in 2018, in millions?', 'and what was it in 2017, also in millions?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'and how much does that change represent, in percentage, in relation to the capital expenditures for operations in the industrial packaging business segment in 2017?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1061', '836', '225', '27%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1061', '836', 'subtract(1061, 836)', 'subtract(1061, 836), divide(#0, 836)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1061.0, 836.0, 225.0, 0.26914], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 225.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:14 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the total long-term debt?\nA1: 5413606.0\nQ2: what are the total contractual obligations?\nA2: 6704679.0\nQ3: what fraction of total contractual obligations is long-term debt?\nA3: 0.80744', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n39 annual report 2010 duke realty corporation | | related party transactions we provide property and asset management , leasing , construction and other tenant related services to unconsolidated companies in which we have equity interests . for the years ended december 31 , 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , respectively , we earned management fees of $ 7.6 million , $ 8.4 million and $ 7.8 million , leasing fees of $ 2.7 million , $ 4.2 million and $ 2.8 million and construction and development fees of $ 10.3 million , $ 10.2 million and $ 12.7 million from these companies . we recorded these fees based on contractual terms that approximate market rates for these types of services , and we have eliminated our ownership percentages of these fees in the consolidated financial statements . commitments and contingencies we have guaranteed the repayment of $ 95.4 million of economic development bonds issued by various municipalities in connection with certain commercial developments . we will be required to make payments under our guarantees to the extent that incremental taxes from specified developments are not sufficient to pay the bond debt service . management does not believe that it is probable that we will be required to make any significant payments in satisfaction of these guarantees . we also have guaranteed the repayment of secured and unsecured loans of six of our unconsolidated subsidiaries . at december 31 , 2010 , the maximum guarantee exposure for these loans was approximately $ 245.4 million . with the exception of the guarantee of the debt of 3630 peachtree joint venture , for which we recorded a contingent liability in 2009 of $ 36.3 million , management believes it probable that we will not be required to satisfy these guarantees . we lease certain land positions with terms extending to december 2080 , with a total obligation of $ 103.6 million . no payments on these ground leases are material in any individual year . we are subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business . in the opinion of management , the amount of any ultimate liability with respect to these actions will not materially affect our consolidated financial statements or results of operations . contractual obligations at december 31 , 2010 , we were subject to certain contractual payment obligations as described in the table below: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( 1 ) our long-term debt consists of both secured and unsecured debt and includes both principal and interest . interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rates as of december 31 , 2010 . ( 2 ) our unsecured lines of credit consist of an operating line of credit that matures february 2013 and the line of credit of a consolidated subsidiary that matures july 2011 . interest expense for our unsecured lines of credit was calculated using the most recent stated interest rates that were in effect . ( 3 ) our share of unconsolidated joint venture debt includes both principal and interest . interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rate at december 31 , 2010 . ( 4 ) represents estimated remaining costs on the completion of owned development projects and third-party construction projects. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) total | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2011 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2012 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2013 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2014 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2015 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) thereafter | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 |', 'question': 'what percentage does this represent?', 'ops': 'divide(5413606, 6704679), multiply(#0, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_DRE/2010/page_41.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': '39 annual report 2010 duke realty corporation | | related party transactions we provide property and asset management , leasing , construction and other tenant related services to unconsolidated companies in which we have equity interests . for the years ended december 31 , 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , respectively , we earned management fees of $ 7.6 million , $ 8.4 million and $ 7.8 million , leasing fees of $ 2.7 million , $ 4.2 million and $ 2.8 million and construction and development fees of $ 10.3 million , $ 10.2 million and $ 12.7 million from these companies . we recorded these fees based on contractual terms that approximate market rates for these types of services , and we have eliminated our ownership percentages of these fees in the consolidated financial statements . commitments and contingencies we have guaranteed the repayment of $ 95.4 million of economic development bonds issued by various municipalities in connection with certain commercial developments . we will be required to make payments under our guarantees to the extent that incremental taxes from specified developments are not sufficient to pay the bond debt service . management does not believe that it is probable that we will be required to make any significant payments in satisfaction of these guarantees . we also have guaranteed the repayment of secured and unsecured loans of six of our unconsolidated subsidiaries . at december 31 , 2010 , the maximum guarantee exposure for these loans was approximately $ 245.4 million . with the exception of the guarantee of the debt of 3630 peachtree joint venture , for which we recorded a contingent liability in 2009 of $ 36.3 million , management believes it probable that we will not be required to satisfy these guarantees . we lease certain land positions with terms extending to december 2080 , with a total obligation of $ 103.6 million . no payments on these ground leases are material in any individual year . we are subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business . in the opinion of management , the amount of any ultimate liability with respect to these actions will not materially affect our consolidated financial statements or results of operations . contractual obligations at december 31 , 2010 , we were subject to certain contractual payment obligations as described in the table below: .', 'doc_post_text': '( 1 ) our long-term debt consists of both secured and unsecured debt and includes both principal and interest . interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rates as of december 31 , 2010 . ( 2 ) our unsecured lines of credit consist of an operating line of credit that matures february 2013 and the line of credit of a consolidated subsidiary that matures july 2011 . interest expense for our unsecured lines of credit was calculated using the most recent stated interest rates that were in effect . ( 3 ) our share of unconsolidated joint venture debt includes both principal and interest . interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rate at december 31 , 2010 . ( 4 ) represents estimated remaining costs on the completion of owned development projects and third-party construction projects. .', 'doc_table': {'payments due by period ( in thousands ) total': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 5413606.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': 214225.0, 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 447573.0, 'ground leases': 103563.0, 'operating leases': 2704.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 521041.0, 'other': 1967.0, 'total contractual obligations': 6704679.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2011': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 629781.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': 28046.0, 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 87602.0, 'ground leases': 2199.0, 'operating leases': 840.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 476314.0, 'other': 1015.0, 'total contractual obligations': 1225797.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2012': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 548966.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': 9604.0, 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 27169.0, 'ground leases': 2198.0, 'operating leases': 419.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 44727.0, 'other': 398.0, 'total contractual obligations': 633481.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2013': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 725060.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': 176575.0, 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 93663.0, 'ground leases': 2169.0, 'operating leases': 395.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': '-', 'other': 229.0, 'total contractual obligations': 998091.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2014': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 498912.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': '-', 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 34854.0, 'ground leases': 2192.0, 'operating leases': 380.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': '-', 'other': 90.0, 'total contractual obligations': 536428.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2015': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 473417.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': '-', 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 65847.0, 'ground leases': 2202.0, 'operating leases': 370.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': '-', 'other': 54.0, 'total contractual obligations': 541890.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) thereafter': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 2537470.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': '-', 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 138438.0, 'ground leases': 92603.0, 'operating leases': 300.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': '-', 'other': 181.0, 'total contractual obligations': 2768992.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the total long-term debt?', 'what are the total contractual obligations?', 'what fraction of total contractual obligations is long-term debt?', 'what percentage does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['5413606', '6704679', '0.807', '80.7%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['5413606', '6704679', 'divide(5413606, 6704679)', 'divide(5413606, 6704679), multiply(#0, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [5413606.0, 6704679.0, 0.80744, 80.7437], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 80.7437}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:14 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the net change in foreign operations including foreign tax credits from 2004 to 2006?\nA1: 9.4\nQ2: what was the value of foreign operations including foreign tax credits in 2004?\nA2: 0.5', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfor additional information on segment results see page 43 . income from equity method investments increased by $ 126 million in 2006 from 2005 and increased by $ 98 million in 2005 from 2004 . income from our lpg operations in equatorial guinea increased in both periods due to higher sales volumes as a result of the plant expansions completed in 2005 . the increase in 2005 also included higher ptc income as a result of higher distillate gross margins . cost of revenues increased $ 4.609 billion in 2006 from 2005 and $ 7.106 billion in 2005 from 2004 . in both periods the increases were primarily in the rm&t segment and resulted from increases in acquisition costs of crude oil , refinery charge and blend stocks and purchased refined products . the increase in both periods was also impacted by higher manufacturing expenses , primarily the result of higher contract services and labor costs in 2006 and higher purchased energy costs in 2005 . purchases related to matching buy/sell transactions decreased $ 6.968 billion in 2006 from 2005 and increased $ 3.314 billion in 2005 from 2004 , mostly in the rm&t segment . the decrease in 2006 was primarily related to the change in accounting for matching buy/sell transactions discussed above . the increase in 2005 was primarily due to increased crude oil prices . depreciation , depletion and amortization increased $ 215 million in 2006 from 2005 and $ 125 million in 2005 from 2004 . rm&t segment depreciation expense increased in both years as a result of the increase in asset value recorded for our acquisition of the 38 percent interest in mpc on june 30 , 2005 . in addition , the detroit refinery expansion completed in the fourth quarter of 2005 contributed to the rm&t depreciation expense increase in 2006 . e&p segment depreciation expense for 2006 included a $ 20 million impairment of capitalized costs related to the camden hills field in the gulf of mexico and the associated canyon express pipeline . natural gas production from the camden hills field ended in 2006 as a result of increased water production from the well . selling , general and administrative expenses increased $ 73 million in 2006 from 2005 and $ 134 million in 2005 from 2004 . the 2006 increase was primarily because personnel and staffing costs increased throughout the year primarily as a result of variable compensation arrangements and increased business activity . partially offsetting these increases were reductions in stock-based compensation expense . the increase in 2005 was primarily a result of increased stock-based compensation expense , due to the increase in our stock price during that year as well as an increase in equity-based awards , which was partially offset by a decrease in expense as a result of severance and pension plan curtailment charges and start-up costs related to egholdings in 2004 . exploration expenses increased $ 148 million in 2006 from 2005 and $ 59 million in 2005 from 2004 . exploration expense related to dry wells and other write-offs totaled $ 166 million , $ 111 million and $ 47 million in 2006 , 2005 and 2004 . exploration expense in 2006 also included $ 47 million for exiting the cortland and empire leases in nova scotia . net interest and other financing costs ( income ) reflected a net $ 37 million of income for 2006 , a favorable change of $ 183 million from the net $ 146 million expense in 2005 . net interest and other financing costs decreased $ 16 million in 2005 from 2004 . the favorable changes in 2006 included increased interest income due to higher interest rates and average cash balances , foreign currency exchange gains , adjustments to interest on tax issues and greater capitalized interest . the decrease in expense for 2005 was primarily a result of increased interest income on higher average cash balances and greater capitalized interest , partially offset by increased interest on potential tax deficiencies and higher foreign exchange losses . included in net interest and other financing costs ( income ) are foreign currency gains of $ 16 million , losses of $ 17 million and gains of $ 9 million for 2006 , 2005 and 2004 . minority interest in income of mpc decreased $ 148 million in 2005 from 2004 due to our acquisition of the 38 percent interest in mpc on june 30 , 2005 . provision for income taxes increased $ 2.308 billion in 2006 from 2005 and $ 979 million in 2005 from 2004 , primarily due to the $ 4.259 billion and $ 2.691 billion increases in income from continuing operations before income taxes . the increase in our effective income tax rate in 2006 was primarily a result of the income taxes related to our libyan operations , where the statutory income tax rate is in excess of 90 percent . the following is an analysis of the effective income tax rates for continuing operations for 2006 , 2005 and 2004 . see note 11 to the consolidated financial statements for further discussion. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | statutory u.s . income tax rate | effects of foreign operations including foreign tax credits | state and local income taxes net of federal income tax effects | other tax effects | effective income tax rate for continuing operations | statutory u.s . income tax rate | effects of foreign operations including foreign tax credits | state and local income taxes net of federal income tax effects | other tax effects | effective income tax rate for continuing operations | statutory u.s . income tax rate | effects of foreign operations including foreign tax credits | state and local income taxes net of federal income tax effects | other tax effects | effective income tax rate for continuing operations |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2006 | -35.0 | 9.9 | 1.9 | -2.0 | -44.8 | -35.0 | 9.9 | 1.9 | -2.0 | -44.8 | -35.0 | 9.9 | 1.9 | -2.0 | -44.8 |\n| 2005 | -35.0 | -0.8 | 2.5 | -0.4 | -36.3 | -35.0 | -0.8 | 2.5 | -0.4 | -36.3 | -35.0 | -0.8 | 2.5 | -0.4 | -36.3 |\n| 2004 | -35.0 | 0.5 | 1.6 | -0.9 | -36.2 | -35.0 | 0.5 | 1.6 | -0.9 | -36.2 | -35.0 | 0.5 | 1.6 | -0.9 | -36.2 |', 'question': 'what is the percent change?', 'ops': 'subtract(9.9, 0.5), divide(#0, 0.5)', 'id': 'Single_MRO/2006/page_61.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'for additional information on segment results see page 43 . income from equity method investments increased by $ 126 million in 2006 from 2005 and increased by $ 98 million in 2005 from 2004 . income from our lpg operations in equatorial guinea increased in both periods due to higher sales volumes as a result of the plant expansions completed in 2005 . the increase in 2005 also included higher ptc income as a result of higher distillate gross margins . cost of revenues increased $ 4.609 billion in 2006 from 2005 and $ 7.106 billion in 2005 from 2004 . in both periods the increases were primarily in the rm&t segment and resulted from increases in acquisition costs of crude oil , refinery charge and blend stocks and purchased refined products . the increase in both periods was also impacted by higher manufacturing expenses , primarily the result of higher contract services and labor costs in 2006 and higher purchased energy costs in 2005 . purchases related to matching buy/sell transactions decreased $ 6.968 billion in 2006 from 2005 and increased $ 3.314 billion in 2005 from 2004 , mostly in the rm&t segment . the decrease in 2006 was primarily related to the change in accounting for matching buy/sell transactions discussed above . the increase in 2005 was primarily due to increased crude oil prices . depreciation , depletion and amortization increased $ 215 million in 2006 from 2005 and $ 125 million in 2005 from 2004 . rm&t segment depreciation expense increased in both years as a result of the increase in asset value recorded for our acquisition of the 38 percent interest in mpc on june 30 , 2005 . in addition , the detroit refinery expansion completed in the fourth quarter of 2005 contributed to the rm&t depreciation expense increase in 2006 . e&p segment depreciation expense for 2006 included a $ 20 million impairment of capitalized costs related to the camden hills field in the gulf of mexico and the associated canyon express pipeline . natural gas production from the camden hills field ended in 2006 as a result of increased water production from the well . selling , general and administrative expenses increased $ 73 million in 2006 from 2005 and $ 134 million in 2005 from 2004 . the 2006 increase was primarily because personnel and staffing costs increased throughout the year primarily as a result of variable compensation arrangements and increased business activity . partially offsetting these increases were reductions in stock-based compensation expense . the increase in 2005 was primarily a result of increased stock-based compensation expense , due to the increase in our stock price during that year as well as an increase in equity-based awards , which was partially offset by a decrease in expense as a result of severance and pension plan curtailment charges and start-up costs related to egholdings in 2004 . exploration expenses increased $ 148 million in 2006 from 2005 and $ 59 million in 2005 from 2004 . exploration expense related to dry wells and other write-offs totaled $ 166 million , $ 111 million and $ 47 million in 2006 , 2005 and 2004 . exploration expense in 2006 also included $ 47 million for exiting the cortland and empire leases in nova scotia . net interest and other financing costs ( income ) reflected a net $ 37 million of income for 2006 , a favorable change of $ 183 million from the net $ 146 million expense in 2005 . net interest and other financing costs decreased $ 16 million in 2005 from 2004 . the favorable changes in 2006 included increased interest income due to higher interest rates and average cash balances , foreign currency exchange gains , adjustments to interest on tax issues and greater capitalized interest . the decrease in expense for 2005 was primarily a result of increased interest income on higher average cash balances and greater capitalized interest , partially offset by increased interest on potential tax deficiencies and higher foreign exchange losses . included in net interest and other financing costs ( income ) are foreign currency gains of $ 16 million , losses of $ 17 million and gains of $ 9 million for 2006 , 2005 and 2004 . minority interest in income of mpc decreased $ 148 million in 2005 from 2004 due to our acquisition of the 38 percent interest in mpc on june 30 , 2005 . provision for income taxes increased $ 2.308 billion in 2006 from 2005 and $ 979 million in 2005 from 2004 , primarily due to the $ 4.259 billion and $ 2.691 billion increases in income from continuing operations before income taxes . the increase in our effective income tax rate in 2006 was primarily a result of the income taxes related to our libyan operations , where the statutory income tax rate is in excess of 90 percent . the following is an analysis of the effective income tax rates for continuing operations for 2006 , 2005 and 2004 . see note 11 to the consolidated financial statements for further discussion. .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'2006': {'statutory u.s . income tax rate': -35.0, 'effects of foreign operations including foreign tax credits': 9.9, 'state and local income taxes net of federal income tax effects': 1.9, 'other tax effects': -2.0, 'effective income tax rate for continuing operations': -44.8}, '2005': {'statutory u.s . income tax rate': -35.0, 'effects of foreign operations including foreign tax credits': -0.8, 'state and local income taxes net of federal income tax effects': 2.5, 'other tax effects': -0.4, 'effective income tax rate for continuing operations': -36.3}, '2004': {'statutory u.s . income tax rate': -35.0, 'effects of foreign operations including foreign tax credits': 0.5, 'state and local income taxes net of federal income tax effects': 1.6, 'other tax effects': -0.9, 'effective income tax rate for continuing operations': -36.2}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the net change in foreign operations including foreign tax credits from 2004 to 2006?', 'what was the value of foreign operations including foreign tax credits in 2004?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['9.4', '0.5', '1880%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(9.9, 0.5)', '0.5', 'subtract(9.9, 0.5), divide(#0, 0.5)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [9.4, 0.5, 18.8], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 18.8}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:14 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in value of lkq corporation price between 2007 and 2012?\nA1: 101.0\nQ2: what was the price of lkq corporation in 2007?\nA2: 100.0\nQ3: what is the percent change?\nA3: 1.01\nQ4: what was the change in value of the peer group between 2007 and 2012?\nA4: 110.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ncomparison of cumulative return among lkq corporation , the nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index and the peer group .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthis stock performance information is "furnished" and shall not be deemed to be "soliciting material" or subject to rule 14a , shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of section 18 of the securities exchange act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section , and shall not be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the securities act of 1933 or the securities exchange act of 1934 , whether made before or after the date of this report and irrespective of any general incorporation by reference language in any such filing , except to the extent that it specifically incorporates the information by reference . information about our common stock that may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2012 included in part iii , item 12 of this annual report on form 10-k is incorporated herein by reference. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 12/31/2007 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| 12/31/2008 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 |\n| 12/31/2009 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 |\n| 12/31/2010 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 |\n| 12/31/2011 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 |\n| 12/31/2012 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 |', 'question': 'what is the percent change?', 'ops': 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(210, 100), divide(#2, 100)', 'id': 'Single_LKQ/2012/page_25.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'comparison of cumulative return among lkq corporation , the nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index and the peer group .', 'doc_post_text': 'this stock performance information is "furnished" and shall not be deemed to be "soliciting material" or subject to rule 14a , shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of section 18 of the securities exchange act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section , and shall not be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the securities act of 1933 or the securities exchange act of 1934 , whether made before or after the date of this report and irrespective of any general incorporation by reference language in any such filing , except to the extent that it specifically incorporates the information by reference . information about our common stock that may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2012 included in part iii , item 12 of this annual report on form 10-k is incorporated herein by reference. .', 'doc_table': {'12/31/2007': {'lkq corporation': 100.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 100.0, 'peer group': 100.0}, '12/31/2008': {'lkq corporation': 55.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 59.0, 'peer group': 83.0}, '12/31/2009': {'lkq corporation': 93.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 86.0, 'peer group': 100.0}, '12/31/2010': {'lkq corporation': 108.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 100.0, 'peer group': 139.0}, '12/31/2011': {'lkq corporation': 143.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 98.0, 'peer group': 187.0}, '12/31/2012': {'lkq corporation': 201.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 114.0, 'peer group': 210.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in value of lkq corporation price between 2007 and 2012?', 'what was the price of lkq corporation in 2007?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what was the change in value of the peer group between 2007 and 2012?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['101', '100', '101%', '110', '110%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(201, 100)', '100', 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(210, 100)', 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(210, 100), divide(#2, 100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [101.0, 100.0, 1.01, 110.0, 1.1], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1.1}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:14 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value of cash provided by operations in 2013?\nA1: 1807.0\nQ2: what was the value in 2011?\nA2: 1595.0\nQ3: what is the net change in value?\nA3: 212.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ngeneral market conditions affecting trust asset performance , future discount rates based on average yields of high quality corporate bonds and our decisions regarding certain elective provisions of the we currently project that we will make total u.s . and foreign benefit plan contributions in 2014 of approximately $ 57 million . actual 2014 contributions could be different from our current projections , as influenced by our decision to undertake discretionary funding of our benefit trusts versus other competing investment priorities , future changes in government requirements , trust asset performance , renewals of union contracts , or higher-than-expected health care claims cost experience . we measure cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities reduced by expenditures for property additions . we use this non-gaap financial measure of cash flow to focus management and investors on the amount of cash available for debt repayment , dividend distributions , acquisition opportunities , and share repurchases . our cash flow metric is reconciled to the most comparable gaap measure , as follows: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nyear-over-year change ( 4.5 ) % (  % ) 22.4% ( 22.4 % ) the decrease in cash flow ( as defined ) in 2013 compared to 2012 was due primarily to higher capital expenditures . the increase in cash flow in 2012 compared to 2011 was driven by improved performance in working capital resulting from the one-time benefit derived from the pringles acquisition , as well as changes in the level of capital expenditures during the three-year period . investing activities our net cash used in investing activities for 2013 amounted to $ 641 million , a decrease of $ 2604 million compared with 2012 primarily attributable to the $ 2668 million acquisition of pringles in 2012 . capital spending in 2013 included investments in our supply chain infrastructure , and to support capacity requirements in certain markets , including pringles . in addition , we continued the investment in our information technology infrastructure related to the reimplementation and upgrade of our sap platform . net cash used in investing activities of $ 3245 million in 2012 increased by $ 2658 million compared with 2011 , due to the acquisition of pringles in 2012 . cash paid for additions to properties as a percentage of net sales has increased to 4.3% ( 4.3 % ) in 2013 , from 3.8% ( 3.8 % ) in 2012 , which was a decrease from 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) in financing activities our net cash used by financing activities was $ 1141 million for 2013 , compared to net cash provided by financing activities of $ 1317 million for 2012 and net cash used in financing activities of $ 957 million for 2011 . the increase in cash provided from financing activities in 2012 compared to 2013 and 2011 , was primarily due to the issuance of debt related to the acquisition of pringles . total debt was $ 7.4 billion at year-end 2013 and $ 7.9 billion at year-end 2012 . in february 2013 , we issued $ 250 million of two-year floating-rate u.s . dollar notes , and $ 400 million of ten-year 2.75% ( 2.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 645 million . the proceeds from these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including , together with cash on hand , repayment of the $ 750 million aggregate principal amount of our 4.25% ( 4.25 % ) u.s . dollar notes due march 2013 . in may 2012 , we issued $ 350 million of three-year 1.125% ( 1.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , $ 400 million of five-year 1.75% ( 1.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes and $ 700 million of ten-year 3.125% ( 3.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 1.442 billion . the proceeds of these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including financing a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in may 2012 , we issued cdn . $ 300 million of two-year 2.10% ( 2.10 % ) fixed rate canadian dollar notes , using the proceeds from these notes for general corporate purposes , which included repayment of intercompany debt . this repayment resulted in cash available to be used for a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in december 2012 , we repaid $ 750 million five-year 5.125% ( 5.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in april 2011 , we repaid $ 945 million ten-year 6.60% ( 6.60 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in may 2011 , we issued $ 400 million of seven-year 3.25% ( 3.25 % ) fixed rate u.s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 397 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper . in november 2011 , we issued $ 500 million of five-year 1.875% ( 1.875 % ) fixed rate u . s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 498 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2013 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 |\n| 2012 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 |\n| 2011 | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  |', 'question': 'what was the 2011 value?', 'ops': '1595', 'id': 'Single_K/2013/page_27.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'general market conditions affecting trust asset performance , future discount rates based on average yields of high quality corporate bonds and our decisions regarding certain elective provisions of the we currently project that we will make total u.s . and foreign benefit plan contributions in 2014 of approximately $ 57 million . actual 2014 contributions could be different from our current projections , as influenced by our decision to undertake discretionary funding of our benefit trusts versus other competing investment priorities , future changes in government requirements , trust asset performance , renewals of union contracts , or higher-than-expected health care claims cost experience . we measure cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities reduced by expenditures for property additions . we use this non-gaap financial measure of cash flow to focus management and investors on the amount of cash available for debt repayment , dividend distributions , acquisition opportunities , and share repurchases . our cash flow metric is reconciled to the most comparable gaap measure , as follows: .', 'doc_post_text': 'year-over-year change ( 4.5 ) % (  % ) 22.4% ( 22.4 % ) the decrease in cash flow ( as defined ) in 2013 compared to 2012 was due primarily to higher capital expenditures . the increase in cash flow in 2012 compared to 2011 was driven by improved performance in working capital resulting from the one-time benefit derived from the pringles acquisition , as well as changes in the level of capital expenditures during the three-year period . investing activities our net cash used in investing activities for 2013 amounted to $ 641 million , a decrease of $ 2604 million compared with 2012 primarily attributable to the $ 2668 million acquisition of pringles in 2012 . capital spending in 2013 included investments in our supply chain infrastructure , and to support capacity requirements in certain markets , including pringles . in addition , we continued the investment in our information technology infrastructure related to the reimplementation and upgrade of our sap platform . net cash used in investing activities of $ 3245 million in 2012 increased by $ 2658 million compared with 2011 , due to the acquisition of pringles in 2012 . cash paid for additions to properties as a percentage of net sales has increased to 4.3% ( 4.3 % ) in 2013 , from 3.8% ( 3.8 % ) in 2012 , which was a decrease from 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) in financing activities our net cash used by financing activities was $ 1141 million for 2013 , compared to net cash provided by financing activities of $ 1317 million for 2012 and net cash used in financing activities of $ 957 million for 2011 . the increase in cash provided from financing activities in 2012 compared to 2013 and 2011 , was primarily due to the issuance of debt related to the acquisition of pringles . total debt was $ 7.4 billion at year-end 2013 and $ 7.9 billion at year-end 2012 . in february 2013 , we issued $ 250 million of two-year floating-rate u.s . dollar notes , and $ 400 million of ten-year 2.75% ( 2.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 645 million . the proceeds from these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including , together with cash on hand , repayment of the $ 750 million aggregate principal amount of our 4.25% ( 4.25 % ) u.s . dollar notes due march 2013 . in may 2012 , we issued $ 350 million of three-year 1.125% ( 1.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , $ 400 million of five-year 1.75% ( 1.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes and $ 700 million of ten-year 3.125% ( 3.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 1.442 billion . the proceeds of these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including financing a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in may 2012 , we issued cdn . $ 300 million of two-year 2.10% ( 2.10 % ) fixed rate canadian dollar notes , using the proceeds from these notes for general corporate purposes , which included repayment of intercompany debt . this repayment resulted in cash available to be used for a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in december 2012 , we repaid $ 750 million five-year 5.125% ( 5.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in april 2011 , we repaid $ 945 million ten-year 6.60% ( 6.60 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in may 2011 , we issued $ 400 million of seven-year 3.25% ( 3.25 % ) fixed rate u.s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 397 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper . in november 2011 , we issued $ 500 million of five-year 1.875% ( 1.875 % ) fixed rate u . s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 498 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper. .', 'doc_table': {'2013': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1807.0, 'additions to properties': -637.0, 'cash flow': 1170.0, 'year-over-year change': -4.5}, '2012': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1758.0, 'additions to properties': -533.0, 'cash flow': 1225.0, 'year-over-year change': -22.4}, '2011': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1595.0, 'additions to properties': -594.0, 'cash flow': 1001.0, 'year-over-year change': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of cash provided by operations in 2013?', 'what was the value in 2011?', 'what is the net change in value?', 'what was the 2011 value?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1807', '1595', '212', '1595', '.1329'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1807', '1595', 'subtract(1807, 1595)', '1595', 'subtract(1807, 1595), divide(#0, 1595)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1807.0, 1595.0, 212.0, 1595.0, 0.13292], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 1595.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value of the aptiv plc in 2018?\nA1: 130.8\nQ2: what was, then, the change in its value, considering 2018 and the original amount invested in it in 2013?\nA2: 30.8\nQ3: and what was the change in the value of the automotive peer group, considering the 2018 one and the original amount invested in it in 2013?\nA3: 6.89\nQ4: how much does the change in the value of the aptiv plc represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?\nA4: 0.308\nQ5: and how much does the change in the value of the automotive peer group represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?\nA5: 0.0689', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities our ordinary shares have been publicly traded since november 17 , 2011 when our ordinary shares were listed and began trading on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) under the symbol 201cdlph . 201d on december 4 , 2017 , following the spin-off of delphi technologies , the company changed its name to aptiv plc and its nyse symbol to 201captv . 201d as of january 25 , 2019 , there were 2 shareholders of record of our ordinary shares . the following graph reflects the comparative changes in the value from december 31 , 2013 through december 31 , 2018 , assuming an initial investment of $ 100 and the reinvestment of dividends , if any in ( 1 ) our ordinary shares , ( 2 ) the s&p 500 index and ( 3 ) the automotive peer group . historical share prices of our ordinary shares have been adjusted to reflect the separation . historical performance may not be indicative of future shareholder returns . stock performance graph * $ 100 invested on december 31 , 2013 in our stock or in the relevant index , including reinvestment of dividends . fiscal year ended december 31 , 2018 . ( 1 ) aptiv plc , adjusted for the distribution of delphi technologies on december 4 , 2017 ( 2 ) s&p 500 2013 standard & poor 2019s 500 total return index ( 3 ) automotive peer group 2013 adient plc , american axle & manufacturing holdings inc , aptiv plc , borgwarner inc , cooper tire & rubber co , cooper- standard holdings inc , dana inc , dorman products inc , ford motor co , garrett motion inc. , general motors co , gentex corp , gentherm inc , genuine parts co , goodyear tire & rubber co , lear corp , lkq corp , meritor inc , motorcar parts of america inc , standard motor products inc , stoneridge inc , superior industries international inc , tenneco inc , tesla inc , tower international inc , visteon corp , wabco holdings inc company index december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| december 31 2013 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| december 31 2014 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 |\n| december 31 2015 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 |\n| december 31 2016 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 |\n| december 31 2017 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 |\n| december 31 2018 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 |', 'question': 'what is, then, the difference between the percentage change of the aptiv plc and the automotive peer group one?', 'ops': 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), divide(#1, const_100), subtract(#2, #3)', 'id': 'Single_APTV/2018/page_36.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'part ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities our ordinary shares have been publicly traded since november 17 , 2011 when our ordinary shares were listed and began trading on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) under the symbol 201cdlph . 201d on december 4 , 2017 , following the spin-off of delphi technologies , the company changed its name to aptiv plc and its nyse symbol to 201captv . 201d as of january 25 , 2019 , there were 2 shareholders of record of our ordinary shares . the following graph reflects the comparative changes in the value from december 31 , 2013 through december 31 , 2018 , assuming an initial investment of $ 100 and the reinvestment of dividends , if any in ( 1 ) our ordinary shares , ( 2 ) the s&p 500 index and ( 3 ) the automotive peer group . historical share prices of our ordinary shares have been adjusted to reflect the separation . historical performance may not be indicative of future shareholder returns . stock performance graph * $ 100 invested on december 31 , 2013 in our stock or in the relevant index , including reinvestment of dividends . fiscal year ended december 31 , 2018 . ( 1 ) aptiv plc , adjusted for the distribution of delphi technologies on december 4 , 2017 ( 2 ) s&p 500 2013 standard & poor 2019s 500 total return index ( 3 ) automotive peer group 2013 adient plc , american axle & manufacturing holdings inc , aptiv plc , borgwarner inc , cooper tire & rubber co , cooper- standard holdings inc , dana inc , dorman products inc , ford motor co , garrett motion inc. , general motors co , gentex corp , gentherm inc , genuine parts co , goodyear tire & rubber co , lear corp , lkq corp , meritor inc , motorcar parts of america inc , standard motor products inc , stoneridge inc , superior industries international inc , tenneco inc , tesla inc , tower international inc , visteon corp , wabco holdings inc company index december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'december 31 2013': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 100.0, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 100.0, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 100.0}, 'december 31 2014': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 122.75, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 113.69, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 107.96}, 'december 31 2015': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 146.49, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 115.26, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 108.05}, 'december 31 2016': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 117.11, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 129.05, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 107.72}, 'december 31 2017': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 178.46, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 157.22, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 134.04}, 'december 31 2018': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 130.8, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 150.33, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 106.89}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of the aptiv plc in 2018?', 'what was, then, the change in its value, considering 2018 and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'and what was the change in the value of the automotive peer group, considering the 2018 one and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'how much does the change in the value of the aptiv plc represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?', 'and how much does the change in the value of the automotive peer group represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?', 'what is, then, the difference between the percentage change of the aptiv plc and the automotive peer group one?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['130.80', '30.8', '6.89', '30.8%', '6.89%', '23.91%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['130.80', 'subtract(130.80, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), divide(#1, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), divide(#1, const_100), subtract(#2, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [130.8, 30.8, 6.89, 0.308, 0.0689, 0.2391], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.2391}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the difference in price for apple between 2008 and 2013?\nA1: 331.0\nQ2: and the percentage growth?\nA2: 3.31\nQ3: and the difference for the s&p computer hardware index over the same period?\nA3: 97.0\nQ4: and the starting price for the index?\nA4: 100.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ntable of contents company stock performance the following graph shows a five-year comparison of cumulative total shareholder return , calculated on a dividend reinvested basis , for the company , the s&p 500 index , the s&p computer hardware index , and the dow jones u.s . technology supersector index . the graph assumes $ 100 was invested in each of the company 2019s common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p computer hardware index , and the dow jones u.s . technology supersector index as of the market close on september 30 , 2008 . data points on the graph are annual . note that historic stock price performance is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance . fiscal year ending september 30 . copyright 2013 s&p , a division of the mcgraw-hill companies inc . all rights reserved . copyright 2013 dow jones & co . all rights reserved . *$ 100 invested on 9/30/08 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| september 30 2008 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| september 30 2009 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 |\n| september 30 2010 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 |\n| september 30 2011 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 |\n| september 30 2012 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 |\n| september 30 2013 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 |', 'question': 'so what was the percentage growth?', 'ops': 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(197, 100), divide(#2, 100)', 'id': 'Single_AAPL/2013/page_27.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'table of contents company stock performance the following graph shows a five-year comparison of cumulative total shareholder return , calculated on a dividend reinvested basis , for the company , the s&p 500 index , the s&p computer hardware index , and the dow jones u.s . technology supersector index . the graph assumes $ 100 was invested in each of the company 2019s common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p computer hardware index , and the dow jones u.s . technology supersector index as of the market close on september 30 , 2008 . data points on the graph are annual . note that historic stock price performance is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance . fiscal year ending september 30 . copyright 2013 s&p , a division of the mcgraw-hill companies inc . all rights reserved . copyright 2013 dow jones & co . all rights reserved . *$ 100 invested on 9/30/08 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'september 30 2008': {'apple inc .': 100.0, 's&p 500 index': 100.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 100.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 100.0}, 'september 30 2009': {'apple inc .': 163.0, 's&p 500 index': 93.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 118.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 111.0}, 'september 30 2010': {'apple inc .': 250.0, 's&p 500 index': 103.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 140.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 124.0}, 'september 30 2011': {'apple inc .': 335.0, 's&p 500 index': 104.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 159.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 128.0}, 'september 30 2012': {'apple inc .': 589.0, 's&p 500 index': 135.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 255.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 166.0}, 'september 30 2013': {'apple inc .': 431.0, 's&p 500 index': 161.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 197.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 175.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the difference in price for apple between 2008 and 2013?', 'and the percentage growth?', 'and the difference for the s&p computer hardware index over the same period?', 'and the starting price for the index?', 'so what was the percentage growth?', 'and the difference between these two growth rates?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['331', '331%', '97', '100', '97%', '270%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(431, 100)', 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(197, 100)', '100', 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(197, 100), divide(#2, 100)', 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(197, 100), divide(#2, 100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [331.0, 3.31, 97.0, 100.0, 0.97, 2.34], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.97}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nthe graph below shows a five-year comparison of the cumulative shareholder return on the company's common stock with the cumulative total return of the s&p smallcap 600 index and the s&p 600 electrical equipment index , all of which are published indices . comparison of five-year cumulative total return from december 31 , 2002 to december 31 , 2007 assumes $ 100 invested with reinvestment of dividends period indexed returns .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n12/31/02 12/31/03 12/31/04 12/31/05 12/31/06 12/31/07 smith ( a o ) corp s&p smallcap 600 index s&p 600 electrical equipment .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| baseperiod 12/31/02 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/03 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/04 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/05 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/06 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 |\n| 12/31/07 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 |', 'question': 'what was the change in the value of a o smith corp from 2002 to 2007?', 'ops': 'subtract(142.72, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_AOS/2007/page_17.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': "the graph below shows a five-year comparison of the cumulative shareholder return on the company's common stock with the cumulative total return of the s&p smallcap 600 index and the s&p 600 electrical equipment index , all of which are published indices . comparison of five-year cumulative total return from december 31 , 2002 to december 31 , 2007 assumes $ 100 invested with reinvestment of dividends period indexed returns .", 'doc_post_text': '12/31/02 12/31/03 12/31/04 12/31/05 12/31/06 12/31/07 smith ( a o ) corp s&p smallcap 600 index s&p 600 electrical equipment .', 'doc_table': {'baseperiod 12/31/02': {'a o smith corp': 100.0, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 100.0, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 100.0}, 'baseperiod 12/31/03': {'a o smith corp': 132.23, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 138.79, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 126.12}, 'baseperiod 12/31/04': {'a o smith corp': 115.36, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 170.22, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 152.18}, 'baseperiod 12/31/05': {'a o smith corp': 138.2, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 183.3, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 169.07}, 'baseperiod 12/31/06': {'a o smith corp': 150.26, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 211.01, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 228.83}, '12/31/07': {'a o smith corp': 142.72, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 210.39, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 253.33}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in the value of a o smith corp from 2002 to 2007?', 'and how much does that change represent in relation to the original value in 2002?', 'what was the value of the s&p 600 electrical equipment in 2007?', 'and what was the change in that value between 2002 and 2007?', 'how much, then, does this change represent in relation to the original value of that stock in 2002?', 'and what was the difference between the return (or the change representation) of the a o smith corp and the one of the s&p 600 electrical equipment?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['42.72', '42.72%', '253.33', '153.33', '153.33%', '-110.61%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(142.72, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', '253.33', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [42.72, 0.4272, 253.33, 153.33, 1.5333, -1.1061], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 42.72}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in value of lkq corporation price between 2007 and 2012?\nA1: 101.0\nQ2: what was the price of lkq corporation in 2007?\nA2: 100.0\nQ3: what is the percent change?\nA3: 1.01', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ncomparison of cumulative return among lkq corporation , the nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index and the peer group .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthis stock performance information is "furnished" and shall not be deemed to be "soliciting material" or subject to rule 14a , shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of section 18 of the securities exchange act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section , and shall not be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the securities act of 1933 or the securities exchange act of 1934 , whether made before or after the date of this report and irrespective of any general incorporation by reference language in any such filing , except to the extent that it specifically incorporates the information by reference . information about our common stock that may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2012 included in part iii , item 12 of this annual report on form 10-k is incorporated herein by reference. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 12/31/2007 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| 12/31/2008 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 |\n| 12/31/2009 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 |\n| 12/31/2010 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 |\n| 12/31/2011 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 |\n| 12/31/2012 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 |', 'question': 'what was the change in value of the peer group between 2007 and 2012?', 'ops': 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(210, 100)', 'id': 'Single_LKQ/2012/page_25.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'comparison of cumulative return among lkq corporation , the nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index and the peer group .', 'doc_post_text': 'this stock performance information is "furnished" and shall not be deemed to be "soliciting material" or subject to rule 14a , shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of section 18 of the securities exchange act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section , and shall not be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the securities act of 1933 or the securities exchange act of 1934 , whether made before or after the date of this report and irrespective of any general incorporation by reference language in any such filing , except to the extent that it specifically incorporates the information by reference . information about our common stock that may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2012 included in part iii , item 12 of this annual report on form 10-k is incorporated herein by reference. .', 'doc_table': {'12/31/2007': {'lkq corporation': 100.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 100.0, 'peer group': 100.0}, '12/31/2008': {'lkq corporation': 55.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 59.0, 'peer group': 83.0}, '12/31/2009': {'lkq corporation': 93.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 86.0, 'peer group': 100.0}, '12/31/2010': {'lkq corporation': 108.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 100.0, 'peer group': 139.0}, '12/31/2011': {'lkq corporation': 143.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 98.0, 'peer group': 187.0}, '12/31/2012': {'lkq corporation': 201.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 114.0, 'peer group': 210.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in value of lkq corporation price between 2007 and 2012?', 'what was the price of lkq corporation in 2007?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what was the change in value of the peer group between 2007 and 2012?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['101', '100', '101%', '110', '110%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(201, 100)', '100', 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(210, 100)', 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(210, 100), divide(#2, 100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [101.0, 100.0, 1.01, 110.0, 1.1], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 110.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in value of lkq corporation price between 2007 and 2012?\nA1: 101.0\nQ2: what was the price of lkq corporation in 2007?\nA2: 100.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ncomparison of cumulative return among lkq corporation , the nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index and the peer group .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthis stock performance information is "furnished" and shall not be deemed to be "soliciting material" or subject to rule 14a , shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of section 18 of the securities exchange act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section , and shall not be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the securities act of 1933 or the securities exchange act of 1934 , whether made before or after the date of this report and irrespective of any general incorporation by reference language in any such filing , except to the extent that it specifically incorporates the information by reference . information about our common stock that may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2012 included in part iii , item 12 of this annual report on form 10-k is incorporated herein by reference. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 12/31/2007 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| 12/31/2008 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 |\n| 12/31/2009 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 |\n| 12/31/2010 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 |\n| 12/31/2011 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 |\n| 12/31/2012 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 |', 'question': 'what is the percent change?', 'ops': 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'id': 'Single_LKQ/2012/page_25.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'comparison of cumulative return among lkq corporation , the nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index and the peer group .', 'doc_post_text': 'this stock performance information is "furnished" and shall not be deemed to be "soliciting material" or subject to rule 14a , shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of section 18 of the securities exchange act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section , and shall not be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the securities act of 1933 or the securities exchange act of 1934 , whether made before or after the date of this report and irrespective of any general incorporation by reference language in any such filing , except to the extent that it specifically incorporates the information by reference . information about our common stock that may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2012 included in part iii , item 12 of this annual report on form 10-k is incorporated herein by reference. .', 'doc_table': {'12/31/2007': {'lkq corporation': 100.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 100.0, 'peer group': 100.0}, '12/31/2008': {'lkq corporation': 55.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 59.0, 'peer group': 83.0}, '12/31/2009': {'lkq corporation': 93.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 86.0, 'peer group': 100.0}, '12/31/2010': {'lkq corporation': 108.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 100.0, 'peer group': 139.0}, '12/31/2011': {'lkq corporation': 143.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 98.0, 'peer group': 187.0}, '12/31/2012': {'lkq corporation': 201.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 114.0, 'peer group': 210.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in value of lkq corporation price between 2007 and 2012?', 'what was the price of lkq corporation in 2007?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what was the change in value of the peer group between 2007 and 2012?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['101', '100', '101%', '110', '110%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(201, 100)', '100', 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(210, 100)', 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(210, 100), divide(#2, 100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [101.0, 100.0, 1.01, 110.0, 1.1], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1.01}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:15 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the long-term debt in 2015?\nA1: 1610.3\nQ2: and what was it in 2014?\nA2: 1612.9\nQ3: what was, then, the total long-term debt for those two years combined?\nA3: 3223.2\nQ4: and what was the total debt in that same period?\nA4: 3484.5\nQ5: how much, then, does the long-term debt represent in relation to this total debt, in the two year period?\nA5: 0.92501', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2013 ( continued ) ( amounts in millions , except per share amounts ) financing activities net cash used in financing activities during 2015 primarily related to the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we repurchased 13.6 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 285.2 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 195.5 on our common stock . net cash used in financing activities during 2014 primarily related to the purchase of long-term debt , the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we redeemed all $ 350.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 6.25% ( 6.25 % ) notes , repurchased 14.9 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 275.1 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 159.0 on our common stock . this was offset by the issuance of $ 500.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 4.20% ( 4.20 % ) notes . foreign exchange rate changes the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 156.1 in 2015 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar , euro and south african rand as of december 31 , 2015 compared to december 31 , 2014 . the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 101.0 in 2014 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar and euro as of december 31 , 2014 compared to december 31 , 2013. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nliquidity outlook we expect our cash flow from operations , cash and cash equivalents to be sufficient to meet our anticipated operating requirements at a minimum for the next twelve months . we also have a committed corporate credit facility as well as uncommitted facilities available to support our operating needs . we continue to maintain a disciplined approach to managing liquidity , with flexibility over significant uses of cash , including our capital expenditures , cash used for new acquisitions , our common stock repurchase program and our common stock dividends . from time to time , we evaluate market conditions and financing alternatives for opportunities to raise additional funds or otherwise improve our liquidity profile , enhance our financial flexibility and manage market risk . our ability to access the capital markets depends on a number of factors , which include those specific to us , such as our credit rating , and those related to the financial markets , such as the amount or terms of available credit . there can be no guarantee that we would be able to access new sources of liquidity on commercially reasonable terms , or at all . funding requirements our most significant funding requirements include our operations , non-cancelable operating lease obligations , capital expenditures , acquisitions , common stock dividends , taxes , debt service and contributions to pension and postretirement plans . additionally , we may be required to make payments to minority shareholders in certain subsidiaries if they exercise their options to sell us their equity interests. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash cash equivalents and marketable securities | short-term borrowings | current portion of long-term debt | long-term debt | total debt | cash cash equivalents and marketable securities | short-term borrowings | current portion of long-term debt | long-term debt | total debt |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| december 31 , 2015 | 1509.7 | 150.1 | 1.9 | 1610.3 | 1762.3 | 1509.7 | 150.1 | 1.9 | 1610.3 | 1762.3 |\n| december 31 , 2014 | 1667.2 | 107.2 | 2.1 | 1612.9 | 1722.2 | 1667.2 | 107.2 | 2.1 | 1612.9 | 1722.2 |', 'question': 'and how much is that in percentage?', 'ops': 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2), divide(#0, #1), multiply(#2, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_IPG/2015/page_38.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2013 ( continued ) ( amounts in millions , except per share amounts ) financing activities net cash used in financing activities during 2015 primarily related to the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we repurchased 13.6 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 285.2 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 195.5 on our common stock . net cash used in financing activities during 2014 primarily related to the purchase of long-term debt , the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we redeemed all $ 350.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 6.25% ( 6.25 % ) notes , repurchased 14.9 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 275.1 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 159.0 on our common stock . this was offset by the issuance of $ 500.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 4.20% ( 4.20 % ) notes . foreign exchange rate changes the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 156.1 in 2015 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar , euro and south african rand as of december 31 , 2015 compared to december 31 , 2014 . the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 101.0 in 2014 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar and euro as of december 31 , 2014 compared to december 31 , 2013. .', 'doc_post_text': 'liquidity outlook we expect our cash flow from operations , cash and cash equivalents to be sufficient to meet our anticipated operating requirements at a minimum for the next twelve months . we also have a committed corporate credit facility as well as uncommitted facilities available to support our operating needs . we continue to maintain a disciplined approach to managing liquidity , with flexibility over significant uses of cash , including our capital expenditures , cash used for new acquisitions , our common stock repurchase program and our common stock dividends . from time to time , we evaluate market conditions and financing alternatives for opportunities to raise additional funds or otherwise improve our liquidity profile , enhance our financial flexibility and manage market risk . our ability to access the capital markets depends on a number of factors , which include those specific to us , such as our credit rating , and those related to the financial markets , such as the amount or terms of available credit . there can be no guarantee that we would be able to access new sources of liquidity on commercially reasonable terms , or at all . funding requirements our most significant funding requirements include our operations , non-cancelable operating lease obligations , capital expenditures , acquisitions , common stock dividends , taxes , debt service and contributions to pension and postretirement plans . additionally , we may be required to make payments to minority shareholders in certain subsidiaries if they exercise their options to sell us their equity interests. .', 'doc_table': {'december 31 , 2015': {'cash cash equivalents and marketable securities': 1509.7, 'short-term borrowings': 150.1, 'current portion of long-term debt': 1.9, 'long-term debt': 1610.3, 'total debt': 1762.3}, 'december 31 , 2014': {'cash cash equivalents and marketable securities': 1667.2, 'short-term borrowings': 107.2, 'current portion of long-term debt': 2.1, 'long-term debt': 1612.9, 'total debt': 1722.2}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the long-term debt in 2015?', 'and what was it in 2014?', 'what was, then, the total long-term debt for those two years combined?', 'and what was the total debt in that same period?', 'how much, then, does the long-term debt represent in relation to this total debt, in the two year period?', 'and how much is that in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1610.3', '1612.9', '3223.2', '3484.5', '0.925', '92.5'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1610.3', '1612.9', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9)', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2)', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2), divide(#0, #1)', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2), divide(#0, #1), multiply(#2, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1610.3, 1612.9, 3223.2, 3484.5, 0.92501, 92.50108], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 92.50108}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "45s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:16 WARNING dspy.utils.parallelizer: Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.
2025/07/29 14:18:16 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?\nA1: 68.4\nQ2: including the year of 2011, what would it then be?\nA2: 89.3', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfor intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | revenue | net loss | revenue | net loss |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| year endedfebruary 12008 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 |\n| year endedfebruary 22007 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 |', 'question': 'including now the year of 2012 in the amount, what would the total estimated aggregate amortization expense be, in millions?', 'ops': 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0)', 'id': 'Single_DG/2008/page_86.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'for intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .', 'doc_post_text': 'the pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .', 'doc_table': {'year endedfebruary 12008': {'revenue': 9495246.0, 'net loss': -57939.0}, 'year endedfebruary 22007': {'revenue': 9169822.0, 'net loss': -156188.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?', 'including the year of 2011, what would it then be?', 'including now the year of 2012 in the amount, what would the total estimated aggregate amortization expense be, in millions?', 'what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense in 2013, in millions?', 'including 2013, what would now be the total sum in estimated aggregate amortization expense over those five years, in millions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['68.4', '89.3', '106.3', '12.0', '118.3'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(41.1, 27.3)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0)', '12.0', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0), add(#2, 12.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [68.4, 89.3, 106.3, 12.0, 118.3], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 106.3}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:16 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total amount of resale agreements in 2008, in millions?\nA1: 20800.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\njpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175 securities borrowed and securities lent are recorded at the amount of cash collateral advanced or received . securities borrowed consist primarily of government and equity securities . jpmorgan chase moni- tors the market value of the securities borrowed and lent on a daily basis and calls for additional collateral when appropriate . fees received or paid in connection with securities borrowed and lent are recorded in interest income or interest expense . the following table details the components of collateralized financings. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( a ) includes resale agreements of $ 20.8 billion and $ 19.1 billion accounted for at fair value at december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . ( b ) includes securities borrowed of $ 3.4 billion accounted for at fair value at december 31 , 2008 . ( c ) includes repurchase agreements of $ 3.0 billion and $ 5.8 billion accounted for at fair value at december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . jpmorgan chase pledges certain financial instruments it owns to col- lateralize repurchase agreements and other securities financings . pledged securities that can be sold or repledged by the secured party are identified as financial instruments owned ( pledged to various parties ) on the consolidated balance sheets . at december 31 , 2008 , the firm received securities as collateral that could be repledged , delivered or otherwise used with a fair value of approximately $ 511.9 billion . this collateral was generally obtained under resale or securities borrowing agreements . of these securities , approximately $ 456.6 billion were repledged , delivered or otherwise used , generally as collateral under repurchase agreements , securities lending agreements or to cover short sales . note 14 2013 loans the accounting for a loan may differ based upon whether it is origi- nated or purchased and as to whether the loan is used in an invest- ing or trading strategy . for purchased loans held-for-investment , the accounting also differs depending on whether a loan is credit- impaired at the date of acquisition . purchased loans with evidence of credit deterioration since the origination date and for which it is probable , at acquisition , that all contractually required payments receivable will not be collected are considered to be credit-impaired . the measurement framework for loans in the consolidated financial statements is one of the following : 2022 at the principal amount outstanding , net of the allowance for loan losses , unearned income and any net deferred loan fees or costs , for loans held for investment ( other than purchased credit- impaired loans ) ; 2022 at the lower of cost or fair value , with valuation changes record- ed in noninterest revenue , for loans that are classified as held- for-sale ; or 2022 at fair value , with changes in fair value recorded in noninterest revenue , for loans classified as trading assets or risk managed on a fair value basis ; 2022 purchased credit-impaired loans held for investment are account- ed for under sop 03-3 and initially measured at fair value , which includes estimated future credit losses . accordingly , an allowance for loan losses related to these loans is not recorded at the acquisition date . see note 5 on pages 156 2013158 of this annual report for further information on the firm 2019s elections of fair value accounting under sfas 159 . see note 6 on pages 158 2013160 of this annual report for further information on loans carried at fair value and classified as trading assets . for loans held for investment , other than purchased credit-impaired loans , interest income is recognized using the interest method or on a basis approximating a level rate of return over the term of the loan . loans within the held-for-investment portfolio that management decides to sell are transferred to the held-for-sale portfolio . transfers to held-for-sale are recorded at the lower of cost or fair value on the date of transfer . credit-related losses are charged off to the allowance for loan losses and losses due to changes in interest rates , or exchange rates , are recognized in noninterest revenue . loans within the held-for-sale portfolio that management decides to retain are transferred to the held-for-investment portfolio at the lower of cost or fair value . these loans are subsequently assessed for impairment based on the firm 2019s allowance methodology . for a fur- ther discussion of the methodologies used in establishing the firm 2019s allowance for loan losses , see note 15 on pages 178 2013180 of this annual report . nonaccrual loans are those on which the accrual of interest is dis- continued . loans ( other than certain consumer and purchased credit- impaired loans discussed below ) are placed on nonaccrual status immediately if , in the opinion of management , full payment of princi- pal or interest is in doubt , or when principal or interest is 90 days or more past due and collateral , if any , is insufficient to cover principal and interest . loans are charged off to the allowance for loan losses when it is highly certain that a loss has been realized . interest accrued but not collected at the date a loan is placed on nonaccrual status is reversed against interest income . in addition , the amortiza- tion of net deferred loan fees is suspended . interest income on nonaccrual loans is recognized only to the extent it is received in cash . however , where there is doubt regarding the ultimate col- lectibility of loan principal , all cash thereafter received is applied to reduce the carrying value of such loans ( i.e. , the cost recovery method ) . loans are restored to accrual status only when future pay- ments of interest and principal are reasonably assured . consumer loans , other than purchased credit-impaired loans , are generally charged to the allowance for loan losses upon reaching specified stages of delinquency , in accordance with the federal financial institutions examination council policy . for example , credit card loans are charged off by the end of the month in which the account becomes 180 days past due or within 60 days from receiv- ing notification of the filing of bankruptcy , whichever is earlier . residential mortgage products are generally charged off to net real- izable value at no later than 180 days past due . other consumer .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | securities purchased under resale agreements ( a ) | securities borrowed ( b ) | securities sold under repurchase agreements ( c ) | securities loaned | securities purchased under resale agreements ( a ) | securities borrowed ( b ) | securities sold under repurchase agreements ( c ) | securities loaned |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2008 | 200265.0 | 124000.0 | 174456.0 | 6077.0 | 200265.0 | 124000.0 | 174456.0 | 6077.0 |\n| 2007 | 169305.0 | 84184.0 | 126098.0 | 10922.0 | 169305.0 | 84184.0 | 126098.0 | 10922.0 |', 'question': 'and how much does that amount represent in relation to the total securities borrowed in that year?', 'ops': 'multiply(20.8, const_1000), divide(#0, 124000)', 'id': 'Single_JPM/2008/page_177.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175 securities borrowed and securities lent are recorded at the amount of cash collateral advanced or received . securities borrowed consist primarily of government and equity securities . jpmorgan chase moni- tors the market value of the securities borrowed and lent on a daily basis and calls for additional collateral when appropriate . fees received or paid in connection with securities borrowed and lent are recorded in interest income or interest expense . the following table details the components of collateralized financings. .', 'doc_post_text': '( a ) includes resale agreements of $ 20.8 billion and $ 19.1 billion accounted for at fair value at december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . ( b ) includes securities borrowed of $ 3.4 billion accounted for at fair value at december 31 , 2008 . ( c ) includes repurchase agreements of $ 3.0 billion and $ 5.8 billion accounted for at fair value at december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . jpmorgan chase pledges certain financial instruments it owns to col- lateralize repurchase agreements and other securities financings . pledged securities that can be sold or repledged by the secured party are identified as financial instruments owned ( pledged to various parties ) on the consolidated balance sheets . at december 31 , 2008 , the firm received securities as collateral that could be repledged , delivered or otherwise used with a fair value of approximately $ 511.9 billion . this collateral was generally obtained under resale or securities borrowing agreements . of these securities , approximately $ 456.6 billion were repledged , delivered or otherwise used , generally as collateral under repurchase agreements , securities lending agreements or to cover short sales . note 14 2013 loans the accounting for a loan may differ based upon whether it is origi- nated or purchased and as to whether the loan is used in an invest- ing or trading strategy . for purchased loans held-for-investment , the accounting also differs depending on whether a loan is credit- impaired at the date of acquisition . purchased loans with evidence of credit deterioration since the origination date and for which it is probable , at acquisition , that all contractually required payments receivable will not be collected are considered to be credit-impaired . the measurement framework for loans in the consolidated financial statements is one of the following : 2022 at the principal amount outstanding , net of the allowance for loan losses , unearned income and any net deferred loan fees or costs , for loans held for investment ( other than purchased credit- impaired loans ) ; 2022 at the lower of cost or fair value , with valuation changes record- ed in noninterest revenue , for loans that are classified as held- for-sale ; or 2022 at fair value , with changes in fair value recorded in noninterest revenue , for loans classified as trading assets or risk managed on a fair value basis ; 2022 purchased credit-impaired loans held for investment are account- ed for under sop 03-3 and initially measured at fair value , which includes estimated future credit losses . accordingly , an allowance for loan losses related to these loans is not recorded at the acquisition date . see note 5 on pages 156 2013158 of this annual report for further information on the firm 2019s elections of fair value accounting under sfas 159 . see note 6 on pages 158 2013160 of this annual report for further information on loans carried at fair value and classified as trading assets . for loans held for investment , other than purchased credit-impaired loans , interest income is recognized using the interest method or on a basis approximating a level rate of return over the term of the loan . loans within the held-for-investment portfolio that management decides to sell are transferred to the held-for-sale portfolio . transfers to held-for-sale are recorded at the lower of cost or fair value on the date of transfer . credit-related losses are charged off to the allowance for loan losses and losses due to changes in interest rates , or exchange rates , are recognized in noninterest revenue . loans within the held-for-sale portfolio that management decides to retain are transferred to the held-for-investment portfolio at the lower of cost or fair value . these loans are subsequently assessed for impairment based on the firm 2019s allowance methodology . for a fur- ther discussion of the methodologies used in establishing the firm 2019s allowance for loan losses , see note 15 on pages 178 2013180 of this annual report . nonaccrual loans are those on which the accrual of interest is dis- continued . loans ( other than certain consumer and purchased credit- impaired loans discussed below ) are placed on nonaccrual status immediately if , in the opinion of management , full payment of princi- pal or interest is in doubt , or when principal or interest is 90 days or more past due and collateral , if any , is insufficient to cover principal and interest . loans are charged off to the allowance for loan losses when it is highly certain that a loss has been realized . interest accrued but not collected at the date a loan is placed on nonaccrual status is reversed against interest income . in addition , the amortiza- tion of net deferred loan fees is suspended . interest income on nonaccrual loans is recognized only to the extent it is received in cash . however , where there is doubt regarding the ultimate col- lectibility of loan principal , all cash thereafter received is applied to reduce the carrying value of such loans ( i.e. , the cost recovery method ) . loans are restored to accrual status only when future pay- ments of interest and principal are reasonably assured . consumer loans , other than purchased credit-impaired loans , are generally charged to the allowance for loan losses upon reaching specified stages of delinquency , in accordance with the federal financial institutions examination council policy . for example , credit card loans are charged off by the end of the month in which the account becomes 180 days past due or within 60 days from receiv- ing notification of the filing of bankruptcy , whichever is earlier . residential mortgage products are generally charged off to net real- izable value at no later than 180 days past due . other consumer .', 'doc_table': {'2008': {'securities purchased under resale agreements ( a )': 200265.0, 'securities borrowed ( b )': 124000.0, 'securities sold under repurchase agreements ( c )': 174456.0, 'securities loaned': 6077.0}, '2007': {'securities purchased under resale agreements ( a )': 169305.0, 'securities borrowed ( b )': 84184.0, 'securities sold under repurchase agreements ( c )': 126098.0, 'securities loaned': 10922.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total amount of resale agreements in 2008, in millions?', 'and how much does that amount represent in relation to the total securities borrowed in that year?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['20800', '16.8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(20.8, const_1000)', 'multiply(20.8, const_1000), divide(#0, 124000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [20800.0, 0.16774], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.16774}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:16 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the net change in value of an investment in s&p500 from 2010 to 2011?\nA1: 8.09\nQ2: what is the initial value?\nA2: 100.0\nQ3: what rate of return does this represent?\nA3: 0.0809\nQ4: what is the quarterly cash dividends for the first three quarters?\nA4: 0.3\nQ5: what about the fourth quarter?\nA5: 0.09', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nperformance graph the performance graph below shows the five-year cumulative total stockholder return on applied common stock during the period from october 31 , 2010 through october 25 , 2015 . this is compared with the cumulative total return of the standard & poor 2019s 500 stock index and the rdg semiconductor composite index over the same period . the comparison assumes $ 100 was invested on october 31 , 2010 in applied common stock and in each of the foregoing indices and assumes reinvestment of dividends , if any . dollar amounts in the graph are rounded to the nearest whole dollar . the performance shown in the graph represents past performance and should not be considered an indication of future performance . comparison of 5 year cumulative total return* among applied materials , inc. , the s&p 500 index and the rdg semiconductor composite index *assumes $ 100 invested on 10/31/10 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . indexes calculated on month-end basis . 201cs&p 201d is a registered trademark of standard & poor 2019s financial services llc , a subsidiary of the mcgraw-hill companies , inc. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ndividends during each of fiscal 2015 and 2014 , applied's board of directors declared four quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share . during fiscal 2013 , applied 2019s board of directors declared three quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share and one quarterly cash dividend of $ 0.09 per share . dividends paid during fiscal 2015 , 2014 and 2013 amounted to $ 487 million , $ 485 million and $ 456 million , respectively . applied currently anticipates that cash dividends will continue to be paid on a quarterly basis , although the declaration of any future cash dividend is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on applied 2019s financial condition , results of operations , capital requirements , business conditions and other factors , as well as a determination by the board of directors that cash dividends are in the best interests of applied 2019s stockholders . 104 136 10/31/10 10/30/11 10/28/12 10/27/13 10/26/14 10/25/15 applied materials , inc . s&p 500 rdg semiconductor composite .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 10/31/2010 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| 10/30/2011 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 |\n| 10/28/2012 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 |\n| 10/27/2013 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 |\n| 10/26/2014 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 |\n| 10/25/2015 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 |', 'question': 'what is the total dividends in 2013?', 'ops': 'multiply(0.10, const_3), add(#0, 0.09)', 'id': 'Double_AMAT/2015/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'performance graph the performance graph below shows the five-year cumulative total stockholder return on applied common stock during the period from october 31 , 2010 through october 25 , 2015 . this is compared with the cumulative total return of the standard & poor 2019s 500 stock index and the rdg semiconductor composite index over the same period . the comparison assumes $ 100 was invested on october 31 , 2010 in applied common stock and in each of the foregoing indices and assumes reinvestment of dividends , if any . dollar amounts in the graph are rounded to the nearest whole dollar . the performance shown in the graph represents past performance and should not be considered an indication of future performance . comparison of 5 year cumulative total return* among applied materials , inc. , the s&p 500 index and the rdg semiconductor composite index *assumes $ 100 invested on 10/31/10 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . indexes calculated on month-end basis . 201cs&p 201d is a registered trademark of standard & poor 2019s financial services llc , a subsidiary of the mcgraw-hill companies , inc. .', 'doc_post_text': "dividends during each of fiscal 2015 and 2014 , applied's board of directors declared four quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share . during fiscal 2013 , applied 2019s board of directors declared three quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share and one quarterly cash dividend of $ 0.09 per share . dividends paid during fiscal 2015 , 2014 and 2013 amounted to $ 487 million , $ 485 million and $ 456 million , respectively . applied currently anticipates that cash dividends will continue to be paid on a quarterly basis , although the declaration of any future cash dividend is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on applied 2019s financial condition , results of operations , capital requirements , business conditions and other factors , as well as a determination by the board of directors that cash dividends are in the best interests of applied 2019s stockholders . 104 136 10/31/10 10/30/11 10/28/12 10/27/13 10/26/14 10/25/15 applied materials , inc . s&p 500 rdg semiconductor composite .", 'doc_table': {'10/31/2010': {'applied materials': 100.0, 's&p 500 index': 100.0, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 100.0}, '10/30/2011': {'applied materials': 104.54, 's&p 500 index': 108.09, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 110.04}, '10/28/2012': {'applied materials': 90.88, 's&p 500 index': 124.52, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 104.07}, '10/27/2013': {'applied materials': 155.43, 's&p 500 index': 158.36, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 136.15}, '10/26/2014': {'applied materials': 188.13, 's&p 500 index': 185.71, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 172.41}, '10/25/2015': {'applied materials': 150.26, 's&p 500 index': 195.37, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 170.4}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in value of an investment in s&p500 from 2010 to 2011?', 'what is the initial value?', 'what rate of return does this represent?', 'what is the quarterly cash dividends for the first three quarters?', 'what about the fourth quarter?', 'what is the total dividends in 2013?', 'how many shares received this dividend in 2013?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['8.09', '100', '8.1%', '0.3', '0.09', '0.39', '1248.7'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(108.09, 100)', '100', 'subtract(108.09, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'multiply(0.10, const_3)', '0.09', 'multiply(0.10, const_3), add(#0, 0.09)', 'multiply(0.10, const_3), add(#0, 0.09), divide(487, #1)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [8.09, 100.0, 0.0809, 0.3, 0.09, 0.39, 1248.71795], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.39}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:16 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total of benefit payments in 2012?\nA1: 3369.0\nQ2: and what was that in 2011?\nA2: 3028.0\nQ3: how much, then, does the 2012 total represent in relation to this 2011 one?\nA3: 1.11262\nQ4: and what is this value without the portion equivalent to the 2011 total?\nA4: 0.11262\nQ5: and concerning the the incremental severance expense, what was the amount of the one related to the severance plan in 2009?\nA5: 3471.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmastercard incorporated notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) ( in thousands , except percent and per share data ) the company does not make any contributions to its postretirement plan other than funding benefits payments . the following table summarizes expected net benefit payments from the company 2019s general assets through 2019 : benefit payments expected subsidy receipts benefit payments .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company provides limited postemployment benefits to eligible former u.s . employees , primarily severance under a formal severance plan ( the 201cseverance plan 201d ) . the company accounts for severance expense by accruing the expected cost of the severance benefits expected to be provided to former employees after employment over their relevant service periods . the company updates the assumptions in determining the severance accrual by evaluating the actual severance activity and long-term trends underlying the assumptions . as a result of updating the assumptions , the company recorded incremental severance expense ( benefit ) related to the severance plan of $ 3471 , $ 2643 and $ ( 3418 ) , respectively , during the years 2009 , 2008 and 2007 . these amounts were part of total severance expenses of $ 135113 , $ 32997 and $ 21284 in 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively , included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations . note 14 . debt on april 28 , 2008 , the company extended its committed unsecured revolving credit facility , dated as of april 28 , 2006 ( the 201ccredit facility 201d ) , for an additional year . the new expiration date of the credit facility is april 26 , 2011 . the available funding under the credit facility will remain at $ 2500000 through april 27 , 2010 and then decrease to $ 2000000 during the final year of the credit facility agreement . other terms and conditions in the credit facility remain unchanged . the company 2019s option to request that each lender under the credit facility extend its commitment was provided pursuant to the original terms of the credit facility agreement . borrowings under the facility are available to provide liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by mastercard international customers and , subject to a limit of $ 500000 , for general corporate purposes . the facility fee and borrowing cost are contingent upon the company 2019s credit rating . at december 31 , 2009 , the facility fee was 7 basis points on the total commitment , or approximately $ 1774 annually . interest on borrowings under the credit facility would be charged at the london interbank offered rate ( libor ) plus an applicable margin of 28 basis points or an alternative base rate , and a utilization fee of 10 basis points would be charged if outstanding borrowings under the facility exceed 50% ( 50 % ) of commitments . at the inception of the credit facility , the company also agreed to pay upfront fees of $ 1250 and administrative fees of $ 325 , which are being amortized over five years . facility and other fees associated with the credit facility totaled $ 2222 , $ 2353 and $ 2477 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . mastercard was in compliance with the covenants of the credit facility and had no borrowings under the credit facility at december 31 , 2009 or december 31 , 2008 . the majority of credit facility lenders are members or affiliates of members of mastercard international . in june 1998 , mastercard international issued ten-year unsecured , subordinated notes ( the 201cnotes 201d ) paying a fixed interest rate of 6.67% ( 6.67 % ) per annum . mastercard repaid the entire principal amount of $ 80000 on june 30 , 2008 pursuant to the terms of the notes . the interest expense on the notes was $ 2668 and $ 5336 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| benefit payments | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 |\n| expected subsidy receipts | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 |\n| net benefit payments | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 |', 'question': 'what was the total severance expense in that year?', 'ops': '135113', 'id': 'Double_MA/2009/page_115.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'mastercard incorporated notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) ( in thousands , except percent and per share data ) the company does not make any contributions to its postretirement plan other than funding benefits payments . the following table summarizes expected net benefit payments from the company 2019s general assets through 2019 : benefit payments expected subsidy receipts benefit payments .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company provides limited postemployment benefits to eligible former u.s . employees , primarily severance under a formal severance plan ( the 201cseverance plan 201d ) . the company accounts for severance expense by accruing the expected cost of the severance benefits expected to be provided to former employees after employment over their relevant service periods . the company updates the assumptions in determining the severance accrual by evaluating the actual severance activity and long-term trends underlying the assumptions . as a result of updating the assumptions , the company recorded incremental severance expense ( benefit ) related to the severance plan of $ 3471 , $ 2643 and $ ( 3418 ) , respectively , during the years 2009 , 2008 and 2007 . these amounts were part of total severance expenses of $ 135113 , $ 32997 and $ 21284 in 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively , included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations . note 14 . debt on april 28 , 2008 , the company extended its committed unsecured revolving credit facility , dated as of april 28 , 2006 ( the 201ccredit facility 201d ) , for an additional year . the new expiration date of the credit facility is april 26 , 2011 . the available funding under the credit facility will remain at $ 2500000 through april 27 , 2010 and then decrease to $ 2000000 during the final year of the credit facility agreement . other terms and conditions in the credit facility remain unchanged . the company 2019s option to request that each lender under the credit facility extend its commitment was provided pursuant to the original terms of the credit facility agreement . borrowings under the facility are available to provide liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by mastercard international customers and , subject to a limit of $ 500000 , for general corporate purposes . the facility fee and borrowing cost are contingent upon the company 2019s credit rating . at december 31 , 2009 , the facility fee was 7 basis points on the total commitment , or approximately $ 1774 annually . interest on borrowings under the credit facility would be charged at the london interbank offered rate ( libor ) plus an applicable margin of 28 basis points or an alternative base rate , and a utilization fee of 10 basis points would be charged if outstanding borrowings under the facility exceed 50% ( 50 % ) of commitments . at the inception of the credit facility , the company also agreed to pay upfront fees of $ 1250 and administrative fees of $ 325 , which are being amortized over five years . facility and other fees associated with the credit facility totaled $ 2222 , $ 2353 and $ 2477 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . mastercard was in compliance with the covenants of the credit facility and had no borrowings under the credit facility at december 31 , 2009 or december 31 , 2008 . the majority of credit facility lenders are members or affiliates of members of mastercard international . in june 1998 , mastercard international issued ten-year unsecured , subordinated notes ( the 201cnotes 201d ) paying a fixed interest rate of 6.67% ( 6.67 % ) per annum . mastercard repaid the entire principal amount of $ 80000 on june 30 , 2008 pursuant to the terms of the notes . the interest expense on the notes was $ 2668 and $ 5336 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively. .', 'doc_table': {'benefit payments': {'2010': 2714.0, '2011': 3028.0, '2012': 3369.0, '2013': 3660.0, '2014': 4019.0, '2015 2013 2019': 22686.0}, 'expected subsidy receipts': {'2010': 71.0, '2011': 91.0, '2012': 111.0, '2013': 134.0, '2014': 151.0, '2015 2013 2019': 1071.0}, 'net benefit payments': {'2010': 2643.0, '2011': 2937.0, '2012': 3258.0, '2013': 3526.0, '2014': 3868.0, '2015 2013 2019': 21615.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total of benefit payments in 2012?', 'and what was that in 2011?', 'how much, then, does the 2012 total represent in relation to this 2011 one?', 'and what is this value without the portion equivalent to the 2011 total?', 'and concerning the the incremental severance expense, what was the amount of the one related to the severance plan in 2009?', 'what was the total severance expense in that year?', 'what percentage, then, of this total expense does that amount represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3369', '3028', '1.1126', '11.26%', '3471', '135113', '2.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3369', '3028', 'divide(3369, 3028)', 'divide(3369, 3028), subtract(#0, const_1)', '3471', '135113', 'divide(3471, 135113)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3369.0, 3028.0, 1.11262, 0.11262, 3471.0, 135113.0, 0.02569], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 135113.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:16 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: combined, what were the additions in 2006 and 207?\nA1: 197775.0\nQ2: and in 2008?\nA2: 103.698', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfederal realty investment trust schedule iii summary of real estate and accumulated depreciation 2014continued three years ended december 31 , 2009 reconciliation of accumulated depreciation and amortization ( in thousands ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | additions during period 2014depreciation and amortization expense | deductions during period 2014disposition and retirements of property | balance december 31 2007 | balance december 31 2008 | balance december 31 2009 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 740507 | 103.698 | -11869.0 | 756703.0 | 846258.0 | 938087.0 |', 'question': 'and converting this value into millions?', 'ops': 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698)', 'id': 'Single_FRT/2009/page_124.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'federal realty investment trust schedule iii summary of real estate and accumulated depreciation 2014continued three years ended december 31 , 2009 reconciliation of accumulated depreciation and amortization ( in thousands ) .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'$ 740507': {'additions during period 2014depreciation and amortization expense': 103.698, 'deductions during period 2014disposition and retirements of property': -11869.0, 'balance december 31 2007': 756703.0, 'balance december 31 2008': 846258.0, 'balance december 31 2009': 938087.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['combined, what were the additions in 2006 and 207?', 'and in 2008?', 'and converting this value into millions?', 'now combined with the values from 2006 and 2007?', 'so what is the average of these values?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['197775', '103.698', '103698', '301473', '100491'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(96454, 101321)', '103.698', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698)', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698), add(#0, #1)', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698), add(#0, #1), divide(#2, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [197775.0, 103.698, 103698.0, 301473.0, 100491.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 103698.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:16 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in cash instruments from 2017 to 2018, in millions?\nA1: 1832.0\nQ2: and what was the total of cash instruments in 2017, in millions?\nA2: 15395.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nthe goldman sachs group , inc . and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements the table below presents a summary of level 3 financial assets. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nlevel 3 financial assets as of december 2018 increased compared with december 2017 , primarily reflecting an increase in level 3 cash instruments . see notes 6 through 8 for further information about level 3 financial assets ( including information about unrealized gains and losses related to level 3 financial assets and financial liabilities , and transfers in and out of level 3 ) . note 6 . cash instruments cash instruments include u.s . government and agency obligations , non-u.s . government and agency obligations , mortgage-backed loans and securities , corporate debt instruments , equity securities , investments in funds at nav , and other non-derivative financial instruments owned and financial instruments sold , but not yet purchased . see below for the types of cash instruments included in each level of the fair value hierarchy and the valuation techniques and significant inputs used to determine their fair values . see note 5 for an overview of the firm 2019s fair value measurement policies . level 1 cash instruments level 1 cash instruments include certain money market instruments , u.s . government obligations , most non-u.s . government obligations , certain government agency obligations , certain corporate debt instruments and actively traded listed equities . these instruments are valued using quoted prices for identical unrestricted instruments in active markets . the firm defines active markets for equity instruments based on the average daily trading volume both in absolute terms and relative to the market capitalization for the instrument . the firm defines active markets for debt instruments based on both the average daily trading volume and the number of days with trading activity . level 2 cash instruments level 2 cash instruments include most money market instruments , most government agency obligations , certain non-u.s . government obligations , most mortgage-backed loans and securities , most corporate debt instruments , most state and municipal obligations , most other debt obligations , restricted or less liquid listed equities , commodities and certain lending commitments . valuations of level 2 cash instruments can be verified to quoted prices , recent trading activity for identical or similar instruments , broker or dealer quotations or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency . consideration is given to the nature of the quotations ( e.g. , indicative or firm ) and the relationship of recent market activity to the prices provided from alternative pricing sources . valuation adjustments are typically made to level 2 cash instruments ( i ) if the cash instrument is subject to transfer restrictions and/or ( ii ) for other premiums and liquidity discounts that a market participant would require to arrive at fair value . valuation adjustments are generally based on market evidence . level 3 cash instruments level 3 cash instruments have one or more significant valuation inputs that are not observable . absent evidence to the contrary , level 3 cash instruments are initially valued at transaction price , which is considered to be the best initial estimate of fair value . subsequently , the firm uses other methodologies to determine fair value , which vary based on the type of instrument . valuation inputs and assumptions are changed when corroborated by substantive observable evidence , including values realized on sales . valuation techniques and significant inputs of level 3 cash instruments valuation techniques of level 3 cash instruments vary by instrument , but are generally based on discounted cash flow techniques . the valuation techniques and the nature of significant inputs used to determine the fair values of each type of level 3 cash instrument are described below : loans and securities backed by commercial real estate . loans and securities backed by commercial real estate are directly or indirectly collateralized by a single commercial real estate property or a portfolio of properties , and may include tranches of varying levels of subordination . significant inputs are generally determined based on relative value analyses and include : 2030 market yields implied by transactions of similar or related assets and/or current levels and changes in market indices such as the cmbx ( an index that tracks the performance of commercial mortgage bonds ) ; 118 goldman sachs 2018 form 10-k .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash instruments | derivatives | other financial assets | total | cash instruments | derivatives | other financial assets | total |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| as of december 2018 | 17227.0 | 4948.0 | 6.0 | 22181.0 | 17227.0 | 4948.0 | 6.0 | 22181.0 |\n| as of december 2017 | 15395.0 | 3802.0 | 4.0 | 19201.0 | 15395.0 | 3802.0 | 4.0 | 19201.0 |', 'question': 'how much does that change represent, in percentage, in relation to this 2017 total?', 'ops': 'subtract(17227, 15395), divide(#0, 15395)', 'id': 'Single_GS/2018/page_134.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'the goldman sachs group , inc . and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements the table below presents a summary of level 3 financial assets. .', 'doc_post_text': 'level 3 financial assets as of december 2018 increased compared with december 2017 , primarily reflecting an increase in level 3 cash instruments . see notes 6 through 8 for further information about level 3 financial assets ( including information about unrealized gains and losses related to level 3 financial assets and financial liabilities , and transfers in and out of level 3 ) . note 6 . cash instruments cash instruments include u.s . government and agency obligations , non-u.s . government and agency obligations , mortgage-backed loans and securities , corporate debt instruments , equity securities , investments in funds at nav , and other non-derivative financial instruments owned and financial instruments sold , but not yet purchased . see below for the types of cash instruments included in each level of the fair value hierarchy and the valuation techniques and significant inputs used to determine their fair values . see note 5 for an overview of the firm 2019s fair value measurement policies . level 1 cash instruments level 1 cash instruments include certain money market instruments , u.s . government obligations , most non-u.s . government obligations , certain government agency obligations , certain corporate debt instruments and actively traded listed equities . these instruments are valued using quoted prices for identical unrestricted instruments in active markets . the firm defines active markets for equity instruments based on the average daily trading volume both in absolute terms and relative to the market capitalization for the instrument . the firm defines active markets for debt instruments based on both the average daily trading volume and the number of days with trading activity . level 2 cash instruments level 2 cash instruments include most money market instruments , most government agency obligations , certain non-u.s . government obligations , most mortgage-backed loans and securities , most corporate debt instruments , most state and municipal obligations , most other debt obligations , restricted or less liquid listed equities , commodities and certain lending commitments . valuations of level 2 cash instruments can be verified to quoted prices , recent trading activity for identical or similar instruments , broker or dealer quotations or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency . consideration is given to the nature of the quotations ( e.g. , indicative or firm ) and the relationship of recent market activity to the prices provided from alternative pricing sources . valuation adjustments are typically made to level 2 cash instruments ( i ) if the cash instrument is subject to transfer restrictions and/or ( ii ) for other premiums and liquidity discounts that a market participant would require to arrive at fair value . valuation adjustments are generally based on market evidence . level 3 cash instruments level 3 cash instruments have one or more significant valuation inputs that are not observable . absent evidence to the contrary , level 3 cash instruments are initially valued at transaction price , which is considered to be the best initial estimate of fair value . subsequently , the firm uses other methodologies to determine fair value , which vary based on the type of instrument . valuation inputs and assumptions are changed when corroborated by substantive observable evidence , including values realized on sales . valuation techniques and significant inputs of level 3 cash instruments valuation techniques of level 3 cash instruments vary by instrument , but are generally based on discounted cash flow techniques . the valuation techniques and the nature of significant inputs used to determine the fair values of each type of level 3 cash instrument are described below : loans and securities backed by commercial real estate . loans and securities backed by commercial real estate are directly or indirectly collateralized by a single commercial real estate property or a portfolio of properties , and may include tranches of varying levels of subordination . significant inputs are generally determined based on relative value analyses and include : 2030 market yields implied by transactions of similar or related assets and/or current levels and changes in market indices such as the cmbx ( an index that tracks the performance of commercial mortgage bonds ) ; 118 goldman sachs 2018 form 10-k .', 'doc_table': {'as of december 2018': {'cash instruments': 17227.0, 'derivatives': 4948.0, 'other financial assets': 6.0, 'total': 22181.0}, 'as of december 2017': {'cash instruments': 15395.0, 'derivatives': 3802.0, 'other financial assets': 4.0, 'total': 19201.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in cash instruments from 2017 to 2018, in millions?', 'and what was the total of cash instruments in 2017, in millions?', 'how much does that change represent, in percentage, in relation to this 2017 total?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1832', '15395', '11.9%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(17227, 15395)', '15395', 'subtract(17227, 15395), divide(#0, 15395)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1832.0, 15395.0, 0.119], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.119}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:16 ERROR dspy.teleprompt.utils: An exception occurred during evaluation
Traceback (most recent call last):
    return evaluate(candidate_program, devset=trainset, return_all_scores=return_all_scores, callback_metadata={"metric_key": "eval_full"})
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    return original(*args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    raise exception
    results = fn(instance, *args, **kwargs)
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    results = executor.execute(process_item, devset)
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    return self._execute_parallel(wrapped, data)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    raise Exception("Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.")
Exception: Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.
2025/07/29 14:18:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0, 78.57, 0.0]
2025/07/29 14:18:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:18:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 14:18:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 14:18:16 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 20 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:18:16 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in 2010?\nA1: 7274.0\nQ2: and what were the net sales in 2009?\nA2: 8654.0\nQ3: and what was the operating profit in that year?\nA3: 972.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\noperating profit for the segment decreased by 1% ( 1 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . for the year , operating profit declines in defense more than offset an increase in civil , while operating profit at intelligence essentially was unchanged . the $ 27 million decrease in operating profit at defense primarily was attributable to a decrease in the level of favorable performance adjustments on mission and combat systems activities in 2010 . the $ 19 million increase in civil principally was due to higher volume on enterprise civilian services . operating profit for the segment decreased by 3% ( 3 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . operating profit declines in civil and intelligence partially were offset by growth in defense . the decrease of $ 29 million in civil 2019s operating profit primarily was attributable to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on enterprise civilian services programs in 2009 compared to 2008 . the decrease in operating profit of $ 27 million at intelligence mainly was due to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on security solution activities in 2009 compared to 2008 . the increase in defense 2019s operating profit of $ 29 million mainly was due to volume and improved performance in mission and combat systems . the decrease in backlog during 2010 compared to 2009 mainly was due to higher sales volume on enterprise civilian service programs at civil , including volume associated with the dris 2010 program , and mission and combat system programs at defense . backlog decreased in 2009 compared to 2008 due to u.s . government 2019s exercise of the termination for convenience clause on the tsat mission operations system ( tmos ) contract at defense , which resulted in a $ 1.6 billion reduction in orders . this decline more than offset increased orders on enterprise civilian services programs at civil . we expect is&gs will experience a low single digit percentage decrease in sales for 2011 as compared to 2010 . this decline primarily is due to completion of most of the work associated with the dris 2010 program . operating profit in 2011 is expected to decline in relationship to the decline in sales volume , while operating margins are expected to be comparable between the years . space systems our space systems business segment is engaged in the design , research and development , engineering , and production of satellites , strategic and defensive missile systems , and space transportation systems , including activities related to the planned replacement of the space shuttle . government satellite programs include the advanced extremely high frequency ( aehf ) system , the mobile user objective system ( muos ) , the global positioning satellite iii ( gps iii ) system , the space-based infrared system ( sbirs ) , and the geostationary operational environmental satellite r-series ( goes-r ) . strategic and missile defense programs include the targets and countermeasures program and the fleet ballistic missile program . space transportation includes the nasa orion program and , through ownership interests in two joint ventures , expendable launch services ( united launch alliance , or ula ) and space shuttle processing activities for the u.s . government ( united space alliance , or usa ) . the space shuttle is expected to complete its final flight mission in 2011 and our involvement with its launch and processing activities will end at that time . space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2010 2009 2008 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnet sales for space systems decreased by 5% ( 5 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . sales declined in all three lines of business during the year . the $ 253 million decrease in space transportation principally was due to lower volume on the space shuttle external tank , commercial launch vehicle activity and other human space flight programs , which partially were offset by higher volume on the orion program . there were no commercial launches in 2010 compared to one commercial launch in 2009 . strategic & defensive missile systems ( s&dms ) sales declined $ 147 million principally due to lower volume on defensive missile programs . the $ 8 million sales decline in satellites primarily was attributable to lower volume on commercial satellites , which partially were offset by higher volume on government satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2010 and one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 . net sales for space systems increased 8% ( 8 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . during the year , sales growth at satellites and space transportation offset a decline in s&dms . the sales growth of $ 707 million in satellites was due to higher volume in government satellite activities , which partially was offset by lower volume in commercial satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 and two deliveries in 2008 . the increase in sales of $ 21 million in space transportation primarily was due to higher volume on the orion program , which more than offset a decline in the space shuttle 2019s external tank program . there was one commercial launch in both 2009 and 2008 . s&dms 2019 sales decreased by $ 102 million mainly due to lower volume on defensive missile programs , which more than offset growth in strategic missile programs. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2010 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 |\n| 2009 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 |\n| 2008 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 |', 'question': 'what is, then, the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in that year?', 'ops': 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972)', 'id': 'Single_LMT/2010/page_39.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'operating profit for the segment decreased by 1% ( 1 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . for the year , operating profit declines in defense more than offset an increase in civil , while operating profit at intelligence essentially was unchanged . the $ 27 million decrease in operating profit at defense primarily was attributable to a decrease in the level of favorable performance adjustments on mission and combat systems activities in 2010 . the $ 19 million increase in civil principally was due to higher volume on enterprise civilian services . operating profit for the segment decreased by 3% ( 3 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . operating profit declines in civil and intelligence partially were offset by growth in defense . the decrease of $ 29 million in civil 2019s operating profit primarily was attributable to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on enterprise civilian services programs in 2009 compared to 2008 . the decrease in operating profit of $ 27 million at intelligence mainly was due to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on security solution activities in 2009 compared to 2008 . the increase in defense 2019s operating profit of $ 29 million mainly was due to volume and improved performance in mission and combat systems . the decrease in backlog during 2010 compared to 2009 mainly was due to higher sales volume on enterprise civilian service programs at civil , including volume associated with the dris 2010 program , and mission and combat system programs at defense . backlog decreased in 2009 compared to 2008 due to u.s . government 2019s exercise of the termination for convenience clause on the tsat mission operations system ( tmos ) contract at defense , which resulted in a $ 1.6 billion reduction in orders . this decline more than offset increased orders on enterprise civilian services programs at civil . we expect is&gs will experience a low single digit percentage decrease in sales for 2011 as compared to 2010 . this decline primarily is due to completion of most of the work associated with the dris 2010 program . operating profit in 2011 is expected to decline in relationship to the decline in sales volume , while operating margins are expected to be comparable between the years . space systems our space systems business segment is engaged in the design , research and development , engineering , and production of satellites , strategic and defensive missile systems , and space transportation systems , including activities related to the planned replacement of the space shuttle . government satellite programs include the advanced extremely high frequency ( aehf ) system , the mobile user objective system ( muos ) , the global positioning satellite iii ( gps iii ) system , the space-based infrared system ( sbirs ) , and the geostationary operational environmental satellite r-series ( goes-r ) . strategic and missile defense programs include the targets and countermeasures program and the fleet ballistic missile program . space transportation includes the nasa orion program and , through ownership interests in two joint ventures , expendable launch services ( united launch alliance , or ula ) and space shuttle processing activities for the u.s . government ( united space alliance , or usa ) . the space shuttle is expected to complete its final flight mission in 2011 and our involvement with its launch and processing activities will end at that time . space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2010 2009 2008 .', 'doc_post_text': 'net sales for space systems decreased by 5% ( 5 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . sales declined in all three lines of business during the year . the $ 253 million decrease in space transportation principally was due to lower volume on the space shuttle external tank , commercial launch vehicle activity and other human space flight programs , which partially were offset by higher volume on the orion program . there were no commercial launches in 2010 compared to one commercial launch in 2009 . strategic & defensive missile systems ( s&dms ) sales declined $ 147 million principally due to lower volume on defensive missile programs . the $ 8 million sales decline in satellites primarily was attributable to lower volume on commercial satellites , which partially were offset by higher volume on government satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2010 and one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 . net sales for space systems increased 8% ( 8 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . during the year , sales growth at satellites and space transportation offset a decline in s&dms . the sales growth of $ 707 million in satellites was due to higher volume in government satellite activities , which partially was offset by lower volume in commercial satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 and two deliveries in 2008 . the increase in sales of $ 21 million in space transportation primarily was due to higher volume on the orion program , which more than offset a decline in the space shuttle 2019s external tank program . there was one commercial launch in both 2009 and 2008 . s&dms 2019 sales decreased by $ 102 million mainly due to lower volume on defensive missile programs , which more than offset growth in strategic missile programs. .', 'doc_table': {'2010': {'net sales': 8246.0, 'operating profit': 972.0, 'operating margin': -11.8, 'backlog at year-end': 17800.0}, '2009': {'net sales': 8654.0, 'operating profit': 972.0, 'operating margin': -11.2, 'backlog at year-end': 16800.0}, '2008': {'net sales': 8027.0, 'operating profit': 953.0, 'operating margin': -11.9, 'backlog at year-end': 17900.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in 2010?', 'and what were the net sales in 2009?', 'and what was the operating profit in that year?', 'what is, then, the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in that year?', 'and what is the change in that difference from 2009 to 2010?', 'how much does this change represent in relation to the 2009 difference?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['7274', '8654', '972', '7682', '-408', '-5.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(8246, 972)', '8654', '972', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972)', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972), subtract(#0, #1)', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972), subtract(#0, #1), divide(#2, #1)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [7274.0, 8654.0, 972.0, 7682.0, -408.0, -0.05311], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 7682.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:17 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in value of lkq corporation price between 2007 and 2012?\nA1: 101.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ncomparison of cumulative return among lkq corporation , the nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index and the peer group .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthis stock performance information is "furnished" and shall not be deemed to be "soliciting material" or subject to rule 14a , shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of section 18 of the securities exchange act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section , and shall not be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the securities act of 1933 or the securities exchange act of 1934 , whether made before or after the date of this report and irrespective of any general incorporation by reference language in any such filing , except to the extent that it specifically incorporates the information by reference . information about our common stock that may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2012 included in part iii , item 12 of this annual report on form 10-k is incorporated herein by reference. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group | lkq corporation | nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index | peer group |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 12/31/2007 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| 12/31/2008 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 | 55.0 | 59.0 | 83.0 |\n| 12/31/2009 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 | 86.0 | 100.0 |\n| 12/31/2010 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 | 108.0 | 100.0 | 139.0 |\n| 12/31/2011 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 | 143.0 | 98.0 | 187.0 |\n| 12/31/2012 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 | 201.0 | 114.0 | 210.0 |', 'question': 'what was the price of lkq corporation in 2007?', 'ops': '100', 'id': 'Single_LKQ/2012/page_25.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'comparison of cumulative return among lkq corporation , the nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index and the peer group .', 'doc_post_text': 'this stock performance information is "furnished" and shall not be deemed to be "soliciting material" or subject to rule 14a , shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of section 18 of the securities exchange act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section , and shall not be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the securities act of 1933 or the securities exchange act of 1934 , whether made before or after the date of this report and irrespective of any general incorporation by reference language in any such filing , except to the extent that it specifically incorporates the information by reference . information about our common stock that may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2012 included in part iii , item 12 of this annual report on form 10-k is incorporated herein by reference. .', 'doc_table': {'12/31/2007': {'lkq corporation': 100.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 100.0, 'peer group': 100.0}, '12/31/2008': {'lkq corporation': 55.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 59.0, 'peer group': 83.0}, '12/31/2009': {'lkq corporation': 93.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 86.0, 'peer group': 100.0}, '12/31/2010': {'lkq corporation': 108.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 100.0, 'peer group': 139.0}, '12/31/2011': {'lkq corporation': 143.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 98.0, 'peer group': 187.0}, '12/31/2012': {'lkq corporation': 201.0, 'nasdaq stock market ( u.s. ) index': 114.0, 'peer group': 210.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in value of lkq corporation price between 2007 and 2012?', 'what was the price of lkq corporation in 2007?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what was the change in value of the peer group between 2007 and 2012?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['101', '100', '101%', '110', '110%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(201, 100)', '100', 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(210, 100)', 'subtract(201, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(210, 100), divide(#2, 100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [101.0, 100.0, 1.01, 110.0, 1.1], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 100.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:18 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total of benefit payments in 2012?\nA1: 3369.0\nQ2: and what was that in 2011?\nA2: 3028.0\nQ3: how much, then, does the 2012 total represent in relation to this 2011 one?\nA3: 1.11262', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmastercard incorporated notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) ( in thousands , except percent and per share data ) the company does not make any contributions to its postretirement plan other than funding benefits payments . the following table summarizes expected net benefit payments from the company 2019s general assets through 2019 : benefit payments expected subsidy receipts benefit payments .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company provides limited postemployment benefits to eligible former u.s . employees , primarily severance under a formal severance plan ( the 201cseverance plan 201d ) . the company accounts for severance expense by accruing the expected cost of the severance benefits expected to be provided to former employees after employment over their relevant service periods . the company updates the assumptions in determining the severance accrual by evaluating the actual severance activity and long-term trends underlying the assumptions . as a result of updating the assumptions , the company recorded incremental severance expense ( benefit ) related to the severance plan of $ 3471 , $ 2643 and $ ( 3418 ) , respectively , during the years 2009 , 2008 and 2007 . these amounts were part of total severance expenses of $ 135113 , $ 32997 and $ 21284 in 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively , included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations . note 14 . debt on april 28 , 2008 , the company extended its committed unsecured revolving credit facility , dated as of april 28 , 2006 ( the 201ccredit facility 201d ) , for an additional year . the new expiration date of the credit facility is april 26 , 2011 . the available funding under the credit facility will remain at $ 2500000 through april 27 , 2010 and then decrease to $ 2000000 during the final year of the credit facility agreement . other terms and conditions in the credit facility remain unchanged . the company 2019s option to request that each lender under the credit facility extend its commitment was provided pursuant to the original terms of the credit facility agreement . borrowings under the facility are available to provide liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by mastercard international customers and , subject to a limit of $ 500000 , for general corporate purposes . the facility fee and borrowing cost are contingent upon the company 2019s credit rating . at december 31 , 2009 , the facility fee was 7 basis points on the total commitment , or approximately $ 1774 annually . interest on borrowings under the credit facility would be charged at the london interbank offered rate ( libor ) plus an applicable margin of 28 basis points or an alternative base rate , and a utilization fee of 10 basis points would be charged if outstanding borrowings under the facility exceed 50% ( 50 % ) of commitments . at the inception of the credit facility , the company also agreed to pay upfront fees of $ 1250 and administrative fees of $ 325 , which are being amortized over five years . facility and other fees associated with the credit facility totaled $ 2222 , $ 2353 and $ 2477 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . mastercard was in compliance with the covenants of the credit facility and had no borrowings under the credit facility at december 31 , 2009 or december 31 , 2008 . the majority of credit facility lenders are members or affiliates of members of mastercard international . in june 1998 , mastercard international issued ten-year unsecured , subordinated notes ( the 201cnotes 201d ) paying a fixed interest rate of 6.67% ( 6.67 % ) per annum . mastercard repaid the entire principal amount of $ 80000 on june 30 , 2008 pursuant to the terms of the notes . the interest expense on the notes was $ 2668 and $ 5336 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| benefit payments | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 |\n| expected subsidy receipts | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 |\n| net benefit payments | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 |', 'question': 'and what is this value without the portion equivalent to the 2011 total?', 'ops': 'divide(3369, 3028), subtract(#0, const_1)', 'id': 'Double_MA/2009/page_115.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'mastercard incorporated notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) ( in thousands , except percent and per share data ) the company does not make any contributions to its postretirement plan other than funding benefits payments . the following table summarizes expected net benefit payments from the company 2019s general assets through 2019 : benefit payments expected subsidy receipts benefit payments .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company provides limited postemployment benefits to eligible former u.s . employees , primarily severance under a formal severance plan ( the 201cseverance plan 201d ) . the company accounts for severance expense by accruing the expected cost of the severance benefits expected to be provided to former employees after employment over their relevant service periods . the company updates the assumptions in determining the severance accrual by evaluating the actual severance activity and long-term trends underlying the assumptions . as a result of updating the assumptions , the company recorded incremental severance expense ( benefit ) related to the severance plan of $ 3471 , $ 2643 and $ ( 3418 ) , respectively , during the years 2009 , 2008 and 2007 . these amounts were part of total severance expenses of $ 135113 , $ 32997 and $ 21284 in 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively , included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations . note 14 . debt on april 28 , 2008 , the company extended its committed unsecured revolving credit facility , dated as of april 28 , 2006 ( the 201ccredit facility 201d ) , for an additional year . the new expiration date of the credit facility is april 26 , 2011 . the available funding under the credit facility will remain at $ 2500000 through april 27 , 2010 and then decrease to $ 2000000 during the final year of the credit facility agreement . other terms and conditions in the credit facility remain unchanged . the company 2019s option to request that each lender under the credit facility extend its commitment was provided pursuant to the original terms of the credit facility agreement . borrowings under the facility are available to provide liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by mastercard international customers and , subject to a limit of $ 500000 , for general corporate purposes . the facility fee and borrowing cost are contingent upon the company 2019s credit rating . at december 31 , 2009 , the facility fee was 7 basis points on the total commitment , or approximately $ 1774 annually . interest on borrowings under the credit facility would be charged at the london interbank offered rate ( libor ) plus an applicable margin of 28 basis points or an alternative base rate , and a utilization fee of 10 basis points would be charged if outstanding borrowings under the facility exceed 50% ( 50 % ) of commitments . at the inception of the credit facility , the company also agreed to pay upfront fees of $ 1250 and administrative fees of $ 325 , which are being amortized over five years . facility and other fees associated with the credit facility totaled $ 2222 , $ 2353 and $ 2477 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . mastercard was in compliance with the covenants of the credit facility and had no borrowings under the credit facility at december 31 , 2009 or december 31 , 2008 . the majority of credit facility lenders are members or affiliates of members of mastercard international . in june 1998 , mastercard international issued ten-year unsecured , subordinated notes ( the 201cnotes 201d ) paying a fixed interest rate of 6.67% ( 6.67 % ) per annum . mastercard repaid the entire principal amount of $ 80000 on june 30 , 2008 pursuant to the terms of the notes . the interest expense on the notes was $ 2668 and $ 5336 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively. .', 'doc_table': {'benefit payments': {'2010': 2714.0, '2011': 3028.0, '2012': 3369.0, '2013': 3660.0, '2014': 4019.0, '2015 2013 2019': 22686.0}, 'expected subsidy receipts': {'2010': 71.0, '2011': 91.0, '2012': 111.0, '2013': 134.0, '2014': 151.0, '2015 2013 2019': 1071.0}, 'net benefit payments': {'2010': 2643.0, '2011': 2937.0, '2012': 3258.0, '2013': 3526.0, '2014': 3868.0, '2015 2013 2019': 21615.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total of benefit payments in 2012?', 'and what was that in 2011?', 'how much, then, does the 2012 total represent in relation to this 2011 one?', 'and what is this value without the portion equivalent to the 2011 total?', 'and concerning the the incremental severance expense, what was the amount of the one related to the severance plan in 2009?', 'what was the total severance expense in that year?', 'what percentage, then, of this total expense does that amount represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3369', '3028', '1.1126', '11.26%', '3471', '135113', '2.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3369', '3028', 'divide(3369, 3028)', 'divide(3369, 3028), subtract(#0, const_1)', '3471', '135113', 'divide(3471, 135113)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3369.0, 3028.0, 1.11262, 0.11262, 3471.0, 135113.0, 0.02569], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.11262}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:18 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what were the number of berths in 2011?\nA1: 155000.0\nQ2: what were the number of berths in 2007?\nA2: 100000.0\nQ3: what is the net change in berths?\nA3: 55000.0\nQ4: what is the percent change?\nA4: 0.55', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart i berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 34000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the north american cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . europe in europe , cruising represents a smaller but growing sector of the vacation industry . it has experienced a compound annual growth rate in cruise guests of approximately 9.6% ( 9.6 % ) from 2007 to 2011 and we believe this market has significant continued growth poten- tial . we estimate that europe was served by 104 ships with approximately 100000 berths at the beginning of 2007 and by 121 ships with approximately 155000 berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 28000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the european cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . the following table details the growth in the global , north american and european cruise markets in terms of cruise guests and estimated weighted-average berths over the past five years : global cruise guests ( 1 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) north american cruise guests ( 2 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in north america ( 1 ) european cruise guests ( 3 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in europe ( 1 ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests , and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally , in north america and europe are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources including seatrade insider and cruise line international association . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) source : cruise line international association based on cruise guests carried for at least two consecutive nights for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . ( 3 ) source : european cruise council for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . other markets in addition to expected industry growth in north america and europe as discussed above , we expect the asia/pacific region to demonstrate an even higher growth rate in the near term , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america and europe . we compete with a number of cruise lines ; however , our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise lines , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , iberocruceros , p&o cruises and princess cruises ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; norwegian cruise line and oceania cruises . cruise lines compete with other vacation alternatives such as land-based resort hotels and sightseeing destinations for consum- ers 2019 leisure time . demand for such activities is influ- enced by political and general economic conditions . companies within the vacation market are dependent on consumer discretionary spending . operating strategies our principal operating strategies are to : and employees and protect the environment in which our vessels and organization operate , to better serve our global guest base and grow our business , order to enhance our revenues while continuing to expand and diversify our guest mix through interna- tional guest sourcing , and ensure adequate cash and liquidity , with the overall goal of maximizing our return on invested capital and long-term shareholder value , our brands throughout the world , revitalization of existing ships and the transfer of key innovations across each brand , while expanding our fleet with the new state-of-the-art cruise ships recently delivered and on order , by deploying them into those markets and itineraries that provide opportunities to optimize returns , while continuing our focus on existing key markets , support ongoing operations and initiatives , and the principal industry distribution channel , while enhancing our consumer outreach programs. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| global cruiseguests ( 1 ) | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 |\n| weighted-averagesupplyofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 ) | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 |\n| northamericancruiseguests ( 2 ) | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 |\n| weighted-average supply ofberths marketedin northamerica ( 1 ) | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 |\n| europeancruiseguests | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 |\n| weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketed ineurope ( 1 ) | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 |', 'question': 'what is that as a percentage?', 'ops': 'subtract(155000, 100000), divide(#0, 100000), multiply(#1, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_RCL/2011/page_16.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'part i berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 34000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the north american cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . europe in europe , cruising represents a smaller but growing sector of the vacation industry . it has experienced a compound annual growth rate in cruise guests of approximately 9.6% ( 9.6 % ) from 2007 to 2011 and we believe this market has significant continued growth poten- tial . we estimate that europe was served by 104 ships with approximately 100000 berths at the beginning of 2007 and by 121 ships with approximately 155000 berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 28000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the european cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . the following table details the growth in the global , north american and european cruise markets in terms of cruise guests and estimated weighted-average berths over the past five years : global cruise guests ( 1 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) north american cruise guests ( 2 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in north america ( 1 ) european cruise guests ( 3 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in europe ( 1 ) .', 'doc_post_text': '( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests , and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally , in north america and europe are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources including seatrade insider and cruise line international association . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) source : cruise line international association based on cruise guests carried for at least two consecutive nights for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . ( 3 ) source : european cruise council for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . other markets in addition to expected industry growth in north america and europe as discussed above , we expect the asia/pacific region to demonstrate an even higher growth rate in the near term , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america and europe . we compete with a number of cruise lines ; however , our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise lines , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , iberocruceros , p&o cruises and princess cruises ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; norwegian cruise line and oceania cruises . cruise lines compete with other vacation alternatives such as land-based resort hotels and sightseeing destinations for consum- ers 2019 leisure time . demand for such activities is influ- enced by political and general economic conditions . companies within the vacation market are dependent on consumer discretionary spending . operating strategies our principal operating strategies are to : and employees and protect the environment in which our vessels and organization operate , to better serve our global guest base and grow our business , order to enhance our revenues while continuing to expand and diversify our guest mix through interna- tional guest sourcing , and ensure adequate cash and liquidity , with the overall goal of maximizing our return on invested capital and long-term shareholder value , our brands throughout the world , revitalization of existing ships and the transfer of key innovations across each brand , while expanding our fleet with the new state-of-the-art cruise ships recently delivered and on order , by deploying them into those markets and itineraries that provide opportunities to optimize returns , while continuing our focus on existing key markets , support ongoing operations and initiatives , and the principal industry distribution channel , while enhancing our consumer outreach programs. .', 'doc_table': {'global cruiseguests ( 1 )': {'2007': 16586000.0, '2008': 17184000.0, '2009': 17340000.0, '2010': 18800000.0, '2011': 20227000.0}, 'weighted-averagesupplyofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 )': {'2007': 327000.0, '2008': 347000.0, '2009': 363000.0, '2010': 391000.0, '2011': 412000.0}, 'northamericancruiseguests ( 2 )': {'2007': 10247000.0, '2008': 10093000.0, '2009': 10198000.0, '2010': 10781000.0, '2011': 11625000.0}, 'weighted-average supply ofberths marketedin northamerica ( 1 )': {'2007': 212000.0, '2008': 219000.0, '2009': 222000.0, '2010': 232000.0, '2011': 245000.0}, 'europeancruiseguests': {'2007': 4080000.0, '2008': 4500000.0, '2009': 5000000.0, '2010': 5540000.0, '2011': 5894000.0}, 'weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketed ineurope ( 1 )': {'2007': 105000.0, '2008': 120000.0, '2009': 131000.0, '2010': 143000.0, '2011': 149000.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what were the number of berths in 2011?', 'what were the number of berths in 2007?', 'what is the net change in berths?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what is that as a percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['155000', '100000', '55000', '0.55', '55'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['155000', '100000', 'subtract(155000, 100000)', 'subtract(155000, 100000), divide(#0, 100000)', 'subtract(155000, 100000), divide(#0, 100000), multiply(#1, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [155000.0, 100000.0, 55000.0, 0.55, 55.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 55.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:19 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value of pension plans for 2017?\nA1: 3856.0\nQ2: and total plan contributions for that year?\nA2: 16745.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n112 / sl green realty corp . 2017 annual report 20 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings as of december a031 , 2017 , the company and the operating partnership were not involved in any material litigation nor , to management 2019s knowledge , was any material litigation threat- ened against us or our portfolio which if adversely determined could have a material adverse impact on us . environmental matters our management believes that the properties are in compliance in all material respects with applicable federal , state and local ordinances and regulations regarding environmental issues . management is not aware of any environmental liability that it believes would have a materially adverse impact on our financial position , results of operations or cash flows . management is unaware of any instances in which it would incur significant envi- ronmental cost if any of our properties were sold . employment agreements we have entered into employment agreements with certain exec- utives , which expire between december a02018 and february a02020 . the minimum cash-based compensation , including base sal- ary and guaranteed bonus payments , associated with these employment agreements total $ 5.4 a0million for 2018 . in addition these employment agreements provide for deferred compen- sation awards based on our stock price and which were valued at $ 1.6 a0million on the grant date . the value of these awards may change based on fluctuations in our stock price . insurance we maintain 201call-risk 201d property and rental value coverage ( includ- ing coverage regarding the perils of flood , earthquake and terrorism , excluding nuclear , biological , chemical , and radiological terrorism ( 201cnbcr 201d ) ) , within three property insurance programs and liability insurance . separate property and liability coverage may be purchased on a stand-alone basis for certain assets , such as the development of one vanderbilt . additionally , our captive insurance company , belmont insurance company , or belmont , pro- vides coverage for nbcr terrorist acts above a specified trigger , although if belmont is required to pay a claim under our insur- ance policies , we would ultimately record the loss to the extent of belmont 2019s required payment . however , there is no assurance that in the future we will be able to procure coverage at a reasonable cost . further , if we experience losses that are uninsured or that exceed policy limits , we could lose the capital invested in the damaged properties as well as the anticipated future cash flows from those plan trustees adopted a rehabilitation plan consistent with this requirement . no surcharges have been paid to the pension plan as of december a031 , 2017 . for the pension plan years ended june a030 , 2017 , 2016 , and 2015 , the plan received contributions from employers totaling $ 257.8 a0million , $ 249.5 a0million , and $ 221.9 a0million . our contributions to the pension plan represent less than 5.0% ( 5.0 % ) of total contributions to the plan . the health plan was established under the terms of collective bargaining agreements between the union , the realty advisory board on labor relations , inc . and certain other employees . the health plan provides health and other benefits to eligible participants employed in the building service industry who are covered under collective bargaining agreements , or other writ- ten agreements , with the union . the health plan is administered by a board of trustees with equal representation by the employ- ers and the union and operates under employer identification number a013-2928869 . the health plan receives contributions in accordance with collective bargaining agreements or participa- tion agreements . generally , these agreements provide that the employers contribute to the health plan at a fixed rate on behalf of each covered employee . for the health plan years ended , june a030 , 2017 , 2016 , and 2015 , the plan received contributions from employers totaling $ 1.3 a0billion , $ 1.2 a0billion and $ 1.1 a0billion , respectively . our contributions to the health plan represent less than 5.0% ( 5.0 % ) of total contributions to the plan . contributions we made to the multi-employer plans for the years ended december a031 , 2017 , 2016 and 2015 are included in the table below ( in thousands ) : .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n401 ( k ) plan in august a01997 , we implemented a 401 ( k ) a0savings/retirement plan , or the 401 ( k ) a0plan , to cover eligible employees of ours , and any designated affiliate . the 401 ( k ) a0plan permits eligible employees to defer up to 15% ( 15 % ) of their annual compensation , subject to certain limitations imposed by the code . the employees 2019 elective deferrals are immediately vested and non-forfeitable upon contribution to the 401 ( k ) a0plan . during a02003 , we amended our 401 ( k ) a0plan to pro- vide for discretionary matching contributions only . for 2017 , 2016 and 2015 , a matching contribution equal to 50% ( 50 % ) of the first 6% ( 6 % ) of annual compensation was made . for the year ended december a031 , 2017 , we made a matching contribution of $ 728782 . for the years ended december a031 , 2016 and 2015 , we made matching contribu- tions of $ 566000 and $ 550000 , respectively. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | pension plan | health plan | other plans | total plan contributions | pension plan | health plan | other plans | total plan contributions | pension plan | health plan | other plans | total plan contributions |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2017 | 3856.0 | 11426.0 | 1463.0 | 16745.0 | 3856.0 | 11426.0 | 1463.0 | 16745.0 | 3856.0 | 11426.0 | 1463.0 | 16745.0 |\n| 2016 | 3979.0 | 11530.0 | 1583.0 | 17092.0 | 3979.0 | 11530.0 | 1583.0 | 17092.0 | 3979.0 | 11530.0 | 1583.0 | 17092.0 |\n| 2015 | 2732.0 | 8736.0 | 5716.0 | 17184.0 | 2732.0 | 8736.0 | 5716.0 | 17184.0 | 2732.0 | 8736.0 | 5716.0 | 17184.0 |', 'question': 'so what was the percentage of pension plan contributions out of the total?', 'ops': 'divide(3856, 16745)', 'id': 'Single_SLG/2017/page_114.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': '112 / sl green realty corp . 2017 annual report 20 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings as of december a031 , 2017 , the company and the operating partnership were not involved in any material litigation nor , to management 2019s knowledge , was any material litigation threat- ened against us or our portfolio which if adversely determined could have a material adverse impact on us . environmental matters our management believes that the properties are in compliance in all material respects with applicable federal , state and local ordinances and regulations regarding environmental issues . management is not aware of any environmental liability that it believes would have a materially adverse impact on our financial position , results of operations or cash flows . management is unaware of any instances in which it would incur significant envi- ronmental cost if any of our properties were sold . employment agreements we have entered into employment agreements with certain exec- utives , which expire between december a02018 and february a02020 . the minimum cash-based compensation , including base sal- ary and guaranteed bonus payments , associated with these employment agreements total $ 5.4 a0million for 2018 . in addition these employment agreements provide for deferred compen- sation awards based on our stock price and which were valued at $ 1.6 a0million on the grant date . the value of these awards may change based on fluctuations in our stock price . insurance we maintain 201call-risk 201d property and rental value coverage ( includ- ing coverage regarding the perils of flood , earthquake and terrorism , excluding nuclear , biological , chemical , and radiological terrorism ( 201cnbcr 201d ) ) , within three property insurance programs and liability insurance . separate property and liability coverage may be purchased on a stand-alone basis for certain assets , such as the development of one vanderbilt . additionally , our captive insurance company , belmont insurance company , or belmont , pro- vides coverage for nbcr terrorist acts above a specified trigger , although if belmont is required to pay a claim under our insur- ance policies , we would ultimately record the loss to the extent of belmont 2019s required payment . however , there is no assurance that in the future we will be able to procure coverage at a reasonable cost . further , if we experience losses that are uninsured or that exceed policy limits , we could lose the capital invested in the damaged properties as well as the anticipated future cash flows from those plan trustees adopted a rehabilitation plan consistent with this requirement . no surcharges have been paid to the pension plan as of december a031 , 2017 . for the pension plan years ended june a030 , 2017 , 2016 , and 2015 , the plan received contributions from employers totaling $ 257.8 a0million , $ 249.5 a0million , and $ 221.9 a0million . our contributions to the pension plan represent less than 5.0% ( 5.0 % ) of total contributions to the plan . the health plan was established under the terms of collective bargaining agreements between the union , the realty advisory board on labor relations , inc . and certain other employees . the health plan provides health and other benefits to eligible participants employed in the building service industry who are covered under collective bargaining agreements , or other writ- ten agreements , with the union . the health plan is administered by a board of trustees with equal representation by the employ- ers and the union and operates under employer identification number a013-2928869 . the health plan receives contributions in accordance with collective bargaining agreements or participa- tion agreements . generally , these agreements provide that the employers contribute to the health plan at a fixed rate on behalf of each covered employee . for the health plan years ended , june a030 , 2017 , 2016 , and 2015 , the plan received contributions from employers totaling $ 1.3 a0billion , $ 1.2 a0billion and $ 1.1 a0billion , respectively . our contributions to the health plan represent less than 5.0% ( 5.0 % ) of total contributions to the plan . contributions we made to the multi-employer plans for the years ended december a031 , 2017 , 2016 and 2015 are included in the table below ( in thousands ) : .', 'doc_post_text': '401 ( k ) plan in august a01997 , we implemented a 401 ( k ) a0savings/retirement plan , or the 401 ( k ) a0plan , to cover eligible employees of ours , and any designated affiliate . the 401 ( k ) a0plan permits eligible employees to defer up to 15% ( 15 % ) of their annual compensation , subject to certain limitations imposed by the code . the employees 2019 elective deferrals are immediately vested and non-forfeitable upon contribution to the 401 ( k ) a0plan . during a02003 , we amended our 401 ( k ) a0plan to pro- vide for discretionary matching contributions only . for 2017 , 2016 and 2015 , a matching contribution equal to 50% ( 50 % ) of the first 6% ( 6 % ) of annual compensation was made . for the year ended december a031 , 2017 , we made a matching contribution of $ 728782 . for the years ended december a031 , 2016 and 2015 , we made matching contribu- tions of $ 566000 and $ 550000 , respectively. .', 'doc_table': {'2017': {'pension plan': 3856.0, 'health plan': 11426.0, 'other plans': 1463.0, 'total plan contributions': 16745.0}, '2016': {'pension plan': 3979.0, 'health plan': 11530.0, 'other plans': 1583.0, 'total plan contributions': 17092.0}, '2015': {'pension plan': 2732.0, 'health plan': 8736.0, 'other plans': 5716.0, 'total plan contributions': 17184.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of pension plans for 2017?', 'and total plan contributions for that year?', 'so what was the percentage of pension plan contributions out of the total?', 'and converted to a percentage value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3856', '16745', '0.23', '23'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3856', '16745', 'divide(3856, 16745)', 'divide(3856, 16745), multiply(#0, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3856.0, 16745.0, 0.23028, 23.02777], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.23028}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:18:20 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmeasurement point december 31 booking holdings nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| booking holdings inc . | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 |\n| nasdaqcomposite index | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 |\n| s&p 500index | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 |\n| rdg internetcomposite | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 |', 'question': 'what was the change in value for booking holding inc. in 2018, assuming a $100 initial investment?', 'ops': 'subtract(148.18, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_BKNG/2018/page_34.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': 'measurement point december 31 booking holdings nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'booking holdings inc .': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 98.09, '2015': 109.68, '2016': 126.12, '2017': 149.5, '2018': 148.18}, 'nasdaqcomposite index': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 114.62, '2015': 122.81, '2016': 133.19, '2017': 172.11, '2018': 165.84}, 's&p 500index': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 113.69, '2015': 115.26, '2016': 129.05, '2017': 157.22, '2018': 150.33}, 'rdg internetcomposite': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 96.39, '2015': 133.2, '2016': 140.23, '2017': 202.15, '2018': 201.16}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in value for booking holding inc. in 2018, assuming a $100 initial investment?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what was the nasdaq composite value in 2018?', 'what is the net change also assuming a $100 initial investment?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what was the difference in the percent changes?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['48.18', '48.18%', '165.84', '65.84', '65.84%', '17.66%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(148.18, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', '165.84', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [48.18, 0.4818, 165.84, 65.84, 0.6584, -0.1766], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 48.18}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
IOStream.flush timed out
2025/07/29 14:19:24 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the difference between the price of masco in 2010 and the starting value as of 12/31/05?\nA1: -48.49\nQ2: so what was the percentage growth during that time?\nA2: -0.4849', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nperformance graph the table below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on our common stock with the cumulative total return of ( i ) the standard & poor 2019s 500 composite stock index ( 201cs&p 500 index 201d ) , ( ii ) the standard & poor 2019s industrials index ( 201cs&p industrials index 201d ) and ( iii ) the standard & poor 2019s consumer durables & apparel index ( 201cs&p consumer durables & apparel index 201d ) , from december 31 , 2005 through december 31 , 2010 , when the closing price of our common stock was $ 12.66 . the graph assumes investments of $ 100 on december 31 , 2005 in our common stock and in each of the three indices and the reinvestment of dividends . performance graph 201020092008200720062005 s&p 500 index s&p industrials index s&p consumer durables & apparel index the table below sets forth the value , as of december 31 for each of the years indicated , of a $ 100 investment made on december 31 , 2005 in each of our common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p industrials index and the s&p consumer durables & apparel index and includes the reinvestment of dividends. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin july 2007 , our board of directors authorized the purchase of up to 50 million shares of our common stock in open-market transactions or otherwise . at december 31 , 2010 , we had remaining authorization to repurchase up to 27 million shares . during 2010 , we repurchased and retired three million shares of our common stock , for cash aggregating $ 45 million to offset the dilutive impact of the 2010 grant of three million shares of long-term stock awards . we did not purchase any shares during the three months ended december 31 , 2010. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2006 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 |\n| 2007 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 |\n| 2008 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 |\n| 2009 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 |\n| 2010 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 |', 'question': 'what was the difference between the price of the s&p 500 in 2010 and the starting value as of 12/31/05?', 'ops': 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(111.89, 100)', 'id': 'Single_MAS/2010/page_29.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': 'performance graph the table below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on our common stock with the cumulative total return of ( i ) the standard & poor 2019s 500 composite stock index ( 201cs&p 500 index 201d ) , ( ii ) the standard & poor 2019s industrials index ( 201cs&p industrials index 201d ) and ( iii ) the standard & poor 2019s consumer durables & apparel index ( 201cs&p consumer durables & apparel index 201d ) , from december 31 , 2005 through december 31 , 2010 , when the closing price of our common stock was $ 12.66 . the graph assumes investments of $ 100 on december 31 , 2005 in our common stock and in each of the three indices and the reinvestment of dividends . performance graph 201020092008200720062005 s&p 500 index s&p industrials index s&p consumer durables & apparel index the table below sets forth the value , as of december 31 for each of the years indicated , of a $ 100 investment made on december 31 , 2005 in each of our common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p industrials index and the s&p consumer durables & apparel index and includes the reinvestment of dividends. .', 'doc_post_text': 'in july 2007 , our board of directors authorized the purchase of up to 50 million shares of our common stock in open-market transactions or otherwise . at december 31 , 2010 , we had remaining authorization to repurchase up to 27 million shares . during 2010 , we repurchased and retired three million shares of our common stock , for cash aggregating $ 45 million to offset the dilutive impact of the 2010 grant of three million shares of long-term stock awards . we did not purchase any shares during the three months ended december 31 , 2010. .', 'doc_table': {'2006': {'masco': 101.79, 's&p 500 index': 115.61, 's&p industrials index': 113.16, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 106.16}, '2007': {'masco': 76.74, 's&p 500 index': 121.95, 's&p industrials index': 126.72, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 84.5}, '2008': {'masco': 42.81, 's&p 500 index': 77.38, 's&p industrials index': 76.79, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 56.13}, '2009': {'masco': 54.89, 's&p 500 index': 97.44, 's&p industrials index': 92.3, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 76.51}, '2010': {'masco': 51.51, 's&p 500 index': 111.89, 's&p industrials index': 116.64, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 99.87}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the difference between the price of masco in 2010 and the starting value as of 12/31/05?', 'so what was the percentage growth during that time?', 'what was the difference between the price of the s&p 500 in 2010 and the starting value as of 12/31/05?', 'and the original investment again?', 'so what was the growth rate of s&p 500 during this time?', 'what was the difference between the two growth rates?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['-48.49', '-48.49%', '11.89', '100', '11.89%', '-60.38%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(51.51, 100)', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(111.89, 100)', '100', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(111.89, 100), divide(#2, 100)', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(111.89, 100), divide(#2, 100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [-48.49, -0.4849, 11.89, 100.0, 0.1189, -0.6038], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 11.89}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:25 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the difference in price for apple between 2008 and 2013?\nA1: 331.0\nQ2: and the percentage growth?\nA2: 3.31\nQ3: and the difference for the s&p computer hardware index over the same period?\nA3: 97.0\nQ4: and the starting price for the index?\nA4: 100.0\nQ5: so what was the percentage growth?\nA5: 0.97', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ntable of contents company stock performance the following graph shows a five-year comparison of cumulative total shareholder return , calculated on a dividend reinvested basis , for the company , the s&p 500 index , the s&p computer hardware index , and the dow jones u.s . technology supersector index . the graph assumes $ 100 was invested in each of the company 2019s common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p computer hardware index , and the dow jones u.s . technology supersector index as of the market close on september 30 , 2008 . data points on the graph are annual . note that historic stock price performance is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance . fiscal year ending september 30 . copyright 2013 s&p , a division of the mcgraw-hill companies inc . all rights reserved . copyright 2013 dow jones & co . all rights reserved . *$ 100 invested on 9/30/08 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index | apple inc . | s&p 500 index | s&p computer hardware index | dow jones us technology supersector index |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| september 30 2008 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| september 30 2009 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 | 163.0 | 93.0 | 118.0 | 111.0 |\n| september 30 2010 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 | 250.0 | 103.0 | 140.0 | 124.0 |\n| september 30 2011 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 | 335.0 | 104.0 | 159.0 | 128.0 |\n| september 30 2012 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 | 589.0 | 135.0 | 255.0 | 166.0 |\n| september 30 2013 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 | 431.0 | 161.0 | 197.0 | 175.0 |', 'question': 'and the difference between these two growth rates?', 'ops': 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(197, 100), divide(#2, 100), subtract(#1, #3)', 'id': 'Single_AAPL/2013/page_27.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'table of contents company stock performance the following graph shows a five-year comparison of cumulative total shareholder return , calculated on a dividend reinvested basis , for the company , the s&p 500 index , the s&p computer hardware index , and the dow jones u.s . technology supersector index . the graph assumes $ 100 was invested in each of the company 2019s common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p computer hardware index , and the dow jones u.s . technology supersector index as of the market close on september 30 , 2008 . data points on the graph are annual . note that historic stock price performance is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance . fiscal year ending september 30 . copyright 2013 s&p , a division of the mcgraw-hill companies inc . all rights reserved . copyright 2013 dow jones & co . all rights reserved . *$ 100 invested on 9/30/08 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 , september 30 .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'september 30 2008': {'apple inc .': 100.0, 's&p 500 index': 100.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 100.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 100.0}, 'september 30 2009': {'apple inc .': 163.0, 's&p 500 index': 93.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 118.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 111.0}, 'september 30 2010': {'apple inc .': 250.0, 's&p 500 index': 103.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 140.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 124.0}, 'september 30 2011': {'apple inc .': 335.0, 's&p 500 index': 104.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 159.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 128.0}, 'september 30 2012': {'apple inc .': 589.0, 's&p 500 index': 135.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 255.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 166.0}, 'september 30 2013': {'apple inc .': 431.0, 's&p 500 index': 161.0, 's&p computer hardware index': 197.0, 'dow jones us technology supersector index': 175.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the difference in price for apple between 2008 and 2013?', 'and the percentage growth?', 'and the difference for the s&p computer hardware index over the same period?', 'and the starting price for the index?', 'so what was the percentage growth?', 'and the difference between these two growth rates?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['331', '331%', '97', '100', '97%', '270%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(431, 100)', 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(197, 100)', '100', 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(197, 100), divide(#2, 100)', 'subtract(431, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(197, 100), divide(#2, 100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [331.0, 3.31, 97.0, 100.0, 0.97, 2.34], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 2.34}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "41s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:25 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amortization expense in 2009?\nA1: 7.4\nQ2: and what was it in 2008?\nA2: 9.3\nQ3: what was, then, the change over the year?\nA3: -1.9', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nintangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives or on an accelerated method of amortization that is expected to reflect the estimated pattern of economic use . the remaining amortization expense will be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 0.9 years . amortization expense from continuing operations , related to intangibles was $ 7.4 million , $ 9.3 million and $ 9.2 million in fiscal 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . the company expects annual amortization expense for these intangible assets to be: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ng . grant accounting certain of the company 2019s foreign subsidiaries have received various grants from governmental agencies . these grants include capital , employment and research and development grants . capital grants for the acquisition of property and equipment are netted against the related capital expenditures and amortized as a credit to depreciation expense over the useful life of the related asset . employment grants , which relate to employee hiring and training , and research and development grants are recognized in earnings in the period in which the related expenditures are incurred by the company . h . translation of foreign currencies the functional currency for the company 2019s foreign sales and research and development operations is the applicable local currency . gains and losses resulting from translation of these foreign currencies into u.s . dollars are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income . transaction gains and losses and remeasurement of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities are included in income currently , including those at the company 2019s principal foreign manufacturing operations where the functional currency is the u.s . dollar . foreign currency transaction gains or losses included in other expenses , net , were not material in fiscal 2009 , 2008 or 2007 . i . derivative instruments and hedging agreements foreign exchange exposure management 2014 the company enters into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to offset certain operational and balance sheet exposures from the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates . such exposures result from the portion of the company 2019s operations , assets and liabilities that are denominated in currencies other than the u.s . dollar , primarily the euro ; other exposures include the philippine peso and the british pound . these foreign currency exchange contracts are entered into to support transactions made in the normal course of business , and accordingly , are not speculative in nature . the contracts are for periods consistent with the terms of the underlying transactions , generally one year or less . hedges related to anticipated transactions are designated and documented at the inception of the respective hedges as cash flow hedges and are evaluated for effectiveness monthly . derivative instruments are employed to eliminate or minimize certain foreign currency exposures that can be confidently identified and quantified . as the terms of the contract and the underlying transaction are matched at inception , forward contract effectiveness is calculated by comparing the change in fair value of the contract to the change in the forward value of the anticipated transaction , with the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income ( oci ) in shareholders 2019 equity and reclassified into earnings in the same period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings . any residual change in fair value of the instruments , or ineffectiveness , is recognized immediately in other income/expense . additionally , the company enters into forward foreign currency contracts that economically hedge the gains and losses generated by the remeasurement of certain recorded assets and liabilities in a non-functional currency . changes in the fair value of these undesignated hedges are recognized in other income/expense immediately as an offset to the changes in the fair value of the asset or liability being hedged . analog devices , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 |\n|---|---|---|\n| amortization expense | 5425.0 | 1430.0 |', 'question': 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2008 amortization expense?', 'ops': 'subtract(7.4, 9.3), divide(#0, 9.3)', 'id': 'Double_ADI/2009/page_59.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives or on an accelerated method of amortization that is expected to reflect the estimated pattern of economic use . the remaining amortization expense will be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 0.9 years . amortization expense from continuing operations , related to intangibles was $ 7.4 million , $ 9.3 million and $ 9.2 million in fiscal 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . the company expects annual amortization expense for these intangible assets to be: .', 'doc_post_text': 'g . grant accounting certain of the company 2019s foreign subsidiaries have received various grants from governmental agencies . these grants include capital , employment and research and development grants . capital grants for the acquisition of property and equipment are netted against the related capital expenditures and amortized as a credit to depreciation expense over the useful life of the related asset . employment grants , which relate to employee hiring and training , and research and development grants are recognized in earnings in the period in which the related expenditures are incurred by the company . h . translation of foreign currencies the functional currency for the company 2019s foreign sales and research and development operations is the applicable local currency . gains and losses resulting from translation of these foreign currencies into u.s . dollars are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income . transaction gains and losses and remeasurement of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities are included in income currently , including those at the company 2019s principal foreign manufacturing operations where the functional currency is the u.s . dollar . foreign currency transaction gains or losses included in other expenses , net , were not material in fiscal 2009 , 2008 or 2007 . i . derivative instruments and hedging agreements foreign exchange exposure management 2014 the company enters into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to offset certain operational and balance sheet exposures from the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates . such exposures result from the portion of the company 2019s operations , assets and liabilities that are denominated in currencies other than the u.s . dollar , primarily the euro ; other exposures include the philippine peso and the british pound . these foreign currency exchange contracts are entered into to support transactions made in the normal course of business , and accordingly , are not speculative in nature . the contracts are for periods consistent with the terms of the underlying transactions , generally one year or less . hedges related to anticipated transactions are designated and documented at the inception of the respective hedges as cash flow hedges and are evaluated for effectiveness monthly . derivative instruments are employed to eliminate or minimize certain foreign currency exposures that can be confidently identified and quantified . as the terms of the contract and the underlying transaction are matched at inception , forward contract effectiveness is calculated by comparing the change in fair value of the contract to the change in the forward value of the anticipated transaction , with the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income ( oci ) in shareholders 2019 equity and reclassified into earnings in the same period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings . any residual change in fair value of the instruments , or ineffectiveness , is recognized immediately in other income/expense . additionally , the company enters into forward foreign currency contracts that economically hedge the gains and losses generated by the remeasurement of certain recorded assets and liabilities in a non-functional currency . changes in the fair value of these undesignated hedges are recognized in other income/expense immediately as an offset to the changes in the fair value of the asset or liability being hedged . analog devices , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) .', 'doc_table': {'amortization expense': {'2010': 5425.0, '2011': 1430.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amortization expense in 2009?', 'and what was it in 2008?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2008 amortization expense?', 'and in 2010, what was this amortization expense, in millions?', 'what was, then, the change since 2009?', 'and what is this change as a portion of the 2009 amortization expense?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['7.4', '9.3', '-1.9', '-20.4%', '5.4', '-2', '-27.0%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['7.4', '9.3', 'subtract(7.4, 9.3)', 'subtract(7.4, 9.3), divide(#0, 9.3)', 'divide(5425, const_1000)', 'divide(5425, const_1000), subtract(#0, 7.4)', 'divide(5425, const_1000), subtract(#0, 7.4), divide(#1, 7.4)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [7.4, 9.3, -1.9, -0.2043, 5.425, -1.975, -0.26689], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -0.2043}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "43s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:25 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what portion ot total net revenue is generated by noninterest revenue\tin 2009?\nA1: 0.49069\nQ2: what is the noninterest revenue in 2010?\nA2: 51693.0\nQ3: what about the total net revenue?\nA3: 102694.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\njpmorgan chase & co./2010 annual report 59 consolidated results of operations this following section provides a comparative discussion of jpmorgan chase 2019s consolidated results of operations on a reported basis for the three-year period ended december 31 , 2010 . factors that related primarily to a single business segment are discussed in more detail within that business segment . for a discussion of the critical accounting estimates used by the firm that affect the consolidated results of operations , see pages 149 2013 154 of this annual report . revenue year ended december 31 , ( in millions ) 2010 2009 2008 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n2010 compared with 2009 total net revenue for 2010 was $ 102.7 billion , up by $ 2.3 billion , or 2% ( 2 % ) , from 2009 . results for 2010 were driven by a higher level of securities gains and private equity gains in corporate/private equity , higher asset management fees in am and administration fees in tss , and higher other income in several businesses , partially offset by lower credit card income . investment banking fees decreased from 2009 due to lower equity underwriting and advisory fees , partially offset by higher debt underwriting fees . competitive markets combined with flat industry-wide equity underwriting and completed m&a volumes , resulted in lower equity underwriting and advisory fees ; while strong industry-wide loan syndication and high-yield bond volumes drove record debt underwriting fees in ib . for additional information on investment banking fees , which are primarily recorded in ib , see ib segment results on pages 69 201371 of this annual report . principal transactions revenue , which consists of revenue from the firm 2019s trading and private equity investing activities , increased compared with 2009 . this was driven by the private equity business , which had significant private equity gains in 2010 , compared with a small loss in 2009 , reflecting improvements in market conditions . trading revenue decreased , reflecting lower results in corporate , offset by higher revenue in ib primarily reflecting gains from the widening of the firm 2019s credit spread on certain structured and derivative liabilities . for additional information on principal transactions revenue , see ib and corporate/private equity segment results on pages 69 201371 and 89 2013 90 , respectively , and note 7 on pages 199 2013200 of this annual report . lending- and deposit-related fees decreased in 2010 from 2009 levels , reflecting lower deposit-related fees in rfs associated , in part , with newly-enacted legislation related to non-sufficient funds and overdraft fees ; this was partially offset by higher lending- related service fees in ib , primarily from growth in business volume , and in cb , primarily from higher commitment and letter-of-credit fees . for additional information on lending- and deposit-related fees , which are mostly recorded in ib , rfs , cb and tss , see segment results for ib on pages 69 201371 , rfs on pages 72 201378 , cb on pages 82 201383 and tss on pages 84 201385 of this annual report . asset management , administration and commissions revenue increased from 2009 . the increase largely reflected higher asset management fees in am , driven by the effect of higher market levels , net inflows to products with higher margins and higher performance fees ; and higher administration fees in tss , reflecting the effects of higher market levels and net inflows of assets under custody . this increase was partially offset by lower brokerage commissions in ib , as a result of lower market volumes . for additional information on these fees and commissions , see the segment discussions for am on pages 86 201388 and tss on pages 84 201385 of this annual report . securities gains were significantly higher in 2010 compared with 2009 , resulting primarily from the repositioning of the portfolio in response to changes in the interest rate environment and to rebalance exposure . for additional information on securities gains , which are mostly recorded in the firm 2019s corporate segment , see the corporate/private equity segment discussion on pages 89 201390 of this annual report . mortgage fees and related income increased in 2010 compared with 2009 , driven by higher mortgage production revenue , reflecting increased mortgage origination volumes in rfs and am , and wider margins , particularly in rfs . this increase was largely offset by higher repurchase losses in rfs ( recorded as contra- revenue ) , which were attributable to higher estimated losses related to repurchase demands , predominantly from gses . for additional information on mortgage fees and related income , which is recorded primarily in rfs , see rfs 2019s mortgage banking , auto & other consumer lending discussion on pages 74 201377 of this annual report . for additional information on repurchase losses , see the repurchase liability discussion on pages 98 2013101 and note 30 on pages 275 2013280 of this annual report . credit card income decreased during 2010 , predominantly due to the impact of the accounting guidance related to vies , effective january 1 , 2010 , that required the firm to consolidate the assets and liabilities of its firm-sponsored credit card securitization trusts . adoption of the new guidance resulted in the elimination of all servicing fees received from firm-sponsored credit card securitization trusts ( which was offset by related increases in net .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | investment banking fees | principal transactions | lending- and deposit-related fees | asset management administrationand commissions | securities gains | mortgage fees and related income | credit card income | other income | noninterest revenue | net interest income | total net revenue | investment banking fees | principal transactions | lending- and deposit-related fees | asset management administrationand commissions | securities gains | mortgage fees and related income | credit card income | other income | noninterest revenue | net interest income | total net revenue | investment banking fees | principal transactions | lending- and deposit-related fees | asset management administrationand commissions | securities gains | mortgage fees and related income | credit card income | other income | noninterest revenue | net interest income | total net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2010 | 6190.0 | 10894.0 | 6340.0 | 13499.0 | 2965.0 | 3870.0 | 5891.0 | 2044.0 | 51693.0 | 51001.0 | 102694.0 | 6190.0 | 10894.0 | 6340.0 | 13499.0 | 2965.0 | 3870.0 | 5891.0 | 2044.0 | 51693.0 | 51001.0 | 102694.0 | 6190.0 | 10894.0 | 6340.0 | 13499.0 | 2965.0 | 3870.0 | 5891.0 | 2044.0 | 51693.0 | 51001.0 | 102694.0 |\n| 2009 | 7087.0 | 9796.0 | 7045.0 | 12540.0 | 1110.0 | 3678.0 | 7110.0 | 916.0 | 49282.0 | 51152.0 | 100434.0 | 7087.0 | 9796.0 | 7045.0 | 12540.0 | 1110.0 | 3678.0 | 7110.0 | 916.0 | 49282.0 | 51152.0 | 100434.0 | 7087.0 | 9796.0 | 7045.0 | 12540.0 | 1110.0 | 3678.0 | 7110.0 | 916.0 | 49282.0 | 51152.0 | 100434.0 |\n| 2008 | 5526.0 | -10699.0 | 5088.0 | 13943.0 | 1560.0 | 3467.0 | 7419.0 | 2169.0 | 28473.0 | 38779.0 | 67252.0 | 5526.0 | -10699.0 | 5088.0 | 13943.0 | 1560.0 | 3467.0 | 7419.0 | 2169.0 | 28473.0 | 38779.0 | 67252.0 | 5526.0 | -10699.0 | 5088.0 | 13943.0 | 1560.0 | 3467.0 | 7419.0 | 2169.0 | 28473.0 | 38779.0 | 67252.0 |', 'question': 'what portion is generated by noninterest revenue?', 'ops': 'divide(51693, 102694)', 'id': 'Double_JPM/2010/page_59.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'jpmorgan chase & co./2010 annual report 59 consolidated results of operations this following section provides a comparative discussion of jpmorgan chase 2019s consolidated results of operations on a reported basis for the three-year period ended december 31 , 2010 . factors that related primarily to a single business segment are discussed in more detail within that business segment . for a discussion of the critical accounting estimates used by the firm that affect the consolidated results of operations , see pages 149 2013 154 of this annual report . revenue year ended december 31 , ( in millions ) 2010 2009 2008 .', 'doc_post_text': '2010 compared with 2009 total net revenue for 2010 was $ 102.7 billion , up by $ 2.3 billion , or 2% ( 2 % ) , from 2009 . results for 2010 were driven by a higher level of securities gains and private equity gains in corporate/private equity , higher asset management fees in am and administration fees in tss , and higher other income in several businesses , partially offset by lower credit card income . investment banking fees decreased from 2009 due to lower equity underwriting and advisory fees , partially offset by higher debt underwriting fees . competitive markets combined with flat industry-wide equity underwriting and completed m&a volumes , resulted in lower equity underwriting and advisory fees ; while strong industry-wide loan syndication and high-yield bond volumes drove record debt underwriting fees in ib . for additional information on investment banking fees , which are primarily recorded in ib , see ib segment results on pages 69 201371 of this annual report . principal transactions revenue , which consists of revenue from the firm 2019s trading and private equity investing activities , increased compared with 2009 . this was driven by the private equity business , which had significant private equity gains in 2010 , compared with a small loss in 2009 , reflecting improvements in market conditions . trading revenue decreased , reflecting lower results in corporate , offset by higher revenue in ib primarily reflecting gains from the widening of the firm 2019s credit spread on certain structured and derivative liabilities . for additional information on principal transactions revenue , see ib and corporate/private equity segment results on pages 69 201371 and 89 2013 90 , respectively , and note 7 on pages 199 2013200 of this annual report . lending- and deposit-related fees decreased in 2010 from 2009 levels , reflecting lower deposit-related fees in rfs associated , in part , with newly-enacted legislation related to non-sufficient funds and overdraft fees ; this was partially offset by higher lending- related service fees in ib , primarily from growth in business volume , and in cb , primarily from higher commitment and letter-of-credit fees . for additional information on lending- and deposit-related fees , which are mostly recorded in ib , rfs , cb and tss , see segment results for ib on pages 69 201371 , rfs on pages 72 201378 , cb on pages 82 201383 and tss on pages 84 201385 of this annual report . asset management , administration and commissions revenue increased from 2009 . the increase largely reflected higher asset management fees in am , driven by the effect of higher market levels , net inflows to products with higher margins and higher performance fees ; and higher administration fees in tss , reflecting the effects of higher market levels and net inflows of assets under custody . this increase was partially offset by lower brokerage commissions in ib , as a result of lower market volumes . for additional information on these fees and commissions , see the segment discussions for am on pages 86 201388 and tss on pages 84 201385 of this annual report . securities gains were significantly higher in 2010 compared with 2009 , resulting primarily from the repositioning of the portfolio in response to changes in the interest rate environment and to rebalance exposure . for additional information on securities gains , which are mostly recorded in the firm 2019s corporate segment , see the corporate/private equity segment discussion on pages 89 201390 of this annual report . mortgage fees and related income increased in 2010 compared with 2009 , driven by higher mortgage production revenue , reflecting increased mortgage origination volumes in rfs and am , and wider margins , particularly in rfs . this increase was largely offset by higher repurchase losses in rfs ( recorded as contra- revenue ) , which were attributable to higher estimated losses related to repurchase demands , predominantly from gses . for additional information on mortgage fees and related income , which is recorded primarily in rfs , see rfs 2019s mortgage banking , auto & other consumer lending discussion on pages 74 201377 of this annual report . for additional information on repurchase losses , see the repurchase liability discussion on pages 98 2013101 and note 30 on pages 275 2013280 of this annual report . credit card income decreased during 2010 , predominantly due to the impact of the accounting guidance related to vies , effective january 1 , 2010 , that required the firm to consolidate the assets and liabilities of its firm-sponsored credit card securitization trusts . adoption of the new guidance resulted in the elimination of all servicing fees received from firm-sponsored credit card securitization trusts ( which was offset by related increases in net .', 'doc_table': {'2010': {'investment banking fees': 6190.0, 'principal transactions': 10894.0, 'lending- and deposit-related fees': 6340.0, 'asset management administrationand commissions': 13499.0, 'securities gains': 2965.0, 'mortgage fees and related income': 3870.0, 'credit card income': 5891.0, 'other income': 2044.0, 'noninterest revenue': 51693.0, 'net interest income': 51001.0, 'total net revenue': 102694.0}, '2009': {'investment banking fees': 7087.0, 'principal transactions': 9796.0, 'lending- and deposit-related fees': 7045.0, 'asset management administrationand commissions': 12540.0, 'securities gains': 1110.0, 'mortgage fees and related income': 3678.0, 'credit card income': 7110.0, 'other income': 916.0, 'noninterest revenue': 49282.0, 'net interest income': 51152.0, 'total net revenue': 100434.0}, '2008': {'investment banking fees': 5526.0, 'principal transactions': -10699.0, 'lending- and deposit-related fees': 5088.0, 'asset management administrationand commissions': 13943.0, 'securities gains': 1560.0, 'mortgage fees and related income': 3467.0, 'credit card income': 7419.0, 'other income': 2169.0, 'noninterest revenue': 28473.0, 'net interest income': 38779.0, 'total net revenue': 67252.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what portion ot total net revenue is generated by noninterest revenue\tin 2009?', 'what is the noninterest revenue in 2010?', 'what about the total net revenue?', 'what portion is generated by noninterest revenue?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['49%', '51693', '102694', '50%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['divide(49282, 100434)', '51693', '102694', 'divide(51693, 102694)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [0.49069, 51693.0, 102694.0, 0.50337], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.50337}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "42s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:25 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the net change of sales and profit in 2008?\nA1: 6336.0\nQ2: what is the net change of sales and profit in 2009?\nA2: 4589.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmill in the fourth quarter of 2008 . this compares with 635000 tons of total downtime in 2008 of which 305000 tons were lack-of-order downtime . printing papers in millions 2009 2008 2007 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnorth american printing papers net sales in 2009 were $ 2.8 billion compared with $ 3.4 billion in 2008 and $ 3.5 billion in 2007 . operating earnings in 2009 were $ 746 million ( $ 307 million excluding alter- native fuel mixture credits and plant closure costs ) compared with $ 405 million ( $ 435 million excluding shutdown costs for a paper machine ) in 2008 and $ 415 million in 2007 . sales volumes decreased sig- nificantly in 2009 compared with 2008 reflecting weak customer demand and reduced production capacity resulting from the shutdown of a paper machine at the franklin mill in december 2008 and the conversion of the bastrop mill to pulp production in june 2008 . average sales price realizations were lower reflecting slight declines for uncoated freesheet paper in domestic markets and significant declines in export markets . margins were also unfavorably affected by a higher proportion of shipments to lower-margin export markets . input costs , however , were favorable due to lower wood and chemical costs and sig- nificantly lower energy costs . freight costs were also lower . planned maintenance downtime costs in 2009 were comparable with 2008 . operating costs were favorable , reflecting cost control efforts and strong machine performance . lack-of-order downtime increased to 525000 tons in 2009 , including 120000 tons related to the shutdown of a paper machine at our franklin mill in the 2008 fourth quarter , from 135000 tons in 2008 . operating earnings in 2009 included $ 671 million of alternative fuel mixture cred- its , $ 223 million of costs associated with the shutdown of our franklin mill and $ 9 million of other shutdown costs , while operating earnings in 2008 included $ 30 million of costs for the shutdown of a paper machine at our franklin mill . looking ahead to 2010 , first-quarter sales volumes are expected to increase slightly from fourth-quarter 2009 levels . average sales price realizations should be higher , reflecting the full-quarter impact of sales price increases announced in the fourth quarter for converting and envelope grades of uncoated free- sheet paper and an increase in prices to export markets . however , input costs for wood , energy and chemicals are expected to continue to increase . planned maintenance downtime costs should be lower and operating costs should be favorable . brazil ian papers net sales for 2009 of $ 960 mil- lion increased from $ 950 million in 2008 and $ 850 million in 2007 . operating profits for 2009 were $ 112 million compared with $ 186 million in 2008 and $ 174 million in 2007 . sales volumes increased in 2009 compared with 2008 for both paper and pulp reflect- ing higher export shipments . average sales price realizations were lower due to strong competitive pressures in the brazilian domestic market in the second half of the year , lower export prices and unfavorable foreign exchange rates . margins were unfavorably affected by a higher proportion of lower margin export sales . input costs for wood and chem- icals were favorable , but these benefits were partially offset by higher energy costs . planned maintenance downtime costs were lower , and operating costs were also favorable . earnings in 2009 were adversely impacted by unfavorable foreign exchange effects . entering 2010 , sales volumes are expected to be seasonally lower compared with the fourth quarter of 2009 . profit margins are expected to be slightly higher reflecting a more favorable geographic sales mix and improving sales price realizations in export markets , partially offset by higher planned main- tenance outage costs . european papers net sales in 2009 were $ 1.3 bil- lion compared with $ 1.7 billion in 2008 and $ 1.5 bil- lion in 2007 . operating profits in 2009 of $ 92 million ( $ 115 million excluding expenses associated with the closure of the inverurie mill ) compared with $ 39 mil- lion ( $ 146 million excluding a charge to reduce the carrying value of the fixed assets at the inverurie , scotland mill to their estimated realizable value ) in 2008 and $ 171 million in 2007 . sales volumes in 2009 were lower than in 2008 primarily due to reduced sales of uncoated freesheet paper following the closure of the inverurie mill in 2009 . average sales price realizations decreased significantly in 2009 across most of western europe , but margins increased in poland and russia reflecting the effect of local currency devaluations . input costs were favorable as lower wood costs , particularly in russia , were only partially offset by higher energy costs in poland and higher chemical costs . planned main- tenance downtime costs were higher in 2009 than in 2008 , while manufacturing operating costs were lower . operating profits in 2009 also reflect favorable foreign exchange impacts . looking ahead to 2010 , sales volumes are expected to decline from strong 2009 fourth-quarter levels despite solid customer demand . average sales price realizations are expected to increase over the quar- ter , primarily in eastern europe , as price increases .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | sales | operating profit | sales | operating profit | sales | operating profit |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2009 | 5680.0 | 1091.0 | 5680.0 | 1091.0 | 5680.0 | 1091.0 |\n| 2008 | 6810.0 | 474.0 | 6810.0 | 474.0 | 6810.0 | 474.0 |\n| 2007 | 6530.0 | 839.0 | 6530.0 | 839.0 | 6530.0 | 839.0 |', 'question': 'what is the net difference between each year?', 'ops': 'subtract(6810, 474), subtract(5680, 1091), subtract(#0, #1)', 'id': 'Single_IP/2009/page_36.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': 'mill in the fourth quarter of 2008 . this compares with 635000 tons of total downtime in 2008 of which 305000 tons were lack-of-order downtime . printing papers in millions 2009 2008 2007 .', 'doc_post_text': 'north american printing papers net sales in 2009 were $ 2.8 billion compared with $ 3.4 billion in 2008 and $ 3.5 billion in 2007 . operating earnings in 2009 were $ 746 million ( $ 307 million excluding alter- native fuel mixture credits and plant closure costs ) compared with $ 405 million ( $ 435 million excluding shutdown costs for a paper machine ) in 2008 and $ 415 million in 2007 . sales volumes decreased sig- nificantly in 2009 compared with 2008 reflecting weak customer demand and reduced production capacity resulting from the shutdown of a paper machine at the franklin mill in december 2008 and the conversion of the bastrop mill to pulp production in june 2008 . average sales price realizations were lower reflecting slight declines for uncoated freesheet paper in domestic markets and significant declines in export markets . margins were also unfavorably affected by a higher proportion of shipments to lower-margin export markets . input costs , however , were favorable due to lower wood and chemical costs and sig- nificantly lower energy costs . freight costs were also lower . planned maintenance downtime costs in 2009 were comparable with 2008 . operating costs were favorable , reflecting cost control efforts and strong machine performance . lack-of-order downtime increased to 525000 tons in 2009 , including 120000 tons related to the shutdown of a paper machine at our franklin mill in the 2008 fourth quarter , from 135000 tons in 2008 . operating earnings in 2009 included $ 671 million of alternative fuel mixture cred- its , $ 223 million of costs associated with the shutdown of our franklin mill and $ 9 million of other shutdown costs , while operating earnings in 2008 included $ 30 million of costs for the shutdown of a paper machine at our franklin mill . looking ahead to 2010 , first-quarter sales volumes are expected to increase slightly from fourth-quarter 2009 levels . average sales price realizations should be higher , reflecting the full-quarter impact of sales price increases announced in the fourth quarter for converting and envelope grades of uncoated free- sheet paper and an increase in prices to export markets . however , input costs for wood , energy and chemicals are expected to continue to increase . planned maintenance downtime costs should be lower and operating costs should be favorable . brazil ian papers net sales for 2009 of $ 960 mil- lion increased from $ 950 million in 2008 and $ 850 million in 2007 . operating profits for 2009 were $ 112 million compared with $ 186 million in 2008 and $ 174 million in 2007 . sales volumes increased in 2009 compared with 2008 for both paper and pulp reflect- ing higher export shipments . average sales price realizations were lower due to strong competitive pressures in the brazilian domestic market in the second half of the year , lower export prices and unfavorable foreign exchange rates . margins were unfavorably affected by a higher proportion of lower margin export sales . input costs for wood and chem- icals were favorable , but these benefits were partially offset by higher energy costs . planned maintenance downtime costs were lower , and operating costs were also favorable . earnings in 2009 were adversely impacted by unfavorable foreign exchange effects . entering 2010 , sales volumes are expected to be seasonally lower compared with the fourth quarter of 2009 . profit margins are expected to be slightly higher reflecting a more favorable geographic sales mix and improving sales price realizations in export markets , partially offset by higher planned main- tenance outage costs . european papers net sales in 2009 were $ 1.3 bil- lion compared with $ 1.7 billion in 2008 and $ 1.5 bil- lion in 2007 . operating profits in 2009 of $ 92 million ( $ 115 million excluding expenses associated with the closure of the inverurie mill ) compared with $ 39 mil- lion ( $ 146 million excluding a charge to reduce the carrying value of the fixed assets at the inverurie , scotland mill to their estimated realizable value ) in 2008 and $ 171 million in 2007 . sales volumes in 2009 were lower than in 2008 primarily due to reduced sales of uncoated freesheet paper following the closure of the inverurie mill in 2009 . average sales price realizations decreased significantly in 2009 across most of western europe , but margins increased in poland and russia reflecting the effect of local currency devaluations . input costs were favorable as lower wood costs , particularly in russia , were only partially offset by higher energy costs in poland and higher chemical costs . planned main- tenance downtime costs were higher in 2009 than in 2008 , while manufacturing operating costs were lower . operating profits in 2009 also reflect favorable foreign exchange impacts . looking ahead to 2010 , sales volumes are expected to decline from strong 2009 fourth-quarter levels despite solid customer demand . average sales price realizations are expected to increase over the quar- ter , primarily in eastern europe , as price increases .', 'doc_table': {'2009': {'sales': 5680.0, 'operating profit': 1091.0}, '2008': {'sales': 6810.0, 'operating profit': 474.0}, '2007': {'sales': 6530.0, 'operating profit': 839.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change of sales and profit in 2008?', 'what is the net change of sales and profit in 2009?', 'what is the net difference between each year?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['6336', '4589', '1747'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(6810, 474)', 'subtract(6810, 474), subtract(5680, 1091)', 'subtract(6810, 474), subtract(5680, 1091), subtract(#0, #1)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [6336.0, 4589.0, 1747.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1747.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "42s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:25 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: combined, what were the additions in 2006 and 207?\nA1: 197775.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfederal realty investment trust schedule iii summary of real estate and accumulated depreciation 2014continued three years ended december 31 , 2009 reconciliation of accumulated depreciation and amortization ( in thousands ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | additions during period 2014depreciation and amortization expense | deductions during period 2014disposition and retirements of property | balance december 31 2007 | balance december 31 2008 | balance december 31 2009 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 740507 | 103.698 | -11869.0 | 756703.0 | 846258.0 | 938087.0 |', 'question': 'and in 2008?', 'ops': '103.698', 'id': 'Single_FRT/2009/page_124.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'federal realty investment trust schedule iii summary of real estate and accumulated depreciation 2014continued three years ended december 31 , 2009 reconciliation of accumulated depreciation and amortization ( in thousands ) .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'$ 740507': {'additions during period 2014depreciation and amortization expense': 103.698, 'deductions during period 2014disposition and retirements of property': -11869.0, 'balance december 31 2007': 756703.0, 'balance december 31 2008': 846258.0, 'balance december 31 2009': 938087.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['combined, what were the additions in 2006 and 207?', 'and in 2008?', 'and converting this value into millions?', 'now combined with the values from 2006 and 2007?', 'so what is the average of these values?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['197775', '103.698', '103698', '301473', '100491'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(96454, 101321)', '103.698', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698)', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698), add(#0, #1)', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698), add(#0, #1), divide(#2, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [197775.0, 103.698, 103698.0, 301473.0, 100491.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 103.698}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "43s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:25 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: in the year of 2007, what was the number of granted shares?\nA1: 852353.0\nQ2: and what was it for vested ones?\nA2: 51206.0\nQ3: how much, then, did the granted number represent in relation to the vested one?\nA3: 16.64557\nQ4: and in that same year, what was the fair value of these vested shares, in millions?\nA4: 3.4\nQ5: what was it for 2005?\nA5: 0.6\nQ6: what was, then, the total combined fair value for both years, in millions?\nA6: 4.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nhumana inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during 2007 was $ 133.9 million , compared with $ 133.7 million during 2006 and $ 57.8 million during 2005 . cash received from stock option exercises for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 totaled $ 62.7 million , $ 49.2 million , and $ 36.4 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested options not yet recognized was $ 23.6 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.6 years . restricted stock awards restricted stock awards are granted with a fair value equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant . compensation expense is recorded straight-line over the vesting period , generally three years from the date of grant . the weighted average grant date fair value of our restricted stock awards was $ 63.59 , $ 54.36 , and $ 32.81 for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 , respectively . activity for our restricted stock awards was as follows for the year ended december 31 , 2007 : shares weighted average grant-date fair value .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe fair value of shares vested during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 was $ 3.4 million , $ 2.3 million , and $ 0.6 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock awards not yet recognized was $ 44.7 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.4 years . there are no other contractual terms covering restricted stock awards once vested. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006 | granted | vested | forfeited | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007 | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006 | granted | vested | forfeited | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| shares | 1107455.0 | 852353.0 | -51206.0 | -63624.0 | 1844978.0 | 1107455.0 | 852353.0 | -51206.0 | -63624.0 | 1844978.0 |\n| weighted average grant-date fair value | 45.86 | 63.59 | 56.93 | 49.65 | 53.61 | 45.86 | 63.59 | 56.93 | 49.65 | 53.61 |', 'question': 'including 2006, what becomes this total?', 'ops': 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3)', 'id': 'Double_HUM/2007/page_96.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'humana inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during 2007 was $ 133.9 million , compared with $ 133.7 million during 2006 and $ 57.8 million during 2005 . cash received from stock option exercises for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 totaled $ 62.7 million , $ 49.2 million , and $ 36.4 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested options not yet recognized was $ 23.6 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.6 years . restricted stock awards restricted stock awards are granted with a fair value equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant . compensation expense is recorded straight-line over the vesting period , generally three years from the date of grant . the weighted average grant date fair value of our restricted stock awards was $ 63.59 , $ 54.36 , and $ 32.81 for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 , respectively . activity for our restricted stock awards was as follows for the year ended december 31 , 2007 : shares weighted average grant-date fair value .', 'doc_post_text': 'the fair value of shares vested during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 was $ 3.4 million , $ 2.3 million , and $ 0.6 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock awards not yet recognized was $ 44.7 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.4 years . there are no other contractual terms covering restricted stock awards once vested. .', 'doc_table': {'shares': {'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006': 1107455.0, 'granted': 852353.0, 'vested': -51206.0, 'forfeited': -63624.0, 'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007': 1844978.0}, 'weighted average grant-date fair value': {'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006': 45.86, 'granted': 63.59, 'vested': 56.93, 'forfeited': 49.65, 'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007': 53.61}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['in the year of 2007, what was the number of granted shares?', 'and what was it for vested ones?', 'how much, then, did the granted number represent in relation to the vested one?', 'and in that same year, what was the fair value of these vested shares, in millions?', 'what was it for 2005?', 'what was, then, the total combined fair value for both years, in millions?', 'including 2006, what becomes this total?', 'and what was, in millions, the average between the three years?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['852353', '51206', '16.65', '3.4', '0.6', '4', '6.3', '2.1'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['852353', '51206', 'divide(852353, 51206)', '3.4', '0.6', 'add(3.4, 0.6)', 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3)', 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3), divide(#1, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [852353.0, 51206.0, 16.64557, 3.4, 0.6, 4.0, 6.3, 2.1], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 6.3}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "43s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:25 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nrisks relating to our business fluctuations in the financial markets could result in investment losses . prolonged and severe disruptions in the overall public debt and equity markets , such as occurred during 2008 , could result in significant realized and unrealized losses in our investment portfolio . although financial markets have significantly improved since 2008 , they could deteriorate in the future . there could also be disruption in individual market sectors , such as occurred in the energy sector in recent years . such declines in the financial markets could result in significant realized and unrealized losses on investments and could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations , equity , business and insurer financial strength and debt ratings . our results could be adversely affected by catastrophic events . we are exposed to unpredictable catastrophic events , including weather-related and other natural catastrophes , as well as acts of terrorism . any material reduction in our operating results caused by the occurrence of one or more catastrophes could inhibit our ability to pay dividends or to meet our interest and principal payment obligations . by way of illustration , during the past five calendar years , pre-tax catastrophe losses , net of contract specific reinsurance but before cessions under corporate reinsurance programs , were as follows: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nour losses from future catastrophic events could exceed our projections . we use projections of possible losses from future catastrophic events of varying types and magnitudes as a strategic underwriting tool . we use these loss projections to estimate our potential catastrophe losses in certain geographic areas and decide on the placement of retrocessional coverage or other actions to limit the extent of potential losses in a given geographic area . these loss projections are approximations , reliant on a mix of quantitative and qualitative processes , and actual losses may exceed the projections by a material amount , resulting in a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | ( dollars in millions ) | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| pre-tax catastrophe losses |  | 301.2 | 53.8 | 56.3 | 194.0 | 410.0 |', 'question': 'what was the total of pre-tax catastrophe losses in the years of 2015 and 2016, combined?', 'ops': 'add(301.2, 53.8)', 'id': 'Single_RE/2016/page_40.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'risks relating to our business fluctuations in the financial markets could result in investment losses . prolonged and severe disruptions in the overall public debt and equity markets , such as occurred during 2008 , could result in significant realized and unrealized losses in our investment portfolio . although financial markets have significantly improved since 2008 , they could deteriorate in the future . there could also be disruption in individual market sectors , such as occurred in the energy sector in recent years . such declines in the financial markets could result in significant realized and unrealized losses on investments and could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations , equity , business and insurer financial strength and debt ratings . our results could be adversely affected by catastrophic events . we are exposed to unpredictable catastrophic events , including weather-related and other natural catastrophes , as well as acts of terrorism . any material reduction in our operating results caused by the occurrence of one or more catastrophes could inhibit our ability to pay dividends or to meet our interest and principal payment obligations . by way of illustration , during the past five calendar years , pre-tax catastrophe losses , net of contract specific reinsurance but before cessions under corporate reinsurance programs , were as follows: .', 'doc_post_text': 'our losses from future catastrophic events could exceed our projections . we use projections of possible losses from future catastrophic events of varying types and magnitudes as a strategic underwriting tool . we use these loss projections to estimate our potential catastrophe losses in certain geographic areas and decide on the placement of retrocessional coverage or other actions to limit the extent of potential losses in a given geographic area . these loss projections are approximations , reliant on a mix of quantitative and qualitative processes , and actual losses may exceed the projections by a material amount , resulting in a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. .', 'doc_table': {'pre-tax catastrophe losses': {'( dollars in millions )': '', '2016': 301.2, '2015': 53.8, '2014': 56.3, '2013': 194.0, '2012': 410.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total of pre-tax catastrophe losses in the years of 2015 and 2016, combined?', 'including the year of 2014, what would then be the total of pre-tax catastrophe losses for the three years?', 'what was the total of pre-tax catastrophe losses in 2013?', 'including now the year of 2013, what would be the total for the four years?', 'and including the year of 2012, what would then be the total of pre-tax catastrophe losses for those five years?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['355', '411.3', '194.0', '605.3', '1015.3'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(301.2, 53.8)', 'add(301.2, 53.8), add(#0, 56.3)', '194.0', 'add(301.2, 53.8), add(#0, 56.3), add(#1, 194.0)', 'add(301.2, 53.8), add(#0, 56.3), add(#1, 194.0), add(#2, 410.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [355.0, 411.3, 194.0, 605.3, 1015.3], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 355.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "42s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:25 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the profit margin for lockheed martin in 2002?\nA1: 0.05999\nQ2: what was the total operating profit in 2002 and 2001?\nA2: 803.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nlockheed martin corporation management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations december 31 , 2002 space systems space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2002 2001 2000 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnet sales for space systems increased by 8% ( 8 % ) in 2002 compared to 2001 . the increase in sales for 2002 resulted from higher volume in government space of $ 370 million and commercial space of $ 180 million . in government space , increases of $ 470 million in government satellite programs and $ 130 million in ground systems activities more than offset volume declines of $ 175 million on government launch vehi- cles and $ 55 million on strategic missile programs . the increase in commercial space sales is primarily attributable to an increase in launch vehicle activities , with nine commercial launches during 2002 compared to six in 2001 . net sales for the segment decreased by 7% ( 7 % ) in 2001 com- pared to 2000 . the decrease in sales for 2001 resulted from volume declines in commercial space of $ 560 million , which more than offset increases in government space of $ 60 million . in commercial space , sales declined due to volume reductions of $ 480 million in commercial launch vehicle activities and $ 80 million in satellite programs . there were six launches in 2001 compared to 14 launches in 2000 . the increase in gov- ernment space resulted from a combined increase of $ 230 mil- lion related to higher volume on government satellite programs and ground systems activities . these increases were partially offset by a $ 110 million decrease related to volume declines in government launch vehicle activity , primarily due to program maturities , and by $ 50 million due to the absence in 2001 of favorable adjustments recorded on the titan iv pro- gram in 2000 . operating profit for the segment increased 23% ( 23 % ) in 2002 as compared to 2001 , mainly driven by the commercial space business . reduced losses in commercial space during 2002 resulted in increased operating profit of $ 90 million when compared to 2001 . commercial satellite manufacturing losses declined $ 100 million in 2002 as operating performance improved and satellite deliveries increased . in the first quarter of 2001 , a $ 40 million loss provision was recorded on certain commercial satellite manufacturing contracts . due to the industry-wide oversupply and deterioration of pricing in the commercial launch market , financial results on commercial launch vehicles continue to be challenging . during 2002 , this trend led to a decline in operating profit of $ 10 million on commercial launch vehicles when compared to 2001 . this decrease was primarily due to lower profitability of $ 55 mil- lion on the three additional launches in the current year , addi- tional charges of $ 60 million ( net of a favorable contract adjustment of $ 20 million ) for market and pricing pressures and included the adverse effect of a $ 35 million adjustment for commercial launch vehicle contract settlement costs . the 2001 results also included charges for market and pricing pressures , which reduced that year 2019s operating profit by $ 145 million . the $ 10 million decrease in government space 2019s operating profit for the year is primarily due to the reduced volume on government launch vehicles and strategic missile programs , which combined to decrease operating profit by $ 80 million , partially offset by increases of $ 40 million in government satellite programs and $ 30 million in ground systems activities . operating profit for the segment increased by 4% ( 4 % ) in 2001 compared to 2000 . operating profit increased in 2001 due to a $ 35 million increase in government space partially offset by higher year-over-year losses of $ 20 million in commercial space . in government space , operating profit increased due to the impact of higher volume and improved performance in ground systems and government satellite programs . the year- to-year comparison of operating profit was not affected by the $ 50 million favorable titan iv adjustment recorded in 2000 discussed above , due to a $ 55 million charge related to a more conservative assessment of government launch vehi- cle programs that was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2000 . in commercial space , decreased operating profit of $ 15 mil- lion on launch vehicles more than offset lower losses on satel- lite manufacturing activities . the commercial launch vehicle operating results included $ 60 million in higher charges for market and pricing pressures when compared to 2000 . these negative adjustments were partially offset by $ 50 million of favorable contract adjustments on certain launch vehicle con- tracts . commercial satellite manufacturing losses decreased slightly from 2000 and included the adverse impact of a $ 40 million loss provision recorded in the first quarter of 2001 for certain commercial satellite contracts related to schedule and technical issues. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net sales | operating profit | net sales | operating profit | net sales | operating profit |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2002 | 7384.0 | 443.0 | 7384.0 | 443.0 | 7384.0 | 443.0 |\n| 2001 | 6836.0 | 360.0 | 6836.0 | 360.0 | 6836.0 | 360.0 |\n| 2000 | 7339.0 | 345.0 | 7339.0 | 345.0 | 7339.0 | 345.0 |', 'question': 'and including the value for 2003?', 'ops': 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345)', 'id': 'Double_LMT/2002/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'lockheed martin corporation management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations december 31 , 2002 space systems space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2002 2001 2000 .', 'doc_post_text': 'net sales for space systems increased by 8% ( 8 % ) in 2002 compared to 2001 . the increase in sales for 2002 resulted from higher volume in government space of $ 370 million and commercial space of $ 180 million . in government space , increases of $ 470 million in government satellite programs and $ 130 million in ground systems activities more than offset volume declines of $ 175 million on government launch vehi- cles and $ 55 million on strategic missile programs . the increase in commercial space sales is primarily attributable to an increase in launch vehicle activities , with nine commercial launches during 2002 compared to six in 2001 . net sales for the segment decreased by 7% ( 7 % ) in 2001 com- pared to 2000 . the decrease in sales for 2001 resulted from volume declines in commercial space of $ 560 million , which more than offset increases in government space of $ 60 million . in commercial space , sales declined due to volume reductions of $ 480 million in commercial launch vehicle activities and $ 80 million in satellite programs . there were six launches in 2001 compared to 14 launches in 2000 . the increase in gov- ernment space resulted from a combined increase of $ 230 mil- lion related to higher volume on government satellite programs and ground systems activities . these increases were partially offset by a $ 110 million decrease related to volume declines in government launch vehicle activity , primarily due to program maturities , and by $ 50 million due to the absence in 2001 of favorable adjustments recorded on the titan iv pro- gram in 2000 . operating profit for the segment increased 23% ( 23 % ) in 2002 as compared to 2001 , mainly driven by the commercial space business . reduced losses in commercial space during 2002 resulted in increased operating profit of $ 90 million when compared to 2001 . commercial satellite manufacturing losses declined $ 100 million in 2002 as operating performance improved and satellite deliveries increased . in the first quarter of 2001 , a $ 40 million loss provision was recorded on certain commercial satellite manufacturing contracts . due to the industry-wide oversupply and deterioration of pricing in the commercial launch market , financial results on commercial launch vehicles continue to be challenging . during 2002 , this trend led to a decline in operating profit of $ 10 million on commercial launch vehicles when compared to 2001 . this decrease was primarily due to lower profitability of $ 55 mil- lion on the three additional launches in the current year , addi- tional charges of $ 60 million ( net of a favorable contract adjustment of $ 20 million ) for market and pricing pressures and included the adverse effect of a $ 35 million adjustment for commercial launch vehicle contract settlement costs . the 2001 results also included charges for market and pricing pressures , which reduced that year 2019s operating profit by $ 145 million . the $ 10 million decrease in government space 2019s operating profit for the year is primarily due to the reduced volume on government launch vehicles and strategic missile programs , which combined to decrease operating profit by $ 80 million , partially offset by increases of $ 40 million in government satellite programs and $ 30 million in ground systems activities . operating profit for the segment increased by 4% ( 4 % ) in 2001 compared to 2000 . operating profit increased in 2001 due to a $ 35 million increase in government space partially offset by higher year-over-year losses of $ 20 million in commercial space . in government space , operating profit increased due to the impact of higher volume and improved performance in ground systems and government satellite programs . the year- to-year comparison of operating profit was not affected by the $ 50 million favorable titan iv adjustment recorded in 2000 discussed above , due to a $ 55 million charge related to a more conservative assessment of government launch vehi- cle programs that was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2000 . in commercial space , decreased operating profit of $ 15 mil- lion on launch vehicles more than offset lower losses on satel- lite manufacturing activities . the commercial launch vehicle operating results included $ 60 million in higher charges for market and pricing pressures when compared to 2000 . these negative adjustments were partially offset by $ 50 million of favorable contract adjustments on certain launch vehicle con- tracts . commercial satellite manufacturing losses decreased slightly from 2000 and included the adverse impact of a $ 40 million loss provision recorded in the first quarter of 2001 for certain commercial satellite contracts related to schedule and technical issues. .', 'doc_table': {'2002': {'net sales': 7384.0, 'operating profit': 443.0}, '2001': {'net sales': 6836.0, 'operating profit': 360.0}, '2000': {'net sales': 7339.0, 'operating profit': 345.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the profit margin for lockheed martin in 2002?', 'what was the total operating profit in 2002 and 2001?', 'and including the value for 2003?', 'so what was the average value during this time?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['6%', '803', '1148', '382.7'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['divide(443, 7384)', 'add(443, 360)', 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345)', 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345), divide(#1, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [0.05999, 803.0, 1148.0, 382.66667], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1148.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "43s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:25 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nlockheed martin corporation management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations december 31 , 2002 space systems space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2002 2001 2000 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnet sales for space systems increased by 8% ( 8 % ) in 2002 compared to 2001 . the increase in sales for 2002 resulted from higher volume in government space of $ 370 million and commercial space of $ 180 million . in government space , increases of $ 470 million in government satellite programs and $ 130 million in ground systems activities more than offset volume declines of $ 175 million on government launch vehi- cles and $ 55 million on strategic missile programs . the increase in commercial space sales is primarily attributable to an increase in launch vehicle activities , with nine commercial launches during 2002 compared to six in 2001 . net sales for the segment decreased by 7% ( 7 % ) in 2001 com- pared to 2000 . the decrease in sales for 2001 resulted from volume declines in commercial space of $ 560 million , which more than offset increases in government space of $ 60 million . in commercial space , sales declined due to volume reductions of $ 480 million in commercial launch vehicle activities and $ 80 million in satellite programs . there were six launches in 2001 compared to 14 launches in 2000 . the increase in gov- ernment space resulted from a combined increase of $ 230 mil- lion related to higher volume on government satellite programs and ground systems activities . these increases were partially offset by a $ 110 million decrease related to volume declines in government launch vehicle activity , primarily due to program maturities , and by $ 50 million due to the absence in 2001 of favorable adjustments recorded on the titan iv pro- gram in 2000 . operating profit for the segment increased 23% ( 23 % ) in 2002 as compared to 2001 , mainly driven by the commercial space business . reduced losses in commercial space during 2002 resulted in increased operating profit of $ 90 million when compared to 2001 . commercial satellite manufacturing losses declined $ 100 million in 2002 as operating performance improved and satellite deliveries increased . in the first quarter of 2001 , a $ 40 million loss provision was recorded on certain commercial satellite manufacturing contracts . due to the industry-wide oversupply and deterioration of pricing in the commercial launch market , financial results on commercial launch vehicles continue to be challenging . during 2002 , this trend led to a decline in operating profit of $ 10 million on commercial launch vehicles when compared to 2001 . this decrease was primarily due to lower profitability of $ 55 mil- lion on the three additional launches in the current year , addi- tional charges of $ 60 million ( net of a favorable contract adjustment of $ 20 million ) for market and pricing pressures and included the adverse effect of a $ 35 million adjustment for commercial launch vehicle contract settlement costs . the 2001 results also included charges for market and pricing pressures , which reduced that year 2019s operating profit by $ 145 million . the $ 10 million decrease in government space 2019s operating profit for the year is primarily due to the reduced volume on government launch vehicles and strategic missile programs , which combined to decrease operating profit by $ 80 million , partially offset by increases of $ 40 million in government satellite programs and $ 30 million in ground systems activities . operating profit for the segment increased by 4% ( 4 % ) in 2001 compared to 2000 . operating profit increased in 2001 due to a $ 35 million increase in government space partially offset by higher year-over-year losses of $ 20 million in commercial space . in government space , operating profit increased due to the impact of higher volume and improved performance in ground systems and government satellite programs . the year- to-year comparison of operating profit was not affected by the $ 50 million favorable titan iv adjustment recorded in 2000 discussed above , due to a $ 55 million charge related to a more conservative assessment of government launch vehi- cle programs that was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2000 . in commercial space , decreased operating profit of $ 15 mil- lion on launch vehicles more than offset lower losses on satel- lite manufacturing activities . the commercial launch vehicle operating results included $ 60 million in higher charges for market and pricing pressures when compared to 2000 . these negative adjustments were partially offset by $ 50 million of favorable contract adjustments on certain launch vehicle con- tracts . commercial satellite manufacturing losses decreased slightly from 2000 and included the adverse impact of a $ 40 million loss provision recorded in the first quarter of 2001 for certain commercial satellite contracts related to schedule and technical issues. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net sales | operating profit | net sales | operating profit | net sales | operating profit |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2002 | 7384.0 | 443.0 | 7384.0 | 443.0 | 7384.0 | 443.0 |\n| 2001 | 6836.0 | 360.0 | 6836.0 | 360.0 | 6836.0 | 360.0 |\n| 2000 | 7339.0 | 345.0 | 7339.0 | 345.0 | 7339.0 | 345.0 |', 'question': 'what was the profit margin for lockheed martin in 2002?', 'ops': 'divide(443, 7384)', 'id': 'Double_LMT/2002/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'lockheed martin corporation management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations december 31 , 2002 space systems space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2002 2001 2000 .', 'doc_post_text': 'net sales for space systems increased by 8% ( 8 % ) in 2002 compared to 2001 . the increase in sales for 2002 resulted from higher volume in government space of $ 370 million and commercial space of $ 180 million . in government space , increases of $ 470 million in government satellite programs and $ 130 million in ground systems activities more than offset volume declines of $ 175 million on government launch vehi- cles and $ 55 million on strategic missile programs . the increase in commercial space sales is primarily attributable to an increase in launch vehicle activities , with nine commercial launches during 2002 compared to six in 2001 . net sales for the segment decreased by 7% ( 7 % ) in 2001 com- pared to 2000 . the decrease in sales for 2001 resulted from volume declines in commercial space of $ 560 million , which more than offset increases in government space of $ 60 million . in commercial space , sales declined due to volume reductions of $ 480 million in commercial launch vehicle activities and $ 80 million in satellite programs . there were six launches in 2001 compared to 14 launches in 2000 . the increase in gov- ernment space resulted from a combined increase of $ 230 mil- lion related to higher volume on government satellite programs and ground systems activities . these increases were partially offset by a $ 110 million decrease related to volume declines in government launch vehicle activity , primarily due to program maturities , and by $ 50 million due to the absence in 2001 of favorable adjustments recorded on the titan iv pro- gram in 2000 . operating profit for the segment increased 23% ( 23 % ) in 2002 as compared to 2001 , mainly driven by the commercial space business . reduced losses in commercial space during 2002 resulted in increased operating profit of $ 90 million when compared to 2001 . commercial satellite manufacturing losses declined $ 100 million in 2002 as operating performance improved and satellite deliveries increased . in the first quarter of 2001 , a $ 40 million loss provision was recorded on certain commercial satellite manufacturing contracts . due to the industry-wide oversupply and deterioration of pricing in the commercial launch market , financial results on commercial launch vehicles continue to be challenging . during 2002 , this trend led to a decline in operating profit of $ 10 million on commercial launch vehicles when compared to 2001 . this decrease was primarily due to lower profitability of $ 55 mil- lion on the three additional launches in the current year , addi- tional charges of $ 60 million ( net of a favorable contract adjustment of $ 20 million ) for market and pricing pressures and included the adverse effect of a $ 35 million adjustment for commercial launch vehicle contract settlement costs . the 2001 results also included charges for market and pricing pressures , which reduced that year 2019s operating profit by $ 145 million . the $ 10 million decrease in government space 2019s operating profit for the year is primarily due to the reduced volume on government launch vehicles and strategic missile programs , which combined to decrease operating profit by $ 80 million , partially offset by increases of $ 40 million in government satellite programs and $ 30 million in ground systems activities . operating profit for the segment increased by 4% ( 4 % ) in 2001 compared to 2000 . operating profit increased in 2001 due to a $ 35 million increase in government space partially offset by higher year-over-year losses of $ 20 million in commercial space . in government space , operating profit increased due to the impact of higher volume and improved performance in ground systems and government satellite programs . the year- to-year comparison of operating profit was not affected by the $ 50 million favorable titan iv adjustment recorded in 2000 discussed above , due to a $ 55 million charge related to a more conservative assessment of government launch vehi- cle programs that was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2000 . in commercial space , decreased operating profit of $ 15 mil- lion on launch vehicles more than offset lower losses on satel- lite manufacturing activities . the commercial launch vehicle operating results included $ 60 million in higher charges for market and pricing pressures when compared to 2000 . these negative adjustments were partially offset by $ 50 million of favorable contract adjustments on certain launch vehicle con- tracts . commercial satellite manufacturing losses decreased slightly from 2000 and included the adverse impact of a $ 40 million loss provision recorded in the first quarter of 2001 for certain commercial satellite contracts related to schedule and technical issues. .', 'doc_table': {'2002': {'net sales': 7384.0, 'operating profit': 443.0}, '2001': {'net sales': 6836.0, 'operating profit': 360.0}, '2000': {'net sales': 7339.0, 'operating profit': 345.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the profit margin for lockheed martin in 2002?', 'what was the total operating profit in 2002 and 2001?', 'and including the value for 2003?', 'so what was the average value during this time?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['6%', '803', '1148', '382.7'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['divide(443, 7384)', 'add(443, 360)', 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345)', 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345), divide(#1, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [0.05999, 803.0, 1148.0, 382.66667], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.05999}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "41s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:25 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the total long-term debt?\nA1: 5413606.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n39 annual report 2010 duke realty corporation | | related party transactions we provide property and asset management , leasing , construction and other tenant related services to unconsolidated companies in which we have equity interests . for the years ended december 31 , 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , respectively , we earned management fees of $ 7.6 million , $ 8.4 million and $ 7.8 million , leasing fees of $ 2.7 million , $ 4.2 million and $ 2.8 million and construction and development fees of $ 10.3 million , $ 10.2 million and $ 12.7 million from these companies . we recorded these fees based on contractual terms that approximate market rates for these types of services , and we have eliminated our ownership percentages of these fees in the consolidated financial statements . commitments and contingencies we have guaranteed the repayment of $ 95.4 million of economic development bonds issued by various municipalities in connection with certain commercial developments . we will be required to make payments under our guarantees to the extent that incremental taxes from specified developments are not sufficient to pay the bond debt service . management does not believe that it is probable that we will be required to make any significant payments in satisfaction of these guarantees . we also have guaranteed the repayment of secured and unsecured loans of six of our unconsolidated subsidiaries . at december 31 , 2010 , the maximum guarantee exposure for these loans was approximately $ 245.4 million . with the exception of the guarantee of the debt of 3630 peachtree joint venture , for which we recorded a contingent liability in 2009 of $ 36.3 million , management believes it probable that we will not be required to satisfy these guarantees . we lease certain land positions with terms extending to december 2080 , with a total obligation of $ 103.6 million . no payments on these ground leases are material in any individual year . we are subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business . in the opinion of management , the amount of any ultimate liability with respect to these actions will not materially affect our consolidated financial statements or results of operations . contractual obligations at december 31 , 2010 , we were subject to certain contractual payment obligations as described in the table below: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( 1 ) our long-term debt consists of both secured and unsecured debt and includes both principal and interest . interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rates as of december 31 , 2010 . ( 2 ) our unsecured lines of credit consist of an operating line of credit that matures february 2013 and the line of credit of a consolidated subsidiary that matures july 2011 . interest expense for our unsecured lines of credit was calculated using the most recent stated interest rates that were in effect . ( 3 ) our share of unconsolidated joint venture debt includes both principal and interest . interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rate at december 31 , 2010 . ( 4 ) represents estimated remaining costs on the completion of owned development projects and third-party construction projects. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations | long-term debt ( 1 ) | lines of credit ( 2 ) | share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 ) | ground leases | operating leases | development and construction backlog costs ( 4 ) | other | total contractual obligations |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) total | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 | 5413606.0 | 214225.0 | 447573.0 | 103563.0 | 2704.0 | 521041.0 | 1967.0 | 6704679.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2011 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 | 629781.0 | 28046.0 | 87602.0 | 2199.0 | 840.0 | 476314.0 | 1015.0 | 1225797.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2012 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 | 548966.0 | 9604.0 | 27169.0 | 2198.0 | 419.0 | 44727.0 | 398.0 | 633481.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2013 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 | 725060.0 | 176575.0 | 93663.0 | 2169.0 | 395.0 | - | 229.0 | 998091.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2014 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 | 498912.0 | - | 34854.0 | 2192.0 | 380.0 | - | 90.0 | 536428.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2015 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 | 473417.0 | - | 65847.0 | 2202.0 | 370.0 | - | 54.0 | 541890.0 |\n| payments due by period ( in thousands ) thereafter | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 | 2537470.0 | - | 138438.0 | 92603.0 | 300.0 | - | 181.0 | 2768992.0 |', 'question': 'what are the total contractual obligations?', 'ops': '6704679', 'id': 'Single_DRE/2010/page_41.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': '39 annual report 2010 duke realty corporation | | related party transactions we provide property and asset management , leasing , construction and other tenant related services to unconsolidated companies in which we have equity interests . for the years ended december 31 , 2010 , 2009 and 2008 , respectively , we earned management fees of $ 7.6 million , $ 8.4 million and $ 7.8 million , leasing fees of $ 2.7 million , $ 4.2 million and $ 2.8 million and construction and development fees of $ 10.3 million , $ 10.2 million and $ 12.7 million from these companies . we recorded these fees based on contractual terms that approximate market rates for these types of services , and we have eliminated our ownership percentages of these fees in the consolidated financial statements . commitments and contingencies we have guaranteed the repayment of $ 95.4 million of economic development bonds issued by various municipalities in connection with certain commercial developments . we will be required to make payments under our guarantees to the extent that incremental taxes from specified developments are not sufficient to pay the bond debt service . management does not believe that it is probable that we will be required to make any significant payments in satisfaction of these guarantees . we also have guaranteed the repayment of secured and unsecured loans of six of our unconsolidated subsidiaries . at december 31 , 2010 , the maximum guarantee exposure for these loans was approximately $ 245.4 million . with the exception of the guarantee of the debt of 3630 peachtree joint venture , for which we recorded a contingent liability in 2009 of $ 36.3 million , management believes it probable that we will not be required to satisfy these guarantees . we lease certain land positions with terms extending to december 2080 , with a total obligation of $ 103.6 million . no payments on these ground leases are material in any individual year . we are subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business . in the opinion of management , the amount of any ultimate liability with respect to these actions will not materially affect our consolidated financial statements or results of operations . contractual obligations at december 31 , 2010 , we were subject to certain contractual payment obligations as described in the table below: .', 'doc_post_text': '( 1 ) our long-term debt consists of both secured and unsecured debt and includes both principal and interest . interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rates as of december 31 , 2010 . ( 2 ) our unsecured lines of credit consist of an operating line of credit that matures february 2013 and the line of credit of a consolidated subsidiary that matures july 2011 . interest expense for our unsecured lines of credit was calculated using the most recent stated interest rates that were in effect . ( 3 ) our share of unconsolidated joint venture debt includes both principal and interest . interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rate at december 31 , 2010 . ( 4 ) represents estimated remaining costs on the completion of owned development projects and third-party construction projects. .', 'doc_table': {'payments due by period ( in thousands ) total': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 5413606.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': 214225.0, 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 447573.0, 'ground leases': 103563.0, 'operating leases': 2704.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 521041.0, 'other': 1967.0, 'total contractual obligations': 6704679.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2011': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 629781.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': 28046.0, 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 87602.0, 'ground leases': 2199.0, 'operating leases': 840.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 476314.0, 'other': 1015.0, 'total contractual obligations': 1225797.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2012': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 548966.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': 9604.0, 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 27169.0, 'ground leases': 2198.0, 'operating leases': 419.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': 44727.0, 'other': 398.0, 'total contractual obligations': 633481.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2013': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 725060.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': 176575.0, 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 93663.0, 'ground leases': 2169.0, 'operating leases': 395.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': '-', 'other': 229.0, 'total contractual obligations': 998091.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2014': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 498912.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': '-', 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 34854.0, 'ground leases': 2192.0, 'operating leases': 380.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': '-', 'other': 90.0, 'total contractual obligations': 536428.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) 2015': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 473417.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': '-', 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 65847.0, 'ground leases': 2202.0, 'operating leases': 370.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': '-', 'other': 54.0, 'total contractual obligations': 541890.0}, 'payments due by period ( in thousands ) thereafter': {'long-term debt ( 1 )': 2537470.0, 'lines of credit ( 2 )': '-', 'share of debt of unconsolidated joint ventures ( 3 )': 138438.0, 'ground leases': 92603.0, 'operating leases': 300.0, 'development and construction backlog costs ( 4 )': '-', 'other': 181.0, 'total contractual obligations': 2768992.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the total long-term debt?', 'what are the total contractual obligations?', 'what fraction of total contractual obligations is long-term debt?', 'what percentage does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['5413606', '6704679', '0.807', '80.7%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['5413606', '6704679', 'divide(5413606, 6704679)', 'divide(5413606, 6704679), multiply(#0, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [5413606.0, 6704679.0, 0.80744, 80.7437], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 6704679.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:25 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the increase in tax payment in 2006?\nA1: 600.0\nQ2: what is the net change in cash flows provided by operating activities in 2006?\nA2: 365.0\nQ3: what is the ratio of tax payment to the net change in cash flows provided by operating activities in 2006?\nA3: 1.64384', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ncash flows from operating activities can fluctuate significantly from period to period , as pension funding decisions , tax timing differences and other items can significantly impact cash flows . in both 2007 and 2006 , the company made discretionary contributions of $ 200 million to its u.s . qualified pension plan , and in 2005 made discretionary contributions totaling $ 500 million . in 2007 , cash flows provided by operating activities increased $ 436 million , including an increase in net income of $ 245 million . since the gain from sale of businesses is included in and increases net income , the pre-tax gain from the sale of the businesses must be subtracted , as shown above , to properly reflect operating cash flows . the cash proceeds from the sale of the pharmaceuticals business are shown as part of cash from investing activities ; however , when the related taxes are paid they are required to be shown as part of cash provided by operating activities . thus , operating cash flows for 2007 were penalized due to cash income tax payments of approximately $ 630 million in 2007 that related to the sale of the global branded pharmaceuticals business . non-pharmaceutical related cash income tax payments were approximately $ 475 million lower than 2006 due to normal timing differences in tax payments , which benefited cash flows . accounts receivable and inventory increases reduced cash flows in 2007 , but decreased cash flow less than in 2006 , resulting in a year-on-year benefit to cash flows of $ 323 million . the category 201cother-net 201d in the preceding table reflects changes in other asset and liability accounts , including the impact of cash payments made in connection with 3m 2019s restructuring actions ( note 4 ) . in 2006 , cash flows provided by operating activities decreased $ 365 million . this decrease was due in large part to an increase of approximately $ 600 million in tax payments in 2006 compared with 2005 . the higher tax payments in 2006 primarily related to the company 2019s repatriation of $ 1.7 billion of foreign earnings in the united states pursuant to the provisions of the american jobs creation act of 2004 . the category 201cother-net 201d in the preceding table reflects changes in other asset and liability accounts , including outstanding liabilities at december 31 , 2006 , related to 3m 2019s restructuring actions ( note 4 ) . cash flows from investing activities : years ended december 31 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ninvestments in property , plant and equipment enable growth in diverse markets , helping to meet product demand and increasing manufacturing efficiency . in 2007 , numerous plants were opened or expanded internationally . this included two facilities in korea ( respirator manufacturing facility and optical plant ) , an optical plant in poland , industrial adhesives/tapes facilities in both brazil and the philippines , a plant in russia ( corrosion protection , industrial adhesive and tapes , and respirators ) , a plant in china ( optical systems , industrial adhesives and tapes , and personal care ) , an expansion in canada ( construction and home improvement business ) , in addition to investments in india , mexico and other countries . in addition , 3m expanded manufacturing capabilities in the u.s. , including investments in industrial adhesives/tapes and optical . 3m also exited several high-cost underutilized manufacturing facilities and streamlined several supply chains by relocating equipment from one facility to another . the streamlining work has primarily occurred inside the u.s . and is in addition to the streamlining achieved through plant construction . as a result of this increased activity , capital expenditures were $ 1.422 billion in 2007 , an increase of $ 254 million when compared to 2006 . the company expects capital expenditures to total approximately $ 1.3 billion to $ 1.4 billion in 2008 . refer to the preceding 201ccapital spending/net property , plant and equipment 201d section for more detail . refer to note 2 for information on 2007 , 2006 and 2005 acquisitions . note 2 also provides information on the proceeds from the sale of businesses . the company is actively considering additional acquisitions , investments and strategic alliances , and from time to time may also divest certain businesses . purchases of marketable securities and investments and proceeds from sale ( or maturities ) of marketable securities and investments are primarily attributable to asset-backed securities , agency securities , corporate medium-term note securities , auction rate securities and other securities , which are classified as available-for-sale . refer to note 9 for more details about 3m 2019s diversified marketable securities portfolio , which totaled $ 1.059 billion as of december 31 , 2007 . purchases of marketable securities , net of sales and maturities , totaled $ 429 million for 2007 and $ 637 million for 2006 . purchases of investments in 2005 include the purchase of 19% ( 19 % ) of ti&m beteiligungsgesellschaft mbh for .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | purchases of property plant and equipment ( pp&e ) | proceeds from sale of pp&e and other assets | acquisitions net of cash acquired | proceeds from sale of businesses | purchases and proceeds from sale or maturities of marketable securities and investments 2014 net | net cash used in investing activities | purchases of property plant and equipment ( pp&e ) | proceeds from sale of pp&e and other assets | acquisitions net of cash acquired | proceeds from sale of businesses | purchases and proceeds from sale or maturities of marketable securities and investments 2014 net | net cash used in investing activities | purchases of property plant and equipment ( pp&e ) | proceeds from sale of pp&e and other assets | acquisitions net of cash acquired | proceeds from sale of businesses | purchases and proceeds from sale or maturities of marketable securities and investments 2014 net | net cash used in investing activities |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2007 | -1422.0 | 103.0 | -539.0 | 897.0 | -406.0 | -1367.0 | -1422.0 | 103.0 | -539.0 | 897.0 | -406.0 | -1367.0 | -1422.0 | 103.0 | -539.0 | 897.0 | -406.0 | -1367.0 |\n| 2006 | -1168.0 | 49.0 | -888.0 | 1209.0 | -662.0 | -1460.0 | -1168.0 | 49.0 | -888.0 | 1209.0 | -662.0 | -1460.0 | -1168.0 | 49.0 | -888.0 | 1209.0 | -662.0 | -1460.0 |\n| 2005 | -943.0 | 41.0 | -1293.0 | 2014.0 | -46.0 | -2241.0 | -943.0 | 41.0 | -1293.0 | 2014.0 | -46.0 | -2241.0 | -943.0 | 41.0 | -1293.0 | 2014.0 | -46.0 | -2241.0 |', 'question': 'what is the net cash used in investing activities in 2007?', 'ops': '-1367', 'id': 'Double_MMM/2007/page_38.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'cash flows from operating activities can fluctuate significantly from period to period , as pension funding decisions , tax timing differences and other items can significantly impact cash flows . in both 2007 and 2006 , the company made discretionary contributions of $ 200 million to its u.s . qualified pension plan , and in 2005 made discretionary contributions totaling $ 500 million . in 2007 , cash flows provided by operating activities increased $ 436 million , including an increase in net income of $ 245 million . since the gain from sale of businesses is included in and increases net income , the pre-tax gain from the sale of the businesses must be subtracted , as shown above , to properly reflect operating cash flows . the cash proceeds from the sale of the pharmaceuticals business are shown as part of cash from investing activities ; however , when the related taxes are paid they are required to be shown as part of cash provided by operating activities . thus , operating cash flows for 2007 were penalized due to cash income tax payments of approximately $ 630 million in 2007 that related to the sale of the global branded pharmaceuticals business . non-pharmaceutical related cash income tax payments were approximately $ 475 million lower than 2006 due to normal timing differences in tax payments , which benefited cash flows . accounts receivable and inventory increases reduced cash flows in 2007 , but decreased cash flow less than in 2006 , resulting in a year-on-year benefit to cash flows of $ 323 million . the category 201cother-net 201d in the preceding table reflects changes in other asset and liability accounts , including the impact of cash payments made in connection with 3m 2019s restructuring actions ( note 4 ) . in 2006 , cash flows provided by operating activities decreased $ 365 million . this decrease was due in large part to an increase of approximately $ 600 million in tax payments in 2006 compared with 2005 . the higher tax payments in 2006 primarily related to the company 2019s repatriation of $ 1.7 billion of foreign earnings in the united states pursuant to the provisions of the american jobs creation act of 2004 . the category 201cother-net 201d in the preceding table reflects changes in other asset and liability accounts , including outstanding liabilities at december 31 , 2006 , related to 3m 2019s restructuring actions ( note 4 ) . cash flows from investing activities : years ended december 31 .', 'doc_post_text': 'investments in property , plant and equipment enable growth in diverse markets , helping to meet product demand and increasing manufacturing efficiency . in 2007 , numerous plants were opened or expanded internationally . this included two facilities in korea ( respirator manufacturing facility and optical plant ) , an optical plant in poland , industrial adhesives/tapes facilities in both brazil and the philippines , a plant in russia ( corrosion protection , industrial adhesive and tapes , and respirators ) , a plant in china ( optical systems , industrial adhesives and tapes , and personal care ) , an expansion in canada ( construction and home improvement business ) , in addition to investments in india , mexico and other countries . in addition , 3m expanded manufacturing capabilities in the u.s. , including investments in industrial adhesives/tapes and optical . 3m also exited several high-cost underutilized manufacturing facilities and streamlined several supply chains by relocating equipment from one facility to another . the streamlining work has primarily occurred inside the u.s . and is in addition to the streamlining achieved through plant construction . as a result of this increased activity , capital expenditures were $ 1.422 billion in 2007 , an increase of $ 254 million when compared to 2006 . the company expects capital expenditures to total approximately $ 1.3 billion to $ 1.4 billion in 2008 . refer to the preceding 201ccapital spending/net property , plant and equipment 201d section for more detail . refer to note 2 for information on 2007 , 2006 and 2005 acquisitions . note 2 also provides information on the proceeds from the sale of businesses . the company is actively considering additional acquisitions , investments and strategic alliances , and from time to time may also divest certain businesses . purchases of marketable securities and investments and proceeds from sale ( or maturities ) of marketable securities and investments are primarily attributable to asset-backed securities , agency securities , corporate medium-term note securities , auction rate securities and other securities , which are classified as available-for-sale . refer to note 9 for more details about 3m 2019s diversified marketable securities portfolio , which totaled $ 1.059 billion as of december 31 , 2007 . purchases of marketable securities , net of sales and maturities , totaled $ 429 million for 2007 and $ 637 million for 2006 . purchases of investments in 2005 include the purchase of 19% ( 19 % ) of ti&m beteiligungsgesellschaft mbh for .', 'doc_table': {'2007': {'purchases of property plant and equipment ( pp&e )': -1422.0, 'proceeds from sale of pp&e and other assets': 103.0, 'acquisitions net of cash acquired': -539.0, 'proceeds from sale of businesses': 897.0, 'purchases and proceeds from sale or maturities of marketable securities and investments 2014 net': -406.0, 'net cash used in investing activities': -1367.0}, '2006': {'purchases of property plant and equipment ( pp&e )': -1168.0, 'proceeds from sale of pp&e and other assets': 49.0, 'acquisitions net of cash acquired': -888.0, 'proceeds from sale of businesses': 1209.0, 'purchases and proceeds from sale or maturities of marketable securities and investments 2014 net': -662.0, 'net cash used in investing activities': -1460.0}, '2005': {'purchases of property plant and equipment ( pp&e )': -943.0, 'proceeds from sale of pp&e and other assets': 41.0, 'acquisitions net of cash acquired': -1293.0, 'proceeds from sale of businesses': 2014.0, 'purchases and proceeds from sale or maturities of marketable securities and investments 2014 net': -46.0, 'net cash used in investing activities': -2241.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the increase in tax payment in 2006?', 'what is the net change in cash flows provided by operating activities in 2006?', 'what is the ratio of tax payment to the net change in cash flows provided by operating activities in 2006?', 'what is the net cash used in investing activities in 2007?', 'what about in 2006?', 'what is the net change?', 'what percentage change does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['600', '365', '1.64', '-1367', '-1460', '93', '-6.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['600', '365', 'divide(600, 365)', '-1367', '-1460', 'subtract(-1367, -1460)', 'subtract(-1367, -1460), divide(#0, -1460)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [600.0, 365.0, 1.64384, -1367.0, -1460.0, 93.0, -0.0637], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -1367.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:25 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: as of december 31, 2011, what was the amount of noncancelable operating leases?\nA1: 185.0\nQ2: and what was the total of future obligations?\nA2: 345.0\nQ3: what percentage, then, does that amount represent in relation to this total?\nA3: 0.53623', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n2322 t . r o w e p r i c e g r o u p a n n u a l r e p o r t 2 0 1 1 c o n t r a c t u a l o b l i g at i o n s the following table presents a summary of our future obligations ( in a0millions ) under the terms of existing operating leases and other contractual cash purchase commitments at december 31 , 2011 . other purchase commitments include contractual amounts that will be due for the purchase of goods or services to be used in our operations and may be cancelable at earlier times than those indicated , under certain conditions that may involve termination fees . because these obligations are generally of a normal recurring nature , we expect that we will fund them from future cash flows from operations . the information presented does not include operating expenses or capital expenditures that will be committed in the normal course of operations in 2012 and future years . the information also excludes the $ 4.7 a0million of uncertain tax positions discussed in note 9 to our consolidated financial statements because it is not possible to estimate the time period in which a payment might be made to the tax authorities. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nwe also have outstanding commitments to fund additional contributions to investment partnerships in which we have an existing investment totaling $ 42.5 a0million at december 31 , 2011 . c r i t i c a l a c c o u n t i n g p o l i c i e s the preparation of financial statements often requires the selection of specific accounting methods and policies from among several acceptable alternatives . further , significant estimates and judgments may be required in selecting and applying those methods and policies in the recognition of the assets and liabilities in our balance sheet , the revenues and expenses in our statement of income , and the information that is contained in our significant accounting policies and notes to consolidated financial statements . making these estimates and judgments requires the analysis of information concerning events that may not yet be complete and of facts and circumstances that may change over time . accordingly , actual amounts or future results can differ materially from those estimates that we include currently in our consolidated financial statements , significant accounting policies , and notes . we present those significant accounting policies used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements as an integral part of those statements within this 2011 annual report . in the following discussion , we highlight and explain further certain of those policies that are most critical to the preparation and understanding of our financial statements . other than temporary impairments of available-for-sale securities . we generally classify our investment holdings in sponsored mutual funds and the debt securities held for investment by our savings bank subsidiary as available-for-sale . at the end of each quarter , we mark the carrying amount of each investment holding to fair value and recognize an unrealized gain or loss as a component of comprehensive income within the statement of stockholders 2019 equity . we next review each individual security position that has an unrealized loss or impairment to determine if that impairment is other than temporary . in determining whether a mutual fund holding is other than temporarily impaired , we consider many factors , including the duration of time it has existed , the severity of the impairment , any subsequent changes in value , and our intent and ability to hold the security for a period of time sufficient for an anticipated recovery in fair value . subject to the other considerations noted above , with respect to duration of time , we believe a mutual fund holding with an unrealized loss that has persisted daily throughout the six months between quarter-ends is generally presumed to have an other than temporary impairment . we may also recognize an other than temporary loss of less than six months in our statement of income if the particular circumstances of the underlying investment do not warrant our belief that a near-term recovery is possible . an impaired debt security held by our savings bank subsidiary is considered to have an other than temporary loss that we will recognize in our statement of income if the impairment is caused by a change in credit quality that affects our ability to recover our amortized cost or if we intend to sell the security or believe that it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the security before recovering cost . minor impairments of 5% ( 5 % ) or less are generally considered temporary . other than temporary impairments of equity method investments . we evaluate our equity method investments , including our investment in uti , for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the investment exceeds its fair value , and the decline in fair value is other than temporary . goodwill . we internally conduct , manage and report our operations as one investment advisory business . we do not have distinct operating segments or components that separately constitute a business . accordingly , we attribute goodwill to a single reportable business segment and reporting unit 2014our investment advisory business . we evaluate the carrying amount of goodwill in our balance sheet for possible impairment on an annual basis in the third quarter of each year using a fair value approach . goodwill would be considered impaired whenever our historical carrying amount exceeds the fair value of our investment advisory business . our annual testing has demonstrated that the fair value of our investment advisory business ( our market capitalization ) exceeds our carrying amount ( our stockholders 2019 equity ) and , therefore , no impairment exists . should we reach a different conclusion in the future , additional work would be performed to ascertain the amount of the non-cash impairment charge to be recognized . we must also perform impairment testing at other times if an event or circumstance occurs indicating that it is more likely than not that an impairment has been incurred . the maximum future impairment of goodwill that we could incur is the amount recognized in our balance sheet , $ 665.7 a0million . stock options . we recognize stock option-based compensation expense in our consolidated statement of income using a fair value based method . fair value methods use a valuation model for shorter-term , market-traded financial instruments to theoretically value stock option grants even though they are not available for trading and are of longer duration . the black- scholes option-pricing model that we use includes the input of certain variables that are dependent on future expectations , including the expected lives of our options from grant date to exercise date , the volatility of our underlying common shares in the market over that time period , and the rate of dividends that we will pay during that time . our estimates of these variables are made for the purpose of using the valuation model to determine an expense for each reporting period and are not subsequently adjusted . unlike most of our expenses , the resulting charge to earnings using a fair value based method is a non-cash charge that is never measured by , or adjusted based on , a cash outflow . provision for income taxes . after compensation and related costs , our provision for income taxes on our earnings is our largest annual expense . we operate in numerous states and countries through our various subsidiaries , and must allocate our income , expenses , and earnings under the various laws and regulations of each of these taxing jurisdictions . accordingly , our provision for income taxes represents our total estimate of the liability that we have incurred in doing business each year in all of our locations . annually , we file tax returns that represent our filing positions with each jurisdiction and settle our return liabilities . each jurisdiction has the right to audit those returns and may take different positions with respect to income and expense allocations and taxable earnings determinations . from time to time , we may also provide for estimated liabilities associated with uncertain tax return filing positions that are subject to , or in the process of , being audited by various tax authorities . because the determination of our annual provision is subject to judgments and estimates , it is likely that actual results will vary from those recognized in our financial statements . as a result , we recognize additions to , or reductions of , income tax expense during a reporting period that pertain to prior period provisions as our estimated liabilities are revised and actual tax returns and tax audits are settled . we recognize any such prior period adjustment in the discrete quarterly period in which it is determined . n e w ly i s s u e d b u t n o t y e t a d o p t e d a c c o u n t i n g g u i d a n c e in may 2011 , the fasb issued amended guidance clarifying how to measure and disclose fair value . we do not believe the adoption of such amended guidance on january 1 , 2012 , will have a significant effect on our consolidated financial statements . we have also considered all other newly issued accounting guidance that is applicable to our operations and the preparation of our consolidated statements , including that which we have not yet adopted . we do not believe that any such guidance will have a material effect on our financial position or results of operation. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| total | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 |\n| 2012 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 |\n| 2013-14 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 |\n| 2015-16 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 |\n| later | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 |', 'question': 'and what percentage do the other purchase commitments represent?', 'ops': 'divide(160, 345)', 'id': 'Double_TROW/2011/page_13.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': '2322 t . r o w e p r i c e g r o u p a n n u a l r e p o r t 2 0 1 1 c o n t r a c t u a l o b l i g at i o n s the following table presents a summary of our future obligations ( in a0millions ) under the terms of existing operating leases and other contractual cash purchase commitments at december 31 , 2011 . other purchase commitments include contractual amounts that will be due for the purchase of goods or services to be used in our operations and may be cancelable at earlier times than those indicated , under certain conditions that may involve termination fees . because these obligations are generally of a normal recurring nature , we expect that we will fund them from future cash flows from operations . the information presented does not include operating expenses or capital expenditures that will be committed in the normal course of operations in 2012 and future years . the information also excludes the $ 4.7 a0million of uncertain tax positions discussed in note 9 to our consolidated financial statements because it is not possible to estimate the time period in which a payment might be made to the tax authorities. .', 'doc_post_text': 'we also have outstanding commitments to fund additional contributions to investment partnerships in which we have an existing investment totaling $ 42.5 a0million at december 31 , 2011 . c r i t i c a l a c c o u n t i n g p o l i c i e s the preparation of financial statements often requires the selection of specific accounting methods and policies from among several acceptable alternatives . further , significant estimates and judgments may be required in selecting and applying those methods and policies in the recognition of the assets and liabilities in our balance sheet , the revenues and expenses in our statement of income , and the information that is contained in our significant accounting policies and notes to consolidated financial statements . making these estimates and judgments requires the analysis of information concerning events that may not yet be complete and of facts and circumstances that may change over time . accordingly , actual amounts or future results can differ materially from those estimates that we include currently in our consolidated financial statements , significant accounting policies , and notes . we present those significant accounting policies used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements as an integral part of those statements within this 2011 annual report . in the following discussion , we highlight and explain further certain of those policies that are most critical to the preparation and understanding of our financial statements . other than temporary impairments of available-for-sale securities . we generally classify our investment holdings in sponsored mutual funds and the debt securities held for investment by our savings bank subsidiary as available-for-sale . at the end of each quarter , we mark the carrying amount of each investment holding to fair value and recognize an unrealized gain or loss as a component of comprehensive income within the statement of stockholders 2019 equity . we next review each individual security position that has an unrealized loss or impairment to determine if that impairment is other than temporary . in determining whether a mutual fund holding is other than temporarily impaired , we consider many factors , including the duration of time it has existed , the severity of the impairment , any subsequent changes in value , and our intent and ability to hold the security for a period of time sufficient for an anticipated recovery in fair value . subject to the other considerations noted above , with respect to duration of time , we believe a mutual fund holding with an unrealized loss that has persisted daily throughout the six months between quarter-ends is generally presumed to have an other than temporary impairment . we may also recognize an other than temporary loss of less than six months in our statement of income if the particular circumstances of the underlying investment do not warrant our belief that a near-term recovery is possible . an impaired debt security held by our savings bank subsidiary is considered to have an other than temporary loss that we will recognize in our statement of income if the impairment is caused by a change in credit quality that affects our ability to recover our amortized cost or if we intend to sell the security or believe that it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the security before recovering cost . minor impairments of 5% ( 5 % ) or less are generally considered temporary . other than temporary impairments of equity method investments . we evaluate our equity method investments , including our investment in uti , for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the investment exceeds its fair value , and the decline in fair value is other than temporary . goodwill . we internally conduct , manage and report our operations as one investment advisory business . we do not have distinct operating segments or components that separately constitute a business . accordingly , we attribute goodwill to a single reportable business segment and reporting unit 2014our investment advisory business . we evaluate the carrying amount of goodwill in our balance sheet for possible impairment on an annual basis in the third quarter of each year using a fair value approach . goodwill would be considered impaired whenever our historical carrying amount exceeds the fair value of our investment advisory business . our annual testing has demonstrated that the fair value of our investment advisory business ( our market capitalization ) exceeds our carrying amount ( our stockholders 2019 equity ) and , therefore , no impairment exists . should we reach a different conclusion in the future , additional work would be performed to ascertain the amount of the non-cash impairment charge to be recognized . we must also perform impairment testing at other times if an event or circumstance occurs indicating that it is more likely than not that an impairment has been incurred . the maximum future impairment of goodwill that we could incur is the amount recognized in our balance sheet , $ 665.7 a0million . stock options . we recognize stock option-based compensation expense in our consolidated statement of income using a fair value based method . fair value methods use a valuation model for shorter-term , market-traded financial instruments to theoretically value stock option grants even though they are not available for trading and are of longer duration . the black- scholes option-pricing model that we use includes the input of certain variables that are dependent on future expectations , including the expected lives of our options from grant date to exercise date , the volatility of our underlying common shares in the market over that time period , and the rate of dividends that we will pay during that time . our estimates of these variables are made for the purpose of using the valuation model to determine an expense for each reporting period and are not subsequently adjusted . unlike most of our expenses , the resulting charge to earnings using a fair value based method is a non-cash charge that is never measured by , or adjusted based on , a cash outflow . provision for income taxes . after compensation and related costs , our provision for income taxes on our earnings is our largest annual expense . we operate in numerous states and countries through our various subsidiaries , and must allocate our income , expenses , and earnings under the various laws and regulations of each of these taxing jurisdictions . accordingly , our provision for income taxes represents our total estimate of the liability that we have incurred in doing business each year in all of our locations . annually , we file tax returns that represent our filing positions with each jurisdiction and settle our return liabilities . each jurisdiction has the right to audit those returns and may take different positions with respect to income and expense allocations and taxable earnings determinations . from time to time , we may also provide for estimated liabilities associated with uncertain tax return filing positions that are subject to , or in the process of , being audited by various tax authorities . because the determination of our annual provision is subject to judgments and estimates , it is likely that actual results will vary from those recognized in our financial statements . as a result , we recognize additions to , or reductions of , income tax expense during a reporting period that pertain to prior period provisions as our estimated liabilities are revised and actual tax returns and tax audits are settled . we recognize any such prior period adjustment in the discrete quarterly period in which it is determined . n e w ly i s s u e d b u t n o t y e t a d o p t e d a c c o u n t i n g g u i d a n c e in may 2011 , the fasb issued amended guidance clarifying how to measure and disclose fair value . we do not believe the adoption of such amended guidance on january 1 , 2012 , will have a significant effect on our consolidated financial statements . we have also considered all other newly issued accounting guidance that is applicable to our operations and the preparation of our consolidated statements , including that which we have not yet adopted . we do not believe that any such guidance will have a material effect on our financial position or results of operation. .', 'doc_table': {'total': {'noncancelable operating leases': 185.0, 'other purchase commitments': 160.0, 'total': 345.0}, '2012': {'noncancelable operating leases': 31.0, 'other purchase commitments': 112.0, 'total': 143.0}, '2013-14': {'noncancelable operating leases': 63.0, 'other purchase commitments': 38.0, 'total': 101.0}, '2015-16': {'noncancelable operating leases': 57.0, 'other purchase commitments': 10.0, 'total': 67.0}, 'later': {'noncancelable operating leases': 34.0, 'other purchase commitments': '-', 'total': 34.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['as of december 31, 2011, what was the amount of noncancelable operating leases?', 'and what was the total of future obligations?', 'what percentage, then, does that amount represent in relation to this total?', 'and what percentage do the other purchase commitments represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['185', '345', '0.53', '46%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['185', '345', 'divide(185, 345)', 'divide(160, 345)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [185.0, 345.0, 0.53623, 0.46377], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 0.46377}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:25 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the increase in tax payment in 2006?\nA1: 600.0\nQ2: what is the net change in cash flows provided by operating activities in 2006?\nA2: 365.0\nQ3: what is the ratio of tax payment to the net change in cash flows provided by operating activities in 2006?\nA3: 1.64384\nQ4: what is the net cash used in investing activities in 2007?\nA4: -1367.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ncash flows from operating activities can fluctuate significantly from period to period , as pension funding decisions , tax timing differences and other items can significantly impact cash flows . in both 2007 and 2006 , the company made discretionary contributions of $ 200 million to its u.s . qualified pension plan , and in 2005 made discretionary contributions totaling $ 500 million . in 2007 , cash flows provided by operating activities increased $ 436 million , including an increase in net income of $ 245 million . since the gain from sale of businesses is included in and increases net income , the pre-tax gain from the sale of the businesses must be subtracted , as shown above , to properly reflect operating cash flows . the cash proceeds from the sale of the pharmaceuticals business are shown as part of cash from investing activities ; however , when the related taxes are paid they are required to be shown as part of cash provided by operating activities . thus , operating cash flows for 2007 were penalized due to cash income tax payments of approximately $ 630 million in 2007 that related to the sale of the global branded pharmaceuticals business . non-pharmaceutical related cash income tax payments were approximately $ 475 million lower than 2006 due to normal timing differences in tax payments , which benefited cash flows . accounts receivable and inventory increases reduced cash flows in 2007 , but decreased cash flow less than in 2006 , resulting in a year-on-year benefit to cash flows of $ 323 million . the category 201cother-net 201d in the preceding table reflects changes in other asset and liability accounts , including the impact of cash payments made in connection with 3m 2019s restructuring actions ( note 4 ) . in 2006 , cash flows provided by operating activities decreased $ 365 million . this decrease was due in large part to an increase of approximately $ 600 million in tax payments in 2006 compared with 2005 . the higher tax payments in 2006 primarily related to the company 2019s repatriation of $ 1.7 billion of foreign earnings in the united states pursuant to the provisions of the american jobs creation act of 2004 . the category 201cother-net 201d in the preceding table reflects changes in other asset and liability accounts , including outstanding liabilities at december 31 , 2006 , related to 3m 2019s restructuring actions ( note 4 ) . cash flows from investing activities : years ended december 31 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ninvestments in property , plant and equipment enable growth in diverse markets , helping to meet product demand and increasing manufacturing efficiency . in 2007 , numerous plants were opened or expanded internationally . this included two facilities in korea ( respirator manufacturing facility and optical plant ) , an optical plant in poland , industrial adhesives/tapes facilities in both brazil and the philippines , a plant in russia ( corrosion protection , industrial adhesive and tapes , and respirators ) , a plant in china ( optical systems , industrial adhesives and tapes , and personal care ) , an expansion in canada ( construction and home improvement business ) , in addition to investments in india , mexico and other countries . in addition , 3m expanded manufacturing capabilities in the u.s. , including investments in industrial adhesives/tapes and optical . 3m also exited several high-cost underutilized manufacturing facilities and streamlined several supply chains by relocating equipment from one facility to another . the streamlining work has primarily occurred inside the u.s . and is in addition to the streamlining achieved through plant construction . as a result of this increased activity , capital expenditures were $ 1.422 billion in 2007 , an increase of $ 254 million when compared to 2006 . the company expects capital expenditures to total approximately $ 1.3 billion to $ 1.4 billion in 2008 . refer to the preceding 201ccapital spending/net property , plant and equipment 201d section for more detail . refer to note 2 for information on 2007 , 2006 and 2005 acquisitions . note 2 also provides information on the proceeds from the sale of businesses . the company is actively considering additional acquisitions , investments and strategic alliances , and from time to time may also divest certain businesses . purchases of marketable securities and investments and proceeds from sale ( or maturities ) of marketable securities and investments are primarily attributable to asset-backed securities , agency securities , corporate medium-term note securities , auction rate securities and other securities , which are classified as available-for-sale . refer to note 9 for more details about 3m 2019s diversified marketable securities portfolio , which totaled $ 1.059 billion as of december 31 , 2007 . purchases of marketable securities , net of sales and maturities , totaled $ 429 million for 2007 and $ 637 million for 2006 . purchases of investments in 2005 include the purchase of 19% ( 19 % ) of ti&m beteiligungsgesellschaft mbh for .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | purchases of property plant and equipment ( pp&e ) | proceeds from sale of pp&e and other assets | acquisitions net of cash acquired | proceeds from sale of businesses | purchases and proceeds from sale or maturities of marketable securities and investments 2014 net | net cash used in investing activities | purchases of property plant and equipment ( pp&e ) | proceeds from sale of pp&e and other assets | acquisitions net of cash acquired | proceeds from sale of businesses | purchases and proceeds from sale or maturities of marketable securities and investments 2014 net | net cash used in investing activities | purchases of property plant and equipment ( pp&e ) | proceeds from sale of pp&e and other assets | acquisitions net of cash acquired | proceeds from sale of businesses | purchases and proceeds from sale or maturities of marketable securities and investments 2014 net | net cash used in investing activities |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2007 | -1422.0 | 103.0 | -539.0 | 897.0 | -406.0 | -1367.0 | -1422.0 | 103.0 | -539.0 | 897.0 | -406.0 | -1367.0 | -1422.0 | 103.0 | -539.0 | 897.0 | -406.0 | -1367.0 |\n| 2006 | -1168.0 | 49.0 | -888.0 | 1209.0 | -662.0 | -1460.0 | -1168.0 | 49.0 | -888.0 | 1209.0 | -662.0 | -1460.0 | -1168.0 | 49.0 | -888.0 | 1209.0 | -662.0 | -1460.0 |\n| 2005 | -943.0 | 41.0 | -1293.0 | 2014.0 | -46.0 | -2241.0 | -943.0 | 41.0 | -1293.0 | 2014.0 | -46.0 | -2241.0 | -943.0 | 41.0 | -1293.0 | 2014.0 | -46.0 | -2241.0 |', 'question': 'what about in 2006?', 'ops': '-1460', 'id': 'Double_MMM/2007/page_38.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'cash flows from operating activities can fluctuate significantly from period to period , as pension funding decisions , tax timing differences and other items can significantly impact cash flows . in both 2007 and 2006 , the company made discretionary contributions of $ 200 million to its u.s . qualified pension plan , and in 2005 made discretionary contributions totaling $ 500 million . in 2007 , cash flows provided by operating activities increased $ 436 million , including an increase in net income of $ 245 million . since the gain from sale of businesses is included in and increases net income , the pre-tax gain from the sale of the businesses must be subtracted , as shown above , to properly reflect operating cash flows . the cash proceeds from the sale of the pharmaceuticals business are shown as part of cash from investing activities ; however , when the related taxes are paid they are required to be shown as part of cash provided by operating activities . thus , operating cash flows for 2007 were penalized due to cash income tax payments of approximately $ 630 million in 2007 that related to the sale of the global branded pharmaceuticals business . non-pharmaceutical related cash income tax payments were approximately $ 475 million lower than 2006 due to normal timing differences in tax payments , which benefited cash flows . accounts receivable and inventory increases reduced cash flows in 2007 , but decreased cash flow less than in 2006 , resulting in a year-on-year benefit to cash flows of $ 323 million . the category 201cother-net 201d in the preceding table reflects changes in other asset and liability accounts , including the impact of cash payments made in connection with 3m 2019s restructuring actions ( note 4 ) . in 2006 , cash flows provided by operating activities decreased $ 365 million . this decrease was due in large part to an increase of approximately $ 600 million in tax payments in 2006 compared with 2005 . the higher tax payments in 2006 primarily related to the company 2019s repatriation of $ 1.7 billion of foreign earnings in the united states pursuant to the provisions of the american jobs creation act of 2004 . the category 201cother-net 201d in the preceding table reflects changes in other asset and liability accounts , including outstanding liabilities at december 31 , 2006 , related to 3m 2019s restructuring actions ( note 4 ) . cash flows from investing activities : years ended december 31 .', 'doc_post_text': 'investments in property , plant and equipment enable growth in diverse markets , helping to meet product demand and increasing manufacturing efficiency . in 2007 , numerous plants were opened or expanded internationally . this included two facilities in korea ( respirator manufacturing facility and optical plant ) , an optical plant in poland , industrial adhesives/tapes facilities in both brazil and the philippines , a plant in russia ( corrosion protection , industrial adhesive and tapes , and respirators ) , a plant in china ( optical systems , industrial adhesives and tapes , and personal care ) , an expansion in canada ( construction and home improvement business ) , in addition to investments in india , mexico and other countries . in addition , 3m expanded manufacturing capabilities in the u.s. , including investments in industrial adhesives/tapes and optical . 3m also exited several high-cost underutilized manufacturing facilities and streamlined several supply chains by relocating equipment from one facility to another . the streamlining work has primarily occurred inside the u.s . and is in addition to the streamlining achieved through plant construction . as a result of this increased activity , capital expenditures were $ 1.422 billion in 2007 , an increase of $ 254 million when compared to 2006 . the company expects capital expenditures to total approximately $ 1.3 billion to $ 1.4 billion in 2008 . refer to the preceding 201ccapital spending/net property , plant and equipment 201d section for more detail . refer to note 2 for information on 2007 , 2006 and 2005 acquisitions . note 2 also provides information on the proceeds from the sale of businesses . the company is actively considering additional acquisitions , investments and strategic alliances , and from time to time may also divest certain businesses . purchases of marketable securities and investments and proceeds from sale ( or maturities ) of marketable securities and investments are primarily attributable to asset-backed securities , agency securities , corporate medium-term note securities , auction rate securities and other securities , which are classified as available-for-sale . refer to note 9 for more details about 3m 2019s diversified marketable securities portfolio , which totaled $ 1.059 billion as of december 31 , 2007 . purchases of marketable securities , net of sales and maturities , totaled $ 429 million for 2007 and $ 637 million for 2006 . purchases of investments in 2005 include the purchase of 19% ( 19 % ) of ti&m beteiligungsgesellschaft mbh for .', 'doc_table': {'2007': {'purchases of property plant and equipment ( pp&e )': -1422.0, 'proceeds from sale of pp&e and other assets': 103.0, 'acquisitions net of cash acquired': -539.0, 'proceeds from sale of businesses': 897.0, 'purchases and proceeds from sale or maturities of marketable securities and investments 2014 net': -406.0, 'net cash used in investing activities': -1367.0}, '2006': {'purchases of property plant and equipment ( pp&e )': -1168.0, 'proceeds from sale of pp&e and other assets': 49.0, 'acquisitions net of cash acquired': -888.0, 'proceeds from sale of businesses': 1209.0, 'purchases and proceeds from sale or maturities of marketable securities and investments 2014 net': -662.0, 'net cash used in investing activities': -1460.0}, '2005': {'purchases of property plant and equipment ( pp&e )': -943.0, 'proceeds from sale of pp&e and other assets': 41.0, 'acquisitions net of cash acquired': -1293.0, 'proceeds from sale of businesses': 2014.0, 'purchases and proceeds from sale or maturities of marketable securities and investments 2014 net': -46.0, 'net cash used in investing activities': -2241.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the increase in tax payment in 2006?', 'what is the net change in cash flows provided by operating activities in 2006?', 'what is the ratio of tax payment to the net change in cash flows provided by operating activities in 2006?', 'what is the net cash used in investing activities in 2007?', 'what about in 2006?', 'what is the net change?', 'what percentage change does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['600', '365', '1.64', '-1367', '-1460', '93', '-6.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['600', '365', 'divide(600, 365)', '-1367', '-1460', 'subtract(-1367, -1460)', 'subtract(-1367, -1460), divide(#0, -1460)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [600.0, 365.0, 1.64384, -1367.0, -1460.0, 93.0, -0.0637], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -1460.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "44s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:25 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the total loan portfolio value based on the percentage of the portfolio made up by home equity loans?\nA1: 2.04118', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\non a regular basis our special asset committee closely monitors loans , primarily commercial loans , that are not included in the nonperforming or accruing past due categories and for which we are uncertain about the borrower 2019s ability to comply with existing repayment terms . these loans totaled $ .2 billion at both december 31 , 2014 and december 31 , 2013 . home equity loan portfolio our home equity loan portfolio totaled $ 34.7 billion as of december 31 , 2014 , or 17% ( 17 % ) of the total loan portfolio . of that total , $ 20.4 billion , or 59% ( 59 % ) , was outstanding under primarily variable-rate home equity lines of credit and $ 14.3 billion , or 41% ( 41 % ) , consisted of closed-end home equity installment loans . approximately 3% ( 3 % ) of the home equity portfolio was on nonperforming status as of december 31 , 2014 . as of december 31 , 2014 , we are in an originated first lien position for approximately 51% ( 51 % ) of the total portfolio and , where originated as a second lien , we currently hold or service the first lien position for approximately an additional 2% ( 2 % ) of the portfolio . the remaining 47% ( 47 % ) of the portfolio was secured by second liens where we do not hold the first lien position . the credit performance of the majority of the home equity portfolio where we are in , hold or service the first lien position , is superior to the portion of the portfolio where we hold the second lien position but do not hold the first lien . lien position information is generally based upon original ltv at the time of origination . however , after origination pnc is not typically notified when a senior lien position that is not held by pnc is satisfied . therefore , information about the current lien status of junior lien loans is less readily available in cases where pnc does not also hold the senior lien . additionally , pnc is not typically notified when a junior lien position is added after origination of a pnc first lien . this updated information for both junior and senior liens must be obtained from external sources , and therefore , pnc has contracted with an industry-leading third-party service provider to obtain updated loan , lien and collateral data that is aggregated from public and private sources . we track borrower performance monthly , including obtaining original ltvs , updated fico scores at least quarterly , updated ltvs semi-annually , and other credit metrics at least quarterly , including the historical performance of any mortgage loans regardless of lien position that we do or do not hold . this information is used for internal reporting and risk management . for internal reporting and risk management we also segment the population into pools based on product type ( e.g. , home equity loans , brokered home equity loans , home equity lines of credit , brokered home equity lines of credit ) . as part of our overall risk analysis and monitoring , we segment the home equity portfolio based upon the delinquency , modification status and bankruptcy status of these loans , as well as the delinquency , modification status and bankruptcy status of any mortgage loan with the same borrower ( regardless of whether it is a first lien senior to our second lien ) . in establishing our alll for non-impaired loans , we primarily utilize a delinquency roll-rate methodology for pools of loans . in accordance with accounting principles , under this methodology , we establish our allowance based upon incurred losses , not lifetime expected losses . the roll-rate methodology estimates transition/roll of loan balances from one delinquency state ( e.g. , 30-59 days past due ) to another delinquency state ( e.g. , 60-89 days past due ) and ultimately to charge-off . the roll through to charge-off is based on pnc 2019s actual loss experience for each type of pool . each of our home equity pools contains both first and second liens . our experience has been that the ratio of first to second lien loans has been consistent over time and the charge-off amounts for the pools , used to establish our allowance , include losses on both first and second liens loans . generally , our variable-rate home equity lines of credit have either a seven or ten year draw period , followed by a 20-year amortization term . during the draw period , we have home equity lines of credit where borrowers pay either interest or principal and interest . we view home equity lines of credit where borrowers are paying principal and interest under the draw period as less risky than those where the borrowers are paying interest only , as these borrowers have a demonstrated ability to make some level of principal and interest payments . the risk associated with the borrower 2019s ability to satisfy the loan terms upon the draw period ending is considered in establishing our alll . based upon outstanding balances at december 31 , 2014 , the following table presents the periods when home equity lines of credit draw periods are scheduled to end . table 36 : home equity lines of credit 2013 draw period end in millions interest only product principal and interest product .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( a ) includes all home equity lines of credit that mature in 2015 or later , including those with borrowers where we have terminated borrowing privileges . ( b ) includes approximately $ 154 million , $ 48 million , $ 57 million , $ 42 million and $ 564 million of home equity lines of credit with balloon payments , including those where we have terminated borrowing privileges , with draw periods scheduled to end in 2015 , 2016 , 2017 , 2018 and 2019 and thereafter , respectively . 76 the pnc financial services group , inc . 2013 form 10-k .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 and thereafter | total ( a ) ( b ) | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 and thereafter | total ( a ) ( b ) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| interest onlyproduct | 1597.0 | 1366.0 | 2434.0 | 1072.0 | 3880.0 | 10349.0 | 1597.0 | 1366.0 | 2434.0 | 1072.0 | 3880.0 | 10349.0 |\n| principal andinterest product | 541.0 | 437.0 | 596.0 | 813.0 | 5391.0 | 7778.0 | 541.0 | 437.0 | 596.0 | 813.0 | 5391.0 | 7778.0 |', 'question': 'and in billions?', 'ops': 'divide(34.7, 17), multiply(#0, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_PNC/2014/page_94.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'on a regular basis our special asset committee closely monitors loans , primarily commercial loans , that are not included in the nonperforming or accruing past due categories and for which we are uncertain about the borrower 2019s ability to comply with existing repayment terms . these loans totaled $ .2 billion at both december 31 , 2014 and december 31 , 2013 . home equity loan portfolio our home equity loan portfolio totaled $ 34.7 billion as of december 31 , 2014 , or 17% ( 17 % ) of the total loan portfolio . of that total , $ 20.4 billion , or 59% ( 59 % ) , was outstanding under primarily variable-rate home equity lines of credit and $ 14.3 billion , or 41% ( 41 % ) , consisted of closed-end home equity installment loans . approximately 3% ( 3 % ) of the home equity portfolio was on nonperforming status as of december 31 , 2014 . as of december 31 , 2014 , we are in an originated first lien position for approximately 51% ( 51 % ) of the total portfolio and , where originated as a second lien , we currently hold or service the first lien position for approximately an additional 2% ( 2 % ) of the portfolio . the remaining 47% ( 47 % ) of the portfolio was secured by second liens where we do not hold the first lien position . the credit performance of the majority of the home equity portfolio where we are in , hold or service the first lien position , is superior to the portion of the portfolio where we hold the second lien position but do not hold the first lien . lien position information is generally based upon original ltv at the time of origination . however , after origination pnc is not typically notified when a senior lien position that is not held by pnc is satisfied . therefore , information about the current lien status of junior lien loans is less readily available in cases where pnc does not also hold the senior lien . additionally , pnc is not typically notified when a junior lien position is added after origination of a pnc first lien . this updated information for both junior and senior liens must be obtained from external sources , and therefore , pnc has contracted with an industry-leading third-party service provider to obtain updated loan , lien and collateral data that is aggregated from public and private sources . we track borrower performance monthly , including obtaining original ltvs , updated fico scores at least quarterly , updated ltvs semi-annually , and other credit metrics at least quarterly , including the historical performance of any mortgage loans regardless of lien position that we do or do not hold . this information is used for internal reporting and risk management . for internal reporting and risk management we also segment the population into pools based on product type ( e.g. , home equity loans , brokered home equity loans , home equity lines of credit , brokered home equity lines of credit ) . as part of our overall risk analysis and monitoring , we segment the home equity portfolio based upon the delinquency , modification status and bankruptcy status of these loans , as well as the delinquency , modification status and bankruptcy status of any mortgage loan with the same borrower ( regardless of whether it is a first lien senior to our second lien ) . in establishing our alll for non-impaired loans , we primarily utilize a delinquency roll-rate methodology for pools of loans . in accordance with accounting principles , under this methodology , we establish our allowance based upon incurred losses , not lifetime expected losses . the roll-rate methodology estimates transition/roll of loan balances from one delinquency state ( e.g. , 30-59 days past due ) to another delinquency state ( e.g. , 60-89 days past due ) and ultimately to charge-off . the roll through to charge-off is based on pnc 2019s actual loss experience for each type of pool . each of our home equity pools contains both first and second liens . our experience has been that the ratio of first to second lien loans has been consistent over time and the charge-off amounts for the pools , used to establish our allowance , include losses on both first and second liens loans . generally , our variable-rate home equity lines of credit have either a seven or ten year draw period , followed by a 20-year amortization term . during the draw period , we have home equity lines of credit where borrowers pay either interest or principal and interest . we view home equity lines of credit where borrowers are paying principal and interest under the draw period as less risky than those where the borrowers are paying interest only , as these borrowers have a demonstrated ability to make some level of principal and interest payments . the risk associated with the borrower 2019s ability to satisfy the loan terms upon the draw period ending is considered in establishing our alll . based upon outstanding balances at december 31 , 2014 , the following table presents the periods when home equity lines of credit draw periods are scheduled to end . table 36 : home equity lines of credit 2013 draw period end in millions interest only product principal and interest product .', 'doc_post_text': '( a ) includes all home equity lines of credit that mature in 2015 or later , including those with borrowers where we have terminated borrowing privileges . ( b ) includes approximately $ 154 million , $ 48 million , $ 57 million , $ 42 million and $ 564 million of home equity lines of credit with balloon payments , including those where we have terminated borrowing privileges , with draw periods scheduled to end in 2015 , 2016 , 2017 , 2018 and 2019 and thereafter , respectively . 76 the pnc financial services group , inc . 2013 form 10-k .', 'doc_table': {'interest onlyproduct': {'2015': 1597.0, '2016': 1366.0, '2017': 2434.0, '2018': 1072.0, '2019 and thereafter': 3880.0, 'total ( a ) ( b )': 10349.0}, 'principal andinterest product': {'2015': 541.0, '2016': 437.0, '2017': 596.0, '2018': 813.0, '2019 and thereafter': 5391.0, 'total ( a ) ( b )': 7778.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the total loan portfolio value based on the percentage of the portfolio made up by home equity loans?', 'and in billions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['2.04', '204'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['divide(34.7, 17)', 'divide(34.7, 17), multiply(#0, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [2.04118, 204.11765], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 204.11765}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "42s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:19:48 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 27.0 / 35 (77.1%)
2025/07/29 14:19:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 77.14 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 3', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 1'].
2025/07/29 14:19:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 88.57, 68.57, 85.71, 82.86, 82.86, 82.86, 85.71, 74.29, 68.57, 77.14]
2025/07/29 14:19:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0, 78.57, 0.0]
2025/07/29 14:19:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:19:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 14:19:51 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 21 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:24:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:24:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:24:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:24:42 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 28.0 / 35 (80.0%)
2025/07/29 14:24:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 80.0 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 5', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 11'].
2025/07/29 14:24:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 88.57, 68.57, 85.71, 82.86, 82.86, 82.86, 85.71, 74.29, 68.57, 77.14, 80.0]
2025/07/29 14:24:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0, 78.57, 0.0]
2025/07/29 14:24:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:24:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 14:24:46 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: == Trial 22 / 23 - Minibatch ==
2025/07/29 14:25:19 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 26.0 / 35 (74.3%)
2025/07/29 14:25:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Score: 74.29 on minibatch of size 35 with parameters ['Predictor 0: Instruction 5', 'Predictor 0: Few-Shot Set 7'].
2025/07/29 14:25:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Minibatch scores so far: [77.14, 82.86, 80.0, 77.14, 77.14, 77.14, 88.57, 68.57, 85.71, 82.86, 82.86, 82.86, 85.71, 74.29, 68.57, 77.14, 80.0, 74.29]
2025/07/29 14:25:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0, 78.57, 0.0]
2025/07/29 14:25:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:25:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ==========================================


2025/07/29 14:25:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: ===== Trial 23 / 23 - Full Evaluation =====
2025/07/29 14:25:22 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Doing full eval on next top averaging program (Avg Score: 82.86) from minibatch trials...
2025/07/29 14:25:32 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:36 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:36 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:36 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:36 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:36 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:36 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:36 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:36 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:36 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:37 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the net change in the accumulated other comprehensive income during 2015?\nA1: -606.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nintel corporation notes to consolidated financial statements ( continued ) note 16 : other comprehensive income ( loss ) the changes in accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss ) by component and related tax effects for each period were as follows : ( in millions ) unrealized holding ( losses ) on available- for-sale investments deferred tax asset valuation allowance unrealized holding ( losses ) on derivatives service credits ( costs ) actuarial ( losses ) foreign currency translation adjustment total .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | december 27 2014 | other comprehensive income ( loss ) before reclassifications | amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss ) | tax effects | other comprehensive income ( loss ) | december 26 2015 | december 31 2016 | december 27 2014 | other comprehensive income ( loss ) before reclassifications | amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss ) | tax effects | other comprehensive income ( loss ) | december 26 2015 | december 31 2016 | december 27 2014 | other comprehensive income ( loss ) before reclassifications | amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss ) | tax effects | other comprehensive income ( loss ) | december 26 2015 | december 31 2016 | december 27 2014 | other comprehensive income ( loss ) before reclassifications | amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss ) | tax effects | other comprehensive income ( loss ) | december 26 2015 | december 31 2016 | december 27 2014 | other comprehensive income ( loss ) before reclassifications | amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss ) | tax effects | other comprehensive income ( loss ) | december 26 2015 | december 31 2016 | december 27 2014 | other comprehensive income ( loss ) before reclassifications | amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss ) | tax effects | other comprehensive income ( loss ) | december 26 2015 | december 31 2016 | december 27 2014 | other comprehensive income ( loss ) before reclassifications | amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss ) | tax effects | other comprehensive income ( loss ) | december 26 2015 | december 31 2016 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| unrealized holding gains ( losses ) on available-for-sale investments | 2459.0 | 1170.0 | -530.0 | -225.0 | 415.0 | 1749.0 | 2164.0 | 2459.0 | 1170.0 | -530.0 | -225.0 | 415.0 | 1749.0 | 2164.0 | 2459.0 | 1170.0 | -530.0 | -225.0 | 415.0 | 1749.0 | 2164.0 | 2459.0 | 1170.0 | -530.0 | -225.0 | 415.0 | 1749.0 | 2164.0 | 2459.0 | 1170.0 | -530.0 | -225.0 | 415.0 | 1749.0 | 2164.0 | 2459.0 | 1170.0 | -530.0 | -225.0 | 415.0 | 1749.0 | 2164.0 | 2459.0 | 1170.0 | -530.0 | -225.0 | 415.0 | 1749.0 | 2164.0 |\n| deferred tax asset valuation allowance | 26.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -8.0 | -8.0 | 8.0 | 2014.0 | 26.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -8.0 | -8.0 | 8.0 | 2014.0 | 26.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -8.0 | -8.0 | 8.0 | 2014.0 | 26.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -8.0 | -8.0 | 8.0 | 2014.0 | 26.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -8.0 | -8.0 | 8.0 | 2014.0 | 26.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -8.0 | -8.0 | 8.0 | 2014.0 | 26.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -8.0 | -8.0 | 8.0 | 2014.0 |\n| unrealized holding gains ( losses ) on derivatives | -423.0 | -26.0 | 38.0 | -5.0 | 7.0 | -266.0 | -259.0 | -423.0 | -26.0 | 38.0 | -5.0 | 7.0 | -266.0 | -259.0 | -423.0 | -26.0 | 38.0 | -5.0 | 7.0 | -266.0 | -259.0 | -423.0 | -26.0 | 38.0 | -5.0 | 7.0 | -266.0 | -259.0 | -423.0 | -26.0 | 38.0 | -5.0 | 7.0 | -266.0 | -259.0 | -423.0 | -26.0 | 38.0 | -5.0 | 7.0 | -266.0 | -259.0 | -423.0 | -26.0 | 38.0 | -5.0 | 7.0 | -266.0 | -259.0 |\n| prior service credits ( costs ) | -47.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -40.0 | -40.0 | -47.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -40.0 | -40.0 | -47.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -40.0 | -40.0 | -47.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -40.0 | -40.0 | -47.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -40.0 | -40.0 | -47.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -40.0 | -40.0 | -47.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -40.0 | -40.0 |\n| actuarial gains ( losses ) | -1004.0 | -680.0 | 170.0 | 146.0 | -364.0 | -876.0 | -1240.0 | -1004.0 | -680.0 | 170.0 | 146.0 | -364.0 | -876.0 | -1240.0 | -1004.0 | -680.0 | 170.0 | 146.0 | -364.0 | -876.0 | -1240.0 | -1004.0 | -680.0 | 170.0 | 146.0 | -364.0 | -876.0 | -1240.0 | -1004.0 | -680.0 | 170.0 | 146.0 | -364.0 | -876.0 | -1240.0 | -1004.0 | -680.0 | 170.0 | 146.0 | -364.0 | -876.0 | -1240.0 | -1004.0 | -680.0 | 170.0 | 146.0 | -364.0 | -876.0 | -1240.0 |\n| foreign currency translation adjustment | -345.0 | -4.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -4.0 | -515.0 | -519.0 | -345.0 | -4.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -4.0 | -515.0 | -519.0 | -345.0 | -4.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -4.0 | -515.0 | -519.0 | -345.0 | -4.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -4.0 | -515.0 | -519.0 | -345.0 | -4.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -4.0 | -515.0 | -519.0 | -345.0 | -4.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -4.0 | -515.0 | -519.0 | -345.0 | -4.0 | 2014.0 | 2014.0 | -4.0 | -515.0 | -519.0 |\n| total | 666.0 | 460.0 | -322.0 | -92.0 | 46.0 | 60.0 | 106.0 | 666.0 | 460.0 | -322.0 | -92.0 | 46.0 | 60.0 | 106.0 | 666.0 | 460.0 | -322.0 | -92.0 | 46.0 | 60.0 | 106.0 | 666.0 | 460.0 | -322.0 | -92.0 | 46.0 | 60.0 | 106.0 | 666.0 | 460.0 | -322.0 | -92.0 | 46.0 | 60.0 | 106.0 | 666.0 | 460.0 | -322.0 | -92.0 | 46.0 | 60.0 | 106.0 | 666.0 | 460.0 | -322.0 | -92.0 | 46.0 | 60.0 | 106.0 |', 'question': 'and what was it during 2016?', 'ops': 'subtract(106, 60)', 'id': 'Double_INTC/2016/page_100.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'intel corporation notes to consolidated financial statements ( continued ) note 16 : other comprehensive income ( loss ) the changes in accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss ) by component and related tax effects for each period were as follows : ( in millions ) unrealized holding ( losses ) on available- for-sale investments deferred tax asset valuation allowance unrealized holding ( losses ) on derivatives service credits ( costs ) actuarial ( losses ) foreign currency translation adjustment total .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'unrealized holding gains ( losses ) on available-for-sale investments': {'december 27 2014': 2459.0, 'other comprehensive income ( loss ) before reclassifications': 1170.0, 'amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss )': -530.0, 'tax effects': -225.0, 'other comprehensive income ( loss )': 415.0, 'december 26 2015': 1749.0, 'december 31 2016': 2164.0}, 'deferred tax asset valuation allowance': {'december 27 2014': 26.0, 'other comprehensive income ( loss ) before reclassifications': 2014.0, 'amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss )': 2014.0, 'tax effects': -8.0, 'other comprehensive income ( loss )': -8.0, 'december 26 2015': 8.0, 'december 31 2016': 2014.0}, 'unrealized holding gains ( losses ) on derivatives': {'december 27 2014': -423.0, 'other comprehensive income ( loss ) before reclassifications': -26.0, 'amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss )': 38.0, 'tax effects': -5.0, 'other comprehensive income ( loss )': 7.0, 'december 26 2015': -266.0, 'december 31 2016': -259.0}, 'prior service credits ( costs )': {'december 27 2014': -47.0, 'other comprehensive income ( loss ) before reclassifications': 2014.0, 'amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss )': 2014.0, 'tax effects': 2014.0, 'other comprehensive income ( loss )': 2014.0, 'december 26 2015': -40.0, 'december 31 2016': -40.0}, 'actuarial gains ( losses )': {'december 27 2014': -1004.0, 'other comprehensive income ( loss ) before reclassifications': -680.0, 'amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss )': 170.0, 'tax effects': 146.0, 'other comprehensive income ( loss )': -364.0, 'december 26 2015': -876.0, 'december 31 2016': -1240.0}, 'foreign currency translation adjustment': {'december 27 2014': -345.0, 'other comprehensive income ( loss ) before reclassifications': -4.0, 'amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss )': 2014.0, 'tax effects': 2014.0, 'other comprehensive income ( loss )': -4.0, 'december 26 2015': -515.0, 'december 31 2016': -519.0}, 'total': {'december 27 2014': 666.0, 'other comprehensive income ( loss ) before reclassifications': 460.0, 'amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss )': -322.0, 'tax effects': -92.0, 'other comprehensive income ( loss )': 46.0, 'december 26 2015': 60.0, 'december 31 2016': 106.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the net change in the accumulated other comprehensive income during 2015?', 'and what was it during 2016?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['-606', '46'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(60, 666)', 'subtract(106, 60)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [-606.0, 46.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 46.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "22s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:38 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nschlumberger limited and subsidiaries shares of common stock issued in treasury shares outstanding ( stated in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nsee the notes to consolidated financial statements part ii , item 8 .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | balance january 1 2008 | shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged | shares issued under employee stock purchase plan | stock repurchase program | issued on conversions of debentures | balance december 31 2008 | vesting of restricted stock | balance december 31 2009 | acquisition of smith international inc . | balance december 31 2010 | balance january 1 2008 | shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged | shares issued under employee stock purchase plan | stock repurchase program | issued on conversions of debentures | balance december 31 2008 | vesting of restricted stock | balance december 31 2009 | acquisition of smith international inc . | balance december 31 2010 | balance january 1 2008 | shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged | shares issued under employee stock purchase plan | stock repurchase program | issued on conversions of debentures | balance december 31 2008 | vesting of restricted stock | balance december 31 2009 | acquisition of smith international inc . | balance december 31 2010 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| issued | 1334.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 1334.0 | 2013.0 | 1334.0 | 100.0 | 1434.0 | 1334.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 1334.0 | 2013.0 | 1334.0 | 100.0 | 1434.0 | 1334.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 2013.0 | 1334.0 | 2013.0 | 1334.0 | 100.0 | 1434.0 |\n| in treasury | -138.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | -27.0 | 8.0 | -140.0 | 1.0 | -139.0 | 76.0 | -73.0 | -138.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | -27.0 | 8.0 | -140.0 | 1.0 | -139.0 | 76.0 | -73.0 | -138.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | -27.0 | 8.0 | -140.0 | 1.0 | -139.0 | 76.0 | -73.0 |\n| shares outstanding | 1196.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | -27.0 | 8.0 | 1194.0 | 1.0 | 1195.0 | 176.0 | 1361.0 | 1196.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | -27.0 | 8.0 | 1194.0 | 1.0 | 1195.0 | 176.0 | 1361.0 | 1196.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | -27.0 | 8.0 | 1194.0 | 1.0 | 1195.0 | 176.0 | 1361.0 |', 'question': 'combined, what was the shares outstanding for 12/31/10 and 12/31/09?', 'ops': 'add(1361, 1195)', 'id': 'Single_SLB/2010/page_58.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'schlumberger limited and subsidiaries shares of common stock issued in treasury shares outstanding ( stated in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'see the notes to consolidated financial statements part ii , item 8 .', 'doc_table': {'issued': {'balance january 1 2008': 1334.0, 'shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged': 2013.0, 'shares issued under employee stock purchase plan': 2013.0, 'stock repurchase program': 2013.0, 'issued on conversions of debentures': 2013.0, 'balance december 31 2008': 1334.0, 'vesting of restricted stock': 2013.0, 'balance december 31 2009': 1334.0, 'acquisition of smith international inc .': 100.0, 'balance december 31 2010': 1434.0}, 'in treasury': {'balance january 1 2008': -138.0, 'shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged': 6.0, 'shares issued under employee stock purchase plan': 3.0, 'stock repurchase program': -27.0, 'issued on conversions of debentures': 8.0, 'balance december 31 2008': -140.0, 'vesting of restricted stock': 1.0, 'balance december 31 2009': -139.0, 'acquisition of smith international inc .': 76.0, 'balance december 31 2010': -73.0}, 'shares outstanding': {'balance january 1 2008': 1196.0, 'shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged': 6.0, 'shares issued under employee stock purchase plan': 3.0, 'stock repurchase program': -27.0, 'issued on conversions of debentures': 8.0, 'balance december 31 2008': 1194.0, 'vesting of restricted stock': 1.0, 'balance december 31 2009': 1195.0, 'acquisition of smith international inc .': 176.0, 'balance december 31 2010': 1361.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['combined, what was the shares outstanding for 12/31/10 and 12/31/09?', 'so what was the average of these values?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['2556.0', '1278'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(1361, 1195)', 'add(1361, 1195), divide(#0, const_2)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [2556.0, 1278.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 2556.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "21s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:38 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?\nA1: 68.4', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfor intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | revenue | net loss | revenue | net loss |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| year endedfebruary 12008 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 |\n| year endedfebruary 22007 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 |', 'question': 'including the year of 2011, what would it then be?', 'ops': 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9)', 'id': 'Single_DG/2008/page_86.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'for intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .', 'doc_post_text': 'the pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .', 'doc_table': {'year endedfebruary 12008': {'revenue': 9495246.0, 'net loss': -57939.0}, 'year endedfebruary 22007': {'revenue': 9169822.0, 'net loss': -156188.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?', 'including the year of 2011, what would it then be?', 'including now the year of 2012 in the amount, what would the total estimated aggregate amortization expense be, in millions?', 'what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense in 2013, in millions?', 'including 2013, what would now be the total sum in estimated aggregate amortization expense over those five years, in millions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['68.4', '89.3', '106.3', '12.0', '118.3'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(41.1, 27.3)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0)', '12.0', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0), add(#2, 12.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [68.4, 89.3, 106.3, 12.0, 118.3], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 89.3}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "21s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:38 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the long-term debt in 2015?\nA1: 1610.3\nQ2: and what was it in 2014?\nA2: 1612.9\nQ3: what was, then, the total long-term debt for those two years combined?\nA3: 3223.2', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2013 ( continued ) ( amounts in millions , except per share amounts ) financing activities net cash used in financing activities during 2015 primarily related to the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we repurchased 13.6 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 285.2 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 195.5 on our common stock . net cash used in financing activities during 2014 primarily related to the purchase of long-term debt , the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we redeemed all $ 350.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 6.25% ( 6.25 % ) notes , repurchased 14.9 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 275.1 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 159.0 on our common stock . this was offset by the issuance of $ 500.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 4.20% ( 4.20 % ) notes . foreign exchange rate changes the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 156.1 in 2015 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar , euro and south african rand as of december 31 , 2015 compared to december 31 , 2014 . the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 101.0 in 2014 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar and euro as of december 31 , 2014 compared to december 31 , 2013. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nliquidity outlook we expect our cash flow from operations , cash and cash equivalents to be sufficient to meet our anticipated operating requirements at a minimum for the next twelve months . we also have a committed corporate credit facility as well as uncommitted facilities available to support our operating needs . we continue to maintain a disciplined approach to managing liquidity , with flexibility over significant uses of cash , including our capital expenditures , cash used for new acquisitions , our common stock repurchase program and our common stock dividends . from time to time , we evaluate market conditions and financing alternatives for opportunities to raise additional funds or otherwise improve our liquidity profile , enhance our financial flexibility and manage market risk . our ability to access the capital markets depends on a number of factors , which include those specific to us , such as our credit rating , and those related to the financial markets , such as the amount or terms of available credit . there can be no guarantee that we would be able to access new sources of liquidity on commercially reasonable terms , or at all . funding requirements our most significant funding requirements include our operations , non-cancelable operating lease obligations , capital expenditures , acquisitions , common stock dividends , taxes , debt service and contributions to pension and postretirement plans . additionally , we may be required to make payments to minority shareholders in certain subsidiaries if they exercise their options to sell us their equity interests. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash cash equivalents and marketable securities | short-term borrowings | current portion of long-term debt | long-term debt | total debt | cash cash equivalents and marketable securities | short-term borrowings | current portion of long-term debt | long-term debt | total debt |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| december 31 , 2015 | 1509.7 | 150.1 | 1.9 | 1610.3 | 1762.3 | 1509.7 | 150.1 | 1.9 | 1610.3 | 1762.3 |\n| december 31 , 2014 | 1667.2 | 107.2 | 2.1 | 1612.9 | 1722.2 | 1667.2 | 107.2 | 2.1 | 1612.9 | 1722.2 |', 'question': 'and what was the total debt in that same period?', 'ops': 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2)', 'id': 'Single_IPG/2015/page_38.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2013 ( continued ) ( amounts in millions , except per share amounts ) financing activities net cash used in financing activities during 2015 primarily related to the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we repurchased 13.6 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 285.2 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 195.5 on our common stock . net cash used in financing activities during 2014 primarily related to the purchase of long-term debt , the repurchase of our common stock and payment of dividends . we redeemed all $ 350.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 6.25% ( 6.25 % ) notes , repurchased 14.9 shares of our common stock for an aggregate cost of $ 275.1 , including fees , and made dividend payments of $ 159.0 on our common stock . this was offset by the issuance of $ 500.0 in aggregate principal amount of our 4.20% ( 4.20 % ) notes . foreign exchange rate changes the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 156.1 in 2015 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar , euro and south african rand as of december 31 , 2015 compared to december 31 , 2014 . the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents included in the consolidated statements of cash flows resulted in a decrease of $ 101.0 in 2014 . the decrease was primarily a result of the u.s . dollar being stronger than several foreign currencies , including the australian dollar , brazilian real , canadian dollar and euro as of december 31 , 2014 compared to december 31 , 2013. .', 'doc_post_text': 'liquidity outlook we expect our cash flow from operations , cash and cash equivalents to be sufficient to meet our anticipated operating requirements at a minimum for the next twelve months . we also have a committed corporate credit facility as well as uncommitted facilities available to support our operating needs . we continue to maintain a disciplined approach to managing liquidity , with flexibility over significant uses of cash , including our capital expenditures , cash used for new acquisitions , our common stock repurchase program and our common stock dividends . from time to time , we evaluate market conditions and financing alternatives for opportunities to raise additional funds or otherwise improve our liquidity profile , enhance our financial flexibility and manage market risk . our ability to access the capital markets depends on a number of factors , which include those specific to us , such as our credit rating , and those related to the financial markets , such as the amount or terms of available credit . there can be no guarantee that we would be able to access new sources of liquidity on commercially reasonable terms , or at all . funding requirements our most significant funding requirements include our operations , non-cancelable operating lease obligations , capital expenditures , acquisitions , common stock dividends , taxes , debt service and contributions to pension and postretirement plans . additionally , we may be required to make payments to minority shareholders in certain subsidiaries if they exercise their options to sell us their equity interests. .', 'doc_table': {'december 31 , 2015': {'cash cash equivalents and marketable securities': 1509.7, 'short-term borrowings': 150.1, 'current portion of long-term debt': 1.9, 'long-term debt': 1610.3, 'total debt': 1762.3}, 'december 31 , 2014': {'cash cash equivalents and marketable securities': 1667.2, 'short-term borrowings': 107.2, 'current portion of long-term debt': 2.1, 'long-term debt': 1612.9, 'total debt': 1722.2}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the long-term debt in 2015?', 'and what was it in 2014?', 'what was, then, the total long-term debt for those two years combined?', 'and what was the total debt in that same period?', 'how much, then, does the long-term debt represent in relation to this total debt, in the two year period?', 'and how much is that in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1610.3', '1612.9', '3223.2', '3484.5', '0.925', '92.5'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1610.3', '1612.9', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9)', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2)', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2), divide(#0, #1)', 'add(1610.3, 1612.9), add(1762.3, 1722.2), divide(#0, #1), multiply(#2, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1610.3, 1612.9, 3223.2, 3484.5, 0.92501, 92.50108], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 3484.5}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "21s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:39 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel, in millions?\nA1: 213.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nour digital media business consists of our websites and mobile and video-on-demand ( 201cvod 201d ) services . our websites include network branded websites such as discovery.com , tlc.com and animalplanet.com , and other websites such as howstuffworks.com , an online source of explanations of how the world actually works ; treehugger.com , a comprehensive source for 201cgreen 201d news , solutions and product information ; and petfinder.com , a leading pet adoption destination . together , these websites attracted an average of 24 million cumulative unique monthly visitors , according to comscore , inc . in 2011 . international networks our international networks segment principally consists of national and pan-regional television networks . this segment generates revenues primarily from fees charged to operators who distribute our networks , which primarily include cable and dth satellite service providers , and from advertising sold on our television networks and websites . discovery channel , animal planet and tlc lead the international networks 2019 portfolio of television networks , which are distributed in virtually every pay-television market in the world through an infrastructure that includes operational centers in london , singapore and miami . international networks has one of the largest international distribution platforms of networks with one to twelve networks in more than 200 countries and territories around the world . at december 31 , 2011 , international networks operated over 150 unique distribution feeds in over 40 languages with channel feeds customized according to language needs and advertising sales opportunities . our international networks segment owns and operates the following television networks which reached the following number of subscribers as of december 31 , 2011 : education and other our education and other segment primarily includes the sale of curriculum-based product and service offerings and postproduction audio services . this segment generates revenues primarily from subscriptions charged to k-12 schools for access to an online suite of curriculum-based vod tools , professional development services , and to a lesser extent student assessment and publication of hardcopy curriculum-based content . our education business also participates in corporate partnerships , global brand and content licensing business with leading non-profits , foundations and trade associations . other businesses primarily include postproduction audio services that are provided to major motion picture studios , independent producers , broadcast networks , cable channels , advertising agencies , and interactive producers . content development our content development strategy is designed to increase viewership , maintain innovation and quality leadership , and provide value for our network distributors and advertising customers . substantially all content is sourced from a wide range of third-party producers , which includes some of the world 2019s leading nonfiction production companies with which we have developed long-standing relationships , as well as independent producers . our production arrangements fall into three categories : produced , coproduced and licensed . substantially all produced content includes programming which we engage third parties to develop and produce while we retain editorial control and own most or all of the rights in exchange for paying all development and production costs . coproduced content refers to program rights acquired that we have collaborated with third parties to finance and develop . coproduced programs are typically high-cost projects for which neither we nor our coproducers wish to bear the entire cost or productions in which the producer has already taken on an international broadcast partner . licensed content is comprised of films or series that have been previously produced by third parties . global networks international subscribers ( millions ) regional networks international subscribers ( millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| international subscribers ( millions ) 213 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 |\n| regional networks dmax | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  |\n| international subscribers ( millions ) 47 | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  |', 'question': 'and what is it for animal planet, also in millions?', 'ops': '166', 'id': 'Single_DISCA/2011/page_35.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'our digital media business consists of our websites and mobile and video-on-demand ( 201cvod 201d ) services . our websites include network branded websites such as discovery.com , tlc.com and animalplanet.com , and other websites such as howstuffworks.com , an online source of explanations of how the world actually works ; treehugger.com , a comprehensive source for 201cgreen 201d news , solutions and product information ; and petfinder.com , a leading pet adoption destination . together , these websites attracted an average of 24 million cumulative unique monthly visitors , according to comscore , inc . in 2011 . international networks our international networks segment principally consists of national and pan-regional television networks . this segment generates revenues primarily from fees charged to operators who distribute our networks , which primarily include cable and dth satellite service providers , and from advertising sold on our television networks and websites . discovery channel , animal planet and tlc lead the international networks 2019 portfolio of television networks , which are distributed in virtually every pay-television market in the world through an infrastructure that includes operational centers in london , singapore and miami . international networks has one of the largest international distribution platforms of networks with one to twelve networks in more than 200 countries and territories around the world . at december 31 , 2011 , international networks operated over 150 unique distribution feeds in over 40 languages with channel feeds customized according to language needs and advertising sales opportunities . our international networks segment owns and operates the following television networks which reached the following number of subscribers as of december 31 , 2011 : education and other our education and other segment primarily includes the sale of curriculum-based product and service offerings and postproduction audio services . this segment generates revenues primarily from subscriptions charged to k-12 schools for access to an online suite of curriculum-based vod tools , professional development services , and to a lesser extent student assessment and publication of hardcopy curriculum-based content . our education business also participates in corporate partnerships , global brand and content licensing business with leading non-profits , foundations and trade associations . other businesses primarily include postproduction audio services that are provided to major motion picture studios , independent producers , broadcast networks , cable channels , advertising agencies , and interactive producers . content development our content development strategy is designed to increase viewership , maintain innovation and quality leadership , and provide value for our network distributors and advertising customers . substantially all content is sourced from a wide range of third-party producers , which includes some of the world 2019s leading nonfiction production companies with which we have developed long-standing relationships , as well as independent producers . our production arrangements fall into three categories : produced , coproduced and licensed . substantially all produced content includes programming which we engage third parties to develop and produce while we retain editorial control and own most or all of the rights in exchange for paying all development and production costs . coproduced content refers to program rights acquired that we have collaborated with third parties to finance and develop . coproduced programs are typically high-cost projects for which neither we nor our coproducers wish to bear the entire cost or productions in which the producer has already taken on an international broadcast partner . licensed content is comprised of films or series that have been previously produced by third parties . global networks international subscribers ( millions ) regional networks international subscribers ( millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'international subscribers ( millions ) 213': {'animal planet': 166.0, 'tlc real time and travel & living': 150.0, 'discovery science': 66.0, 'discovery home & health': 48.0, 'turbo': 37.0, 'discovery world': 27.0, 'investigation discovery': 23.0, 'hd services': 17.0}, 'regional networks dmax': {'animal planet': 'discovery kids', 'tlc real time and travel & living': 'liv', 'discovery science': 'quest', 'discovery home & health': 'discovery history', 'turbo': 'shed', 'discovery world': 'discovery en espanol ( u.s. )', 'investigation discovery': 'discovery famillia ( u.s. )', 'hd services': ''}, 'international subscribers ( millions ) 47': {'animal planet': 37.0, 'tlc real time and travel & living': 29.0, 'discovery science': 23.0, 'discovery home & health': 13.0, 'turbo': 12.0, 'discovery world': 5.0, 'investigation discovery': 4.0, 'hd services': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel, in millions?', 'and what is it for animal planet, also in millions?', 'what is, then, the difference between the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel and for animal planet?', 'and how much does this difference represent in relation to the animal planet number of subscribers?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['213', '166', '47', '28%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['213', '166', 'subtract(213, 166)', 'subtract(213, 166), divide(#0, 166)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [213.0, 166.0, 47.0, 0.28313], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 166.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "21s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:39 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2011?\nA1: 78.0\nQ2: and what was that of 2010?\nA2: 71.0\nQ3: what was the change in value over the year?\nA3: 7.0\nQ4: what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2010?\nA4: 71.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nkorea engineering plastics co. , ltd . founded in 1987 , kepco is the leading producer of pom in south korea . kepco is a venture between celanese's ticona business ( 50% ( 50 % ) ) , mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . ( 40% ( 40 % ) ) and mitsubishi corporation ( 10% ( 10 % ) ) . kepco has polyacetal production facilities in ulsan , south korea , compounding facilities for pbt and nylon in pyongtaek , south korea , and participates with polyplastics and mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . in a world-scale pom facility in nantong , china . polyplastics co. , ltd . polyplastics is a leading supplier of engineered plastics in the asia-pacific region and is a venture between daicel chemical industries ltd. , japan ( 55% ( 55 % ) ) , and celanese's ticona business ( 45% ( 45 % ) ) . established in 1964 , polyplastics is a producer and marketer of pom and lcp in the asia-pacific region , with principal production facilities located in japan , taiwan , malaysia and china . fortron industries llc . fortron is a leading global producer of polyphenylene sulfide ( 201cpps 201d ) , sold under the fortron ae brand , which is used in a wide variety of automotive and other applications , especially those requiring heat and/or chemical resistance . established in 1992 , fortron is a limited liability company whose members are ticona fortron inc . ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of cna holdings , llc ) and kureha corporation ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of kureha chemical industry co. , ltd . of japan ) . fortron's facility is located in wilmington , north carolina . this venture combines the sales , marketing , distribution , compounding and manufacturing expertise of celanese with the pps polymer technology expertise of kureha . china acetate strategic ventures . we hold an approximate 30% ( 30 % ) ownership interest in three separate acetate production ventures in china . these include the nantong cellulose fibers co . ltd. , kunming cellulose fibers co . ltd . and zhuhai cellulose fibers co . ltd . the china national tobacco corporation , the chinese state-owned tobacco entity , controls the remaining ownership interest in each of these ventures . with an estimated 30% ( 30 % ) share of the world's cigarette production and consumption , china is the world's largest and fastest growing area for acetate tow products according to the 2009 stanford research institute international chemical economics handbook . combined , these ventures are a leader in chinese domestic acetate production and are well positioned to supply chinese cigarette producers . in december 2009 , we announced plans with china national tobacco to expand our acetate flake and tow capacity at our venture's nantong facility and we received formal approval for the expansions , each by 30000 tons , during 2010 . since their inception in 1986 , the china acetate ventures have completed 12 expansions , leading to earnings growth and increased dividends . our chinese acetate ventures fund their operations using operating cash flow . during 2011 , we made contributions of $ 8 million related to the capacity expansions in nantong and have committed contributions of $ 9 million in 2012 . in 2010 , we made contributions of $ 12 million . our chinese acetate ventures pay a dividend in the second quarter of each fiscal year , based on the ventures' performance for the preceding year . in 2011 , 2010 and 2009 , we received cash dividends of $ 78 million , $ 71 million and $ 56 million , respectively . although our ownership interest in each of our china acetate ventures exceeds 20% ( 20 % ) , we account for these investments using the cost method of accounting because we determined that we cannot exercise significant influence over these entities due to local government investment in and influence over these entities , limitations on our involvement in the day-to-day operations and the present inability of the entities to provide timely financial information prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the united states ( 201cus gaap 201d ) . 2022 other equity method investments infraservs . we hold indirect ownership interests in several infraserv groups in germany that own and develop industrial parks and provide on-site general and administrative support to tenants . the table below represents our equity investments in infraserv ventures as of december 31 , 2011: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | infraserv gmbh & co . gendorf kg | infraserv gmbh & co . knapsack kg | infraserv gmbh & co . hoechst kg |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| ownership % (  % ) | 39.0 | 27.0 | 32.0 |', 'question': 'how much does that change represent in relation to the this amount?', 'ops': 'subtract(78, 71), divide(#0, 71)', 'id': 'Single_CE/2011/page_17.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': "korea engineering plastics co. , ltd . founded in 1987 , kepco is the leading producer of pom in south korea . kepco is a venture between celanese's ticona business ( 50% ( 50 % ) ) , mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . ( 40% ( 40 % ) ) and mitsubishi corporation ( 10% ( 10 % ) ) . kepco has polyacetal production facilities in ulsan , south korea , compounding facilities for pbt and nylon in pyongtaek , south korea , and participates with polyplastics and mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . in a world-scale pom facility in nantong , china . polyplastics co. , ltd . polyplastics is a leading supplier of engineered plastics in the asia-pacific region and is a venture between daicel chemical industries ltd. , japan ( 55% ( 55 % ) ) , and celanese's ticona business ( 45% ( 45 % ) ) . established in 1964 , polyplastics is a producer and marketer of pom and lcp in the asia-pacific region , with principal production facilities located in japan , taiwan , malaysia and china . fortron industries llc . fortron is a leading global producer of polyphenylene sulfide ( 201cpps 201d ) , sold under the fortron ae brand , which is used in a wide variety of automotive and other applications , especially those requiring heat and/or chemical resistance . established in 1992 , fortron is a limited liability company whose members are ticona fortron inc . ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of cna holdings , llc ) and kureha corporation ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of kureha chemical industry co. , ltd . of japan ) . fortron's facility is located in wilmington , north carolina . this venture combines the sales , marketing , distribution , compounding and manufacturing expertise of celanese with the pps polymer technology expertise of kureha . china acetate strategic ventures . we hold an approximate 30% ( 30 % ) ownership interest in three separate acetate production ventures in china . these include the nantong cellulose fibers co . ltd. , kunming cellulose fibers co . ltd . and zhuhai cellulose fibers co . ltd . the china national tobacco corporation , the chinese state-owned tobacco entity , controls the remaining ownership interest in each of these ventures . with an estimated 30% ( 30 % ) share of the world's cigarette production and consumption , china is the world's largest and fastest growing area for acetate tow products according to the 2009 stanford research institute international chemical economics handbook . combined , these ventures are a leader in chinese domestic acetate production and are well positioned to supply chinese cigarette producers . in december 2009 , we announced plans with china national tobacco to expand our acetate flake and tow capacity at our venture's nantong facility and we received formal approval for the expansions , each by 30000 tons , during 2010 . since their inception in 1986 , the china acetate ventures have completed 12 expansions , leading to earnings growth and increased dividends . our chinese acetate ventures fund their operations using operating cash flow . during 2011 , we made contributions of $ 8 million related to the capacity expansions in nantong and have committed contributions of $ 9 million in 2012 . in 2010 , we made contributions of $ 12 million . our chinese acetate ventures pay a dividend in the second quarter of each fiscal year , based on the ventures' performance for the preceding year . in 2011 , 2010 and 2009 , we received cash dividends of $ 78 million , $ 71 million and $ 56 million , respectively . although our ownership interest in each of our china acetate ventures exceeds 20% ( 20 % ) , we account for these investments using the cost method of accounting because we determined that we cannot exercise significant influence over these entities due to local government investment in and influence over these entities , limitations on our involvement in the day-to-day operations and the present inability of the entities to provide timely financial information prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the united states ( 201cus gaap 201d ) . 2022 other equity method investments infraservs . we hold indirect ownership interests in several infraserv groups in germany that own and develop industrial parks and provide on-site general and administrative support to tenants . the table below represents our equity investments in infraserv ventures as of december 31 , 2011: .", 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'ownership % (  % )': {'infraserv gmbh & co . gendorf kg': 39.0, 'infraserv gmbh & co . knapsack kg': 27.0, 'infraserv gmbh & co . hoechst kg': 32.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2011?', 'and what was that of 2010?', 'what was the change in value over the year?', 'what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2010?', 'how much does that change represent in relation to the this amount?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['78', '71', '7', '71', '9.9%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['78', '71', 'subtract(78, 71)', '71', 'subtract(78, 71), divide(#0, 71)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [78.0, 71.0, 7.0, 71.0, 0.09859], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.09859}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "21s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:39 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the difference between the price of masco in 2010 and the starting value as of 12/31/05?\nA1: -48.49', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nperformance graph the table below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on our common stock with the cumulative total return of ( i ) the standard & poor 2019s 500 composite stock index ( 201cs&p 500 index 201d ) , ( ii ) the standard & poor 2019s industrials index ( 201cs&p industrials index 201d ) and ( iii ) the standard & poor 2019s consumer durables & apparel index ( 201cs&p consumer durables & apparel index 201d ) , from december 31 , 2005 through december 31 , 2010 , when the closing price of our common stock was $ 12.66 . the graph assumes investments of $ 100 on december 31 , 2005 in our common stock and in each of the three indices and the reinvestment of dividends . performance graph 201020092008200720062005 s&p 500 index s&p industrials index s&p consumer durables & apparel index the table below sets forth the value , as of december 31 for each of the years indicated , of a $ 100 investment made on december 31 , 2005 in each of our common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p industrials index and the s&p consumer durables & apparel index and includes the reinvestment of dividends. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin july 2007 , our board of directors authorized the purchase of up to 50 million shares of our common stock in open-market transactions or otherwise . at december 31 , 2010 , we had remaining authorization to repurchase up to 27 million shares . during 2010 , we repurchased and retired three million shares of our common stock , for cash aggregating $ 45 million to offset the dilutive impact of the 2010 grant of three million shares of long-term stock awards . we did not purchase any shares during the three months ended december 31 , 2010. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2006 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 |\n| 2007 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 |\n| 2008 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 |\n| 2009 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 |\n| 2010 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 |', 'question': 'so what was the percentage growth during that time?', 'ops': 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'id': 'Single_MAS/2010/page_29.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': 'performance graph the table below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on our common stock with the cumulative total return of ( i ) the standard & poor 2019s 500 composite stock index ( 201cs&p 500 index 201d ) , ( ii ) the standard & poor 2019s industrials index ( 201cs&p industrials index 201d ) and ( iii ) the standard & poor 2019s consumer durables & apparel index ( 201cs&p consumer durables & apparel index 201d ) , from december 31 , 2005 through december 31 , 2010 , when the closing price of our common stock was $ 12.66 . the graph assumes investments of $ 100 on december 31 , 2005 in our common stock and in each of the three indices and the reinvestment of dividends . performance graph 201020092008200720062005 s&p 500 index s&p industrials index s&p consumer durables & apparel index the table below sets forth the value , as of december 31 for each of the years indicated , of a $ 100 investment made on december 31 , 2005 in each of our common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p industrials index and the s&p consumer durables & apparel index and includes the reinvestment of dividends. .', 'doc_post_text': 'in july 2007 , our board of directors authorized the purchase of up to 50 million shares of our common stock in open-market transactions or otherwise . at december 31 , 2010 , we had remaining authorization to repurchase up to 27 million shares . during 2010 , we repurchased and retired three million shares of our common stock , for cash aggregating $ 45 million to offset the dilutive impact of the 2010 grant of three million shares of long-term stock awards . we did not purchase any shares during the three months ended december 31 , 2010. .', 'doc_table': {'2006': {'masco': 101.79, 's&p 500 index': 115.61, 's&p industrials index': 113.16, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 106.16}, '2007': {'masco': 76.74, 's&p 500 index': 121.95, 's&p industrials index': 126.72, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 84.5}, '2008': {'masco': 42.81, 's&p 500 index': 77.38, 's&p industrials index': 76.79, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 56.13}, '2009': {'masco': 54.89, 's&p 500 index': 97.44, 's&p industrials index': 92.3, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 76.51}, '2010': {'masco': 51.51, 's&p 500 index': 111.89, 's&p industrials index': 116.64, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 99.87}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the difference between the price of masco in 2010 and the starting value as of 12/31/05?', 'so what was the percentage growth during that time?', 'what was the difference between the price of the s&p 500 in 2010 and the starting value as of 12/31/05?', 'and the original investment again?', 'so what was the growth rate of s&p 500 during this time?', 'what was the difference between the two growth rates?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['-48.49', '-48.49%', '11.89', '100', '11.89%', '-60.38%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(51.51, 100)', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(111.89, 100)', '100', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(111.89, 100), divide(#2, 100)', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(111.89, 100), divide(#2, 100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [-48.49, -0.4849, 11.89, 100.0, 0.1189, -0.6038], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -0.4849}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "21s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:39 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: as of december 31, 2011, what was the amount of noncancelable operating leases?\nA1: 185.0\nQ2: and what was the total of future obligations?\nA2: 345.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n2322 t . r o w e p r i c e g r o u p a n n u a l r e p o r t 2 0 1 1 c o n t r a c t u a l o b l i g at i o n s the following table presents a summary of our future obligations ( in a0millions ) under the terms of existing operating leases and other contractual cash purchase commitments at december 31 , 2011 . other purchase commitments include contractual amounts that will be due for the purchase of goods or services to be used in our operations and may be cancelable at earlier times than those indicated , under certain conditions that may involve termination fees . because these obligations are generally of a normal recurring nature , we expect that we will fund them from future cash flows from operations . the information presented does not include operating expenses or capital expenditures that will be committed in the normal course of operations in 2012 and future years . the information also excludes the $ 4.7 a0million of uncertain tax positions discussed in note 9 to our consolidated financial statements because it is not possible to estimate the time period in which a payment might be made to the tax authorities. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nwe also have outstanding commitments to fund additional contributions to investment partnerships in which we have an existing investment totaling $ 42.5 a0million at december 31 , 2011 . c r i t i c a l a c c o u n t i n g p o l i c i e s the preparation of financial statements often requires the selection of specific accounting methods and policies from among several acceptable alternatives . further , significant estimates and judgments may be required in selecting and applying those methods and policies in the recognition of the assets and liabilities in our balance sheet , the revenues and expenses in our statement of income , and the information that is contained in our significant accounting policies and notes to consolidated financial statements . making these estimates and judgments requires the analysis of information concerning events that may not yet be complete and of facts and circumstances that may change over time . accordingly , actual amounts or future results can differ materially from those estimates that we include currently in our consolidated financial statements , significant accounting policies , and notes . we present those significant accounting policies used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements as an integral part of those statements within this 2011 annual report . in the following discussion , we highlight and explain further certain of those policies that are most critical to the preparation and understanding of our financial statements . other than temporary impairments of available-for-sale securities . we generally classify our investment holdings in sponsored mutual funds and the debt securities held for investment by our savings bank subsidiary as available-for-sale . at the end of each quarter , we mark the carrying amount of each investment holding to fair value and recognize an unrealized gain or loss as a component of comprehensive income within the statement of stockholders 2019 equity . we next review each individual security position that has an unrealized loss or impairment to determine if that impairment is other than temporary . in determining whether a mutual fund holding is other than temporarily impaired , we consider many factors , including the duration of time it has existed , the severity of the impairment , any subsequent changes in value , and our intent and ability to hold the security for a period of time sufficient for an anticipated recovery in fair value . subject to the other considerations noted above , with respect to duration of time , we believe a mutual fund holding with an unrealized loss that has persisted daily throughout the six months between quarter-ends is generally presumed to have an other than temporary impairment . we may also recognize an other than temporary loss of less than six months in our statement of income if the particular circumstances of the underlying investment do not warrant our belief that a near-term recovery is possible . an impaired debt security held by our savings bank subsidiary is considered to have an other than temporary loss that we will recognize in our statement of income if the impairment is caused by a change in credit quality that affects our ability to recover our amortized cost or if we intend to sell the security or believe that it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the security before recovering cost . minor impairments of 5% ( 5 % ) or less are generally considered temporary . other than temporary impairments of equity method investments . we evaluate our equity method investments , including our investment in uti , for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the investment exceeds its fair value , and the decline in fair value is other than temporary . goodwill . we internally conduct , manage and report our operations as one investment advisory business . we do not have distinct operating segments or components that separately constitute a business . accordingly , we attribute goodwill to a single reportable business segment and reporting unit 2014our investment advisory business . we evaluate the carrying amount of goodwill in our balance sheet for possible impairment on an annual basis in the third quarter of each year using a fair value approach . goodwill would be considered impaired whenever our historical carrying amount exceeds the fair value of our investment advisory business . our annual testing has demonstrated that the fair value of our investment advisory business ( our market capitalization ) exceeds our carrying amount ( our stockholders 2019 equity ) and , therefore , no impairment exists . should we reach a different conclusion in the future , additional work would be performed to ascertain the amount of the non-cash impairment charge to be recognized . we must also perform impairment testing at other times if an event or circumstance occurs indicating that it is more likely than not that an impairment has been incurred . the maximum future impairment of goodwill that we could incur is the amount recognized in our balance sheet , $ 665.7 a0million . stock options . we recognize stock option-based compensation expense in our consolidated statement of income using a fair value based method . fair value methods use a valuation model for shorter-term , market-traded financial instruments to theoretically value stock option grants even though they are not available for trading and are of longer duration . the black- scholes option-pricing model that we use includes the input of certain variables that are dependent on future expectations , including the expected lives of our options from grant date to exercise date , the volatility of our underlying common shares in the market over that time period , and the rate of dividends that we will pay during that time . our estimates of these variables are made for the purpose of using the valuation model to determine an expense for each reporting period and are not subsequently adjusted . unlike most of our expenses , the resulting charge to earnings using a fair value based method is a non-cash charge that is never measured by , or adjusted based on , a cash outflow . provision for income taxes . after compensation and related costs , our provision for income taxes on our earnings is our largest annual expense . we operate in numerous states and countries through our various subsidiaries , and must allocate our income , expenses , and earnings under the various laws and regulations of each of these taxing jurisdictions . accordingly , our provision for income taxes represents our total estimate of the liability that we have incurred in doing business each year in all of our locations . annually , we file tax returns that represent our filing positions with each jurisdiction and settle our return liabilities . each jurisdiction has the right to audit those returns and may take different positions with respect to income and expense allocations and taxable earnings determinations . from time to time , we may also provide for estimated liabilities associated with uncertain tax return filing positions that are subject to , or in the process of , being audited by various tax authorities . because the determination of our annual provision is subject to judgments and estimates , it is likely that actual results will vary from those recognized in our financial statements . as a result , we recognize additions to , or reductions of , income tax expense during a reporting period that pertain to prior period provisions as our estimated liabilities are revised and actual tax returns and tax audits are settled . we recognize any such prior period adjustment in the discrete quarterly period in which it is determined . n e w ly i s s u e d b u t n o t y e t a d o p t e d a c c o u n t i n g g u i d a n c e in may 2011 , the fasb issued amended guidance clarifying how to measure and disclose fair value . we do not believe the adoption of such amended guidance on january 1 , 2012 , will have a significant effect on our consolidated financial statements . we have also considered all other newly issued accounting guidance that is applicable to our operations and the preparation of our consolidated statements , including that which we have not yet adopted . we do not believe that any such guidance will have a material effect on our financial position or results of operation. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| total | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 |\n| 2012 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 |\n| 2013-14 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 |\n| 2015-16 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 |\n| later | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 |', 'question': 'what percentage, then, does that amount represent in relation to this total?', 'ops': 'divide(185, 345)', 'id': 'Double_TROW/2011/page_13.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': '2322 t . r o w e p r i c e g r o u p a n n u a l r e p o r t 2 0 1 1 c o n t r a c t u a l o b l i g at i o n s the following table presents a summary of our future obligations ( in a0millions ) under the terms of existing operating leases and other contractual cash purchase commitments at december 31 , 2011 . other purchase commitments include contractual amounts that will be due for the purchase of goods or services to be used in our operations and may be cancelable at earlier times than those indicated , under certain conditions that may involve termination fees . because these obligations are generally of a normal recurring nature , we expect that we will fund them from future cash flows from operations . the information presented does not include operating expenses or capital expenditures that will be committed in the normal course of operations in 2012 and future years . the information also excludes the $ 4.7 a0million of uncertain tax positions discussed in note 9 to our consolidated financial statements because it is not possible to estimate the time period in which a payment might be made to the tax authorities. .', 'doc_post_text': 'we also have outstanding commitments to fund additional contributions to investment partnerships in which we have an existing investment totaling $ 42.5 a0million at december 31 , 2011 . c r i t i c a l a c c o u n t i n g p o l i c i e s the preparation of financial statements often requires the selection of specific accounting methods and policies from among several acceptable alternatives . further , significant estimates and judgments may be required in selecting and applying those methods and policies in the recognition of the assets and liabilities in our balance sheet , the revenues and expenses in our statement of income , and the information that is contained in our significant accounting policies and notes to consolidated financial statements . making these estimates and judgments requires the analysis of information concerning events that may not yet be complete and of facts and circumstances that may change over time . accordingly , actual amounts or future results can differ materially from those estimates that we include currently in our consolidated financial statements , significant accounting policies , and notes . we present those significant accounting policies used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements as an integral part of those statements within this 2011 annual report . in the following discussion , we highlight and explain further certain of those policies that are most critical to the preparation and understanding of our financial statements . other than temporary impairments of available-for-sale securities . we generally classify our investment holdings in sponsored mutual funds and the debt securities held for investment by our savings bank subsidiary as available-for-sale . at the end of each quarter , we mark the carrying amount of each investment holding to fair value and recognize an unrealized gain or loss as a component of comprehensive income within the statement of stockholders 2019 equity . we next review each individual security position that has an unrealized loss or impairment to determine if that impairment is other than temporary . in determining whether a mutual fund holding is other than temporarily impaired , we consider many factors , including the duration of time it has existed , the severity of the impairment , any subsequent changes in value , and our intent and ability to hold the security for a period of time sufficient for an anticipated recovery in fair value . subject to the other considerations noted above , with respect to duration of time , we believe a mutual fund holding with an unrealized loss that has persisted daily throughout the six months between quarter-ends is generally presumed to have an other than temporary impairment . we may also recognize an other than temporary loss of less than six months in our statement of income if the particular circumstances of the underlying investment do not warrant our belief that a near-term recovery is possible . an impaired debt security held by our savings bank subsidiary is considered to have an other than temporary loss that we will recognize in our statement of income if the impairment is caused by a change in credit quality that affects our ability to recover our amortized cost or if we intend to sell the security or believe that it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the security before recovering cost . minor impairments of 5% ( 5 % ) or less are generally considered temporary . other than temporary impairments of equity method investments . we evaluate our equity method investments , including our investment in uti , for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the investment exceeds its fair value , and the decline in fair value is other than temporary . goodwill . we internally conduct , manage and report our operations as one investment advisory business . we do not have distinct operating segments or components that separately constitute a business . accordingly , we attribute goodwill to a single reportable business segment and reporting unit 2014our investment advisory business . we evaluate the carrying amount of goodwill in our balance sheet for possible impairment on an annual basis in the third quarter of each year using a fair value approach . goodwill would be considered impaired whenever our historical carrying amount exceeds the fair value of our investment advisory business . our annual testing has demonstrated that the fair value of our investment advisory business ( our market capitalization ) exceeds our carrying amount ( our stockholders 2019 equity ) and , therefore , no impairment exists . should we reach a different conclusion in the future , additional work would be performed to ascertain the amount of the non-cash impairment charge to be recognized . we must also perform impairment testing at other times if an event or circumstance occurs indicating that it is more likely than not that an impairment has been incurred . the maximum future impairment of goodwill that we could incur is the amount recognized in our balance sheet , $ 665.7 a0million . stock options . we recognize stock option-based compensation expense in our consolidated statement of income using a fair value based method . fair value methods use a valuation model for shorter-term , market-traded financial instruments to theoretically value stock option grants even though they are not available for trading and are of longer duration . the black- scholes option-pricing model that we use includes the input of certain variables that are dependent on future expectations , including the expected lives of our options from grant date to exercise date , the volatility of our underlying common shares in the market over that time period , and the rate of dividends that we will pay during that time . our estimates of these variables are made for the purpose of using the valuation model to determine an expense for each reporting period and are not subsequently adjusted . unlike most of our expenses , the resulting charge to earnings using a fair value based method is a non-cash charge that is never measured by , or adjusted based on , a cash outflow . provision for income taxes . after compensation and related costs , our provision for income taxes on our earnings is our largest annual expense . we operate in numerous states and countries through our various subsidiaries , and must allocate our income , expenses , and earnings under the various laws and regulations of each of these taxing jurisdictions . accordingly , our provision for income taxes represents our total estimate of the liability that we have incurred in doing business each year in all of our locations . annually , we file tax returns that represent our filing positions with each jurisdiction and settle our return liabilities . each jurisdiction has the right to audit those returns and may take different positions with respect to income and expense allocations and taxable earnings determinations . from time to time , we may also provide for estimated liabilities associated with uncertain tax return filing positions that are subject to , or in the process of , being audited by various tax authorities . because the determination of our annual provision is subject to judgments and estimates , it is likely that actual results will vary from those recognized in our financial statements . as a result , we recognize additions to , or reductions of , income tax expense during a reporting period that pertain to prior period provisions as our estimated liabilities are revised and actual tax returns and tax audits are settled . we recognize any such prior period adjustment in the discrete quarterly period in which it is determined . n e w ly i s s u e d b u t n o t y e t a d o p t e d a c c o u n t i n g g u i d a n c e in may 2011 , the fasb issued amended guidance clarifying how to measure and disclose fair value . we do not believe the adoption of such amended guidance on january 1 , 2012 , will have a significant effect on our consolidated financial statements . we have also considered all other newly issued accounting guidance that is applicable to our operations and the preparation of our consolidated statements , including that which we have not yet adopted . we do not believe that any such guidance will have a material effect on our financial position or results of operation. .', 'doc_table': {'total': {'noncancelable operating leases': 185.0, 'other purchase commitments': 160.0, 'total': 345.0}, '2012': {'noncancelable operating leases': 31.0, 'other purchase commitments': 112.0, 'total': 143.0}, '2013-14': {'noncancelable operating leases': 63.0, 'other purchase commitments': 38.0, 'total': 101.0}, '2015-16': {'noncancelable operating leases': 57.0, 'other purchase commitments': 10.0, 'total': 67.0}, 'later': {'noncancelable operating leases': 34.0, 'other purchase commitments': '-', 'total': 34.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['as of december 31, 2011, what was the amount of noncancelable operating leases?', 'and what was the total of future obligations?', 'what percentage, then, does that amount represent in relation to this total?', 'and what percentage do the other purchase commitments represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['185', '345', '0.53', '46%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['185', '345', 'divide(185, 345)', 'divide(160, 345)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [185.0, 345.0, 0.53623, 0.46377], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 0.53623}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:39 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in the value of a o smith corp from 2002 to 2007?\nA1: 42.72\nQ2: and how much does that change represent in relation to the original value in 2002?\nA2: 0.4272\nQ3: what was the value of the s&p 600 electrical equipment in 2007?\nA3: 253.33\nQ4: and what was the change in that value between 2002 and 2007?\nA4: 153.33', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nthe graph below shows a five-year comparison of the cumulative shareholder return on the company's common stock with the cumulative total return of the s&p smallcap 600 index and the s&p 600 electrical equipment index , all of which are published indices . comparison of five-year cumulative total return from december 31 , 2002 to december 31 , 2007 assumes $ 100 invested with reinvestment of dividends period indexed returns .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n12/31/02 12/31/03 12/31/04 12/31/05 12/31/06 12/31/07 smith ( a o ) corp s&p smallcap 600 index s&p 600 electrical equipment .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| baseperiod 12/31/02 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/03 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/04 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/05 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/06 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 |\n| 12/31/07 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 |', 'question': 'how much, then, does this change represent in relation to the original value of that stock in 2002?', 'ops': 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_AOS/2007/page_17.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': "the graph below shows a five-year comparison of the cumulative shareholder return on the company's common stock with the cumulative total return of the s&p smallcap 600 index and the s&p 600 electrical equipment index , all of which are published indices . comparison of five-year cumulative total return from december 31 , 2002 to december 31 , 2007 assumes $ 100 invested with reinvestment of dividends period indexed returns .", 'doc_post_text': '12/31/02 12/31/03 12/31/04 12/31/05 12/31/06 12/31/07 smith ( a o ) corp s&p smallcap 600 index s&p 600 electrical equipment .', 'doc_table': {'baseperiod 12/31/02': {'a o smith corp': 100.0, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 100.0, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 100.0}, 'baseperiod 12/31/03': {'a o smith corp': 132.23, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 138.79, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 126.12}, 'baseperiod 12/31/04': {'a o smith corp': 115.36, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 170.22, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 152.18}, 'baseperiod 12/31/05': {'a o smith corp': 138.2, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 183.3, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 169.07}, 'baseperiod 12/31/06': {'a o smith corp': 150.26, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 211.01, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 228.83}, '12/31/07': {'a o smith corp': 142.72, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 210.39, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 253.33}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in the value of a o smith corp from 2002 to 2007?', 'and how much does that change represent in relation to the original value in 2002?', 'what was the value of the s&p 600 electrical equipment in 2007?', 'and what was the change in that value between 2002 and 2007?', 'how much, then, does this change represent in relation to the original value of that stock in 2002?', 'and what was the difference between the return (or the change representation) of the a o smith corp and the one of the s&p 600 electrical equipment?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['42.72', '42.72%', '253.33', '153.33', '153.33%', '-110.61%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(142.72, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', '253.33', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [42.72, 0.4272, 253.33, 153.33, 1.5333, -1.1061], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1.5333}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:40 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the other income in 2006?\nA1: 118.0\nQ2: what about in 2005?\nA2: 145.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nincreased over 4% ( 4 % ) in 2005 , costs for trucking services provided by intermodal carriers remained flat as we substantially reduced expenses associated with network inefficiencies . higher diesel fuel prices increased sales and use taxes in 2005 , which resulted in higher state and local taxes . other contract expenses for equipment maintenance and other services increased in 2005 . the 2005 january west coast storm and hurricanes katrina and rita also contributed to higher expenses in 2005 ( net of insurance settlements received ) . partially offsetting these increases was a reduction in relocation expenses as we incurred higher relocation costs associated with moving support personnel to omaha , nebraska during 2004 . non-operating items millions of dollars 2006 2005 2004 % (  % ) change 2006 v 2005 % (  % ) change 2005 v 2004 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nother income 2013 lower net gains from non-operating asset sales and higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program resulted in a reduction in other income in 2006 , which was partially offset by higher rental income for the use of our right-of-way ( including 2006 settlements of rate disputes from prior years ) and cash investment returns due to higher interest rates . in 2005 , other income increased largely as a result of higher gains from real estate sales partially offset by higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program . interest expense 2013 lower interest expense in 2006 and 2005 was primarily due to declining weighted-average debt levels of $ 7.1 billion , $ 7.8 billion , and $ 8.1 billion in 2006 , 2005 , and 2004 , respectively . a higher effective interest rate of 6.7% ( 6.7 % ) in 2006 , compared to 6.5% ( 6.5 % ) in both 2005 and 2004 , partially offset the effects of the declining debt level . income taxes 2013 income tax expense was $ 509 million higher in 2006 than 2005 . higher pre-tax income resulted in additional taxes of $ 414 million and $ 118 million of the increase resulted from the one-time reduction in 2005 described below . our effective tax rate was 36.4% ( 36.4 % ) and 28.6% ( 28.6 % ) in 2006 and 2005 , respectively . income taxes were greater in 2005 than 2004 due to higher pre-tax income partially offset by a previously reported reduction in income tax expense . in our quarterly report on form 10-q for the quarter ended june 30 , 2005 , we reported that the corporation analyzed the impact that final settlements of pre-1995 tax years had on previously recorded estimates of deferred tax assets and liabilities . the completed analysis of the final settlements for pre-1995 tax years , along with internal revenue service examination reports for tax years 1995 through 2002 were considered , among other things , in a review and re-evaluation of the corporation 2019s estimated deferred tax assets and liabilities as of september 30 , 2005 , resulting in an income tax expense reduction of $ 118 million in .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2006 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 |\n| 2005 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 |\n| 2004 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 |\n| % (  % ) change 2006 v 2005 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 |\n| % (  % ) change 2005 v 2004 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 |', 'question': 'what is the sum for these two years?', 'ops': 'add(118, 145)', 'id': 'Double_UNP/2006/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'increased over 4% ( 4 % ) in 2005 , costs for trucking services provided by intermodal carriers remained flat as we substantially reduced expenses associated with network inefficiencies . higher diesel fuel prices increased sales and use taxes in 2005 , which resulted in higher state and local taxes . other contract expenses for equipment maintenance and other services increased in 2005 . the 2005 january west coast storm and hurricanes katrina and rita also contributed to higher expenses in 2005 ( net of insurance settlements received ) . partially offsetting these increases was a reduction in relocation expenses as we incurred higher relocation costs associated with moving support personnel to omaha , nebraska during 2004 . non-operating items millions of dollars 2006 2005 2004 % (  % ) change 2006 v 2005 % (  % ) change 2005 v 2004 .', 'doc_post_text': 'other income 2013 lower net gains from non-operating asset sales and higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program resulted in a reduction in other income in 2006 , which was partially offset by higher rental income for the use of our right-of-way ( including 2006 settlements of rate disputes from prior years ) and cash investment returns due to higher interest rates . in 2005 , other income increased largely as a result of higher gains from real estate sales partially offset by higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program . interest expense 2013 lower interest expense in 2006 and 2005 was primarily due to declining weighted-average debt levels of $ 7.1 billion , $ 7.8 billion , and $ 8.1 billion in 2006 , 2005 , and 2004 , respectively . a higher effective interest rate of 6.7% ( 6.7 % ) in 2006 , compared to 6.5% ( 6.5 % ) in both 2005 and 2004 , partially offset the effects of the declining debt level . income taxes 2013 income tax expense was $ 509 million higher in 2006 than 2005 . higher pre-tax income resulted in additional taxes of $ 414 million and $ 118 million of the increase resulted from the one-time reduction in 2005 described below . our effective tax rate was 36.4% ( 36.4 % ) and 28.6% ( 28.6 % ) in 2006 and 2005 , respectively . income taxes were greater in 2005 than 2004 due to higher pre-tax income partially offset by a previously reported reduction in income tax expense . in our quarterly report on form 10-q for the quarter ended june 30 , 2005 , we reported that the corporation analyzed the impact that final settlements of pre-1995 tax years had on previously recorded estimates of deferred tax assets and liabilities . the completed analysis of the final settlements for pre-1995 tax years , along with internal revenue service examination reports for tax years 1995 through 2002 were considered , among other things , in a review and re-evaluation of the corporation 2019s estimated deferred tax assets and liabilities as of september 30 , 2005 , resulting in an income tax expense reduction of $ 118 million in .', 'doc_table': {'2006': {'other income': 118.0, 'interest expense': -477.0, 'income taxes': -919.0}, '2005': {'other income': 145.0, 'interest expense': -504.0, 'income taxes': -410.0}, '2004': {'other income': 88.0, 'interest expense': -527.0, 'income taxes': -252.0}, '% (  % ) change 2006 v 2005': {'other income': -19.0, 'interest expense': -5.0, 'income taxes': 124.0}, '% (  % ) change 2005 v 2004': {'other income': -65.0, 'interest expense': -4.0, 'income taxes': 63.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the other income in 2006?', 'what about in 2005?', 'what is the sum for these two years?', 'what about in 2004?', 'what is the total for three years?', 'what is the average for these three years?', 'what is the net change in other income from 2004 to 2005?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['118', '145', '263', '88', '351', '117', '57'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['118', '145', 'add(118, 145)', '88', 'add(118, 145), add(#0, 88)', 'add(118, 145), add(#0, 88), divide(#1, const_3)', 'subtract(145, 88)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [118.0, 145.0, 263.0, 88.0, 351.0, 117.0, 57.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 263.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:40 WARNING dspy.utils.parallelizer: Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.
2025/07/29 14:25:40 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?\nA1: 68.4\nQ2: including the year of 2011, what would it then be?\nA2: 89.3\nQ3: including now the year of 2012 in the amount, what would the total estimated aggregate amortization expense be, in millions?\nA3: 106.3', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfor intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | revenue | net loss | revenue | net loss |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| year endedfebruary 12008 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 |\n| year endedfebruary 22007 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 |', 'question': 'what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense in 2013, in millions?', 'ops': '12.0', 'id': 'Single_DG/2008/page_86.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'for intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .', 'doc_post_text': 'the pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .', 'doc_table': {'year endedfebruary 12008': {'revenue': 9495246.0, 'net loss': -57939.0}, 'year endedfebruary 22007': {'revenue': 9169822.0, 'net loss': -156188.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?', 'including the year of 2011, what would it then be?', 'including now the year of 2012 in the amount, what would the total estimated aggregate amortization expense be, in millions?', 'what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense in 2013, in millions?', 'including 2013, what would now be the total sum in estimated aggregate amortization expense over those five years, in millions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['68.4', '89.3', '106.3', '12.0', '118.3'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(41.1, 27.3)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0)', '12.0', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0), add(#2, 12.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [68.4, 89.3, 106.3, 12.0, 118.3], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 12.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:40 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:40 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value of pension plans for 2017?\nA1: 3856.0\nQ2: and total plan contributions for that year?\nA2: 16745.0\nQ3: so what was the percentage of pension plan contributions out of the total?\nA3: 0.23028', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n112 / sl green realty corp . 2017 annual report 20 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings as of december a031 , 2017 , the company and the operating partnership were not involved in any material litigation nor , to management 2019s knowledge , was any material litigation threat- ened against us or our portfolio which if adversely determined could have a material adverse impact on us . environmental matters our management believes that the properties are in compliance in all material respects with applicable federal , state and local ordinances and regulations regarding environmental issues . management is not aware of any environmental liability that it believes would have a materially adverse impact on our financial position , results of operations or cash flows . management is unaware of any instances in which it would incur significant envi- ronmental cost if any of our properties were sold . employment agreements we have entered into employment agreements with certain exec- utives , which expire between december a02018 and february a02020 . the minimum cash-based compensation , including base sal- ary and guaranteed bonus payments , associated with these employment agreements total $ 5.4 a0million for 2018 . in addition these employment agreements provide for deferred compen- sation awards based on our stock price and which were valued at $ 1.6 a0million on the grant date . the value of these awards may change based on fluctuations in our stock price . insurance we maintain 201call-risk 201d property and rental value coverage ( includ- ing coverage regarding the perils of flood , earthquake and terrorism , excluding nuclear , biological , chemical , and radiological terrorism ( 201cnbcr 201d ) ) , within three property insurance programs and liability insurance . separate property and liability coverage may be purchased on a stand-alone basis for certain assets , such as the development of one vanderbilt . additionally , our captive insurance company , belmont insurance company , or belmont , pro- vides coverage for nbcr terrorist acts above a specified trigger , although if belmont is required to pay a claim under our insur- ance policies , we would ultimately record the loss to the extent of belmont 2019s required payment . however , there is no assurance that in the future we will be able to procure coverage at a reasonable cost . further , if we experience losses that are uninsured or that exceed policy limits , we could lose the capital invested in the damaged properties as well as the anticipated future cash flows from those plan trustees adopted a rehabilitation plan consistent with this requirement . no surcharges have been paid to the pension plan as of december a031 , 2017 . for the pension plan years ended june a030 , 2017 , 2016 , and 2015 , the plan received contributions from employers totaling $ 257.8 a0million , $ 249.5 a0million , and $ 221.9 a0million . our contributions to the pension plan represent less than 5.0% ( 5.0 % ) of total contributions to the plan . the health plan was established under the terms of collective bargaining agreements between the union , the realty advisory board on labor relations , inc . and certain other employees . the health plan provides health and other benefits to eligible participants employed in the building service industry who are covered under collective bargaining agreements , or other writ- ten agreements , with the union . the health plan is administered by a board of trustees with equal representation by the employ- ers and the union and operates under employer identification number a013-2928869 . the health plan receives contributions in accordance with collective bargaining agreements or participa- tion agreements . generally , these agreements provide that the employers contribute to the health plan at a fixed rate on behalf of each covered employee . for the health plan years ended , june a030 , 2017 , 2016 , and 2015 , the plan received contributions from employers totaling $ 1.3 a0billion , $ 1.2 a0billion and $ 1.1 a0billion , respectively . our contributions to the health plan represent less than 5.0% ( 5.0 % ) of total contributions to the plan . contributions we made to the multi-employer plans for the years ended december a031 , 2017 , 2016 and 2015 are included in the table below ( in thousands ) : .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n401 ( k ) plan in august a01997 , we implemented a 401 ( k ) a0savings/retirement plan , or the 401 ( k ) a0plan , to cover eligible employees of ours , and any designated affiliate . the 401 ( k ) a0plan permits eligible employees to defer up to 15% ( 15 % ) of their annual compensation , subject to certain limitations imposed by the code . the employees 2019 elective deferrals are immediately vested and non-forfeitable upon contribution to the 401 ( k ) a0plan . during a02003 , we amended our 401 ( k ) a0plan to pro- vide for discretionary matching contributions only . for 2017 , 2016 and 2015 , a matching contribution equal to 50% ( 50 % ) of the first 6% ( 6 % ) of annual compensation was made . for the year ended december a031 , 2017 , we made a matching contribution of $ 728782 . for the years ended december a031 , 2016 and 2015 , we made matching contribu- tions of $ 566000 and $ 550000 , respectively. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | pension plan | health plan | other plans | total plan contributions | pension plan | health plan | other plans | total plan contributions | pension plan | health plan | other plans | total plan contributions |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2017 | 3856.0 | 11426.0 | 1463.0 | 16745.0 | 3856.0 | 11426.0 | 1463.0 | 16745.0 | 3856.0 | 11426.0 | 1463.0 | 16745.0 |\n| 2016 | 3979.0 | 11530.0 | 1583.0 | 17092.0 | 3979.0 | 11530.0 | 1583.0 | 17092.0 | 3979.0 | 11530.0 | 1583.0 | 17092.0 |\n| 2015 | 2732.0 | 8736.0 | 5716.0 | 17184.0 | 2732.0 | 8736.0 | 5716.0 | 17184.0 | 2732.0 | 8736.0 | 5716.0 | 17184.0 |', 'question': 'and converted to a percentage value?', 'ops': 'divide(3856, 16745), multiply(#0, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_SLG/2017/page_114.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': '112 / sl green realty corp . 2017 annual report 20 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings as of december a031 , 2017 , the company and the operating partnership were not involved in any material litigation nor , to management 2019s knowledge , was any material litigation threat- ened against us or our portfolio which if adversely determined could have a material adverse impact on us . environmental matters our management believes that the properties are in compliance in all material respects with applicable federal , state and local ordinances and regulations regarding environmental issues . management is not aware of any environmental liability that it believes would have a materially adverse impact on our financial position , results of operations or cash flows . management is unaware of any instances in which it would incur significant envi- ronmental cost if any of our properties were sold . employment agreements we have entered into employment agreements with certain exec- utives , which expire between december a02018 and february a02020 . the minimum cash-based compensation , including base sal- ary and guaranteed bonus payments , associated with these employment agreements total $ 5.4 a0million for 2018 . in addition these employment agreements provide for deferred compen- sation awards based on our stock price and which were valued at $ 1.6 a0million on the grant date . the value of these awards may change based on fluctuations in our stock price . insurance we maintain 201call-risk 201d property and rental value coverage ( includ- ing coverage regarding the perils of flood , earthquake and terrorism , excluding nuclear , biological , chemical , and radiological terrorism ( 201cnbcr 201d ) ) , within three property insurance programs and liability insurance . separate property and liability coverage may be purchased on a stand-alone basis for certain assets , such as the development of one vanderbilt . additionally , our captive insurance company , belmont insurance company , or belmont , pro- vides coverage for nbcr terrorist acts above a specified trigger , although if belmont is required to pay a claim under our insur- ance policies , we would ultimately record the loss to the extent of belmont 2019s required payment . however , there is no assurance that in the future we will be able to procure coverage at a reasonable cost . further , if we experience losses that are uninsured or that exceed policy limits , we could lose the capital invested in the damaged properties as well as the anticipated future cash flows from those plan trustees adopted a rehabilitation plan consistent with this requirement . no surcharges have been paid to the pension plan as of december a031 , 2017 . for the pension plan years ended june a030 , 2017 , 2016 , and 2015 , the plan received contributions from employers totaling $ 257.8 a0million , $ 249.5 a0million , and $ 221.9 a0million . our contributions to the pension plan represent less than 5.0% ( 5.0 % ) of total contributions to the plan . the health plan was established under the terms of collective bargaining agreements between the union , the realty advisory board on labor relations , inc . and certain other employees . the health plan provides health and other benefits to eligible participants employed in the building service industry who are covered under collective bargaining agreements , or other writ- ten agreements , with the union . the health plan is administered by a board of trustees with equal representation by the employ- ers and the union and operates under employer identification number a013-2928869 . the health plan receives contributions in accordance with collective bargaining agreements or participa- tion agreements . generally , these agreements provide that the employers contribute to the health plan at a fixed rate on behalf of each covered employee . for the health plan years ended , june a030 , 2017 , 2016 , and 2015 , the plan received contributions from employers totaling $ 1.3 a0billion , $ 1.2 a0billion and $ 1.1 a0billion , respectively . our contributions to the health plan represent less than 5.0% ( 5.0 % ) of total contributions to the plan . contributions we made to the multi-employer plans for the years ended december a031 , 2017 , 2016 and 2015 are included in the table below ( in thousands ) : .', 'doc_post_text': '401 ( k ) plan in august a01997 , we implemented a 401 ( k ) a0savings/retirement plan , or the 401 ( k ) a0plan , to cover eligible employees of ours , and any designated affiliate . the 401 ( k ) a0plan permits eligible employees to defer up to 15% ( 15 % ) of their annual compensation , subject to certain limitations imposed by the code . the employees 2019 elective deferrals are immediately vested and non-forfeitable upon contribution to the 401 ( k ) a0plan . during a02003 , we amended our 401 ( k ) a0plan to pro- vide for discretionary matching contributions only . for 2017 , 2016 and 2015 , a matching contribution equal to 50% ( 50 % ) of the first 6% ( 6 % ) of annual compensation was made . for the year ended december a031 , 2017 , we made a matching contribution of $ 728782 . for the years ended december a031 , 2016 and 2015 , we made matching contribu- tions of $ 566000 and $ 550000 , respectively. .', 'doc_table': {'2017': {'pension plan': 3856.0, 'health plan': 11426.0, 'other plans': 1463.0, 'total plan contributions': 16745.0}, '2016': {'pension plan': 3979.0, 'health plan': 11530.0, 'other plans': 1583.0, 'total plan contributions': 17092.0}, '2015': {'pension plan': 2732.0, 'health plan': 8736.0, 'other plans': 5716.0, 'total plan contributions': 17184.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of pension plans for 2017?', 'and total plan contributions for that year?', 'so what was the percentage of pension plan contributions out of the total?', 'and converted to a percentage value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3856', '16745', '0.23', '23'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3856', '16745', 'divide(3856, 16745)', 'divide(3856, 16745), multiply(#0, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3856.0, 16745.0, 0.23028, 23.02777], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 23.02777}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:41 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nkorea engineering plastics co. , ltd . founded in 1987 , kepco is the leading producer of pom in south korea . kepco is a venture between celanese's ticona business ( 50% ( 50 % ) ) , mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . ( 40% ( 40 % ) ) and mitsubishi corporation ( 10% ( 10 % ) ) . kepco has polyacetal production facilities in ulsan , south korea , compounding facilities for pbt and nylon in pyongtaek , south korea , and participates with polyplastics and mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . in a world-scale pom facility in nantong , china . polyplastics co. , ltd . polyplastics is a leading supplier of engineered plastics in the asia-pacific region and is a venture between daicel chemical industries ltd. , japan ( 55% ( 55 % ) ) , and celanese's ticona business ( 45% ( 45 % ) ) . established in 1964 , polyplastics is a producer and marketer of pom and lcp in the asia-pacific region , with principal production facilities located in japan , taiwan , malaysia and china . fortron industries llc . fortron is a leading global producer of polyphenylene sulfide ( 201cpps 201d ) , sold under the fortron ae brand , which is used in a wide variety of automotive and other applications , especially those requiring heat and/or chemical resistance . established in 1992 , fortron is a limited liability company whose members are ticona fortron inc . ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of cna holdings , llc ) and kureha corporation ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of kureha chemical industry co. , ltd . of japan ) . fortron's facility is located in wilmington , north carolina . this venture combines the sales , marketing , distribution , compounding and manufacturing expertise of celanese with the pps polymer technology expertise of kureha . china acetate strategic ventures . we hold an approximate 30% ( 30 % ) ownership interest in three separate acetate production ventures in china . these include the nantong cellulose fibers co . ltd. , kunming cellulose fibers co . ltd . and zhuhai cellulose fibers co . ltd . the china national tobacco corporation , the chinese state-owned tobacco entity , controls the remaining ownership interest in each of these ventures . with an estimated 30% ( 30 % ) share of the world's cigarette production and consumption , china is the world's largest and fastest growing area for acetate tow products according to the 2009 stanford research institute international chemical economics handbook . combined , these ventures are a leader in chinese domestic acetate production and are well positioned to supply chinese cigarette producers . in december 2009 , we announced plans with china national tobacco to expand our acetate flake and tow capacity at our venture's nantong facility and we received formal approval for the expansions , each by 30000 tons , during 2010 . since their inception in 1986 , the china acetate ventures have completed 12 expansions , leading to earnings growth and increased dividends . our chinese acetate ventures fund their operations using operating cash flow . during 2011 , we made contributions of $ 8 million related to the capacity expansions in nantong and have committed contributions of $ 9 million in 2012 . in 2010 , we made contributions of $ 12 million . our chinese acetate ventures pay a dividend in the second quarter of each fiscal year , based on the ventures' performance for the preceding year . in 2011 , 2010 and 2009 , we received cash dividends of $ 78 million , $ 71 million and $ 56 million , respectively . although our ownership interest in each of our china acetate ventures exceeds 20% ( 20 % ) , we account for these investments using the cost method of accounting because we determined that we cannot exercise significant influence over these entities due to local government investment in and influence over these entities , limitations on our involvement in the day-to-day operations and the present inability of the entities to provide timely financial information prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the united states ( 201cus gaap 201d ) . 2022 other equity method investments infraservs . we hold indirect ownership interests in several infraserv groups in germany that own and develop industrial parks and provide on-site general and administrative support to tenants . the table below represents our equity investments in infraserv ventures as of december 31 , 2011: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | infraserv gmbh & co . gendorf kg | infraserv gmbh & co . knapsack kg | infraserv gmbh & co . hoechst kg |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| ownership % (  % ) | 39.0 | 27.0 | 32.0 |', 'question': 'what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2011?', 'ops': '78', 'id': 'Single_CE/2011/page_17.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': "korea engineering plastics co. , ltd . founded in 1987 , kepco is the leading producer of pom in south korea . kepco is a venture between celanese's ticona business ( 50% ( 50 % ) ) , mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . ( 40% ( 40 % ) ) and mitsubishi corporation ( 10% ( 10 % ) ) . kepco has polyacetal production facilities in ulsan , south korea , compounding facilities for pbt and nylon in pyongtaek , south korea , and participates with polyplastics and mitsubishi gas chemical company , inc . in a world-scale pom facility in nantong , china . polyplastics co. , ltd . polyplastics is a leading supplier of engineered plastics in the asia-pacific region and is a venture between daicel chemical industries ltd. , japan ( 55% ( 55 % ) ) , and celanese's ticona business ( 45% ( 45 % ) ) . established in 1964 , polyplastics is a producer and marketer of pom and lcp in the asia-pacific region , with principal production facilities located in japan , taiwan , malaysia and china . fortron industries llc . fortron is a leading global producer of polyphenylene sulfide ( 201cpps 201d ) , sold under the fortron ae brand , which is used in a wide variety of automotive and other applications , especially those requiring heat and/or chemical resistance . established in 1992 , fortron is a limited liability company whose members are ticona fortron inc . ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of cna holdings , llc ) and kureha corporation ( 50% ( 50 % ) ownership and a wholly-owned subsidiary of kureha chemical industry co. , ltd . of japan ) . fortron's facility is located in wilmington , north carolina . this venture combines the sales , marketing , distribution , compounding and manufacturing expertise of celanese with the pps polymer technology expertise of kureha . china acetate strategic ventures . we hold an approximate 30% ( 30 % ) ownership interest in three separate acetate production ventures in china . these include the nantong cellulose fibers co . ltd. , kunming cellulose fibers co . ltd . and zhuhai cellulose fibers co . ltd . the china national tobacco corporation , the chinese state-owned tobacco entity , controls the remaining ownership interest in each of these ventures . with an estimated 30% ( 30 % ) share of the world's cigarette production and consumption , china is the world's largest and fastest growing area for acetate tow products according to the 2009 stanford research institute international chemical economics handbook . combined , these ventures are a leader in chinese domestic acetate production and are well positioned to supply chinese cigarette producers . in december 2009 , we announced plans with china national tobacco to expand our acetate flake and tow capacity at our venture's nantong facility and we received formal approval for the expansions , each by 30000 tons , during 2010 . since their inception in 1986 , the china acetate ventures have completed 12 expansions , leading to earnings growth and increased dividends . our chinese acetate ventures fund their operations using operating cash flow . during 2011 , we made contributions of $ 8 million related to the capacity expansions in nantong and have committed contributions of $ 9 million in 2012 . in 2010 , we made contributions of $ 12 million . our chinese acetate ventures pay a dividend in the second quarter of each fiscal year , based on the ventures' performance for the preceding year . in 2011 , 2010 and 2009 , we received cash dividends of $ 78 million , $ 71 million and $ 56 million , respectively . although our ownership interest in each of our china acetate ventures exceeds 20% ( 20 % ) , we account for these investments using the cost method of accounting because we determined that we cannot exercise significant influence over these entities due to local government investment in and influence over these entities , limitations on our involvement in the day-to-day operations and the present inability of the entities to provide timely financial information prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the united states ( 201cus gaap 201d ) . 2022 other equity method investments infraservs . we hold indirect ownership interests in several infraserv groups in germany that own and develop industrial parks and provide on-site general and administrative support to tenants . the table below represents our equity investments in infraserv ventures as of december 31 , 2011: .", 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'ownership % (  % )': {'infraserv gmbh & co . gendorf kg': 39.0, 'infraserv gmbh & co . knapsack kg': 27.0, 'infraserv gmbh & co . hoechst kg': 32.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2011?', 'and what was that of 2010?', 'what was the change in value over the year?', 'what was the amount in received cash dividends in the year of 2010?', 'how much does that change represent in relation to the this amount?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['78', '71', '7', '71', '9.9%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['78', '71', 'subtract(78, 71)', '71', 'subtract(78, 71), divide(#0, 71)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [78.0, 71.0, 7.0, 71.0, 0.09859], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 78.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:41 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in 2010?\nA1: 7274.0\nQ2: and what were the net sales in 2009?\nA2: 8654.0\nQ3: and what was the operating profit in that year?\nA3: 972.0\nQ4: what is, then, the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in that year?\nA4: 7682.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\noperating profit for the segment decreased by 1% ( 1 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . for the year , operating profit declines in defense more than offset an increase in civil , while operating profit at intelligence essentially was unchanged . the $ 27 million decrease in operating profit at defense primarily was attributable to a decrease in the level of favorable performance adjustments on mission and combat systems activities in 2010 . the $ 19 million increase in civil principally was due to higher volume on enterprise civilian services . operating profit for the segment decreased by 3% ( 3 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . operating profit declines in civil and intelligence partially were offset by growth in defense . the decrease of $ 29 million in civil 2019s operating profit primarily was attributable to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on enterprise civilian services programs in 2009 compared to 2008 . the decrease in operating profit of $ 27 million at intelligence mainly was due to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on security solution activities in 2009 compared to 2008 . the increase in defense 2019s operating profit of $ 29 million mainly was due to volume and improved performance in mission and combat systems . the decrease in backlog during 2010 compared to 2009 mainly was due to higher sales volume on enterprise civilian service programs at civil , including volume associated with the dris 2010 program , and mission and combat system programs at defense . backlog decreased in 2009 compared to 2008 due to u.s . government 2019s exercise of the termination for convenience clause on the tsat mission operations system ( tmos ) contract at defense , which resulted in a $ 1.6 billion reduction in orders . this decline more than offset increased orders on enterprise civilian services programs at civil . we expect is&gs will experience a low single digit percentage decrease in sales for 2011 as compared to 2010 . this decline primarily is due to completion of most of the work associated with the dris 2010 program . operating profit in 2011 is expected to decline in relationship to the decline in sales volume , while operating margins are expected to be comparable between the years . space systems our space systems business segment is engaged in the design , research and development , engineering , and production of satellites , strategic and defensive missile systems , and space transportation systems , including activities related to the planned replacement of the space shuttle . government satellite programs include the advanced extremely high frequency ( aehf ) system , the mobile user objective system ( muos ) , the global positioning satellite iii ( gps iii ) system , the space-based infrared system ( sbirs ) , and the geostationary operational environmental satellite r-series ( goes-r ) . strategic and missile defense programs include the targets and countermeasures program and the fleet ballistic missile program . space transportation includes the nasa orion program and , through ownership interests in two joint ventures , expendable launch services ( united launch alliance , or ula ) and space shuttle processing activities for the u.s . government ( united space alliance , or usa ) . the space shuttle is expected to complete its final flight mission in 2011 and our involvement with its launch and processing activities will end at that time . space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2010 2009 2008 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnet sales for space systems decreased by 5% ( 5 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . sales declined in all three lines of business during the year . the $ 253 million decrease in space transportation principally was due to lower volume on the space shuttle external tank , commercial launch vehicle activity and other human space flight programs , which partially were offset by higher volume on the orion program . there were no commercial launches in 2010 compared to one commercial launch in 2009 . strategic & defensive missile systems ( s&dms ) sales declined $ 147 million principally due to lower volume on defensive missile programs . the $ 8 million sales decline in satellites primarily was attributable to lower volume on commercial satellites , which partially were offset by higher volume on government satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2010 and one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 . net sales for space systems increased 8% ( 8 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . during the year , sales growth at satellites and space transportation offset a decline in s&dms . the sales growth of $ 707 million in satellites was due to higher volume in government satellite activities , which partially was offset by lower volume in commercial satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 and two deliveries in 2008 . the increase in sales of $ 21 million in space transportation primarily was due to higher volume on the orion program , which more than offset a decline in the space shuttle 2019s external tank program . there was one commercial launch in both 2009 and 2008 . s&dms 2019 sales decreased by $ 102 million mainly due to lower volume on defensive missile programs , which more than offset growth in strategic missile programs. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2010 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 |\n| 2009 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 |\n| 2008 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 |', 'question': 'and what is the change in that difference from 2009 to 2010?', 'ops': 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972), subtract(#0, #1)', 'id': 'Single_LMT/2010/page_39.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'operating profit for the segment decreased by 1% ( 1 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . for the year , operating profit declines in defense more than offset an increase in civil , while operating profit at intelligence essentially was unchanged . the $ 27 million decrease in operating profit at defense primarily was attributable to a decrease in the level of favorable performance adjustments on mission and combat systems activities in 2010 . the $ 19 million increase in civil principally was due to higher volume on enterprise civilian services . operating profit for the segment decreased by 3% ( 3 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . operating profit declines in civil and intelligence partially were offset by growth in defense . the decrease of $ 29 million in civil 2019s operating profit primarily was attributable to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on enterprise civilian services programs in 2009 compared to 2008 . the decrease in operating profit of $ 27 million at intelligence mainly was due to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on security solution activities in 2009 compared to 2008 . the increase in defense 2019s operating profit of $ 29 million mainly was due to volume and improved performance in mission and combat systems . the decrease in backlog during 2010 compared to 2009 mainly was due to higher sales volume on enterprise civilian service programs at civil , including volume associated with the dris 2010 program , and mission and combat system programs at defense . backlog decreased in 2009 compared to 2008 due to u.s . government 2019s exercise of the termination for convenience clause on the tsat mission operations system ( tmos ) contract at defense , which resulted in a $ 1.6 billion reduction in orders . this decline more than offset increased orders on enterprise civilian services programs at civil . we expect is&gs will experience a low single digit percentage decrease in sales for 2011 as compared to 2010 . this decline primarily is due to completion of most of the work associated with the dris 2010 program . operating profit in 2011 is expected to decline in relationship to the decline in sales volume , while operating margins are expected to be comparable between the years . space systems our space systems business segment is engaged in the design , research and development , engineering , and production of satellites , strategic and defensive missile systems , and space transportation systems , including activities related to the planned replacement of the space shuttle . government satellite programs include the advanced extremely high frequency ( aehf ) system , the mobile user objective system ( muos ) , the global positioning satellite iii ( gps iii ) system , the space-based infrared system ( sbirs ) , and the geostationary operational environmental satellite r-series ( goes-r ) . strategic and missile defense programs include the targets and countermeasures program and the fleet ballistic missile program . space transportation includes the nasa orion program and , through ownership interests in two joint ventures , expendable launch services ( united launch alliance , or ula ) and space shuttle processing activities for the u.s . government ( united space alliance , or usa ) . the space shuttle is expected to complete its final flight mission in 2011 and our involvement with its launch and processing activities will end at that time . space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2010 2009 2008 .', 'doc_post_text': 'net sales for space systems decreased by 5% ( 5 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . sales declined in all three lines of business during the year . the $ 253 million decrease in space transportation principally was due to lower volume on the space shuttle external tank , commercial launch vehicle activity and other human space flight programs , which partially were offset by higher volume on the orion program . there were no commercial launches in 2010 compared to one commercial launch in 2009 . strategic & defensive missile systems ( s&dms ) sales declined $ 147 million principally due to lower volume on defensive missile programs . the $ 8 million sales decline in satellites primarily was attributable to lower volume on commercial satellites , which partially were offset by higher volume on government satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2010 and one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 . net sales for space systems increased 8% ( 8 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . during the year , sales growth at satellites and space transportation offset a decline in s&dms . the sales growth of $ 707 million in satellites was due to higher volume in government satellite activities , which partially was offset by lower volume in commercial satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 and two deliveries in 2008 . the increase in sales of $ 21 million in space transportation primarily was due to higher volume on the orion program , which more than offset a decline in the space shuttle 2019s external tank program . there was one commercial launch in both 2009 and 2008 . s&dms 2019 sales decreased by $ 102 million mainly due to lower volume on defensive missile programs , which more than offset growth in strategic missile programs. .', 'doc_table': {'2010': {'net sales': 8246.0, 'operating profit': 972.0, 'operating margin': -11.8, 'backlog at year-end': 17800.0}, '2009': {'net sales': 8654.0, 'operating profit': 972.0, 'operating margin': -11.2, 'backlog at year-end': 16800.0}, '2008': {'net sales': 8027.0, 'operating profit': 953.0, 'operating margin': -11.9, 'backlog at year-end': 17900.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in 2010?', 'and what were the net sales in 2009?', 'and what was the operating profit in that year?', 'what is, then, the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in that year?', 'and what is the change in that difference from 2009 to 2010?', 'how much does this change represent in relation to the 2009 difference?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['7274', '8654', '972', '7682', '-408', '-5.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(8246, 972)', '8654', '972', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972)', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972), subtract(#0, #1)', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972), subtract(#0, #1), divide(#2, #1)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [7274.0, 8654.0, 972.0, 7682.0, -408.0, -0.05311], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -408.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:41 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the number of shares available under the 2014 incentive plan?\nA1: 29045044.0\nQ2: and what is it for the the 2009 one?\nA2: 12181214.0\nQ3: what is, then, the total number of shares available under both plans?\nA3: 41226258.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\npart iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | equity compensation plans approved by security holders | equity compensation plans not approved by security holders | equity compensation plans approved by security holders | equity compensation plans not approved by security holders | equity compensation plans approved by security holders | equity compensation plans not approved by security holders |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options warrants and rights ( a ) 123 | 15563666.0 | none | 15563666.0 | none | 15563666.0 | none |\n| weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options ( b ) | 9.7 |  | 9.7 |  | 9.7 |  |\n| number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) ( c ) 4 | 41661517.0 |  | 41661517.0 |  | 41661517.0 |  |', 'question': 'and including the 2006 employee stock purchase plan, what becomes this total?', 'ops': 'add(29045044, 12181214), add(#0, 435259)', 'id': 'Double_IPG/2014/page_95.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'part iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .', 'doc_post_text': 'part iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .', 'doc_table': {'number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options warrants and rights ( a ) 123': {'equity compensation plans approved by security holders': 15563666.0, 'equity compensation plans not approved by security holders': 'none'}, 'weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options ( b )': {'equity compensation plans approved by security holders': 9.7, 'equity compensation plans not approved by security holders': ''}, 'number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) ( c ) 4': {'equity compensation plans approved by security holders': 41661517.0, 'equity compensation plans not approved by security holders': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the number of shares available under the 2014 incentive plan?', 'and what is it for the the 2009 one?', 'what is, then, the total number of shares available under both plans?', 'and including the 2006 employee stock purchase plan, what becomes this total?', 'and from this total, what is the number of shares to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options warrants and right?', 'what is value of each of those shares?', 'what is, then, the total value of all of those shares?', 'and how much is that in millions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['29045044', '12181214', '41226258', '41661517', '15563666', '9.70', '150967560.2', '151.0'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['29045044', '12181214', 'add(29045044, 12181214)', 'add(29045044, 12181214), add(#0, 435259)', '15563666', '9.70', 'multiply(15563666, 9.70)', 'multiply(15563666, 9.70), divide(#0, const_1000000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [29045044.0, 12181214.0, 41226258.0, 41661517.0, 15563666.0, 9.7, 150967560.2, 150.96756], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 41661517.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:41 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the other income in 2006?\nA1: 118.0\nQ2: what about in 2005?\nA2: 145.0\nQ3: what is the sum for these two years?\nA3: 263.0\nQ4: what about in 2004?\nA4: 88.0\nQ5: what is the total for three years?\nA5: 351.0\nQ6: what is the average for these three years?\nA6: 117.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nincreased over 4% ( 4 % ) in 2005 , costs for trucking services provided by intermodal carriers remained flat as we substantially reduced expenses associated with network inefficiencies . higher diesel fuel prices increased sales and use taxes in 2005 , which resulted in higher state and local taxes . other contract expenses for equipment maintenance and other services increased in 2005 . the 2005 january west coast storm and hurricanes katrina and rita also contributed to higher expenses in 2005 ( net of insurance settlements received ) . partially offsetting these increases was a reduction in relocation expenses as we incurred higher relocation costs associated with moving support personnel to omaha , nebraska during 2004 . non-operating items millions of dollars 2006 2005 2004 % (  % ) change 2006 v 2005 % (  % ) change 2005 v 2004 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nother income 2013 lower net gains from non-operating asset sales and higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program resulted in a reduction in other income in 2006 , which was partially offset by higher rental income for the use of our right-of-way ( including 2006 settlements of rate disputes from prior years ) and cash investment returns due to higher interest rates . in 2005 , other income increased largely as a result of higher gains from real estate sales partially offset by higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program . interest expense 2013 lower interest expense in 2006 and 2005 was primarily due to declining weighted-average debt levels of $ 7.1 billion , $ 7.8 billion , and $ 8.1 billion in 2006 , 2005 , and 2004 , respectively . a higher effective interest rate of 6.7% ( 6.7 % ) in 2006 , compared to 6.5% ( 6.5 % ) in both 2005 and 2004 , partially offset the effects of the declining debt level . income taxes 2013 income tax expense was $ 509 million higher in 2006 than 2005 . higher pre-tax income resulted in additional taxes of $ 414 million and $ 118 million of the increase resulted from the one-time reduction in 2005 described below . our effective tax rate was 36.4% ( 36.4 % ) and 28.6% ( 28.6 % ) in 2006 and 2005 , respectively . income taxes were greater in 2005 than 2004 due to higher pre-tax income partially offset by a previously reported reduction in income tax expense . in our quarterly report on form 10-q for the quarter ended june 30 , 2005 , we reported that the corporation analyzed the impact that final settlements of pre-1995 tax years had on previously recorded estimates of deferred tax assets and liabilities . the completed analysis of the final settlements for pre-1995 tax years , along with internal revenue service examination reports for tax years 1995 through 2002 were considered , among other things , in a review and re-evaluation of the corporation 2019s estimated deferred tax assets and liabilities as of september 30 , 2005 , resulting in an income tax expense reduction of $ 118 million in .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes | other income | interest expense | income taxes |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2006 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 | 118.0 | -477.0 | -919.0 |\n| 2005 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 | 145.0 | -504.0 | -410.0 |\n| 2004 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 | 88.0 | -527.0 | -252.0 |\n| % (  % ) change 2006 v 2005 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 | -19.0 | -5.0 | 124.0 |\n| % (  % ) change 2005 v 2004 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 | -65.0 | -4.0 | 63.0 |', 'question': 'what is the net change in other income from 2004 to 2005?', 'ops': 'subtract(145, 88)', 'id': 'Double_UNP/2006/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'increased over 4% ( 4 % ) in 2005 , costs for trucking services provided by intermodal carriers remained flat as we substantially reduced expenses associated with network inefficiencies . higher diesel fuel prices increased sales and use taxes in 2005 , which resulted in higher state and local taxes . other contract expenses for equipment maintenance and other services increased in 2005 . the 2005 january west coast storm and hurricanes katrina and rita also contributed to higher expenses in 2005 ( net of insurance settlements received ) . partially offsetting these increases was a reduction in relocation expenses as we incurred higher relocation costs associated with moving support personnel to omaha , nebraska during 2004 . non-operating items millions of dollars 2006 2005 2004 % (  % ) change 2006 v 2005 % (  % ) change 2005 v 2004 .', 'doc_post_text': 'other income 2013 lower net gains from non-operating asset sales and higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program resulted in a reduction in other income in 2006 , which was partially offset by higher rental income for the use of our right-of-way ( including 2006 settlements of rate disputes from prior years ) and cash investment returns due to higher interest rates . in 2005 , other income increased largely as a result of higher gains from real estate sales partially offset by higher expenses due to rising interest rates associated with our sale of receivables program . interest expense 2013 lower interest expense in 2006 and 2005 was primarily due to declining weighted-average debt levels of $ 7.1 billion , $ 7.8 billion , and $ 8.1 billion in 2006 , 2005 , and 2004 , respectively . a higher effective interest rate of 6.7% ( 6.7 % ) in 2006 , compared to 6.5% ( 6.5 % ) in both 2005 and 2004 , partially offset the effects of the declining debt level . income taxes 2013 income tax expense was $ 509 million higher in 2006 than 2005 . higher pre-tax income resulted in additional taxes of $ 414 million and $ 118 million of the increase resulted from the one-time reduction in 2005 described below . our effective tax rate was 36.4% ( 36.4 % ) and 28.6% ( 28.6 % ) in 2006 and 2005 , respectively . income taxes were greater in 2005 than 2004 due to higher pre-tax income partially offset by a previously reported reduction in income tax expense . in our quarterly report on form 10-q for the quarter ended june 30 , 2005 , we reported that the corporation analyzed the impact that final settlements of pre-1995 tax years had on previously recorded estimates of deferred tax assets and liabilities . the completed analysis of the final settlements for pre-1995 tax years , along with internal revenue service examination reports for tax years 1995 through 2002 were considered , among other things , in a review and re-evaluation of the corporation 2019s estimated deferred tax assets and liabilities as of september 30 , 2005 , resulting in an income tax expense reduction of $ 118 million in .', 'doc_table': {'2006': {'other income': 118.0, 'interest expense': -477.0, 'income taxes': -919.0}, '2005': {'other income': 145.0, 'interest expense': -504.0, 'income taxes': -410.0}, '2004': {'other income': 88.0, 'interest expense': -527.0, 'income taxes': -252.0}, '% (  % ) change 2006 v 2005': {'other income': -19.0, 'interest expense': -5.0, 'income taxes': 124.0}, '% (  % ) change 2005 v 2004': {'other income': -65.0, 'interest expense': -4.0, 'income taxes': 63.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the other income in 2006?', 'what about in 2005?', 'what is the sum for these two years?', 'what about in 2004?', 'what is the total for three years?', 'what is the average for these three years?', 'what is the net change in other income from 2004 to 2005?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['118', '145', '263', '88', '351', '117', '57'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['118', '145', 'add(118, 145)', '88', 'add(118, 145), add(#0, 88)', 'add(118, 145), add(#0, 88), divide(#1, const_3)', 'subtract(145, 88)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [118.0, 145.0, 263.0, 88.0, 351.0, 117.0, 57.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 57.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:41 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nthe company recorded equity earnings , net of taxes , related to ilim of $ 290 million in 2018 , compared with earnings of $ 183 million in 2017 , and $ 199 million in 2016 . operating results recorded in 2018 included an after-tax non-cash foreign exchange loss of $ 82 million , compared with an after-tax foreign exchange gain of $ 15 million in 2017 and an after-tax foreign exchange gain of $ 25 million in 2016 , primarily on the remeasurement of ilim's u.s . dollar denominated net debt . ilim delivered outstanding performance in 2018 , driven largely by higher price realization and strong demand . sales volumes for the joint venture increased year over year for shipments to china of softwood pulp and linerboard , but were offset by decreased sales of hardwood pulp to china . sales volumes in the russian market increased for softwood pulp and hardwood pulp , but decreased for linerboard . average sales price realizations were significantly higher in 2018 for sales of softwood pulp , hardwood pulp and linerboard to china and other export markets . average sales price realizations in russian markets increased year over year for all products . input costs were higher in 2018 , primarily for wood , fuel and chemicals . distribution costs were negatively impacted by tariffs and inflation . the company received cash dividends from the joint venture of $ 128 million in 2018 , $ 133 million in 2017 and $ 58 million in entering the first quarter of 2019 , sales volumes are expected to be lower than in the fourth quarter of 2018 , due to the seasonal slowdown in china and fewer trading days . based on pricing to date in the current quarter , average sales prices are expected to decrease for hardwood pulp , softwood pulp and linerboard to china . input costs are projected to be relatively flat , while distribution costs are expected to increase . equity earnings - gpip international paper recorded equity earnings of $ 46 million on its 20.5% ( 20.5 % ) ownership position in gpip in 2018 . the company received cash dividends from the investment of $ 25 million in 2018 . liquidity and capital resources overview a major factor in international paper 2019s liquidity and capital resource planning is its generation of operating cash flow , which is highly sensitive to changes in the pricing and demand for our major products . while changes in key cash operating costs , such as energy , raw material , mill outage and transportation costs , do have an effect on operating cash generation , we believe that our focus on pricing and cost controls has improved our cash flow generation over an operating cycle . cash uses during 2018 were primarily focused on working capital requirements , capital spending , debt reductions and returning cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases under the company's share repurchase program . cash provided by operating activities cash provided by operations , including discontinued operations , totaled $ 3.2 billion in 2018 , compared with $ 1.8 billion for 2017 , and $ 2.5 billion for 2016 . cash used by working capital components ( accounts receivable , contract assets and inventory less accounts payable and accrued liabilities , interest payable and other ) totaled $ 439 million in 2018 , compared with cash used by working capital components of $ 402 million in 2017 , and cash provided by working capital components of $ 71 million in 2016 . investment activities including discontinued operations , investment activities in 2018 increased from 2017 , as 2018 included higher capital spending . in 2016 , investment activity included the purchase of weyerhaeuser's pulp business for $ 2.2 billion in cash , the purchase of the holmen business for $ 57 million in cash , net of cash acquired , and proceeds from the sale of the asia packaging business of $ 108 million , net of cash divested . the company maintains an average capital spending target around depreciation and amortization levels , or modestly above , due to strategic plans over the course of an economic cycle . capital spending was $ 1.6 billion in 2018 , or 118% ( 118 % ) of depreciation and amortization , compared with $ 1.4 billion in 2017 , or 98% ( 98 % ) of depreciation and amortization , and $ 1.3 billion , or 110% ( 110 % ) of depreciation and amortization in 2016 . across our segments , capital spending as a percentage of depreciation and amortization ranged from 69.8% ( 69.8 % ) to 132.1% ( 132.1 % ) in 2018 . the following table shows capital spending for operations by business segment for the years ended december 31 , 2018 , 2017 and 2016 , excluding amounts related to discontinued operations of $ 111 million in 2017 and $ 107 million in 2016. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ncapital expenditures in 2019 are currently expected to be about $ 1.4 billion , or 104% ( 104 % ) of depreciation and amortization , including approximately $ 400 million of strategic investments. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | industrial packaging | global cellulose fibers | printing papers | subtotal | corporate and other | capital spending | industrial packaging | global cellulose fibers | printing papers | subtotal | corporate and other | capital spending | industrial packaging | global cellulose fibers | printing papers | subtotal | corporate and other | capital spending |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2018 | 1061.0 | 183.0 | 303.0 | 1547.0 | 25.0 | 1572.0 | 1061.0 | 183.0 | 303.0 | 1547.0 | 25.0 | 1572.0 | 1061.0 | 183.0 | 303.0 | 1547.0 | 25.0 | 1572.0 |\n| 2017 | 836.0 | 188.0 | 235.0 | 1259.0 | 21.0 | 1280.0 | 836.0 | 188.0 | 235.0 | 1259.0 | 21.0 | 1280.0 | 836.0 | 188.0 | 235.0 | 1259.0 | 21.0 | 1280.0 |\n| 2016 | 832.0 | 174.0 | 215.0 | 1221.0 | 20.0 | 1241.0 | 832.0 | 174.0 | 215.0 | 1221.0 | 20.0 | 1241.0 | 832.0 | 174.0 | 215.0 | 1221.0 | 20.0 | 1241.0 |', 'question': 'what was the capital expenditures for operations in the industrial packaging business segment in 2018, in millions?', 'ops': '1061', 'id': 'Single_IP/2018/page_50.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': "the company recorded equity earnings , net of taxes , related to ilim of $ 290 million in 2018 , compared with earnings of $ 183 million in 2017 , and $ 199 million in 2016 . operating results recorded in 2018 included an after-tax non-cash foreign exchange loss of $ 82 million , compared with an after-tax foreign exchange gain of $ 15 million in 2017 and an after-tax foreign exchange gain of $ 25 million in 2016 , primarily on the remeasurement of ilim's u.s . dollar denominated net debt . ilim delivered outstanding performance in 2018 , driven largely by higher price realization and strong demand . sales volumes for the joint venture increased year over year for shipments to china of softwood pulp and linerboard , but were offset by decreased sales of hardwood pulp to china . sales volumes in the russian market increased for softwood pulp and hardwood pulp , but decreased for linerboard . average sales price realizations were significantly higher in 2018 for sales of softwood pulp , hardwood pulp and linerboard to china and other export markets . average sales price realizations in russian markets increased year over year for all products . input costs were higher in 2018 , primarily for wood , fuel and chemicals . distribution costs were negatively impacted by tariffs and inflation . the company received cash dividends from the joint venture of $ 128 million in 2018 , $ 133 million in 2017 and $ 58 million in entering the first quarter of 2019 , sales volumes are expected to be lower than in the fourth quarter of 2018 , due to the seasonal slowdown in china and fewer trading days . based on pricing to date in the current quarter , average sales prices are expected to decrease for hardwood pulp , softwood pulp and linerboard to china . input costs are projected to be relatively flat , while distribution costs are expected to increase . equity earnings - gpip international paper recorded equity earnings of $ 46 million on its 20.5% ( 20.5 % ) ownership position in gpip in 2018 . the company received cash dividends from the investment of $ 25 million in 2018 . liquidity and capital resources overview a major factor in international paper 2019s liquidity and capital resource planning is its generation of operating cash flow , which is highly sensitive to changes in the pricing and demand for our major products . while changes in key cash operating costs , such as energy , raw material , mill outage and transportation costs , do have an effect on operating cash generation , we believe that our focus on pricing and cost controls has improved our cash flow generation over an operating cycle . cash uses during 2018 were primarily focused on working capital requirements , capital spending , debt reductions and returning cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases under the company's share repurchase program . cash provided by operating activities cash provided by operations , including discontinued operations , totaled $ 3.2 billion in 2018 , compared with $ 1.8 billion for 2017 , and $ 2.5 billion for 2016 . cash used by working capital components ( accounts receivable , contract assets and inventory less accounts payable and accrued liabilities , interest payable and other ) totaled $ 439 million in 2018 , compared with cash used by working capital components of $ 402 million in 2017 , and cash provided by working capital components of $ 71 million in 2016 . investment activities including discontinued operations , investment activities in 2018 increased from 2017 , as 2018 included higher capital spending . in 2016 , investment activity included the purchase of weyerhaeuser's pulp business for $ 2.2 billion in cash , the purchase of the holmen business for $ 57 million in cash , net of cash acquired , and proceeds from the sale of the asia packaging business of $ 108 million , net of cash divested . the company maintains an average capital spending target around depreciation and amortization levels , or modestly above , due to strategic plans over the course of an economic cycle . capital spending was $ 1.6 billion in 2018 , or 118% ( 118 % ) of depreciation and amortization , compared with $ 1.4 billion in 2017 , or 98% ( 98 % ) of depreciation and amortization , and $ 1.3 billion , or 110% ( 110 % ) of depreciation and amortization in 2016 . across our segments , capital spending as a percentage of depreciation and amortization ranged from 69.8% ( 69.8 % ) to 132.1% ( 132.1 % ) in 2018 . the following table shows capital spending for operations by business segment for the years ended december 31 , 2018 , 2017 and 2016 , excluding amounts related to discontinued operations of $ 111 million in 2017 and $ 107 million in 2016. .", 'doc_post_text': 'capital expenditures in 2019 are currently expected to be about $ 1.4 billion , or 104% ( 104 % ) of depreciation and amortization , including approximately $ 400 million of strategic investments. .', 'doc_table': {'2018': {'industrial packaging': 1061.0, 'global cellulose fibers': 183.0, 'printing papers': 303.0, 'subtotal': 1547.0, 'corporate and other': 25.0, 'capital spending': 1572.0}, '2017': {'industrial packaging': 836.0, 'global cellulose fibers': 188.0, 'printing papers': 235.0, 'subtotal': 1259.0, 'corporate and other': 21.0, 'capital spending': 1280.0}, '2016': {'industrial packaging': 832.0, 'global cellulose fibers': 174.0, 'printing papers': 215.0, 'subtotal': 1221.0, 'corporate and other': 20.0, 'capital spending': 1241.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the capital expenditures for operations in the industrial packaging business segment in 2018, in millions?', 'and what was it in 2017, also in millions?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'and how much does that change represent, in percentage, in relation to the capital expenditures for operations in the industrial packaging business segment in 2017?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1061', '836', '225', '27%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1061', '836', 'subtract(1061, 836)', 'subtract(1061, 836), divide(#0, 836)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1061.0, 836.0, 225.0, 0.26914], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1061.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:41 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: as of december 31, 2009, what was the total of derivative receivables related to the netting adjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid?\nA1: 65468000000.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\njpmorgan chase & co./2009 annual report 181 the following table shows the current credit risk of derivative receivables after netting adjustments , and the current liquidity risk of derivative payables after netting adjustments , as of december 31 , 2009. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin addition to the collateral amounts reflected in the table above , at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received and posted liquid secu- rities collateral in the amount of $ 15.5 billion and $ 11.7 billion , respectively . the firm also receives and delivers collateral at the initiation of derivative transactions , which is available as security against potential exposure that could arise should the fair value of the transactions move in the firm 2019s or client 2019s favor , respectively . furthermore , the firm and its counterparties hold collateral related to contracts that have a non-daily call frequency for collateral to be posted , and collateral that the firm or a counterparty has agreed to return but has not yet settled as of the reporting date . at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received $ 16.9 billion and delivered $ 5.8 billion of such additional collateral . these amounts were not netted against the derivative receivables and payables in the table above , because , at an individual counterparty level , the collateral exceeded the fair value exposure at december 31 , 2009 . credit derivatives credit derivatives are financial instruments whose value is derived from the credit risk associated with the debt of a third-party issuer ( the reference entity ) and which allow one party ( the protection purchaser ) to transfer that risk to another party ( the protection seller ) . credit derivatives expose the protection purchaser to the creditworthiness of the protection seller , as the protection seller is required to make payments under the contract when the reference entity experiences a credit event , such as a bankruptcy , a failure to pay its obligation or a restructuring . the seller of credit protection receives a premium for providing protection but has the risk that the underlying instrument referenced in the contract will be subject to a credit event . the firm is both a purchaser and seller of protection in the credit derivatives market and uses these derivatives for two primary purposes . first , in its capacity as a market-maker in the dealer/client business , the firm actively risk manages a portfolio of credit derivatives by purchasing and selling credit protection , pre- dominantly on corporate debt obligations , to meet the needs of customers . as a seller of protection , the firm 2019s exposure to a given reference entity may be offset partially , or entirely , with a contract to purchase protection from another counterparty on the same or similar reference entity . second , the firm uses credit derivatives to mitigate credit risk associated with its overall derivative receivables and traditional commercial credit lending exposures ( loans and unfunded commitments ) as well as to manage its exposure to residential and commercial mortgages . see note 3 on pages 156--- 173 of this annual report for further information on the firm 2019s mortgage-related exposures . in accomplishing the above , the firm uses different types of credit derivatives . following is a summary of various types of credit derivatives . credit default swaps credit derivatives may reference the credit of either a single refer- ence entity ( 201csingle-name 201d ) or a broad-based index , as described further below . the firm purchases and sells protection on both single- name and index-reference obligations . single-name cds and index cds contracts are both otc derivative contracts . single- name cds are used to manage the default risk of a single reference entity , while cds index are used to manage credit risk associated with the broader credit markets or credit market segments . like the s&p 500 and other market indices , a cds index is comprised of a portfolio of cds across many reference entities . new series of cds indices are established approximately every six months with a new underlying portfolio of reference entities to reflect changes in the credit markets . if one of the reference entities in the index experi- ences a credit event , then the reference entity that defaulted is removed from the index . cds can also be referenced against spe- cific portfolios of reference names or against customized exposure levels based on specific client demands : for example , to provide protection against the first $ 1 million of realized credit losses in a $ 10 million portfolio of exposure . such structures are commonly known as tranche cds . for both single-name cds contracts and index cds , upon the occurrence of a credit event , under the terms of a cds contract neither party to the cds contract has recourse to the reference entity . the protection purchaser has recourse to the protection seller for the difference between the face value of the cds contract and the fair value of the reference obligation at the time of settling the credit derivative contract , also known as the recovery value . the protection purchaser does not need to hold the debt instrument of the underlying reference entity in order to receive amounts due under the cds contract when a credit event occurs . credit-linked notes a credit linked note ( 201ccln 201d ) is a funded credit derivative where the issuer of the cln purchases credit protection on a referenced entity from the note investor . under the contract , the investor pays the issuer par value of the note at the inception of the transaction , and in return , the issuer pays periodic payments to the investor , based on the credit risk of the referenced entity . the issuer also repays the investor the par value of the note at maturity unless the reference entity experiences a specified credit event . in that event , the issuer is not obligated to repay the par value of the note , but rather , the issuer pays the investor the difference between the par value of the note .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | gross derivative fair value | nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables | nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid | carrying value on consolidated balance sheets | gross derivative fair value | nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables | nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid | carrying value on consolidated balance sheets |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| derivative receivables | 1565518.0 | -1419840.0 | -65468.0 | 80210.0 | 1565518.0 | -1419840.0 | -65468.0 | 80210.0 |\n| derivative payables | 1519183.0 | -1419840.0 | -39218.0 | 60125.0 | 1519183.0 | -1419840.0 | -39218.0 | 60125.0 |', 'question': 'and what was the total of the liquid securities collateral received by the firm?', 'ops': 'multiply(65468, const_1000000), multiply(15.5, const_1000000), multiply(#1, const_1000)', 'id': 'Double_JPM/2009/page_183.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'jpmorgan chase & co./2009 annual report 181 the following table shows the current credit risk of derivative receivables after netting adjustments , and the current liquidity risk of derivative payables after netting adjustments , as of december 31 , 2009. .', 'doc_post_text': 'in addition to the collateral amounts reflected in the table above , at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received and posted liquid secu- rities collateral in the amount of $ 15.5 billion and $ 11.7 billion , respectively . the firm also receives and delivers collateral at the initiation of derivative transactions , which is available as security against potential exposure that could arise should the fair value of the transactions move in the firm 2019s or client 2019s favor , respectively . furthermore , the firm and its counterparties hold collateral related to contracts that have a non-daily call frequency for collateral to be posted , and collateral that the firm or a counterparty has agreed to return but has not yet settled as of the reporting date . at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received $ 16.9 billion and delivered $ 5.8 billion of such additional collateral . these amounts were not netted against the derivative receivables and payables in the table above , because , at an individual counterparty level , the collateral exceeded the fair value exposure at december 31 , 2009 . credit derivatives credit derivatives are financial instruments whose value is derived from the credit risk associated with the debt of a third-party issuer ( the reference entity ) and which allow one party ( the protection purchaser ) to transfer that risk to another party ( the protection seller ) . credit derivatives expose the protection purchaser to the creditworthiness of the protection seller , as the protection seller is required to make payments under the contract when the reference entity experiences a credit event , such as a bankruptcy , a failure to pay its obligation or a restructuring . the seller of credit protection receives a premium for providing protection but has the risk that the underlying instrument referenced in the contract will be subject to a credit event . the firm is both a purchaser and seller of protection in the credit derivatives market and uses these derivatives for two primary purposes . first , in its capacity as a market-maker in the dealer/client business , the firm actively risk manages a portfolio of credit derivatives by purchasing and selling credit protection , pre- dominantly on corporate debt obligations , to meet the needs of customers . as a seller of protection , the firm 2019s exposure to a given reference entity may be offset partially , or entirely , with a contract to purchase protection from another counterparty on the same or similar reference entity . second , the firm uses credit derivatives to mitigate credit risk associated with its overall derivative receivables and traditional commercial credit lending exposures ( loans and unfunded commitments ) as well as to manage its exposure to residential and commercial mortgages . see note 3 on pages 156--- 173 of this annual report for further information on the firm 2019s mortgage-related exposures . in accomplishing the above , the firm uses different types of credit derivatives . following is a summary of various types of credit derivatives . credit default swaps credit derivatives may reference the credit of either a single refer- ence entity ( 201csingle-name 201d ) or a broad-based index , as described further below . the firm purchases and sells protection on both single- name and index-reference obligations . single-name cds and index cds contracts are both otc derivative contracts . single- name cds are used to manage the default risk of a single reference entity , while cds index are used to manage credit risk associated with the broader credit markets or credit market segments . like the s&p 500 and other market indices , a cds index is comprised of a portfolio of cds across many reference entities . new series of cds indices are established approximately every six months with a new underlying portfolio of reference entities to reflect changes in the credit markets . if one of the reference entities in the index experi- ences a credit event , then the reference entity that defaulted is removed from the index . cds can also be referenced against spe- cific portfolios of reference names or against customized exposure levels based on specific client demands : for example , to provide protection against the first $ 1 million of realized credit losses in a $ 10 million portfolio of exposure . such structures are commonly known as tranche cds . for both single-name cds contracts and index cds , upon the occurrence of a credit event , under the terms of a cds contract neither party to the cds contract has recourse to the reference entity . the protection purchaser has recourse to the protection seller for the difference between the face value of the cds contract and the fair value of the reference obligation at the time of settling the credit derivative contract , also known as the recovery value . the protection purchaser does not need to hold the debt instrument of the underlying reference entity in order to receive amounts due under the cds contract when a credit event occurs . credit-linked notes a credit linked note ( 201ccln 201d ) is a funded credit derivative where the issuer of the cln purchases credit protection on a referenced entity from the note investor . under the contract , the investor pays the issuer par value of the note at the inception of the transaction , and in return , the issuer pays periodic payments to the investor , based on the credit risk of the referenced entity . the issuer also repays the investor the par value of the note at maturity unless the reference entity experiences a specified credit event . in that event , the issuer is not obligated to repay the par value of the note , but rather , the issuer pays the investor the difference between the par value of the note .', 'doc_table': {'derivative receivables': {'gross derivative fair value': 1565518.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables': -1419840.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid': -65468.0, 'carrying value on consolidated balance sheets': 80210.0}, 'derivative payables': {'gross derivative fair value': 1519183.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables': -1419840.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid': -39218.0, 'carrying value on consolidated balance sheets': 60125.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['as of december 31, 2009, what was the total of derivative receivables related to the netting adjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid?', 'and what was the total of the liquid securities collateral received by the firm?', 'what was, then, the combined total of both amounts as of that date?', 'and in that same year, how much did the gross derivative fair value receivables represent in relation to the payables one?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['65468000000', '15500000000', '80968000000', '1.03'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(65468, const_1000000)', 'multiply(65468, const_1000000), multiply(15.5, const_1000000), multiply(#1, const_1000)', 'multiply(65468, const_1000000), multiply(15.5, const_1000000), multiply(#1, const_1000), add(#2, #0)', 'divide(1565518, 1519183)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [65468000000.0, 15500000000.0, 80968000000.0, 1.0305], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 15500000000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "19s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:41 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:41 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the fair market value of plan assets of the benefit pension plans in 2015?\nA1: 3916.4\nQ2: and what was it in 2014?\nA2: 4114.6\nQ3: what was, then, the change over the year?\nA3: -198.2\nQ4: what was the fair market value of plan assets of the benefit pension plans in 2014?\nA4: 4114.6', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nunconditional purchase obligations approximately $ 390 of our long-term unconditional purchase obligations relate to feedstock supply for numerous hyco ( hydrogen , carbon monoxide , and syngas ) facilities . the price of feedstock supply is principally related to the price of natural gas . however , long-term take-or-pay sales contracts to hyco customers are generally matched to the term of the feedstock supply obligations and provide recovery of price increases in the feedstock supply . due to the matching of most long-term feedstock supply obligations to customer sales contracts , we do not believe these purchase obligations would have a material effect on our financial condition or results of operations . refer to note 17 , commitments and contingencies , to the consolidated financial statements for additional information on our unconditional purchase obligations . the unconditional purchase obligations also include other product supply and purchase commitments and electric power and natural gas supply purchase obligations , which are primarily pass-through contracts with our customers . in addition , purchase commitments to spend approximately $ 540 for additional plant and equipment are included in the unconditional purchase obligations in 2016 . we also purchase materials , energy , capital equipment , supplies , and services as part of the ordinary course of business under arrangements that are not unconditional purchase obligations . the majority of such purchases are for raw materials and energy , which are obtained under requirements-type contracts at market prices . obligation for future contribution to an equity affiliate on 19 april 2015 , a joint venture between air products and acwa holding entered into a 20-year oxygen and nitrogen supply agreement to supply saudi aramco 2019s oil refinery and power plant being built in jazan , saudi arabia . air products owns 25% ( 25 % ) of the joint venture and guarantees the repayment of its share of an equity bridge loan . in total , we expect to invest approximately $ 100 in this joint venture . as of 30 september 2015 , we recorded a noncurrent liability of $ 67.5 for our obligation to make future equity contributions based on advances received by the joint venture under the loan . income tax liabilities noncurrent deferred income tax liabilities as of 30 september 2015 were $ 903.3 . tax liabilities related to unrecognized tax benefits as of 30 september 2015 were $ 97.5 . these tax liabilities were excluded from the contractual obligations table , as it is impractical to determine a cash impact by year given that payments will vary according to changes in tax laws , tax rates , and our operating results . in addition , there are uncertainties in timing of the effective settlement of our uncertain tax positions with respective taxing authorities . refer to note 23 , income taxes , to the consolidated financial statements for additional information . pension benefits the company sponsors defined benefit pension plans and defined contribution plans that cover a substantial portion of its worldwide employees . the principal defined benefit pension plans 2014the u.s . salaried pension plan and the u.k . pension plan 2014were closed to new participants in 2005 and were replaced with defined contribution plans . over the long run , the shift to defined contribution plans is expected to reduce volatility of both plan expense and contributions . the fair market value of plan assets for our defined benefit pension plans as of the 30 september 2015 measurement date decreased to $ 3916.4 from $ 4114.6 at the end of fiscal year 2014 . the projected benefit obligation for these plans was $ 4787.8 and $ 4738.6 at the end of the fiscal years 2015 and 2014 , respectively . refer to note 16 , retirement benefits , to the consolidated financial statements for comprehensive and detailed disclosures on our postretirement benefits . pension expense .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | pension expense | special terminations settlements and curtailments ( included above ) | weighted average discount rate | weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets | weighted average expected rate of compensation increase | pension expense | special terminations settlements and curtailments ( included above ) | weighted average discount rate | weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets | weighted average expected rate of compensation increase | pension expense | special terminations settlements and curtailments ( included above ) | weighted average discount rate | weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets | weighted average expected rate of compensation increase |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2015 | 135.6 | 35.2 | -4.0 | -7.4 | -3.5 | 135.6 | 35.2 | -4.0 | -7.4 | -3.5 | 135.6 | 35.2 | -4.0 | -7.4 | -3.5 |\n| 2014 | 135.9 | 5.8 | -4.6 | -7.7 | -3.9 | 135.9 | 5.8 | -4.6 | -7.7 | -3.9 | 135.9 | 5.8 | -4.6 | -7.7 | -3.9 |\n| 2013 | 169.7 | 19.8 | -4.0 | -7.7 | -3.8 | 169.7 | 19.8 | -4.0 | -7.7 | -3.8 | 169.7 | 19.8 | -4.0 | -7.7 | -3.8 |', 'question': 'and how much does that change represent in relation to this 2014 fair market value?', 'ops': 'subtract(3916.4, 4114.6), divide(#0, 4114.6)', 'id': 'Single_APD/2015/page_54.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'unconditional purchase obligations approximately $ 390 of our long-term unconditional purchase obligations relate to feedstock supply for numerous hyco ( hydrogen , carbon monoxide , and syngas ) facilities . the price of feedstock supply is principally related to the price of natural gas . however , long-term take-or-pay sales contracts to hyco customers are generally matched to the term of the feedstock supply obligations and provide recovery of price increases in the feedstock supply . due to the matching of most long-term feedstock supply obligations to customer sales contracts , we do not believe these purchase obligations would have a material effect on our financial condition or results of operations . refer to note 17 , commitments and contingencies , to the consolidated financial statements for additional information on our unconditional purchase obligations . the unconditional purchase obligations also include other product supply and purchase commitments and electric power and natural gas supply purchase obligations , which are primarily pass-through contracts with our customers . in addition , purchase commitments to spend approximately $ 540 for additional plant and equipment are included in the unconditional purchase obligations in 2016 . we also purchase materials , energy , capital equipment , supplies , and services as part of the ordinary course of business under arrangements that are not unconditional purchase obligations . the majority of such purchases are for raw materials and energy , which are obtained under requirements-type contracts at market prices . obligation for future contribution to an equity affiliate on 19 april 2015 , a joint venture between air products and acwa holding entered into a 20-year oxygen and nitrogen supply agreement to supply saudi aramco 2019s oil refinery and power plant being built in jazan , saudi arabia . air products owns 25% ( 25 % ) of the joint venture and guarantees the repayment of its share of an equity bridge loan . in total , we expect to invest approximately $ 100 in this joint venture . as of 30 september 2015 , we recorded a noncurrent liability of $ 67.5 for our obligation to make future equity contributions based on advances received by the joint venture under the loan . income tax liabilities noncurrent deferred income tax liabilities as of 30 september 2015 were $ 903.3 . tax liabilities related to unrecognized tax benefits as of 30 september 2015 were $ 97.5 . these tax liabilities were excluded from the contractual obligations table , as it is impractical to determine a cash impact by year given that payments will vary according to changes in tax laws , tax rates , and our operating results . in addition , there are uncertainties in timing of the effective settlement of our uncertain tax positions with respective taxing authorities . refer to note 23 , income taxes , to the consolidated financial statements for additional information . pension benefits the company sponsors defined benefit pension plans and defined contribution plans that cover a substantial portion of its worldwide employees . the principal defined benefit pension plans 2014the u.s . salaried pension plan and the u.k . pension plan 2014were closed to new participants in 2005 and were replaced with defined contribution plans . over the long run , the shift to defined contribution plans is expected to reduce volatility of both plan expense and contributions . the fair market value of plan assets for our defined benefit pension plans as of the 30 september 2015 measurement date decreased to $ 3916.4 from $ 4114.6 at the end of fiscal year 2014 . the projected benefit obligation for these plans was $ 4787.8 and $ 4738.6 at the end of the fiscal years 2015 and 2014 , respectively . refer to note 16 , retirement benefits , to the consolidated financial statements for comprehensive and detailed disclosures on our postretirement benefits . pension expense .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'2015': {'pension expense': 135.6, 'special terminations settlements and curtailments ( included above )': 35.2, 'weighted average discount rate': -4.0, 'weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets': -7.4, 'weighted average expected rate of compensation increase': -3.5}, '2014': {'pension expense': 135.9, 'special terminations settlements and curtailments ( included above )': 5.8, 'weighted average discount rate': -4.6, 'weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets': -7.7, 'weighted average expected rate of compensation increase': -3.9}, '2013': {'pension expense': 169.7, 'special terminations settlements and curtailments ( included above )': 19.8, 'weighted average discount rate': -4.0, 'weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets': -7.7, 'weighted average expected rate of compensation increase': -3.8}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the fair market value of plan assets of the benefit pension plans in 2015?', 'and what was it in 2014?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'what was the fair market value of plan assets of the benefit pension plans in 2014?', 'and how much does that change represent in relation to this 2014 fair market value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3916.4', '4114.6', '-198.2', '4114.6', '-4.81%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3916.4', '4114.6', 'subtract(3916.4, 4114.6)', '4114.6', 'subtract(3916.4, 4114.6), divide(#0, 4114.6)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3916.4, 4114.6, -198.2, 4114.6, -0.04817], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -0.04817}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:41 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ngeneral market conditions affecting trust asset performance , future discount rates based on average yields of high quality corporate bonds and our decisions regarding certain elective provisions of the we currently project that we will make total u.s . and foreign benefit plan contributions in 2014 of approximately $ 57 million . actual 2014 contributions could be different from our current projections , as influenced by our decision to undertake discretionary funding of our benefit trusts versus other competing investment priorities , future changes in government requirements , trust asset performance , renewals of union contracts , or higher-than-expected health care claims cost experience . we measure cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities reduced by expenditures for property additions . we use this non-gaap financial measure of cash flow to focus management and investors on the amount of cash available for debt repayment , dividend distributions , acquisition opportunities , and share repurchases . our cash flow metric is reconciled to the most comparable gaap measure , as follows: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nyear-over-year change ( 4.5 ) % (  % ) 22.4% ( 22.4 % ) the decrease in cash flow ( as defined ) in 2013 compared to 2012 was due primarily to higher capital expenditures . the increase in cash flow in 2012 compared to 2011 was driven by improved performance in working capital resulting from the one-time benefit derived from the pringles acquisition , as well as changes in the level of capital expenditures during the three-year period . investing activities our net cash used in investing activities for 2013 amounted to $ 641 million , a decrease of $ 2604 million compared with 2012 primarily attributable to the $ 2668 million acquisition of pringles in 2012 . capital spending in 2013 included investments in our supply chain infrastructure , and to support capacity requirements in certain markets , including pringles . in addition , we continued the investment in our information technology infrastructure related to the reimplementation and upgrade of our sap platform . net cash used in investing activities of $ 3245 million in 2012 increased by $ 2658 million compared with 2011 , due to the acquisition of pringles in 2012 . cash paid for additions to properties as a percentage of net sales has increased to 4.3% ( 4.3 % ) in 2013 , from 3.8% ( 3.8 % ) in 2012 , which was a decrease from 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) in financing activities our net cash used by financing activities was $ 1141 million for 2013 , compared to net cash provided by financing activities of $ 1317 million for 2012 and net cash used in financing activities of $ 957 million for 2011 . the increase in cash provided from financing activities in 2012 compared to 2013 and 2011 , was primarily due to the issuance of debt related to the acquisition of pringles . total debt was $ 7.4 billion at year-end 2013 and $ 7.9 billion at year-end 2012 . in february 2013 , we issued $ 250 million of two-year floating-rate u.s . dollar notes , and $ 400 million of ten-year 2.75% ( 2.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 645 million . the proceeds from these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including , together with cash on hand , repayment of the $ 750 million aggregate principal amount of our 4.25% ( 4.25 % ) u.s . dollar notes due march 2013 . in may 2012 , we issued $ 350 million of three-year 1.125% ( 1.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , $ 400 million of five-year 1.75% ( 1.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes and $ 700 million of ten-year 3.125% ( 3.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 1.442 billion . the proceeds of these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including financing a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in may 2012 , we issued cdn . $ 300 million of two-year 2.10% ( 2.10 % ) fixed rate canadian dollar notes , using the proceeds from these notes for general corporate purposes , which included repayment of intercompany debt . this repayment resulted in cash available to be used for a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in december 2012 , we repaid $ 750 million five-year 5.125% ( 5.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in april 2011 , we repaid $ 945 million ten-year 6.60% ( 6.60 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in may 2011 , we issued $ 400 million of seven-year 3.25% ( 3.25 % ) fixed rate u.s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 397 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper . in november 2011 , we issued $ 500 million of five-year 1.875% ( 1.875 % ) fixed rate u . s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 498 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2013 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 |\n| 2012 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 |\n| 2011 | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  |', 'question': 'what was the value of cash provided by operations in 2013?', 'ops': '1807', 'id': 'Single_K/2013/page_27.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'general market conditions affecting trust asset performance , future discount rates based on average yields of high quality corporate bonds and our decisions regarding certain elective provisions of the we currently project that we will make total u.s . and foreign benefit plan contributions in 2014 of approximately $ 57 million . actual 2014 contributions could be different from our current projections , as influenced by our decision to undertake discretionary funding of our benefit trusts versus other competing investment priorities , future changes in government requirements , trust asset performance , renewals of union contracts , or higher-than-expected health care claims cost experience . we measure cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities reduced by expenditures for property additions . we use this non-gaap financial measure of cash flow to focus management and investors on the amount of cash available for debt repayment , dividend distributions , acquisition opportunities , and share repurchases . our cash flow metric is reconciled to the most comparable gaap measure , as follows: .', 'doc_post_text': 'year-over-year change ( 4.5 ) % (  % ) 22.4% ( 22.4 % ) the decrease in cash flow ( as defined ) in 2013 compared to 2012 was due primarily to higher capital expenditures . the increase in cash flow in 2012 compared to 2011 was driven by improved performance in working capital resulting from the one-time benefit derived from the pringles acquisition , as well as changes in the level of capital expenditures during the three-year period . investing activities our net cash used in investing activities for 2013 amounted to $ 641 million , a decrease of $ 2604 million compared with 2012 primarily attributable to the $ 2668 million acquisition of pringles in 2012 . capital spending in 2013 included investments in our supply chain infrastructure , and to support capacity requirements in certain markets , including pringles . in addition , we continued the investment in our information technology infrastructure related to the reimplementation and upgrade of our sap platform . net cash used in investing activities of $ 3245 million in 2012 increased by $ 2658 million compared with 2011 , due to the acquisition of pringles in 2012 . cash paid for additions to properties as a percentage of net sales has increased to 4.3% ( 4.3 % ) in 2013 , from 3.8% ( 3.8 % ) in 2012 , which was a decrease from 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) in financing activities our net cash used by financing activities was $ 1141 million for 2013 , compared to net cash provided by financing activities of $ 1317 million for 2012 and net cash used in financing activities of $ 957 million for 2011 . the increase in cash provided from financing activities in 2012 compared to 2013 and 2011 , was primarily due to the issuance of debt related to the acquisition of pringles . total debt was $ 7.4 billion at year-end 2013 and $ 7.9 billion at year-end 2012 . in february 2013 , we issued $ 250 million of two-year floating-rate u.s . dollar notes , and $ 400 million of ten-year 2.75% ( 2.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 645 million . the proceeds from these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including , together with cash on hand , repayment of the $ 750 million aggregate principal amount of our 4.25% ( 4.25 % ) u.s . dollar notes due march 2013 . in may 2012 , we issued $ 350 million of three-year 1.125% ( 1.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , $ 400 million of five-year 1.75% ( 1.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes and $ 700 million of ten-year 3.125% ( 3.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 1.442 billion . the proceeds of these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including financing a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in may 2012 , we issued cdn . $ 300 million of two-year 2.10% ( 2.10 % ) fixed rate canadian dollar notes , using the proceeds from these notes for general corporate purposes , which included repayment of intercompany debt . this repayment resulted in cash available to be used for a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in december 2012 , we repaid $ 750 million five-year 5.125% ( 5.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in april 2011 , we repaid $ 945 million ten-year 6.60% ( 6.60 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in may 2011 , we issued $ 400 million of seven-year 3.25% ( 3.25 % ) fixed rate u.s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 397 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper . in november 2011 , we issued $ 500 million of five-year 1.875% ( 1.875 % ) fixed rate u . s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 498 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper. .', 'doc_table': {'2013': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1807.0, 'additions to properties': -637.0, 'cash flow': 1170.0, 'year-over-year change': -4.5}, '2012': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1758.0, 'additions to properties': -533.0, 'cash flow': 1225.0, 'year-over-year change': -22.4}, '2011': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1595.0, 'additions to properties': -594.0, 'cash flow': 1001.0, 'year-over-year change': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of cash provided by operations in 2013?', 'what was the value in 2011?', 'what is the net change in value?', 'what was the 2011 value?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1807', '1595', '212', '1595', '.1329'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1807', '1595', 'subtract(1807, 1595)', '1595', 'subtract(1807, 1595), divide(#0, 1595)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1807.0, 1595.0, 212.0, 1595.0, 0.13292], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 1807.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:42 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nintangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives or on an accelerated method of amortization that is expected to reflect the estimated pattern of economic use . the remaining amortization expense will be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 0.9 years . amortization expense from continuing operations , related to intangibles was $ 7.4 million , $ 9.3 million and $ 9.2 million in fiscal 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . the company expects annual amortization expense for these intangible assets to be: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ng . grant accounting certain of the company 2019s foreign subsidiaries have received various grants from governmental agencies . these grants include capital , employment and research and development grants . capital grants for the acquisition of property and equipment are netted against the related capital expenditures and amortized as a credit to depreciation expense over the useful life of the related asset . employment grants , which relate to employee hiring and training , and research and development grants are recognized in earnings in the period in which the related expenditures are incurred by the company . h . translation of foreign currencies the functional currency for the company 2019s foreign sales and research and development operations is the applicable local currency . gains and losses resulting from translation of these foreign currencies into u.s . dollars are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income . transaction gains and losses and remeasurement of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities are included in income currently , including those at the company 2019s principal foreign manufacturing operations where the functional currency is the u.s . dollar . foreign currency transaction gains or losses included in other expenses , net , were not material in fiscal 2009 , 2008 or 2007 . i . derivative instruments and hedging agreements foreign exchange exposure management 2014 the company enters into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to offset certain operational and balance sheet exposures from the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates . such exposures result from the portion of the company 2019s operations , assets and liabilities that are denominated in currencies other than the u.s . dollar , primarily the euro ; other exposures include the philippine peso and the british pound . these foreign currency exchange contracts are entered into to support transactions made in the normal course of business , and accordingly , are not speculative in nature . the contracts are for periods consistent with the terms of the underlying transactions , generally one year or less . hedges related to anticipated transactions are designated and documented at the inception of the respective hedges as cash flow hedges and are evaluated for effectiveness monthly . derivative instruments are employed to eliminate or minimize certain foreign currency exposures that can be confidently identified and quantified . as the terms of the contract and the underlying transaction are matched at inception , forward contract effectiveness is calculated by comparing the change in fair value of the contract to the change in the forward value of the anticipated transaction , with the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income ( oci ) in shareholders 2019 equity and reclassified into earnings in the same period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings . any residual change in fair value of the instruments , or ineffectiveness , is recognized immediately in other income/expense . additionally , the company enters into forward foreign currency contracts that economically hedge the gains and losses generated by the remeasurement of certain recorded assets and liabilities in a non-functional currency . changes in the fair value of these undesignated hedges are recognized in other income/expense immediately as an offset to the changes in the fair value of the asset or liability being hedged . analog devices , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 |\n|---|---|---|\n| amortization expense | 5425.0 | 1430.0 |', 'question': 'what was the amortization expense in 2009?', 'ops': '7.4', 'id': 'Double_ADI/2009/page_59.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives or on an accelerated method of amortization that is expected to reflect the estimated pattern of economic use . the remaining amortization expense will be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 0.9 years . amortization expense from continuing operations , related to intangibles was $ 7.4 million , $ 9.3 million and $ 9.2 million in fiscal 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . the company expects annual amortization expense for these intangible assets to be: .', 'doc_post_text': 'g . grant accounting certain of the company 2019s foreign subsidiaries have received various grants from governmental agencies . these grants include capital , employment and research and development grants . capital grants for the acquisition of property and equipment are netted against the related capital expenditures and amortized as a credit to depreciation expense over the useful life of the related asset . employment grants , which relate to employee hiring and training , and research and development grants are recognized in earnings in the period in which the related expenditures are incurred by the company . h . translation of foreign currencies the functional currency for the company 2019s foreign sales and research and development operations is the applicable local currency . gains and losses resulting from translation of these foreign currencies into u.s . dollars are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income . transaction gains and losses and remeasurement of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities are included in income currently , including those at the company 2019s principal foreign manufacturing operations where the functional currency is the u.s . dollar . foreign currency transaction gains or losses included in other expenses , net , were not material in fiscal 2009 , 2008 or 2007 . i . derivative instruments and hedging agreements foreign exchange exposure management 2014 the company enters into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to offset certain operational and balance sheet exposures from the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates . such exposures result from the portion of the company 2019s operations , assets and liabilities that are denominated in currencies other than the u.s . dollar , primarily the euro ; other exposures include the philippine peso and the british pound . these foreign currency exchange contracts are entered into to support transactions made in the normal course of business , and accordingly , are not speculative in nature . the contracts are for periods consistent with the terms of the underlying transactions , generally one year or less . hedges related to anticipated transactions are designated and documented at the inception of the respective hedges as cash flow hedges and are evaluated for effectiveness monthly . derivative instruments are employed to eliminate or minimize certain foreign currency exposures that can be confidently identified and quantified . as the terms of the contract and the underlying transaction are matched at inception , forward contract effectiveness is calculated by comparing the change in fair value of the contract to the change in the forward value of the anticipated transaction , with the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income ( oci ) in shareholders 2019 equity and reclassified into earnings in the same period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings . any residual change in fair value of the instruments , or ineffectiveness , is recognized immediately in other income/expense . additionally , the company enters into forward foreign currency contracts that economically hedge the gains and losses generated by the remeasurement of certain recorded assets and liabilities in a non-functional currency . changes in the fair value of these undesignated hedges are recognized in other income/expense immediately as an offset to the changes in the fair value of the asset or liability being hedged . analog devices , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) .', 'doc_table': {'amortization expense': {'2010': 5425.0, '2011': 1430.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amortization expense in 2009?', 'and what was it in 2008?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2008 amortization expense?', 'and in 2010, what was this amortization expense, in millions?', 'what was, then, the change since 2009?', 'and what is this change as a portion of the 2009 amortization expense?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['7.4', '9.3', '-1.9', '-20.4%', '5.4', '-2', '-27.0%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['7.4', '9.3', 'subtract(7.4, 9.3)', 'subtract(7.4, 9.3), divide(#0, 9.3)', 'divide(5425, const_1000)', 'divide(5425, const_1000), subtract(#0, 7.4)', 'divide(5425, const_1000), subtract(#0, 7.4), divide(#1, 7.4)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [7.4, 9.3, -1.9, -0.2043, 5.425, -1.975, -0.26689], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 7.4}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "19s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:42 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: in the year of 2008, what was the income from continuing operations available to common stockholders?\nA1: 285.7\nQ2: and what were the basic earnings per share?\nA2: 0.76', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nsubstantially all of the goodwill and other intangible assets recorded related to the acquisition of allied are not deductible for tax purposes . pro forma information the consolidated financial statements presented for republic include the operating results of allied from the date of the acquisition . the following pro forma information is presented assuming the merger had been completed as of january 1 , 2007 . the unaudited pro forma information presented below has been prepared for illustrative purposes and is not intended to be indicative of the results of operations that would have actually occurred had the acquisition been consummated at the beginning of the periods presented or of future results of the combined operations ( in millions , except share and per share amounts ) . year ended december 31 , year ended december 31 , ( unaudited ) ( unaudited ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe above unaudited pro forma financial information includes adjustments for amortization of identifiable intangible assets , accretion of discounts to fair value associated with debt , environmental , self-insurance and other liabilities , accretion of capping , closure and post-closure obligations and amortization of the related assets , and provision for income taxes . assets held for sale as a condition of the merger with allied in december 2008 , we reached a settlement with the doj requiring us to divest of certain operations serving fifteen metropolitan areas including los angeles , ca ; san francisco , ca ; denver , co ; atlanta , ga ; northwestern indiana ; lexington , ky ; flint , mi ; cape girardeau , mo ; charlotte , nc ; cleveland , oh ; philadelphia , pa ; greenville-spartanburg , sc ; and fort worth , houston and lubbock , tx . the settlement requires us to divest 87 commercial waste collection routes , nine landfills and ten transfer stations , together with ancillary assets and , in three cases , access to landfill disposal capacity . we have classified the assets and liabilities we expect to divest ( including accounts receivable , property and equipment , goodwill , and accrued landfill and environmental costs ) as assets held for sale in our consolidated balance sheet at december 31 , 2008 . the assets held for sale related to operations that were republic 2019s prior to the merger with allied have been adjusted to the lower of their carrying amounts or estimated fair values less costs to sell , which resulted in us recognizing an asset impairment loss of $ 6.1 million in our consolidated statement of income for the year ended december 31 , 2008 . the assets held for sale related to operations that were allied 2019s prior to the merger are recorded at their estimated fair values in our consolidated balance sheet as of december 31 , 2008 in accordance with the purchase method of accounting . in february 2009 , we entered into an agreement to divest certain assets to waste connections , inc . the assets covered by the agreement include six municipal solid waste landfills , six collection operations and three transfer stations across the following seven markets : los angeles , ca ; denver , co ; houston , tx ; lubbock , tx ; greenville-spartanburg , sc ; charlotte , nc ; and flint , mi . the transaction with waste connections is subject to closing conditions regarding due diligence , regulatory approval and other customary matters . closing is expected to occur in the second quarter of 2009 . republic services , inc . and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements %%transmsg*** transmitting job : p14076 pcn : 106000000 ***%%pcmsg|104 |00046|yes|no|02/28/2009 21:07|0|0|page is valid , no graphics -- color : d| .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | revenue | income from continuing operations available to common stockholders | basic earnings per share | diluted earnings per share | revenue | income from continuing operations available to common stockholders | basic earnings per share | diluted earnings per share |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| year ended december 31 2008 ( unaudited ) | 9362.2 | 285.7 | 76.0 | 75.0 | 9362.2 | 285.7 | 76.0 | 75.0 |\n| year ended december 31 2007 ( unaudited ) | 9244.9 | 423.2 | 1.1 | 1.09 | 9244.9 | 423.2 | 1.1 | 1.09 |', 'question': 'what, then, can be concluded to be the number of shares available?', 'ops': 'divide(285.7, .76)', 'id': 'Double_RSG/2008/page_114.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'substantially all of the goodwill and other intangible assets recorded related to the acquisition of allied are not deductible for tax purposes . pro forma information the consolidated financial statements presented for republic include the operating results of allied from the date of the acquisition . the following pro forma information is presented assuming the merger had been completed as of january 1 , 2007 . the unaudited pro forma information presented below has been prepared for illustrative purposes and is not intended to be indicative of the results of operations that would have actually occurred had the acquisition been consummated at the beginning of the periods presented or of future results of the combined operations ( in millions , except share and per share amounts ) . year ended december 31 , year ended december 31 , ( unaudited ) ( unaudited ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the above unaudited pro forma financial information includes adjustments for amortization of identifiable intangible assets , accretion of discounts to fair value associated with debt , environmental , self-insurance and other liabilities , accretion of capping , closure and post-closure obligations and amortization of the related assets , and provision for income taxes . assets held for sale as a condition of the merger with allied in december 2008 , we reached a settlement with the doj requiring us to divest of certain operations serving fifteen metropolitan areas including los angeles , ca ; san francisco , ca ; denver , co ; atlanta , ga ; northwestern indiana ; lexington , ky ; flint , mi ; cape girardeau , mo ; charlotte , nc ; cleveland , oh ; philadelphia , pa ; greenville-spartanburg , sc ; and fort worth , houston and lubbock , tx . the settlement requires us to divest 87 commercial waste collection routes , nine landfills and ten transfer stations , together with ancillary assets and , in three cases , access to landfill disposal capacity . we have classified the assets and liabilities we expect to divest ( including accounts receivable , property and equipment , goodwill , and accrued landfill and environmental costs ) as assets held for sale in our consolidated balance sheet at december 31 , 2008 . the assets held for sale related to operations that were republic 2019s prior to the merger with allied have been adjusted to the lower of their carrying amounts or estimated fair values less costs to sell , which resulted in us recognizing an asset impairment loss of $ 6.1 million in our consolidated statement of income for the year ended december 31 , 2008 . the assets held for sale related to operations that were allied 2019s prior to the merger are recorded at their estimated fair values in our consolidated balance sheet as of december 31 , 2008 in accordance with the purchase method of accounting . in february 2009 , we entered into an agreement to divest certain assets to waste connections , inc . the assets covered by the agreement include six municipal solid waste landfills , six collection operations and three transfer stations across the following seven markets : los angeles , ca ; denver , co ; houston , tx ; lubbock , tx ; greenville-spartanburg , sc ; charlotte , nc ; and flint , mi . the transaction with waste connections is subject to closing conditions regarding due diligence , regulatory approval and other customary matters . closing is expected to occur in the second quarter of 2009 . republic services , inc . and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements %%transmsg*** transmitting job : p14076 pcn : 106000000 ***%%pcmsg|104 |00046|yes|no|02/28/2009 21:07|0|0|page is valid , no graphics -- color : d| .', 'doc_table': {'year ended december 31 2008 ( unaudited )': {'revenue': 9362.2, 'income from continuing operations available to common stockholders': 285.7, 'basic earnings per share': 76.0, 'diluted earnings per share': 75.0}, 'year ended december 31 2007 ( unaudited )': {'revenue': 9244.9, 'income from continuing operations available to common stockholders': 423.2, 'basic earnings per share': 1.1, 'diluted earnings per share': 1.09}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['in the year of 2008, what was the income from continuing operations available to common stockholders?', 'and what were the basic earnings per share?', 'what, then, can be concluded to be the number of shares available?', 'in that same year, what was the revenue?', 'and what was it in 2007?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'and what is this change as a percentage of the 2007 revenue?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['285.7', '.76', '375.9', '9362.2', '9244.9', '117.3', '1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['285.7', '.76', 'divide(285.7, .76)', '9362.2', '9244.9', 'subtract(9362.2, 9244.9)', 'subtract(9362.2, 9244.9), divide(#0, 9244.9)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [285.7, 0.76, 375.92105, 9362.2, 9244.9, 117.3, 0.01269], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 375.92105}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "19s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:42 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nthe goldman sachs group , inc . and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements the table below presents a summary of level 3 financial assets. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nlevel 3 financial assets as of december 2018 increased compared with december 2017 , primarily reflecting an increase in level 3 cash instruments . see notes 6 through 8 for further information about level 3 financial assets ( including information about unrealized gains and losses related to level 3 financial assets and financial liabilities , and transfers in and out of level 3 ) . note 6 . cash instruments cash instruments include u.s . government and agency obligations , non-u.s . government and agency obligations , mortgage-backed loans and securities , corporate debt instruments , equity securities , investments in funds at nav , and other non-derivative financial instruments owned and financial instruments sold , but not yet purchased . see below for the types of cash instruments included in each level of the fair value hierarchy and the valuation techniques and significant inputs used to determine their fair values . see note 5 for an overview of the firm 2019s fair value measurement policies . level 1 cash instruments level 1 cash instruments include certain money market instruments , u.s . government obligations , most non-u.s . government obligations , certain government agency obligations , certain corporate debt instruments and actively traded listed equities . these instruments are valued using quoted prices for identical unrestricted instruments in active markets . the firm defines active markets for equity instruments based on the average daily trading volume both in absolute terms and relative to the market capitalization for the instrument . the firm defines active markets for debt instruments based on both the average daily trading volume and the number of days with trading activity . level 2 cash instruments level 2 cash instruments include most money market instruments , most government agency obligations , certain non-u.s . government obligations , most mortgage-backed loans and securities , most corporate debt instruments , most state and municipal obligations , most other debt obligations , restricted or less liquid listed equities , commodities and certain lending commitments . valuations of level 2 cash instruments can be verified to quoted prices , recent trading activity for identical or similar instruments , broker or dealer quotations or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency . consideration is given to the nature of the quotations ( e.g. , indicative or firm ) and the relationship of recent market activity to the prices provided from alternative pricing sources . valuation adjustments are typically made to level 2 cash instruments ( i ) if the cash instrument is subject to transfer restrictions and/or ( ii ) for other premiums and liquidity discounts that a market participant would require to arrive at fair value . valuation adjustments are generally based on market evidence . level 3 cash instruments level 3 cash instruments have one or more significant valuation inputs that are not observable . absent evidence to the contrary , level 3 cash instruments are initially valued at transaction price , which is considered to be the best initial estimate of fair value . subsequently , the firm uses other methodologies to determine fair value , which vary based on the type of instrument . valuation inputs and assumptions are changed when corroborated by substantive observable evidence , including values realized on sales . valuation techniques and significant inputs of level 3 cash instruments valuation techniques of level 3 cash instruments vary by instrument , but are generally based on discounted cash flow techniques . the valuation techniques and the nature of significant inputs used to determine the fair values of each type of level 3 cash instrument are described below : loans and securities backed by commercial real estate . loans and securities backed by commercial real estate are directly or indirectly collateralized by a single commercial real estate property or a portfolio of properties , and may include tranches of varying levels of subordination . significant inputs are generally determined based on relative value analyses and include : 2030 market yields implied by transactions of similar or related assets and/or current levels and changes in market indices such as the cmbx ( an index that tracks the performance of commercial mortgage bonds ) ; 118 goldman sachs 2018 form 10-k .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash instruments | derivatives | other financial assets | total | cash instruments | derivatives | other financial assets | total |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| as of december 2018 | 17227.0 | 4948.0 | 6.0 | 22181.0 | 17227.0 | 4948.0 | 6.0 | 22181.0 |\n| as of december 2017 | 15395.0 | 3802.0 | 4.0 | 19201.0 | 15395.0 | 3802.0 | 4.0 | 19201.0 |', 'question': 'what was the change in cash instruments from 2017 to 2018, in millions?', 'ops': 'subtract(17227, 15395)', 'id': 'Single_GS/2018/page_134.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'the goldman sachs group , inc . and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements the table below presents a summary of level 3 financial assets. .', 'doc_post_text': 'level 3 financial assets as of december 2018 increased compared with december 2017 , primarily reflecting an increase in level 3 cash instruments . see notes 6 through 8 for further information about level 3 financial assets ( including information about unrealized gains and losses related to level 3 financial assets and financial liabilities , and transfers in and out of level 3 ) . note 6 . cash instruments cash instruments include u.s . government and agency obligations , non-u.s . government and agency obligations , mortgage-backed loans and securities , corporate debt instruments , equity securities , investments in funds at nav , and other non-derivative financial instruments owned and financial instruments sold , but not yet purchased . see below for the types of cash instruments included in each level of the fair value hierarchy and the valuation techniques and significant inputs used to determine their fair values . see note 5 for an overview of the firm 2019s fair value measurement policies . level 1 cash instruments level 1 cash instruments include certain money market instruments , u.s . government obligations , most non-u.s . government obligations , certain government agency obligations , certain corporate debt instruments and actively traded listed equities . these instruments are valued using quoted prices for identical unrestricted instruments in active markets . the firm defines active markets for equity instruments based on the average daily trading volume both in absolute terms and relative to the market capitalization for the instrument . the firm defines active markets for debt instruments based on both the average daily trading volume and the number of days with trading activity . level 2 cash instruments level 2 cash instruments include most money market instruments , most government agency obligations , certain non-u.s . government obligations , most mortgage-backed loans and securities , most corporate debt instruments , most state and municipal obligations , most other debt obligations , restricted or less liquid listed equities , commodities and certain lending commitments . valuations of level 2 cash instruments can be verified to quoted prices , recent trading activity for identical or similar instruments , broker or dealer quotations or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency . consideration is given to the nature of the quotations ( e.g. , indicative or firm ) and the relationship of recent market activity to the prices provided from alternative pricing sources . valuation adjustments are typically made to level 2 cash instruments ( i ) if the cash instrument is subject to transfer restrictions and/or ( ii ) for other premiums and liquidity discounts that a market participant would require to arrive at fair value . valuation adjustments are generally based on market evidence . level 3 cash instruments level 3 cash instruments have one or more significant valuation inputs that are not observable . absent evidence to the contrary , level 3 cash instruments are initially valued at transaction price , which is considered to be the best initial estimate of fair value . subsequently , the firm uses other methodologies to determine fair value , which vary based on the type of instrument . valuation inputs and assumptions are changed when corroborated by substantive observable evidence , including values realized on sales . valuation techniques and significant inputs of level 3 cash instruments valuation techniques of level 3 cash instruments vary by instrument , but are generally based on discounted cash flow techniques . the valuation techniques and the nature of significant inputs used to determine the fair values of each type of level 3 cash instrument are described below : loans and securities backed by commercial real estate . loans and securities backed by commercial real estate are directly or indirectly collateralized by a single commercial real estate property or a portfolio of properties , and may include tranches of varying levels of subordination . significant inputs are generally determined based on relative value analyses and include : 2030 market yields implied by transactions of similar or related assets and/or current levels and changes in market indices such as the cmbx ( an index that tracks the performance of commercial mortgage bonds ) ; 118 goldman sachs 2018 form 10-k .', 'doc_table': {'as of december 2018': {'cash instruments': 17227.0, 'derivatives': 4948.0, 'other financial assets': 6.0, 'total': 22181.0}, 'as of december 2017': {'cash instruments': 15395.0, 'derivatives': 3802.0, 'other financial assets': 4.0, 'total': 19201.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in cash instruments from 2017 to 2018, in millions?', 'and what was the total of cash instruments in 2017, in millions?', 'how much does that change represent, in percentage, in relation to this 2017 total?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1832', '15395', '11.9%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(17227, 15395)', '15395', 'subtract(17227, 15395), divide(#0, 15395)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1832.0, 15395.0, 0.119], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1832.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:42 ERROR dspy.teleprompt.utils: An exception occurred during evaluation
Traceback (most recent call last):
    return evaluate(candidate_program, devset=trainset, return_all_scores=return_all_scores, callback_metadata={"metric_key": "eval_full"})
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    return original(*args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    raise exception
    results = fn(instance, *args, **kwargs)
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    results = executor.execute(process_item, devset)
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    return self._execute_parallel(wrapped, data)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    raise Exception("Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.")
Exception: Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.
2025/07/29 14:25:42 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: in the year of 2008, what was the income from continuing operations available to common stockholders?\nA1: 285.7\nQ2: and what were the basic earnings per share?\nA2: 0.76\nQ3: what, then, can be concluded to be the number of shares available?\nA3: 375.92105', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nsubstantially all of the goodwill and other intangible assets recorded related to the acquisition of allied are not deductible for tax purposes . pro forma information the consolidated financial statements presented for republic include the operating results of allied from the date of the acquisition . the following pro forma information is presented assuming the merger had been completed as of january 1 , 2007 . the unaudited pro forma information presented below has been prepared for illustrative purposes and is not intended to be indicative of the results of operations that would have actually occurred had the acquisition been consummated at the beginning of the periods presented or of future results of the combined operations ( in millions , except share and per share amounts ) . year ended december 31 , year ended december 31 , ( unaudited ) ( unaudited ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe above unaudited pro forma financial information includes adjustments for amortization of identifiable intangible assets , accretion of discounts to fair value associated with debt , environmental , self-insurance and other liabilities , accretion of capping , closure and post-closure obligations and amortization of the related assets , and provision for income taxes . assets held for sale as a condition of the merger with allied in december 2008 , we reached a settlement with the doj requiring us to divest of certain operations serving fifteen metropolitan areas including los angeles , ca ; san francisco , ca ; denver , co ; atlanta , ga ; northwestern indiana ; lexington , ky ; flint , mi ; cape girardeau , mo ; charlotte , nc ; cleveland , oh ; philadelphia , pa ; greenville-spartanburg , sc ; and fort worth , houston and lubbock , tx . the settlement requires us to divest 87 commercial waste collection routes , nine landfills and ten transfer stations , together with ancillary assets and , in three cases , access to landfill disposal capacity . we have classified the assets and liabilities we expect to divest ( including accounts receivable , property and equipment , goodwill , and accrued landfill and environmental costs ) as assets held for sale in our consolidated balance sheet at december 31 , 2008 . the assets held for sale related to operations that were republic 2019s prior to the merger with allied have been adjusted to the lower of their carrying amounts or estimated fair values less costs to sell , which resulted in us recognizing an asset impairment loss of $ 6.1 million in our consolidated statement of income for the year ended december 31 , 2008 . the assets held for sale related to operations that were allied 2019s prior to the merger are recorded at their estimated fair values in our consolidated balance sheet as of december 31 , 2008 in accordance with the purchase method of accounting . in february 2009 , we entered into an agreement to divest certain assets to waste connections , inc . the assets covered by the agreement include six municipal solid waste landfills , six collection operations and three transfer stations across the following seven markets : los angeles , ca ; denver , co ; houston , tx ; lubbock , tx ; greenville-spartanburg , sc ; charlotte , nc ; and flint , mi . the transaction with waste connections is subject to closing conditions regarding due diligence , regulatory approval and other customary matters . closing is expected to occur in the second quarter of 2009 . republic services , inc . and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements %%transmsg*** transmitting job : p14076 pcn : 106000000 ***%%pcmsg|104 |00046|yes|no|02/28/2009 21:07|0|0|page is valid , no graphics -- color : d| .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | revenue | income from continuing operations available to common stockholders | basic earnings per share | diluted earnings per share | revenue | income from continuing operations available to common stockholders | basic earnings per share | diluted earnings per share |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| year ended december 31 2008 ( unaudited ) | 9362.2 | 285.7 | 76.0 | 75.0 | 9362.2 | 285.7 | 76.0 | 75.0 |\n| year ended december 31 2007 ( unaudited ) | 9244.9 | 423.2 | 1.1 | 1.09 | 9244.9 | 423.2 | 1.1 | 1.09 |', 'question': 'in that same year, what was the revenue?', 'ops': '9362.2', 'id': 'Double_RSG/2008/page_114.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'substantially all of the goodwill and other intangible assets recorded related to the acquisition of allied are not deductible for tax purposes . pro forma information the consolidated financial statements presented for republic include the operating results of allied from the date of the acquisition . the following pro forma information is presented assuming the merger had been completed as of january 1 , 2007 . the unaudited pro forma information presented below has been prepared for illustrative purposes and is not intended to be indicative of the results of operations that would have actually occurred had the acquisition been consummated at the beginning of the periods presented or of future results of the combined operations ( in millions , except share and per share amounts ) . year ended december 31 , year ended december 31 , ( unaudited ) ( unaudited ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the above unaudited pro forma financial information includes adjustments for amortization of identifiable intangible assets , accretion of discounts to fair value associated with debt , environmental , self-insurance and other liabilities , accretion of capping , closure and post-closure obligations and amortization of the related assets , and provision for income taxes . assets held for sale as a condition of the merger with allied in december 2008 , we reached a settlement with the doj requiring us to divest of certain operations serving fifteen metropolitan areas including los angeles , ca ; san francisco , ca ; denver , co ; atlanta , ga ; northwestern indiana ; lexington , ky ; flint , mi ; cape girardeau , mo ; charlotte , nc ; cleveland , oh ; philadelphia , pa ; greenville-spartanburg , sc ; and fort worth , houston and lubbock , tx . the settlement requires us to divest 87 commercial waste collection routes , nine landfills and ten transfer stations , together with ancillary assets and , in three cases , access to landfill disposal capacity . we have classified the assets and liabilities we expect to divest ( including accounts receivable , property and equipment , goodwill , and accrued landfill and environmental costs ) as assets held for sale in our consolidated balance sheet at december 31 , 2008 . the assets held for sale related to operations that were republic 2019s prior to the merger with allied have been adjusted to the lower of their carrying amounts or estimated fair values less costs to sell , which resulted in us recognizing an asset impairment loss of $ 6.1 million in our consolidated statement of income for the year ended december 31 , 2008 . the assets held for sale related to operations that were allied 2019s prior to the merger are recorded at their estimated fair values in our consolidated balance sheet as of december 31 , 2008 in accordance with the purchase method of accounting . in february 2009 , we entered into an agreement to divest certain assets to waste connections , inc . the assets covered by the agreement include six municipal solid waste landfills , six collection operations and three transfer stations across the following seven markets : los angeles , ca ; denver , co ; houston , tx ; lubbock , tx ; greenville-spartanburg , sc ; charlotte , nc ; and flint , mi . the transaction with waste connections is subject to closing conditions regarding due diligence , regulatory approval and other customary matters . closing is expected to occur in the second quarter of 2009 . republic services , inc . and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements %%transmsg*** transmitting job : p14076 pcn : 106000000 ***%%pcmsg|104 |00046|yes|no|02/28/2009 21:07|0|0|page is valid , no graphics -- color : d| .', 'doc_table': {'year ended december 31 2008 ( unaudited )': {'revenue': 9362.2, 'income from continuing operations available to common stockholders': 285.7, 'basic earnings per share': 76.0, 'diluted earnings per share': 75.0}, 'year ended december 31 2007 ( unaudited )': {'revenue': 9244.9, 'income from continuing operations available to common stockholders': 423.2, 'basic earnings per share': 1.1, 'diluted earnings per share': 1.09}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['in the year of 2008, what was the income from continuing operations available to common stockholders?', 'and what were the basic earnings per share?', 'what, then, can be concluded to be the number of shares available?', 'in that same year, what was the revenue?', 'and what was it in 2007?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'and what is this change as a percentage of the 2007 revenue?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['285.7', '.76', '375.9', '9362.2', '9244.9', '117.3', '1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['285.7', '.76', 'divide(285.7, .76)', '9362.2', '9244.9', 'subtract(9362.2, 9244.9)', 'subtract(9362.2, 9244.9), divide(#0, 9244.9)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [285.7, 0.76, 375.92105, 9362.2, 9244.9, 117.3, 0.01269], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 9362.2}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:42 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Full eval scores so far: [84.96, 0.0, 78.57, 0.0, 0.0]
2025/07/29 14:25:42 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Best full score so far: 84.96
2025/07/29 14:25:42 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: =======================
2025/07/29 14:25:42 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: 

2025/07/29 14:25:42 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:42 INFO dspy.teleprompt.mipro_optimizer_v2: Returning best identified program with score 84.96!
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the difference between the price of masco in 2010 and the starting value as of 12/31/05?\nA1: -48.49\nQ2: so what was the percentage growth during that time?\nA2: -0.4849\nQ3: what was the difference between the price of the s&p 500 in 2010 and the starting value as of 12/31/05?\nA3: 11.89\nQ4: and the original investment again?\nA4: 100.0\nQ5: so what was the growth rate of s&p 500 during this time?\nA5: 0.1189', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nperformance graph the table below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on our common stock with the cumulative total return of ( i ) the standard & poor 2019s 500 composite stock index ( 201cs&p 500 index 201d ) , ( ii ) the standard & poor 2019s industrials index ( 201cs&p industrials index 201d ) and ( iii ) the standard & poor 2019s consumer durables & apparel index ( 201cs&p consumer durables & apparel index 201d ) , from december 31 , 2005 through december 31 , 2010 , when the closing price of our common stock was $ 12.66 . the graph assumes investments of $ 100 on december 31 , 2005 in our common stock and in each of the three indices and the reinvestment of dividends . performance graph 201020092008200720062005 s&p 500 index s&p industrials index s&p consumer durables & apparel index the table below sets forth the value , as of december 31 for each of the years indicated , of a $ 100 investment made on december 31 , 2005 in each of our common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p industrials index and the s&p consumer durables & apparel index and includes the reinvestment of dividends. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin july 2007 , our board of directors authorized the purchase of up to 50 million shares of our common stock in open-market transactions or otherwise . at december 31 , 2010 , we had remaining authorization to repurchase up to 27 million shares . during 2010 , we repurchased and retired three million shares of our common stock , for cash aggregating $ 45 million to offset the dilutive impact of the 2010 grant of three million shares of long-term stock awards . we did not purchase any shares during the three months ended december 31 , 2010. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index | masco | s&p 500 index | s&p industrials index | s&p consumer durables & apparel index |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2006 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 | 101.79 | 115.61 | 113.16 | 106.16 |\n| 2007 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 | 76.74 | 121.95 | 126.72 | 84.5 |\n| 2008 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 | 42.81 | 77.38 | 76.79 | 56.13 |\n| 2009 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 | 54.89 | 97.44 | 92.3 | 76.51 |\n| 2010 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 | 51.51 | 111.89 | 116.64 | 99.87 |', 'question': 'what was the difference between the two growth rates?', 'ops': 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(111.89, 100), divide(#2, 100), subtract(#1, #3)', 'id': 'Single_MAS/2010/page_29.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': 'performance graph the table below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on our common stock with the cumulative total return of ( i ) the standard & poor 2019s 500 composite stock index ( 201cs&p 500 index 201d ) , ( ii ) the standard & poor 2019s industrials index ( 201cs&p industrials index 201d ) and ( iii ) the standard & poor 2019s consumer durables & apparel index ( 201cs&p consumer durables & apparel index 201d ) , from december 31 , 2005 through december 31 , 2010 , when the closing price of our common stock was $ 12.66 . the graph assumes investments of $ 100 on december 31 , 2005 in our common stock and in each of the three indices and the reinvestment of dividends . performance graph 201020092008200720062005 s&p 500 index s&p industrials index s&p consumer durables & apparel index the table below sets forth the value , as of december 31 for each of the years indicated , of a $ 100 investment made on december 31 , 2005 in each of our common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p industrials index and the s&p consumer durables & apparel index and includes the reinvestment of dividends. .', 'doc_post_text': 'in july 2007 , our board of directors authorized the purchase of up to 50 million shares of our common stock in open-market transactions or otherwise . at december 31 , 2010 , we had remaining authorization to repurchase up to 27 million shares . during 2010 , we repurchased and retired three million shares of our common stock , for cash aggregating $ 45 million to offset the dilutive impact of the 2010 grant of three million shares of long-term stock awards . we did not purchase any shares during the three months ended december 31 , 2010. .', 'doc_table': {'2006': {'masco': 101.79, 's&p 500 index': 115.61, 's&p industrials index': 113.16, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 106.16}, '2007': {'masco': 76.74, 's&p 500 index': 121.95, 's&p industrials index': 126.72, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 84.5}, '2008': {'masco': 42.81, 's&p 500 index': 77.38, 's&p industrials index': 76.79, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 56.13}, '2009': {'masco': 54.89, 's&p 500 index': 97.44, 's&p industrials index': 92.3, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 76.51}, '2010': {'masco': 51.51, 's&p 500 index': 111.89, 's&p industrials index': 116.64, 's&p consumer durables & apparel index': 99.87}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the difference between the price of masco in 2010 and the starting value as of 12/31/05?', 'so what was the percentage growth during that time?', 'what was the difference between the price of the s&p 500 in 2010 and the starting value as of 12/31/05?', 'and the original investment again?', 'so what was the growth rate of s&p 500 during this time?', 'what was the difference between the two growth rates?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['-48.49', '-48.49%', '11.89', '100', '11.89%', '-60.38%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(51.51, 100)', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(111.89, 100)', '100', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(111.89, 100), divide(#2, 100)', 'subtract(51.51, 100), divide(#0, 100), subtract(111.89, 100), divide(#2, 100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [-48.49, -0.4849, 11.89, 100.0, 0.1189, -0.6038], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -0.6038}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "19s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfor intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | revenue | net loss | revenue | net loss |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| year endedfebruary 12008 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 |\n| year endedfebruary 22007 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 |', 'question': 'what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?', 'ops': 'add(41.1, 27.3)', 'id': 'Single_DG/2008/page_86.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'for intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .', 'doc_post_text': 'the pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .', 'doc_table': {'year endedfebruary 12008': {'revenue': 9495246.0, 'net loss': -57939.0}, 'year endedfebruary 22007': {'revenue': 9169822.0, 'net loss': -156188.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?', 'including the year of 2011, what would it then be?', 'including now the year of 2012 in the amount, what would the total estimated aggregate amortization expense be, in millions?', 'what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense in 2013, in millions?', 'including 2013, what would now be the total sum in estimated aggregate amortization expense over those five years, in millions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['68.4', '89.3', '106.3', '12.0', '118.3'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(41.1, 27.3)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0)', '12.0', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0), add(#2, 12.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [68.4, 89.3, 106.3, 12.0, 118.3], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 68.4}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "19s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: in the year of 2007, what was the number of granted shares?\nA1: 852353.0\nQ2: and what was it for vested ones?\nA2: 51206.0\nQ3: how much, then, did the granted number represent in relation to the vested one?\nA3: 16.64557\nQ4: and in that same year, what was the fair value of these vested shares, in millions?\nA4: 3.4\nQ5: what was it for 2005?\nA5: 0.6', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nhumana inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during 2007 was $ 133.9 million , compared with $ 133.7 million during 2006 and $ 57.8 million during 2005 . cash received from stock option exercises for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 totaled $ 62.7 million , $ 49.2 million , and $ 36.4 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested options not yet recognized was $ 23.6 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.6 years . restricted stock awards restricted stock awards are granted with a fair value equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant . compensation expense is recorded straight-line over the vesting period , generally three years from the date of grant . the weighted average grant date fair value of our restricted stock awards was $ 63.59 , $ 54.36 , and $ 32.81 for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 , respectively . activity for our restricted stock awards was as follows for the year ended december 31 , 2007 : shares weighted average grant-date fair value .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe fair value of shares vested during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 was $ 3.4 million , $ 2.3 million , and $ 0.6 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock awards not yet recognized was $ 44.7 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.4 years . there are no other contractual terms covering restricted stock awards once vested. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006 | granted | vested | forfeited | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007 | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006 | granted | vested | forfeited | nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| shares | 1107455.0 | 852353.0 | -51206.0 | -63624.0 | 1844978.0 | 1107455.0 | 852353.0 | -51206.0 | -63624.0 | 1844978.0 |\n| weighted average grant-date fair value | 45.86 | 63.59 | 56.93 | 49.65 | 53.61 | 45.86 | 63.59 | 56.93 | 49.65 | 53.61 |', 'question': 'what was, then, the total combined fair value for both years, in millions?', 'ops': 'add(3.4, 0.6)', 'id': 'Double_HUM/2007/page_96.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'humana inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during 2007 was $ 133.9 million , compared with $ 133.7 million during 2006 and $ 57.8 million during 2005 . cash received from stock option exercises for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 totaled $ 62.7 million , $ 49.2 million , and $ 36.4 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested options not yet recognized was $ 23.6 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.6 years . restricted stock awards restricted stock awards are granted with a fair value equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant . compensation expense is recorded straight-line over the vesting period , generally three years from the date of grant . the weighted average grant date fair value of our restricted stock awards was $ 63.59 , $ 54.36 , and $ 32.81 for the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 , respectively . activity for our restricted stock awards was as follows for the year ended december 31 , 2007 : shares weighted average grant-date fair value .', 'doc_post_text': 'the fair value of shares vested during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 , and 2005 was $ 3.4 million , $ 2.3 million , and $ 0.6 million , respectively . total compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock awards not yet recognized was $ 44.7 million at december 31 , 2007 . we expect to recognize this compensation expense over a weighted average period of approximately 1.4 years . there are no other contractual terms covering restricted stock awards once vested. .', 'doc_table': {'shares': {'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006': 1107455.0, 'granted': 852353.0, 'vested': -51206.0, 'forfeited': -63624.0, 'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007': 1844978.0}, 'weighted average grant-date fair value': {'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2006': 45.86, 'granted': 63.59, 'vested': 56.93, 'forfeited': 49.65, 'nonvested restricted stock at december 31 2007': 53.61}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['in the year of 2007, what was the number of granted shares?', 'and what was it for vested ones?', 'how much, then, did the granted number represent in relation to the vested one?', 'and in that same year, what was the fair value of these vested shares, in millions?', 'what was it for 2005?', 'what was, then, the total combined fair value for both years, in millions?', 'including 2006, what becomes this total?', 'and what was, in millions, the average between the three years?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['852353', '51206', '16.65', '3.4', '0.6', '4', '6.3', '2.1'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['852353', '51206', 'divide(852353, 51206)', '3.4', '0.6', 'add(3.4, 0.6)', 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3)', 'add(3.4, 0.6), add(#0, 2.3), divide(#1, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [852353.0, 51206.0, 16.64557, 3.4, 0.6, 4.0, 6.3, 2.1], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 4.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "19s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amount of receivables collected by the railroad in 2011, in billions?\nA1: 18.8', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nthe railroad collected approximately $ 18.8 billion and $ 16.3 billion of receivables during the years ended december 31 , 2011 and 2010 , respectively . upri used certain of these proceeds to purchase new receivables under the facility . the costs of the receivables securitization facility include interest , which will vary based on prevailing commercial paper rates , program fees paid to banks , commercial paper issuing costs , and fees for unused commitment availability . the costs of the receivables securitization facility are included in interest expense and were $ 4 million and $ 6 million for 2011 and 2010 , respectively . prior to adoption of the new accounting standard , the costs of the receivables securitization facility were included in other income and were $ 9 million for 2009 . the investors have no recourse to the railroad 2019s other assets , except for customary warranty and indemnity claims . creditors of the railroad do not have recourse to the assets of upri . in august 2011 , the receivables securitization facility was renewed for an additional 364-day period at comparable terms and conditions . contractual obligations and commercial commitments as described in the notes to the consolidated financial statements and as referenced in the tables below , we have contractual obligations and commercial commitments that may affect our financial condition . based on our assessment of the underlying provisions and circumstances of our contractual obligations and commercial commitments , including material sources of off-balance sheet and structured finance arrangements , other than the risks that we and other similarly situated companies face with respect to the condition of the capital markets ( as described in item 1a of part ii of this report ) , there is no known trend , demand , commitment , event , or uncertainty that is reasonably likely to occur that would have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations , financial condition , or liquidity . in addition , our commercial obligations , financings , and commitments are customary transactions that are similar to those of other comparable corporations , particularly within the transportation industry . the following tables identify material obligations and commitments as of december 31 , 2011 : payments due by december 31 , contractual obligations after millions total 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2016 other .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n[a] excludes capital lease obligations of $ 1874 million and unamortized discount of $ 364 million . includes an interest component of $ 5120 million . [b] includes leases for locomotives , freight cars , other equipment , and real estate . [c] represents total obligations , including interest component of $ 685 million . [d] purchase obligations include locomotive maintenance contracts ; purchase commitments for fuel purchases , locomotives , ties , ballast , and rail ; and agreements to purchase other goods and services . for amounts where we cannot reasonably estimate the year of settlement , they are reflected in the other column . [e] includes estimated other post retirement , medical , and life insurance payments and payments made under the unfunded pension plan for the next ten years . no amounts are included for funded pension obligations as no contributions are currently required . [f] future cash flows for income tax contingencies reflect the recorded liability for unrecognized tax benefits , including interest and penalties , as of december 31 , 2011 . where we can reasonably estimate the years in which these liabilities may be settled , this is shown in the table . for amounts where we cannot reasonably estimate the year of settlement , they are reflected in the other column. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations | debt [a] | operating leases [b] | capital lease obligations [c] | purchase obligations [d] | other post retirement benefits [e] | income tax contingencies [f] | total contractualobligations |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| total | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 | 12516.0 | 4528.0 | 2559.0 | 5137.0 | 249.0 | 107.0 | 25096.0 |\n| payments due by december 31 2012 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 | 538.0 | 525.0 | 297.0 | 2598.0 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 4015.0 |\n| payments due by december 31 2013 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 | 852.0 | 489.0 | 269.0 | 568.0 | 26.0 | - | 2204.0 |\n| payments due by december 31 2014 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 | 887.0 | 415.0 | 276.0 | 560.0 | 26.0 | - | 2164.0 |\n| payments due by december 31 2015 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 | 615.0 | 372.0 | 276.0 | 276.0 | 26.0 | - | 1565.0 |\n| payments due by december 31 2016 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 | 652.0 | 347.0 | 262.0 | 245.0 | 26.0 | - | 1532.0 |\n| payments due by december 31 after 2016 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 | 8972.0 | 2380.0 | 1179.0 | 858.0 | 119.0 | - | 13508.0 |\n| payments due by december 31 other | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 | $ - | - | - | 32.0 | - | 76.0 | 108.0 |', 'question': 'if there were 4 inventory turns per year, what would be the 2012 cash flow from the balance of these receivables, also in billions?', 'ops': 'divide(18.8, 4)', 'id': 'Double_UNP/2011/page_40.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'the railroad collected approximately $ 18.8 billion and $ 16.3 billion of receivables during the years ended december 31 , 2011 and 2010 , respectively . upri used certain of these proceeds to purchase new receivables under the facility . the costs of the receivables securitization facility include interest , which will vary based on prevailing commercial paper rates , program fees paid to banks , commercial paper issuing costs , and fees for unused commitment availability . the costs of the receivables securitization facility are included in interest expense and were $ 4 million and $ 6 million for 2011 and 2010 , respectively . prior to adoption of the new accounting standard , the costs of the receivables securitization facility were included in other income and were $ 9 million for 2009 . the investors have no recourse to the railroad 2019s other assets , except for customary warranty and indemnity claims . creditors of the railroad do not have recourse to the assets of upri . in august 2011 , the receivables securitization facility was renewed for an additional 364-day period at comparable terms and conditions . contractual obligations and commercial commitments as described in the notes to the consolidated financial statements and as referenced in the tables below , we have contractual obligations and commercial commitments that may affect our financial condition . based on our assessment of the underlying provisions and circumstances of our contractual obligations and commercial commitments , including material sources of off-balance sheet and structured finance arrangements , other than the risks that we and other similarly situated companies face with respect to the condition of the capital markets ( as described in item 1a of part ii of this report ) , there is no known trend , demand , commitment , event , or uncertainty that is reasonably likely to occur that would have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations , financial condition , or liquidity . in addition , our commercial obligations , financings , and commitments are customary transactions that are similar to those of other comparable corporations , particularly within the transportation industry . the following tables identify material obligations and commitments as of december 31 , 2011 : payments due by december 31 , contractual obligations after millions total 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2016 other .', 'doc_post_text': '[a] excludes capital lease obligations of $ 1874 million and unamortized discount of $ 364 million . includes an interest component of $ 5120 million . [b] includes leases for locomotives , freight cars , other equipment , and real estate . [c] represents total obligations , including interest component of $ 685 million . [d] purchase obligations include locomotive maintenance contracts ; purchase commitments for fuel purchases , locomotives , ties , ballast , and rail ; and agreements to purchase other goods and services . for amounts where we cannot reasonably estimate the year of settlement , they are reflected in the other column . [e] includes estimated other post retirement , medical , and life insurance payments and payments made under the unfunded pension plan for the next ten years . no amounts are included for funded pension obligations as no contributions are currently required . [f] future cash flows for income tax contingencies reflect the recorded liability for unrecognized tax benefits , including interest and penalties , as of december 31 , 2011 . where we can reasonably estimate the years in which these liabilities may be settled , this is shown in the table . for amounts where we cannot reasonably estimate the year of settlement , they are reflected in the other column. .', 'doc_table': {'total': {'debt [a]': 12516.0, 'operating leases [b]': 4528.0, 'capital lease obligations [c]': 2559.0, 'purchase obligations [d]': 5137.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': 249.0, 'income tax contingencies [f]': 107.0, 'total contractualobligations': 25096.0}, 'payments due by december 31 2012': {'debt [a]': 538.0, 'operating leases [b]': 525.0, 'capital lease obligations [c]': 297.0, 'purchase obligations [d]': 2598.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': 26.0, 'income tax contingencies [f]': 31.0, 'total contractualobligations': 4015.0}, 'payments due by december 31 2013': {'debt [a]': 852.0, 'operating leases [b]': 489.0, 'capital lease obligations [c]': 269.0, 'purchase obligations [d]': 568.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': 26.0, 'income tax contingencies [f]': '-', 'total contractualobligations': 2204.0}, 'payments due by december 31 2014': {'debt [a]': 887.0, 'operating leases [b]': 415.0, 'capital lease obligations [c]': 276.0, 'purchase obligations [d]': 560.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': 26.0, 'income tax contingencies [f]': '-', 'total contractualobligations': 2164.0}, 'payments due by december 31 2015': {'debt [a]': 615.0, 'operating leases [b]': 372.0, 'capital lease obligations [c]': 276.0, 'purchase obligations [d]': 276.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': 26.0, 'income tax contingencies [f]': '-', 'total contractualobligations': 1565.0}, 'payments due by december 31 2016': {'debt [a]': 652.0, 'operating leases [b]': 347.0, 'capital lease obligations [c]': 262.0, 'purchase obligations [d]': 245.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': 26.0, 'income tax contingencies [f]': '-', 'total contractualobligations': 1532.0}, 'payments due by december 31 after 2016': {'debt [a]': 8972.0, 'operating leases [b]': 2380.0, 'capital lease obligations [c]': 1179.0, 'purchase obligations [d]': 858.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': 119.0, 'income tax contingencies [f]': '-', 'total contractualobligations': 13508.0}, 'payments due by december 31 other': {'debt [a]': '$ -', 'operating leases [b]': '-', 'capital lease obligations [c]': '-', 'purchase obligations [d]': 32.0, 'other post retirement benefits [e]': '-', 'income tax contingencies [f]': 76.0, 'total contractualobligations': 108.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amount of receivables collected by the railroad in 2011, in billions?', 'if there were 4 inventory turns per year, what would be the 2012 cash flow from the balance of these receivables, also in billions?', 'and for the receivables collected in 2010, what would be, in billions, the cash flow in 2011 for their balance?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['18.8', '4.7', '5.4'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['18.8', 'divide(18.8, 4)', 'divide(16.3, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [18.8, 4.7, 5.43333], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 4.7}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "20s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total of benefit payments in 2012?\nA1: 3369.0\nQ2: and what was that in 2011?\nA2: 3028.0\nQ3: how much, then, does the 2012 total represent in relation to this 2011 one?\nA3: 1.11262\nQ4: and what is this value without the portion equivalent to the 2011 total?\nA4: 0.11262\nQ5: and concerning the the incremental severance expense, what was the amount of the one related to the severance plan in 2009?\nA5: 3471.0\nQ6: what was the total severance expense in that year?\nA6: 135113.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmastercard incorporated notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) ( in thousands , except percent and per share data ) the company does not make any contributions to its postretirement plan other than funding benefits payments . the following table summarizes expected net benefit payments from the company 2019s general assets through 2019 : benefit payments expected subsidy receipts benefit payments .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company provides limited postemployment benefits to eligible former u.s . employees , primarily severance under a formal severance plan ( the 201cseverance plan 201d ) . the company accounts for severance expense by accruing the expected cost of the severance benefits expected to be provided to former employees after employment over their relevant service periods . the company updates the assumptions in determining the severance accrual by evaluating the actual severance activity and long-term trends underlying the assumptions . as a result of updating the assumptions , the company recorded incremental severance expense ( benefit ) related to the severance plan of $ 3471 , $ 2643 and $ ( 3418 ) , respectively , during the years 2009 , 2008 and 2007 . these amounts were part of total severance expenses of $ 135113 , $ 32997 and $ 21284 in 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively , included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations . note 14 . debt on april 28 , 2008 , the company extended its committed unsecured revolving credit facility , dated as of april 28 , 2006 ( the 201ccredit facility 201d ) , for an additional year . the new expiration date of the credit facility is april 26 , 2011 . the available funding under the credit facility will remain at $ 2500000 through april 27 , 2010 and then decrease to $ 2000000 during the final year of the credit facility agreement . other terms and conditions in the credit facility remain unchanged . the company 2019s option to request that each lender under the credit facility extend its commitment was provided pursuant to the original terms of the credit facility agreement . borrowings under the facility are available to provide liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by mastercard international customers and , subject to a limit of $ 500000 , for general corporate purposes . the facility fee and borrowing cost are contingent upon the company 2019s credit rating . at december 31 , 2009 , the facility fee was 7 basis points on the total commitment , or approximately $ 1774 annually . interest on borrowings under the credit facility would be charged at the london interbank offered rate ( libor ) plus an applicable margin of 28 basis points or an alternative base rate , and a utilization fee of 10 basis points would be charged if outstanding borrowings under the facility exceed 50% ( 50 % ) of commitments . at the inception of the credit facility , the company also agreed to pay upfront fees of $ 1250 and administrative fees of $ 325 , which are being amortized over five years . facility and other fees associated with the credit facility totaled $ 2222 , $ 2353 and $ 2477 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . mastercard was in compliance with the covenants of the credit facility and had no borrowings under the credit facility at december 31 , 2009 or december 31 , 2008 . the majority of credit facility lenders are members or affiliates of members of mastercard international . in june 1998 , mastercard international issued ten-year unsecured , subordinated notes ( the 201cnotes 201d ) paying a fixed interest rate of 6.67% ( 6.67 % ) per annum . mastercard repaid the entire principal amount of $ 80000 on june 30 , 2008 pursuant to the terms of the notes . the interest expense on the notes was $ 2668 and $ 5336 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| benefit payments | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 |\n| expected subsidy receipts | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 |\n| net benefit payments | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 |', 'question': 'what percentage, then, of this total expense does that amount represent?', 'ops': 'divide(3471, 135113)', 'id': 'Double_MA/2009/page_115.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'mastercard incorporated notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) ( in thousands , except percent and per share data ) the company does not make any contributions to its postretirement plan other than funding benefits payments . the following table summarizes expected net benefit payments from the company 2019s general assets through 2019 : benefit payments expected subsidy receipts benefit payments .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company provides limited postemployment benefits to eligible former u.s . employees , primarily severance under a formal severance plan ( the 201cseverance plan 201d ) . the company accounts for severance expense by accruing the expected cost of the severance benefits expected to be provided to former employees after employment over their relevant service periods . the company updates the assumptions in determining the severance accrual by evaluating the actual severance activity and long-term trends underlying the assumptions . as a result of updating the assumptions , the company recorded incremental severance expense ( benefit ) related to the severance plan of $ 3471 , $ 2643 and $ ( 3418 ) , respectively , during the years 2009 , 2008 and 2007 . these amounts were part of total severance expenses of $ 135113 , $ 32997 and $ 21284 in 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively , included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations . note 14 . debt on april 28 , 2008 , the company extended its committed unsecured revolving credit facility , dated as of april 28 , 2006 ( the 201ccredit facility 201d ) , for an additional year . the new expiration date of the credit facility is april 26 , 2011 . the available funding under the credit facility will remain at $ 2500000 through april 27 , 2010 and then decrease to $ 2000000 during the final year of the credit facility agreement . other terms and conditions in the credit facility remain unchanged . the company 2019s option to request that each lender under the credit facility extend its commitment was provided pursuant to the original terms of the credit facility agreement . borrowings under the facility are available to provide liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by mastercard international customers and , subject to a limit of $ 500000 , for general corporate purposes . the facility fee and borrowing cost are contingent upon the company 2019s credit rating . at december 31 , 2009 , the facility fee was 7 basis points on the total commitment , or approximately $ 1774 annually . interest on borrowings under the credit facility would be charged at the london interbank offered rate ( libor ) plus an applicable margin of 28 basis points or an alternative base rate , and a utilization fee of 10 basis points would be charged if outstanding borrowings under the facility exceed 50% ( 50 % ) of commitments . at the inception of the credit facility , the company also agreed to pay upfront fees of $ 1250 and administrative fees of $ 325 , which are being amortized over five years . facility and other fees associated with the credit facility totaled $ 2222 , $ 2353 and $ 2477 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . mastercard was in compliance with the covenants of the credit facility and had no borrowings under the credit facility at december 31 , 2009 or december 31 , 2008 . the majority of credit facility lenders are members or affiliates of members of mastercard international . in june 1998 , mastercard international issued ten-year unsecured , subordinated notes ( the 201cnotes 201d ) paying a fixed interest rate of 6.67% ( 6.67 % ) per annum . mastercard repaid the entire principal amount of $ 80000 on june 30 , 2008 pursuant to the terms of the notes . the interest expense on the notes was $ 2668 and $ 5336 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively. .', 'doc_table': {'benefit payments': {'2010': 2714.0, '2011': 3028.0, '2012': 3369.0, '2013': 3660.0, '2014': 4019.0, '2015 2013 2019': 22686.0}, 'expected subsidy receipts': {'2010': 71.0, '2011': 91.0, '2012': 111.0, '2013': 134.0, '2014': 151.0, '2015 2013 2019': 1071.0}, 'net benefit payments': {'2010': 2643.0, '2011': 2937.0, '2012': 3258.0, '2013': 3526.0, '2014': 3868.0, '2015 2013 2019': 21615.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total of benefit payments in 2012?', 'and what was that in 2011?', 'how much, then, does the 2012 total represent in relation to this 2011 one?', 'and what is this value without the portion equivalent to the 2011 total?', 'and concerning the the incremental severance expense, what was the amount of the one related to the severance plan in 2009?', 'what was the total severance expense in that year?', 'what percentage, then, of this total expense does that amount represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3369', '3028', '1.1126', '11.26%', '3471', '135113', '2.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3369', '3028', 'divide(3369, 3028)', 'divide(3369, 3028), subtract(#0, const_1)', '3471', '135113', 'divide(3471, 135113)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3369.0, 3028.0, 1.11262, 0.11262, 3471.0, 135113.0, 0.02569], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.02569}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "19s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nthe following table details the growth in global weighted average berths and the global , north american , european and asia/pacific cruise guests over the past five years ( in thousands , except berth data ) : weighted- average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 ) global cruise guests ( 1 ) american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 ) european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 ) asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n_______________________________________________________________________________ ( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources . we use data obtained from seatrade insider , cruise industry news and company press releases to estimate weighted-average supply of berths and clia and g.p . wild to estimate cruise guest information . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) total berths include our berths related to our global brands and partner brands . ( 3 ) our estimates include the united states and canada . ( 4 ) our estimates include european countries relevant to the industry ( e.g. , nordics , germany , france , italy , spain and the united kingdom ) . ( 5 ) our estimates include the southeast asia ( e.g. , singapore , thailand and the philippines ) , east asia ( e.g. , china and japan ) , south asia ( e.g. , india and pakistan ) and oceanian ( e.g. , australia and fiji islands ) regions . north america the majority of industry cruise guests are sourced from north america , which represented approximately 52% ( 52 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 2% ( 2 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . europe industry cruise guests sourced from europe represented approximately 27% ( 27 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 1% ( 1 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . asia/pacific industry cruise guests sourced from the asia/pacific region represented approximately 15% ( 15 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 25% ( 25 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . the asia/pacific region is experiencing the highest growth rate of the major regions , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america . competition we compete with a number of cruise lines . our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise line , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , p&o cruises , princess cruises and seabourn ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; and norwegian cruise line holdings ltd , which owns norwegian cruise line , oceania cruises and regent seven seas cruises . cruise lines compete with .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 ) | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 |\n| royal caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 ) | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 |\n| globalcruiseguests ( 1 ) | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 |\n| north american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 ) | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 |\n| european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 ) | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 |\n| asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 ) | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 |', 'question': 'what is the net change in weighted-average supply of berths market ed globally from 2012 to 2016?', 'ops': 'subtract(493000, 425000)', 'id': 'Single_RCL/2016/page_7.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': 'the following table details the growth in global weighted average berths and the global , north american , european and asia/pacific cruise guests over the past five years ( in thousands , except berth data ) : weighted- average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 ) global cruise guests ( 1 ) american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 ) european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 ) asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 ) .', 'doc_post_text': '_______________________________________________________________________________ ( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources . we use data obtained from seatrade insider , cruise industry news and company press releases to estimate weighted-average supply of berths and clia and g.p . wild to estimate cruise guest information . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) total berths include our berths related to our global brands and partner brands . ( 3 ) our estimates include the united states and canada . ( 4 ) our estimates include european countries relevant to the industry ( e.g. , nordics , germany , france , italy , spain and the united kingdom ) . ( 5 ) our estimates include the southeast asia ( e.g. , singapore , thailand and the philippines ) , east asia ( e.g. , china and japan ) , south asia ( e.g. , india and pakistan ) and oceanian ( e.g. , australia and fiji islands ) regions . north america the majority of industry cruise guests are sourced from north america , which represented approximately 52% ( 52 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 2% ( 2 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . europe industry cruise guests sourced from europe represented approximately 27% ( 27 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 1% ( 1 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . asia/pacific industry cruise guests sourced from the asia/pacific region represented approximately 15% ( 15 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 25% ( 25 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . the asia/pacific region is experiencing the highest growth rate of the major regions , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america . competition we compete with a number of cruise lines . our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise line , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , p&o cruises , princess cruises and seabourn ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; and norwegian cruise line holdings ltd , which owns norwegian cruise line , oceania cruises and regent seven seas cruises . cruise lines compete with .', 'doc_table': {'weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 )': {'2012': 425000.0, '2013': 432000.0, '2014': 448000.0, '2015': 469000.0, '2016': 493000.0}, 'royal caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 )': {'2012': 98650.0, '2013': 98750.0, '2014': 105750.0, '2015': 112700.0, '2016': 123270.0}, 'globalcruiseguests ( 1 )': {'2012': 20813.0, '2013': 21343.0, '2014': 22039.0, '2015': 23000.0, '2016': 24000.0}, 'north american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 )': {'2012': 11641.0, '2013': 11710.0, '2014': 12269.0, '2015': 12004.0, '2016': 12581.0}, 'european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 )': {'2012': 6225.0, '2013': 6430.0, '2014': 6387.0, '2015': 6587.0, '2016': 6542.0}, 'asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 )': {'2012': 1474.0, '2013': 2045.0, '2014': 2382.0, '2015': 3129.0, '2016': 3636.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in weighted-average supply of berths market ed globally from 2012 to 2016?', 'what percentage change does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['68000', '16%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(493000, 425000)', 'subtract(493000, 425000), divide(#0, 425000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [68000.0, 0.16], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 68000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "19s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in value for booking holding inc. in 2018, assuming a $100 initial investment?\nA1: 48.18\nQ2: what is the percent change?\nA2: 0.4818', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmeasurement point december 31 booking holdings nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| booking holdings inc . | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 |\n| nasdaqcomposite index | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 |\n| s&p 500index | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 |\n| rdg internetcomposite | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 |', 'question': 'what was the nasdaq composite value in 2018?', 'ops': '165.84', 'id': 'Single_BKNG/2018/page_34.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': 'measurement point december 31 booking holdings nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'booking holdings inc .': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 98.09, '2015': 109.68, '2016': 126.12, '2017': 149.5, '2018': 148.18}, 'nasdaqcomposite index': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 114.62, '2015': 122.81, '2016': 133.19, '2017': 172.11, '2018': 165.84}, 's&p 500index': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 113.69, '2015': 115.26, '2016': 129.05, '2017': 157.22, '2018': 150.33}, 'rdg internetcomposite': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 96.39, '2015': 133.2, '2016': 140.23, '2017': 202.15, '2018': 201.16}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in value for booking holding inc. in 2018, assuming a $100 initial investment?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what was the nasdaq composite value in 2018?', 'what is the net change also assuming a $100 initial investment?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what was the difference in the percent changes?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['48.18', '48.18%', '165.84', '65.84', '65.84%', '17.66%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(148.18, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', '165.84', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [48.18, 0.4818, 165.84, 65.84, 0.6584, -0.1766], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 165.84}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "17s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amortization expense in 2009?\nA1: 7.4\nQ2: and what was it in 2008?\nA2: 9.3\nQ3: what was, then, the change over the year?\nA3: -1.9\nQ4: and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2008 amortization expense?\nA4: -0.2043', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nintangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives or on an accelerated method of amortization that is expected to reflect the estimated pattern of economic use . the remaining amortization expense will be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 0.9 years . amortization expense from continuing operations , related to intangibles was $ 7.4 million , $ 9.3 million and $ 9.2 million in fiscal 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . the company expects annual amortization expense for these intangible assets to be: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ng . grant accounting certain of the company 2019s foreign subsidiaries have received various grants from governmental agencies . these grants include capital , employment and research and development grants . capital grants for the acquisition of property and equipment are netted against the related capital expenditures and amortized as a credit to depreciation expense over the useful life of the related asset . employment grants , which relate to employee hiring and training , and research and development grants are recognized in earnings in the period in which the related expenditures are incurred by the company . h . translation of foreign currencies the functional currency for the company 2019s foreign sales and research and development operations is the applicable local currency . gains and losses resulting from translation of these foreign currencies into u.s . dollars are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income . transaction gains and losses and remeasurement of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities are included in income currently , including those at the company 2019s principal foreign manufacturing operations where the functional currency is the u.s . dollar . foreign currency transaction gains or losses included in other expenses , net , were not material in fiscal 2009 , 2008 or 2007 . i . derivative instruments and hedging agreements foreign exchange exposure management 2014 the company enters into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to offset certain operational and balance sheet exposures from the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates . such exposures result from the portion of the company 2019s operations , assets and liabilities that are denominated in currencies other than the u.s . dollar , primarily the euro ; other exposures include the philippine peso and the british pound . these foreign currency exchange contracts are entered into to support transactions made in the normal course of business , and accordingly , are not speculative in nature . the contracts are for periods consistent with the terms of the underlying transactions , generally one year or less . hedges related to anticipated transactions are designated and documented at the inception of the respective hedges as cash flow hedges and are evaluated for effectiveness monthly . derivative instruments are employed to eliminate or minimize certain foreign currency exposures that can be confidently identified and quantified . as the terms of the contract and the underlying transaction are matched at inception , forward contract effectiveness is calculated by comparing the change in fair value of the contract to the change in the forward value of the anticipated transaction , with the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income ( oci ) in shareholders 2019 equity and reclassified into earnings in the same period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings . any residual change in fair value of the instruments , or ineffectiveness , is recognized immediately in other income/expense . additionally , the company enters into forward foreign currency contracts that economically hedge the gains and losses generated by the remeasurement of certain recorded assets and liabilities in a non-functional currency . changes in the fair value of these undesignated hedges are recognized in other income/expense immediately as an offset to the changes in the fair value of the asset or liability being hedged . analog devices , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 |\n|---|---|---|\n| amortization expense | 5425.0 | 1430.0 |', 'question': 'and in 2010, what was this amortization expense, in millions?', 'ops': 'divide(5425, const_1000)', 'id': 'Double_ADI/2009/page_59.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives or on an accelerated method of amortization that is expected to reflect the estimated pattern of economic use . the remaining amortization expense will be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 0.9 years . amortization expense from continuing operations , related to intangibles was $ 7.4 million , $ 9.3 million and $ 9.2 million in fiscal 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . the company expects annual amortization expense for these intangible assets to be: .', 'doc_post_text': 'g . grant accounting certain of the company 2019s foreign subsidiaries have received various grants from governmental agencies . these grants include capital , employment and research and development grants . capital grants for the acquisition of property and equipment are netted against the related capital expenditures and amortized as a credit to depreciation expense over the useful life of the related asset . employment grants , which relate to employee hiring and training , and research and development grants are recognized in earnings in the period in which the related expenditures are incurred by the company . h . translation of foreign currencies the functional currency for the company 2019s foreign sales and research and development operations is the applicable local currency . gains and losses resulting from translation of these foreign currencies into u.s . dollars are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income . transaction gains and losses and remeasurement of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities are included in income currently , including those at the company 2019s principal foreign manufacturing operations where the functional currency is the u.s . dollar . foreign currency transaction gains or losses included in other expenses , net , were not material in fiscal 2009 , 2008 or 2007 . i . derivative instruments and hedging agreements foreign exchange exposure management 2014 the company enters into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to offset certain operational and balance sheet exposures from the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates . such exposures result from the portion of the company 2019s operations , assets and liabilities that are denominated in currencies other than the u.s . dollar , primarily the euro ; other exposures include the philippine peso and the british pound . these foreign currency exchange contracts are entered into to support transactions made in the normal course of business , and accordingly , are not speculative in nature . the contracts are for periods consistent with the terms of the underlying transactions , generally one year or less . hedges related to anticipated transactions are designated and documented at the inception of the respective hedges as cash flow hedges and are evaluated for effectiveness monthly . derivative instruments are employed to eliminate or minimize certain foreign currency exposures that can be confidently identified and quantified . as the terms of the contract and the underlying transaction are matched at inception , forward contract effectiveness is calculated by comparing the change in fair value of the contract to the change in the forward value of the anticipated transaction , with the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive ( loss ) income ( oci ) in shareholders 2019 equity and reclassified into earnings in the same period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings . any residual change in fair value of the instruments , or ineffectiveness , is recognized immediately in other income/expense . additionally , the company enters into forward foreign currency contracts that economically hedge the gains and losses generated by the remeasurement of certain recorded assets and liabilities in a non-functional currency . changes in the fair value of these undesignated hedges are recognized in other income/expense immediately as an offset to the changes in the fair value of the asset or liability being hedged . analog devices , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) .', 'doc_table': {'amortization expense': {'2010': 5425.0, '2011': 1430.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amortization expense in 2009?', 'and what was it in 2008?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2008 amortization expense?', 'and in 2010, what was this amortization expense, in millions?', 'what was, then, the change since 2009?', 'and what is this change as a portion of the 2009 amortization expense?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['7.4', '9.3', '-1.9', '-20.4%', '5.4', '-2', '-27.0%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['7.4', '9.3', 'subtract(7.4, 9.3)', 'subtract(7.4, 9.3), divide(#0, 9.3)', 'divide(5425, const_1000)', 'divide(5425, const_1000), subtract(#0, 7.4)', 'divide(5425, const_1000), subtract(#0, 7.4), divide(#1, 7.4)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [7.4, 9.3, -1.9, -0.2043, 5.425, -1.975, -0.26689], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 5.425}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "18s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: from the beginning of 2009 to the end of 2011, what was the net increase in aro, in millions?\nA1: 22.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nexcept for long-term debt , the carrying amounts of the company 2019s other financial instruments are measured at fair value or approximate fair value due to the short-term nature of these instruments . asset retirement obligations 2014the company records all known asset retirement obligations within other current liabilities for which the liability 2019s fair value can be reasonably estimated , including certain asbestos removal , asset decommissioning and contractual lease restoration obligations . the changes in the asset retirement obligation carrying amounts during 2011 , 2010 and 2009 were as follows : ( $ in millions ) retirement obligations .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company also has known conditional asset retirement obligations related to assets currently in use , such as certain asbestos remediation and asset decommissioning activities to be performed in the future , that were not reasonably estimable as of december 31 , 2011 and 2010 , due to insufficient information about the timing and method of settlement of the obligation . accordingly , the fair value of these obligations has not been recorded in the consolidated financial statements . environmental remediation and/or asset decommissioning of the relevant facilities may be required when the company ceases to utilize these facilities . in addition , there may be conditional environmental asset retirement obligations that the company has not yet discovered . income taxes 2014income tax expense and other income tax related information contained in the financial statements for periods before the spin-off are presented as if the company filed its own tax returns on a stand-alone basis , while similar information for periods after the spin-off reflect the company 2019s positions to be filed in its own tax returns in the future . income tax expense and other related information are based on the prevailing statutory rates for u.s . federal income taxes and the composite state income tax rate for the company for each period presented . state and local income and franchise tax provisions are allocable to contracts in process and , accordingly , are included in general and administrative expenses . deferred income taxes are recorded when revenues and expenses are recognized in different periods for financial statement purposes than for tax return purposes . deferred tax asset or liability account balances are calculated at the balance sheet date using current tax laws and rates in effect . determinations of the expected realizability of deferred tax assets and the need for any valuation allowances against these deferred tax assets were evaluated based upon the stand-alone tax attributes of the company , and an $ 18 million valuation allowance was deemed necessary as of december 31 , 2011 . no valuation allowance was deemed necessary as of december 31 , 2010 . uncertain tax positions meeting the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold , based on the merits of the position , are recognized in the financial statements . we recognize the amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% ( 50 % ) likely to be realized upon ultimate settlement with the related tax authority . if a tax position does not meet the minimum statutory threshold to avoid payment of penalties , we recognize an expense for the amount of the penalty in the period the tax position is claimed or expected to be claimed in our tax return . penalties , if probable and reasonably estimable , are recognized as a component of income tax expense . we also recognize accrued interest related to uncertain tax positions in income tax expense . the timing and amount of accrued interest is determined by the applicable tax law associated with an underpayment of income taxes . see note 12 : income taxes . under existing gaap , changes in accruals associated with uncertainties are recorded in earnings in the period they are determined. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | balance at january 1 2009 | accretion expense | payment of asset retirement obligation | balance at december 31 2009 | obligation relating to the future retirement of a facility | balance at december 31 2010 | balance at december 31 2011 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| asset retirement obligations | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 20.0 | 25.0 |', 'question': 'and what portion of this increase was due to accretion?', 'ops': 'add(0, 0), add(#0, #0), subtract(25, 3), divide(#1, #2)', 'id': 'Double_HII/2011/page_86.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'except for long-term debt , the carrying amounts of the company 2019s other financial instruments are measured at fair value or approximate fair value due to the short-term nature of these instruments . asset retirement obligations 2014the company records all known asset retirement obligations within other current liabilities for which the liability 2019s fair value can be reasonably estimated , including certain asbestos removal , asset decommissioning and contractual lease restoration obligations . the changes in the asset retirement obligation carrying amounts during 2011 , 2010 and 2009 were as follows : ( $ in millions ) retirement obligations .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company also has known conditional asset retirement obligations related to assets currently in use , such as certain asbestos remediation and asset decommissioning activities to be performed in the future , that were not reasonably estimable as of december 31 , 2011 and 2010 , due to insufficient information about the timing and method of settlement of the obligation . accordingly , the fair value of these obligations has not been recorded in the consolidated financial statements . environmental remediation and/or asset decommissioning of the relevant facilities may be required when the company ceases to utilize these facilities . in addition , there may be conditional environmental asset retirement obligations that the company has not yet discovered . income taxes 2014income tax expense and other income tax related information contained in the financial statements for periods before the spin-off are presented as if the company filed its own tax returns on a stand-alone basis , while similar information for periods after the spin-off reflect the company 2019s positions to be filed in its own tax returns in the future . income tax expense and other related information are based on the prevailing statutory rates for u.s . federal income taxes and the composite state income tax rate for the company for each period presented . state and local income and franchise tax provisions are allocable to contracts in process and , accordingly , are included in general and administrative expenses . deferred income taxes are recorded when revenues and expenses are recognized in different periods for financial statement purposes than for tax return purposes . deferred tax asset or liability account balances are calculated at the balance sheet date using current tax laws and rates in effect . determinations of the expected realizability of deferred tax assets and the need for any valuation allowances against these deferred tax assets were evaluated based upon the stand-alone tax attributes of the company , and an $ 18 million valuation allowance was deemed necessary as of december 31 , 2011 . no valuation allowance was deemed necessary as of december 31 , 2010 . uncertain tax positions meeting the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold , based on the merits of the position , are recognized in the financial statements . we recognize the amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% ( 50 % ) likely to be realized upon ultimate settlement with the related tax authority . if a tax position does not meet the minimum statutory threshold to avoid payment of penalties , we recognize an expense for the amount of the penalty in the period the tax position is claimed or expected to be claimed in our tax return . penalties , if probable and reasonably estimable , are recognized as a component of income tax expense . we also recognize accrued interest related to uncertain tax positions in income tax expense . the timing and amount of accrued interest is determined by the applicable tax law associated with an underpayment of income taxes . see note 12 : income taxes . under existing gaap , changes in accruals associated with uncertainties are recorded in earnings in the period they are determined. .', 'doc_table': {'asset retirement obligations': {'balance at january 1 2009': 3.0, 'accretion expense': 0.0, 'payment of asset retirement obligation': 0.0, 'balance at december 31 2009': 3.0, 'obligation relating to the future retirement of a facility': 5.0, 'balance at december 31 2010': 20.0, 'balance at december 31 2011': 25.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['from the beginning of 2009 to the end of 2011, what was the net increase in aro, in millions?', 'and what portion of this increase was due to accretion?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['22', '0%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(25, 3)', 'add(0, 0), add(#0, #0), subtract(25, 3), divide(#1, #2)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [22.0, 0.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "19s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what were the number of berths in 2011?\nA1: 155000.0\nQ2: what were the number of berths in 2007?\nA2: 100000.0\nQ3: what is the net change in berths?\nA3: 55000.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart i berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 34000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the north american cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . europe in europe , cruising represents a smaller but growing sector of the vacation industry . it has experienced a compound annual growth rate in cruise guests of approximately 9.6% ( 9.6 % ) from 2007 to 2011 and we believe this market has significant continued growth poten- tial . we estimate that europe was served by 104 ships with approximately 100000 berths at the beginning of 2007 and by 121 ships with approximately 155000 berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 28000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the european cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . the following table details the growth in the global , north american and european cruise markets in terms of cruise guests and estimated weighted-average berths over the past five years : global cruise guests ( 1 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) north american cruise guests ( 2 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in north america ( 1 ) european cruise guests ( 3 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in europe ( 1 ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests , and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally , in north america and europe are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources including seatrade insider and cruise line international association . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) source : cruise line international association based on cruise guests carried for at least two consecutive nights for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . ( 3 ) source : european cruise council for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . other markets in addition to expected industry growth in north america and europe as discussed above , we expect the asia/pacific region to demonstrate an even higher growth rate in the near term , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america and europe . we compete with a number of cruise lines ; however , our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise lines , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , iberocruceros , p&o cruises and princess cruises ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; norwegian cruise line and oceania cruises . cruise lines compete with other vacation alternatives such as land-based resort hotels and sightseeing destinations for consum- ers 2019 leisure time . demand for such activities is influ- enced by political and general economic conditions . companies within the vacation market are dependent on consumer discretionary spending . operating strategies our principal operating strategies are to : and employees and protect the environment in which our vessels and organization operate , to better serve our global guest base and grow our business , order to enhance our revenues while continuing to expand and diversify our guest mix through interna- tional guest sourcing , and ensure adequate cash and liquidity , with the overall goal of maximizing our return on invested capital and long-term shareholder value , our brands throughout the world , revitalization of existing ships and the transfer of key innovations across each brand , while expanding our fleet with the new state-of-the-art cruise ships recently delivered and on order , by deploying them into those markets and itineraries that provide opportunities to optimize returns , while continuing our focus on existing key markets , support ongoing operations and initiatives , and the principal industry distribution channel , while enhancing our consumer outreach programs. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| global cruiseguests ( 1 ) | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 |\n| weighted-averagesupplyofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 ) | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 |\n| northamericancruiseguests ( 2 ) | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 |\n| weighted-average supply ofberths marketedin northamerica ( 1 ) | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 |\n| europeancruiseguests | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 |\n| weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketed ineurope ( 1 ) | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 |', 'question': 'what is the percent change?', 'ops': 'subtract(155000, 100000), divide(#0, 100000)', 'id': 'Single_RCL/2011/page_16.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'part i berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 34000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the north american cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . europe in europe , cruising represents a smaller but growing sector of the vacation industry . it has experienced a compound annual growth rate in cruise guests of approximately 9.6% ( 9.6 % ) from 2007 to 2011 and we believe this market has significant continued growth poten- tial . we estimate that europe was served by 104 ships with approximately 100000 berths at the beginning of 2007 and by 121 ships with approximately 155000 berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 28000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the european cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . the following table details the growth in the global , north american and european cruise markets in terms of cruise guests and estimated weighted-average berths over the past five years : global cruise guests ( 1 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) north american cruise guests ( 2 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in north america ( 1 ) european cruise guests ( 3 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in europe ( 1 ) .', 'doc_post_text': '( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests , and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally , in north america and europe are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources including seatrade insider and cruise line international association . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) source : cruise line international association based on cruise guests carried for at least two consecutive nights for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . ( 3 ) source : european cruise council for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . other markets in addition to expected industry growth in north america and europe as discussed above , we expect the asia/pacific region to demonstrate an even higher growth rate in the near term , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america and europe . we compete with a number of cruise lines ; however , our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise lines , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , iberocruceros , p&o cruises and princess cruises ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; norwegian cruise line and oceania cruises . cruise lines compete with other vacation alternatives such as land-based resort hotels and sightseeing destinations for consum- ers 2019 leisure time . demand for such activities is influ- enced by political and general economic conditions . companies within the vacation market are dependent on consumer discretionary spending . operating strategies our principal operating strategies are to : and employees and protect the environment in which our vessels and organization operate , to better serve our global guest base and grow our business , order to enhance our revenues while continuing to expand and diversify our guest mix through interna- tional guest sourcing , and ensure adequate cash and liquidity , with the overall goal of maximizing our return on invested capital and long-term shareholder value , our brands throughout the world , revitalization of existing ships and the transfer of key innovations across each brand , while expanding our fleet with the new state-of-the-art cruise ships recently delivered and on order , by deploying them into those markets and itineraries that provide opportunities to optimize returns , while continuing our focus on existing key markets , support ongoing operations and initiatives , and the principal industry distribution channel , while enhancing our consumer outreach programs. .', 'doc_table': {'global cruiseguests ( 1 )': {'2007': 16586000.0, '2008': 17184000.0, '2009': 17340000.0, '2010': 18800000.0, '2011': 20227000.0}, 'weighted-averagesupplyofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 )': {'2007': 327000.0, '2008': 347000.0, '2009': 363000.0, '2010': 391000.0, '2011': 412000.0}, 'northamericancruiseguests ( 2 )': {'2007': 10247000.0, '2008': 10093000.0, '2009': 10198000.0, '2010': 10781000.0, '2011': 11625000.0}, 'weighted-average supply ofberths marketedin northamerica ( 1 )': {'2007': 212000.0, '2008': 219000.0, '2009': 222000.0, '2010': 232000.0, '2011': 245000.0}, 'europeancruiseguests': {'2007': 4080000.0, '2008': 4500000.0, '2009': 5000000.0, '2010': 5540000.0, '2011': 5894000.0}, 'weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketed ineurope ( 1 )': {'2007': 105000.0, '2008': 120000.0, '2009': 131000.0, '2010': 143000.0, '2011': 149000.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what were the number of berths in 2011?', 'what were the number of berths in 2007?', 'what is the net change in berths?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what is that as a percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['155000', '100000', '55000', '0.55', '55'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['155000', '100000', 'subtract(155000, 100000)', 'subtract(155000, 100000), divide(#0, 100000)', 'subtract(155000, 100000), divide(#0, 100000), multiply(#1, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [155000.0, 100000.0, 55000.0, 0.55, 55.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.55}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "19s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nour international networks segment owns and operates the following television networks , which reached the following number of subscribers via pay television services as of december 31 , 2013 : global networks international subscribers ( millions ) regional networks international subscribers ( millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( a ) number of subscribers corresponds to the collective sum of the total number of subscribers to each of the sbs nordic broadcast networks in sweden , norway , and denmark subject to retransmission agreements with pay television providers . ( b ) number of subscribers corresponds to dmax pay television networks in the u.k. , austria , switzerland and ireland . our international networks segment also owns and operates free-to-air television networks which reached 285 million cumulative viewers in europe and the middle east as of december 31 , 2013 . our free-to-air networks include dmax , fatafeat , quest , real time , giallo , frisbee , focus and k2 . similar to u.s . networks , the primary sources of revenue for international networks are fees charged to operators who distribute our networks , which primarily include cable and dth satellite service providers , and advertising sold on our television networks . international television markets vary in their stages of development . some markets , such as the u.k. , are more advanced digital television markets , while others remain in the analog environment with varying degrees of investment from operators to expand channel capacity or convert to digital technologies . common practice in some markets results in long-term contractual distribution relationships , while customers in other markets renew contracts annually . distribution revenue for our international networks segment is largely dependent on the number of subscribers that receive our networks or content , the rates negotiated in the agreements , and the market demand for the content that we provide . advertising revenue is dependent upon a number of factors including the development of pay and free-to-air television markets , the number of subscribers to and viewers of our channels , viewership demographics , the popularity of our programming , and our ability to sell commercial time over a group of channels . in certain markets , our advertising sales business operates with in-house sales teams , while we rely on external sales representation services in other markets . in developing television markets , we expect that advertising revenue growth will result from continued subscriber and viewership growth , our localization strategy , and the shift of advertising spending from traditional analog networks to channels in the multi-channel environment . in relatively mature markets , such as western europe , growth in advertising revenue will come from increasing viewership and pricing of advertising on our existing television networks and the launching of new services , both organic and through acquisitions . during 2013 , distribution , advertising and other revenues were 50% ( 50 % ) , 47% ( 47 % ) and 3% ( 3 % ) , respectively , of total net revenues for this segment . on january 21 , 2014 , we entered into an agreement with tf1 to acquire a controlling interest in eurosport international ( "eurosport" ) , a leading pan-european sports media platform , by increasing our ownership stake from 20% ( 20 % ) to 51% ( 51 % ) for cash of approximately 20ac253 million ( $ 343 million ) subject to working capital adjustments . due to regulatory constraints the acquisition initially excludes eurosport france , a subsidiary of eurosport . we will retain a 20% ( 20 % ) equity interest in eurosport france and a commitment to acquire another 31% ( 31 % ) ownership interest beginning 2015 , contingent upon resolution of all regulatory matters . the flagship eurosport network focuses on regionally popular sports such as tennis , skiing , cycling and motor sports and reaches 133 million homes across 54 countries in 20 languages . eurosport 2019s brands and platforms also include eurosport hd ( high definition simulcast ) , eurosport 2 , eurosport 2 hd ( high definition simulcast ) , eurosport asia-pacific , and eurosportnews . the acquisition is intended to increase the growth of eurosport and enhance our pay television offerings in europe . tf1 will have the right to put the entirety of its remaining 49% ( 49 % ) non-controlling interest to us for approximately two and a half years after completion of this acquisition . the put has a floor value equal to the fair value at the acquisition date if exercised in the 90 day period beginning on july 1 , 2015 and is subsequently priced at fair value if exercised in the 90 day period beginning on july 1 , 2016 . we expect the acquisition to close in the second quarter of 2014 subject to obtaining necessary regulatory approvals. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | investigation discovery | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | investigation discovery | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | investigation discovery | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| internationalsubscribers ( millions ) 271 | 200.0 | 162.0 | 81.0 | 74.0 | 64.0 | 52.0 | 23.0 | 200.0 | 162.0 | 81.0 | 74.0 | 64.0 | 52.0 | 23.0 | 200.0 | 162.0 | 81.0 | 74.0 | 64.0 | 52.0 | 23.0 |\n| regional networks discovery kids | sbs nordic ( a ) | dmax ( b ) | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery familia ( u.s. ) | gxt | sbs nordic ( a ) | dmax ( b ) | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery familia ( u.s. ) | gxt | sbs nordic ( a ) | dmax ( b ) | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery familia ( u.s. ) | gxt |\n| internationalsubscribers ( millions ) 76 | 28.0 | 16.0 | 14.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 | 4.0 | 28.0 | 16.0 | 14.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 | 4.0 | 28.0 | 16.0 | 14.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 | 4.0 |', 'question': 'what was, in millions, the difference in the number of international subscribers between discovery channel and animal planet?', 'ops': 'subtract(271, 200)', 'id': 'Double_DISCA/2013/page_45.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'our international networks segment owns and operates the following television networks , which reached the following number of subscribers via pay television services as of december 31 , 2013 : global networks international subscribers ( millions ) regional networks international subscribers ( millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': '( a ) number of subscribers corresponds to the collective sum of the total number of subscribers to each of the sbs nordic broadcast networks in sweden , norway , and denmark subject to retransmission agreements with pay television providers . ( b ) number of subscribers corresponds to dmax pay television networks in the u.k. , austria , switzerland and ireland . our international networks segment also owns and operates free-to-air television networks which reached 285 million cumulative viewers in europe and the middle east as of december 31 , 2013 . our free-to-air networks include dmax , fatafeat , quest , real time , giallo , frisbee , focus and k2 . similar to u.s . networks , the primary sources of revenue for international networks are fees charged to operators who distribute our networks , which primarily include cable and dth satellite service providers , and advertising sold on our television networks . international television markets vary in their stages of development . some markets , such as the u.k. , are more advanced digital television markets , while others remain in the analog environment with varying degrees of investment from operators to expand channel capacity or convert to digital technologies . common practice in some markets results in long-term contractual distribution relationships , while customers in other markets renew contracts annually . distribution revenue for our international networks segment is largely dependent on the number of subscribers that receive our networks or content , the rates negotiated in the agreements , and the market demand for the content that we provide . advertising revenue is dependent upon a number of factors including the development of pay and free-to-air television markets , the number of subscribers to and viewers of our channels , viewership demographics , the popularity of our programming , and our ability to sell commercial time over a group of channels . in certain markets , our advertising sales business operates with in-house sales teams , while we rely on external sales representation services in other markets . in developing television markets , we expect that advertising revenue growth will result from continued subscriber and viewership growth , our localization strategy , and the shift of advertising spending from traditional analog networks to channels in the multi-channel environment . in relatively mature markets , such as western europe , growth in advertising revenue will come from increasing viewership and pricing of advertising on our existing television networks and the launching of new services , both organic and through acquisitions . during 2013 , distribution , advertising and other revenues were 50% ( 50 % ) , 47% ( 47 % ) and 3% ( 3 % ) , respectively , of total net revenues for this segment . on january 21 , 2014 , we entered into an agreement with tf1 to acquire a controlling interest in eurosport international ( "eurosport" ) , a leading pan-european sports media platform , by increasing our ownership stake from 20% ( 20 % ) to 51% ( 51 % ) for cash of approximately 20ac253 million ( $ 343 million ) subject to working capital adjustments . due to regulatory constraints the acquisition initially excludes eurosport france , a subsidiary of eurosport . we will retain a 20% ( 20 % ) equity interest in eurosport france and a commitment to acquire another 31% ( 31 % ) ownership interest beginning 2015 , contingent upon resolution of all regulatory matters . the flagship eurosport network focuses on regionally popular sports such as tennis , skiing , cycling and motor sports and reaches 133 million homes across 54 countries in 20 languages . eurosport 2019s brands and platforms also include eurosport hd ( high definition simulcast ) , eurosport 2 , eurosport 2 hd ( high definition simulcast ) , eurosport asia-pacific , and eurosportnews . the acquisition is intended to increase the growth of eurosport and enhance our pay television offerings in europe . tf1 will have the right to put the entirety of its remaining 49% ( 49 % ) non-controlling interest to us for approximately two and a half years after completion of this acquisition . the put has a floor value equal to the fair value at the acquisition date if exercised in the 90 day period beginning on july 1 , 2015 and is subsequently priced at fair value if exercised in the 90 day period beginning on july 1 , 2016 . we expect the acquisition to close in the second quarter of 2014 subject to obtaining necessary regulatory approvals. .', 'doc_table': {'internationalsubscribers ( millions ) 271': {'animal planet': 200.0, 'tlc real time and travel & living': 162.0, 'discovery science': 81.0, 'investigation discovery': 74.0, 'discovery home & health': 64.0, 'turbo': 52.0, 'discovery world': 23.0}, 'regional networks discovery kids': {'animal planet': 'sbs nordic ( a )', 'tlc real time and travel & living': 'dmax ( b )', 'discovery science': 'discovery history', 'investigation discovery': 'shed', 'discovery home & health': 'discovery en espanol ( u.s. )', 'turbo': 'discovery familia ( u.s. )', 'discovery world': 'gxt'}, 'internationalsubscribers ( millions ) 76': {'animal planet': 28.0, 'tlc real time and travel & living': 16.0, 'discovery science': 14.0, 'investigation discovery': 12.0, 'discovery home & health': 5.0, 'turbo': 4.0, 'discovery world': 4.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was, in millions, the difference in the number of international subscribers between discovery channel and animal planet?', 'and what was that difference between discovery channel and discovery science?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['71', '190'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(271, 200)', 'subtract(271, 81)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [71.0, 190.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 71.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "19s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: how many shares were purchased during october 2012?\nA1: 13566.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nrepurchase of equity securities the following table provides information regarding our purchases of our equity securities during the period from october 1 , 2012 to december 31 , 2012 . total number of shares ( or units ) purchased 1 average price paid per share ( or unit ) 2 total number of shares ( or units ) purchased as part of publicly announced plans or programs 3 maximum number ( or approximate dollar value ) of shares ( or units ) that may yet be purchased under the plans or programs 3 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n1 includes shares of our common stock , par value $ 0.10 per share , withheld under the terms of grants under employee stock-based compensation plans to offset tax withholding obligations that occurred upon vesting and release of restricted shares ( the 201cwithheld shares 201d ) . we repurchased 13566 withheld shares in october 2012 , 1419 withheld shares in november 2012 and 7959 withheld shares in december 2012 , for a total of 22944 withheld shares during the three-month period . 2 the average price per share for each of the months in the fiscal quarter and for the three-month period was calculated by dividing the sum of the applicable period of the aggregate value of the tax withholding obligations and the aggregate amount we paid for shares acquired under our stock repurchase program , described in note 5 to the consolidated financial statements , by the sum of the number of withheld shares and the number of shares acquired in our stock repurchase program . 3 on february 24 , 2012 , we announced in a press release that our board had approved a share repurchase program to repurchase from time to time up to $ 300.0 million of our common stock ( the 201c2012 share repurchase program 201d ) , in addition to amounts available on existing authorizations . on november 20 , 2012 , we announced in a press release that our board had authorized an increase in our 2012 share repurchase program to $ 400.0 million of our common stock . on february 22 , 2013 , we announced that our board had approved a new share repurchase program to repurchase from time to time up to $ 300.0 million of our common stock . the new authorization is in addition to any amounts remaining available for repurchase under the 2012 share repurchase program . there is no expiration date associated with the share repurchase programs. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | october 1 - 31 | november 1 - 30 | december 1 - 31 | total | october 1 - 31 | november 1 - 30 | december 1 - 31 | total | october 1 - 31 | november 1 - 30 | december 1 - 31 | total | october 1 - 31 | november 1 - 30 | december 1 - 31 | total |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| total number ofshares ( or units ) purchased1 | 13566.0 | 5345171.0 | 8797959.0 | 14156696.0 | 13566.0 | 5345171.0 | 8797959.0 | 14156696.0 | 13566.0 | 5345171.0 | 8797959.0 | 14156696.0 | 13566.0 | 5345171.0 | 8797959.0 | 14156696.0 |\n| average price paidper share ( or unit ) 2 | 10.26 | 9.98 | 10.87 | 10.53 | 10.26 | 9.98 | 10.87 | 10.53 | 10.26 | 9.98 | 10.87 | 10.53 | 10.26 | 9.98 | 10.87 | 10.53 |\n| total number ofshares ( or units ) purchased as part ofpublicly announcedplans or programs3 | 0.0 | 5343752.0 | 8790000.0 | 14133752.0 | 0.0 | 5343752.0 | 8790000.0 | 14133752.0 | 0.0 | 5343752.0 | 8790000.0 | 14133752.0 | 0.0 | 5343752.0 | 8790000.0 | 14133752.0 |\n| maximum number ( or approximate dollar value ) of shares ( or units ) that mayyet be purchased under theplans or programs3 | 148858924.0 | 195551133.0 | 99989339.0 |  | 148858924.0 | 195551133.0 | 99989339.0 |  | 148858924.0 | 195551133.0 | 99989339.0 |  | 148858924.0 | 195551133.0 | 99989339.0 |  |', 'question': 'what about the total number of shares purchased during the fourth quarter of 2012?', 'ops': '14156696', 'id': 'Double_IPG/2012/page_21.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'repurchase of equity securities the following table provides information regarding our purchases of our equity securities during the period from october 1 , 2012 to december 31 , 2012 . total number of shares ( or units ) purchased 1 average price paid per share ( or unit ) 2 total number of shares ( or units ) purchased as part of publicly announced plans or programs 3 maximum number ( or approximate dollar value ) of shares ( or units ) that may yet be purchased under the plans or programs 3 .', 'doc_post_text': '1 includes shares of our common stock , par value $ 0.10 per share , withheld under the terms of grants under employee stock-based compensation plans to offset tax withholding obligations that occurred upon vesting and release of restricted shares ( the 201cwithheld shares 201d ) . we repurchased 13566 withheld shares in october 2012 , 1419 withheld shares in november 2012 and 7959 withheld shares in december 2012 , for a total of 22944 withheld shares during the three-month period . 2 the average price per share for each of the months in the fiscal quarter and for the three-month period was calculated by dividing the sum of the applicable period of the aggregate value of the tax withholding obligations and the aggregate amount we paid for shares acquired under our stock repurchase program , described in note 5 to the consolidated financial statements , by the sum of the number of withheld shares and the number of shares acquired in our stock repurchase program . 3 on february 24 , 2012 , we announced in a press release that our board had approved a share repurchase program to repurchase from time to time up to $ 300.0 million of our common stock ( the 201c2012 share repurchase program 201d ) , in addition to amounts available on existing authorizations . on november 20 , 2012 , we announced in a press release that our board had authorized an increase in our 2012 share repurchase program to $ 400.0 million of our common stock . on february 22 , 2013 , we announced that our board had approved a new share repurchase program to repurchase from time to time up to $ 300.0 million of our common stock . the new authorization is in addition to any amounts remaining available for repurchase under the 2012 share repurchase program . there is no expiration date associated with the share repurchase programs. .', 'doc_table': {'total number ofshares ( or units ) purchased1': {'october 1 - 31': 13566.0, 'november 1 - 30': 5345171.0, 'december 1 - 31': 8797959.0, 'total': 14156696.0}, 'average price paidper share ( or unit ) 2': {'october 1 - 31': 10.26, 'november 1 - 30': 9.98, 'december 1 - 31': 10.87, 'total': 10.53}, 'total number ofshares ( or units ) purchased as part ofpublicly announcedplans or programs3': {'october 1 - 31': 0.0, 'november 1 - 30': 5343752.0, 'december 1 - 31': 8790000.0, 'total': 14133752.0}, 'maximum number ( or approximate dollar value ) of shares ( or units ) that mayyet be purchased under theplans or programs3': {'october 1 - 31': 148858924.0, 'november 1 - 30': 195551133.0, 'december 1 - 31': 99989339.0, 'total': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['how many shares were purchased during october 2012?', 'what about the total number of shares purchased during the fourth quarter of 2012?', 'what fraction of fourth quarter purchases occurred during october?', 'what about in percentage terms?', 'what is the number of repurchased shares during october 2012?', 'what about repurchased shares during fourth quarter of 2012?', 'what proportion does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['13566', '14156696', '0.000958', '0.0958', '13566', '22944', '59.1%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['13566', '14156696', 'divide(13566, 14156696)', 'divide(13566, 14156696), multiply(#0, const_100)', '13566', '22944', 'divide(13566, 22944)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [13566.0, 14156696.0, 0.00096, 0.09583, 13566.0, 22944.0, 0.59127], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 14156696.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "18s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n2322 t . r o w e p r i c e g r o u p a n n u a l r e p o r t 2 0 1 1 c o n t r a c t u a l o b l i g at i o n s the following table presents a summary of our future obligations ( in a0millions ) under the terms of existing operating leases and other contractual cash purchase commitments at december 31 , 2011 . other purchase commitments include contractual amounts that will be due for the purchase of goods or services to be used in our operations and may be cancelable at earlier times than those indicated , under certain conditions that may involve termination fees . because these obligations are generally of a normal recurring nature , we expect that we will fund them from future cash flows from operations . the information presented does not include operating expenses or capital expenditures that will be committed in the normal course of operations in 2012 and future years . the information also excludes the $ 4.7 a0million of uncertain tax positions discussed in note 9 to our consolidated financial statements because it is not possible to estimate the time period in which a payment might be made to the tax authorities. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nwe also have outstanding commitments to fund additional contributions to investment partnerships in which we have an existing investment totaling $ 42.5 a0million at december 31 , 2011 . c r i t i c a l a c c o u n t i n g p o l i c i e s the preparation of financial statements often requires the selection of specific accounting methods and policies from among several acceptable alternatives . further , significant estimates and judgments may be required in selecting and applying those methods and policies in the recognition of the assets and liabilities in our balance sheet , the revenues and expenses in our statement of income , and the information that is contained in our significant accounting policies and notes to consolidated financial statements . making these estimates and judgments requires the analysis of information concerning events that may not yet be complete and of facts and circumstances that may change over time . accordingly , actual amounts or future results can differ materially from those estimates that we include currently in our consolidated financial statements , significant accounting policies , and notes . we present those significant accounting policies used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements as an integral part of those statements within this 2011 annual report . in the following discussion , we highlight and explain further certain of those policies that are most critical to the preparation and understanding of our financial statements . other than temporary impairments of available-for-sale securities . we generally classify our investment holdings in sponsored mutual funds and the debt securities held for investment by our savings bank subsidiary as available-for-sale . at the end of each quarter , we mark the carrying amount of each investment holding to fair value and recognize an unrealized gain or loss as a component of comprehensive income within the statement of stockholders 2019 equity . we next review each individual security position that has an unrealized loss or impairment to determine if that impairment is other than temporary . in determining whether a mutual fund holding is other than temporarily impaired , we consider many factors , including the duration of time it has existed , the severity of the impairment , any subsequent changes in value , and our intent and ability to hold the security for a period of time sufficient for an anticipated recovery in fair value . subject to the other considerations noted above , with respect to duration of time , we believe a mutual fund holding with an unrealized loss that has persisted daily throughout the six months between quarter-ends is generally presumed to have an other than temporary impairment . we may also recognize an other than temporary loss of less than six months in our statement of income if the particular circumstances of the underlying investment do not warrant our belief that a near-term recovery is possible . an impaired debt security held by our savings bank subsidiary is considered to have an other than temporary loss that we will recognize in our statement of income if the impairment is caused by a change in credit quality that affects our ability to recover our amortized cost or if we intend to sell the security or believe that it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the security before recovering cost . minor impairments of 5% ( 5 % ) or less are generally considered temporary . other than temporary impairments of equity method investments . we evaluate our equity method investments , including our investment in uti , for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the investment exceeds its fair value , and the decline in fair value is other than temporary . goodwill . we internally conduct , manage and report our operations as one investment advisory business . we do not have distinct operating segments or components that separately constitute a business . accordingly , we attribute goodwill to a single reportable business segment and reporting unit 2014our investment advisory business . we evaluate the carrying amount of goodwill in our balance sheet for possible impairment on an annual basis in the third quarter of each year using a fair value approach . goodwill would be considered impaired whenever our historical carrying amount exceeds the fair value of our investment advisory business . our annual testing has demonstrated that the fair value of our investment advisory business ( our market capitalization ) exceeds our carrying amount ( our stockholders 2019 equity ) and , therefore , no impairment exists . should we reach a different conclusion in the future , additional work would be performed to ascertain the amount of the non-cash impairment charge to be recognized . we must also perform impairment testing at other times if an event or circumstance occurs indicating that it is more likely than not that an impairment has been incurred . the maximum future impairment of goodwill that we could incur is the amount recognized in our balance sheet , $ 665.7 a0million . stock options . we recognize stock option-based compensation expense in our consolidated statement of income using a fair value based method . fair value methods use a valuation model for shorter-term , market-traded financial instruments to theoretically value stock option grants even though they are not available for trading and are of longer duration . the black- scholes option-pricing model that we use includes the input of certain variables that are dependent on future expectations , including the expected lives of our options from grant date to exercise date , the volatility of our underlying common shares in the market over that time period , and the rate of dividends that we will pay during that time . our estimates of these variables are made for the purpose of using the valuation model to determine an expense for each reporting period and are not subsequently adjusted . unlike most of our expenses , the resulting charge to earnings using a fair value based method is a non-cash charge that is never measured by , or adjusted based on , a cash outflow . provision for income taxes . after compensation and related costs , our provision for income taxes on our earnings is our largest annual expense . we operate in numerous states and countries through our various subsidiaries , and must allocate our income , expenses , and earnings under the various laws and regulations of each of these taxing jurisdictions . accordingly , our provision for income taxes represents our total estimate of the liability that we have incurred in doing business each year in all of our locations . annually , we file tax returns that represent our filing positions with each jurisdiction and settle our return liabilities . each jurisdiction has the right to audit those returns and may take different positions with respect to income and expense allocations and taxable earnings determinations . from time to time , we may also provide for estimated liabilities associated with uncertain tax return filing positions that are subject to , or in the process of , being audited by various tax authorities . because the determination of our annual provision is subject to judgments and estimates , it is likely that actual results will vary from those recognized in our financial statements . as a result , we recognize additions to , or reductions of , income tax expense during a reporting period that pertain to prior period provisions as our estimated liabilities are revised and actual tax returns and tax audits are settled . we recognize any such prior period adjustment in the discrete quarterly period in which it is determined . n e w ly i s s u e d b u t n o t y e t a d o p t e d a c c o u n t i n g g u i d a n c e in may 2011 , the fasb issued amended guidance clarifying how to measure and disclose fair value . we do not believe the adoption of such amended guidance on january 1 , 2012 , will have a significant effect on our consolidated financial statements . we have also considered all other newly issued accounting guidance that is applicable to our operations and the preparation of our consolidated statements , including that which we have not yet adopted . we do not believe that any such guidance will have a material effect on our financial position or results of operation. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total | noncancelable operating leases | other purchase commitments | total |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| total | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 | 185.0 | 160.0 | 345.0 |\n| 2012 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 | 31.0 | 112.0 | 143.0 |\n| 2013-14 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 | 63.0 | 38.0 | 101.0 |\n| 2015-16 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 | 57.0 | 10.0 | 67.0 |\n| later | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | 34.0 | - | 34.0 |', 'question': 'as of december 31, 2011, what was the amount of noncancelable operating leases?', 'ops': '185', 'id': 'Double_TROW/2011/page_13.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': '2322 t . r o w e p r i c e g r o u p a n n u a l r e p o r t 2 0 1 1 c o n t r a c t u a l o b l i g at i o n s the following table presents a summary of our future obligations ( in a0millions ) under the terms of existing operating leases and other contractual cash purchase commitments at december 31 , 2011 . other purchase commitments include contractual amounts that will be due for the purchase of goods or services to be used in our operations and may be cancelable at earlier times than those indicated , under certain conditions that may involve termination fees . because these obligations are generally of a normal recurring nature , we expect that we will fund them from future cash flows from operations . the information presented does not include operating expenses or capital expenditures that will be committed in the normal course of operations in 2012 and future years . the information also excludes the $ 4.7 a0million of uncertain tax positions discussed in note 9 to our consolidated financial statements because it is not possible to estimate the time period in which a payment might be made to the tax authorities. .', 'doc_post_text': 'we also have outstanding commitments to fund additional contributions to investment partnerships in which we have an existing investment totaling $ 42.5 a0million at december 31 , 2011 . c r i t i c a l a c c o u n t i n g p o l i c i e s the preparation of financial statements often requires the selection of specific accounting methods and policies from among several acceptable alternatives . further , significant estimates and judgments may be required in selecting and applying those methods and policies in the recognition of the assets and liabilities in our balance sheet , the revenues and expenses in our statement of income , and the information that is contained in our significant accounting policies and notes to consolidated financial statements . making these estimates and judgments requires the analysis of information concerning events that may not yet be complete and of facts and circumstances that may change over time . accordingly , actual amounts or future results can differ materially from those estimates that we include currently in our consolidated financial statements , significant accounting policies , and notes . we present those significant accounting policies used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements as an integral part of those statements within this 2011 annual report . in the following discussion , we highlight and explain further certain of those policies that are most critical to the preparation and understanding of our financial statements . other than temporary impairments of available-for-sale securities . we generally classify our investment holdings in sponsored mutual funds and the debt securities held for investment by our savings bank subsidiary as available-for-sale . at the end of each quarter , we mark the carrying amount of each investment holding to fair value and recognize an unrealized gain or loss as a component of comprehensive income within the statement of stockholders 2019 equity . we next review each individual security position that has an unrealized loss or impairment to determine if that impairment is other than temporary . in determining whether a mutual fund holding is other than temporarily impaired , we consider many factors , including the duration of time it has existed , the severity of the impairment , any subsequent changes in value , and our intent and ability to hold the security for a period of time sufficient for an anticipated recovery in fair value . subject to the other considerations noted above , with respect to duration of time , we believe a mutual fund holding with an unrealized loss that has persisted daily throughout the six months between quarter-ends is generally presumed to have an other than temporary impairment . we may also recognize an other than temporary loss of less than six months in our statement of income if the particular circumstances of the underlying investment do not warrant our belief that a near-term recovery is possible . an impaired debt security held by our savings bank subsidiary is considered to have an other than temporary loss that we will recognize in our statement of income if the impairment is caused by a change in credit quality that affects our ability to recover our amortized cost or if we intend to sell the security or believe that it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the security before recovering cost . minor impairments of 5% ( 5 % ) or less are generally considered temporary . other than temporary impairments of equity method investments . we evaluate our equity method investments , including our investment in uti , for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the investment exceeds its fair value , and the decline in fair value is other than temporary . goodwill . we internally conduct , manage and report our operations as one investment advisory business . we do not have distinct operating segments or components that separately constitute a business . accordingly , we attribute goodwill to a single reportable business segment and reporting unit 2014our investment advisory business . we evaluate the carrying amount of goodwill in our balance sheet for possible impairment on an annual basis in the third quarter of each year using a fair value approach . goodwill would be considered impaired whenever our historical carrying amount exceeds the fair value of our investment advisory business . our annual testing has demonstrated that the fair value of our investment advisory business ( our market capitalization ) exceeds our carrying amount ( our stockholders 2019 equity ) and , therefore , no impairment exists . should we reach a different conclusion in the future , additional work would be performed to ascertain the amount of the non-cash impairment charge to be recognized . we must also perform impairment testing at other times if an event or circumstance occurs indicating that it is more likely than not that an impairment has been incurred . the maximum future impairment of goodwill that we could incur is the amount recognized in our balance sheet , $ 665.7 a0million . stock options . we recognize stock option-based compensation expense in our consolidated statement of income using a fair value based method . fair value methods use a valuation model for shorter-term , market-traded financial instruments to theoretically value stock option grants even though they are not available for trading and are of longer duration . the black- scholes option-pricing model that we use includes the input of certain variables that are dependent on future expectations , including the expected lives of our options from grant date to exercise date , the volatility of our underlying common shares in the market over that time period , and the rate of dividends that we will pay during that time . our estimates of these variables are made for the purpose of using the valuation model to determine an expense for each reporting period and are not subsequently adjusted . unlike most of our expenses , the resulting charge to earnings using a fair value based method is a non-cash charge that is never measured by , or adjusted based on , a cash outflow . provision for income taxes . after compensation and related costs , our provision for income taxes on our earnings is our largest annual expense . we operate in numerous states and countries through our various subsidiaries , and must allocate our income , expenses , and earnings under the various laws and regulations of each of these taxing jurisdictions . accordingly , our provision for income taxes represents our total estimate of the liability that we have incurred in doing business each year in all of our locations . annually , we file tax returns that represent our filing positions with each jurisdiction and settle our return liabilities . each jurisdiction has the right to audit those returns and may take different positions with respect to income and expense allocations and taxable earnings determinations . from time to time , we may also provide for estimated liabilities associated with uncertain tax return filing positions that are subject to , or in the process of , being audited by various tax authorities . because the determination of our annual provision is subject to judgments and estimates , it is likely that actual results will vary from those recognized in our financial statements . as a result , we recognize additions to , or reductions of , income tax expense during a reporting period that pertain to prior period provisions as our estimated liabilities are revised and actual tax returns and tax audits are settled . we recognize any such prior period adjustment in the discrete quarterly period in which it is determined . n e w ly i s s u e d b u t n o t y e t a d o p t e d a c c o u n t i n g g u i d a n c e in may 2011 , the fasb issued amended guidance clarifying how to measure and disclose fair value . we do not believe the adoption of such amended guidance on january 1 , 2012 , will have a significant effect on our consolidated financial statements . we have also considered all other newly issued accounting guidance that is applicable to our operations and the preparation of our consolidated statements , including that which we have not yet adopted . we do not believe that any such guidance will have a material effect on our financial position or results of operation. .', 'doc_table': {'total': {'noncancelable operating leases': 185.0, 'other purchase commitments': 160.0, 'total': 345.0}, '2012': {'noncancelable operating leases': 31.0, 'other purchase commitments': 112.0, 'total': 143.0}, '2013-14': {'noncancelable operating leases': 63.0, 'other purchase commitments': 38.0, 'total': 101.0}, '2015-16': {'noncancelable operating leases': 57.0, 'other purchase commitments': 10.0, 'total': 67.0}, 'later': {'noncancelable operating leases': 34.0, 'other purchase commitments': '-', 'total': 34.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['as of december 31, 2011, what was the amount of noncancelable operating leases?', 'and what was the total of future obligations?', 'what percentage, then, does that amount represent in relation to this total?', 'and what percentage do the other purchase commitments represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['185', '345', '0.53', '46%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['185', '345', 'divide(185, 345)', 'divide(160, 345)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [185.0, 345.0, 0.53623, 0.46377], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 185.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "18s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the profit margin for lockheed martin in 2002?\nA1: 0.05999\nQ2: what was the total operating profit in 2002 and 2001?\nA2: 803.0\nQ3: and including the value for 2003?\nA3: 1148.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nlockheed martin corporation management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations december 31 , 2002 space systems space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2002 2001 2000 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnet sales for space systems increased by 8% ( 8 % ) in 2002 compared to 2001 . the increase in sales for 2002 resulted from higher volume in government space of $ 370 million and commercial space of $ 180 million . in government space , increases of $ 470 million in government satellite programs and $ 130 million in ground systems activities more than offset volume declines of $ 175 million on government launch vehi- cles and $ 55 million on strategic missile programs . the increase in commercial space sales is primarily attributable to an increase in launch vehicle activities , with nine commercial launches during 2002 compared to six in 2001 . net sales for the segment decreased by 7% ( 7 % ) in 2001 com- pared to 2000 . the decrease in sales for 2001 resulted from volume declines in commercial space of $ 560 million , which more than offset increases in government space of $ 60 million . in commercial space , sales declined due to volume reductions of $ 480 million in commercial launch vehicle activities and $ 80 million in satellite programs . there were six launches in 2001 compared to 14 launches in 2000 . the increase in gov- ernment space resulted from a combined increase of $ 230 mil- lion related to higher volume on government satellite programs and ground systems activities . these increases were partially offset by a $ 110 million decrease related to volume declines in government launch vehicle activity , primarily due to program maturities , and by $ 50 million due to the absence in 2001 of favorable adjustments recorded on the titan iv pro- gram in 2000 . operating profit for the segment increased 23% ( 23 % ) in 2002 as compared to 2001 , mainly driven by the commercial space business . reduced losses in commercial space during 2002 resulted in increased operating profit of $ 90 million when compared to 2001 . commercial satellite manufacturing losses declined $ 100 million in 2002 as operating performance improved and satellite deliveries increased . in the first quarter of 2001 , a $ 40 million loss provision was recorded on certain commercial satellite manufacturing contracts . due to the industry-wide oversupply and deterioration of pricing in the commercial launch market , financial results on commercial launch vehicles continue to be challenging . during 2002 , this trend led to a decline in operating profit of $ 10 million on commercial launch vehicles when compared to 2001 . this decrease was primarily due to lower profitability of $ 55 mil- lion on the three additional launches in the current year , addi- tional charges of $ 60 million ( net of a favorable contract adjustment of $ 20 million ) for market and pricing pressures and included the adverse effect of a $ 35 million adjustment for commercial launch vehicle contract settlement costs . the 2001 results also included charges for market and pricing pressures , which reduced that year 2019s operating profit by $ 145 million . the $ 10 million decrease in government space 2019s operating profit for the year is primarily due to the reduced volume on government launch vehicles and strategic missile programs , which combined to decrease operating profit by $ 80 million , partially offset by increases of $ 40 million in government satellite programs and $ 30 million in ground systems activities . operating profit for the segment increased by 4% ( 4 % ) in 2001 compared to 2000 . operating profit increased in 2001 due to a $ 35 million increase in government space partially offset by higher year-over-year losses of $ 20 million in commercial space . in government space , operating profit increased due to the impact of higher volume and improved performance in ground systems and government satellite programs . the year- to-year comparison of operating profit was not affected by the $ 50 million favorable titan iv adjustment recorded in 2000 discussed above , due to a $ 55 million charge related to a more conservative assessment of government launch vehi- cle programs that was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2000 . in commercial space , decreased operating profit of $ 15 mil- lion on launch vehicles more than offset lower losses on satel- lite manufacturing activities . the commercial launch vehicle operating results included $ 60 million in higher charges for market and pricing pressures when compared to 2000 . these negative adjustments were partially offset by $ 50 million of favorable contract adjustments on certain launch vehicle con- tracts . commercial satellite manufacturing losses decreased slightly from 2000 and included the adverse impact of a $ 40 million loss provision recorded in the first quarter of 2001 for certain commercial satellite contracts related to schedule and technical issues. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net sales | operating profit | net sales | operating profit | net sales | operating profit |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2002 | 7384.0 | 443.0 | 7384.0 | 443.0 | 7384.0 | 443.0 |\n| 2001 | 6836.0 | 360.0 | 6836.0 | 360.0 | 6836.0 | 360.0 |\n| 2000 | 7339.0 | 345.0 | 7339.0 | 345.0 | 7339.0 | 345.0 |', 'question': 'so what was the average value during this time?', 'ops': 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345), divide(#1, const_3)', 'id': 'Double_LMT/2002/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'lockheed martin corporation management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations december 31 , 2002 space systems space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2002 2001 2000 .', 'doc_post_text': 'net sales for space systems increased by 8% ( 8 % ) in 2002 compared to 2001 . the increase in sales for 2002 resulted from higher volume in government space of $ 370 million and commercial space of $ 180 million . in government space , increases of $ 470 million in government satellite programs and $ 130 million in ground systems activities more than offset volume declines of $ 175 million on government launch vehi- cles and $ 55 million on strategic missile programs . the increase in commercial space sales is primarily attributable to an increase in launch vehicle activities , with nine commercial launches during 2002 compared to six in 2001 . net sales for the segment decreased by 7% ( 7 % ) in 2001 com- pared to 2000 . the decrease in sales for 2001 resulted from volume declines in commercial space of $ 560 million , which more than offset increases in government space of $ 60 million . in commercial space , sales declined due to volume reductions of $ 480 million in commercial launch vehicle activities and $ 80 million in satellite programs . there were six launches in 2001 compared to 14 launches in 2000 . the increase in gov- ernment space resulted from a combined increase of $ 230 mil- lion related to higher volume on government satellite programs and ground systems activities . these increases were partially offset by a $ 110 million decrease related to volume declines in government launch vehicle activity , primarily due to program maturities , and by $ 50 million due to the absence in 2001 of favorable adjustments recorded on the titan iv pro- gram in 2000 . operating profit for the segment increased 23% ( 23 % ) in 2002 as compared to 2001 , mainly driven by the commercial space business . reduced losses in commercial space during 2002 resulted in increased operating profit of $ 90 million when compared to 2001 . commercial satellite manufacturing losses declined $ 100 million in 2002 as operating performance improved and satellite deliveries increased . in the first quarter of 2001 , a $ 40 million loss provision was recorded on certain commercial satellite manufacturing contracts . due to the industry-wide oversupply and deterioration of pricing in the commercial launch market , financial results on commercial launch vehicles continue to be challenging . during 2002 , this trend led to a decline in operating profit of $ 10 million on commercial launch vehicles when compared to 2001 . this decrease was primarily due to lower profitability of $ 55 mil- lion on the three additional launches in the current year , addi- tional charges of $ 60 million ( net of a favorable contract adjustment of $ 20 million ) for market and pricing pressures and included the adverse effect of a $ 35 million adjustment for commercial launch vehicle contract settlement costs . the 2001 results also included charges for market and pricing pressures , which reduced that year 2019s operating profit by $ 145 million . the $ 10 million decrease in government space 2019s operating profit for the year is primarily due to the reduced volume on government launch vehicles and strategic missile programs , which combined to decrease operating profit by $ 80 million , partially offset by increases of $ 40 million in government satellite programs and $ 30 million in ground systems activities . operating profit for the segment increased by 4% ( 4 % ) in 2001 compared to 2000 . operating profit increased in 2001 due to a $ 35 million increase in government space partially offset by higher year-over-year losses of $ 20 million in commercial space . in government space , operating profit increased due to the impact of higher volume and improved performance in ground systems and government satellite programs . the year- to-year comparison of operating profit was not affected by the $ 50 million favorable titan iv adjustment recorded in 2000 discussed above , due to a $ 55 million charge related to a more conservative assessment of government launch vehi- cle programs that was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2000 . in commercial space , decreased operating profit of $ 15 mil- lion on launch vehicles more than offset lower losses on satel- lite manufacturing activities . the commercial launch vehicle operating results included $ 60 million in higher charges for market and pricing pressures when compared to 2000 . these negative adjustments were partially offset by $ 50 million of favorable contract adjustments on certain launch vehicle con- tracts . commercial satellite manufacturing losses decreased slightly from 2000 and included the adverse impact of a $ 40 million loss provision recorded in the first quarter of 2001 for certain commercial satellite contracts related to schedule and technical issues. .', 'doc_table': {'2002': {'net sales': 7384.0, 'operating profit': 443.0}, '2001': {'net sales': 6836.0, 'operating profit': 360.0}, '2000': {'net sales': 7339.0, 'operating profit': 345.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the profit margin for lockheed martin in 2002?', 'what was the total operating profit in 2002 and 2001?', 'and including the value for 2003?', 'so what was the average value during this time?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['6%', '803', '1148', '382.7'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['divide(443, 7384)', 'add(443, 360)', 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345)', 'add(443, 360), add(#0, 345), divide(#1, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [0.05999, 803.0, 1148.0, 382.66667], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 382.66667}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "18s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nour digital media business consists of our websites and mobile and video-on-demand ( 201cvod 201d ) services . our websites include network branded websites such as discovery.com , tlc.com and animalplanet.com , and other websites such as howstuffworks.com , an online source of explanations of how the world actually works ; treehugger.com , a comprehensive source for 201cgreen 201d news , solutions and product information ; and petfinder.com , a leading pet adoption destination . together , these websites attracted an average of 24 million cumulative unique monthly visitors , according to comscore , inc . in 2011 . international networks our international networks segment principally consists of national and pan-regional television networks . this segment generates revenues primarily from fees charged to operators who distribute our networks , which primarily include cable and dth satellite service providers , and from advertising sold on our television networks and websites . discovery channel , animal planet and tlc lead the international networks 2019 portfolio of television networks , which are distributed in virtually every pay-television market in the world through an infrastructure that includes operational centers in london , singapore and miami . international networks has one of the largest international distribution platforms of networks with one to twelve networks in more than 200 countries and territories around the world . at december 31 , 2011 , international networks operated over 150 unique distribution feeds in over 40 languages with channel feeds customized according to language needs and advertising sales opportunities . our international networks segment owns and operates the following television networks which reached the following number of subscribers as of december 31 , 2011 : education and other our education and other segment primarily includes the sale of curriculum-based product and service offerings and postproduction audio services . this segment generates revenues primarily from subscriptions charged to k-12 schools for access to an online suite of curriculum-based vod tools , professional development services , and to a lesser extent student assessment and publication of hardcopy curriculum-based content . our education business also participates in corporate partnerships , global brand and content licensing business with leading non-profits , foundations and trade associations . other businesses primarily include postproduction audio services that are provided to major motion picture studios , independent producers , broadcast networks , cable channels , advertising agencies , and interactive producers . content development our content development strategy is designed to increase viewership , maintain innovation and quality leadership , and provide value for our network distributors and advertising customers . substantially all content is sourced from a wide range of third-party producers , which includes some of the world 2019s leading nonfiction production companies with which we have developed long-standing relationships , as well as independent producers . our production arrangements fall into three categories : produced , coproduced and licensed . substantially all produced content includes programming which we engage third parties to develop and produce while we retain editorial control and own most or all of the rights in exchange for paying all development and production costs . coproduced content refers to program rights acquired that we have collaborated with third parties to finance and develop . coproduced programs are typically high-cost projects for which neither we nor our coproducers wish to bear the entire cost or productions in which the producer has already taken on an international broadcast partner . licensed content is comprised of films or series that have been previously produced by third parties . global networks international subscribers ( millions ) regional networks international subscribers ( millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services | animal planet | tlc real time and travel & living | discovery science | discovery home & health | turbo | discovery world | investigation discovery | hd services |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| international subscribers ( millions ) 213 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 | 166.0 | 150.0 | 66.0 | 48.0 | 37.0 | 27.0 | 23.0 | 17.0 |\n| regional networks dmax | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  | discovery kids | liv | quest | discovery history | shed | discovery en espanol ( u.s. ) | discovery famillia ( u.s. ) |  |\n| international subscribers ( millions ) 47 | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  | 37.0 | 29.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 |  |', 'question': 'what is the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel, in millions?', 'ops': '213', 'id': 'Single_DISCA/2011/page_35.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'our digital media business consists of our websites and mobile and video-on-demand ( 201cvod 201d ) services . our websites include network branded websites such as discovery.com , tlc.com and animalplanet.com , and other websites such as howstuffworks.com , an online source of explanations of how the world actually works ; treehugger.com , a comprehensive source for 201cgreen 201d news , solutions and product information ; and petfinder.com , a leading pet adoption destination . together , these websites attracted an average of 24 million cumulative unique monthly visitors , according to comscore , inc . in 2011 . international networks our international networks segment principally consists of national and pan-regional television networks . this segment generates revenues primarily from fees charged to operators who distribute our networks , which primarily include cable and dth satellite service providers , and from advertising sold on our television networks and websites . discovery channel , animal planet and tlc lead the international networks 2019 portfolio of television networks , which are distributed in virtually every pay-television market in the world through an infrastructure that includes operational centers in london , singapore and miami . international networks has one of the largest international distribution platforms of networks with one to twelve networks in more than 200 countries and territories around the world . at december 31 , 2011 , international networks operated over 150 unique distribution feeds in over 40 languages with channel feeds customized according to language needs and advertising sales opportunities . our international networks segment owns and operates the following television networks which reached the following number of subscribers as of december 31 , 2011 : education and other our education and other segment primarily includes the sale of curriculum-based product and service offerings and postproduction audio services . this segment generates revenues primarily from subscriptions charged to k-12 schools for access to an online suite of curriculum-based vod tools , professional development services , and to a lesser extent student assessment and publication of hardcopy curriculum-based content . our education business also participates in corporate partnerships , global brand and content licensing business with leading non-profits , foundations and trade associations . other businesses primarily include postproduction audio services that are provided to major motion picture studios , independent producers , broadcast networks , cable channels , advertising agencies , and interactive producers . content development our content development strategy is designed to increase viewership , maintain innovation and quality leadership , and provide value for our network distributors and advertising customers . substantially all content is sourced from a wide range of third-party producers , which includes some of the world 2019s leading nonfiction production companies with which we have developed long-standing relationships , as well as independent producers . our production arrangements fall into three categories : produced , coproduced and licensed . substantially all produced content includes programming which we engage third parties to develop and produce while we retain editorial control and own most or all of the rights in exchange for paying all development and production costs . coproduced content refers to program rights acquired that we have collaborated with third parties to finance and develop . coproduced programs are typically high-cost projects for which neither we nor our coproducers wish to bear the entire cost or productions in which the producer has already taken on an international broadcast partner . licensed content is comprised of films or series that have been previously produced by third parties . global networks international subscribers ( millions ) regional networks international subscribers ( millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'international subscribers ( millions ) 213': {'animal planet': 166.0, 'tlc real time and travel & living': 150.0, 'discovery science': 66.0, 'discovery home & health': 48.0, 'turbo': 37.0, 'discovery world': 27.0, 'investigation discovery': 23.0, 'hd services': 17.0}, 'regional networks dmax': {'animal planet': 'discovery kids', 'tlc real time and travel & living': 'liv', 'discovery science': 'quest', 'discovery home & health': 'discovery history', 'turbo': 'shed', 'discovery world': 'discovery en espanol ( u.s. )', 'investigation discovery': 'discovery famillia ( u.s. )', 'hd services': ''}, 'international subscribers ( millions ) 47': {'animal planet': 37.0, 'tlc real time and travel & living': 29.0, 'discovery science': 23.0, 'discovery home & health': 13.0, 'turbo': 12.0, 'discovery world': 5.0, 'investigation discovery': 4.0, 'hd services': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel, in millions?', 'and what is it for animal planet, also in millions?', 'what is, then, the difference between the number of subscribers for global networks discovery channel and for animal planet?', 'and how much does this difference represent in relation to the animal planet number of subscribers?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['213', '166', '47', '28%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['213', '166', 'subtract(213, 166)', 'subtract(213, 166), divide(#0, 166)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [213.0, 166.0, 47.0, 0.28313], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 213.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "18s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the 2015 value of priceline less 100?\nA1: 219.1\nQ2: what is the percent change?\nA2: 2.191\nQ3: what is the value of the s&p 500 index in 2015?\nA3: 180.75\nQ4: what is that less 100?\nA4: 80.75', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmeasurement point december 31 the priceline group nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| the priceline group inc . | 100.0 | 117.06 | 155.27 | 290.93 | 285.37 | 319.1 | 100.0 | 117.06 | 155.27 | 290.93 | 285.37 | 319.1 | 100.0 | 117.06 | 155.27 | 290.93 | 285.37 | 319.1 | 100.0 | 117.06 | 155.27 | 290.93 | 285.37 | 319.1 |\n| nasdaqcomposite index | 100.0 | 100.53 | 116.92 | 166.19 | 188.78 | 199.95 | 100.0 | 100.53 | 116.92 | 166.19 | 188.78 | 199.95 | 100.0 | 100.53 | 116.92 | 166.19 | 188.78 | 199.95 | 100.0 | 100.53 | 116.92 | 166.19 | 188.78 | 199.95 |\n| s&p 500index | 100.0 | 102.11 | 118.45 | 156.82 | 178.29 | 180.75 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 118.45 | 156.82 | 178.29 | 180.75 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 118.45 | 156.82 | 178.29 | 180.75 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 118.45 | 156.82 | 178.29 | 180.75 |\n| rdg internetcomposite | 100.0 | 102.11 | 122.23 | 199.42 | 195.42 | 267.25 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 122.23 | 199.42 | 195.42 | 267.25 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 122.23 | 199.42 | 195.42 | 267.25 | 100.0 | 102.11 | 122.23 | 199.42 | 195.42 | 267.25 |', 'question': 'what is the difference divided by 100?', 'ops': 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(180.75, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_BKNG/2015/page_38.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'measurement point december 31 the priceline group nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'the priceline group inc .': {'2010': 100.0, '2011': 117.06, '2012': 155.27, '2013': 290.93, '2014': 285.37, '2015': 319.1}, 'nasdaqcomposite index': {'2010': 100.0, '2011': 100.53, '2012': 116.92, '2013': 166.19, '2014': 188.78, '2015': 199.95}, 's&p 500index': {'2010': 100.0, '2011': 102.11, '2012': 118.45, '2013': 156.82, '2014': 178.29, '2015': 180.75}, 'rdg internetcomposite': {'2010': 100.0, '2011': 102.11, '2012': 122.23, '2013': 199.42, '2014': 195.42, '2015': 267.25}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the 2015 value of priceline less 100?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what is the value of the s&p 500 index in 2015?', 'what is that less 100?', 'what is the difference divided by 100?', 'what is the difference in percent changes?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['219.1', '219.1%', '180.75', '80.75', '80.75%', '138.35%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(319.10, const_100)', 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', '180.75', 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(180.75, const_100)', 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(180.75, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'subtract(319.10, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(180.75, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [219.1, 2.191, 180.75, 80.75, 0.8075, 1.3835], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.8075}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "18s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what were the number of berths in 2011?\nA1: 155000.0\nQ2: what were the number of berths in 2007?\nA2: 100000.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart i berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 34000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the north american cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . europe in europe , cruising represents a smaller but growing sector of the vacation industry . it has experienced a compound annual growth rate in cruise guests of approximately 9.6% ( 9.6 % ) from 2007 to 2011 and we believe this market has significant continued growth poten- tial . we estimate that europe was served by 104 ships with approximately 100000 berths at the beginning of 2007 and by 121 ships with approximately 155000 berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 28000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the european cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . the following table details the growth in the global , north american and european cruise markets in terms of cruise guests and estimated weighted-average berths over the past five years : global cruise guests ( 1 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) north american cruise guests ( 2 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in north america ( 1 ) european cruise guests ( 3 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in europe ( 1 ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests , and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally , in north america and europe are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources including seatrade insider and cruise line international association . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) source : cruise line international association based on cruise guests carried for at least two consecutive nights for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . ( 3 ) source : european cruise council for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . other markets in addition to expected industry growth in north america and europe as discussed above , we expect the asia/pacific region to demonstrate an even higher growth rate in the near term , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america and europe . we compete with a number of cruise lines ; however , our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise lines , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , iberocruceros , p&o cruises and princess cruises ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; norwegian cruise line and oceania cruises . cruise lines compete with other vacation alternatives such as land-based resort hotels and sightseeing destinations for consum- ers 2019 leisure time . demand for such activities is influ- enced by political and general economic conditions . companies within the vacation market are dependent on consumer discretionary spending . operating strategies our principal operating strategies are to : and employees and protect the environment in which our vessels and organization operate , to better serve our global guest base and grow our business , order to enhance our revenues while continuing to expand and diversify our guest mix through interna- tional guest sourcing , and ensure adequate cash and liquidity , with the overall goal of maximizing our return on invested capital and long-term shareholder value , our brands throughout the world , revitalization of existing ships and the transfer of key innovations across each brand , while expanding our fleet with the new state-of-the-art cruise ships recently delivered and on order , by deploying them into those markets and itineraries that provide opportunities to optimize returns , while continuing our focus on existing key markets , support ongoing operations and initiatives , and the principal industry distribution channel , while enhancing our consumer outreach programs. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| global cruiseguests ( 1 ) | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 | 16586000.0 | 17184000.0 | 17340000.0 | 18800000.0 | 20227000.0 |\n| weighted-averagesupplyofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 ) | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 | 327000.0 | 347000.0 | 363000.0 | 391000.0 | 412000.0 |\n| northamericancruiseguests ( 2 ) | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 | 10247000.0 | 10093000.0 | 10198000.0 | 10781000.0 | 11625000.0 |\n| weighted-average supply ofberths marketedin northamerica ( 1 ) | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 | 212000.0 | 219000.0 | 222000.0 | 232000.0 | 245000.0 |\n| europeancruiseguests | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 | 4080000.0 | 4500000.0 | 5000000.0 | 5540000.0 | 5894000.0 |\n| weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketed ineurope ( 1 ) | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 | 105000.0 | 120000.0 | 131000.0 | 143000.0 | 149000.0 |', 'question': 'what is the net change in berths?', 'ops': 'subtract(155000, 100000)', 'id': 'Single_RCL/2011/page_16.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'part i berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 34000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the north american cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . europe in europe , cruising represents a smaller but growing sector of the vacation industry . it has experienced a compound annual growth rate in cruise guests of approximately 9.6% ( 9.6 % ) from 2007 to 2011 and we believe this market has significant continued growth poten- tial . we estimate that europe was served by 104 ships with approximately 100000 berths at the beginning of 2007 and by 121 ships with approximately 155000 berths at the end of 2011 . there are approximately 10 ships with an estimated 28000 berths that are expected to be placed in service in the european cruise market between 2012 and 2016 . the following table details the growth in the global , north american and european cruise markets in terms of cruise guests and estimated weighted-average berths over the past five years : global cruise guests ( 1 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) north american cruise guests ( 2 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in north america ( 1 ) european cruise guests ( 3 ) weighted-average supply of berths marketed in europe ( 1 ) .', 'doc_post_text': '( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests , and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally , in north america and europe are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources including seatrade insider and cruise line international association . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) source : cruise line international association based on cruise guests carried for at least two consecutive nights for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . ( 3 ) source : european cruise council for years 2007 through 2010 . year 2011 amounts represent our estimates ( see number 1 above ) . other markets in addition to expected industry growth in north america and europe as discussed above , we expect the asia/pacific region to demonstrate an even higher growth rate in the near term , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america and europe . we compete with a number of cruise lines ; however , our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise lines , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , iberocruceros , p&o cruises and princess cruises ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; norwegian cruise line and oceania cruises . cruise lines compete with other vacation alternatives such as land-based resort hotels and sightseeing destinations for consum- ers 2019 leisure time . demand for such activities is influ- enced by political and general economic conditions . companies within the vacation market are dependent on consumer discretionary spending . operating strategies our principal operating strategies are to : and employees and protect the environment in which our vessels and organization operate , to better serve our global guest base and grow our business , order to enhance our revenues while continuing to expand and diversify our guest mix through interna- tional guest sourcing , and ensure adequate cash and liquidity , with the overall goal of maximizing our return on invested capital and long-term shareholder value , our brands throughout the world , revitalization of existing ships and the transfer of key innovations across each brand , while expanding our fleet with the new state-of-the-art cruise ships recently delivered and on order , by deploying them into those markets and itineraries that provide opportunities to optimize returns , while continuing our focus on existing key markets , support ongoing operations and initiatives , and the principal industry distribution channel , while enhancing our consumer outreach programs. .', 'doc_table': {'global cruiseguests ( 1 )': {'2007': 16586000.0, '2008': 17184000.0, '2009': 17340000.0, '2010': 18800000.0, '2011': 20227000.0}, 'weighted-averagesupplyofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 )': {'2007': 327000.0, '2008': 347000.0, '2009': 363000.0, '2010': 391000.0, '2011': 412000.0}, 'northamericancruiseguests ( 2 )': {'2007': 10247000.0, '2008': 10093000.0, '2009': 10198000.0, '2010': 10781000.0, '2011': 11625000.0}, 'weighted-average supply ofberths marketedin northamerica ( 1 )': {'2007': 212000.0, '2008': 219000.0, '2009': 222000.0, '2010': 232000.0, '2011': 245000.0}, 'europeancruiseguests': {'2007': 4080000.0, '2008': 4500000.0, '2009': 5000000.0, '2010': 5540000.0, '2011': 5894000.0}, 'weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketed ineurope ( 1 )': {'2007': 105000.0, '2008': 120000.0, '2009': 131000.0, '2010': 143000.0, '2011': 149000.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what were the number of berths in 2011?', 'what were the number of berths in 2007?', 'what is the net change in berths?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what is that as a percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['155000', '100000', '55000', '0.55', '55'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['155000', '100000', 'subtract(155000, 100000)', 'subtract(155000, 100000), divide(#0, 100000)', 'subtract(155000, 100000), divide(#0, 100000), multiply(#1, const_100)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [155000.0, 100000.0, 55000.0, 0.55, 55.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 55000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "18s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: as of december 31, 2009, what was the total of derivative receivables related to the netting adjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid?\nA1: 65468000000.0\nQ2: and what was the total of the liquid securities collateral received by the firm?\nA2: 15500000000.0\nQ3: what was, then, the combined total of both amounts as of that date?\nA3: 80968000000.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\njpmorgan chase & co./2009 annual report 181 the following table shows the current credit risk of derivative receivables after netting adjustments , and the current liquidity risk of derivative payables after netting adjustments , as of december 31 , 2009. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin addition to the collateral amounts reflected in the table above , at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received and posted liquid secu- rities collateral in the amount of $ 15.5 billion and $ 11.7 billion , respectively . the firm also receives and delivers collateral at the initiation of derivative transactions , which is available as security against potential exposure that could arise should the fair value of the transactions move in the firm 2019s or client 2019s favor , respectively . furthermore , the firm and its counterparties hold collateral related to contracts that have a non-daily call frequency for collateral to be posted , and collateral that the firm or a counterparty has agreed to return but has not yet settled as of the reporting date . at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received $ 16.9 billion and delivered $ 5.8 billion of such additional collateral . these amounts were not netted against the derivative receivables and payables in the table above , because , at an individual counterparty level , the collateral exceeded the fair value exposure at december 31 , 2009 . credit derivatives credit derivatives are financial instruments whose value is derived from the credit risk associated with the debt of a third-party issuer ( the reference entity ) and which allow one party ( the protection purchaser ) to transfer that risk to another party ( the protection seller ) . credit derivatives expose the protection purchaser to the creditworthiness of the protection seller , as the protection seller is required to make payments under the contract when the reference entity experiences a credit event , such as a bankruptcy , a failure to pay its obligation or a restructuring . the seller of credit protection receives a premium for providing protection but has the risk that the underlying instrument referenced in the contract will be subject to a credit event . the firm is both a purchaser and seller of protection in the credit derivatives market and uses these derivatives for two primary purposes . first , in its capacity as a market-maker in the dealer/client business , the firm actively risk manages a portfolio of credit derivatives by purchasing and selling credit protection , pre- dominantly on corporate debt obligations , to meet the needs of customers . as a seller of protection , the firm 2019s exposure to a given reference entity may be offset partially , or entirely , with a contract to purchase protection from another counterparty on the same or similar reference entity . second , the firm uses credit derivatives to mitigate credit risk associated with its overall derivative receivables and traditional commercial credit lending exposures ( loans and unfunded commitments ) as well as to manage its exposure to residential and commercial mortgages . see note 3 on pages 156--- 173 of this annual report for further information on the firm 2019s mortgage-related exposures . in accomplishing the above , the firm uses different types of credit derivatives . following is a summary of various types of credit derivatives . credit default swaps credit derivatives may reference the credit of either a single refer- ence entity ( 201csingle-name 201d ) or a broad-based index , as described further below . the firm purchases and sells protection on both single- name and index-reference obligations . single-name cds and index cds contracts are both otc derivative contracts . single- name cds are used to manage the default risk of a single reference entity , while cds index are used to manage credit risk associated with the broader credit markets or credit market segments . like the s&p 500 and other market indices , a cds index is comprised of a portfolio of cds across many reference entities . new series of cds indices are established approximately every six months with a new underlying portfolio of reference entities to reflect changes in the credit markets . if one of the reference entities in the index experi- ences a credit event , then the reference entity that defaulted is removed from the index . cds can also be referenced against spe- cific portfolios of reference names or against customized exposure levels based on specific client demands : for example , to provide protection against the first $ 1 million of realized credit losses in a $ 10 million portfolio of exposure . such structures are commonly known as tranche cds . for both single-name cds contracts and index cds , upon the occurrence of a credit event , under the terms of a cds contract neither party to the cds contract has recourse to the reference entity . the protection purchaser has recourse to the protection seller for the difference between the face value of the cds contract and the fair value of the reference obligation at the time of settling the credit derivative contract , also known as the recovery value . the protection purchaser does not need to hold the debt instrument of the underlying reference entity in order to receive amounts due under the cds contract when a credit event occurs . credit-linked notes a credit linked note ( 201ccln 201d ) is a funded credit derivative where the issuer of the cln purchases credit protection on a referenced entity from the note investor . under the contract , the investor pays the issuer par value of the note at the inception of the transaction , and in return , the issuer pays periodic payments to the investor , based on the credit risk of the referenced entity . the issuer also repays the investor the par value of the note at maturity unless the reference entity experiences a specified credit event . in that event , the issuer is not obligated to repay the par value of the note , but rather , the issuer pays the investor the difference between the par value of the note .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | gross derivative fair value | nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables | nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid | carrying value on consolidated balance sheets | gross derivative fair value | nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables | nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid | carrying value on consolidated balance sheets |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| derivative receivables | 1565518.0 | -1419840.0 | -65468.0 | 80210.0 | 1565518.0 | -1419840.0 | -65468.0 | 80210.0 |\n| derivative payables | 1519183.0 | -1419840.0 | -39218.0 | 60125.0 | 1519183.0 | -1419840.0 | -39218.0 | 60125.0 |', 'question': 'and in that same year, how much did the gross derivative fair value receivables represent in relation to the payables one?', 'ops': 'divide(1565518, 1519183)', 'id': 'Double_JPM/2009/page_183.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'jpmorgan chase & co./2009 annual report 181 the following table shows the current credit risk of derivative receivables after netting adjustments , and the current liquidity risk of derivative payables after netting adjustments , as of december 31 , 2009. .', 'doc_post_text': 'in addition to the collateral amounts reflected in the table above , at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received and posted liquid secu- rities collateral in the amount of $ 15.5 billion and $ 11.7 billion , respectively . the firm also receives and delivers collateral at the initiation of derivative transactions , which is available as security against potential exposure that could arise should the fair value of the transactions move in the firm 2019s or client 2019s favor , respectively . furthermore , the firm and its counterparties hold collateral related to contracts that have a non-daily call frequency for collateral to be posted , and collateral that the firm or a counterparty has agreed to return but has not yet settled as of the reporting date . at december 31 , 2009 , the firm had received $ 16.9 billion and delivered $ 5.8 billion of such additional collateral . these amounts were not netted against the derivative receivables and payables in the table above , because , at an individual counterparty level , the collateral exceeded the fair value exposure at december 31 , 2009 . credit derivatives credit derivatives are financial instruments whose value is derived from the credit risk associated with the debt of a third-party issuer ( the reference entity ) and which allow one party ( the protection purchaser ) to transfer that risk to another party ( the protection seller ) . credit derivatives expose the protection purchaser to the creditworthiness of the protection seller , as the protection seller is required to make payments under the contract when the reference entity experiences a credit event , such as a bankruptcy , a failure to pay its obligation or a restructuring . the seller of credit protection receives a premium for providing protection but has the risk that the underlying instrument referenced in the contract will be subject to a credit event . the firm is both a purchaser and seller of protection in the credit derivatives market and uses these derivatives for two primary purposes . first , in its capacity as a market-maker in the dealer/client business , the firm actively risk manages a portfolio of credit derivatives by purchasing and selling credit protection , pre- dominantly on corporate debt obligations , to meet the needs of customers . as a seller of protection , the firm 2019s exposure to a given reference entity may be offset partially , or entirely , with a contract to purchase protection from another counterparty on the same or similar reference entity . second , the firm uses credit derivatives to mitigate credit risk associated with its overall derivative receivables and traditional commercial credit lending exposures ( loans and unfunded commitments ) as well as to manage its exposure to residential and commercial mortgages . see note 3 on pages 156--- 173 of this annual report for further information on the firm 2019s mortgage-related exposures . in accomplishing the above , the firm uses different types of credit derivatives . following is a summary of various types of credit derivatives . credit default swaps credit derivatives may reference the credit of either a single refer- ence entity ( 201csingle-name 201d ) or a broad-based index , as described further below . the firm purchases and sells protection on both single- name and index-reference obligations . single-name cds and index cds contracts are both otc derivative contracts . single- name cds are used to manage the default risk of a single reference entity , while cds index are used to manage credit risk associated with the broader credit markets or credit market segments . like the s&p 500 and other market indices , a cds index is comprised of a portfolio of cds across many reference entities . new series of cds indices are established approximately every six months with a new underlying portfolio of reference entities to reflect changes in the credit markets . if one of the reference entities in the index experi- ences a credit event , then the reference entity that defaulted is removed from the index . cds can also be referenced against spe- cific portfolios of reference names or against customized exposure levels based on specific client demands : for example , to provide protection against the first $ 1 million of realized credit losses in a $ 10 million portfolio of exposure . such structures are commonly known as tranche cds . for both single-name cds contracts and index cds , upon the occurrence of a credit event , under the terms of a cds contract neither party to the cds contract has recourse to the reference entity . the protection purchaser has recourse to the protection seller for the difference between the face value of the cds contract and the fair value of the reference obligation at the time of settling the credit derivative contract , also known as the recovery value . the protection purchaser does not need to hold the debt instrument of the underlying reference entity in order to receive amounts due under the cds contract when a credit event occurs . credit-linked notes a credit linked note ( 201ccln 201d ) is a funded credit derivative where the issuer of the cln purchases credit protection on a referenced entity from the note investor . under the contract , the investor pays the issuer par value of the note at the inception of the transaction , and in return , the issuer pays periodic payments to the investor , based on the credit risk of the referenced entity . the issuer also repays the investor the par value of the note at maturity unless the reference entity experiences a specified credit event . in that event , the issuer is not obligated to repay the par value of the note , but rather , the issuer pays the investor the difference between the par value of the note .', 'doc_table': {'derivative receivables': {'gross derivative fair value': 1565518.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables': -1419840.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid': -65468.0, 'carrying value on consolidated balance sheets': 80210.0}, 'derivative payables': {'gross derivative fair value': 1519183.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 offsetting receivables/payables': -1419840.0, 'nettingadjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid': -39218.0, 'carrying value on consolidated balance sheets': 60125.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['as of december 31, 2009, what was the total of derivative receivables related to the netting adjustment 2013 cash collateral received/paid?', 'and what was the total of the liquid securities collateral received by the firm?', 'what was, then, the combined total of both amounts as of that date?', 'and in that same year, how much did the gross derivative fair value receivables represent in relation to the payables one?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['65468000000', '15500000000', '80968000000', '1.03'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(65468, const_1000000)', 'multiply(65468, const_1000000), multiply(15.5, const_1000000), multiply(#1, const_1000)', 'multiply(65468, const_1000000), multiply(15.5, const_1000000), multiply(#1, const_1000), add(#2, #0)', 'divide(1565518, 1519183)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [65468000000.0, 15500000000.0, 80968000000.0, 1.0305], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1.0305}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "16s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amount of receivables in 2016?\nA1: 14215.0\nQ2: and what was it in 2015?\nA2: 15794.0\nQ3: what was, then, the total amount of receivables in both years?\nA3: 30009.0\nQ4: including 2014, what becomes this total?\nA4: 30451.0\nQ5: and including 2013, what then becomes the total for the four years?\nA5: 35188.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis entergy new orleans 2019s receivables from the money pool were as follows as of december 31 for each of the following years. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nsee note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool . entergy new orleans has a credit facility in the amount of $ 25 million scheduled to expire in november 2018 . the credit facility allows entergy new orleans to issue letters of credit against $ 10 million of the borrowing capacity of the facility . as of december 31 , 2016 , there were no cash borrowings and a $ 0.8 million letter of credit was outstanding under the facility . in addition , entergy new orleans is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations under miso . as of december 31 , 2016 , a $ 6.2 million letter of credit was outstanding under entergy new orleans 2019s letter of credit facility . see note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the credit facilities . entergy new orleans obtained authorization from the ferc through october 2017 for short-term borrowings not to exceed an aggregate amount of $ 100 million at any time outstanding . see note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of entergy new orleans 2019s short-term borrowing limits . the long-term securities issuances of entergy new orleans are limited to amounts authorized by the city council , and the current authorization extends through june 2018 . state and local rate regulation the rates that entergy new orleans charges for electricity and natural gas significantly influence its financial position , results of operations , and liquidity . entergy new orleans is regulated and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings . a governmental agency , the city council , is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers . retail rates see 201calgiers asset transfer 201d below for discussion of the transfer from entergy louisiana to entergy new orleans of certain assets that serve algiers customers . in march 2013 , entergy louisiana filed a rate case for the algiers area , which is in new orleans and is regulated by the city council . entergy louisiana requested a rate increase of $ 13 million over three years , including a 10.4% ( 10.4 % ) return on common equity and a formula rate plan mechanism identical to its lpsc request . in january 2014 the city council advisors filed direct testimony recommending a rate increase of $ 5.56 million over three years , including an 8.13% ( 8.13 % ) return on common equity . in june 2014 the city council unanimously approved a settlement that includes the following : 2022 a $ 9.3 million base rate revenue increase to be phased in on a levelized basis over four years ; 2022 recovery of an additional $ 853 thousand annually through a miso recovery rider ; and 2022 the adoption of a four-year formula rate plan requiring the filing of annual evaluation reports in may of each year , commencing may 2015 , with resulting rates being implemented in october of each year . the formula rate plan includes a midpoint target authorized return on common equity of 9.95% ( 9.95 % ) with a +/- 40 basis point bandwidth . the rate increase was effective with bills rendered on and after the first billing cycle of july 2014 . additional compliance filings were made with the city council in october 2014 for approval of the form of certain rate riders , including among others , a ninemile 6 non-fuel cost recovery interim rider , allowing for contemporaneous recovery of capacity .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | ( in thousands ) | $ 14215 | ( in thousands ) | $ 14215 | ( in thousands ) | $ 14215 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2015 | ( in thousands ) | 15794.0 | ( in thousands ) | 15794.0 | ( in thousands ) | 15794.0 |\n| 2014 | ( in thousands ) | 442.0 | ( in thousands ) | 442.0 | ( in thousands ) | 442.0 |\n| 2013 | ( in thousands ) | 4737.0 | ( in thousands ) | 4737.0 | ( in thousands ) | 4737.0 |', 'question': 'and concerning the city council unanimously approved settlement from june 2014, what was the percentage bandwidth of the midpoint target authorized return on common equity?', 'ops': 'divide(40, const_100)', 'id': 'Double_ETR/2016/page_403.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy new orleans , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis entergy new orleans 2019s receivables from the money pool were as follows as of december 31 for each of the following years. .', 'doc_post_text': 'see note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool . entergy new orleans has a credit facility in the amount of $ 25 million scheduled to expire in november 2018 . the credit facility allows entergy new orleans to issue letters of credit against $ 10 million of the borrowing capacity of the facility . as of december 31 , 2016 , there were no cash borrowings and a $ 0.8 million letter of credit was outstanding under the facility . in addition , entergy new orleans is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations under miso . as of december 31 , 2016 , a $ 6.2 million letter of credit was outstanding under entergy new orleans 2019s letter of credit facility . see note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the credit facilities . entergy new orleans obtained authorization from the ferc through october 2017 for short-term borrowings not to exceed an aggregate amount of $ 100 million at any time outstanding . see note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of entergy new orleans 2019s short-term borrowing limits . the long-term securities issuances of entergy new orleans are limited to amounts authorized by the city council , and the current authorization extends through june 2018 . state and local rate regulation the rates that entergy new orleans charges for electricity and natural gas significantly influence its financial position , results of operations , and liquidity . entergy new orleans is regulated and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings . a governmental agency , the city council , is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers . retail rates see 201calgiers asset transfer 201d below for discussion of the transfer from entergy louisiana to entergy new orleans of certain assets that serve algiers customers . in march 2013 , entergy louisiana filed a rate case for the algiers area , which is in new orleans and is regulated by the city council . entergy louisiana requested a rate increase of $ 13 million over three years , including a 10.4% ( 10.4 % ) return on common equity and a formula rate plan mechanism identical to its lpsc request . in january 2014 the city council advisors filed direct testimony recommending a rate increase of $ 5.56 million over three years , including an 8.13% ( 8.13 % ) return on common equity . in june 2014 the city council unanimously approved a settlement that includes the following : 2022 a $ 9.3 million base rate revenue increase to be phased in on a levelized basis over four years ; 2022 recovery of an additional $ 853 thousand annually through a miso recovery rider ; and 2022 the adoption of a four-year formula rate plan requiring the filing of annual evaluation reports in may of each year , commencing may 2015 , with resulting rates being implemented in october of each year . the formula rate plan includes a midpoint target authorized return on common equity of 9.95% ( 9.95 % ) with a +/- 40 basis point bandwidth . the rate increase was effective with bills rendered on and after the first billing cycle of july 2014 . additional compliance filings were made with the city council in october 2014 for approval of the form of certain rate riders , including among others , a ninemile 6 non-fuel cost recovery interim rider , allowing for contemporaneous recovery of capacity .', 'doc_table': {'2015': {'( in thousands )': '( in thousands )', '$ 14215': 15794.0}, '2014': {'( in thousands )': '( in thousands )', '$ 14215': 442.0}, '2013': {'( in thousands )': '( in thousands )', '$ 14215': 4737.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amount of receivables in 2016?', 'and what was it in 2015?', 'what was, then, the total amount of receivables in both years?', 'including 2014, what becomes this total?', 'and including 2013, what then becomes the total for the four years?', 'and concerning the city council unanimously approved settlement from june 2014, what was the percentage bandwidth of the midpoint target authorized return on common equity?', 'and what was that midpoint target authorized return?', 'what is, then, the maximum possible amount of this return?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['14215', '15794', '30009', '30451', '35188', '0.4', '9.95', '10.35'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['14215', '15794', 'add(14215, 15794)', 'add(14215, 15794), add(#0, 442)', 'add(14215, 15794), add(#0, 442), add(#1, 4737)', 'divide(40, const_100)', '9.95', 'divide(40, const_100), add(#0, 9.95)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [14215.0, 15794.0, 30009.0, 30451.0, 35188.0, 0.4, 9.95, 10.35], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 0.4}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "17s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the net change in weighted-average supply of berths market ed globally from 2012 to 2016?\nA1: 68000.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nthe following table details the growth in global weighted average berths and the global , north american , european and asia/pacific cruise guests over the past five years ( in thousands , except berth data ) : weighted- average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 ) global cruise guests ( 1 ) american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 ) european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 ) asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n_______________________________________________________________________________ ( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources . we use data obtained from seatrade insider , cruise industry news and company press releases to estimate weighted-average supply of berths and clia and g.p . wild to estimate cruise guest information . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) total berths include our berths related to our global brands and partner brands . ( 3 ) our estimates include the united states and canada . ( 4 ) our estimates include european countries relevant to the industry ( e.g. , nordics , germany , france , italy , spain and the united kingdom ) . ( 5 ) our estimates include the southeast asia ( e.g. , singapore , thailand and the philippines ) , east asia ( e.g. , china and japan ) , south asia ( e.g. , india and pakistan ) and oceanian ( e.g. , australia and fiji islands ) regions . north america the majority of industry cruise guests are sourced from north america , which represented approximately 52% ( 52 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 2% ( 2 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . europe industry cruise guests sourced from europe represented approximately 27% ( 27 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 1% ( 1 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . asia/pacific industry cruise guests sourced from the asia/pacific region represented approximately 15% ( 15 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 25% ( 25 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . the asia/pacific region is experiencing the highest growth rate of the major regions , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america . competition we compete with a number of cruise lines . our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise line , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , p&o cruises , princess cruises and seabourn ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; and norwegian cruise line holdings ltd , which owns norwegian cruise line , oceania cruises and regent seven seas cruises . cruise lines compete with .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 ) | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 | 425000.0 | 432000.0 | 448000.0 | 469000.0 | 493000.0 |\n| royal caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 ) | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 | 98650.0 | 98750.0 | 105750.0 | 112700.0 | 123270.0 |\n| globalcruiseguests ( 1 ) | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 | 20813.0 | 21343.0 | 22039.0 | 23000.0 | 24000.0 |\n| north american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 ) | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 | 11641.0 | 11710.0 | 12269.0 | 12004.0 | 12581.0 |\n| european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 ) | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 | 6225.0 | 6430.0 | 6387.0 | 6587.0 | 6542.0 |\n| asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 ) | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 | 1474.0 | 2045.0 | 2382.0 | 3129.0 | 3636.0 |', 'question': 'what percentage change does this represent?', 'ops': 'subtract(493000, 425000), divide(#0, 425000)', 'id': 'Single_RCL/2016/page_7.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': 'the following table details the growth in global weighted average berths and the global , north american , european and asia/pacific cruise guests over the past five years ( in thousands , except berth data ) : weighted- average supply of berths marketed globally ( 1 ) caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 ) global cruise guests ( 1 ) american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 ) european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 ) asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 ) .', 'doc_post_text': '_______________________________________________________________________________ ( 1 ) source : our estimates of the number of global cruise guests and the weighted-average supply of berths marketed globally are based on a combination of data that we obtain from various publicly available cruise industry trade information sources . we use data obtained from seatrade insider , cruise industry news and company press releases to estimate weighted-average supply of berths and clia and g.p . wild to estimate cruise guest information . in addition , our estimates incorporate our own statistical analysis utilizing the same publicly available cruise industry data as a base . ( 2 ) total berths include our berths related to our global brands and partner brands . ( 3 ) our estimates include the united states and canada . ( 4 ) our estimates include european countries relevant to the industry ( e.g. , nordics , germany , france , italy , spain and the united kingdom ) . ( 5 ) our estimates include the southeast asia ( e.g. , singapore , thailand and the philippines ) , east asia ( e.g. , china and japan ) , south asia ( e.g. , india and pakistan ) and oceanian ( e.g. , australia and fiji islands ) regions . north america the majority of industry cruise guests are sourced from north america , which represented approximately 52% ( 52 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 2% ( 2 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . europe industry cruise guests sourced from europe represented approximately 27% ( 27 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 1% ( 1 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . asia/pacific industry cruise guests sourced from the asia/pacific region represented approximately 15% ( 15 % ) of global cruise guests in 2016 . the compound annual growth rate in cruise guests sourced from this market was approximately 25% ( 25 % ) from 2012 to 2016 . the asia/pacific region is experiencing the highest growth rate of the major regions , although it will continue to represent a relatively small sector compared to north america . competition we compete with a number of cruise lines . our principal competitors are carnival corporation & plc , which owns , among others , aida cruises , carnival cruise line , costa cruises , cunard line , holland america line , p&o cruises , princess cruises and seabourn ; disney cruise line ; msc cruises ; and norwegian cruise line holdings ltd , which owns norwegian cruise line , oceania cruises and regent seven seas cruises . cruise lines compete with .', 'doc_table': {'weighted-averagesupply ofberthsmarketedglobally ( 1 )': {'2012': 425000.0, '2013': 432000.0, '2014': 448000.0, '2015': 469000.0, '2016': 493000.0}, 'royal caribbean cruises ltd . total berths ( 2 )': {'2012': 98650.0, '2013': 98750.0, '2014': 105750.0, '2015': 112700.0, '2016': 123270.0}, 'globalcruiseguests ( 1 )': {'2012': 20813.0, '2013': 21343.0, '2014': 22039.0, '2015': 23000.0, '2016': 24000.0}, 'north american cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 3 )': {'2012': 11641.0, '2013': 11710.0, '2014': 12269.0, '2015': 12004.0, '2016': 12581.0}, 'european cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 4 )': {'2012': 6225.0, '2013': 6430.0, '2014': 6387.0, '2015': 6587.0, '2016': 6542.0}, 'asia/pacific cruise guests ( 1 ) ( 5 )': {'2012': 1474.0, '2013': 2045.0, '2014': 2382.0, '2015': 3129.0, '2016': 3636.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in weighted-average supply of berths market ed globally from 2012 to 2016?', 'what percentage change does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['68000', '16%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(493000, 425000)', 'subtract(493000, 425000), divide(#0, 425000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [68000.0, 0.16], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.16}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "17s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the net change in value of an investment in s&p500 from 2010 to 2011?\nA1: 8.09\nQ2: what is the initial value?\nA2: 100.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nperformance graph the performance graph below shows the five-year cumulative total stockholder return on applied common stock during the period from october 31 , 2010 through october 25 , 2015 . this is compared with the cumulative total return of the standard & poor 2019s 500 stock index and the rdg semiconductor composite index over the same period . the comparison assumes $ 100 was invested on october 31 , 2010 in applied common stock and in each of the foregoing indices and assumes reinvestment of dividends , if any . dollar amounts in the graph are rounded to the nearest whole dollar . the performance shown in the graph represents past performance and should not be considered an indication of future performance . comparison of 5 year cumulative total return* among applied materials , inc. , the s&p 500 index and the rdg semiconductor composite index *assumes $ 100 invested on 10/31/10 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . indexes calculated on month-end basis . 201cs&p 201d is a registered trademark of standard & poor 2019s financial services llc , a subsidiary of the mcgraw-hill companies , inc. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ndividends during each of fiscal 2015 and 2014 , applied's board of directors declared four quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share . during fiscal 2013 , applied 2019s board of directors declared three quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share and one quarterly cash dividend of $ 0.09 per share . dividends paid during fiscal 2015 , 2014 and 2013 amounted to $ 487 million , $ 485 million and $ 456 million , respectively . applied currently anticipates that cash dividends will continue to be paid on a quarterly basis , although the declaration of any future cash dividend is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on applied 2019s financial condition , results of operations , capital requirements , business conditions and other factors , as well as a determination by the board of directors that cash dividends are in the best interests of applied 2019s stockholders . 104 136 10/31/10 10/30/11 10/28/12 10/27/13 10/26/14 10/25/15 applied materials , inc . s&p 500 rdg semiconductor composite .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index | applied materials | s&p 500 index | rdg semiconductor composite index |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 10/31/2010 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| 10/30/2011 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 | 104.54 | 108.09 | 110.04 |\n| 10/28/2012 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 | 90.88 | 124.52 | 104.07 |\n| 10/27/2013 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 | 155.43 | 158.36 | 136.15 |\n| 10/26/2014 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 | 188.13 | 185.71 | 172.41 |\n| 10/25/2015 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 | 150.26 | 195.37 | 170.4 |', 'question': 'what rate of return does this represent?', 'ops': 'subtract(108.09, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'id': 'Double_AMAT/2015/page_33.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'performance graph the performance graph below shows the five-year cumulative total stockholder return on applied common stock during the period from october 31 , 2010 through october 25 , 2015 . this is compared with the cumulative total return of the standard & poor 2019s 500 stock index and the rdg semiconductor composite index over the same period . the comparison assumes $ 100 was invested on october 31 , 2010 in applied common stock and in each of the foregoing indices and assumes reinvestment of dividends , if any . dollar amounts in the graph are rounded to the nearest whole dollar . the performance shown in the graph represents past performance and should not be considered an indication of future performance . comparison of 5 year cumulative total return* among applied materials , inc. , the s&p 500 index and the rdg semiconductor composite index *assumes $ 100 invested on 10/31/10 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends . indexes calculated on month-end basis . 201cs&p 201d is a registered trademark of standard & poor 2019s financial services llc , a subsidiary of the mcgraw-hill companies , inc. .', 'doc_post_text': "dividends during each of fiscal 2015 and 2014 , applied's board of directors declared four quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share . during fiscal 2013 , applied 2019s board of directors declared three quarterly cash dividends of $ 0.10 per share and one quarterly cash dividend of $ 0.09 per share . dividends paid during fiscal 2015 , 2014 and 2013 amounted to $ 487 million , $ 485 million and $ 456 million , respectively . applied currently anticipates that cash dividends will continue to be paid on a quarterly basis , although the declaration of any future cash dividend is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on applied 2019s financial condition , results of operations , capital requirements , business conditions and other factors , as well as a determination by the board of directors that cash dividends are in the best interests of applied 2019s stockholders . 104 136 10/31/10 10/30/11 10/28/12 10/27/13 10/26/14 10/25/15 applied materials , inc . s&p 500 rdg semiconductor composite .", 'doc_table': {'10/31/2010': {'applied materials': 100.0, 's&p 500 index': 100.0, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 100.0}, '10/30/2011': {'applied materials': 104.54, 's&p 500 index': 108.09, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 110.04}, '10/28/2012': {'applied materials': 90.88, 's&p 500 index': 124.52, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 104.07}, '10/27/2013': {'applied materials': 155.43, 's&p 500 index': 158.36, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 136.15}, '10/26/2014': {'applied materials': 188.13, 's&p 500 index': 185.71, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 172.41}, '10/25/2015': {'applied materials': 150.26, 's&p 500 index': 195.37, 'rdg semiconductor composite index': 170.4}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in value of an investment in s&p500 from 2010 to 2011?', 'what is the initial value?', 'what rate of return does this represent?', 'what is the quarterly cash dividends for the first three quarters?', 'what about the fourth quarter?', 'what is the total dividends in 2013?', 'how many shares received this dividend in 2013?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['8.09', '100', '8.1%', '0.3', '0.09', '0.39', '1248.7'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(108.09, 100)', '100', 'subtract(108.09, 100), divide(#0, 100)', 'multiply(0.10, const_3)', '0.09', 'multiply(0.10, const_3), add(#0, 0.09)', 'multiply(0.10, const_3), add(#0, 0.09), divide(487, #1)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [8.09, 100.0, 0.0809, 0.3, 0.09, 0.39, 1248.71795], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.0809}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "18s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the principal amount by the interest rate for unsecured notes issued in 2016?\nA1: 33.25\nQ2: what was the principal amount?\nA2: 700.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nnew term loan a facility , with the remaining unpaid principal amount of loans under the new term loan a facility due and payable in full at maturity on june 6 , 2021 . principal amounts outstanding under the new revolving loan facility are due and payable in full at maturity on june 6 , 2021 , subject to earlier repayment pursuant to the springing maturity date described above . in addition to paying interest on outstanding principal under the borrowings , we are obligated to pay a quarterly commitment fee at a rate determined by reference to a total leverage ratio , with a maximum commitment fee of 40% ( 40 % ) of the applicable margin for eurocurrency loans . in july 2016 , breakaway four , ltd. , as borrower , and nclc , as guarantor , entered into a supplemental agreement , which amended the breakaway four loan to , among other things , increase the aggregate principal amount of commitments under the multi-draw term loan credit facility from 20ac590.5 million to 20ac729.9 million . in june 2016 , we took delivery of seven seas explorer . to finance the payment due upon delivery , we had export credit financing in place for 80% ( 80 % ) of the contract price . the associated $ 373.6 million term loan bears interest at 3.43% ( 3.43 % ) with a maturity date of june 30 , 2028 . principal and interest payments shall be paid semiannually . in december 2016 , nclc issued $ 700.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.750% ( 4.750 % ) senior unsecured notes due december 2021 ( the 201cnotes 201d ) in a private offering ( the 201coffering 201d ) at par . nclc used the net proceeds from the offering , after deducting the initial purchasers 2019 discount and estimated fees and expenses , together with cash on hand , to purchase its outstanding 5.25% ( 5.25 % ) senior notes due 2019 having an aggregate outstanding principal amount of $ 680 million . the redemption of the 5.25% ( 5.25 % ) senior notes due 2019 was completed in january 2017 . nclc will pay interest on the notes at 4.750% ( 4.750 % ) per annum , semiannually on june 15 and december 15 of each year , commencing on june 15 , 2017 , to holders of record at the close of business on the immediately preceding june 1 and december 1 , respectively . nclc may redeem the notes , in whole or part , at any time prior to december 15 , 2018 , at a price equal to 100% ( 100 % ) of the principal amount of the notes redeemed plus accrued and unpaid interest to , but not including , the redemption date and a 201cmake-whole premium . 201d nclc may redeem the notes , in whole or in part , on or after december 15 , 2018 , at the redemption prices set forth in the indenture governing the notes . at any time ( which may be more than once ) on or prior to december 15 , 2018 , nclc may choose to redeem up to 40% ( 40 % ) of the aggregate principal amount of the notes at a redemption price equal to 104.750% ( 104.750 % ) of the face amount thereof with an amount equal to the net proceeds of one or more equity offerings , so long as at least 60% ( 60 % ) of the aggregate principal amount of the notes issued remains outstanding following such redemption . the indenture governing the notes contains covenants that limit nclc 2019s ability ( and its restricted subsidiaries 2019 ability ) to , among other things : ( i ) incur or guarantee additional indebtedness or issue certain preferred shares ; ( ii ) pay dividends and make certain other restricted payments ; ( iii ) create restrictions on the payment of dividends or other distributions to nclc from its restricted subsidiaries ; ( iv ) create liens on certain assets to secure debt ; ( v ) make certain investments ; ( vi ) engage in transactions with affiliates ; ( vii ) engage in sales of assets and subsidiary stock ; and ( viii ) transfer all or substantially all of its assets or enter into merger or consolidation transactions . the indenture governing the notes also provides for events of default , which , if any of them occurs , would permit or require the principal , premium ( if any ) , interest and other monetary obligations on all of the then-outstanding notes to become due and payable immediately . interest expense , net for the year ended december 31 , 2016 was $ 276.9 million which included $ 34.7 million of amortization of deferred financing fees and a $ 27.7 million loss on extinguishment of debt . interest expense , net for the year ended december 31 , 2015 was $ 221.9 million which included $ 36.7 million of amortization of deferred financing fees and a $ 12.7 million loss on extinguishment of debt . interest expense , net for the year ended december 31 , 2014 was $ 151.8 million which included $ 32.3 million of amortization of deferred financing fees and $ 15.4 million of expenses related to financing transactions in connection with the acquisition of prestige . certain of our debt agreements contain covenants that , among other things , require us to maintain a minimum level of liquidity , as well as limit our net funded debt-to-capital ratio , maintain certain other ratios and restrict our ability to pay dividends . substantially all of our ships and other property and equipment are pledged as collateral for certain of our debt . we believe we were in compliance with these covenants as of december 31 , 2016 . the following are scheduled principal repayments on long-term debt including capital lease obligations as of december 31 , 2016 for each of the next five years ( in thousands ) : .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nwe had an accrued interest liability of $ 32.5 million and $ 34.2 million as of december 31 , 2016 and 2015 , respectively. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | thereafter | total |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount | 560193.0 | 554846.0 | 561687.0 | 1153733.0 | 2193823.0 | 1490322.0 | 6514604.0 |', 'question': 'what is the prior product plus the principal value?', 'ops': 'multiply(700.0, 4.750%), add(#0, 700.0)', 'id': 'Single_NCLH/2016/page_84.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'new term loan a facility , with the remaining unpaid principal amount of loans under the new term loan a facility due and payable in full at maturity on june 6 , 2021 . principal amounts outstanding under the new revolving loan facility are due and payable in full at maturity on june 6 , 2021 , subject to earlier repayment pursuant to the springing maturity date described above . in addition to paying interest on outstanding principal under the borrowings , we are obligated to pay a quarterly commitment fee at a rate determined by reference to a total leverage ratio , with a maximum commitment fee of 40% ( 40 % ) of the applicable margin for eurocurrency loans . in july 2016 , breakaway four , ltd. , as borrower , and nclc , as guarantor , entered into a supplemental agreement , which amended the breakaway four loan to , among other things , increase the aggregate principal amount of commitments under the multi-draw term loan credit facility from 20ac590.5 million to 20ac729.9 million . in june 2016 , we took delivery of seven seas explorer . to finance the payment due upon delivery , we had export credit financing in place for 80% ( 80 % ) of the contract price . the associated $ 373.6 million term loan bears interest at 3.43% ( 3.43 % ) with a maturity date of june 30 , 2028 . principal and interest payments shall be paid semiannually . in december 2016 , nclc issued $ 700.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.750% ( 4.750 % ) senior unsecured notes due december 2021 ( the 201cnotes 201d ) in a private offering ( the 201coffering 201d ) at par . nclc used the net proceeds from the offering , after deducting the initial purchasers 2019 discount and estimated fees and expenses , together with cash on hand , to purchase its outstanding 5.25% ( 5.25 % ) senior notes due 2019 having an aggregate outstanding principal amount of $ 680 million . the redemption of the 5.25% ( 5.25 % ) senior notes due 2019 was completed in january 2017 . nclc will pay interest on the notes at 4.750% ( 4.750 % ) per annum , semiannually on june 15 and december 15 of each year , commencing on june 15 , 2017 , to holders of record at the close of business on the immediately preceding june 1 and december 1 , respectively . nclc may redeem the notes , in whole or part , at any time prior to december 15 , 2018 , at a price equal to 100% ( 100 % ) of the principal amount of the notes redeemed plus accrued and unpaid interest to , but not including , the redemption date and a 201cmake-whole premium . 201d nclc may redeem the notes , in whole or in part , on or after december 15 , 2018 , at the redemption prices set forth in the indenture governing the notes . at any time ( which may be more than once ) on or prior to december 15 , 2018 , nclc may choose to redeem up to 40% ( 40 % ) of the aggregate principal amount of the notes at a redemption price equal to 104.750% ( 104.750 % ) of the face amount thereof with an amount equal to the net proceeds of one or more equity offerings , so long as at least 60% ( 60 % ) of the aggregate principal amount of the notes issued remains outstanding following such redemption . the indenture governing the notes contains covenants that limit nclc 2019s ability ( and its restricted subsidiaries 2019 ability ) to , among other things : ( i ) incur or guarantee additional indebtedness or issue certain preferred shares ; ( ii ) pay dividends and make certain other restricted payments ; ( iii ) create restrictions on the payment of dividends or other distributions to nclc from its restricted subsidiaries ; ( iv ) create liens on certain assets to secure debt ; ( v ) make certain investments ; ( vi ) engage in transactions with affiliates ; ( vii ) engage in sales of assets and subsidiary stock ; and ( viii ) transfer all or substantially all of its assets or enter into merger or consolidation transactions . the indenture governing the notes also provides for events of default , which , if any of them occurs , would permit or require the principal , premium ( if any ) , interest and other monetary obligations on all of the then-outstanding notes to become due and payable immediately . interest expense , net for the year ended december 31 , 2016 was $ 276.9 million which included $ 34.7 million of amortization of deferred financing fees and a $ 27.7 million loss on extinguishment of debt . interest expense , net for the year ended december 31 , 2015 was $ 221.9 million which included $ 36.7 million of amortization of deferred financing fees and a $ 12.7 million loss on extinguishment of debt . interest expense , net for the year ended december 31 , 2014 was $ 151.8 million which included $ 32.3 million of amortization of deferred financing fees and $ 15.4 million of expenses related to financing transactions in connection with the acquisition of prestige . certain of our debt agreements contain covenants that , among other things , require us to maintain a minimum level of liquidity , as well as limit our net funded debt-to-capital ratio , maintain certain other ratios and restrict our ability to pay dividends . substantially all of our ships and other property and equipment are pledged as collateral for certain of our debt . we believe we were in compliance with these covenants as of december 31 , 2016 . the following are scheduled principal repayments on long-term debt including capital lease obligations as of december 31 , 2016 for each of the next five years ( in thousands ) : .', 'doc_post_text': 'we had an accrued interest liability of $ 32.5 million and $ 34.2 million as of december 31 , 2016 and 2015 , respectively. .', 'doc_table': {'amount': {'2017': 560193.0, '2018': 554846.0, '2019': 561687.0, '2020': 1153733.0, '2021': 2193823.0, 'thereafter': 1490322.0, 'total': 6514604.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the principal amount by the interest rate for unsecured notes issued in 2016?', 'what was the principal amount?', 'what is the prior product plus the principal value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['33.35', '700.0', '733.35'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(700.0, 4.750%)', '700.0', 'multiply(700.0, 4.750%), add(#0, 700.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [33.25, 700.0, 733.25], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 733.25}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "18s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities our ordinary shares have been publicly traded since november 17 , 2011 when our ordinary shares were listed and began trading on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) under the symbol 201cdlph . 201d on december 4 , 2017 , following the spin-off of delphi technologies , the company changed its name to aptiv plc and its nyse symbol to 201captv . 201d as of january 25 , 2019 , there were 2 shareholders of record of our ordinary shares . the following graph reflects the comparative changes in the value from december 31 , 2013 through december 31 , 2018 , assuming an initial investment of $ 100 and the reinvestment of dividends , if any in ( 1 ) our ordinary shares , ( 2 ) the s&p 500 index and ( 3 ) the automotive peer group . historical share prices of our ordinary shares have been adjusted to reflect the separation . historical performance may not be indicative of future shareholder returns . stock performance graph * $ 100 invested on december 31 , 2013 in our stock or in the relevant index , including reinvestment of dividends . fiscal year ended december 31 , 2018 . ( 1 ) aptiv plc , adjusted for the distribution of delphi technologies on december 4 , 2017 ( 2 ) s&p 500 2013 standard & poor 2019s 500 total return index ( 3 ) automotive peer group 2013 adient plc , american axle & manufacturing holdings inc , aptiv plc , borgwarner inc , cooper tire & rubber co , cooper- standard holdings inc , dana inc , dorman products inc , ford motor co , garrett motion inc. , general motors co , gentex corp , gentherm inc , genuine parts co , goodyear tire & rubber co , lear corp , lkq corp , meritor inc , motorcar parts of america inc , standard motor products inc , stoneridge inc , superior industries international inc , tenneco inc , tesla inc , tower international inc , visteon corp , wabco holdings inc company index december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| december 31 2013 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| december 31 2014 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 |\n| december 31 2015 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 |\n| december 31 2016 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 |\n| december 31 2017 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 |\n| december 31 2018 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 |', 'question': 'what was the value of the aptiv plc in 2018?', 'ops': '130.80', 'id': 'Single_APTV/2018/page_36.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'part ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities our ordinary shares have been publicly traded since november 17 , 2011 when our ordinary shares were listed and began trading on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) under the symbol 201cdlph . 201d on december 4 , 2017 , following the spin-off of delphi technologies , the company changed its name to aptiv plc and its nyse symbol to 201captv . 201d as of january 25 , 2019 , there were 2 shareholders of record of our ordinary shares . the following graph reflects the comparative changes in the value from december 31 , 2013 through december 31 , 2018 , assuming an initial investment of $ 100 and the reinvestment of dividends , if any in ( 1 ) our ordinary shares , ( 2 ) the s&p 500 index and ( 3 ) the automotive peer group . historical share prices of our ordinary shares have been adjusted to reflect the separation . historical performance may not be indicative of future shareholder returns . stock performance graph * $ 100 invested on december 31 , 2013 in our stock or in the relevant index , including reinvestment of dividends . fiscal year ended december 31 , 2018 . ( 1 ) aptiv plc , adjusted for the distribution of delphi technologies on december 4 , 2017 ( 2 ) s&p 500 2013 standard & poor 2019s 500 total return index ( 3 ) automotive peer group 2013 adient plc , american axle & manufacturing holdings inc , aptiv plc , borgwarner inc , cooper tire & rubber co , cooper- standard holdings inc , dana inc , dorman products inc , ford motor co , garrett motion inc. , general motors co , gentex corp , gentherm inc , genuine parts co , goodyear tire & rubber co , lear corp , lkq corp , meritor inc , motorcar parts of america inc , standard motor products inc , stoneridge inc , superior industries international inc , tenneco inc , tesla inc , tower international inc , visteon corp , wabco holdings inc company index december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'december 31 2013': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 100.0, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 100.0, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 100.0}, 'december 31 2014': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 122.75, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 113.69, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 107.96}, 'december 31 2015': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 146.49, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 115.26, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 108.05}, 'december 31 2016': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 117.11, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 129.05, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 107.72}, 'december 31 2017': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 178.46, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 157.22, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 134.04}, 'december 31 2018': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 130.8, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 150.33, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 106.89}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of the aptiv plc in 2018?', 'what was, then, the change in its value, considering 2018 and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'and what was the change in the value of the automotive peer group, considering the 2018 one and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'how much does the change in the value of the aptiv plc represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?', 'and how much does the change in the value of the automotive peer group represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?', 'what is, then, the difference between the percentage change of the aptiv plc and the automotive peer group one?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['130.80', '30.8', '6.89', '30.8%', '6.89%', '23.91%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['130.80', 'subtract(130.80, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), divide(#1, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), divide(#1, const_100), subtract(#2, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [130.8, 30.8, 6.89, 0.308, 0.0689, 0.2391], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 130.8}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "18s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nnotes to the consolidated financial statements union pacific corporation and subsidiary companies for purposes of this report , unless the context otherwise requires , all references herein to the 201ccorporation 201d , 201ccompany 201d , 201cupc 201d , 201cwe 201d , 201cus 201d , and 201cour 201d mean union pacific corporation and its subsidiaries , including union pacific railroad company , which will be separately referred to herein as 201cuprr 201d or the 201crailroad 201d . 1 . nature of operations operations and segmentation 2013 we are a class i railroad operating in the u.s . our network includes 32236 route miles , linking pacific coast and gulf coast ports with the midwest and eastern u.s . gateways and providing several corridors to key mexican gateways . we own 26039 miles and operate on the remainder pursuant to trackage rights or leases . we serve the western two-thirds of the country and maintain coordinated schedules with other rail carriers for the handling of freight to and from the atlantic coast , the pacific coast , the southeast , the southwest , canada , and mexico . export and import traffic is moved through gulf coast and pacific coast ports and across the mexican and canadian borders . the railroad , along with its subsidiaries and rail affiliates , is our one reportable operating segment . although we provide and analyze revenue by commodity group , we treat the financial results of the railroad as one segment due to the integrated nature of our rail network . our operating revenues are primarily derived from contracts with customers for the transportation of freight from origin to destination . effective january 1 , 2018 , the company reclassified its six commodity groups into four : agricultural products , energy , industrial , and premium . the following table represents a disaggregation of our freight and other revenues: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nalthough our revenues are principally derived from customers domiciled in the u.s. , the ultimate points of origination or destination for some products we transport are outside the u.s . each of our commodity groups includes revenue from shipments to and from mexico . included in the above table are freight revenues from our mexico business which amounted to $ 2.5 billion in 2018 , $ 2.3 billion in 2017 , and $ 2.2 billion in 2016 . basis of presentation 2013 the consolidated financial statements are presented in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the u.s . ( gaap ) as codified in the financial accounting standards board ( fasb ) accounting standards codification ( asc ) . 2 . significant accounting policies principles of consolidation 2013 the consolidated financial statements include the accounts of union pacific corporation and all of its subsidiaries . investments in affiliated companies ( 20% ( 20 % ) to 50% ( 50 % ) owned ) are accounted for using the equity method of accounting . all intercompany transactions are eliminated . we currently have no less than majority-owned investments that require consolidation under variable interest entity requirements . cash , cash equivalents and restricted cash 2013 cash equivalents consist of investments with original maturities of three months or less . amounts included in restricted cash represent those required to be set aside by contractual agreement. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | agricultural products | energy | industrial | premium | total freight revenues | other subsidiary revenues | accessorial revenues | other | total operating revenues | agricultural products | energy | industrial | premium | total freight revenues | other subsidiary revenues | accessorial revenues | other | total operating revenues | agricultural products | energy | industrial | premium | total freight revenues | other subsidiary revenues | accessorial revenues | other | total operating revenues |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2018 | 4469.0 | 4608.0 | 5679.0 | 6628.0 | 21384.0 | 881.0 | 502.0 | 65.0 | 22832.0 | 4469.0 | 4608.0 | 5679.0 | 6628.0 | 21384.0 | 881.0 | 502.0 | 65.0 | 22832.0 | 4469.0 | 4608.0 | 5679.0 | 6628.0 | 21384.0 | 881.0 | 502.0 | 65.0 | 22832.0 |\n| 2017 | 4303.0 | 4498.0 | 5204.0 | 5832.0 | 19837.0 | 885.0 | 458.0 | 60.0 | 21240.0 | 4303.0 | 4498.0 | 5204.0 | 5832.0 | 19837.0 | 885.0 | 458.0 | 60.0 | 21240.0 | 4303.0 | 4498.0 | 5204.0 | 5832.0 | 19837.0 | 885.0 | 458.0 | 60.0 | 21240.0 |\n| 2016 | 4209.0 | 3715.0 | 4964.0 | 5713.0 | 18601.0 | 814.0 | 455.0 | 71.0 | 19941.0 | 4209.0 | 3715.0 | 4964.0 | 5713.0 | 18601.0 | 814.0 | 455.0 | 71.0 | 19941.0 | 4209.0 | 3715.0 | 4964.0 | 5713.0 | 18601.0 | 814.0 | 455.0 | 71.0 | 19941.0 |', 'question': 'what is the revenue from industrial segement in 2018?', 'ops': '5679', 'id': 'Single_UNP/2018/page_50.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'notes to the consolidated financial statements union pacific corporation and subsidiary companies for purposes of this report , unless the context otherwise requires , all references herein to the 201ccorporation 201d , 201ccompany 201d , 201cupc 201d , 201cwe 201d , 201cus 201d , and 201cour 201d mean union pacific corporation and its subsidiaries , including union pacific railroad company , which will be separately referred to herein as 201cuprr 201d or the 201crailroad 201d . 1 . nature of operations operations and segmentation 2013 we are a class i railroad operating in the u.s . our network includes 32236 route miles , linking pacific coast and gulf coast ports with the midwest and eastern u.s . gateways and providing several corridors to key mexican gateways . we own 26039 miles and operate on the remainder pursuant to trackage rights or leases . we serve the western two-thirds of the country and maintain coordinated schedules with other rail carriers for the handling of freight to and from the atlantic coast , the pacific coast , the southeast , the southwest , canada , and mexico . export and import traffic is moved through gulf coast and pacific coast ports and across the mexican and canadian borders . the railroad , along with its subsidiaries and rail affiliates , is our one reportable operating segment . although we provide and analyze revenue by commodity group , we treat the financial results of the railroad as one segment due to the integrated nature of our rail network . our operating revenues are primarily derived from contracts with customers for the transportation of freight from origin to destination . effective january 1 , 2018 , the company reclassified its six commodity groups into four : agricultural products , energy , industrial , and premium . the following table represents a disaggregation of our freight and other revenues: .', 'doc_post_text': 'although our revenues are principally derived from customers domiciled in the u.s. , the ultimate points of origination or destination for some products we transport are outside the u.s . each of our commodity groups includes revenue from shipments to and from mexico . included in the above table are freight revenues from our mexico business which amounted to $ 2.5 billion in 2018 , $ 2.3 billion in 2017 , and $ 2.2 billion in 2016 . basis of presentation 2013 the consolidated financial statements are presented in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the u.s . ( gaap ) as codified in the financial accounting standards board ( fasb ) accounting standards codification ( asc ) . 2 . significant accounting policies principles of consolidation 2013 the consolidated financial statements include the accounts of union pacific corporation and all of its subsidiaries . investments in affiliated companies ( 20% ( 20 % ) to 50% ( 50 % ) owned ) are accounted for using the equity method of accounting . all intercompany transactions are eliminated . we currently have no less than majority-owned investments that require consolidation under variable interest entity requirements . cash , cash equivalents and restricted cash 2013 cash equivalents consist of investments with original maturities of three months or less . amounts included in restricted cash represent those required to be set aside by contractual agreement. .', 'doc_table': {'2018': {'agricultural products': 4469.0, 'energy': 4608.0, 'industrial': 5679.0, 'premium': 6628.0, 'total freight revenues': 21384.0, 'other subsidiary revenues': 881.0, 'accessorial revenues': 502.0, 'other': 65.0, 'total operating revenues': 22832.0}, '2017': {'agricultural products': 4303.0, 'energy': 4498.0, 'industrial': 5204.0, 'premium': 5832.0, 'total freight revenues': 19837.0, 'other subsidiary revenues': 885.0, 'accessorial revenues': 458.0, 'other': 60.0, 'total operating revenues': 21240.0}, '2016': {'agricultural products': 4209.0, 'energy': 3715.0, 'industrial': 4964.0, 'premium': 5713.0, 'total freight revenues': 18601.0, 'other subsidiary revenues': 814.0, 'accessorial revenues': 455.0, 'other': 71.0, 'total operating revenues': 19941.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the revenue from industrial segement in 2018?', 'what about in 2017?', 'what is the growth rate in 2018 compare to 2017?', 'what would the 2019 revenue be?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['5679', '5204', '109%', '6197'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['5679', '5204', 'divide(5679, 5204)', 'divide(5679, 5204), multiply(#0, 5679)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [5679.0, 5204.0, 1.09128, 6197.35607], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 5679.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "17s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?\nA1: 68.4\nQ2: including the year of 2011, what would it then be?\nA2: 89.3\nQ3: including now the year of 2012 in the amount, what would the total estimated aggregate amortization expense be, in millions?\nA3: 106.3\nQ4: what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense in 2013, in millions?\nA4: 12.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfor intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | revenue | net loss | revenue | net loss |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| year endedfebruary 12008 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 | 9495246.0 | -57939.0 |\n| year endedfebruary 22007 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 | 9169822.0 | -156188.0 |', 'question': 'including 2013, what would now be the total sum in estimated aggregate amortization expense over those five years, in millions?', 'ops': 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0), add(#2, 12.0)', 'id': 'Single_DG/2008/page_86.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'for intangible assets subject to amortization , the estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows : 2009 - $ 41.1 million , 2010 - $ 27.3 million , 2011 - $ 20.9 million , 2012 - $ 17.0 million , and 2013 - $ 12.0 million . fees and expenses related to the merger totaled $ 102.6 million , principally consisting of investment banking fees , legal fees and stock compensation ( $ 39.4 million as further discussed in note 10 ) , and are reflected in the 2007 results of operations . capitalized debt issuance costs as of the merger date of $ 87.4 million for merger-related financing were reflected in other long- term assets in the consolidated balance sheet . the following represents the unaudited pro forma results of the company 2019s consolidated operations as if the merger had occurred on february 3 , 2007 and february 4 , 2006 , respectively , after giving effect to certain adjustments , including the depreciation and amortization of the assets acquired based on their estimated fair values and changes in interest expense resulting from changes in consolidated debt ( in thousands ) : ( in thousands ) year ended february 1 , year ended february 2 .', 'doc_post_text': 'the pro forma information does not purport to be indicative of what the company 2019s results of operations would have been if the acquisition had in fact occurred at the beginning of the periods presented , and is not intended to be a projection of the company 2019s future results of operations . subsequent to the announcement of the merger agreement , the company and its directors , along with other parties , were named in seven putative class actions filed in tennessee state courts alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the proposed merger , all as described more fully under 201clegal proceedings 201d in note 8 below . 3 . strategic initiatives during 2006 , the company began implementing certain strategic initiatives related to its historical inventory management and real estate strategies , as more fully described below . inventory management in november 2006 , the company undertook an initiative to discontinue its historical inventory packaway model for virtually all merchandise by the end of fiscal 2007 . under the packaway model , certain unsold inventory items ( primarily seasonal merchandise ) were stored on-site and returned to the sales floor until the items were eventually sold , damaged or discarded . through end-of-season and other markdowns , this initiative resulted in the elimination of seasonal , home products and basic clothing packaway merchandise to allow for increased levels of newer , current-season merchandise . in connection with this strategic change , in the third quarter of 2006 the company recorded a reserve for lower of cost or market inventory .', 'doc_table': {'year endedfebruary 12008': {'revenue': 9495246.0, 'net loss': -57939.0}, 'year endedfebruary 22007': {'revenue': 9169822.0, 'net loss': -156188.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense for the years of 2009 and 2010, in millions?', 'including the year of 2011, what would it then be?', 'including now the year of 2012 in the amount, what would the total estimated aggregate amortization expense be, in millions?', 'what was the total estimated aggregate amortization expense in 2013, in millions?', 'including 2013, what would now be the total sum in estimated aggregate amortization expense over those five years, in millions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['68.4', '89.3', '106.3', '12.0', '118.3'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(41.1, 27.3)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9)', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0)', '12.0', 'add(41.1, 27.3), add(#0, 20.9), add(#1, 17.0), add(#2, 12.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [68.4, 89.3, 106.3, 12.0, 118.3], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 118.3}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "18s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in 2010?\nA1: 7274.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\noperating profit for the segment decreased by 1% ( 1 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . for the year , operating profit declines in defense more than offset an increase in civil , while operating profit at intelligence essentially was unchanged . the $ 27 million decrease in operating profit at defense primarily was attributable to a decrease in the level of favorable performance adjustments on mission and combat systems activities in 2010 . the $ 19 million increase in civil principally was due to higher volume on enterprise civilian services . operating profit for the segment decreased by 3% ( 3 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . operating profit declines in civil and intelligence partially were offset by growth in defense . the decrease of $ 29 million in civil 2019s operating profit primarily was attributable to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on enterprise civilian services programs in 2009 compared to 2008 . the decrease in operating profit of $ 27 million at intelligence mainly was due to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on security solution activities in 2009 compared to 2008 . the increase in defense 2019s operating profit of $ 29 million mainly was due to volume and improved performance in mission and combat systems . the decrease in backlog during 2010 compared to 2009 mainly was due to higher sales volume on enterprise civilian service programs at civil , including volume associated with the dris 2010 program , and mission and combat system programs at defense . backlog decreased in 2009 compared to 2008 due to u.s . government 2019s exercise of the termination for convenience clause on the tsat mission operations system ( tmos ) contract at defense , which resulted in a $ 1.6 billion reduction in orders . this decline more than offset increased orders on enterprise civilian services programs at civil . we expect is&gs will experience a low single digit percentage decrease in sales for 2011 as compared to 2010 . this decline primarily is due to completion of most of the work associated with the dris 2010 program . operating profit in 2011 is expected to decline in relationship to the decline in sales volume , while operating margins are expected to be comparable between the years . space systems our space systems business segment is engaged in the design , research and development , engineering , and production of satellites , strategic and defensive missile systems , and space transportation systems , including activities related to the planned replacement of the space shuttle . government satellite programs include the advanced extremely high frequency ( aehf ) system , the mobile user objective system ( muos ) , the global positioning satellite iii ( gps iii ) system , the space-based infrared system ( sbirs ) , and the geostationary operational environmental satellite r-series ( goes-r ) . strategic and missile defense programs include the targets and countermeasures program and the fleet ballistic missile program . space transportation includes the nasa orion program and , through ownership interests in two joint ventures , expendable launch services ( united launch alliance , or ula ) and space shuttle processing activities for the u.s . government ( united space alliance , or usa ) . the space shuttle is expected to complete its final flight mission in 2011 and our involvement with its launch and processing activities will end at that time . space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2010 2009 2008 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnet sales for space systems decreased by 5% ( 5 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . sales declined in all three lines of business during the year . the $ 253 million decrease in space transportation principally was due to lower volume on the space shuttle external tank , commercial launch vehicle activity and other human space flight programs , which partially were offset by higher volume on the orion program . there were no commercial launches in 2010 compared to one commercial launch in 2009 . strategic & defensive missile systems ( s&dms ) sales declined $ 147 million principally due to lower volume on defensive missile programs . the $ 8 million sales decline in satellites primarily was attributable to lower volume on commercial satellites , which partially were offset by higher volume on government satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2010 and one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 . net sales for space systems increased 8% ( 8 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . during the year , sales growth at satellites and space transportation offset a decline in s&dms . the sales growth of $ 707 million in satellites was due to higher volume in government satellite activities , which partially was offset by lower volume in commercial satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 and two deliveries in 2008 . the increase in sales of $ 21 million in space transportation primarily was due to higher volume on the orion program , which more than offset a decline in the space shuttle 2019s external tank program . there was one commercial launch in both 2009 and 2008 . s&dms 2019 sales decreased by $ 102 million mainly due to lower volume on defensive missile programs , which more than offset growth in strategic missile programs. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end | net sales | operating profit | operating margin | backlog at year-end |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2010 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 | 8246.0 | 972.0 | -11.8 | 17800.0 |\n| 2009 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 | 8654.0 | 972.0 | -11.2 | 16800.0 |\n| 2008 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 | 8027.0 | 953.0 | -11.9 | 17900.0 |', 'question': 'and what were the net sales in 2009?', 'ops': '8654', 'id': 'Single_LMT/2010/page_39.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'operating profit for the segment decreased by 1% ( 1 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . for the year , operating profit declines in defense more than offset an increase in civil , while operating profit at intelligence essentially was unchanged . the $ 27 million decrease in operating profit at defense primarily was attributable to a decrease in the level of favorable performance adjustments on mission and combat systems activities in 2010 . the $ 19 million increase in civil principally was due to higher volume on enterprise civilian services . operating profit for the segment decreased by 3% ( 3 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . operating profit declines in civil and intelligence partially were offset by growth in defense . the decrease of $ 29 million in civil 2019s operating profit primarily was attributable to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on enterprise civilian services programs in 2009 compared to 2008 . the decrease in operating profit of $ 27 million at intelligence mainly was due to a reduction in the level of favorable performance adjustments on security solution activities in 2009 compared to 2008 . the increase in defense 2019s operating profit of $ 29 million mainly was due to volume and improved performance in mission and combat systems . the decrease in backlog during 2010 compared to 2009 mainly was due to higher sales volume on enterprise civilian service programs at civil , including volume associated with the dris 2010 program , and mission and combat system programs at defense . backlog decreased in 2009 compared to 2008 due to u.s . government 2019s exercise of the termination for convenience clause on the tsat mission operations system ( tmos ) contract at defense , which resulted in a $ 1.6 billion reduction in orders . this decline more than offset increased orders on enterprise civilian services programs at civil . we expect is&gs will experience a low single digit percentage decrease in sales for 2011 as compared to 2010 . this decline primarily is due to completion of most of the work associated with the dris 2010 program . operating profit in 2011 is expected to decline in relationship to the decline in sales volume , while operating margins are expected to be comparable between the years . space systems our space systems business segment is engaged in the design , research and development , engineering , and production of satellites , strategic and defensive missile systems , and space transportation systems , including activities related to the planned replacement of the space shuttle . government satellite programs include the advanced extremely high frequency ( aehf ) system , the mobile user objective system ( muos ) , the global positioning satellite iii ( gps iii ) system , the space-based infrared system ( sbirs ) , and the geostationary operational environmental satellite r-series ( goes-r ) . strategic and missile defense programs include the targets and countermeasures program and the fleet ballistic missile program . space transportation includes the nasa orion program and , through ownership interests in two joint ventures , expendable launch services ( united launch alliance , or ula ) and space shuttle processing activities for the u.s . government ( united space alliance , or usa ) . the space shuttle is expected to complete its final flight mission in 2011 and our involvement with its launch and processing activities will end at that time . space systems 2019 operating results included the following : ( in millions ) 2010 2009 2008 .', 'doc_post_text': 'net sales for space systems decreased by 5% ( 5 % ) in 2010 compared to 2009 . sales declined in all three lines of business during the year . the $ 253 million decrease in space transportation principally was due to lower volume on the space shuttle external tank , commercial launch vehicle activity and other human space flight programs , which partially were offset by higher volume on the orion program . there were no commercial launches in 2010 compared to one commercial launch in 2009 . strategic & defensive missile systems ( s&dms ) sales declined $ 147 million principally due to lower volume on defensive missile programs . the $ 8 million sales decline in satellites primarily was attributable to lower volume on commercial satellites , which partially were offset by higher volume on government satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2010 and one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 . net sales for space systems increased 8% ( 8 % ) in 2009 compared to 2008 . during the year , sales growth at satellites and space transportation offset a decline in s&dms . the sales growth of $ 707 million in satellites was due to higher volume in government satellite activities , which partially was offset by lower volume in commercial satellite activities . there was one commercial satellite delivery in 2009 and two deliveries in 2008 . the increase in sales of $ 21 million in space transportation primarily was due to higher volume on the orion program , which more than offset a decline in the space shuttle 2019s external tank program . there was one commercial launch in both 2009 and 2008 . s&dms 2019 sales decreased by $ 102 million mainly due to lower volume on defensive missile programs , which more than offset growth in strategic missile programs. .', 'doc_table': {'2010': {'net sales': 8246.0, 'operating profit': 972.0, 'operating margin': -11.8, 'backlog at year-end': 17800.0}, '2009': {'net sales': 8654.0, 'operating profit': 972.0, 'operating margin': -11.2, 'backlog at year-end': 16800.0}, '2008': {'net sales': 8027.0, 'operating profit': 953.0, 'operating margin': -11.9, 'backlog at year-end': 17900.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in 2010?', 'and what were the net sales in 2009?', 'and what was the operating profit in that year?', 'what is, then, the difference between the net sales and the operating profit in that year?', 'and what is the change in that difference from 2009 to 2010?', 'how much does this change represent in relation to the 2009 difference?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['7274', '8654', '972', '7682', '-408', '-5.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(8246, 972)', '8654', '972', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972)', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972), subtract(#0, #1)', 'subtract(8246, 972), subtract(8654, 972), subtract(#0, #1), divide(#2, #1)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [7274.0, 8654.0, 972.0, 7682.0, -408.0, -0.05311], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 8654.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "17s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value of the aptiv plc in 2018?\nA1: 130.8', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities our ordinary shares have been publicly traded since november 17 , 2011 when our ordinary shares were listed and began trading on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) under the symbol 201cdlph . 201d on december 4 , 2017 , following the spin-off of delphi technologies , the company changed its name to aptiv plc and its nyse symbol to 201captv . 201d as of january 25 , 2019 , there were 2 shareholders of record of our ordinary shares . the following graph reflects the comparative changes in the value from december 31 , 2013 through december 31 , 2018 , assuming an initial investment of $ 100 and the reinvestment of dividends , if any in ( 1 ) our ordinary shares , ( 2 ) the s&p 500 index and ( 3 ) the automotive peer group . historical share prices of our ordinary shares have been adjusted to reflect the separation . historical performance may not be indicative of future shareholder returns . stock performance graph * $ 100 invested on december 31 , 2013 in our stock or in the relevant index , including reinvestment of dividends . fiscal year ended december 31 , 2018 . ( 1 ) aptiv plc , adjusted for the distribution of delphi technologies on december 4 , 2017 ( 2 ) s&p 500 2013 standard & poor 2019s 500 total return index ( 3 ) automotive peer group 2013 adient plc , american axle & manufacturing holdings inc , aptiv plc , borgwarner inc , cooper tire & rubber co , cooper- standard holdings inc , dana inc , dorman products inc , ford motor co , garrett motion inc. , general motors co , gentex corp , gentherm inc , genuine parts co , goodyear tire & rubber co , lear corp , lkq corp , meritor inc , motorcar parts of america inc , standard motor products inc , stoneridge inc , superior industries international inc , tenneco inc , tesla inc , tower international inc , visteon corp , wabco holdings inc company index december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) | aptiv plc ( 1 ) | s&p 500 ( 2 ) | automotive peer group ( 3 ) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| december 31 2013 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| december 31 2014 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 | 122.75 | 113.69 | 107.96 |\n| december 31 2015 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 | 146.49 | 115.26 | 108.05 |\n| december 31 2016 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 | 117.11 | 129.05 | 107.72 |\n| december 31 2017 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 | 178.46 | 157.22 | 134.04 |\n| december 31 2018 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 | 130.8 | 150.33 | 106.89 |', 'question': 'what was, then, the change in its value, considering 2018 and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'ops': 'subtract(130.80, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_APTV/2018/page_36.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'part ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities our ordinary shares have been publicly traded since november 17 , 2011 when our ordinary shares were listed and began trading on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) under the symbol 201cdlph . 201d on december 4 , 2017 , following the spin-off of delphi technologies , the company changed its name to aptiv plc and its nyse symbol to 201captv . 201d as of january 25 , 2019 , there were 2 shareholders of record of our ordinary shares . the following graph reflects the comparative changes in the value from december 31 , 2013 through december 31 , 2018 , assuming an initial investment of $ 100 and the reinvestment of dividends , if any in ( 1 ) our ordinary shares , ( 2 ) the s&p 500 index and ( 3 ) the automotive peer group . historical share prices of our ordinary shares have been adjusted to reflect the separation . historical performance may not be indicative of future shareholder returns . stock performance graph * $ 100 invested on december 31 , 2013 in our stock or in the relevant index , including reinvestment of dividends . fiscal year ended december 31 , 2018 . ( 1 ) aptiv plc , adjusted for the distribution of delphi technologies on december 4 , 2017 ( 2 ) s&p 500 2013 standard & poor 2019s 500 total return index ( 3 ) automotive peer group 2013 adient plc , american axle & manufacturing holdings inc , aptiv plc , borgwarner inc , cooper tire & rubber co , cooper- standard holdings inc , dana inc , dorman products inc , ford motor co , garrett motion inc. , general motors co , gentex corp , gentherm inc , genuine parts co , goodyear tire & rubber co , lear corp , lkq corp , meritor inc , motorcar parts of america inc , standard motor products inc , stoneridge inc , superior industries international inc , tenneco inc , tesla inc , tower international inc , visteon corp , wabco holdings inc company index december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 , december 31 .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'december 31 2013': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 100.0, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 100.0, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 100.0}, 'december 31 2014': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 122.75, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 113.69, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 107.96}, 'december 31 2015': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 146.49, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 115.26, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 108.05}, 'december 31 2016': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 117.11, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 129.05, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 107.72}, 'december 31 2017': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 178.46, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 157.22, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 134.04}, 'december 31 2018': {'aptiv plc ( 1 )': 130.8, 's&p 500 ( 2 )': 150.33, 'automotive peer group ( 3 )': 106.89}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of the aptiv plc in 2018?', 'what was, then, the change in its value, considering 2018 and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'and what was the change in the value of the automotive peer group, considering the 2018 one and the original amount invested in it in 2013?', 'how much does the change in the value of the aptiv plc represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?', 'and how much does the change in the value of the automotive peer group represent in relation to the original amount invested in it, in percentage?', 'what is, then, the difference between the percentage change of the aptiv plc and the automotive peer group one?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['130.80', '30.8', '6.89', '30.8%', '6.89%', '23.91%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['130.80', 'subtract(130.80, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), divide(#1, const_100)', 'subtract(130.80, const_100), subtract(106.89, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), divide(#1, const_100), subtract(#2, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [130.8, 30.8, 6.89, 0.308, 0.0689, 0.2391], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 30.8}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "18s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nlocal consumer lending local consumer lending ( lcl ) , which constituted approximately 70% ( 70 % ) of citi holdings by assets as of december 31 , 2010 , includes a portion of citigroup 2019s north american mortgage business , retail partner cards , western european cards and retail banking , citifinancial north america and other local consumer finance businesses globally . the student loan corporation is reported as discontinued operations within the corporate/other segment for the second half of 2010 only . at december 31 , 2010 , lcl had $ 252 billion of assets ( $ 226 billion in north america ) . approximately $ 129 billion of assets in lcl as of december 31 , 2010 consisted of u.s . mortgages in the company 2019s citimortgage and citifinancial operations . the north american assets consist of residential mortgage loans ( first and second mortgages ) , retail partner card loans , personal loans , commercial real estate ( cre ) , and other consumer loans and assets . in millions of dollars 2010 2009 2008 % (  % ) change 2010 vs . 2009 % (  % ) change 2009 vs . 2008 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnm not meaningful 2010 vs . 2009 revenues , net of interest expense decreased 11% ( 11 % ) from the prior year . net interest revenue increased 6% ( 6 % ) due to the adoption of sfas 166/167 , partially offset by the impact of lower balances due to portfolio run-off and asset sales . non-interest revenue declined 58% ( 58 % ) , primarily due to the absence of the $ 1.1 billion gain on the sale of redecard in the first quarter of 2009 and a higher mortgage repurchase reserve charge . operating expenses decreased 18% ( 18 % ) , primarily due to the impact of divestitures , lower volumes , re-engineering actions and the absence of costs associated with the u.s . government loss-sharing agreement , which was exited in the fourth quarter of 2009 . provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims decreased 38% ( 38 % ) , reflecting a net $ 1.8 billion credit reserve release in 2010 compared to a $ 5.8 billion build in 2009 . lower net credit losses across most businesses were partially offset by the impact of the adoption of sfas 166/167 . on a comparable basis , net credit losses were lower year-over-year , driven by improvement in u.s . mortgages , international portfolios and retail partner cards . assets declined 21% ( 21 % ) from the prior year , primarily driven by portfolio run-off , higher loan loss reserve balances , and the impact of asset sales and divestitures , partially offset by an increase of $ 41 billion resulting from the adoption of sfas 166/167 . key divestitures in 2010 included the student loan corporation , primerica , auto loans , the canadian mastercard business and u.s . retail sales finance portfolios . 2009 vs . 2008 revenues , net of interest expense decreased 24% ( 24 % ) from the prior year . net interest revenue was 24% ( 24 % ) lower than the prior year , primarily due to lower balances , de-risking of the portfolio , and spread compression . non-interest revenue decreased $ 1.6 billion , mostly driven by the impact of higher credit losses flowing through the securitization trusts , partially offset by the $ 1.1 billion gain on the sale of redecard in the first quarter of 2009 . operating expenses declined 31% ( 31 % ) from the prior year , due to lower volumes and reductions from expense re-engineering actions , and the impact of goodwill write-offs of $ 3.0 billion in the fourth quarter of 2008 , partially offset by higher costs associated with delinquent loans . provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims increased 14% ( 14 % ) from the prior year , reflecting an increase in net credit losses of $ 6.1 billion , partially offset by lower reserve builds of $ 2.8 billion . higher net credit losses were primarily driven by higher losses of $ 3.6 billion in residential real estate lending , $ 1.0 billion in retail partner cards , and $ 0.7 billion in international . assets decreased $ 57 billion from the prior year , primarily driven by lower originations , wind-down of specific businesses , asset sales , divestitures , write- offs and higher loan loss reserve balances . key divestitures in 2009 included the fi credit card business , italy consumer finance , diners europe , portugal cards , norway consumer and diners club north america. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net interest revenue | non-interest revenue | total revenues net of interest expense | total operating expenses | net credit losses | credit reserve build ( release ) | provision for benefits and claims | provision for unfunded lending commitments | provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims | ( loss ) from continuing operations before taxes | benefits for income taxes | ( loss ) from continuing operations | net income attributable to noncontrolling interests | net ( loss ) | average assets ( in billions of dollars ) | net credit losses as a percentage of average loans | net interest revenue | non-interest revenue | total revenues net of interest expense | total operating expenses | net credit losses | credit reserve build ( release ) | provision for benefits and claims | provision for unfunded lending commitments | provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims | ( loss ) from continuing operations before taxes | benefits for income taxes | ( loss ) from continuing operations | net income attributable to noncontrolling interests | net ( loss ) | average assets ( in billions of dollars ) | net credit losses as a percentage of average loans | net interest revenue | non-interest revenue | total revenues net of interest expense | total operating expenses | net credit losses | credit reserve build ( release ) | provision for benefits and claims | provision for unfunded lending commitments | provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims | ( loss ) from continuing operations before taxes | benefits for income taxes | ( loss ) from continuing operations | net income attributable to noncontrolling interests | net ( loss ) | average assets ( in billions of dollars ) | net credit losses as a percentage of average loans | net interest revenue | non-interest revenue | total revenues net of interest expense | total operating expenses | net credit losses | credit reserve build ( release ) | provision for benefits and claims | provision for unfunded lending commitments | provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims | ( loss ) from continuing operations before taxes | benefits for income taxes | ( loss ) from continuing operations | net income attributable to noncontrolling interests | net ( loss ) | average assets ( in billions of dollars ) | net credit losses as a percentage of average loans | net interest revenue | non-interest revenue | total revenues net of interest expense | total operating expenses | net credit losses | credit reserve build ( release ) | provision for benefits and claims | provision for unfunded lending commitments | provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims | ( loss ) from continuing operations before taxes | benefits for income taxes | ( loss ) from continuing operations | net income attributable to noncontrolling interests | net ( loss ) | average assets ( in billions of dollars ) | net credit losses as a percentage of average loans |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2010 | 13831.0 | 1995.0 | 15826.0 | 8064.0 | 17040.0 | -1771.0 | 775.0 | 2014.0 | 16044.0 | -8282.0 | -3289.0 | -4993.0 | 8.0 | -5001.0 | 324.0 | -6.2 | 13831.0 | 1995.0 | 15826.0 | 8064.0 | 17040.0 | -1771.0 | 775.0 | 2014.0 | 16044.0 | -8282.0 | -3289.0 | -4993.0 | 8.0 | -5001.0 | 324.0 | -6.2 | 13831.0 | 1995.0 | 15826.0 | 8064.0 | 17040.0 | -1771.0 | 775.0 | 2014.0 | 16044.0 | -8282.0 | -3289.0 | -4993.0 | 8.0 | -5001.0 | 324.0 | -6.2 | 13831.0 | 1995.0 | 15826.0 | 8064.0 | 17040.0 | -1771.0 | 775.0 | 2014.0 | 16044.0 | -8282.0 | -3289.0 | -4993.0 | 8.0 | -5001.0 | 324.0 | -6.2 | 13831.0 | 1995.0 | 15826.0 | 8064.0 | 17040.0 | -1771.0 | 775.0 | 2014.0 | 16044.0 | -8282.0 | -3289.0 | -4993.0 | 8.0 | -5001.0 | 324.0 | -6.2 |\n| 2009 | 12995.0 | 4770.0 | 17765.0 | 9799.0 | 19185.0 | 5799.0 | 1054.0 | 2014.0 | 26038.0 | -18072.0 | -7656.0 | -10416.0 | 33.0 | -10449.0 | 351.0 | -6.38 | 12995.0 | 4770.0 | 17765.0 | 9799.0 | 19185.0 | 5799.0 | 1054.0 | 2014.0 | 26038.0 | -18072.0 | -7656.0 | -10416.0 | 33.0 | -10449.0 | 351.0 | -6.38 | 12995.0 | 4770.0 | 17765.0 | 9799.0 | 19185.0 | 5799.0 | 1054.0 | 2014.0 | 26038.0 | -18072.0 | -7656.0 | -10416.0 | 33.0 | -10449.0 | 351.0 | -6.38 | 12995.0 | 4770.0 | 17765.0 | 9799.0 | 19185.0 | 5799.0 | 1054.0 | 2014.0 | 26038.0 | -18072.0 | -7656.0 | -10416.0 | 33.0 | -10449.0 | 351.0 | -6.38 | 12995.0 | 4770.0 | 17765.0 | 9799.0 | 19185.0 | 5799.0 | 1054.0 | 2014.0 | 26038.0 | -18072.0 | -7656.0 | -10416.0 | 33.0 | -10449.0 | 351.0 | -6.38 |\n| 2008 | 17136.0 | 6362.0 | 23498.0 | 14238.0 | 13111.0 | 8573.0 | 1192.0 | 2014.0 | 22876.0 | -13616.0 | -5259.0 | -8357.0 | 12.0 | -8369.0 | 420.0 | -3.8 | 17136.0 | 6362.0 | 23498.0 | 14238.0 | 13111.0 | 8573.0 | 1192.0 | 2014.0 | 22876.0 | -13616.0 | -5259.0 | -8357.0 | 12.0 | -8369.0 | 420.0 | -3.8 | 17136.0 | 6362.0 | 23498.0 | 14238.0 | 13111.0 | 8573.0 | 1192.0 | 2014.0 | 22876.0 | -13616.0 | -5259.0 | -8357.0 | 12.0 | -8369.0 | 420.0 | -3.8 | 17136.0 | 6362.0 | 23498.0 | 14238.0 | 13111.0 | 8573.0 | 1192.0 | 2014.0 | 22876.0 | -13616.0 | -5259.0 | -8357.0 | 12.0 | -8369.0 | 420.0 | -3.8 | 17136.0 | 6362.0 | 23498.0 | 14238.0 | 13111.0 | 8573.0 | 1192.0 | 2014.0 | 22876.0 | -13616.0 | -5259.0 | -8357.0 | 12.0 | -8369.0 | 420.0 | -3.8 |\n| % (  % ) change 2010 vs . 2009 | -6.0 | -58.0 | -11.0 | -18.0 | -11.0 | nm | -26.0 | 2014.0 | -38.0 | -54.0 | 57.0 | -52.0 | -76.0 | -52.0 | -8.0 |  | -6.0 | -58.0 | -11.0 | -18.0 | -11.0 | nm | -26.0 | 2014.0 | -38.0 | -54.0 | 57.0 | -52.0 | -76.0 | -52.0 | -8.0 |  | -6.0 | -58.0 | -11.0 | -18.0 | -11.0 | nm | -26.0 | 2014.0 | -38.0 | -54.0 | 57.0 | -52.0 | -76.0 | -52.0 | -8.0 |  | -6.0 | -58.0 | -11.0 | -18.0 | -11.0 | nm | -26.0 | 2014.0 | -38.0 | -54.0 | 57.0 | -52.0 | -76.0 | -52.0 | -8.0 |  | -6.0 | -58.0 | -11.0 | -18.0 | -11.0 | nm | -26.0 | 2014.0 | -38.0 | -54.0 | 57.0 | -52.0 | -76.0 | -52.0 | -8.0 |  |\n| % (  % ) change 2009 vs . 2008 | -24.0 | -25.0 | -24.0 | -31.0 | -46.0 | -32.0 | -12.0 | 2014.0 | -14.0 | -33.0 | -46.0 | -25.0 | nm | -25.0 | -16.0 |  | -24.0 | -25.0 | -24.0 | -31.0 | -46.0 | -32.0 | -12.0 | 2014.0 | -14.0 | -33.0 | -46.0 | -25.0 | nm | -25.0 | -16.0 |  | -24.0 | -25.0 | -24.0 | -31.0 | -46.0 | -32.0 | -12.0 | 2014.0 | -14.0 | -33.0 | -46.0 | -25.0 | nm | -25.0 | -16.0 |  | -24.0 | -25.0 | -24.0 | -31.0 | -46.0 | -32.0 | -12.0 | 2014.0 | -14.0 | -33.0 | -46.0 | -25.0 | nm | -25.0 | -16.0 |  | -24.0 | -25.0 | -24.0 | -31.0 | -46.0 | -32.0 | -12.0 | 2014.0 | -14.0 | -33.0 | -46.0 | -25.0 | nm | -25.0 | -16.0 |  |', 'question': 'in 2009, what percentage of the total revenues net of interest expense was due to net interest revenues?', 'ops': 'divide(12995, 17765)', 'id': 'Double_C/2010/page_50.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'local consumer lending local consumer lending ( lcl ) , which constituted approximately 70% ( 70 % ) of citi holdings by assets as of december 31 , 2010 , includes a portion of citigroup 2019s north american mortgage business , retail partner cards , western european cards and retail banking , citifinancial north america and other local consumer finance businesses globally . the student loan corporation is reported as discontinued operations within the corporate/other segment for the second half of 2010 only . at december 31 , 2010 , lcl had $ 252 billion of assets ( $ 226 billion in north america ) . approximately $ 129 billion of assets in lcl as of december 31 , 2010 consisted of u.s . mortgages in the company 2019s citimortgage and citifinancial operations . the north american assets consist of residential mortgage loans ( first and second mortgages ) , retail partner card loans , personal loans , commercial real estate ( cre ) , and other consumer loans and assets . in millions of dollars 2010 2009 2008 % (  % ) change 2010 vs . 2009 % (  % ) change 2009 vs . 2008 .', 'doc_post_text': 'nm not meaningful 2010 vs . 2009 revenues , net of interest expense decreased 11% ( 11 % ) from the prior year . net interest revenue increased 6% ( 6 % ) due to the adoption of sfas 166/167 , partially offset by the impact of lower balances due to portfolio run-off and asset sales . non-interest revenue declined 58% ( 58 % ) , primarily due to the absence of the $ 1.1 billion gain on the sale of redecard in the first quarter of 2009 and a higher mortgage repurchase reserve charge . operating expenses decreased 18% ( 18 % ) , primarily due to the impact of divestitures , lower volumes , re-engineering actions and the absence of costs associated with the u.s . government loss-sharing agreement , which was exited in the fourth quarter of 2009 . provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims decreased 38% ( 38 % ) , reflecting a net $ 1.8 billion credit reserve release in 2010 compared to a $ 5.8 billion build in 2009 . lower net credit losses across most businesses were partially offset by the impact of the adoption of sfas 166/167 . on a comparable basis , net credit losses were lower year-over-year , driven by improvement in u.s . mortgages , international portfolios and retail partner cards . assets declined 21% ( 21 % ) from the prior year , primarily driven by portfolio run-off , higher loan loss reserve balances , and the impact of asset sales and divestitures , partially offset by an increase of $ 41 billion resulting from the adoption of sfas 166/167 . key divestitures in 2010 included the student loan corporation , primerica , auto loans , the canadian mastercard business and u.s . retail sales finance portfolios . 2009 vs . 2008 revenues , net of interest expense decreased 24% ( 24 % ) from the prior year . net interest revenue was 24% ( 24 % ) lower than the prior year , primarily due to lower balances , de-risking of the portfolio , and spread compression . non-interest revenue decreased $ 1.6 billion , mostly driven by the impact of higher credit losses flowing through the securitization trusts , partially offset by the $ 1.1 billion gain on the sale of redecard in the first quarter of 2009 . operating expenses declined 31% ( 31 % ) from the prior year , due to lower volumes and reductions from expense re-engineering actions , and the impact of goodwill write-offs of $ 3.0 billion in the fourth quarter of 2008 , partially offset by higher costs associated with delinquent loans . provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims increased 14% ( 14 % ) from the prior year , reflecting an increase in net credit losses of $ 6.1 billion , partially offset by lower reserve builds of $ 2.8 billion . higher net credit losses were primarily driven by higher losses of $ 3.6 billion in residential real estate lending , $ 1.0 billion in retail partner cards , and $ 0.7 billion in international . assets decreased $ 57 billion from the prior year , primarily driven by lower originations , wind-down of specific businesses , asset sales , divestitures , write- offs and higher loan loss reserve balances . key divestitures in 2009 included the fi credit card business , italy consumer finance , diners europe , portugal cards , norway consumer and diners club north america. .', 'doc_table': {'2010': {'net interest revenue': 13831.0, 'non-interest revenue': 1995.0, 'total revenues net of interest expense': 15826.0, 'total operating expenses': 8064.0, 'net credit losses': 17040.0, 'credit reserve build ( release )': -1771.0, 'provision for benefits and claims': 775.0, 'provision for unfunded lending commitments': 2014.0, 'provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims': 16044.0, '( loss ) from continuing operations before taxes': -8282.0, 'benefits for income taxes': -3289.0, '( loss ) from continuing operations': -4993.0, 'net income attributable to noncontrolling interests': 8.0, 'net ( loss )': -5001.0, 'average assets ( in billions of dollars )': 324.0, 'net credit losses as a percentage of average loans': -6.2}, '2009': {'net interest revenue': 12995.0, 'non-interest revenue': 4770.0, 'total revenues net of interest expense': 17765.0, 'total operating expenses': 9799.0, 'net credit losses': 19185.0, 'credit reserve build ( release )': 5799.0, 'provision for benefits and claims': 1054.0, 'provision for unfunded lending commitments': 2014.0, 'provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims': 26038.0, '( loss ) from continuing operations before taxes': -18072.0, 'benefits for income taxes': -7656.0, '( loss ) from continuing operations': -10416.0, 'net income attributable to noncontrolling interests': 33.0, 'net ( loss )': -10449.0, 'average assets ( in billions of dollars )': 351.0, 'net credit losses as a percentage of average loans': -6.38}, '2008': {'net interest revenue': 17136.0, 'non-interest revenue': 6362.0, 'total revenues net of interest expense': 23498.0, 'total operating expenses': 14238.0, 'net credit losses': 13111.0, 'credit reserve build ( release )': 8573.0, 'provision for benefits and claims': 1192.0, 'provision for unfunded lending commitments': 2014.0, 'provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims': 22876.0, '( loss ) from continuing operations before taxes': -13616.0, 'benefits for income taxes': -5259.0, '( loss ) from continuing operations': -8357.0, 'net income attributable to noncontrolling interests': 12.0, 'net ( loss )': -8369.0, 'average assets ( in billions of dollars )': 420.0, 'net credit losses as a percentage of average loans': -3.8}, '% (  % ) change 2010 vs . 2009': {'net interest revenue': -6.0, 'non-interest revenue': -58.0, 'total revenues net of interest expense': -11.0, 'total operating expenses': -18.0, 'net credit losses': -11.0, 'credit reserve build ( release )': 'nm', 'provision for benefits and claims': -26.0, 'provision for unfunded lending commitments': 2014.0, 'provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims': -38.0, '( loss ) from continuing operations before taxes': -54.0, 'benefits for income taxes': 57.0, '( loss ) from continuing operations': -52.0, 'net income attributable to noncontrolling interests': -76.0, 'net ( loss )': -52.0, 'average assets ( in billions of dollars )': -8.0, 'net credit losses as a percentage of average loans': ''}, '% (  % ) change 2009 vs . 2008': {'net interest revenue': -24.0, 'non-interest revenue': -25.0, 'total revenues net of interest expense': -24.0, 'total operating expenses': -31.0, 'net credit losses': -46.0, 'credit reserve build ( release )': -32.0, 'provision for benefits and claims': -12.0, 'provision for unfunded lending commitments': 2014.0, 'provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims': -14.0, '( loss ) from continuing operations before taxes': -33.0, 'benefits for income taxes': -46.0, '( loss ) from continuing operations': -25.0, 'net income attributable to noncontrolling interests': 'nm', 'net ( loss )': -25.0, 'average assets ( in billions of dollars )': -16.0, 'net credit losses as a percentage of average loans': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['in 2009, what percentage of the total revenues net of interest expense was due to net interest revenues?', 'and what was that percentage in the next year, in 2010?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['73%', '87%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['divide(12995, 17765)', 'divide(13831, 15826)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [0.73149, 0.87394], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 0.73149}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "17s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value of cash provided by operations in 2013?\nA1: 1807.0\nQ2: what was the value in 2011?\nA2: 1595.0\nQ3: what is the net change in value?\nA3: 212.0\nQ4: what was the 2011 value?\nA4: 1595.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\ngeneral market conditions affecting trust asset performance , future discount rates based on average yields of high quality corporate bonds and our decisions regarding certain elective provisions of the we currently project that we will make total u.s . and foreign benefit plan contributions in 2014 of approximately $ 57 million . actual 2014 contributions could be different from our current projections , as influenced by our decision to undertake discretionary funding of our benefit trusts versus other competing investment priorities , future changes in government requirements , trust asset performance , renewals of union contracts , or higher-than-expected health care claims cost experience . we measure cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities reduced by expenditures for property additions . we use this non-gaap financial measure of cash flow to focus management and investors on the amount of cash available for debt repayment , dividend distributions , acquisition opportunities , and share repurchases . our cash flow metric is reconciled to the most comparable gaap measure , as follows: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nyear-over-year change ( 4.5 ) % (  % ) 22.4% ( 22.4 % ) the decrease in cash flow ( as defined ) in 2013 compared to 2012 was due primarily to higher capital expenditures . the increase in cash flow in 2012 compared to 2011 was driven by improved performance in working capital resulting from the one-time benefit derived from the pringles acquisition , as well as changes in the level of capital expenditures during the three-year period . investing activities our net cash used in investing activities for 2013 amounted to $ 641 million , a decrease of $ 2604 million compared with 2012 primarily attributable to the $ 2668 million acquisition of pringles in 2012 . capital spending in 2013 included investments in our supply chain infrastructure , and to support capacity requirements in certain markets , including pringles . in addition , we continued the investment in our information technology infrastructure related to the reimplementation and upgrade of our sap platform . net cash used in investing activities of $ 3245 million in 2012 increased by $ 2658 million compared with 2011 , due to the acquisition of pringles in 2012 . cash paid for additions to properties as a percentage of net sales has increased to 4.3% ( 4.3 % ) in 2013 , from 3.8% ( 3.8 % ) in 2012 , which was a decrease from 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) in financing activities our net cash used by financing activities was $ 1141 million for 2013 , compared to net cash provided by financing activities of $ 1317 million for 2012 and net cash used in financing activities of $ 957 million for 2011 . the increase in cash provided from financing activities in 2012 compared to 2013 and 2011 , was primarily due to the issuance of debt related to the acquisition of pringles . total debt was $ 7.4 billion at year-end 2013 and $ 7.9 billion at year-end 2012 . in february 2013 , we issued $ 250 million of two-year floating-rate u.s . dollar notes , and $ 400 million of ten-year 2.75% ( 2.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 645 million . the proceeds from these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including , together with cash on hand , repayment of the $ 750 million aggregate principal amount of our 4.25% ( 4.25 % ) u.s . dollar notes due march 2013 . in may 2012 , we issued $ 350 million of three-year 1.125% ( 1.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , $ 400 million of five-year 1.75% ( 1.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes and $ 700 million of ten-year 3.125% ( 3.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 1.442 billion . the proceeds of these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including financing a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in may 2012 , we issued cdn . $ 300 million of two-year 2.10% ( 2.10 % ) fixed rate canadian dollar notes , using the proceeds from these notes for general corporate purposes , which included repayment of intercompany debt . this repayment resulted in cash available to be used for a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in december 2012 , we repaid $ 750 million five-year 5.125% ( 5.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in april 2011 , we repaid $ 945 million ten-year 6.60% ( 6.60 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in may 2011 , we issued $ 400 million of seven-year 3.25% ( 3.25 % ) fixed rate u.s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 397 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper . in november 2011 , we issued $ 500 million of five-year 1.875% ( 1.875 % ) fixed rate u . s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 498 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change | net cash provided by operating activities | additions to properties | cash flow | year-over-year change |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2013 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 | 1807.0 | -637.0 | 1170.0 | -4.5 |\n| 2012 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 | 1758.0 | -533.0 | 1225.0 | -22.4 |\n| 2011 | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  | 1595.0 | -594.0 | 1001.0 |  |', 'question': 'what is the percent change?', 'ops': 'subtract(1807, 1595), divide(#0, 1595)', 'id': 'Single_K/2013/page_27.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'general market conditions affecting trust asset performance , future discount rates based on average yields of high quality corporate bonds and our decisions regarding certain elective provisions of the we currently project that we will make total u.s . and foreign benefit plan contributions in 2014 of approximately $ 57 million . actual 2014 contributions could be different from our current projections , as influenced by our decision to undertake discretionary funding of our benefit trusts versus other competing investment priorities , future changes in government requirements , trust asset performance , renewals of union contracts , or higher-than-expected health care claims cost experience . we measure cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities reduced by expenditures for property additions . we use this non-gaap financial measure of cash flow to focus management and investors on the amount of cash available for debt repayment , dividend distributions , acquisition opportunities , and share repurchases . our cash flow metric is reconciled to the most comparable gaap measure , as follows: .', 'doc_post_text': 'year-over-year change ( 4.5 ) % (  % ) 22.4% ( 22.4 % ) the decrease in cash flow ( as defined ) in 2013 compared to 2012 was due primarily to higher capital expenditures . the increase in cash flow in 2012 compared to 2011 was driven by improved performance in working capital resulting from the one-time benefit derived from the pringles acquisition , as well as changes in the level of capital expenditures during the three-year period . investing activities our net cash used in investing activities for 2013 amounted to $ 641 million , a decrease of $ 2604 million compared with 2012 primarily attributable to the $ 2668 million acquisition of pringles in 2012 . capital spending in 2013 included investments in our supply chain infrastructure , and to support capacity requirements in certain markets , including pringles . in addition , we continued the investment in our information technology infrastructure related to the reimplementation and upgrade of our sap platform . net cash used in investing activities of $ 3245 million in 2012 increased by $ 2658 million compared with 2011 , due to the acquisition of pringles in 2012 . cash paid for additions to properties as a percentage of net sales has increased to 4.3% ( 4.3 % ) in 2013 , from 3.8% ( 3.8 % ) in 2012 , which was a decrease from 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) in financing activities our net cash used by financing activities was $ 1141 million for 2013 , compared to net cash provided by financing activities of $ 1317 million for 2012 and net cash used in financing activities of $ 957 million for 2011 . the increase in cash provided from financing activities in 2012 compared to 2013 and 2011 , was primarily due to the issuance of debt related to the acquisition of pringles . total debt was $ 7.4 billion at year-end 2013 and $ 7.9 billion at year-end 2012 . in february 2013 , we issued $ 250 million of two-year floating-rate u.s . dollar notes , and $ 400 million of ten-year 2.75% ( 2.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 645 million . the proceeds from these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including , together with cash on hand , repayment of the $ 750 million aggregate principal amount of our 4.25% ( 4.25 % ) u.s . dollar notes due march 2013 . in may 2012 , we issued $ 350 million of three-year 1.125% ( 1.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , $ 400 million of five-year 1.75% ( 1.75 % ) u.s . dollar notes and $ 700 million of ten-year 3.125% ( 3.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes , resulting in aggregate net proceeds after debt discount of $ 1.442 billion . the proceeds of these notes were used for general corporate purposes , including financing a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in may 2012 , we issued cdn . $ 300 million of two-year 2.10% ( 2.10 % ) fixed rate canadian dollar notes , using the proceeds from these notes for general corporate purposes , which included repayment of intercompany debt . this repayment resulted in cash available to be used for a portion of the acquisition of pringles . in december 2012 , we repaid $ 750 million five-year 5.125% ( 5.125 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in april 2011 , we repaid $ 945 million ten-year 6.60% ( 6.60 % ) u.s . dollar notes at maturity with commercial paper . in may 2011 , we issued $ 400 million of seven-year 3.25% ( 3.25 % ) fixed rate u.s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 397 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper . in november 2011 , we issued $ 500 million of five-year 1.875% ( 1.875 % ) fixed rate u . s . dollar notes , using the proceeds of $ 498 million for general corporate purposes and repayment of commercial paper. .', 'doc_table': {'2013': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1807.0, 'additions to properties': -637.0, 'cash flow': 1170.0, 'year-over-year change': -4.5}, '2012': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1758.0, 'additions to properties': -533.0, 'cash flow': 1225.0, 'year-over-year change': -22.4}, '2011': {'net cash provided by operating activities': 1595.0, 'additions to properties': -594.0, 'cash flow': 1001.0, 'year-over-year change': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value of cash provided by operations in 2013?', 'what was the value in 2011?', 'what is the net change in value?', 'what was the 2011 value?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1807', '1595', '212', '1595', '.1329'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1807', '1595', 'subtract(1807, 1595)', '1595', 'subtract(1807, 1595), divide(#0, 1595)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1807.0, 1595.0, 212.0, 1595.0, 0.13292], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 0.13292}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "17s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total of benefit payments in 2012?\nA1: 3369.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmastercard incorporated notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) ( in thousands , except percent and per share data ) the company does not make any contributions to its postretirement plan other than funding benefits payments . the following table summarizes expected net benefit payments from the company 2019s general assets through 2019 : benefit payments expected subsidy receipts benefit payments .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company provides limited postemployment benefits to eligible former u.s . employees , primarily severance under a formal severance plan ( the 201cseverance plan 201d ) . the company accounts for severance expense by accruing the expected cost of the severance benefits expected to be provided to former employees after employment over their relevant service periods . the company updates the assumptions in determining the severance accrual by evaluating the actual severance activity and long-term trends underlying the assumptions . as a result of updating the assumptions , the company recorded incremental severance expense ( benefit ) related to the severance plan of $ 3471 , $ 2643 and $ ( 3418 ) , respectively , during the years 2009 , 2008 and 2007 . these amounts were part of total severance expenses of $ 135113 , $ 32997 and $ 21284 in 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively , included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations . note 14 . debt on april 28 , 2008 , the company extended its committed unsecured revolving credit facility , dated as of april 28 , 2006 ( the 201ccredit facility 201d ) , for an additional year . the new expiration date of the credit facility is april 26 , 2011 . the available funding under the credit facility will remain at $ 2500000 through april 27 , 2010 and then decrease to $ 2000000 during the final year of the credit facility agreement . other terms and conditions in the credit facility remain unchanged . the company 2019s option to request that each lender under the credit facility extend its commitment was provided pursuant to the original terms of the credit facility agreement . borrowings under the facility are available to provide liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by mastercard international customers and , subject to a limit of $ 500000 , for general corporate purposes . the facility fee and borrowing cost are contingent upon the company 2019s credit rating . at december 31 , 2009 , the facility fee was 7 basis points on the total commitment , or approximately $ 1774 annually . interest on borrowings under the credit facility would be charged at the london interbank offered rate ( libor ) plus an applicable margin of 28 basis points or an alternative base rate , and a utilization fee of 10 basis points would be charged if outstanding borrowings under the facility exceed 50% ( 50 % ) of commitments . at the inception of the credit facility , the company also agreed to pay upfront fees of $ 1250 and administrative fees of $ 325 , which are being amortized over five years . facility and other fees associated with the credit facility totaled $ 2222 , $ 2353 and $ 2477 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . mastercard was in compliance with the covenants of the credit facility and had no borrowings under the credit facility at december 31 , 2009 or december 31 , 2008 . the majority of credit facility lenders are members or affiliates of members of mastercard international . in june 1998 , mastercard international issued ten-year unsecured , subordinated notes ( the 201cnotes 201d ) paying a fixed interest rate of 6.67% ( 6.67 % ) per annum . mastercard repaid the entire principal amount of $ 80000 on june 30 , 2008 pursuant to the terms of the notes . the interest expense on the notes was $ 2668 and $ 5336 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 2013 2019 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| benefit payments | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 | 2714.0 | 3028.0 | 3369.0 | 3660.0 | 4019.0 | 22686.0 |\n| expected subsidy receipts | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 | 71.0 | 91.0 | 111.0 | 134.0 | 151.0 | 1071.0 |\n| net benefit payments | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 | 2643.0 | 2937.0 | 3258.0 | 3526.0 | 3868.0 | 21615.0 |', 'question': 'and what was that in 2011?', 'ops': '3028', 'id': 'Double_MA/2009/page_115.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'mastercard incorporated notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) ( in thousands , except percent and per share data ) the company does not make any contributions to its postretirement plan other than funding benefits payments . the following table summarizes expected net benefit payments from the company 2019s general assets through 2019 : benefit payments expected subsidy receipts benefit payments .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company provides limited postemployment benefits to eligible former u.s . employees , primarily severance under a formal severance plan ( the 201cseverance plan 201d ) . the company accounts for severance expense by accruing the expected cost of the severance benefits expected to be provided to former employees after employment over their relevant service periods . the company updates the assumptions in determining the severance accrual by evaluating the actual severance activity and long-term trends underlying the assumptions . as a result of updating the assumptions , the company recorded incremental severance expense ( benefit ) related to the severance plan of $ 3471 , $ 2643 and $ ( 3418 ) , respectively , during the years 2009 , 2008 and 2007 . these amounts were part of total severance expenses of $ 135113 , $ 32997 and $ 21284 in 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively , included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations . note 14 . debt on april 28 , 2008 , the company extended its committed unsecured revolving credit facility , dated as of april 28 , 2006 ( the 201ccredit facility 201d ) , for an additional year . the new expiration date of the credit facility is april 26 , 2011 . the available funding under the credit facility will remain at $ 2500000 through april 27 , 2010 and then decrease to $ 2000000 during the final year of the credit facility agreement . other terms and conditions in the credit facility remain unchanged . the company 2019s option to request that each lender under the credit facility extend its commitment was provided pursuant to the original terms of the credit facility agreement . borrowings under the facility are available to provide liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by mastercard international customers and , subject to a limit of $ 500000 , for general corporate purposes . the facility fee and borrowing cost are contingent upon the company 2019s credit rating . at december 31 , 2009 , the facility fee was 7 basis points on the total commitment , or approximately $ 1774 annually . interest on borrowings under the credit facility would be charged at the london interbank offered rate ( libor ) plus an applicable margin of 28 basis points or an alternative base rate , and a utilization fee of 10 basis points would be charged if outstanding borrowings under the facility exceed 50% ( 50 % ) of commitments . at the inception of the credit facility , the company also agreed to pay upfront fees of $ 1250 and administrative fees of $ 325 , which are being amortized over five years . facility and other fees associated with the credit facility totaled $ 2222 , $ 2353 and $ 2477 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . mastercard was in compliance with the covenants of the credit facility and had no borrowings under the credit facility at december 31 , 2009 or december 31 , 2008 . the majority of credit facility lenders are members or affiliates of members of mastercard international . in june 1998 , mastercard international issued ten-year unsecured , subordinated notes ( the 201cnotes 201d ) paying a fixed interest rate of 6.67% ( 6.67 % ) per annum . mastercard repaid the entire principal amount of $ 80000 on june 30 , 2008 pursuant to the terms of the notes . the interest expense on the notes was $ 2668 and $ 5336 for each of the years ended december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively. .', 'doc_table': {'benefit payments': {'2010': 2714.0, '2011': 3028.0, '2012': 3369.0, '2013': 3660.0, '2014': 4019.0, '2015 2013 2019': 22686.0}, 'expected subsidy receipts': {'2010': 71.0, '2011': 91.0, '2012': 111.0, '2013': 134.0, '2014': 151.0, '2015 2013 2019': 1071.0}, 'net benefit payments': {'2010': 2643.0, '2011': 2937.0, '2012': 3258.0, '2013': 3526.0, '2014': 3868.0, '2015 2013 2019': 21615.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total of benefit payments in 2012?', 'and what was that in 2011?', 'how much, then, does the 2012 total represent in relation to this 2011 one?', 'and what is this value without the portion equivalent to the 2011 total?', 'and concerning the the incremental severance expense, what was the amount of the one related to the severance plan in 2009?', 'what was the total severance expense in that year?', 'what percentage, then, of this total expense does that amount represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3369', '3028', '1.1126', '11.26%', '3471', '135113', '2.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3369', '3028', 'divide(3369, 3028)', 'divide(3369, 3028), subtract(#0, const_1)', '3471', '135113', 'divide(3471, 135113)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3369.0, 3028.0, 1.11262, 0.11262, 3471.0, 135113.0, 0.02569], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 7, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 3028.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "17s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amount of receivables in 2016?\nA1: 14215.0\nQ2: and what was it in 2015?\nA2: 15794.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis entergy new orleans 2019s receivables from the money pool were as follows as of december 31 for each of the following years. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nsee note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool . entergy new orleans has a credit facility in the amount of $ 25 million scheduled to expire in november 2018 . the credit facility allows entergy new orleans to issue letters of credit against $ 10 million of the borrowing capacity of the facility . as of december 31 , 2016 , there were no cash borrowings and a $ 0.8 million letter of credit was outstanding under the facility . in addition , entergy new orleans is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations under miso . as of december 31 , 2016 , a $ 6.2 million letter of credit was outstanding under entergy new orleans 2019s letter of credit facility . see note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the credit facilities . entergy new orleans obtained authorization from the ferc through october 2017 for short-term borrowings not to exceed an aggregate amount of $ 100 million at any time outstanding . see note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of entergy new orleans 2019s short-term borrowing limits . the long-term securities issuances of entergy new orleans are limited to amounts authorized by the city council , and the current authorization extends through june 2018 . state and local rate regulation the rates that entergy new orleans charges for electricity and natural gas significantly influence its financial position , results of operations , and liquidity . entergy new orleans is regulated and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings . a governmental agency , the city council , is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers . retail rates see 201calgiers asset transfer 201d below for discussion of the transfer from entergy louisiana to entergy new orleans of certain assets that serve algiers customers . in march 2013 , entergy louisiana filed a rate case for the algiers area , which is in new orleans and is regulated by the city council . entergy louisiana requested a rate increase of $ 13 million over three years , including a 10.4% ( 10.4 % ) return on common equity and a formula rate plan mechanism identical to its lpsc request . in january 2014 the city council advisors filed direct testimony recommending a rate increase of $ 5.56 million over three years , including an 8.13% ( 8.13 % ) return on common equity . in june 2014 the city council unanimously approved a settlement that includes the following : 2022 a $ 9.3 million base rate revenue increase to be phased in on a levelized basis over four years ; 2022 recovery of an additional $ 853 thousand annually through a miso recovery rider ; and 2022 the adoption of a four-year formula rate plan requiring the filing of annual evaluation reports in may of each year , commencing may 2015 , with resulting rates being implemented in october of each year . the formula rate plan includes a midpoint target authorized return on common equity of 9.95% ( 9.95 % ) with a +/- 40 basis point bandwidth . the rate increase was effective with bills rendered on and after the first billing cycle of july 2014 . additional compliance filings were made with the city council in october 2014 for approval of the form of certain rate riders , including among others , a ninemile 6 non-fuel cost recovery interim rider , allowing for contemporaneous recovery of capacity .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | ( in thousands ) | $ 14215 | ( in thousands ) | $ 14215 | ( in thousands ) | $ 14215 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2015 | ( in thousands ) | 15794.0 | ( in thousands ) | 15794.0 | ( in thousands ) | 15794.0 |\n| 2014 | ( in thousands ) | 442.0 | ( in thousands ) | 442.0 | ( in thousands ) | 442.0 |\n| 2013 | ( in thousands ) | 4737.0 | ( in thousands ) | 4737.0 | ( in thousands ) | 4737.0 |', 'question': 'what was, then, the total amount of receivables in both years?', 'ops': 'add(14215, 15794)', 'id': 'Double_ETR/2016/page_403.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy new orleans , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis entergy new orleans 2019s receivables from the money pool were as follows as of december 31 for each of the following years. .', 'doc_post_text': 'see note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool . entergy new orleans has a credit facility in the amount of $ 25 million scheduled to expire in november 2018 . the credit facility allows entergy new orleans to issue letters of credit against $ 10 million of the borrowing capacity of the facility . as of december 31 , 2016 , there were no cash borrowings and a $ 0.8 million letter of credit was outstanding under the facility . in addition , entergy new orleans is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations under miso . as of december 31 , 2016 , a $ 6.2 million letter of credit was outstanding under entergy new orleans 2019s letter of credit facility . see note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the credit facilities . entergy new orleans obtained authorization from the ferc through october 2017 for short-term borrowings not to exceed an aggregate amount of $ 100 million at any time outstanding . see note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of entergy new orleans 2019s short-term borrowing limits . the long-term securities issuances of entergy new orleans are limited to amounts authorized by the city council , and the current authorization extends through june 2018 . state and local rate regulation the rates that entergy new orleans charges for electricity and natural gas significantly influence its financial position , results of operations , and liquidity . entergy new orleans is regulated and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings . a governmental agency , the city council , is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers . retail rates see 201calgiers asset transfer 201d below for discussion of the transfer from entergy louisiana to entergy new orleans of certain assets that serve algiers customers . in march 2013 , entergy louisiana filed a rate case for the algiers area , which is in new orleans and is regulated by the city council . entergy louisiana requested a rate increase of $ 13 million over three years , including a 10.4% ( 10.4 % ) return on common equity and a formula rate plan mechanism identical to its lpsc request . in january 2014 the city council advisors filed direct testimony recommending a rate increase of $ 5.56 million over three years , including an 8.13% ( 8.13 % ) return on common equity . in june 2014 the city council unanimously approved a settlement that includes the following : 2022 a $ 9.3 million base rate revenue increase to be phased in on a levelized basis over four years ; 2022 recovery of an additional $ 853 thousand annually through a miso recovery rider ; and 2022 the adoption of a four-year formula rate plan requiring the filing of annual evaluation reports in may of each year , commencing may 2015 , with resulting rates being implemented in october of each year . the formula rate plan includes a midpoint target authorized return on common equity of 9.95% ( 9.95 % ) with a +/- 40 basis point bandwidth . the rate increase was effective with bills rendered on and after the first billing cycle of july 2014 . additional compliance filings were made with the city council in october 2014 for approval of the form of certain rate riders , including among others , a ninemile 6 non-fuel cost recovery interim rider , allowing for contemporaneous recovery of capacity .', 'doc_table': {'2015': {'( in thousands )': '( in thousands )', '$ 14215': 15794.0}, '2014': {'( in thousands )': '( in thousands )', '$ 14215': 442.0}, '2013': {'( in thousands )': '( in thousands )', '$ 14215': 4737.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amount of receivables in 2016?', 'and what was it in 2015?', 'what was, then, the total amount of receivables in both years?', 'including 2014, what becomes this total?', 'and including 2013, what then becomes the total for the four years?', 'and concerning the city council unanimously approved settlement from june 2014, what was the percentage bandwidth of the midpoint target authorized return on common equity?', 'and what was that midpoint target authorized return?', 'what is, then, the maximum possible amount of this return?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['14215', '15794', '30009', '30451', '35188', '0.4', '9.95', '10.35'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['14215', '15794', 'add(14215, 15794)', 'add(14215, 15794), add(#0, 442)', 'add(14215, 15794), add(#0, 442), add(#1, 4737)', 'divide(40, const_100)', '9.95', 'divide(40, const_100), add(#0, 9.95)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [14215.0, 15794.0, 30009.0, 30451.0, 35188.0, 0.4, 9.95, 10.35], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 30009.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "16s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the ratio of statutory capital and surplus to statutory net income in 2009?\nA1: 3.76173\nQ2: what is the statutory net income in 2009?\nA2: 2472.0\nQ3: what about in 2008?\nA3: 2196.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nn o t e s t o t h e c o n s o l i d a t e d f i n a n c i a l s t a t e m e n t s ( continued ) ace limited and subsidiaries 20 . statutory financial information the company 2019s insurance and reinsurance subsidiaries are subject to insurance laws and regulations in the jurisdictions in which they operate . these regulations include restrictions that limit the amount of dividends or other distributions , such as loans or cash advances , available to shareholders without prior approval of the insurance regulatory authorities . there are no statutory restrictions on the payment of dividends from retained earnings by any of the bermuda subsidiaries as the minimum statutory capital and surplus requirements are satisfied by the share capital and additional paid-in capital of each of the bermuda subsidiaries . the company 2019s u.s . subsidiaries file financial statements prepared in accordance with statutory accounting practices prescribed or permitted by insurance regulators . statutory accounting differs from gaap in the reporting of certain reinsurance contracts , investments , subsidiaries , acquis- ition expenses , fixed assets , deferred income taxes , and certain other items . the statutory capital and surplus of the u.s . subsidiaries met regulatory requirements for 2009 , 2008 , and 2007 . the amount of dividends available to be paid in 2010 , without prior approval from the state insurance departments , totals $ 733 million . the combined statutory capital and surplus and statutory net income of the bermuda and u.s . subsidiaries as at and for the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 , and 2007 , are as follows: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nas permitted by the restructuring discussed previously in note 7 , certain of the company 2019s u.s . subsidiaries discount certain a&e liabilities , which increased statutory capital and surplus by approximately $ 215 million , $ 211 million , and $ 140 million at december 31 , 2009 , 2008 , and 2007 , respectively . the company 2019s international subsidiaries prepare statutory financial statements based on local laws and regulations . some jurisdictions impose complex regulatory requirements on insurance companies while other jurisdictions impose fewer requirements . in some countries , the company must obtain licenses issued by governmental authorities to conduct local insurance business . these licenses may be subject to reserves and minimum capital and solvency tests . jurisdictions may impose fines , censure , and/or criminal sanctions for violation of regulatory requirements . 21 . information provided in connection with outstanding debt of subsidiaries the following tables present condensed consolidating financial information at december 31 , 2009 , and december 31 , 2008 , and for the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 , and 2007 , for ace limited ( the parent guarantor ) and its 201csubsidiary issuer 201d , ace ina holdings , inc . the subsidiary issuer is an indirect 100 percent-owned subsidiary of the parent guarantor . investments in subsidiaries are accounted for by the parent guarantor under the equity method for purposes of the supplemental consolidating presentation . earnings of subsidiaries are reflected in the parent guarantor 2019s investment accounts and earnings . the parent guarantor fully and unconditionally guarantees certain of the debt of the subsidiary issuer. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | statutory capital and surplus | statutory net income | statutory capital and surplus | statutory net income | statutory capital and surplus | statutory net income | statutory capital and surplus | statutory net income | statutory capital and surplus | statutory net income | statutory capital and surplus | statutory net income |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| bermuda subsidiaries 2009 (1) | 9299.0 | 2472.0 | 9299.0 | 2472.0 | 9299.0 | 2472.0 | 9299.0 | 2472.0 | 9299.0 | 2472.0 | 9299.0 | 2472.0 |\n| bermuda subsidiaries 2008 (1) | 6205.0 | 2196.0 | 6205.0 | 2196.0 | 6205.0 | 2196.0 | 6205.0 | 2196.0 | 6205.0 | 2196.0 | 6205.0 | 2196.0 |\n| bermuda subsidiaries 2007 | 8579.0 | 1535.0 | 8579.0 | 1535.0 | 8579.0 | 1535.0 | 8579.0 | 1535.0 | 8579.0 | 1535.0 | 8579.0 | 1535.0 |\n| bermuda subsidiaries 2009 (2) | 5801.0 | 870.0 | 5801.0 | 870.0 | 5801.0 | 870.0 | 5801.0 | 870.0 | 5801.0 | 870.0 | 5801.0 | 870.0 |\n| bermuda subsidiaries 2008 (2) | 5368.0 | 818.0 | 5368.0 | 818.0 | 5368.0 | 818.0 | 5368.0 | 818.0 | 5368.0 | 818.0 | 5368.0 | 818.0 |\n| 2007 | 5321.0 | 873.0 | 5321.0 | 873.0 | 5321.0 | 873.0 | 5321.0 | 873.0 | 5321.0 | 873.0 | 5321.0 | 873.0 |', 'question': 'what is the net change?', 'ops': 'subtract(2472, 2196)', 'id': 'Double_CB/2009/page_220.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'n o t e s t o t h e c o n s o l i d a t e d f i n a n c i a l s t a t e m e n t s ( continued ) ace limited and subsidiaries 20 . statutory financial information the company 2019s insurance and reinsurance subsidiaries are subject to insurance laws and regulations in the jurisdictions in which they operate . these regulations include restrictions that limit the amount of dividends or other distributions , such as loans or cash advances , available to shareholders without prior approval of the insurance regulatory authorities . there are no statutory restrictions on the payment of dividends from retained earnings by any of the bermuda subsidiaries as the minimum statutory capital and surplus requirements are satisfied by the share capital and additional paid-in capital of each of the bermuda subsidiaries . the company 2019s u.s . subsidiaries file financial statements prepared in accordance with statutory accounting practices prescribed or permitted by insurance regulators . statutory accounting differs from gaap in the reporting of certain reinsurance contracts , investments , subsidiaries , acquis- ition expenses , fixed assets , deferred income taxes , and certain other items . the statutory capital and surplus of the u.s . subsidiaries met regulatory requirements for 2009 , 2008 , and 2007 . the amount of dividends available to be paid in 2010 , without prior approval from the state insurance departments , totals $ 733 million . the combined statutory capital and surplus and statutory net income of the bermuda and u.s . subsidiaries as at and for the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 , and 2007 , are as follows: .', 'doc_post_text': 'as permitted by the restructuring discussed previously in note 7 , certain of the company 2019s u.s . subsidiaries discount certain a&e liabilities , which increased statutory capital and surplus by approximately $ 215 million , $ 211 million , and $ 140 million at december 31 , 2009 , 2008 , and 2007 , respectively . the company 2019s international subsidiaries prepare statutory financial statements based on local laws and regulations . some jurisdictions impose complex regulatory requirements on insurance companies while other jurisdictions impose fewer requirements . in some countries , the company must obtain licenses issued by governmental authorities to conduct local insurance business . these licenses may be subject to reserves and minimum capital and solvency tests . jurisdictions may impose fines , censure , and/or criminal sanctions for violation of regulatory requirements . 21 . information provided in connection with outstanding debt of subsidiaries the following tables present condensed consolidating financial information at december 31 , 2009 , and december 31 , 2008 , and for the years ended december 31 , 2009 , 2008 , and 2007 , for ace limited ( the parent guarantor ) and its 201csubsidiary issuer 201d , ace ina holdings , inc . the subsidiary issuer is an indirect 100 percent-owned subsidiary of the parent guarantor . investments in subsidiaries are accounted for by the parent guarantor under the equity method for purposes of the supplemental consolidating presentation . earnings of subsidiaries are reflected in the parent guarantor 2019s investment accounts and earnings . the parent guarantor fully and unconditionally guarantees certain of the debt of the subsidiary issuer. .', 'doc_table': {'bermuda subsidiaries 2009 (1)': {'statutory capital and surplus': 9299.0, 'statutory net income': 2472.0}, 'bermuda subsidiaries 2008 (1)': {'statutory capital and surplus': 6205.0, 'statutory net income': 2196.0}, 'bermuda subsidiaries 2007': {'statutory capital and surplus': 8579.0, 'statutory net income': 1535.0}, 'bermuda subsidiaries 2009 (2)': {'statutory capital and surplus': 5801.0, 'statutory net income': 870.0}, 'bermuda subsidiaries 2008 (2)': {'statutory capital and surplus': 5368.0, 'statutory net income': 818.0}, '2007': {'statutory capital and surplus': 5321.0, 'statutory net income': 873.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the ratio of statutory capital and surplus to statutory net income in 2009?', 'what is the statutory net income in 2009?', 'what about in 2008?', 'what is the net change?', 'what growth rate does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3.76', '2472', '2196', '276', '12.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['divide(9299, 2472)', '2472', '2196', 'subtract(2472, 2196)', 'subtract(2472, 2196), divide(#0, 2196)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3.76173, 2472.0, 2196.0, 276.0, 0.12568], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': True, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 276.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "16s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amount of receivables in 2016?\nA1: 14215.0\nQ2: and what was it in 2015?\nA2: 15794.0\nQ3: what was, then, the total amount of receivables in both years?\nA3: 30009.0\nQ4: including 2014, what becomes this total?\nA4: 30451.0\nQ5: and including 2013, what then becomes the total for the four years?\nA5: 35188.0\nQ6: and concerning the city council unanimously approved settlement from june 2014, what was the percentage bandwidth of the midpoint target authorized return on common equity?\nA6: 0.4', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis entergy new orleans 2019s receivables from the money pool were as follows as of december 31 for each of the following years. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nsee note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool . entergy new orleans has a credit facility in the amount of $ 25 million scheduled to expire in november 2018 . the credit facility allows entergy new orleans to issue letters of credit against $ 10 million of the borrowing capacity of the facility . as of december 31 , 2016 , there were no cash borrowings and a $ 0.8 million letter of credit was outstanding under the facility . in addition , entergy new orleans is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations under miso . as of december 31 , 2016 , a $ 6.2 million letter of credit was outstanding under entergy new orleans 2019s letter of credit facility . see note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the credit facilities . entergy new orleans obtained authorization from the ferc through october 2017 for short-term borrowings not to exceed an aggregate amount of $ 100 million at any time outstanding . see note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of entergy new orleans 2019s short-term borrowing limits . the long-term securities issuances of entergy new orleans are limited to amounts authorized by the city council , and the current authorization extends through june 2018 . state and local rate regulation the rates that entergy new orleans charges for electricity and natural gas significantly influence its financial position , results of operations , and liquidity . entergy new orleans is regulated and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings . a governmental agency , the city council , is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers . retail rates see 201calgiers asset transfer 201d below for discussion of the transfer from entergy louisiana to entergy new orleans of certain assets that serve algiers customers . in march 2013 , entergy louisiana filed a rate case for the algiers area , which is in new orleans and is regulated by the city council . entergy louisiana requested a rate increase of $ 13 million over three years , including a 10.4% ( 10.4 % ) return on common equity and a formula rate plan mechanism identical to its lpsc request . in january 2014 the city council advisors filed direct testimony recommending a rate increase of $ 5.56 million over three years , including an 8.13% ( 8.13 % ) return on common equity . in june 2014 the city council unanimously approved a settlement that includes the following : 2022 a $ 9.3 million base rate revenue increase to be phased in on a levelized basis over four years ; 2022 recovery of an additional $ 853 thousand annually through a miso recovery rider ; and 2022 the adoption of a four-year formula rate plan requiring the filing of annual evaluation reports in may of each year , commencing may 2015 , with resulting rates being implemented in october of each year . the formula rate plan includes a midpoint target authorized return on common equity of 9.95% ( 9.95 % ) with a +/- 40 basis point bandwidth . the rate increase was effective with bills rendered on and after the first billing cycle of july 2014 . additional compliance filings were made with the city council in october 2014 for approval of the form of certain rate riders , including among others , a ninemile 6 non-fuel cost recovery interim rider , allowing for contemporaneous recovery of capacity .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | ( in thousands ) | $ 14215 | ( in thousands ) | $ 14215 | ( in thousands ) | $ 14215 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2015 | ( in thousands ) | 15794.0 | ( in thousands ) | 15794.0 | ( in thousands ) | 15794.0 |\n| 2014 | ( in thousands ) | 442.0 | ( in thousands ) | 442.0 | ( in thousands ) | 442.0 |\n| 2013 | ( in thousands ) | 4737.0 | ( in thousands ) | 4737.0 | ( in thousands ) | 4737.0 |', 'question': 'and what was that midpoint target authorized return?', 'ops': '9.95', 'id': 'Double_ETR/2016/page_403.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy new orleans , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis entergy new orleans 2019s receivables from the money pool were as follows as of december 31 for each of the following years. .', 'doc_post_text': 'see note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool . entergy new orleans has a credit facility in the amount of $ 25 million scheduled to expire in november 2018 . the credit facility allows entergy new orleans to issue letters of credit against $ 10 million of the borrowing capacity of the facility . as of december 31 , 2016 , there were no cash borrowings and a $ 0.8 million letter of credit was outstanding under the facility . in addition , entergy new orleans is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations under miso . as of december 31 , 2016 , a $ 6.2 million letter of credit was outstanding under entergy new orleans 2019s letter of credit facility . see note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the credit facilities . entergy new orleans obtained authorization from the ferc through october 2017 for short-term borrowings not to exceed an aggregate amount of $ 100 million at any time outstanding . see note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of entergy new orleans 2019s short-term borrowing limits . the long-term securities issuances of entergy new orleans are limited to amounts authorized by the city council , and the current authorization extends through june 2018 . state and local rate regulation the rates that entergy new orleans charges for electricity and natural gas significantly influence its financial position , results of operations , and liquidity . entergy new orleans is regulated and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings . a governmental agency , the city council , is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers . retail rates see 201calgiers asset transfer 201d below for discussion of the transfer from entergy louisiana to entergy new orleans of certain assets that serve algiers customers . in march 2013 , entergy louisiana filed a rate case for the algiers area , which is in new orleans and is regulated by the city council . entergy louisiana requested a rate increase of $ 13 million over three years , including a 10.4% ( 10.4 % ) return on common equity and a formula rate plan mechanism identical to its lpsc request . in january 2014 the city council advisors filed direct testimony recommending a rate increase of $ 5.56 million over three years , including an 8.13% ( 8.13 % ) return on common equity . in june 2014 the city council unanimously approved a settlement that includes the following : 2022 a $ 9.3 million base rate revenue increase to be phased in on a levelized basis over four years ; 2022 recovery of an additional $ 853 thousand annually through a miso recovery rider ; and 2022 the adoption of a four-year formula rate plan requiring the filing of annual evaluation reports in may of each year , commencing may 2015 , with resulting rates being implemented in october of each year . the formula rate plan includes a midpoint target authorized return on common equity of 9.95% ( 9.95 % ) with a +/- 40 basis point bandwidth . the rate increase was effective with bills rendered on and after the first billing cycle of july 2014 . additional compliance filings were made with the city council in october 2014 for approval of the form of certain rate riders , including among others , a ninemile 6 non-fuel cost recovery interim rider , allowing for contemporaneous recovery of capacity .', 'doc_table': {'2015': {'( in thousands )': '( in thousands )', '$ 14215': 15794.0}, '2014': {'( in thousands )': '( in thousands )', '$ 14215': 442.0}, '2013': {'( in thousands )': '( in thousands )', '$ 14215': 4737.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amount of receivables in 2016?', 'and what was it in 2015?', 'what was, then, the total amount of receivables in both years?', 'including 2014, what becomes this total?', 'and including 2013, what then becomes the total for the four years?', 'and concerning the city council unanimously approved settlement from june 2014, what was the percentage bandwidth of the midpoint target authorized return on common equity?', 'and what was that midpoint target authorized return?', 'what is, then, the maximum possible amount of this return?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['14215', '15794', '30009', '30451', '35188', '0.4', '9.95', '10.35'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['14215', '15794', 'add(14215, 15794)', 'add(14215, 15794), add(#0, 442)', 'add(14215, 15794), add(#0, 442), add(#1, 4737)', 'divide(40, const_100)', '9.95', 'divide(40, const_100), add(#0, 9.95)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [14215.0, 15794.0, 30009.0, 30451.0, 35188.0, 0.4, 9.95, 10.35], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 9.95}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "16s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in the value of a o smith corp from 2002 to 2007?\nA1: 42.72\nQ2: and how much does that change represent in relation to the original value in 2002?\nA2: 0.4272\nQ3: what was the value of the s&p 600 electrical equipment in 2007?\nA3: 253.33\nQ4: and what was the change in that value between 2002 and 2007?\nA4: 153.33\nQ5: how much, then, does this change represent in relation to the original value of that stock in 2002?\nA5: 1.5333', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nthe graph below shows a five-year comparison of the cumulative shareholder return on the company's common stock with the cumulative total return of the s&p smallcap 600 index and the s&p 600 electrical equipment index , all of which are published indices . comparison of five-year cumulative total return from december 31 , 2002 to december 31 , 2007 assumes $ 100 invested with reinvestment of dividends period indexed returns .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n12/31/02 12/31/03 12/31/04 12/31/05 12/31/06 12/31/07 smith ( a o ) corp s&p smallcap 600 index s&p 600 electrical equipment .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| baseperiod 12/31/02 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/03 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/04 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/05 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/06 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 |\n| 12/31/07 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 |', 'question': 'and what was the difference between the return (or the change representation) of the a o smith corp and the one of the s&p 600 electrical equipment?', 'ops': 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)', 'id': 'Single_AOS/2007/page_17.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': "the graph below shows a five-year comparison of the cumulative shareholder return on the company's common stock with the cumulative total return of the s&p smallcap 600 index and the s&p 600 electrical equipment index , all of which are published indices . comparison of five-year cumulative total return from december 31 , 2002 to december 31 , 2007 assumes $ 100 invested with reinvestment of dividends period indexed returns .", 'doc_post_text': '12/31/02 12/31/03 12/31/04 12/31/05 12/31/06 12/31/07 smith ( a o ) corp s&p smallcap 600 index s&p 600 electrical equipment .', 'doc_table': {'baseperiod 12/31/02': {'a o smith corp': 100.0, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 100.0, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 100.0}, 'baseperiod 12/31/03': {'a o smith corp': 132.23, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 138.79, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 126.12}, 'baseperiod 12/31/04': {'a o smith corp': 115.36, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 170.22, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 152.18}, 'baseperiod 12/31/05': {'a o smith corp': 138.2, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 183.3, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 169.07}, 'baseperiod 12/31/06': {'a o smith corp': 150.26, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 211.01, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 228.83}, '12/31/07': {'a o smith corp': 142.72, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 210.39, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 253.33}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in the value of a o smith corp from 2002 to 2007?', 'and how much does that change represent in relation to the original value in 2002?', 'what was the value of the s&p 600 electrical equipment in 2007?', 'and what was the change in that value between 2002 and 2007?', 'how much, then, does this change represent in relation to the original value of that stock in 2002?', 'and what was the difference between the return (or the change representation) of the a o smith corp and the one of the s&p 600 electrical equipment?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['42.72', '42.72%', '253.33', '153.33', '153.33%', '-110.61%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(142.72, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', '253.33', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [42.72, 0.4272, 253.33, 153.33, 1.5333, -1.1061], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -1.1061}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "18s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\njpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175 securities borrowed and securities lent are recorded at the amount of cash collateral advanced or received . securities borrowed consist primarily of government and equity securities . jpmorgan chase moni- tors the market value of the securities borrowed and lent on a daily basis and calls for additional collateral when appropriate . fees received or paid in connection with securities borrowed and lent are recorded in interest income or interest expense . the following table details the components of collateralized financings. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( a ) includes resale agreements of $ 20.8 billion and $ 19.1 billion accounted for at fair value at december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . ( b ) includes securities borrowed of $ 3.4 billion accounted for at fair value at december 31 , 2008 . ( c ) includes repurchase agreements of $ 3.0 billion and $ 5.8 billion accounted for at fair value at december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . jpmorgan chase pledges certain financial instruments it owns to col- lateralize repurchase agreements and other securities financings . pledged securities that can be sold or repledged by the secured party are identified as financial instruments owned ( pledged to various parties ) on the consolidated balance sheets . at december 31 , 2008 , the firm received securities as collateral that could be repledged , delivered or otherwise used with a fair value of approximately $ 511.9 billion . this collateral was generally obtained under resale or securities borrowing agreements . of these securities , approximately $ 456.6 billion were repledged , delivered or otherwise used , generally as collateral under repurchase agreements , securities lending agreements or to cover short sales . note 14 2013 loans the accounting for a loan may differ based upon whether it is origi- nated or purchased and as to whether the loan is used in an invest- ing or trading strategy . for purchased loans held-for-investment , the accounting also differs depending on whether a loan is credit- impaired at the date of acquisition . purchased loans with evidence of credit deterioration since the origination date and for which it is probable , at acquisition , that all contractually required payments receivable will not be collected are considered to be credit-impaired . the measurement framework for loans in the consolidated financial statements is one of the following : 2022 at the principal amount outstanding , net of the allowance for loan losses , unearned income and any net deferred loan fees or costs , for loans held for investment ( other than purchased credit- impaired loans ) ; 2022 at the lower of cost or fair value , with valuation changes record- ed in noninterest revenue , for loans that are classified as held- for-sale ; or 2022 at fair value , with changes in fair value recorded in noninterest revenue , for loans classified as trading assets or risk managed on a fair value basis ; 2022 purchased credit-impaired loans held for investment are account- ed for under sop 03-3 and initially measured at fair value , which includes estimated future credit losses . accordingly , an allowance for loan losses related to these loans is not recorded at the acquisition date . see note 5 on pages 156 2013158 of this annual report for further information on the firm 2019s elections of fair value accounting under sfas 159 . see note 6 on pages 158 2013160 of this annual report for further information on loans carried at fair value and classified as trading assets . for loans held for investment , other than purchased credit-impaired loans , interest income is recognized using the interest method or on a basis approximating a level rate of return over the term of the loan . loans within the held-for-investment portfolio that management decides to sell are transferred to the held-for-sale portfolio . transfers to held-for-sale are recorded at the lower of cost or fair value on the date of transfer . credit-related losses are charged off to the allowance for loan losses and losses due to changes in interest rates , or exchange rates , are recognized in noninterest revenue . loans within the held-for-sale portfolio that management decides to retain are transferred to the held-for-investment portfolio at the lower of cost or fair value . these loans are subsequently assessed for impairment based on the firm 2019s allowance methodology . for a fur- ther discussion of the methodologies used in establishing the firm 2019s allowance for loan losses , see note 15 on pages 178 2013180 of this annual report . nonaccrual loans are those on which the accrual of interest is dis- continued . loans ( other than certain consumer and purchased credit- impaired loans discussed below ) are placed on nonaccrual status immediately if , in the opinion of management , full payment of princi- pal or interest is in doubt , or when principal or interest is 90 days or more past due and collateral , if any , is insufficient to cover principal and interest . loans are charged off to the allowance for loan losses when it is highly certain that a loss has been realized . interest accrued but not collected at the date a loan is placed on nonaccrual status is reversed against interest income . in addition , the amortiza- tion of net deferred loan fees is suspended . interest income on nonaccrual loans is recognized only to the extent it is received in cash . however , where there is doubt regarding the ultimate col- lectibility of loan principal , all cash thereafter received is applied to reduce the carrying value of such loans ( i.e. , the cost recovery method ) . loans are restored to accrual status only when future pay- ments of interest and principal are reasonably assured . consumer loans , other than purchased credit-impaired loans , are generally charged to the allowance for loan losses upon reaching specified stages of delinquency , in accordance with the federal financial institutions examination council policy . for example , credit card loans are charged off by the end of the month in which the account becomes 180 days past due or within 60 days from receiv- ing notification of the filing of bankruptcy , whichever is earlier . residential mortgage products are generally charged off to net real- izable value at no later than 180 days past due . other consumer .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | securities purchased under resale agreements ( a ) | securities borrowed ( b ) | securities sold under repurchase agreements ( c ) | securities loaned | securities purchased under resale agreements ( a ) | securities borrowed ( b ) | securities sold under repurchase agreements ( c ) | securities loaned |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2008 | 200265.0 | 124000.0 | 174456.0 | 6077.0 | 200265.0 | 124000.0 | 174456.0 | 6077.0 |\n| 2007 | 169305.0 | 84184.0 | 126098.0 | 10922.0 | 169305.0 | 84184.0 | 126098.0 | 10922.0 |', 'question': 'what was the total amount of resale agreements in 2008, in millions?', 'ops': 'multiply(20.8, const_1000)', 'id': 'Single_JPM/2008/page_177.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175jpmorgan chase & co . / 2008 annual report 175 securities borrowed and securities lent are recorded at the amount of cash collateral advanced or received . securities borrowed consist primarily of government and equity securities . jpmorgan chase moni- tors the market value of the securities borrowed and lent on a daily basis and calls for additional collateral when appropriate . fees received or paid in connection with securities borrowed and lent are recorded in interest income or interest expense . the following table details the components of collateralized financings. .', 'doc_post_text': '( a ) includes resale agreements of $ 20.8 billion and $ 19.1 billion accounted for at fair value at december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . ( b ) includes securities borrowed of $ 3.4 billion accounted for at fair value at december 31 , 2008 . ( c ) includes repurchase agreements of $ 3.0 billion and $ 5.8 billion accounted for at fair value at december 31 , 2008 and 2007 , respectively . jpmorgan chase pledges certain financial instruments it owns to col- lateralize repurchase agreements and other securities financings . pledged securities that can be sold or repledged by the secured party are identified as financial instruments owned ( pledged to various parties ) on the consolidated balance sheets . at december 31 , 2008 , the firm received securities as collateral that could be repledged , delivered or otherwise used with a fair value of approximately $ 511.9 billion . this collateral was generally obtained under resale or securities borrowing agreements . of these securities , approximately $ 456.6 billion were repledged , delivered or otherwise used , generally as collateral under repurchase agreements , securities lending agreements or to cover short sales . note 14 2013 loans the accounting for a loan may differ based upon whether it is origi- nated or purchased and as to whether the loan is used in an invest- ing or trading strategy . for purchased loans held-for-investment , the accounting also differs depending on whether a loan is credit- impaired at the date of acquisition . purchased loans with evidence of credit deterioration since the origination date and for which it is probable , at acquisition , that all contractually required payments receivable will not be collected are considered to be credit-impaired . the measurement framework for loans in the consolidated financial statements is one of the following : 2022 at the principal amount outstanding , net of the allowance for loan losses , unearned income and any net deferred loan fees or costs , for loans held for investment ( other than purchased credit- impaired loans ) ; 2022 at the lower of cost or fair value , with valuation changes record- ed in noninterest revenue , for loans that are classified as held- for-sale ; or 2022 at fair value , with changes in fair value recorded in noninterest revenue , for loans classified as trading assets or risk managed on a fair value basis ; 2022 purchased credit-impaired loans held for investment are account- ed for under sop 03-3 and initially measured at fair value , which includes estimated future credit losses . accordingly , an allowance for loan losses related to these loans is not recorded at the acquisition date . see note 5 on pages 156 2013158 of this annual report for further information on the firm 2019s elections of fair value accounting under sfas 159 . see note 6 on pages 158 2013160 of this annual report for further information on loans carried at fair value and classified as trading assets . for loans held for investment , other than purchased credit-impaired loans , interest income is recognized using the interest method or on a basis approximating a level rate of return over the term of the loan . loans within the held-for-investment portfolio that management decides to sell are transferred to the held-for-sale portfolio . transfers to held-for-sale are recorded at the lower of cost or fair value on the date of transfer . credit-related losses are charged off to the allowance for loan losses and losses due to changes in interest rates , or exchange rates , are recognized in noninterest revenue . loans within the held-for-sale portfolio that management decides to retain are transferred to the held-for-investment portfolio at the lower of cost or fair value . these loans are subsequently assessed for impairment based on the firm 2019s allowance methodology . for a fur- ther discussion of the methodologies used in establishing the firm 2019s allowance for loan losses , see note 15 on pages 178 2013180 of this annual report . nonaccrual loans are those on which the accrual of interest is dis- continued . loans ( other than certain consumer and purchased credit- impaired loans discussed below ) are placed on nonaccrual status immediately if , in the opinion of management , full payment of princi- pal or interest is in doubt , or when principal or interest is 90 days or more past due and collateral , if any , is insufficient to cover principal and interest . loans are charged off to the allowance for loan losses when it is highly certain that a loss has been realized . interest accrued but not collected at the date a loan is placed on nonaccrual status is reversed against interest income . in addition , the amortiza- tion of net deferred loan fees is suspended . interest income on nonaccrual loans is recognized only to the extent it is received in cash . however , where there is doubt regarding the ultimate col- lectibility of loan principal , all cash thereafter received is applied to reduce the carrying value of such loans ( i.e. , the cost recovery method ) . loans are restored to accrual status only when future pay- ments of interest and principal are reasonably assured . consumer loans , other than purchased credit-impaired loans , are generally charged to the allowance for loan losses upon reaching specified stages of delinquency , in accordance with the federal financial institutions examination council policy . for example , credit card loans are charged off by the end of the month in which the account becomes 180 days past due or within 60 days from receiv- ing notification of the filing of bankruptcy , whichever is earlier . residential mortgage products are generally charged off to net real- izable value at no later than 180 days past due . other consumer .', 'doc_table': {'2008': {'securities purchased under resale agreements ( a )': 200265.0, 'securities borrowed ( b )': 124000.0, 'securities sold under repurchase agreements ( c )': 174456.0, 'securities loaned': 6077.0}, '2007': {'securities purchased under resale agreements ( a )': 169305.0, 'securities borrowed ( b )': 84184.0, 'securities sold under repurchase agreements ( c )': 126098.0, 'securities loaned': 10922.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total amount of resale agreements in 2008, in millions?', 'and how much does that amount represent in relation to the total securities borrowed in that year?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['20800', '16.8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(20.8, const_1000)', 'multiply(20.8, const_1000), divide(#0, 124000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [20800.0, 0.16774], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 20800.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "15s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:44 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:45 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in the value of a o smith corp from 2002 to 2007?\nA1: 42.72', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nthe graph below shows a five-year comparison of the cumulative shareholder return on the company's common stock with the cumulative total return of the s&p smallcap 600 index and the s&p 600 electrical equipment index , all of which are published indices . comparison of five-year cumulative total return from december 31 , 2002 to december 31 , 2007 assumes $ 100 invested with reinvestment of dividends period indexed returns .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n12/31/02 12/31/03 12/31/04 12/31/05 12/31/06 12/31/07 smith ( a o ) corp s&p smallcap 600 index s&p 600 electrical equipment .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment | a o smith corp | s&p smallcap 600 index | s&p 600 electrical equipment |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| baseperiod 12/31/02 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/03 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 | 132.23 | 138.79 | 126.12 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/04 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 | 115.36 | 170.22 | 152.18 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/05 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 | 138.2 | 183.3 | 169.07 |\n| baseperiod 12/31/06 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 | 150.26 | 211.01 | 228.83 |\n| 12/31/07 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 | 142.72 | 210.39 | 253.33 |', 'question': 'and how much does that change represent in relation to the original value in 2002?', 'ops': 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_AOS/2007/page_17.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': "the graph below shows a five-year comparison of the cumulative shareholder return on the company's common stock with the cumulative total return of the s&p smallcap 600 index and the s&p 600 electrical equipment index , all of which are published indices . comparison of five-year cumulative total return from december 31 , 2002 to december 31 , 2007 assumes $ 100 invested with reinvestment of dividends period indexed returns .", 'doc_post_text': '12/31/02 12/31/03 12/31/04 12/31/05 12/31/06 12/31/07 smith ( a o ) corp s&p smallcap 600 index s&p 600 electrical equipment .', 'doc_table': {'baseperiod 12/31/02': {'a o smith corp': 100.0, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 100.0, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 100.0}, 'baseperiod 12/31/03': {'a o smith corp': 132.23, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 138.79, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 126.12}, 'baseperiod 12/31/04': {'a o smith corp': 115.36, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 170.22, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 152.18}, 'baseperiod 12/31/05': {'a o smith corp': 138.2, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 183.3, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 169.07}, 'baseperiod 12/31/06': {'a o smith corp': 150.26, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 211.01, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 228.83}, '12/31/07': {'a o smith corp': 142.72, 's&p smallcap 600 index': 210.39, 's&p 600 electrical equipment': 253.33}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in the value of a o smith corp from 2002 to 2007?', 'and how much does that change represent in relation to the original value in 2002?', 'what was the value of the s&p 600 electrical equipment in 2007?', 'and what was the change in that value between 2002 and 2007?', 'how much, then, does this change represent in relation to the original value of that stock in 2002?', 'and what was the difference between the return (or the change representation) of the a o smith corp and the one of the s&p 600 electrical equipment?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['42.72', '42.72%', '253.33', '153.33', '153.33%', '-110.61%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(142.72, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', '253.33', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'subtract(142.72, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(253.33, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [42.72, 0.4272, 253.33, 153.33, 1.5333, -1.1061], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.4272}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "15s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:46 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:46 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:46 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:46 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:46 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:25:47 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfor additional information on segment results see page 43 . income from equity method investments increased by $ 126 million in 2006 from 2005 and increased by $ 98 million in 2005 from 2004 . income from our lpg operations in equatorial guinea increased in both periods due to higher sales volumes as a result of the plant expansions completed in 2005 . the increase in 2005 also included higher ptc income as a result of higher distillate gross margins . cost of revenues increased $ 4.609 billion in 2006 from 2005 and $ 7.106 billion in 2005 from 2004 . in both periods the increases were primarily in the rm&t segment and resulted from increases in acquisition costs of crude oil , refinery charge and blend stocks and purchased refined products . the increase in both periods was also impacted by higher manufacturing expenses , primarily the result of higher contract services and labor costs in 2006 and higher purchased energy costs in 2005 . purchases related to matching buy/sell transactions decreased $ 6.968 billion in 2006 from 2005 and increased $ 3.314 billion in 2005 from 2004 , mostly in the rm&t segment . the decrease in 2006 was primarily related to the change in accounting for matching buy/sell transactions discussed above . the increase in 2005 was primarily due to increased crude oil prices . depreciation , depletion and amortization increased $ 215 million in 2006 from 2005 and $ 125 million in 2005 from 2004 . rm&t segment depreciation expense increased in both years as a result of the increase in asset value recorded for our acquisition of the 38 percent interest in mpc on june 30 , 2005 . in addition , the detroit refinery expansion completed in the fourth quarter of 2005 contributed to the rm&t depreciation expense increase in 2006 . e&p segment depreciation expense for 2006 included a $ 20 million impairment of capitalized costs related to the camden hills field in the gulf of mexico and the associated canyon express pipeline . natural gas production from the camden hills field ended in 2006 as a result of increased water production from the well . selling , general and administrative expenses increased $ 73 million in 2006 from 2005 and $ 134 million in 2005 from 2004 . the 2006 increase was primarily because personnel and staffing costs increased throughout the year primarily as a result of variable compensation arrangements and increased business activity . partially offsetting these increases were reductions in stock-based compensation expense . the increase in 2005 was primarily a result of increased stock-based compensation expense , due to the increase in our stock price during that year as well as an increase in equity-based awards , which was partially offset by a decrease in expense as a result of severance and pension plan curtailment charges and start-up costs related to egholdings in 2004 . exploration expenses increased $ 148 million in 2006 from 2005 and $ 59 million in 2005 from 2004 . exploration expense related to dry wells and other write-offs totaled $ 166 million , $ 111 million and $ 47 million in 2006 , 2005 and 2004 . exploration expense in 2006 also included $ 47 million for exiting the cortland and empire leases in nova scotia . net interest and other financing costs ( income ) reflected a net $ 37 million of income for 2006 , a favorable change of $ 183 million from the net $ 146 million expense in 2005 . net interest and other financing costs decreased $ 16 million in 2005 from 2004 . the favorable changes in 2006 included increased interest income due to higher interest rates and average cash balances , foreign currency exchange gains , adjustments to interest on tax issues and greater capitalized interest . the decrease in expense for 2005 was primarily a result of increased interest income on higher average cash balances and greater capitalized interest , partially offset by increased interest on potential tax deficiencies and higher foreign exchange losses . included in net interest and other financing costs ( income ) are foreign currency gains of $ 16 million , losses of $ 17 million and gains of $ 9 million for 2006 , 2005 and 2004 . minority interest in income of mpc decreased $ 148 million in 2005 from 2004 due to our acquisition of the 38 percent interest in mpc on june 30 , 2005 . provision for income taxes increased $ 2.308 billion in 2006 from 2005 and $ 979 million in 2005 from 2004 , primarily due to the $ 4.259 billion and $ 2.691 billion increases in income from continuing operations before income taxes . the increase in our effective income tax rate in 2006 was primarily a result of the income taxes related to our libyan operations , where the statutory income tax rate is in excess of 90 percent . the following is an analysis of the effective income tax rates for continuing operations for 2006 , 2005 and 2004 . see note 11 to the consolidated financial statements for further discussion. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | statutory u.s . income tax rate | effects of foreign operations including foreign tax credits | state and local income taxes net of federal income tax effects | other tax effects | effective income tax rate for continuing operations | statutory u.s . income tax rate | effects of foreign operations including foreign tax credits | state and local income taxes net of federal income tax effects | other tax effects | effective income tax rate for continuing operations | statutory u.s . income tax rate | effects of foreign operations including foreign tax credits | state and local income taxes net of federal income tax effects | other tax effects | effective income tax rate for continuing operations |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2006 | -35.0 | 9.9 | 1.9 | -2.0 | -44.8 | -35.0 | 9.9 | 1.9 | -2.0 | -44.8 | -35.0 | 9.9 | 1.9 | -2.0 | -44.8 |\n| 2005 | -35.0 | -0.8 | 2.5 | -0.4 | -36.3 | -35.0 | -0.8 | 2.5 | -0.4 | -36.3 | -35.0 | -0.8 | 2.5 | -0.4 | -36.3 |\n| 2004 | -35.0 | 0.5 | 1.6 | -0.9 | -36.2 | -35.0 | 0.5 | 1.6 | -0.9 | -36.2 | -35.0 | 0.5 | 1.6 | -0.9 | -36.2 |', 'question': 'what was the net change in foreign operations including foreign tax credits from 2004 to 2006?', 'ops': 'subtract(9.9, 0.5)', 'id': 'Single_MRO/2006/page_61.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'for additional information on segment results see page 43 . income from equity method investments increased by $ 126 million in 2006 from 2005 and increased by $ 98 million in 2005 from 2004 . income from our lpg operations in equatorial guinea increased in both periods due to higher sales volumes as a result of the plant expansions completed in 2005 . the increase in 2005 also included higher ptc income as a result of higher distillate gross margins . cost of revenues increased $ 4.609 billion in 2006 from 2005 and $ 7.106 billion in 2005 from 2004 . in both periods the increases were primarily in the rm&t segment and resulted from increases in acquisition costs of crude oil , refinery charge and blend stocks and purchased refined products . the increase in both periods was also impacted by higher manufacturing expenses , primarily the result of higher contract services and labor costs in 2006 and higher purchased energy costs in 2005 . purchases related to matching buy/sell transactions decreased $ 6.968 billion in 2006 from 2005 and increased $ 3.314 billion in 2005 from 2004 , mostly in the rm&t segment . the decrease in 2006 was primarily related to the change in accounting for matching buy/sell transactions discussed above . the increase in 2005 was primarily due to increased crude oil prices . depreciation , depletion and amortization increased $ 215 million in 2006 from 2005 and $ 125 million in 2005 from 2004 . rm&t segment depreciation expense increased in both years as a result of the increase in asset value recorded for our acquisition of the 38 percent interest in mpc on june 30 , 2005 . in addition , the detroit refinery expansion completed in the fourth quarter of 2005 contributed to the rm&t depreciation expense increase in 2006 . e&p segment depreciation expense for 2006 included a $ 20 million impairment of capitalized costs related to the camden hills field in the gulf of mexico and the associated canyon express pipeline . natural gas production from the camden hills field ended in 2006 as a result of increased water production from the well . selling , general and administrative expenses increased $ 73 million in 2006 from 2005 and $ 134 million in 2005 from 2004 . the 2006 increase was primarily because personnel and staffing costs increased throughout the year primarily as a result of variable compensation arrangements and increased business activity . partially offsetting these increases were reductions in stock-based compensation expense . the increase in 2005 was primarily a result of increased stock-based compensation expense , due to the increase in our stock price during that year as well as an increase in equity-based awards , which was partially offset by a decrease in expense as a result of severance and pension plan curtailment charges and start-up costs related to egholdings in 2004 . exploration expenses increased $ 148 million in 2006 from 2005 and $ 59 million in 2005 from 2004 . exploration expense related to dry wells and other write-offs totaled $ 166 million , $ 111 million and $ 47 million in 2006 , 2005 and 2004 . exploration expense in 2006 also included $ 47 million for exiting the cortland and empire leases in nova scotia . net interest and other financing costs ( income ) reflected a net $ 37 million of income for 2006 , a favorable change of $ 183 million from the net $ 146 million expense in 2005 . net interest and other financing costs decreased $ 16 million in 2005 from 2004 . the favorable changes in 2006 included increased interest income due to higher interest rates and average cash balances , foreign currency exchange gains , adjustments to interest on tax issues and greater capitalized interest . the decrease in expense for 2005 was primarily a result of increased interest income on higher average cash balances and greater capitalized interest , partially offset by increased interest on potential tax deficiencies and higher foreign exchange losses . included in net interest and other financing costs ( income ) are foreign currency gains of $ 16 million , losses of $ 17 million and gains of $ 9 million for 2006 , 2005 and 2004 . minority interest in income of mpc decreased $ 148 million in 2005 from 2004 due to our acquisition of the 38 percent interest in mpc on june 30 , 2005 . provision for income taxes increased $ 2.308 billion in 2006 from 2005 and $ 979 million in 2005 from 2004 , primarily due to the $ 4.259 billion and $ 2.691 billion increases in income from continuing operations before income taxes . the increase in our effective income tax rate in 2006 was primarily a result of the income taxes related to our libyan operations , where the statutory income tax rate is in excess of 90 percent . the following is an analysis of the effective income tax rates for continuing operations for 2006 , 2005 and 2004 . see note 11 to the consolidated financial statements for further discussion. .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'2006': {'statutory u.s . income tax rate': -35.0, 'effects of foreign operations including foreign tax credits': 9.9, 'state and local income taxes net of federal income tax effects': 1.9, 'other tax effects': -2.0, 'effective income tax rate for continuing operations': -44.8}, '2005': {'statutory u.s . income tax rate': -35.0, 'effects of foreign operations including foreign tax credits': -0.8, 'state and local income taxes net of federal income tax effects': 2.5, 'other tax effects': -0.4, 'effective income tax rate for continuing operations': -36.3}, '2004': {'statutory u.s . income tax rate': -35.0, 'effects of foreign operations including foreign tax credits': 0.5, 'state and local income taxes net of federal income tax effects': 1.6, 'other tax effects': -0.9, 'effective income tax rate for continuing operations': -36.2}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the net change in foreign operations including foreign tax credits from 2004 to 2006?', 'what was the value of foreign operations including foreign tax credits in 2004?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['9.4', '0.5', '1880%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(9.9, 0.5)', '0.5', 'subtract(9.9, 0.5), divide(#0, 0.5)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [9.4, 0.5, 18.8], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 9.4}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "12s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:48 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the capital expenditures for operations in the industrial packaging business segment in 2018, in millions?\nA1: 1061.0\nQ2: and what was it in 2017, also in millions?\nA2: 836.0\nQ3: what was, then, the change over the year?\nA3: 225.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nthe company recorded equity earnings , net of taxes , related to ilim of $ 290 million in 2018 , compared with earnings of $ 183 million in 2017 , and $ 199 million in 2016 . operating results recorded in 2018 included an after-tax non-cash foreign exchange loss of $ 82 million , compared with an after-tax foreign exchange gain of $ 15 million in 2017 and an after-tax foreign exchange gain of $ 25 million in 2016 , primarily on the remeasurement of ilim's u.s . dollar denominated net debt . ilim delivered outstanding performance in 2018 , driven largely by higher price realization and strong demand . sales volumes for the joint venture increased year over year for shipments to china of softwood pulp and linerboard , but were offset by decreased sales of hardwood pulp to china . sales volumes in the russian market increased for softwood pulp and hardwood pulp , but decreased for linerboard . average sales price realizations were significantly higher in 2018 for sales of softwood pulp , hardwood pulp and linerboard to china and other export markets . average sales price realizations in russian markets increased year over year for all products . input costs were higher in 2018 , primarily for wood , fuel and chemicals . distribution costs were negatively impacted by tariffs and inflation . the company received cash dividends from the joint venture of $ 128 million in 2018 , $ 133 million in 2017 and $ 58 million in entering the first quarter of 2019 , sales volumes are expected to be lower than in the fourth quarter of 2018 , due to the seasonal slowdown in china and fewer trading days . based on pricing to date in the current quarter , average sales prices are expected to decrease for hardwood pulp , softwood pulp and linerboard to china . input costs are projected to be relatively flat , while distribution costs are expected to increase . equity earnings - gpip international paper recorded equity earnings of $ 46 million on its 20.5% ( 20.5 % ) ownership position in gpip in 2018 . the company received cash dividends from the investment of $ 25 million in 2018 . liquidity and capital resources overview a major factor in international paper 2019s liquidity and capital resource planning is its generation of operating cash flow , which is highly sensitive to changes in the pricing and demand for our major products . while changes in key cash operating costs , such as energy , raw material , mill outage and transportation costs , do have an effect on operating cash generation , we believe that our focus on pricing and cost controls has improved our cash flow generation over an operating cycle . cash uses during 2018 were primarily focused on working capital requirements , capital spending , debt reductions and returning cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases under the company's share repurchase program . cash provided by operating activities cash provided by operations , including discontinued operations , totaled $ 3.2 billion in 2018 , compared with $ 1.8 billion for 2017 , and $ 2.5 billion for 2016 . cash used by working capital components ( accounts receivable , contract assets and inventory less accounts payable and accrued liabilities , interest payable and other ) totaled $ 439 million in 2018 , compared with cash used by working capital components of $ 402 million in 2017 , and cash provided by working capital components of $ 71 million in 2016 . investment activities including discontinued operations , investment activities in 2018 increased from 2017 , as 2018 included higher capital spending . in 2016 , investment activity included the purchase of weyerhaeuser's pulp business for $ 2.2 billion in cash , the purchase of the holmen business for $ 57 million in cash , net of cash acquired , and proceeds from the sale of the asia packaging business of $ 108 million , net of cash divested . the company maintains an average capital spending target around depreciation and amortization levels , or modestly above , due to strategic plans over the course of an economic cycle . capital spending was $ 1.6 billion in 2018 , or 118% ( 118 % ) of depreciation and amortization , compared with $ 1.4 billion in 2017 , or 98% ( 98 % ) of depreciation and amortization , and $ 1.3 billion , or 110% ( 110 % ) of depreciation and amortization in 2016 . across our segments , capital spending as a percentage of depreciation and amortization ranged from 69.8% ( 69.8 % ) to 132.1% ( 132.1 % ) in 2018 . the following table shows capital spending for operations by business segment for the years ended december 31 , 2018 , 2017 and 2016 , excluding amounts related to discontinued operations of $ 111 million in 2017 and $ 107 million in 2016. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\ncapital expenditures in 2019 are currently expected to be about $ 1.4 billion , or 104% ( 104 % ) of depreciation and amortization , including approximately $ 400 million of strategic investments. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | industrial packaging | global cellulose fibers | printing papers | subtotal | corporate and other | capital spending | industrial packaging | global cellulose fibers | printing papers | subtotal | corporate and other | capital spending | industrial packaging | global cellulose fibers | printing papers | subtotal | corporate and other | capital spending |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2018 | 1061.0 | 183.0 | 303.0 | 1547.0 | 25.0 | 1572.0 | 1061.0 | 183.0 | 303.0 | 1547.0 | 25.0 | 1572.0 | 1061.0 | 183.0 | 303.0 | 1547.0 | 25.0 | 1572.0 |\n| 2017 | 836.0 | 188.0 | 235.0 | 1259.0 | 21.0 | 1280.0 | 836.0 | 188.0 | 235.0 | 1259.0 | 21.0 | 1280.0 | 836.0 | 188.0 | 235.0 | 1259.0 | 21.0 | 1280.0 |\n| 2016 | 832.0 | 174.0 | 215.0 | 1221.0 | 20.0 | 1241.0 | 832.0 | 174.0 | 215.0 | 1221.0 | 20.0 | 1241.0 | 832.0 | 174.0 | 215.0 | 1221.0 | 20.0 | 1241.0 |', 'question': 'and how much does that change represent, in percentage, in relation to the capital expenditures for operations in the industrial packaging business segment in 2017?', 'ops': 'subtract(1061, 836), divide(#0, 836)', 'id': 'Single_IP/2018/page_50.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': "the company recorded equity earnings , net of taxes , related to ilim of $ 290 million in 2018 , compared with earnings of $ 183 million in 2017 , and $ 199 million in 2016 . operating results recorded in 2018 included an after-tax non-cash foreign exchange loss of $ 82 million , compared with an after-tax foreign exchange gain of $ 15 million in 2017 and an after-tax foreign exchange gain of $ 25 million in 2016 , primarily on the remeasurement of ilim's u.s . dollar denominated net debt . ilim delivered outstanding performance in 2018 , driven largely by higher price realization and strong demand . sales volumes for the joint venture increased year over year for shipments to china of softwood pulp and linerboard , but were offset by decreased sales of hardwood pulp to china . sales volumes in the russian market increased for softwood pulp and hardwood pulp , but decreased for linerboard . average sales price realizations were significantly higher in 2018 for sales of softwood pulp , hardwood pulp and linerboard to china and other export markets . average sales price realizations in russian markets increased year over year for all products . input costs were higher in 2018 , primarily for wood , fuel and chemicals . distribution costs were negatively impacted by tariffs and inflation . the company received cash dividends from the joint venture of $ 128 million in 2018 , $ 133 million in 2017 and $ 58 million in entering the first quarter of 2019 , sales volumes are expected to be lower than in the fourth quarter of 2018 , due to the seasonal slowdown in china and fewer trading days . based on pricing to date in the current quarter , average sales prices are expected to decrease for hardwood pulp , softwood pulp and linerboard to china . input costs are projected to be relatively flat , while distribution costs are expected to increase . equity earnings - gpip international paper recorded equity earnings of $ 46 million on its 20.5% ( 20.5 % ) ownership position in gpip in 2018 . the company received cash dividends from the investment of $ 25 million in 2018 . liquidity and capital resources overview a major factor in international paper 2019s liquidity and capital resource planning is its generation of operating cash flow , which is highly sensitive to changes in the pricing and demand for our major products . while changes in key cash operating costs , such as energy , raw material , mill outage and transportation costs , do have an effect on operating cash generation , we believe that our focus on pricing and cost controls has improved our cash flow generation over an operating cycle . cash uses during 2018 were primarily focused on working capital requirements , capital spending , debt reductions and returning cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases under the company's share repurchase program . cash provided by operating activities cash provided by operations , including discontinued operations , totaled $ 3.2 billion in 2018 , compared with $ 1.8 billion for 2017 , and $ 2.5 billion for 2016 . cash used by working capital components ( accounts receivable , contract assets and inventory less accounts payable and accrued liabilities , interest payable and other ) totaled $ 439 million in 2018 , compared with cash used by working capital components of $ 402 million in 2017 , and cash provided by working capital components of $ 71 million in 2016 . investment activities including discontinued operations , investment activities in 2018 increased from 2017 , as 2018 included higher capital spending . in 2016 , investment activity included the purchase of weyerhaeuser's pulp business for $ 2.2 billion in cash , the purchase of the holmen business for $ 57 million in cash , net of cash acquired , and proceeds from the sale of the asia packaging business of $ 108 million , net of cash divested . the company maintains an average capital spending target around depreciation and amortization levels , or modestly above , due to strategic plans over the course of an economic cycle . capital spending was $ 1.6 billion in 2018 , or 118% ( 118 % ) of depreciation and amortization , compared with $ 1.4 billion in 2017 , or 98% ( 98 % ) of depreciation and amortization , and $ 1.3 billion , or 110% ( 110 % ) of depreciation and amortization in 2016 . across our segments , capital spending as a percentage of depreciation and amortization ranged from 69.8% ( 69.8 % ) to 132.1% ( 132.1 % ) in 2018 . the following table shows capital spending for operations by business segment for the years ended december 31 , 2018 , 2017 and 2016 , excluding amounts related to discontinued operations of $ 111 million in 2017 and $ 107 million in 2016. .", 'doc_post_text': 'capital expenditures in 2019 are currently expected to be about $ 1.4 billion , or 104% ( 104 % ) of depreciation and amortization , including approximately $ 400 million of strategic investments. .', 'doc_table': {'2018': {'industrial packaging': 1061.0, 'global cellulose fibers': 183.0, 'printing papers': 303.0, 'subtotal': 1547.0, 'corporate and other': 25.0, 'capital spending': 1572.0}, '2017': {'industrial packaging': 836.0, 'global cellulose fibers': 188.0, 'printing papers': 235.0, 'subtotal': 1259.0, 'corporate and other': 21.0, 'capital spending': 1280.0}, '2016': {'industrial packaging': 832.0, 'global cellulose fibers': 174.0, 'printing papers': 215.0, 'subtotal': 1221.0, 'corporate and other': 20.0, 'capital spending': 1241.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the capital expenditures for operations in the industrial packaging business segment in 2018, in millions?', 'and what was it in 2017, also in millions?', 'what was, then, the change over the year?', 'and how much does that change represent, in percentage, in relation to the capital expenditures for operations in the industrial packaging business segment in 2017?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1061', '836', '225', '27%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1061', '836', 'subtract(1061, 836)', 'subtract(1061, 836), divide(#0, 836)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1061.0, 836.0, 225.0, 0.26914], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.26914}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "11s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:48 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the number of shares available under the 2014 incentive plan?\nA1: 29045044.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\npart iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | equity compensation plans approved by security holders | equity compensation plans not approved by security holders | equity compensation plans approved by security holders | equity compensation plans not approved by security holders | equity compensation plans approved by security holders | equity compensation plans not approved by security holders |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options warrants and rights ( a ) 123 | 15563666.0 | none | 15563666.0 | none | 15563666.0 | none |\n| weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options ( b ) | 9.7 |  | 9.7 |  | 9.7 |  |\n| number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) ( c ) 4 | 41661517.0 |  | 41661517.0 |  | 41661517.0 |  |', 'question': 'and what is it for the the 2009 one?', 'ops': '12181214', 'id': 'Double_IPG/2014/page_95.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'part iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .', 'doc_post_text': 'part iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .', 'doc_table': {'number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options warrants and rights ( a ) 123': {'equity compensation plans approved by security holders': 15563666.0, 'equity compensation plans not approved by security holders': 'none'}, 'weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options ( b )': {'equity compensation plans approved by security holders': 9.7, 'equity compensation plans not approved by security holders': ''}, 'number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) ( c ) 4': {'equity compensation plans approved by security holders': 41661517.0, 'equity compensation plans not approved by security holders': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the number of shares available under the 2014 incentive plan?', 'and what is it for the the 2009 one?', 'what is, then, the total number of shares available under both plans?', 'and including the 2006 employee stock purchase plan, what becomes this total?', 'and from this total, what is the number of shares to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options warrants and right?', 'what is value of each of those shares?', 'what is, then, the total value of all of those shares?', 'and how much is that in millions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['29045044', '12181214', '41226258', '41661517', '15563666', '9.70', '150967560.2', '151.0'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['29045044', '12181214', 'add(29045044, 12181214)', 'add(29045044, 12181214), add(#0, 435259)', '15563666', '9.70', 'multiply(15563666, 9.70)', 'multiply(15563666, 9.70), divide(#0, const_1000000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [29045044.0, 12181214.0, 41226258.0, 41661517.0, 15563666.0, 9.7, 150967560.2, 150.96756], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 12181214.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "11s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:50 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nnote 6 : allowance for uncollectible accounts the following table provides the changes in the allowances for uncollectible accounts for the years ended december 31: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nnote 7 : regulatory assets and liabilities regulatory assets regulatory assets represent costs that are probable of recovery from customers in future rates . the majority of the regulatory assets earn a return . the following table provides the composition of regulatory assets as of december 31 : 2018 2017 deferred pension expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 362 $ 285 removal costs recoverable through rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292 269 regulatory balancing accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 113 san clemente dam project costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 89 debt expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 67 purchase premium recoverable through rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 57 deferred tank painting costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 42 make-whole premium on early extinguishment of debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 27 other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 112 total regulatory assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1156 $ 1061 the company 2019s deferred pension expense includes a portion of the underfunded status that is probable of recovery through rates in future periods of $ 352 million and $ 270 million as of december 31 , 2018 and 2017 , respectively . the remaining portion is the pension expense in excess of the amount contributed to the pension plans which is deferred by certain subsidiaries and will be recovered in future service rates as contributions are made to the pension plan . removal costs recoverable through rates represent costs incurred for removal of property , plant and equipment or other retirement costs . regulatory balancing accounts accumulate differences between revenues recognized and authorized revenue requirements until they are collected from customers or are refunded . regulatory balancing accounts include low income programs and purchased power and water accounts . san clemente dam project costs represent costs incurred and deferred by the company 2019s utility subsidiary in california pursuant to its efforts to investigate alternatives and remove the dam due to potential earthquake and flood safety concerns . in june 2012 , the california public utilities commission ( 201ccpuc 201d ) issued a decision authorizing implementation of a project to reroute the carmel river and remove the san clemente dam . the project includes the company 2019s utility subsidiary in california , the california state conservancy and the national marine fisheries services . under the order 2019s terms , the cpuc has authorized recovery for .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | balance as of january 1 | amounts charged to expense | amounts written off | recoveries of amounts written off | balance as of december 31 | balance as of january 1 | amounts charged to expense | amounts written off | recoveries of amounts written off | balance as of december 31 | balance as of january 1 | amounts charged to expense | amounts written off | recoveries of amounts written off | balance as of december 31 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2018 | -42.0 | -33.0 | 34.0 | -4.0 | -45.0 | -42.0 | -33.0 | 34.0 | -4.0 | -45.0 | -42.0 | -33.0 | 34.0 | -4.0 | -45.0 |\n| 2017 | -40.0 | -29.0 | 30.0 | -3.0 | -42.0 | -40.0 | -29.0 | 30.0 | -3.0 | -42.0 | -40.0 | -29.0 | 30.0 | -3.0 | -42.0 |\n| 2016 | -39.0 | -27.0 | 29.0 | -3.0 | -40.0 | -39.0 | -27.0 | 29.0 | -3.0 | -40.0 | -39.0 | -27.0 | 29.0 | -3.0 | -40.0 |', 'question': 'what was the balance of noncollectable accounts?', 'ops': '42', 'id': 'Single_AWK/2018/page_141.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'note 6 : allowance for uncollectible accounts the following table provides the changes in the allowances for uncollectible accounts for the years ended december 31: .', 'doc_post_text': 'note 7 : regulatory assets and liabilities regulatory assets regulatory assets represent costs that are probable of recovery from customers in future rates . the majority of the regulatory assets earn a return . the following table provides the composition of regulatory assets as of december 31 : 2018 2017 deferred pension expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 362 $ 285 removal costs recoverable through rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292 269 regulatory balancing accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 113 san clemente dam project costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 89 debt expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 67 purchase premium recoverable through rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 57 deferred tank painting costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 42 make-whole premium on early extinguishment of debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 27 other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 112 total regulatory assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1156 $ 1061 the company 2019s deferred pension expense includes a portion of the underfunded status that is probable of recovery through rates in future periods of $ 352 million and $ 270 million as of december 31 , 2018 and 2017 , respectively . the remaining portion is the pension expense in excess of the amount contributed to the pension plans which is deferred by certain subsidiaries and will be recovered in future service rates as contributions are made to the pension plan . removal costs recoverable through rates represent costs incurred for removal of property , plant and equipment or other retirement costs . regulatory balancing accounts accumulate differences between revenues recognized and authorized revenue requirements until they are collected from customers or are refunded . regulatory balancing accounts include low income programs and purchased power and water accounts . san clemente dam project costs represent costs incurred and deferred by the company 2019s utility subsidiary in california pursuant to its efforts to investigate alternatives and remove the dam due to potential earthquake and flood safety concerns . in june 2012 , the california public utilities commission ( 201ccpuc 201d ) issued a decision authorizing implementation of a project to reroute the carmel river and remove the san clemente dam . the project includes the company 2019s utility subsidiary in california , the california state conservancy and the national marine fisheries services . under the order 2019s terms , the cpuc has authorized recovery for .', 'doc_table': {'2018': {'balance as of january 1': -42.0, 'amounts charged to expense': -33.0, 'amounts written off': 34.0, 'recoveries of amounts written off': -4.0, 'balance as of december 31': -45.0}, '2017': {'balance as of january 1': -40.0, 'amounts charged to expense': -29.0, 'amounts written off': 30.0, 'recoveries of amounts written off': -3.0, 'balance as of december 31': -42.0}, '2016': {'balance as of january 1': -39.0, 'amounts charged to expense': -27.0, 'amounts written off': 29.0, 'recoveries of amounts written off': -3.0, 'balance as of december 31': -40.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the balance of noncollectable accounts?', 'what is that balance times itself?', 'what is the product less the december 31 balance?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['42', '-42', '3'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['42', 'multiply(42, const_m1)', 'multiply(42, const_m1), subtract(#0, -45)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [42.0, -42.0, 3.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 42.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "10s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:50 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the number of shares available under the 2014 incentive plan?\nA1: 29045044.0\nQ2: and what is it for the the 2009 one?\nA2: 12181214.0\nQ3: what is, then, the total number of shares available under both plans?\nA3: 41226258.0\nQ4: and including the 2006 employee stock purchase plan, what becomes this total?\nA4: 41661517.0\nQ5: and from this total, what is the number of shares to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options warrants and right?\nA5: 15563666.0\nQ6: what is value of each of those shares?\nA6: 9.7\nQ7: what is, then, the total value of all of those shares?\nA7: 150967560.2', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\npart iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | equity compensation plans approved by security holders | equity compensation plans not approved by security holders | equity compensation plans approved by security holders | equity compensation plans not approved by security holders | equity compensation plans approved by security holders | equity compensation plans not approved by security holders |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options warrants and rights ( a ) 123 | 15563666.0 | none | 15563666.0 | none | 15563666.0 | none |\n| weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options ( b ) | 9.7 |  | 9.7 |  | 9.7 |  |\n| number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) ( c ) 4 | 41661517.0 |  | 41661517.0 |  | 41661517.0 |  |', 'question': 'and how much is that in millions?', 'ops': 'multiply(15563666, 9.70), divide(#0, const_1000000)', 'id': 'Double_IPG/2014/page_95.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'part iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .', 'doc_post_text': 'part iii item 10 . directors , executive officers and corporate governance the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201celection of directors 201d section , the 201cdirector selection process 201d section , the 201ccode of conduct 201d section , the 201cprincipal committees of the board of directors 201d section , the 201caudit committee 201d section and the 201csection 16 ( a ) beneficial ownership reporting compliance 201d section of the proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on may 21 , 2015 ( the 201cproxy statement 201d ) , except for the description of our executive officers , which appears in part i of this report on form 10-k under the heading 201cexecutive officers of ipg . 201d new york stock exchange certification in 2014 , our chief executive officer provided the annual ceo certification to the new york stock exchange , as required under section 303a.12 ( a ) of the new york stock exchange listed company manual . item 11 . executive compensation the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201cexecutive compensation 201d section , the 201cnon- management director compensation 201d section , the 201ccompensation discussion and analysis 201d section and the 201ccompensation and leadership talent committee report 201d section of the proxy statement . item 12 . security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters the information required by this item is incorporated by reference to the 201coutstanding shares and ownership of common stock 201d section of the proxy statement , except for information regarding the shares of common stock to be issued or which may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of december 31 , 2014 , which is provided in the following table . equity compensation plan information plan category number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options , warrants and rights ( a ) 123 weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15563666 9.70 41661517 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none 1 included a total of 5866475 performance-based share awards made under the 2009 and 2014 performance incentive plans representing the target number of shares of common stock to be issued to employees following the completion of the 2012-2014 performance period ( the 201c2014 ltip share awards 201d ) , the 2013-2015 performance period ( the 201c2015 ltip share awards 201d ) and the 2014-2016 performance period ( the 201c2016 ltip share awards 201d ) , respectively . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the 2014 ltip share awards , the 2015 ltip share awards or the 2016 ltip share awards into account . 2 included a total of 98877 restricted share units and performance-based awards ( 201cshare unit awards 201d ) which may be settled in shares of common stock or cash . the computation of the weighted-average exercise price in column ( b ) of this table does not take the share unit awards into account . each share unit award actually settled in cash will increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance shown in column ( c ) . 3 ipg has issued restricted cash awards ( 201cperformance cash awards 201d ) , half of which shall be settled in shares of common stock and half of which shall be settled in cash . using the 2014 closing stock price of $ 20.77 , the awards which shall be settled in shares of common stock represent rights to an additional 2721405 shares . these shares are not included in the table above . 4 included ( i ) 29045044 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2014 performance incentive plan , ( ii ) 12181214 shares of common stock available for issuance under the employee stock purchase plan ( 2006 ) and ( iii ) 435259 shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2009 non-management directors 2019 stock incentive plan. .', 'doc_table': {'number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options warrants and rights ( a ) 123': {'equity compensation plans approved by security holders': 15563666.0, 'equity compensation plans not approved by security holders': 'none'}, 'weighted-average exercise price of outstanding stock options ( b )': {'equity compensation plans approved by security holders': 9.7, 'equity compensation plans not approved by security holders': ''}, 'number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) ( c ) 4': {'equity compensation plans approved by security holders': 41661517.0, 'equity compensation plans not approved by security holders': ''}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the number of shares available under the 2014 incentive plan?', 'and what is it for the the 2009 one?', 'what is, then, the total number of shares available under both plans?', 'and including the 2006 employee stock purchase plan, what becomes this total?', 'and from this total, what is the number of shares to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options warrants and right?', 'what is value of each of those shares?', 'what is, then, the total value of all of those shares?', 'and how much is that in millions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['29045044', '12181214', '41226258', '41661517', '15563666', '9.70', '150967560.2', '151.0'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['29045044', '12181214', 'add(29045044, 12181214)', 'add(29045044, 12181214), add(#0, 435259)', '15563666', '9.70', 'multiply(15563666, 9.70)', 'multiply(15563666, 9.70), divide(#0, const_1000000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [29045044.0, 12181214.0, 41226258.0, 41661517.0, 15563666.0, 9.7, 150967560.2, 150.96756], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, True, True, True, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 8, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 150.96756}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
              "location": "global"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "10s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:50 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the amount of fixed-to-floating rate non-cumulative preferred stock, series cc issued by the company, in billions?\nA1: 1.3\nQ2: and what was the initial dividend rate of that amount?\nA2: 0.04625', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\njpmorgan chase & co./2017 annual report 89 the table below reflects the firm 2019s assessed level of capital allocated to each line of business as of the dates indicated . line of business equity ( allocated capital ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nplanning and stress testing comprehensive capital analysis and review the federal reserve requires large bank holding companies , including the firm , to submit a capital plan on an annual basis . the federal reserve uses the ccar and dodd-frank act stress test processes to ensure that large bhcs have sufficient capital during periods of economic and financial stress , and have robust , forward-looking capital assessment and planning processes in place that address each bhc 2019s unique risks to enable it to absorb losses under certain stress scenarios . through the ccar , the federal reserve evaluates each bhc 2019s capital adequacy and internal capital adequacy assessment processes ( 201cicaap 201d ) , as well as its plans to make capital distributions , such as dividend payments or stock repurchases . on june 28 , 2017 , the federal reserve informed the firm that it did not object , on either a quantitative or qualitative basis , to the firm 2019s 2017 capital plan . for information on actions taken by the firm 2019s board of directors following the 2017 ccar results , see capital actions on pages 89-90 . the firm 2019s ccar process is integrated into and employs the same methodologies utilized in the firm 2019s icaap process , as discussed below . internal capital adequacy assessment process semiannually , the firm completes the icaap , which provides management with a view of the impact of severe and unexpected events on earnings , balance sheet positions , reserves and capital . the firm 2019s icaap integrates stress testing protocols with capital planning . the process assesses the potential impact of alternative economic and business scenarios on the firm 2019s earnings and capital . economic scenarios , and the parameters underlying those scenarios , are defined centrally and applied uniformly across the businesses . these scenarios are articulated in terms of macroeconomic factors , which are key drivers of business results ; global market shocks , which generate short-term but severe trading losses ; and idiosyncratic operational risk events . the scenarios are intended to capture and stress key vulnerabilities and idiosyncratic risks facing the firm . however , when defining a broad range of scenarios , actual events can always be worse . accordingly , management considers additional stresses outside these scenarios , as necessary . icaap results are reviewed by management and the audit committee . capital actions preferred stock preferred stock dividends declared were $ 1.7 billion for the year ended december 31 , 2017 . on october 20 , 2017 , the firm issued $ 1.3 billion of fixed- to-floating rate non-cumulative preferred stock , series cc , with an initial dividend rate of 4.625% ( 4.625 % ) . on december 1 , 2017 , the firm redeemed all $ 1.3 billion of its outstanding 5.50% ( 5.50 % ) non-cumulative preferred stock , series o . for additional information on the firm 2019s preferred stock , see note 20 . trust preferred securities on december 18 , 2017 , the delaware trusts that issued seven series of outstanding trust preferred securities were liquidated , $ 1.6 billion of trust preferred and $ 56 million of common securities originally issued by those trusts were cancelled , and the junior subordinated debentures previously held by each trust issuer were distributed pro rata to the holders of the corresponding series of trust preferred and common securities . the firm redeemed $ 1.6 billion of trust preferred securities in the year ended december 31 , 2016 . common stock dividends the firm 2019s common stock dividend policy reflects jpmorgan chase 2019s earnings outlook , desired dividend payout ratio , capital objectives , and alternative investment opportunities . on september 19 , 2017 , the firm announced that its board of directors increased the quarterly common stock dividend to $ 0.56 per share , effective with the dividend paid on october 31 , 2017 . the firm 2019s dividends are subject to the board of directors 2019 approval on a quarterly basis . for information regarding dividend restrictions , see note 20 and note 25. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | consumer & community banking | corporate & investment bank | commercial banking | asset & wealth management | corporate | total common stockholders 2019 equity | consumer & community banking | corporate & investment bank | commercial banking | asset & wealth management | corporate | total common stockholders 2019 equity | consumer & community banking | corporate & investment bank | commercial banking | asset & wealth management | corporate | total common stockholders 2019 equity |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| january 12018 | 51.0 | 70.0 | 20.0 | 9.0 | 79.6 | 229.6 | 51.0 | 70.0 | 20.0 | 9.0 | 79.6 | 229.6 | 51.0 | 70.0 | 20.0 | 9.0 | 79.6 | 229.6 |\n| december 31 , 2017 | 51.0 | 70.0 | 20.0 | 9.0 | 79.6 | 229.6 | 51.0 | 70.0 | 20.0 | 9.0 | 79.6 | 229.6 | 51.0 | 70.0 | 20.0 | 9.0 | 79.6 | 229.6 |\n| december 31 , 2016 | 51.0 | 64.0 | 16.0 | 9.0 | 88.1 | 228.1 | 51.0 | 64.0 | 16.0 | 9.0 | 88.1 | 228.1 | 51.0 | 64.0 | 16.0 | 9.0 | 88.1 | 228.1 |', 'question': 'what is, then, the value, in billions, from that amount, that is represented by this rate?', 'ops': 'multiply(1.3, 4.625%)', 'id': 'Single_JPM/2017/page_119.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'jpmorgan chase & co./2017 annual report 89 the table below reflects the firm 2019s assessed level of capital allocated to each line of business as of the dates indicated . line of business equity ( allocated capital ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'planning and stress testing comprehensive capital analysis and review the federal reserve requires large bank holding companies , including the firm , to submit a capital plan on an annual basis . the federal reserve uses the ccar and dodd-frank act stress test processes to ensure that large bhcs have sufficient capital during periods of economic and financial stress , and have robust , forward-looking capital assessment and planning processes in place that address each bhc 2019s unique risks to enable it to absorb losses under certain stress scenarios . through the ccar , the federal reserve evaluates each bhc 2019s capital adequacy and internal capital adequacy assessment processes ( 201cicaap 201d ) , as well as its plans to make capital distributions , such as dividend payments or stock repurchases . on june 28 , 2017 , the federal reserve informed the firm that it did not object , on either a quantitative or qualitative basis , to the firm 2019s 2017 capital plan . for information on actions taken by the firm 2019s board of directors following the 2017 ccar results , see capital actions on pages 89-90 . the firm 2019s ccar process is integrated into and employs the same methodologies utilized in the firm 2019s icaap process , as discussed below . internal capital adequacy assessment process semiannually , the firm completes the icaap , which provides management with a view of the impact of severe and unexpected events on earnings , balance sheet positions , reserves and capital . the firm 2019s icaap integrates stress testing protocols with capital planning . the process assesses the potential impact of alternative economic and business scenarios on the firm 2019s earnings and capital . economic scenarios , and the parameters underlying those scenarios , are defined centrally and applied uniformly across the businesses . these scenarios are articulated in terms of macroeconomic factors , which are key drivers of business results ; global market shocks , which generate short-term but severe trading losses ; and idiosyncratic operational risk events . the scenarios are intended to capture and stress key vulnerabilities and idiosyncratic risks facing the firm . however , when defining a broad range of scenarios , actual events can always be worse . accordingly , management considers additional stresses outside these scenarios , as necessary . icaap results are reviewed by management and the audit committee . capital actions preferred stock preferred stock dividends declared were $ 1.7 billion for the year ended december 31 , 2017 . on october 20 , 2017 , the firm issued $ 1.3 billion of fixed- to-floating rate non-cumulative preferred stock , series cc , with an initial dividend rate of 4.625% ( 4.625 % ) . on december 1 , 2017 , the firm redeemed all $ 1.3 billion of its outstanding 5.50% ( 5.50 % ) non-cumulative preferred stock , series o . for additional information on the firm 2019s preferred stock , see note 20 . trust preferred securities on december 18 , 2017 , the delaware trusts that issued seven series of outstanding trust preferred securities were liquidated , $ 1.6 billion of trust preferred and $ 56 million of common securities originally issued by those trusts were cancelled , and the junior subordinated debentures previously held by each trust issuer were distributed pro rata to the holders of the corresponding series of trust preferred and common securities . the firm redeemed $ 1.6 billion of trust preferred securities in the year ended december 31 , 2016 . common stock dividends the firm 2019s common stock dividend policy reflects jpmorgan chase 2019s earnings outlook , desired dividend payout ratio , capital objectives , and alternative investment opportunities . on september 19 , 2017 , the firm announced that its board of directors increased the quarterly common stock dividend to $ 0.56 per share , effective with the dividend paid on october 31 , 2017 . the firm 2019s dividends are subject to the board of directors 2019 approval on a quarterly basis . for information regarding dividend restrictions , see note 20 and note 25. .', 'doc_table': {'january 12018': {'consumer & community banking': 51.0, 'corporate & investment bank': 70.0, 'commercial banking': 20.0, 'asset & wealth management': 9.0, 'corporate': 79.6, 'total common stockholders 2019 equity': 229.6}, 'december 31 , 2017': {'consumer & community banking': 51.0, 'corporate & investment bank': 70.0, 'commercial banking': 20.0, 'asset & wealth management': 9.0, 'corporate': 79.6, 'total common stockholders 2019 equity': 229.6}, 'december 31 , 2016': {'consumer & community banking': 51.0, 'corporate & investment bank': 64.0, 'commercial banking': 16.0, 'asset & wealth management': 9.0, 'corporate': 88.1, 'total common stockholders 2019 equity': 228.1}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the amount of fixed-to-floating rate non-cumulative preferred stock, series cc issued by the company, in billions?', 'and what was the initial dividend rate of that amount?', 'what is, then, the value, in billions, from that amount, that is represented by this rate?', 'and how much is that, in millions?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1.3', '4.625%', '.060125', '60.1'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1.3', '4.625%', 'multiply(1.3, 4.625%)', 'multiply(1.3, 4.625%), multiply(#0, const_1000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1.3, 0.04625, 0.06012, 60.125], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.06012}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "9s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:51 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in value for booking holding inc. in 2018, assuming a $100 initial investment?\nA1: 48.18\nQ2: what is the percent change?\nA2: 0.4818\nQ3: what was the nasdaq composite value in 2018?\nA3: 165.84', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nmeasurement point december 31 booking holdings nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| booking holdings inc . | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 | 100.0 | 98.09 | 109.68 | 126.12 | 149.5 | 148.18 |\n| nasdaqcomposite index | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 | 100.0 | 114.62 | 122.81 | 133.19 | 172.11 | 165.84 |\n| s&p 500index | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 | 100.0 | 113.69 | 115.26 | 129.05 | 157.22 | 150.33 |\n| rdg internetcomposite | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 | 100.0 | 96.39 | 133.2 | 140.23 | 202.15 | 201.16 |', 'question': 'what is the net change also assuming a $100 initial investment?', 'ops': 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100)', 'id': 'Single_BKNG/2018/page_34.pdf-3', 'doc_pre_text': 'measurement point december 31 booking holdings nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'booking holdings inc .': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 98.09, '2015': 109.68, '2016': 126.12, '2017': 149.5, '2018': 148.18}, 'nasdaqcomposite index': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 114.62, '2015': 122.81, '2016': 133.19, '2017': 172.11, '2018': 165.84}, 's&p 500index': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 113.69, '2015': 115.26, '2016': 129.05, '2017': 157.22, '2018': 150.33}, 'rdg internetcomposite': {'2013': 100.0, '2014': 96.39, '2015': 133.2, '2016': 140.23, '2017': 202.15, '2018': 201.16}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in value for booking holding inc. in 2018, assuming a $100 initial investment?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what was the nasdaq composite value in 2018?', 'what is the net change also assuming a $100 initial investment?', 'what is the percent change?', 'what was the difference in the percent changes?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['48.18', '48.18%', '165.84', '65.84', '65.84%', '17.66%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(148.18, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)', '165.84', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100), divide(#2, const_100)', 'subtract(148.18, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(165.84, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [48.18, 0.4818, 165.84, 65.84, 0.6584, -0.1766], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 6, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 65.84}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "9s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:51 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the sum of impairment projects in the construction of zeg and bujagali?\nA1: 99.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nwe cannot assure you that the gener restructuring will be completed or that the terms thereof will not be changed materially . in addition , gener is in the process of restructuring the debt of its subsidiaries , termoandes s.a . ( 2018 2018termoandes 2019 2019 ) and interandes , s.a . ( 2018 2018interandes 2019 2019 ) , and expects that the maturities of these obligations will be extended . under-performing businesses during 2003 we sold or discontinued under-performing businesses and construction projects that did not meet our investment criteria or did not provide reasonable opportunities to restructure . it is anticipated that there will be less ongoing activity related to write-offs of development or construction projects and impairment charges in the future . the businesses , which were affected in 2003 , are listed below . impairment project name project type date location ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n( 1 ) see note 4 2014discontinued operations . improving credit quality our de-leveraging efforts reduced parent level debt by $ 1.2 billion in 2003 ( including the secured equity-linked loan previously issued by aes new york funding l.l.c. ) . we refinanced and paid down near-term maturities by $ 3.5 billion and enhanced our year-end liquidity to over $ 1 billion . our average debt maturity was extended from 2009 to 2012 . at the subsidiary level we continue to pursue limited recourse financing to reduce parent credit risk . these factors resulted in an overall reduced cost of capital , improved credit statistics and expanded access to credit at both aes and our subsidiaries . liquidity at the aes parent level is an important factor for the rating agencies in determining whether the company 2019s credit quality should improve . currency and political risk tend to be biggest variables to sustaining predictable cash flow . the nature of our large contractual and concession-based cash flow from these businesses serves to mitigate these variables . in 2003 , over 81% ( 81 % ) of cash distributions to the parent company were from u.s . large utilities and worldwide contract generation . on february 4 , 2004 , we called for redemption of $ 155049000 aggregate principal amount of outstanding 8% ( 8 % ) senior notes due 2008 , which represents the entire outstanding principal amount of the 8% ( 8 % ) senior notes due 2008 , and $ 34174000 aggregate principal amount of outstanding 10% ( 10 % ) secured senior notes due 2005 . the 8% ( 8 % ) senior notes due 2008 and the 10% ( 10 % ) secured senior notes due 2005 were redeemed on march 8 , 2004 at a redemption price equal to 100% ( 100 % ) of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date . the mandatory redemption of the 10% ( 10 % ) secured senior notes due 2005 was being made with a portion of our 2018 2018adjusted free cash flow 2019 2019 ( as defined in the indenture pursuant to which the notes were issued ) for the fiscal year ended december 31 , 2003 as required by the indenture and was made on a pro rata basis . on february 13 , 2004 we issued $ 500 million of unsecured senior notes . the unsecured senior notes mature on march 1 , 2014 and are callable at our option at any time at a redemption price equal to 100% ( 100 % ) of the principal amount of the unsecured senior notes plus a make-whole premium . the unsecured senior notes were issued at a price of 98.288% ( 98.288 % ) and pay interest semi-annually at an annual .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | ede este ( 1 ) | wolf hollow | granite ridge | colombia i | zeg | bujagali | el faro | ede este ( 1 ) | wolf hollow | granite ridge | colombia i | zeg | bujagali | el faro | ede este ( 1 ) | wolf hollow | granite ridge | colombia i | zeg | bujagali | el faro | ede este ( 1 ) | wolf hollow | granite ridge | colombia i | zeg | bujagali | el faro |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| project type | operating | operating | operating | operating | construction | construction | construction | operating | operating | operating | operating | construction | construction | construction | operating | operating | operating | operating | construction | construction | construction | operating | operating | operating | operating | construction | construction | construction |\n| date | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 | 2003.0 |\n| location | dominican republic | united states | united states | colombia | poland | uganda | honduras | dominican republic | united states | united states | colombia | poland | uganda | honduras | dominican republic | united states | united states | colombia | poland | uganda | honduras | dominican republic | united states | united states | colombia | poland | uganda | honduras |\n| impairment ( in millions ) | 60.0 | 120.0 | 201.0 | 19.0 | 23.0 | 76.0 | 20.0 | 60.0 | 120.0 | 201.0 | 19.0 | 23.0 | 76.0 | 20.0 | 60.0 | 120.0 | 201.0 | 19.0 | 23.0 | 76.0 | 20.0 | 60.0 | 120.0 | 201.0 | 19.0 | 23.0 | 76.0 | 20.0 |', 'question': 'what is the sum including el faro?', 'ops': 'add(23, 76), add(#0, 20)', 'id': 'Single_AES/2003/page_55.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'we cannot assure you that the gener restructuring will be completed or that the terms thereof will not be changed materially . in addition , gener is in the process of restructuring the debt of its subsidiaries , termoandes s.a . ( 2018 2018termoandes 2019 2019 ) and interandes , s.a . ( 2018 2018interandes 2019 2019 ) , and expects that the maturities of these obligations will be extended . under-performing businesses during 2003 we sold or discontinued under-performing businesses and construction projects that did not meet our investment criteria or did not provide reasonable opportunities to restructure . it is anticipated that there will be less ongoing activity related to write-offs of development or construction projects and impairment charges in the future . the businesses , which were affected in 2003 , are listed below . impairment project name project type date location ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': '( 1 ) see note 4 2014discontinued operations . improving credit quality our de-leveraging efforts reduced parent level debt by $ 1.2 billion in 2003 ( including the secured equity-linked loan previously issued by aes new york funding l.l.c. ) . we refinanced and paid down near-term maturities by $ 3.5 billion and enhanced our year-end liquidity to over $ 1 billion . our average debt maturity was extended from 2009 to 2012 . at the subsidiary level we continue to pursue limited recourse financing to reduce parent credit risk . these factors resulted in an overall reduced cost of capital , improved credit statistics and expanded access to credit at both aes and our subsidiaries . liquidity at the aes parent level is an important factor for the rating agencies in determining whether the company 2019s credit quality should improve . currency and political risk tend to be biggest variables to sustaining predictable cash flow . the nature of our large contractual and concession-based cash flow from these businesses serves to mitigate these variables . in 2003 , over 81% ( 81 % ) of cash distributions to the parent company were from u.s . large utilities and worldwide contract generation . on february 4 , 2004 , we called for redemption of $ 155049000 aggregate principal amount of outstanding 8% ( 8 % ) senior notes due 2008 , which represents the entire outstanding principal amount of the 8% ( 8 % ) senior notes due 2008 , and $ 34174000 aggregate principal amount of outstanding 10% ( 10 % ) secured senior notes due 2005 . the 8% ( 8 % ) senior notes due 2008 and the 10% ( 10 % ) secured senior notes due 2005 were redeemed on march 8 , 2004 at a redemption price equal to 100% ( 100 % ) of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date . the mandatory redemption of the 10% ( 10 % ) secured senior notes due 2005 was being made with a portion of our 2018 2018adjusted free cash flow 2019 2019 ( as defined in the indenture pursuant to which the notes were issued ) for the fiscal year ended december 31 , 2003 as required by the indenture and was made on a pro rata basis . on february 13 , 2004 we issued $ 500 million of unsecured senior notes . the unsecured senior notes mature on march 1 , 2014 and are callable at our option at any time at a redemption price equal to 100% ( 100 % ) of the principal amount of the unsecured senior notes plus a make-whole premium . the unsecured senior notes were issued at a price of 98.288% ( 98.288 % ) and pay interest semi-annually at an annual .', 'doc_table': {'project type': {'ede este ( 1 )': 'operating', 'wolf hollow': 'operating', 'granite ridge': 'operating', 'colombia i': 'operating', 'zeg': 'construction', 'bujagali': 'construction', 'el faro': 'construction'}, 'date': {'ede este ( 1 )': 2003.0, 'wolf hollow': 2003.0, 'granite ridge': 2003.0, 'colombia i': 2003.0, 'zeg': 2003.0, 'bujagali': 2003.0, 'el faro': 2003.0}, 'location': {'ede este ( 1 )': 'dominican republic', 'wolf hollow': 'united states', 'granite ridge': 'united states', 'colombia i': 'colombia', 'zeg': 'poland', 'bujagali': 'uganda', 'el faro': 'honduras'}, 'impairment ( in millions )': {'ede este ( 1 )': 60.0, 'wolf hollow': 120.0, 'granite ridge': 201.0, 'colombia i': 19.0, 'zeg': 23.0, 'bujagali': 76.0, 'el faro': 20.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the sum of impairment projects in the construction of zeg and bujagali?', 'what is the sum including el faro?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['99', '119'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(23, 76)', 'add(23, 76), add(#0, 20)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [99.0, 119.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 119.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "9s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:51 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n13 . rentals and leases the company leases sales and administrative office facilities , distribution centers , research and manufacturing facilities , as well as vehicles and other equipment under operating leases . total rental expense under the company 2019s operating leases was $ 239 million in 2017 and $ 221 million in both 2016 and 2015 . as of december 31 , 2017 , identifiable future minimum payments with non-cancelable terms in excess of one year were : ( millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company enters into operating leases for vehicles whose non-cancelable terms are one year or less in duration with month-to-month renewal options . these leases have been excluded from the table above . the company estimates payments under such leases will approximate $ 62 million in 2018 . these vehicle leases have guaranteed residual values that have historically been satisfied by the proceeds on the sale of the vehicles . 14 . research and development expenditures research expenditures that relate to the development of new products and processes , including significant improvements and refinements to existing products , are expensed as incurred . such costs were $ 201 million in 2017 , $ 189 million in 2016 and $ 191 million in 2015 . the company did not participate in any material customer sponsored research during 2017 , 2016 or 2015 . 15 . commitments and contingencies the company is subject to various claims and contingencies related to , among other things , workers 2019 compensation , general liability ( including product liability ) , automobile claims , health care claims , environmental matters and lawsuits . the company is also subject to various claims and contingencies related to income taxes , which are discussed in note 12 . the company also has contractual obligations including lease commitments , which are discussed in note 13 . the company records liabilities where a contingent loss is probable and can be reasonably estimated . if the reasonable estimate of a probable loss is a range , the company records the most probable estimate of the loss or the minimum amount when no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount . the company discloses a contingent liability even if the liability is not probable or the amount is not estimable , or both , if there is a reasonable possibility that a material loss may have been incurred . insurance globally , the company has insurance policies with varying deductibility levels for property and casualty losses . the company is insured for losses in excess of these deductibles , subject to policy terms and conditions and has recorded both a liability and an offsetting receivable for amounts in excess of these deductibles . the company is self-insured for health care claims for eligible participating employees , subject to certain deductibles and limitations . the company determines its liabilities for claims on an actuarial basis . litigation and environmental matters the company and certain subsidiaries are party to various lawsuits , claims and environmental actions that have arisen in the ordinary course of business . these include from time to time antitrust , commercial , patent infringement , product liability and wage hour lawsuits , as well as possible obligations to investigate and mitigate the effects on the environment of the disposal or release of certain chemical substances at various sites , such as superfund sites and other operating or closed facilities . the company has established accruals for certain lawsuits , claims and environmental matters . the company currently believes that there is not a reasonably possible risk of material loss in excess of the amounts accrued related to these legal matters . because litigation is inherently uncertain , and unfavorable rulings or developments could occur , there can be no certainty that the company may not ultimately incur charges in excess of recorded liabilities . a future adverse ruling , settlement or unfavorable development could result in future charges that could have a material adverse effect on the company 2019s results of operations or cash flows in the period in which they are recorded . the company currently believes that such future charges related to suits and legal claims , if any , would not have a material adverse effect on the company 2019s consolidated financial position . environmental matters the company is currently participating in environmental assessments and remediation at approximately 45 locations , the majority of which are in the u.s. , and environmental liabilities have been accrued reflecting management 2019s best estimate of future costs . potential insurance reimbursements are not anticipated in the company 2019s accruals for environmental liabilities. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | thereafter | total |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 131 | 115.0 | 96.0 | 86.0 | 74.0 | 115.0 | 617.0 |', 'question': 'what was the variation in the r&d expenses from 2016 to 2017?', 'ops': 'subtract(201, 189)', 'id': 'Double_ECL/2017/page_96.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': '13 . rentals and leases the company leases sales and administrative office facilities , distribution centers , research and manufacturing facilities , as well as vehicles and other equipment under operating leases . total rental expense under the company 2019s operating leases was $ 239 million in 2017 and $ 221 million in both 2016 and 2015 . as of december 31 , 2017 , identifiable future minimum payments with non-cancelable terms in excess of one year were : ( millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company enters into operating leases for vehicles whose non-cancelable terms are one year or less in duration with month-to-month renewal options . these leases have been excluded from the table above . the company estimates payments under such leases will approximate $ 62 million in 2018 . these vehicle leases have guaranteed residual values that have historically been satisfied by the proceeds on the sale of the vehicles . 14 . research and development expenditures research expenditures that relate to the development of new products and processes , including significant improvements and refinements to existing products , are expensed as incurred . such costs were $ 201 million in 2017 , $ 189 million in 2016 and $ 191 million in 2015 . the company did not participate in any material customer sponsored research during 2017 , 2016 or 2015 . 15 . commitments and contingencies the company is subject to various claims and contingencies related to , among other things , workers 2019 compensation , general liability ( including product liability ) , automobile claims , health care claims , environmental matters and lawsuits . the company is also subject to various claims and contingencies related to income taxes , which are discussed in note 12 . the company also has contractual obligations including lease commitments , which are discussed in note 13 . the company records liabilities where a contingent loss is probable and can be reasonably estimated . if the reasonable estimate of a probable loss is a range , the company records the most probable estimate of the loss or the minimum amount when no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount . the company discloses a contingent liability even if the liability is not probable or the amount is not estimable , or both , if there is a reasonable possibility that a material loss may have been incurred . insurance globally , the company has insurance policies with varying deductibility levels for property and casualty losses . the company is insured for losses in excess of these deductibles , subject to policy terms and conditions and has recorded both a liability and an offsetting receivable for amounts in excess of these deductibles . the company is self-insured for health care claims for eligible participating employees , subject to certain deductibles and limitations . the company determines its liabilities for claims on an actuarial basis . litigation and environmental matters the company and certain subsidiaries are party to various lawsuits , claims and environmental actions that have arisen in the ordinary course of business . these include from time to time antitrust , commercial , patent infringement , product liability and wage hour lawsuits , as well as possible obligations to investigate and mitigate the effects on the environment of the disposal or release of certain chemical substances at various sites , such as superfund sites and other operating or closed facilities . the company has established accruals for certain lawsuits , claims and environmental matters . the company currently believes that there is not a reasonably possible risk of material loss in excess of the amounts accrued related to these legal matters . because litigation is inherently uncertain , and unfavorable rulings or developments could occur , there can be no certainty that the company may not ultimately incur charges in excess of recorded liabilities . a future adverse ruling , settlement or unfavorable development could result in future charges that could have a material adverse effect on the company 2019s results of operations or cash flows in the period in which they are recorded . the company currently believes that such future charges related to suits and legal claims , if any , would not have a material adverse effect on the company 2019s consolidated financial position . environmental matters the company is currently participating in environmental assessments and remediation at approximately 45 locations , the majority of which are in the u.s. , and environmental liabilities have been accrued reflecting management 2019s best estimate of future costs . potential insurance reimbursements are not anticipated in the company 2019s accruals for environmental liabilities. .', 'doc_table': {'$ 131': {'2019': 115.0, '2020': 96.0, '2021': 86.0, '2022': 74.0, 'thereafter': 115.0, 'total': 617.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the variation in the r&d expenses from 2016 to 2017?', 'and what percentage did this change represent in relation to those expenses in 2016?', 'and over the next year, from 2017 to 2018, what was the change in the total rental expense under the company 2019s operating leases?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['12', '6.3%', '-108'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(201, 189)', 'subtract(201, 189), divide(#0, 189)', 'subtract(131, 239)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [12.0, 0.06349, -108.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 12.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "8s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:52 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nexcept for long-term debt , the carrying amounts of the company 2019s other financial instruments are measured at fair value or approximate fair value due to the short-term nature of these instruments . asset retirement obligations 2014the company records all known asset retirement obligations within other current liabilities for which the liability 2019s fair value can be reasonably estimated , including certain asbestos removal , asset decommissioning and contractual lease restoration obligations . the changes in the asset retirement obligation carrying amounts during 2011 , 2010 and 2009 were as follows : ( $ in millions ) retirement obligations .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company also has known conditional asset retirement obligations related to assets currently in use , such as certain asbestos remediation and asset decommissioning activities to be performed in the future , that were not reasonably estimable as of december 31 , 2011 and 2010 , due to insufficient information about the timing and method of settlement of the obligation . accordingly , the fair value of these obligations has not been recorded in the consolidated financial statements . environmental remediation and/or asset decommissioning of the relevant facilities may be required when the company ceases to utilize these facilities . in addition , there may be conditional environmental asset retirement obligations that the company has not yet discovered . income taxes 2014income tax expense and other income tax related information contained in the financial statements for periods before the spin-off are presented as if the company filed its own tax returns on a stand-alone basis , while similar information for periods after the spin-off reflect the company 2019s positions to be filed in its own tax returns in the future . income tax expense and other related information are based on the prevailing statutory rates for u.s . federal income taxes and the composite state income tax rate for the company for each period presented . state and local income and franchise tax provisions are allocable to contracts in process and , accordingly , are included in general and administrative expenses . deferred income taxes are recorded when revenues and expenses are recognized in different periods for financial statement purposes than for tax return purposes . deferred tax asset or liability account balances are calculated at the balance sheet date using current tax laws and rates in effect . determinations of the expected realizability of deferred tax assets and the need for any valuation allowances against these deferred tax assets were evaluated based upon the stand-alone tax attributes of the company , and an $ 18 million valuation allowance was deemed necessary as of december 31 , 2011 . no valuation allowance was deemed necessary as of december 31 , 2010 . uncertain tax positions meeting the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold , based on the merits of the position , are recognized in the financial statements . we recognize the amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% ( 50 % ) likely to be realized upon ultimate settlement with the related tax authority . if a tax position does not meet the minimum statutory threshold to avoid payment of penalties , we recognize an expense for the amount of the penalty in the period the tax position is claimed or expected to be claimed in our tax return . penalties , if probable and reasonably estimable , are recognized as a component of income tax expense . we also recognize accrued interest related to uncertain tax positions in income tax expense . the timing and amount of accrued interest is determined by the applicable tax law associated with an underpayment of income taxes . see note 12 : income taxes . under existing gaap , changes in accruals associated with uncertainties are recorded in earnings in the period they are determined. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | balance at january 1 2009 | accretion expense | payment of asset retirement obligation | balance at december 31 2009 | obligation relating to the future retirement of a facility | balance at december 31 2010 | balance at december 31 2011 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| asset retirement obligations | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 20.0 | 25.0 |', 'question': 'from the beginning of 2009 to the end of 2011, what was the net increase in aro, in millions?', 'ops': 'subtract(25, 3)', 'id': 'Double_HII/2011/page_86.pdf', 'doc_pre_text': 'except for long-term debt , the carrying amounts of the company 2019s other financial instruments are measured at fair value or approximate fair value due to the short-term nature of these instruments . asset retirement obligations 2014the company records all known asset retirement obligations within other current liabilities for which the liability 2019s fair value can be reasonably estimated , including certain asbestos removal , asset decommissioning and contractual lease restoration obligations . the changes in the asset retirement obligation carrying amounts during 2011 , 2010 and 2009 were as follows : ( $ in millions ) retirement obligations .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company also has known conditional asset retirement obligations related to assets currently in use , such as certain asbestos remediation and asset decommissioning activities to be performed in the future , that were not reasonably estimable as of december 31 , 2011 and 2010 , due to insufficient information about the timing and method of settlement of the obligation . accordingly , the fair value of these obligations has not been recorded in the consolidated financial statements . environmental remediation and/or asset decommissioning of the relevant facilities may be required when the company ceases to utilize these facilities . in addition , there may be conditional environmental asset retirement obligations that the company has not yet discovered . income taxes 2014income tax expense and other income tax related information contained in the financial statements for periods before the spin-off are presented as if the company filed its own tax returns on a stand-alone basis , while similar information for periods after the spin-off reflect the company 2019s positions to be filed in its own tax returns in the future . income tax expense and other related information are based on the prevailing statutory rates for u.s . federal income taxes and the composite state income tax rate for the company for each period presented . state and local income and franchise tax provisions are allocable to contracts in process and , accordingly , are included in general and administrative expenses . deferred income taxes are recorded when revenues and expenses are recognized in different periods for financial statement purposes than for tax return purposes . deferred tax asset or liability account balances are calculated at the balance sheet date using current tax laws and rates in effect . determinations of the expected realizability of deferred tax assets and the need for any valuation allowances against these deferred tax assets were evaluated based upon the stand-alone tax attributes of the company , and an $ 18 million valuation allowance was deemed necessary as of december 31 , 2011 . no valuation allowance was deemed necessary as of december 31 , 2010 . uncertain tax positions meeting the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold , based on the merits of the position , are recognized in the financial statements . we recognize the amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% ( 50 % ) likely to be realized upon ultimate settlement with the related tax authority . if a tax position does not meet the minimum statutory threshold to avoid payment of penalties , we recognize an expense for the amount of the penalty in the period the tax position is claimed or expected to be claimed in our tax return . penalties , if probable and reasonably estimable , are recognized as a component of income tax expense . we also recognize accrued interest related to uncertain tax positions in income tax expense . the timing and amount of accrued interest is determined by the applicable tax law associated with an underpayment of income taxes . see note 12 : income taxes . under existing gaap , changes in accruals associated with uncertainties are recorded in earnings in the period they are determined. .', 'doc_table': {'asset retirement obligations': {'balance at january 1 2009': 3.0, 'accretion expense': 0.0, 'payment of asset retirement obligation': 0.0, 'balance at december 31 2009': 3.0, 'obligation relating to the future retirement of a facility': 5.0, 'balance at december 31 2010': 20.0, 'balance at december 31 2011': 25.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['from the beginning of 2009 to the end of 2011, what was the net increase in aro, in millions?', 'and what portion of this increase was due to accretion?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['22', '0%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(25, 3)', 'add(0, 0), add(#0, #0), subtract(25, 3), divide(#1, #2)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [22.0, 0.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, True], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': True, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 22.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "8s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/07/29 14:25:52 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nfederal realty investment trust schedule iii summary of real estate and accumulated depreciation 2014continued three years ended december 31 , 2009 reconciliation of accumulated depreciation and amortization ( in thousands ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n.\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | additions during period 2014depreciation and amortization expense | deductions during period 2014disposition and retirements of property | balance december 31 2007 | balance december 31 2008 | balance december 31 2009 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 740507 | 103.698 | -11869.0 | 756703.0 | 846258.0 | 938087.0 |', 'question': 'combined, what were the additions in 2006 and 207?', 'ops': 'add(96454, 101321)', 'id': 'Single_FRT/2009/page_124.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'federal realty investment trust schedule iii summary of real estate and accumulated depreciation 2014continued three years ended december 31 , 2009 reconciliation of accumulated depreciation and amortization ( in thousands ) .', 'doc_post_text': '.', 'doc_table': {'$ 740507': {'additions during period 2014depreciation and amortization expense': 103.698, 'deductions during period 2014disposition and retirements of property': -11869.0, 'balance december 31 2007': 756703.0, 'balance december 31 2008': 846258.0, 'balance december 31 2009': 938087.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['combined, what were the additions in 2006 and 207?', 'and in 2008?', 'and converting this value into millions?', 'now combined with the values from 2006 and 2007?', 'so what is the average of these values?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['197775', '103.698', '103698', '301473', '100491'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(96454, 101321)', '103.698', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698)', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698), add(#0, #1)', 'add(96454, 101321), multiply(const_1000, 103.698), add(#0, #1), divide(#2, const_3)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [197775.0, 103.698, 103698.0, 301473.0, 100491.0], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 5, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 197775.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'conversation_context', 'table', 'question'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.RateLimitError: litellm.RateLimitError: VertexAIException - {
  "error": {
    "code": 429,
    "message": "You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits.",
    "status": "RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED",
    "details": [
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.QuotaFailure",
        "violations": [
          {
            "quotaMetric": "generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_paid_tier_input_token_count",
            "quotaId": "GenerateContentPaidTierInputTokensPerModelPerMinute",
            "quotaDimensions": {
              "location": "global",
              "model": "gemini-2.5-flash"
            },
            "quotaValue": "1000000"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.Help",
        "links": [
          {
            "description": "Learn more about Gemini API quotas",
            "url": "https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "@type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.RetryInfo",
        "retryDelay": "8s"
      }
    ]
  }
}
. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.

Bootstrapping set 1/12
Bootstrapping set 2/12
Bootstrapping set 3/12
Bootstrapped 3 full traces after 4 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 4 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 4/12
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 5/12
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 6/12
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 3 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 3 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 7/12
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 6 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 6 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 8/12
Bootstrapped 3 full traces after 5 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 5 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 9/12
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 10/12
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 11/12
Bootstrapped 3 full traces after 3 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 3 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 12/12
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Error getting source code: unhashable type: 'dict'.

Running without program aware proposer.
Average Metric: 208.00 / 266 (78.2%): 100%|██████████| 266/266 [00:03<00:00, 73.54it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_full_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/4da8f6bc50ae4bd0845d8de1781181a5
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 28.00 / 35 (80.0%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:30<00:00,  1.17it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/44f08c60c4f84629b9a4a93bfabbb560
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 31.00 / 35 (88.6%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:17<00:00,  1.98it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/4ab7410b34314ad9bc763bb3df609b5c
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 29.00 / 35 (82.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:28<00:00,  1.23it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/4effb19ecb414d3ab1ede7e97804a3f4
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 30.00 / 35 (85.7%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:19<00:00,  1.82it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_3 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/2c00c269346d47209d09c26efdd83297
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 29.00 / 35 (82.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:26<00:00,  1.34it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_4 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/76aa07e74201463ab1b212e73fe8be6b
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 226.00 / 266 (85.0%): 100%|██████████| 266/266 [00:56<00:00,  4.71it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/6ae364d9cde04d669cd1a126cc02e6b3
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 27.00 / 35 (77.1%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:29<00:00,  1.18it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_5 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/f4b9c1d44dca47069a16a459fba3835e
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 29.00 / 35 (82.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:24<00:00,  1.45it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_6 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/ee111292e74646eb9b7a891bd366aba7
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 26.00 / 35 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:54<00:00,  1.55s/it] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_7 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/ac9652d6740845c48d38cc610004f12c
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 29.00 / 35 (82.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:00<00:00, 71.22it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_8 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/44f5c30de70e4946b631dcffe1e25ed3
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 31.00 / 35 (88.6%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:30<00:00,  1.16it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_9 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/30f1e7848d284e0dbe75012f4e18785d
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 215.00 / 266 (80.8%): 100%|██████████| 266/266 [01:12<00:00,  3.67it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/3248746ffd0345428cde67e4f0b924af
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 32.00 / 35 (91.4%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:15<00:00,  2.31it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_10 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/169c70093a174ff9badd43b86e755223
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 32.00 / 35 (91.4%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:25<00:00,  1.40it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_11 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/c07161b53e3d44319ff8622a678d06a2
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 30.00 / 35 (85.7%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:29<00:00,  1.19it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_12 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/6ab21408e4804344830a41b7f38a9dab
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 31.00 / 35 (88.6%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:18<00:00,  1.92it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_13 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/3d8e74e4121d491d96d7704242140c3e
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 27.00 / 35 (77.1%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:25<00:00,  1.37it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_14 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/41f5530aa5674d429586f694a2912ebc
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 228.00 / 266 (85.7%): 100%|██████████| 266/266 [01:17<00:00,  3.44it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_3 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/54934dc4d8ae4742a58773c24d969598
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 30.00 / 35 (85.7%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:20<00:00,  1.67it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_15 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/676836b3c0d2497d84b99da3d1638dda
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 31.00 / 35 (88.6%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:26<00:00,  1.32it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/6fa55f8c5ed94491bfbc476ebc16fa8c
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 29.00 / 35 (82.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:25<00:00,  1.38it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_17 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/2384f2fdddf34beb8906d80452fea22e
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 230.00 / 266 (86.5%): 100%|██████████| 266/266 [01:14<00:00,  3.58it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_4 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/6c40ca4acea9459281e68c355ec6eadf
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run mipro_openai_o4-mini-2025-04-16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/db59ac8b827b48a18313b6171171e4c5
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Bootstrapping set 1/12
Bootstrapping set 2/12
Bootstrapping set 3/12
Bootstrapped 3 full traces after 4 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 4 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 4/12
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 5/12
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 6/12
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 3 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 3 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 7/12
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 6 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 6 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 8/12
Bootstrapped 3 full traces after 6 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 6 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 9/12
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 10/12
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 3 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 3 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 11/12
Bootstrapped 3 full traces after 3 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 3 attempts.
Bootstrapping set 12/12
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Error getting source code: unhashable type: 'dict'.

Running without program aware proposer.
Average Metric: 226.00 / 266 (85.0%): 100%|██████████| 266/266 [00:03<00:00, 69.55it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/b6ad1a68e59a4ebd933c440d71bac1c0
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 25.00 / 32 (78.1%):  91%|█████████▏| 32/35 [00:09<00:02,  1.04it/s]Average Metric: 27.00 / 35 (77.1%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:18<00:00,  1.93it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/cf68788e1fe34e92a205f9b4b58ffd18
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 29.00 / 35 (82.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:09<00:00,  3.81it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/c3f7efbcc02c480e85ed0904b940f2a2
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 28.00 / 35 (80.0%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:26<00:00,  1.32it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/742f48dd7a8e40f9a091d1aa1cdd8941
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 27.00 / 35 (77.1%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:20<00:00,  1.73it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_3 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/ecf520d0ba614d6089371c38e8b69c8d
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 27.00 / 35 (77.1%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:28<00:00,  1.21it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_4 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/5f07ede5af654af292499b4317761055
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 135.00 / 156 (86.5%):  59%|█████▊    | 156/266 [00:08<00:11,  9.71it/s]Average Metric: 136.00 / 157 (86.6%):  59%|█████▊    | 156/266 [00:08<00:11,  9.71it/s]Average Metric: 137.00 / 158 (86.7%):  59%|█████▉    | 157/266 [00:09<00:11,  9.71it/s]Average Metric: 138.00 / 159 (86.8%):  60%|█████▉    | 159/266 [00:13<00:57,  1.85it/s]Average Metric: 138.00 / 159 (86.8%):  61%|██████    | 161/266 [00:13<00:49,  2.12it/s]Average Metric: 138.00 / 159 (86.8%):  61%|██████    | 161/266 [00:14<00:49,  2.12it/s]Average Metric: 138.00 / 159 (86.8%):  61%|██████▏   | 163/266 [00:14<00:48,  2.13it/s]Average Metric: 138.00 / 159 (86.8%):  61%|██████▏   | 163/266 [00:14<00:48,  2.13it/s]Average Metric: 138.00 / 159 (86.8%):  62%|██████▏   | 165/266 [00:15<00:39,  2.57it/s]Average Metric: 138.00 / 159 (86.8%):  62%|██████▏   | 166/266 [00:15<00:36,  2.77it/s]Average Metric: 138.00 / 159 (86.8%):  62%|██████▏   | 166/266 [00:15<00:36,  2.77it/s]Average Metric: 138.00 / 159 (86.8%):  63%|██████▎   | 168/266 [00:15<00:26,  3.69it/s]Average Metric: 138.00 / 159 (86.8%):  67%|██████▋   | 177/266 [00:15<00:21,  4.05it/s]Average Metric: 138.00 / 159 (86.8%):  76%|███████▌  | 202/266 [00:15<00:02, 23.98it/s]Average Metric: 138.00 / 159 (86.8%):  76%|███████▋  | 203/266 [00:15<00:04, 12.69it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/069f4c4d98ce4ef38094e55fb840b925
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
  0%|          | 0/35 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 1.00 / 1 (100.0%):   0%|          | 0/35 [00:04<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 2.00 / 2 (100.0%):   3%|▎         | 1/35 [00:05<02:48,  4.97s/it]Average Metric: 4.00 / 4 (100.0%):   9%|▊         | 3/35 [00:05<00:43,  1.35s/it]Average Metric: 5.00 / 5 (100.0%):  11%|█▏        | 4/35 [00:06<00:41,  1.35s/it]Average Metric: 6.00 / 6 (100.0%):  14%|█▍        | 5/35 [00:06<00:29,  1.03it/s]Average Metric: 7.00 / 7 (100.0%):  20%|██        | 7/35 [00:07<00:21,  1.32it/s]Average Metric: 8.00 / 8 (100.0%):  23%|██▎       | 8/35 [00:07<00:18,  1.43it/s]Average Metric: 8.00 / 10 (80.0%):  26%|██▌       | 9/35 [00:08<00:14,  1.78it/s]Average Metric: 27.00 / 35 (77.1%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [01:02<00:00,  1.78s/it]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_5 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/907d10f48e10467aa1f7e76593102220
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 30.00 / 34 (88.2%):  94%|█████████▍| 33/35 [00:05<00:00,  7.06it/s]Average Metric: 31.00 / 35 (88.6%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:16<00:00,  2.10it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_6 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/7a2fac5237994726a22b1c6f165ea60a
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 24.00 / 35 (68.6%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:39<00:00,  1.12s/it]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_7 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/c5d346f696b8472e8ad006d8d9d82afe
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 30.00 / 35 (85.7%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:31<00:00,  1.11it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_8 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/88047d9134f843ecbccf28a59c3271dc
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 18.00 / 21 (85.7%):  60%|██████    | 21/35 [00:02<00:01, 10.28it/s]Average Metric: 29.00 / 35 (82.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:05<00:00,  6.25it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_9 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/b56cabdf25ec4f0e91dea26809685e69
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
  0%|          | 0/266 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 103.00 / 121 (85.1%):  45%|████▌     | 120/266 [00:03<00:02, 51.43it/s]Average Metric: 109.00 / 128 (85.2%):  48%|████▊     | 127/266 [00:03<00:02, 47.78it/s]Average Metric: 177.00 / 214 (82.7%):  80%|████████  | 213/266 [00:07<00:04, 11.07it/s]Average Metric: 209.00 / 266 (78.6%): 100%|██████████| 266/266 [00:43<00:00,  6.06it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/73df768e4c8a4349b681a635c361a44d
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 29.00 / 35 (82.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:05<00:00,  5.91it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_10 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/d395557806ef427c808d1b7fe82b6b05
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 29.00 / 35 (82.9%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:21<00:00,  1.65it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_11 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/75671f2310f742618e9bc84336c3e27c
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 29.00 / 34 (85.3%):  97%|█████████▋| 34/35 [00:16<00:00,  4.08it/s] Average Metric: 30.00 / 35 (85.7%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:25<00:00,  1.40it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_12 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/906b056c9cf547e0a722b4d96f2eda8b
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 26.00 / 35 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:32<00:00,  1.08it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_13 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/3f4bee84808842d784a8a718b60552ac
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 24.00 / 35 (68.6%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:06<00:00,  5.45it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_14 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/8b6e4a6ad3eb4222bf88900653b6ede6
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 93.00 / 108 (86.1%):  40%|████      | 107/266 [00:06<00:04, 34.27it/s]Average Metric: 93.00 / 108 (86.1%):  41%|████      | 109/266 [00:13<01:16,  2.05it/s]Average Metric: 93.00 / 108 (86.1%):  41%|████      | 109/266 [00:13<01:16,  2.05it/s]Average Metric: 93.00 / 108 (86.1%):  41%|████▏     | 110/266 [00:14<01:15,  2.05it/s]Average Metric: 93.00 / 108 (86.1%):  42%|████▏     | 111/266 [00:14<01:15,  2.05it/s]Average Metric: 93.00 / 108 (86.1%):  42%|████▏     | 113/266 [00:14<01:03,  2.41it/s]Average Metric: 94.00 / 109 (86.2%):  43%|████▎     | 114/266 [00:14<01:02,  2.41it/s]Average Metric: 95.00 / 111 (85.6%):  44%|████▍     | 117/266 [00:14<00:51,  2.89it/s]Average Metric: 95.00 / 111 (85.6%):  45%|████▍     | 119/266 [00:14<00:41,  3.54it/s]Average Metric: 95.00 / 111 (85.6%):  45%|████▍     | 119/266 [00:14<00:41,  3.54it/s]Average Metric: 95.00 / 111 (85.6%):  57%|█████▋    | 151/266 [00:15<00:06, 17.49it/s]Average Metric: 95.00 / 111 (85.6%):  57%|█████▋    | 151/266 [00:15<00:06, 17.49it/s]Average Metric: 95.00 / 111 (85.6%):  68%|██████▊   | 182/266 [00:15<00:02, 35.27it/s]Average Metric: 95.00 / 111 (85.6%):  76%|███████▋  | 203/266 [00:15<00:04, 12.96it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_3 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/031a56c13de749b9b7d23605adeb5523
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 27.00 / 35 (77.1%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:23<00:00,  1.49it/s]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_15 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/9fdf85b5fcd34a05b123c08bb0d60c27
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 26.00 / 32 (81.2%):  91%|█████████▏| 32/35 [00:03<00:00,  9.58it/s]Average Metric: 28.00 / 35 (80.0%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [04:47<00:00,  8.21s/it]
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/192de4e9e2df489499b200ccd60dd387
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 26.00 / 35 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 35/35 [00:29<00:00,  1.17it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_minibatch_17 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/f627817cdc324c2fbbfc8e13537913be
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Average Metric: 145.00 / 171 (84.8%):  64%|██████▍   | 170/266 [00:09<00:09,  9.84it/s]Average Metric: 145.00 / 172 (84.3%):  64%|██████▍   | 171/266 [00:10<00:09,  9.84it/s]Average Metric: 145.00 / 173 (83.8%):  65%|██████▌   | 173/266 [00:11<00:23,  3.99it/s]Average Metric: 145.00 / 174 (83.3%):  65%|██████▌   | 173/266 [00:11<00:23,  3.99it/s]Average Metric: 145.00 / 175 (82.9%):  66%|██████▌   | 175/266 [00:12<00:29,  3.10it/s]Average Metric: 145.00 / 175 (82.9%):  66%|██████▌   | 175/266 [00:14<00:29,  3.10it/s]Average Metric: 145.00 / 175 (82.9%):  67%|██████▋   | 177/266 [00:15<00:49,  1.81it/s]Average Metric: 145.00 / 175 (82.9%):  67%|██████▋   | 177/266 [00:15<00:49,  1.81it/s]Average Metric: 145.00 / 175 (82.9%):  67%|██████▋   | 179/266 [00:15<00:40,  2.13it/s]Average Metric: 145.00 / 175 (82.9%):  68%|██████▊   | 180/266 [00:16<00:37,  2.32it/s]Average Metric: 145.00 / 175 (82.9%):  68%|██████▊   | 180/266 [00:16<00:37,  2.32it/s]Average Metric: 145.00 / 175 (82.9%):  68%|██████▊   | 181/266 [00:16<00:36,  2.32it/s]Average Metric: 145.00 / 175 (82.9%):  69%|██████▉   | 183/266 [00:16<00:29,  2.78it/s]Average Metric: 145.00 / 175 (82.9%):  69%|██████▉   | 183/266 [00:16<00:29,  2.78it/s]Average Metric: 145.00 / 175 (82.9%):  76%|███████▋  | 203/266 [00:17<00:05, 11.68it/s]
🏃 View run eval_full_4 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/d42af3a2f5674ecb8579b46c8adcdb87
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run mipro_gemini_gemini-2_5-flash at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/add9bb06b00943c593c8e562fcde594f
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run mipro_micro_hard at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/d368c83b497347c984aafef7921c3b65
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3

We faced some rate-limits errors on gemini-2.5-flash, which caused a few full validation evals to fail. We’ll use the evals we have so far for the model, and continue.

We have the following results:

model_name	em_metric before optimisation	em_metric after MIPROv2	% change
o4-mini	78.20	86.47	+10.6%
gemini-2.5-flash	85.00	84.96	-0.05%

Aha! MIPROv2 has succesfully helped improve the performance of o4-mini on the hard validation dataset, bringing the total validation accuracy to 86.47%

We see a slight degregation in the performance for gemini-2.5-flash. Note that because of the rate-limit errors, this metric is not a true estimation of the model ability.

Through this analysis, we can conclude that MIPROv2 is a useful tool for improving the performance of models on hard validation datasets, but it may not be as effective for models that are already performing well.

We’ve finally identified our winner: o4-mini!

Let’s save the programs to disk!

for id, oc in enumerate(mipro_micro_hard_compiled_programs):
    model_name = selected_llms[id].model
    sanitized_model_name = re.sub(r"[-/\.]", "_", model_name)
    oc.save(
        f"./programs/{sanitized_model_name}_mipro_micro_hard/",
        save_program=True,
    )

Final Evaluation

We now want to evaluate our winning models on the final test dataset. In our case, the test dataset will be collection of easy + medium + hard test sets.

Before evaluating our optimised model, let’s benchmark the zero-shot performance of o4-mini on the test dataset

final_test_examples = easy_test_examples + medium_test_examples + hard_test_examples

import re

from dspy.evaluate import Evaluate

final_baseline_results = []

with mlflow.start_run(run_name="final_evaluation_baseline_gpt_5_nano") as parent_ctx:
    run_name = f"baseline_{lm_oai_gpt_5_nano.model.replace('/', '_')}"
    sanitized_run_name = re.sub(r"[^a-zA-Z0-9_\-]", "_", run_name)
    with mlflow.start_run(run_name=sanitized_run_name, nested=True):
        current_evaluator = Evaluate(
            devset=final_test_examples,
            num_threads=32,
            display_progress=True,
            return_all_scores=True,
            return_outputs=True,
        )
        with dspy.context(lm=lm_oai_gpt_5_nano) as ctx:
            current_result = current_evaluator(
                TurnSolver(reasoning_lm=True), metric=turn_em_metric
            )
            final_baseline_results.append(current_result)

  0%|          | 0/678 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   0%|          | 1/678 [00:09<1:44:15,  9.24s/it]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   0%|          | 2/678 [00:09<45:38,  4.05s/it]  Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   0%|          | 2/678 [00:09<45:38,  4.05s/it]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   0%|          | 3/678 [00:09<45:34,  4.05s/it]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   1%|          | 8/678 [00:09<07:38,  1.46it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   1%|▏         | 10/678 [00:09<07:37,  1.46it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   2%|▏         | 12/678 [00:09<07:35,  1.46it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   2%|▏         | 15/678 [00:09<07:33,  1.46it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   5%|▌         | 35/678 [00:09<07:20,  1.46it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  16%|█▌        | 108/678 [00:09<06:30,  1.46it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  17%|█▋        | 118/678 [00:09<00:17, 31.31it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  22%|██▏       | 146/678 [00:09<00:16, 31.31it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  24%|██▍       | 165/678 [00:09<00:16, 31.31it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  26%|██▌       | 175/678 [00:09<00:16, 31.31it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  27%|██▋       | 182/678 [00:09<00:15, 31.31it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  27%|██▋       | 185/678 [00:09<00:15, 31.31it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  30%|██▉       | 202/678 [00:09<00:15, 31.31it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  32%|███▏      | 219/678 [00:09<00:14, 31.31it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  34%|███▍      | 233/678 [00:09<00:14, 31.31it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  35%|███▌      | 240/678 [00:09<00:13, 31.31it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  37%|███▋      | 250/678 [00:09<00:05, 80.45it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  39%|███▊      | 262/678 [00:09<00:05, 80.45it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  40%|███▉      | 269/678 [00:09<00:05, 80.45it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  41%|████▏     | 280/678 [00:09<00:04, 80.45it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  42%|████▏     | 286/678 [00:09<00:04, 80.45it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  44%|████▍     | 300/678 [00:09<00:04, 80.45it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  46%|████▌     | 309/678 [00:09<00:04, 80.45it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  48%|████▊     | 327/678 [00:10<00:04, 80.45it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  56%|█████▌    | 378/678 [00:10<00:03, 80.45it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  65%|██████▍   | 439/678 [00:10<00:02, 80.45it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  70%|███████   | 477/678 [00:10<00:02, 80.45it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  95%|█████████▌| 647/678 [00:10<00:00, 63.91it/s] 
🏃 View run eval at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/6c75579e534b4751a98f4adad09d0fd9
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run baseline_openai_gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/6de549c23ce449c8bfbb95bea5f65caa
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run final_evaluation_baseline_gpt_5_nano at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/9dc30fa86bb848d7a4372fe8c8e1abed
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Unexpected exception formatting exception. Falling back to standard exception

2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:42 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the net change in the balance of other intangible assets net from 2003 to 2004?\nA1: -34446.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\namerican tower corporation and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) a description of the company 2019s reporting units and the results of the related transitional impairment testing are as follows : verestar 2014verestar was a single segment and reporting unit until december 2002 , when the company committed to a plan to dispose of verestar . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 189.3 million relating to the impairment of goodwill in this reporting unit . the fair value of this reporting unit was determined based on an independent third party appraisal . network development services 2014as of january 1 , 2002 , the reporting units in the company 2019s network development services segment included kline , specialty constructors , galaxy , mts components and flash technologies . the company estimated the fair value of these reporting units utilizing future discounted cash flows and market information as to the value of each reporting unit on january 1 , 2002 . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 387.8 million for the year ended december 31 , 2002 related to the impairment of goodwill within these reporting units . such charge included full impairment for all of the goodwill within the reporting units except kline , for which only a partial impairment was recorded . as discussed in note 2 , the assets of all of these reporting units were sold as of december 31 , 2003 , except for those of kline and our tower construction services unit , which were sold in march and november 2004 , respectively . rental and management 2014the company obtained an independent third party appraisal of the rental and management reporting unit that contains goodwill and determined that goodwill was not impaired . the company 2019s other intangible assets subject to amortization consist of the following as of december 31 , ( in thousands ) : .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company amortizes its intangible assets over periods ranging from three to fifteen years . amortization of intangible assets for the years ended december 31 , 2004 and 2003 aggregated approximately $ 97.8 million and $ 94.6 million , respectively ( excluding amortization of deferred financing costs , which is included in interest expense ) . the company expects to record amortization expense of approximately $ 97.8 million , $ 95.9 million , $ 92.0 million , $ 90.5 million and $ 88.8 million , respectively , for the years ended december 31 , 2005 , 2006 , 2007 , 2008 and 2009 , respectively . 5 . notes receivable in 2000 , the company loaned tv azteca , s.a . de c.v . ( tv azteca ) , the owner of a major national television network in mexico , $ 119.8 million . the loan , which initially bore interest at 12.87% ( 12.87 % ) , payable quarterly , was discounted by the company , as the fair value interest rate at the date of the loan was determined to be 14.25% ( 14.25 % ) . the loan was amended effective january 1 , 2003 to increase the original interest rate to 13.11% ( 13.11 % ) . as of december 31 , 2004 , and 2003 , approximately $ 119.8 million undiscounted ( $ 108.2 million discounted ) under the loan was outstanding and included in notes receivable and other long-term assets in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets . the term of the loan is seventy years ; however , the loan may be prepaid by tv .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | acquired customer base and network location intangibles | deferred financing costs | acquired licenses and other intangibles | total | less accumulated amortization | other intangible assets net | acquired customer base and network location intangibles | deferred financing costs | acquired licenses and other intangibles | total | less accumulated amortization | other intangible assets net |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2004 | 1369607.0 | 89736.0 | 43404.0 | 1502747.0 | -517444.0 | 985303.0 | 1369607.0 | 89736.0 | 43404.0 | 1502747.0 | -517444.0 | 985303.0 |\n| 2003 | 1299521.0 | 111484.0 | 43125.0 | 1454130.0 | -434381.0 | 1019749.0 | 1299521.0 | 111484.0 | 43125.0 | 1454130.0 | -434381.0 | 1019749.0 |', 'question': 'what percentage change does this represent?', 'ops': 'subtract(985303, 1019749), divide(#0, 1019749)', 'id': 'Single_AMT/2004/page_81.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'american tower corporation and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) a description of the company 2019s reporting units and the results of the related transitional impairment testing are as follows : verestar 2014verestar was a single segment and reporting unit until december 2002 , when the company committed to a plan to dispose of verestar . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 189.3 million relating to the impairment of goodwill in this reporting unit . the fair value of this reporting unit was determined based on an independent third party appraisal . network development services 2014as of january 1 , 2002 , the reporting units in the company 2019s network development services segment included kline , specialty constructors , galaxy , mts components and flash technologies . the company estimated the fair value of these reporting units utilizing future discounted cash flows and market information as to the value of each reporting unit on january 1 , 2002 . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 387.8 million for the year ended december 31 , 2002 related to the impairment of goodwill within these reporting units . such charge included full impairment for all of the goodwill within the reporting units except kline , for which only a partial impairment was recorded . as discussed in note 2 , the assets of all of these reporting units were sold as of december 31 , 2003 , except for those of kline and our tower construction services unit , which were sold in march and november 2004 , respectively . rental and management 2014the company obtained an independent third party appraisal of the rental and management reporting unit that contains goodwill and determined that goodwill was not impaired . the company 2019s other intangible assets subject to amortization consist of the following as of december 31 , ( in thousands ) : .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company amortizes its intangible assets over periods ranging from three to fifteen years . amortization of intangible assets for the years ended december 31 , 2004 and 2003 aggregated approximately $ 97.8 million and $ 94.6 million , respectively ( excluding amortization of deferred financing costs , which is included in interest expense ) . the company expects to record amortization expense of approximately $ 97.8 million , $ 95.9 million , $ 92.0 million , $ 90.5 million and $ 88.8 million , respectively , for the years ended december 31 , 2005 , 2006 , 2007 , 2008 and 2009 , respectively . 5 . notes receivable in 2000 , the company loaned tv azteca , s.a . de c.v . ( tv azteca ) , the owner of a major national television network in mexico , $ 119.8 million . the loan , which initially bore interest at 12.87% ( 12.87 % ) , payable quarterly , was discounted by the company , as the fair value interest rate at the date of the loan was determined to be 14.25% ( 14.25 % ) . the loan was amended effective january 1 , 2003 to increase the original interest rate to 13.11% ( 13.11 % ) . as of december 31 , 2004 , and 2003 , approximately $ 119.8 million undiscounted ( $ 108.2 million discounted ) under the loan was outstanding and included in notes receivable and other long-term assets in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets . the term of the loan is seventy years ; however , the loan may be prepaid by tv .', 'doc_table': {'2004': {'acquired customer base and network location intangibles': 1369607.0, 'deferred financing costs': 89736.0, 'acquired licenses and other intangibles': 43404.0, 'total': 1502747.0, 'less accumulated amortization': -517444.0, 'other intangible assets net': 985303.0}, '2003': {'acquired customer base and network location intangibles': 1299521.0, 'deferred financing costs': 111484.0, 'acquired licenses and other intangibles': 43125.0, 'total': 1454130.0, 'less accumulated amortization': -434381.0, 'other intangible assets net': 1019749.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in the balance of other intangible assets net from 2003 to 2004?', 'what percentage change does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['-34446', '-3.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(985303, 1019749)', 'subtract(985303, 1019749), divide(#0, 1019749)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [-34446.0, -0.03378], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -0.03378}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\namerican tower corporation and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) a description of the company 2019s reporting units and the results of the related transitional impairment testing are as follows : verestar 2014verestar was a single segment and reporting unit until december 2002 , when the company committed to a plan to dispose of verestar . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 189.3 million relating to the impairment of goodwill in this reporting unit . the fair value of this reporting unit was determined based on an independent third party appraisal . network development services 2014as of january 1 , 2002 , the reporting units in the company 2019s network development services segment included kline , specialty constructors , galaxy , mts components and flash technologies . the company estimated the fair value of these reporting units utilizing future discounted cash flows and market information as to the value of each reporting unit on january 1 , 2002 . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 387.8 million for the year ended december 31 , 2002 related to the impairment of goodwill within these reporting units . such charge included full impairment for all of the goodwill within the reporting units except kline , for which only a partial impairment was recorded . as discussed in note 2 , the assets of all of these reporting units were sold as of december 31 , 2003 , except for those of kline and our tower construction services unit , which were sold in march and november 2004 , respectively . rental and management 2014the company obtained an independent third party appraisal of the rental and management reporting unit that contains goodwill and determined that goodwill was not impaired . the company 2019s other intangible assets subject to amortization consist of the following as of december 31 , ( in thousands ) : .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company amortizes its intangible assets over periods ranging from three to fifteen years . amortization of intangible assets for the years ended december 31 , 2004 and 2003 aggregated approximately $ 97.8 million and $ 94.6 million , respectively ( excluding amortization of deferred financing costs , which is included in interest expense ) . the company expects to record amortization expense of approximately $ 97.8 million , $ 95.9 million , $ 92.0 million , $ 90.5 million and $ 88.8 million , respectively , for the years ended december 31 , 2005 , 2006 , 2007 , 2008 and 2009 , respectively . 5 . notes receivable in 2000 , the company loaned tv azteca , s.a . de c.v . ( tv azteca ) , the owner of a major national television network in mexico , $ 119.8 million . the loan , which initially bore interest at 12.87% ( 12.87 % ) , payable quarterly , was discounted by the company , as the fair value interest rate at the date of the loan was determined to be 14.25% ( 14.25 % ) . the loan was amended effective january 1 , 2003 to increase the original interest rate to 13.11% ( 13.11 % ) . as of december 31 , 2004 , and 2003 , approximately $ 119.8 million undiscounted ( $ 108.2 million discounted ) under the loan was outstanding and included in notes receivable and other long-term assets in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets . the term of the loan is seventy years ; however , the loan may be prepaid by tv .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | acquired customer base and network location intangibles | deferred financing costs | acquired licenses and other intangibles | total | less accumulated amortization | other intangible assets net | acquired customer base and network location intangibles | deferred financing costs | acquired licenses and other intangibles | total | less accumulated amortization | other intangible assets net |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2004 | 1369607.0 | 89736.0 | 43404.0 | 1502747.0 | -517444.0 | 985303.0 | 1369607.0 | 89736.0 | 43404.0 | 1502747.0 | -517444.0 | 985303.0 |\n| 2003 | 1299521.0 | 111484.0 | 43125.0 | 1454130.0 | -434381.0 | 1019749.0 | 1299521.0 | 111484.0 | 43125.0 | 1454130.0 | -434381.0 | 1019749.0 |', 'question': 'what is the net change in the balance of other intangible assets net from 2003 to 2004?', 'ops': 'subtract(985303, 1019749)', 'id': 'Single_AMT/2004/page_81.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'american tower corporation and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) a description of the company 2019s reporting units and the results of the related transitional impairment testing are as follows : verestar 2014verestar was a single segment and reporting unit until december 2002 , when the company committed to a plan to dispose of verestar . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 189.3 million relating to the impairment of goodwill in this reporting unit . the fair value of this reporting unit was determined based on an independent third party appraisal . network development services 2014as of january 1 , 2002 , the reporting units in the company 2019s network development services segment included kline , specialty constructors , galaxy , mts components and flash technologies . the company estimated the fair value of these reporting units utilizing future discounted cash flows and market information as to the value of each reporting unit on january 1 , 2002 . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 387.8 million for the year ended december 31 , 2002 related to the impairment of goodwill within these reporting units . such charge included full impairment for all of the goodwill within the reporting units except kline , for which only a partial impairment was recorded . as discussed in note 2 , the assets of all of these reporting units were sold as of december 31 , 2003 , except for those of kline and our tower construction services unit , which were sold in march and november 2004 , respectively . rental and management 2014the company obtained an independent third party appraisal of the rental and management reporting unit that contains goodwill and determined that goodwill was not impaired . the company 2019s other intangible assets subject to amortization consist of the following as of december 31 , ( in thousands ) : .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company amortizes its intangible assets over periods ranging from three to fifteen years . amortization of intangible assets for the years ended december 31 , 2004 and 2003 aggregated approximately $ 97.8 million and $ 94.6 million , respectively ( excluding amortization of deferred financing costs , which is included in interest expense ) . the company expects to record amortization expense of approximately $ 97.8 million , $ 95.9 million , $ 92.0 million , $ 90.5 million and $ 88.8 million , respectively , for the years ended december 31 , 2005 , 2006 , 2007 , 2008 and 2009 , respectively . 5 . notes receivable in 2000 , the company loaned tv azteca , s.a . de c.v . ( tv azteca ) , the owner of a major national television network in mexico , $ 119.8 million . the loan , which initially bore interest at 12.87% ( 12.87 % ) , payable quarterly , was discounted by the company , as the fair value interest rate at the date of the loan was determined to be 14.25% ( 14.25 % ) . the loan was amended effective january 1 , 2003 to increase the original interest rate to 13.11% ( 13.11 % ) . as of december 31 , 2004 , and 2003 , approximately $ 119.8 million undiscounted ( $ 108.2 million discounted ) under the loan was outstanding and included in notes receivable and other long-term assets in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets . the term of the loan is seventy years ; however , the loan may be prepaid by tv .', 'doc_table': {'2004': {'acquired customer base and network location intangibles': 1369607.0, 'deferred financing costs': 89736.0, 'acquired licenses and other intangibles': 43404.0, 'total': 1502747.0, 'less accumulated amortization': -517444.0, 'other intangible assets net': 985303.0}, '2003': {'acquired customer base and network location intangibles': 1299521.0, 'deferred financing costs': 111484.0, 'acquired licenses and other intangibles': 43125.0, 'total': 1454130.0, 'less accumulated amortization': -434381.0, 'other intangible assets net': 1019749.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in the balance of other intangible assets net from 2003 to 2004?', 'what percentage change does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['-34446', '-3.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(985303, 1019749)', 'subtract(985303, 1019749), divide(#0, 1019749)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [-34446.0, -0.03378], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -34446.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?\nA1: 3200.0\nQ2: what was it in 2010?\nA2: 3160.0\nQ3: what is the difference?\nA3: 40.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nalexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | thereafter |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 4935 | 3144.0 | 3160.0 | 3200.0 | 2768.0 | 9934.0 |', 'question': 'what is the percent change?', 'ops': 'subtract(3200, 3160), divide(#0, 3160)', 'id': 'Single_ALXN/2007/page_104.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'alexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .', 'doc_post_text': "9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .", 'doc_table': {'$ 4935': {'2009': 3144.0, '2010': 3160.0, '2011': 3200.0, '2012': 2768.0, 'thereafter': 9934.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?', 'what was it in 2010?', 'what is the difference?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3200', '3160', '40', '1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3200', '3160', 'subtract(3200, 3160)', 'subtract(3200, 3160), divide(#0, 3160)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3200.0, 3160.0, 40.0, 0.01266], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.01266}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the 2016 net revenue?\nA1: 1542.0\nQ2: what was the 2015 net revenue?\nA2: 1666.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\namortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nas shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2015 net revenue | nuclear realized price changes | rhode island state energy center | nuclear volume | fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement | nuclear fuel expenses | other | 2016 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 1666.0 | -149.0 | -44.0 | -36.0 | 41.0 | 68.0 | -4.0 | 1542.0 |', 'question': 'what is the 2016 less the 2015 values?', 'ops': 'subtract(1542, 1666)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2017/page_26.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'amortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'as shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2015 net revenue': 1666.0, 'nuclear realized price changes': -149.0, 'rhode island state energy center': -44.0, 'nuclear volume': -36.0, 'fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement': 41.0, 'nuclear fuel expenses': 68.0, 'other': -4.0, '2016 net revenue': 1542.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the 2016 net revenue?', 'what was the 2015 net revenue?', 'what is the 2016 less the 2015 values?', 'what is that difference divided by the 2015 value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1542', '1666', '-124', '-7.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1542', '1666', 'subtract(1542, 1666)', 'subtract(1542, 1666), divide(#0, 1666)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1542.0, 1666.0, -124.0, -0.07443], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -124.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the number of gas customers in 2008?\nA1: 93000.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2007 net revenue | volume/weather | net gas revenue | rider revenue | base revenue | other | 2008 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 231.0 | 15.5 | 6.6 | 3.9 | -11.3 | 7.0 | 252.7 |', 'question': 'and what was it in 2007?', 'ops': '86000', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2008/page_355.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .", 'doc_post_text': "the volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .", 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2007 net revenue': 231.0, 'volume/weather': 15.5, 'net gas revenue': 6.6, 'rider revenue': 3.9, 'base revenue': -11.3, 'other': 7.0, '2008 net revenue': 252.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the number of gas customers in 2008?', 'and what was it in 2007?', 'what was, then, the change in that number over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2007 number of customers, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['93000', '86000', '7000', '8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['93000', '86000', 'subtract(93000, 86000)', 'subtract(93000, 86000), divide(#0, 86000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [93000.0, 86000.0, 7000.0, 0.0814], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 86000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value included in the capital investments for buyout of locomotives in 2012, in dollars?\nA1: 75000000.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nwe have adequate access to capital markets to meet any foreseeable cash requirements , and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities . cash flows millions 2014 2013 2012 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\noperating activities higher net income in 2014 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2013 , despite higher income tax payments . 2014 income tax payments were higher than 2013 primarily due to higher income , but also because we paid taxes previously deferred by bonus depreciation ( discussed below ) . higher net income in 2013 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2012 . in addition , we made payments in 2012 for past wages as a result of national labor negotiations , which reduced cash provided by operating activities in 2012 . lower tax benefits from bonus depreciation ( as discussed below ) partially offset the increases . federal tax law provided for 100% ( 100 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2011 and 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2012-2013 . as a result , the company deferred a substantial portion of its 2011-2013 income tax expense , contributing to the positive operating cash flow in those years . congress extended 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for 2014 , but this extension occurred in december and did not have a significant benefit on our income tax payments during 2014 . investing activities higher capital investments , including the early buyout of the long-term operating lease of our headquarters building for approximately $ 261 million , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities compared to 2013 . significant investments also were made for new locomotives , freight cars and containers , and capacity and commercial facility projects . capital investments in 2014 also included $ 99 million for the early buyout of locomotives and freight cars under long-term operating leases , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions . lower capital investments in locomotives and freight cars in 2013 drove the decrease in cash used in investing activities compared to 2012 . included in capital investments in 2012 was $ 75 million for the early buyout of 165 locomotives under long-term operating and capital leases during the first quarter of 2012 , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2014 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 |\n| 2013 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 |\n| 2012 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 |', 'question': 'and how many locomotives were bought with that value?', 'ops': '165', 'id': 'Single_UNP/2014/page_35.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'we have adequate access to capital markets to meet any foreseeable cash requirements , and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities . cash flows millions 2014 2013 2012 .', 'doc_post_text': 'operating activities higher net income in 2014 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2013 , despite higher income tax payments . 2014 income tax payments were higher than 2013 primarily due to higher income , but also because we paid taxes previously deferred by bonus depreciation ( discussed below ) . higher net income in 2013 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2012 . in addition , we made payments in 2012 for past wages as a result of national labor negotiations , which reduced cash provided by operating activities in 2012 . lower tax benefits from bonus depreciation ( as discussed below ) partially offset the increases . federal tax law provided for 100% ( 100 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2011 and 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2012-2013 . as a result , the company deferred a substantial portion of its 2011-2013 income tax expense , contributing to the positive operating cash flow in those years . congress extended 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for 2014 , but this extension occurred in december and did not have a significant benefit on our income tax payments during 2014 . investing activities higher capital investments , including the early buyout of the long-term operating lease of our headquarters building for approximately $ 261 million , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities compared to 2013 . significant investments also were made for new locomotives , freight cars and containers , and capacity and commercial facility projects . capital investments in 2014 also included $ 99 million for the early buyout of locomotives and freight cars under long-term operating leases , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions . lower capital investments in locomotives and freight cars in 2013 drove the decrease in cash used in investing activities compared to 2012 . included in capital investments in 2012 was $ 75 million for the early buyout of 165 locomotives under long-term operating and capital leases during the first quarter of 2012 , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions. .', 'doc_table': {'2014': {'cash provided by operating activities': 7385.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -4249.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -2982.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': 154.0}, '2013': {'cash provided by operating activities': 6823.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -3405.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -3049.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': 369.0}, '2012': {'cash provided by operating activities': 6161.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -3633.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -2682.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': -154.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value included in the capital investments for buyout of locomotives in 2012, in dollars?', 'and how many locomotives were bought with that value?', 'what was, then, the average cost of each one of those locomotives?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['75000000', '165', '454545'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(75, const_1000000)', '165', 'multiply(75, const_1000000), divide(#0, 165)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [75000000.0, 165.0, 454545.45455], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 165.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?\nA1: 3200.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nalexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | thereafter |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 4935 | 3144.0 | 3160.0 | 3200.0 | 2768.0 | 9934.0 |', 'question': 'what was it in 2010?', 'ops': '3160', 'id': 'Single_ALXN/2007/page_104.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'alexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .', 'doc_post_text': "9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .", 'doc_table': {'$ 4935': {'2009': 3144.0, '2010': 3160.0, '2011': 3200.0, '2012': 2768.0, 'thereafter': 9934.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?', 'what was it in 2010?', 'what is the difference?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3200', '3160', '40', '1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3200', '3160', 'subtract(3200, 3160)', 'subtract(3200, 3160), divide(#0, 3160)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3200.0, 3160.0, 40.0, 0.01266], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 3160.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy arkansas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis results of operations net income 2017 compared to 2016 net income decreased $ 27.4 million primarily due to higher nuclear refueling outage expenses , higher depreciation and amortization expenses , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher interest expense , partially offset by higher other income . 2016 compared to 2015 net income increased $ 92.9 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower other operation and maintenance expenses , partially offset by a higher effective income tax rate and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . net revenue 2017 compared to 2016 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . a0 a0following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2017 to 2016 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe retail electric price variance is primarily due to the implementation of formula rate plan rates effective with the first billing cycle of january 2017 and an increase in base rates effective february 24 , 2016 , each as approved by the apsc . a significant portion of the base rate increase was related to the purchase of power block 2 of the union power station in march 2016 . the increase was partially offset by decreases in the energy efficiency rider , as approved by the apsc , effective april 2016 and january 2017 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case and formula rate plan filings . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the union power station purchase . the opportunity sales variance results from the estimated net revenue effect of the 2017 and 2016 ferc orders in the opportunity sales proceeding attributable to wholesale customers . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the opportunity sales proceeding. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2016 net revenue | retail electric price | opportunity sales | asset retirement obligation | volume/weather | other | 2017 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 1520.5 | 33.8 | 5.6 | -14.8 | -29.0 | 6.5 | 1522.6 |', 'question': 'what is the sum of net revenues from 2016 and 2017?', 'ops': 'add(1520.5, 1522.6)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2017/page_316.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy arkansas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis results of operations net income 2017 compared to 2016 net income decreased $ 27.4 million primarily due to higher nuclear refueling outage expenses , higher depreciation and amortization expenses , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher interest expense , partially offset by higher other income . 2016 compared to 2015 net income increased $ 92.9 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower other operation and maintenance expenses , partially offset by a higher effective income tax rate and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . net revenue 2017 compared to 2016 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . a0 a0following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2017 to 2016 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the retail electric price variance is primarily due to the implementation of formula rate plan rates effective with the first billing cycle of january 2017 and an increase in base rates effective february 24 , 2016 , each as approved by the apsc . a significant portion of the base rate increase was related to the purchase of power block 2 of the union power station in march 2016 . the increase was partially offset by decreases in the energy efficiency rider , as approved by the apsc , effective april 2016 and january 2017 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case and formula rate plan filings . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the union power station purchase . the opportunity sales variance results from the estimated net revenue effect of the 2017 and 2016 ferc orders in the opportunity sales proceeding attributable to wholesale customers . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the opportunity sales proceeding. .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2016 net revenue': 1520.5, 'retail electric price': 33.8, 'opportunity sales': 5.6, 'asset retirement obligation': -14.8, 'volume/weather': -29.0, 'other': 6.5, '2017 net revenue': 1522.6}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the sum of net revenues from 2016 and 2017?', 'what is that divided by 2?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3043.1', '1521.55'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(1520.5, 1522.6)', 'add(1520.5, 1522.6), divide(#0, const_2)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3043.1, 1521.55], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 3043.1}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the sum of net revenues from 2016 and 2017?\nA1: 3043.1', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy arkansas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis results of operations net income 2017 compared to 2016 net income decreased $ 27.4 million primarily due to higher nuclear refueling outage expenses , higher depreciation and amortization expenses , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher interest expense , partially offset by higher other income . 2016 compared to 2015 net income increased $ 92.9 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower other operation and maintenance expenses , partially offset by a higher effective income tax rate and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . net revenue 2017 compared to 2016 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . a0 a0following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2017 to 2016 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe retail electric price variance is primarily due to the implementation of formula rate plan rates effective with the first billing cycle of january 2017 and an increase in base rates effective february 24 , 2016 , each as approved by the apsc . a significant portion of the base rate increase was related to the purchase of power block 2 of the union power station in march 2016 . the increase was partially offset by decreases in the energy efficiency rider , as approved by the apsc , effective april 2016 and january 2017 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case and formula rate plan filings . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the union power station purchase . the opportunity sales variance results from the estimated net revenue effect of the 2017 and 2016 ferc orders in the opportunity sales proceeding attributable to wholesale customers . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the opportunity sales proceeding. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2016 net revenue | retail electric price | opportunity sales | asset retirement obligation | volume/weather | other | 2017 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 1520.5 | 33.8 | 5.6 | -14.8 | -29.0 | 6.5 | 1522.6 |', 'question': 'what is that divided by 2?', 'ops': 'add(1520.5, 1522.6), divide(#0, const_2)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2017/page_316.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy arkansas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis results of operations net income 2017 compared to 2016 net income decreased $ 27.4 million primarily due to higher nuclear refueling outage expenses , higher depreciation and amortization expenses , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher interest expense , partially offset by higher other income . 2016 compared to 2015 net income increased $ 92.9 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower other operation and maintenance expenses , partially offset by a higher effective income tax rate and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . net revenue 2017 compared to 2016 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . a0 a0following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2017 to 2016 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the retail electric price variance is primarily due to the implementation of formula rate plan rates effective with the first billing cycle of january 2017 and an increase in base rates effective february 24 , 2016 , each as approved by the apsc . a significant portion of the base rate increase was related to the purchase of power block 2 of the union power station in march 2016 . the increase was partially offset by decreases in the energy efficiency rider , as approved by the apsc , effective april 2016 and january 2017 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case and formula rate plan filings . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the union power station purchase . the opportunity sales variance results from the estimated net revenue effect of the 2017 and 2016 ferc orders in the opportunity sales proceeding attributable to wholesale customers . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the opportunity sales proceeding. .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2016 net revenue': 1520.5, 'retail electric price': 33.8, 'opportunity sales': 5.6, 'asset retirement obligation': -14.8, 'volume/weather': -29.0, 'other': 6.5, '2017 net revenue': 1522.6}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the sum of net revenues from 2016 and 2017?', 'what is that divided by 2?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3043.1', '1521.55'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(1520.5, 1522.6)', 'add(1520.5, 1522.6), divide(#0, const_2)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3043.1, 1521.55], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1521.55}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?\nA1: 385373.0\nQ2: what is that divided by 1000?\nA2: 385.373', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in thousands ) | 385373.0 | 1110566.0 | 270852.0 | 766801.0 | 1324616.0 |', 'question': 'what are lease obligation at entergy lousiana?', 'ops': '149', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2013/page_118.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'in november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in thousands )': {'2014': 385373.0, '2015': 1110566.0, '2016': 270852.0, '2017': 766801.0, '2018': 1324616.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?', 'what is that divided by 1000?', 'what are lease obligation at entergy lousiana?', 'what is that value over the prior quotient?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['385373', '385.373', '149', '38.7%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['385373', 'divide(385373, const_1000)', '149', 'divide(385373, const_1000), divide(149, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [385373.0, 385.373, 149.0, 0.38664], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 149.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nalexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | thereafter |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 4935 | 3144.0 | 3160.0 | 3200.0 | 2768.0 | 9934.0 |', 'question': 'what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?', 'ops': '3200', 'id': 'Single_ALXN/2007/page_104.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'alexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .', 'doc_post_text': "9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .", 'doc_table': {'$ 4935': {'2009': 3144.0, '2010': 3160.0, '2011': 3200.0, '2012': 2768.0, 'thereafter': 9934.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?', 'what was it in 2010?', 'what is the difference?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3200', '3160', '40', '1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3200', '3160', 'subtract(3200, 3160)', 'subtract(3200, 3160), divide(#0, 3160)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3200.0, 3160.0, 40.0, 0.01266], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 3200.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in thousands ) | 385373.0 | 1110566.0 | 270852.0 | 766801.0 | 1324616.0 |', 'question': 'what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?', 'ops': '385373', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2013/page_118.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'in november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in thousands )': {'2014': 385373.0, '2015': 1110566.0, '2016': 270852.0, '2017': 766801.0, '2018': 1324616.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?', 'what is that divided by 1000?', 'what are lease obligation at entergy lousiana?', 'what is that value over the prior quotient?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['385373', '385.373', '149', '38.7%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['385373', 'divide(385373, const_1000)', '149', 'divide(385373, const_1000), divide(149, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [385373.0, 385.373, 149.0, 0.38664], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 385373.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?\nA1: 56.73\nQ2: and the high price for the quarter ended 12/31/10?\nA2: 53.14\nQ3: and the difference between these two prices?\nA3: 3.59', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\non february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high |\n| low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low |', 'question': 'so what was the growth rate during this time?', 'ops': 'subtract(56.73, 53.14), divide(#0, 53.14)', 'id': 'Single_AMT/2010/page_34.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'part ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .', 'doc_post_text': 'on february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .', 'doc_table': {'high': {'quarter ended march 31': 32.53, 'quarter ended june 30': 34.52, 'quarter ended september 30': 37.71, 'quarter ended december 31': 43.84, '2009': 'high'}, 'low': {'quarter ended march 31': 25.45, 'quarter ended june 30': 27.93, 'quarter ended september 30': 29.89, 'quarter ended december 31': 35.03, '2009': 'low'}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?', 'and the high price for the quarter ended 12/31/10?', 'and the difference between these two prices?', 'so what was the growth rate during this time?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['56.73', '53.14', '3.59', '6.8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['56.73', '53.14', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14)', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14), divide(#0, 53.14)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [56.73, 53.14, 3.59, 0.06756], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 0.06756}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\non february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high |\n| low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low |', 'question': 'what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?', 'ops': '56.73', 'id': 'Single_AMT/2010/page_34.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'part ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .', 'doc_post_text': 'on february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .', 'doc_table': {'high': {'quarter ended march 31': 32.53, 'quarter ended june 30': 34.52, 'quarter ended september 30': 37.71, 'quarter ended december 31': 43.84, '2009': 'high'}, 'low': {'quarter ended march 31': 25.45, 'quarter ended june 30': 27.93, 'quarter ended september 30': 29.89, 'quarter ended december 31': 35.03, '2009': 'low'}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?', 'and the high price for the quarter ended 12/31/10?', 'and the difference between these two prices?', 'so what was the growth rate during this time?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['56.73', '53.14', '3.59', '6.8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['56.73', '53.14', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14)', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14), divide(#0, 53.14)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [56.73, 53.14, 3.59, 0.06756], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 56.73}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the 2016 net revenue?\nA1: 1542.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\namortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nas shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2015 net revenue | nuclear realized price changes | rhode island state energy center | nuclear volume | fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement | nuclear fuel expenses | other | 2016 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 1666.0 | -149.0 | -44.0 | -36.0 | 41.0 | 68.0 | -4.0 | 1542.0 |', 'question': 'what was the 2015 net revenue?', 'ops': '1666', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2017/page_26.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'amortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'as shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2015 net revenue': 1666.0, 'nuclear realized price changes': -149.0, 'rhode island state energy center': -44.0, 'nuclear volume': -36.0, 'fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement': 41.0, 'nuclear fuel expenses': 68.0, 'other': -4.0, '2016 net revenue': 1542.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the 2016 net revenue?', 'what was the 2015 net revenue?', 'what is the 2016 less the 2015 values?', 'what is that difference divided by the 2015 value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1542', '1666', '-124', '-7.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1542', '1666', 'subtract(1542, 1666)', 'subtract(1542, 1666), divide(#0, 1666)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1542.0, 1666.0, -124.0, -0.07443], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1666.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in net revenues during 2003?\nA1: 50.8', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy louisiana , inc . management\'s financial discussion and analysis gross operating revenues , fuel and purchased power expenses , and other regulatory credits gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase of $ 98.0 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates ; and 2022 an increase due to volume/weather , as discussed above . the increase was partially offset by the following : 2022 a decrease of $ 31.9 million in the price applied to unbilled sales , as discussed above ; 2022 a decrease of $ 12.2 million in rate refund provisions , as discussed above ; and 2022 a decrease of $ 5.2 million in gross wholesale revenue due to decreased sales to affiliated systems . fuel and purchased power expenses increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase in the recovery from customers of deferred fuel costs ; and 2022 an increase in the market price of natural gas . other regulatory credits increased primarily due to : 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 14.3 million of capacity charges related to generation resource planning as allowed by the lpsc ; 2022 the amortization in 2003 of $ 11.8 million of deferred capacity charges , as discussed above ; and 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 11.4 million related to entergy\'s voluntary severance program , in accordance with a proposed stipulation with the lpsc staff . 2003 compared to 2002 net revenue , which is entergy louisiana\'s measure of gross margin , consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related , and purchased power expenses and 2 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2003 to 2002. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe deferred fuel cost revisions variance resulted from a revised unbilled sales pricing estimate made in december 2002 and a further revision made in the first quarter of 2003 to more closely align the fuel component of that pricing with expected recoverable fuel costs . the asset retirement obligation variance was due to the implementation of sfas 143 , "accounting for asset retirement obligations" adopted in january 2003 . see "critical accounting estimates" for more details on sfas 143 . the increase was offset by decommissioning expense and had no effect on net income . the volume variance was due to a decrease in electricity usage in the service territory . billed usage decreased 1868 gwh in the industrial sector including the loss of a large industrial customer to cogeneration. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2002 net revenue | deferred fuel cost revisions | asset retirement obligation | volume | vidalia settlement | other | 2003 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| ( in millions ) | 922.9 | 59.1 | 8.2 | -16.2 | -9.2 | 8.9 | 973.7 |', 'question': 'what is the percent change?', 'ops': 'subtract(973.7, 922.9), divide(#0, 922.9)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2004/page_213.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy louisiana , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis gross operating revenues , fuel and purchased power expenses , and other regulatory credits gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase of $ 98.0 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates ; and 2022 an increase due to volume/weather , as discussed above . the increase was partially offset by the following : 2022 a decrease of $ 31.9 million in the price applied to unbilled sales , as discussed above ; 2022 a decrease of $ 12.2 million in rate refund provisions , as discussed above ; and 2022 a decrease of $ 5.2 million in gross wholesale revenue due to decreased sales to affiliated systems . fuel and purchased power expenses increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase in the recovery from customers of deferred fuel costs ; and 2022 an increase in the market price of natural gas . other regulatory credits increased primarily due to : 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 14.3 million of capacity charges related to generation resource planning as allowed by the lpsc ; 2022 the amortization in 2003 of $ 11.8 million of deferred capacity charges , as discussed above ; and 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 11.4 million related to entergy's voluntary severance program , in accordance with a proposed stipulation with the lpsc staff . 2003 compared to 2002 net revenue , which is entergy louisiana's measure of gross margin , consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related , and purchased power expenses and 2 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2003 to 2002. .", 'doc_post_text': 'the deferred fuel cost revisions variance resulted from a revised unbilled sales pricing estimate made in december 2002 and a further revision made in the first quarter of 2003 to more closely align the fuel component of that pricing with expected recoverable fuel costs . the asset retirement obligation variance was due to the implementation of sfas 143 , "accounting for asset retirement obligations" adopted in january 2003 . see "critical accounting estimates" for more details on sfas 143 . the increase was offset by decommissioning expense and had no effect on net income . the volume variance was due to a decrease in electricity usage in the service territory . billed usage decreased 1868 gwh in the industrial sector including the loss of a large industrial customer to cogeneration. .', 'doc_table': {'( in millions )': {'2002 net revenue': 922.9, 'deferred fuel cost revisions': 59.1, 'asset retirement obligation': 8.2, 'volume': -16.2, 'vidalia settlement': -9.2, 'other': 8.9, '2003 net revenue': 973.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in net revenues during 2003?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['50.8', '5.5%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(973.7, 922.9)', 'subtract(973.7, 922.9), divide(#0, 922.9)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [50.8, 0.05504], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.05504}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\namortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nas shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2015 net revenue | nuclear realized price changes | rhode island state energy center | nuclear volume | fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement | nuclear fuel expenses | other | 2016 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 1666.0 | -149.0 | -44.0 | -36.0 | 41.0 | 68.0 | -4.0 | 1542.0 |', 'question': 'what was the 2016 net revenue?', 'ops': '1542', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2017/page_26.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'amortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'as shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2015 net revenue': 1666.0, 'nuclear realized price changes': -149.0, 'rhode island state energy center': -44.0, 'nuclear volume': -36.0, 'fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement': 41.0, 'nuclear fuel expenses': 68.0, 'other': -4.0, '2016 net revenue': 1542.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the 2016 net revenue?', 'what was the 2015 net revenue?', 'what is the 2016 less the 2015 values?', 'what is that difference divided by the 2015 value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1542', '1666', '-124', '-7.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1542', '1666', 'subtract(1542, 1666)', 'subtract(1542, 1666), divide(#0, 1666)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1542.0, 1666.0, -124.0, -0.07443], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1542.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nwe have adequate access to capital markets to meet any foreseeable cash requirements , and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities . cash flows millions 2014 2013 2012 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\noperating activities higher net income in 2014 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2013 , despite higher income tax payments . 2014 income tax payments were higher than 2013 primarily due to higher income , but also because we paid taxes previously deferred by bonus depreciation ( discussed below ) . higher net income in 2013 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2012 . in addition , we made payments in 2012 for past wages as a result of national labor negotiations , which reduced cash provided by operating activities in 2012 . lower tax benefits from bonus depreciation ( as discussed below ) partially offset the increases . federal tax law provided for 100% ( 100 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2011 and 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2012-2013 . as a result , the company deferred a substantial portion of its 2011-2013 income tax expense , contributing to the positive operating cash flow in those years . congress extended 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for 2014 , but this extension occurred in december and did not have a significant benefit on our income tax payments during 2014 . investing activities higher capital investments , including the early buyout of the long-term operating lease of our headquarters building for approximately $ 261 million , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities compared to 2013 . significant investments also were made for new locomotives , freight cars and containers , and capacity and commercial facility projects . capital investments in 2014 also included $ 99 million for the early buyout of locomotives and freight cars under long-term operating leases , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions . lower capital investments in locomotives and freight cars in 2013 drove the decrease in cash used in investing activities compared to 2012 . included in capital investments in 2012 was $ 75 million for the early buyout of 165 locomotives under long-term operating and capital leases during the first quarter of 2012 , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2014 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 |\n| 2013 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 |\n| 2012 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 |', 'question': 'what was the value included in the capital investments for buyout of locomotives in 2012, in dollars?', 'ops': 'multiply(75, const_1000000)', 'id': 'Single_UNP/2014/page_35.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'we have adequate access to capital markets to meet any foreseeable cash requirements , and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities . cash flows millions 2014 2013 2012 .', 'doc_post_text': 'operating activities higher net income in 2014 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2013 , despite higher income tax payments . 2014 income tax payments were higher than 2013 primarily due to higher income , but also because we paid taxes previously deferred by bonus depreciation ( discussed below ) . higher net income in 2013 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2012 . in addition , we made payments in 2012 for past wages as a result of national labor negotiations , which reduced cash provided by operating activities in 2012 . lower tax benefits from bonus depreciation ( as discussed below ) partially offset the increases . federal tax law provided for 100% ( 100 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2011 and 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2012-2013 . as a result , the company deferred a substantial portion of its 2011-2013 income tax expense , contributing to the positive operating cash flow in those years . congress extended 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for 2014 , but this extension occurred in december and did not have a significant benefit on our income tax payments during 2014 . investing activities higher capital investments , including the early buyout of the long-term operating lease of our headquarters building for approximately $ 261 million , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities compared to 2013 . significant investments also were made for new locomotives , freight cars and containers , and capacity and commercial facility projects . capital investments in 2014 also included $ 99 million for the early buyout of locomotives and freight cars under long-term operating leases , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions . lower capital investments in locomotives and freight cars in 2013 drove the decrease in cash used in investing activities compared to 2012 . included in capital investments in 2012 was $ 75 million for the early buyout of 165 locomotives under long-term operating and capital leases during the first quarter of 2012 , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions. .', 'doc_table': {'2014': {'cash provided by operating activities': 7385.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -4249.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -2982.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': 154.0}, '2013': {'cash provided by operating activities': 6823.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -3405.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -3049.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': 369.0}, '2012': {'cash provided by operating activities': 6161.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -3633.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -2682.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': -154.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value included in the capital investments for buyout of locomotives in 2012, in dollars?', 'and how many locomotives were bought with that value?', 'what was, then, the average cost of each one of those locomotives?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['75000000', '165', '454545'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(75, const_1000000)', '165', 'multiply(75, const_1000000), divide(#0, 165)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [75000000.0, 165.0, 454545.45455], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 75000000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?\nA1: 56.73\nQ2: and the high price for the quarter ended 12/31/10?\nA2: 53.14', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\non february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high |\n| low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low |', 'question': 'and the difference between these two prices?', 'ops': 'subtract(56.73, 53.14)', 'id': 'Single_AMT/2010/page_34.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'part ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .', 'doc_post_text': 'on february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .', 'doc_table': {'high': {'quarter ended march 31': 32.53, 'quarter ended june 30': 34.52, 'quarter ended september 30': 37.71, 'quarter ended december 31': 43.84, '2009': 'high'}, 'low': {'quarter ended march 31': 25.45, 'quarter ended june 30': 27.93, 'quarter ended september 30': 29.89, 'quarter ended december 31': 35.03, '2009': 'low'}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?', 'and the high price for the quarter ended 12/31/10?', 'and the difference between these two prices?', 'so what was the growth rate during this time?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['56.73', '53.14', '3.59', '6.8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['56.73', '53.14', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14)', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14), divide(#0, 53.14)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [56.73, 53.14, 3.59, 0.06756], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 3.59}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n15 . commitments and contingencies in the ordinary course of business , the company is involved in lawsuits , arbitrations and other formal and informal dispute resolution procedures , the outcomes of which will determine the company 2019s rights and obligations under insurance and reinsurance agreements . in some disputes , the company seeks to enforce its rights under an agreement or to collect funds owing to it . in other matters , the company is resisting attempts by others to collect funds or enforce alleged rights . these disputes arise from time to time and are ultimately resolved through both informal and formal means , including negotiated resolution , arbitration and litigation . in all such matters , the company believes that its positions are legally and commercially reasonable . the company considers the statuses of these proceedings when determining its reserves for unpaid loss and loss adjustment expenses . aside from litigation and arbitrations related to these insurance and reinsurance agreements , the company is not a party to any other material litigation or arbitration . the company has entered into separate annuity agreements with the prudential insurance of america ( 201cthe prudential 201d ) and an additional unaffiliated life insurance company in which the company has either purchased annuity contracts or become the assignee of annuity proceeds that are meant to settle claim payment obligations in the future . in both instances , the company would become contingently liable if either the prudential or the unaffiliated life insurance company were unable to make payments related to the respective annuity contract . the table below presents the estimated cost to replace all such annuities for which the company was contingently liable for the periods indicated: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n16 . share-based compensation plans the company has a 2010 stock incentive plan ( 201c2010 employee plan 201d ) , a 2009 non-employee director stock option and restricted stock plan ( 201c2009 director plan 201d ) and a 2003 non-employee director equity compensation plan ( 201c2003 director plan 201d ) . under the 2010 employee plan , 4000000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as non- qualified share options , incentive share options , share appreciation rights , restricted share awards or performance share unit awards to officers and key employees of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 2553473 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2010 employee plan . the 2010 employee plan replaced a 2002 employee plan , which replaced a 1995 employee plan ; therefore , no further awards will be granted under the 2002 employee plan or the 1995 employee plan . through december 31 , 2017 , only non-qualified share options , restricted share awards and performance share unit awards had been granted under the employee plans . under the 2009 director plan , 37439 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or restricted share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 34957 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2009 director plan . the 2009 director plan replaced a 1995 director plan , which expired . under the 2003 director plan , 500000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 there were 346714 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2003 director plan. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | the prudential insurance company of america | unaffiliated life insurance company | the prudential insurance company of america | unaffiliated life insurance company |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| at december 31 , 2017 | 144618.0 | 34444.0 | 144618.0 | 34444.0 |\n| at december 31 , 2016 | 146507.0 | 33860.0 | 146507.0 | 33860.0 |', 'question': 'what was the change in the balance of the prudential insurance company of america from 2016 to 2017?', 'ops': 'subtract(144618, 146507)', 'id': 'Single_RE/2017/page_159.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': '15 . commitments and contingencies in the ordinary course of business , the company is involved in lawsuits , arbitrations and other formal and informal dispute resolution procedures , the outcomes of which will determine the company 2019s rights and obligations under insurance and reinsurance agreements . in some disputes , the company seeks to enforce its rights under an agreement or to collect funds owing to it . in other matters , the company is resisting attempts by others to collect funds or enforce alleged rights . these disputes arise from time to time and are ultimately resolved through both informal and formal means , including negotiated resolution , arbitration and litigation . in all such matters , the company believes that its positions are legally and commercially reasonable . the company considers the statuses of these proceedings when determining its reserves for unpaid loss and loss adjustment expenses . aside from litigation and arbitrations related to these insurance and reinsurance agreements , the company is not a party to any other material litigation or arbitration . the company has entered into separate annuity agreements with the prudential insurance of america ( 201cthe prudential 201d ) and an additional unaffiliated life insurance company in which the company has either purchased annuity contracts or become the assignee of annuity proceeds that are meant to settle claim payment obligations in the future . in both instances , the company would become contingently liable if either the prudential or the unaffiliated life insurance company were unable to make payments related to the respective annuity contract . the table below presents the estimated cost to replace all such annuities for which the company was contingently liable for the periods indicated: .', 'doc_post_text': '16 . share-based compensation plans the company has a 2010 stock incentive plan ( 201c2010 employee plan 201d ) , a 2009 non-employee director stock option and restricted stock plan ( 201c2009 director plan 201d ) and a 2003 non-employee director equity compensation plan ( 201c2003 director plan 201d ) . under the 2010 employee plan , 4000000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as non- qualified share options , incentive share options , share appreciation rights , restricted share awards or performance share unit awards to officers and key employees of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 2553473 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2010 employee plan . the 2010 employee plan replaced a 2002 employee plan , which replaced a 1995 employee plan ; therefore , no further awards will be granted under the 2002 employee plan or the 1995 employee plan . through december 31 , 2017 , only non-qualified share options , restricted share awards and performance share unit awards had been granted under the employee plans . under the 2009 director plan , 37439 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or restricted share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 34957 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2009 director plan . the 2009 director plan replaced a 1995 director plan , which expired . under the 2003 director plan , 500000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 there were 346714 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2003 director plan. .', 'doc_table': {'at december 31 , 2017': {'the prudential insurance company of america': 144618.0, 'unaffiliated life insurance company': 34444.0}, 'at december 31 , 2016': {'the prudential insurance company of america': 146507.0, 'unaffiliated life insurance company': 33860.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in the balance of the prudential insurance company of america from 2016 to 2017?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to that balance in 2016, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['-1889', '-1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(144618, 146507)', 'subtract(144618, 146507), divide(#0, 146507)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [-1889.0, -0.01289], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -1889.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?\nA1: 3200.0\nQ2: what was it in 2010?\nA2: 3160.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nalexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | thereafter |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 4935 | 3144.0 | 3160.0 | 3200.0 | 2768.0 | 9934.0 |', 'question': 'what is the difference?', 'ops': 'subtract(3200, 3160)', 'id': 'Single_ALXN/2007/page_104.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'alexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .', 'doc_post_text': "9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .", 'doc_table': {'$ 4935': {'2009': 3144.0, '2010': 3160.0, '2011': 3200.0, '2012': 2768.0, 'thereafter': 9934.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?', 'what was it in 2010?', 'what is the difference?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3200', '3160', '40', '1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3200', '3160', 'subtract(3200, 3160)', 'subtract(3200, 3160), divide(#0, 3160)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3200.0, 3160.0, 40.0, 0.01266], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 40.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the 2016 net revenue?\nA1: 1542.0\nQ2: what was the 2015 net revenue?\nA2: 1666.0\nQ3: what is the 2016 less the 2015 values?\nA3: -124.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\namortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nas shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2015 net revenue | nuclear realized price changes | rhode island state energy center | nuclear volume | fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement | nuclear fuel expenses | other | 2016 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 1666.0 | -149.0 | -44.0 | -36.0 | 41.0 | 68.0 | -4.0 | 1542.0 |', 'question': 'what is that difference divided by the 2015 value?', 'ops': 'subtract(1542, 1666), divide(#0, 1666)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2017/page_26.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'amortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'as shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2015 net revenue': 1666.0, 'nuclear realized price changes': -149.0, 'rhode island state energy center': -44.0, 'nuclear volume': -36.0, 'fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement': 41.0, 'nuclear fuel expenses': 68.0, 'other': -4.0, '2016 net revenue': 1542.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the 2016 net revenue?', 'what was the 2015 net revenue?', 'what is the 2016 less the 2015 values?', 'what is that difference divided by the 2015 value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1542', '1666', '-124', '-7.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1542', '1666', 'subtract(1542, 1666)', 'subtract(1542, 1666), divide(#0, 1666)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1542.0, 1666.0, -124.0, -0.07443], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -0.07443}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?\nA1: 56.73', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\non february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high |\n| low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low |', 'question': 'and the high price for the quarter ended 12/31/10?', 'ops': '53.14', 'id': 'Single_AMT/2010/page_34.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'part ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .', 'doc_post_text': 'on february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .', 'doc_table': {'high': {'quarter ended march 31': 32.53, 'quarter ended june 30': 34.52, 'quarter ended september 30': 37.71, 'quarter ended december 31': 43.84, '2009': 'high'}, 'low': {'quarter ended march 31': 25.45, 'quarter ended june 30': 27.93, 'quarter ended september 30': 29.89, 'quarter ended december 31': 35.03, '2009': 'low'}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?', 'and the high price for the quarter ended 12/31/10?', 'and the difference between these two prices?', 'so what was the growth rate during this time?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['56.73', '53.14', '3.59', '6.8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['56.73', '53.14', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14)', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14), divide(#0, 53.14)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [56.73, 53.14, 3.59, 0.06756], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 53.14}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2007 net revenue | volume/weather | net gas revenue | rider revenue | base revenue | other | 2008 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 231.0 | 15.5 | 6.6 | 3.9 | -11.3 | 7.0 | 252.7 |', 'question': 'what was the number of gas customers in 2008?', 'ops': '93000', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2008/page_355.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .", 'doc_post_text': "the volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .", 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2007 net revenue': 231.0, 'volume/weather': 15.5, 'net gas revenue': 6.6, 'rider revenue': 3.9, 'base revenue': -11.3, 'other': 7.0, '2008 net revenue': 252.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the number of gas customers in 2008?', 'and what was it in 2007?', 'what was, then, the change in that number over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2007 number of customers, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['93000', '86000', '7000', '8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['93000', '86000', 'subtract(93000, 86000)', 'subtract(93000, 86000), divide(#0, 86000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [93000.0, 86000.0, 7000.0, 0.0814], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 93000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value included in the capital investments for buyout of locomotives in 2012, in dollars?\nA1: 75000000.0\nQ2: and how many locomotives were bought with that value?\nA2: 165.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nwe have adequate access to capital markets to meet any foreseeable cash requirements , and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities . cash flows millions 2014 2013 2012 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\noperating activities higher net income in 2014 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2013 , despite higher income tax payments . 2014 income tax payments were higher than 2013 primarily due to higher income , but also because we paid taxes previously deferred by bonus depreciation ( discussed below ) . higher net income in 2013 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2012 . in addition , we made payments in 2012 for past wages as a result of national labor negotiations , which reduced cash provided by operating activities in 2012 . lower tax benefits from bonus depreciation ( as discussed below ) partially offset the increases . federal tax law provided for 100% ( 100 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2011 and 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2012-2013 . as a result , the company deferred a substantial portion of its 2011-2013 income tax expense , contributing to the positive operating cash flow in those years . congress extended 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for 2014 , but this extension occurred in december and did not have a significant benefit on our income tax payments during 2014 . investing activities higher capital investments , including the early buyout of the long-term operating lease of our headquarters building for approximately $ 261 million , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities compared to 2013 . significant investments also were made for new locomotives , freight cars and containers , and capacity and commercial facility projects . capital investments in 2014 also included $ 99 million for the early buyout of locomotives and freight cars under long-term operating leases , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions . lower capital investments in locomotives and freight cars in 2013 drove the decrease in cash used in investing activities compared to 2012 . included in capital investments in 2012 was $ 75 million for the early buyout of 165 locomotives under long-term operating and capital leases during the first quarter of 2012 , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2014 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 |\n| 2013 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 |\n| 2012 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 |', 'question': 'what was, then, the average cost of each one of those locomotives?', 'ops': 'multiply(75, const_1000000), divide(#0, 165)', 'id': 'Single_UNP/2014/page_35.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'we have adequate access to capital markets to meet any foreseeable cash requirements , and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities . cash flows millions 2014 2013 2012 .', 'doc_post_text': 'operating activities higher net income in 2014 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2013 , despite higher income tax payments . 2014 income tax payments were higher than 2013 primarily due to higher income , but also because we paid taxes previously deferred by bonus depreciation ( discussed below ) . higher net income in 2013 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2012 . in addition , we made payments in 2012 for past wages as a result of national labor negotiations , which reduced cash provided by operating activities in 2012 . lower tax benefits from bonus depreciation ( as discussed below ) partially offset the increases . federal tax law provided for 100% ( 100 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2011 and 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2012-2013 . as a result , the company deferred a substantial portion of its 2011-2013 income tax expense , contributing to the positive operating cash flow in those years . congress extended 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for 2014 , but this extension occurred in december and did not have a significant benefit on our income tax payments during 2014 . investing activities higher capital investments , including the early buyout of the long-term operating lease of our headquarters building for approximately $ 261 million , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities compared to 2013 . significant investments also were made for new locomotives , freight cars and containers , and capacity and commercial facility projects . capital investments in 2014 also included $ 99 million for the early buyout of locomotives and freight cars under long-term operating leases , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions . lower capital investments in locomotives and freight cars in 2013 drove the decrease in cash used in investing activities compared to 2012 . included in capital investments in 2012 was $ 75 million for the early buyout of 165 locomotives under long-term operating and capital leases during the first quarter of 2012 , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions. .', 'doc_table': {'2014': {'cash provided by operating activities': 7385.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -4249.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -2982.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': 154.0}, '2013': {'cash provided by operating activities': 6823.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -3405.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -3049.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': 369.0}, '2012': {'cash provided by operating activities': 6161.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -3633.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -2682.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': -154.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value included in the capital investments for buyout of locomotives in 2012, in dollars?', 'and how many locomotives were bought with that value?', 'what was, then, the average cost of each one of those locomotives?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['75000000', '165', '454545'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(75, const_1000000)', '165', 'multiply(75, const_1000000), divide(#0, 165)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [75000000.0, 165.0, 454545.45455], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 454545.45455}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?\nA1: 385373.0\nQ2: what is that divided by 1000?\nA2: 385.373\nQ3: what are lease obligation at entergy lousiana?\nA3: 149.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in thousands ) | 385373.0 | 1110566.0 | 270852.0 | 766801.0 | 1324616.0 |', 'question': 'what is that value over the prior quotient?', 'ops': 'divide(385373, const_1000), divide(149, #0)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2013/page_118.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'in november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in thousands )': {'2014': 385373.0, '2015': 1110566.0, '2016': 270852.0, '2017': 766801.0, '2018': 1324616.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?', 'what is that divided by 1000?', 'what are lease obligation at entergy lousiana?', 'what is that value over the prior quotient?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['385373', '385.373', '149', '38.7%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['385373', 'divide(385373, const_1000)', '149', 'divide(385373, const_1000), divide(149, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [385373.0, 385.373, 149.0, 0.38664], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.38664}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy louisiana , inc . management\'s financial discussion and analysis gross operating revenues , fuel and purchased power expenses , and other regulatory credits gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase of $ 98.0 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates ; and 2022 an increase due to volume/weather , as discussed above . the increase was partially offset by the following : 2022 a decrease of $ 31.9 million in the price applied to unbilled sales , as discussed above ; 2022 a decrease of $ 12.2 million in rate refund provisions , as discussed above ; and 2022 a decrease of $ 5.2 million in gross wholesale revenue due to decreased sales to affiliated systems . fuel and purchased power expenses increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase in the recovery from customers of deferred fuel costs ; and 2022 an increase in the market price of natural gas . other regulatory credits increased primarily due to : 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 14.3 million of capacity charges related to generation resource planning as allowed by the lpsc ; 2022 the amortization in 2003 of $ 11.8 million of deferred capacity charges , as discussed above ; and 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 11.4 million related to entergy\'s voluntary severance program , in accordance with a proposed stipulation with the lpsc staff . 2003 compared to 2002 net revenue , which is entergy louisiana\'s measure of gross margin , consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related , and purchased power expenses and 2 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2003 to 2002. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe deferred fuel cost revisions variance resulted from a revised unbilled sales pricing estimate made in december 2002 and a further revision made in the first quarter of 2003 to more closely align the fuel component of that pricing with expected recoverable fuel costs . the asset retirement obligation variance was due to the implementation of sfas 143 , "accounting for asset retirement obligations" adopted in january 2003 . see "critical accounting estimates" for more details on sfas 143 . the increase was offset by decommissioning expense and had no effect on net income . the volume variance was due to a decrease in electricity usage in the service territory . billed usage decreased 1868 gwh in the industrial sector including the loss of a large industrial customer to cogeneration. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2002 net revenue | deferred fuel cost revisions | asset retirement obligation | volume | vidalia settlement | other | 2003 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| ( in millions ) | 922.9 | 59.1 | 8.2 | -16.2 | -9.2 | 8.9 | 973.7 |', 'question': 'what was the change in net revenues during 2003?', 'ops': 'subtract(973.7, 922.9)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2004/page_213.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy louisiana , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis gross operating revenues , fuel and purchased power expenses , and other regulatory credits gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase of $ 98.0 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates ; and 2022 an increase due to volume/weather , as discussed above . the increase was partially offset by the following : 2022 a decrease of $ 31.9 million in the price applied to unbilled sales , as discussed above ; 2022 a decrease of $ 12.2 million in rate refund provisions , as discussed above ; and 2022 a decrease of $ 5.2 million in gross wholesale revenue due to decreased sales to affiliated systems . fuel and purchased power expenses increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase in the recovery from customers of deferred fuel costs ; and 2022 an increase in the market price of natural gas . other regulatory credits increased primarily due to : 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 14.3 million of capacity charges related to generation resource planning as allowed by the lpsc ; 2022 the amortization in 2003 of $ 11.8 million of deferred capacity charges , as discussed above ; and 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 11.4 million related to entergy's voluntary severance program , in accordance with a proposed stipulation with the lpsc staff . 2003 compared to 2002 net revenue , which is entergy louisiana's measure of gross margin , consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related , and purchased power expenses and 2 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2003 to 2002. .", 'doc_post_text': 'the deferred fuel cost revisions variance resulted from a revised unbilled sales pricing estimate made in december 2002 and a further revision made in the first quarter of 2003 to more closely align the fuel component of that pricing with expected recoverable fuel costs . the asset retirement obligation variance was due to the implementation of sfas 143 , "accounting for asset retirement obligations" adopted in january 2003 . see "critical accounting estimates" for more details on sfas 143 . the increase was offset by decommissioning expense and had no effect on net income . the volume variance was due to a decrease in electricity usage in the service territory . billed usage decreased 1868 gwh in the industrial sector including the loss of a large industrial customer to cogeneration. .', 'doc_table': {'( in millions )': {'2002 net revenue': 922.9, 'deferred fuel cost revisions': 59.1, 'asset retirement obligation': 8.2, 'volume': -16.2, 'vidalia settlement': -9.2, 'other': 8.9, '2003 net revenue': 973.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in net revenues during 2003?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['50.8', '5.5%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(973.7, 922.9)', 'subtract(973.7, 922.9), divide(#0, 922.9)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [50.8, 0.05504], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 50.8}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the number of gas customers in 2008?\nA1: 93000.0\nQ2: and what was it in 2007?\nA2: 86000.0\nQ3: what was, then, the change in that number over the year?\nA3: 7000.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2007 net revenue | volume/weather | net gas revenue | rider revenue | base revenue | other | 2008 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 231.0 | 15.5 | 6.6 | 3.9 | -11.3 | 7.0 | 252.7 |', 'question': 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2007 number of customers, in percentage?', 'ops': 'subtract(93000, 86000), divide(#0, 86000)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2008/page_355.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .", 'doc_post_text': "the volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .", 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2007 net revenue': 231.0, 'volume/weather': 15.5, 'net gas revenue': 6.6, 'rider revenue': 3.9, 'base revenue': -11.3, 'other': 7.0, '2008 net revenue': 252.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the number of gas customers in 2008?', 'and what was it in 2007?', 'what was, then, the change in that number over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2007 number of customers, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['93000', '86000', '7000', '8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['93000', '86000', 'subtract(93000, 86000)', 'subtract(93000, 86000), divide(#0, 86000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [93000.0, 86000.0, 7000.0, 0.0814], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.0814}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis plan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business see the 201cplan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business 201d section of entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis for a discussion of this matter , including the planned retirement of debt and preferred securities . results of operations net income 2011 compared to 2010 net income increased by $ 14.6 million primarily due to higher net revenue , partially offset by higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . 2010 compared to 2009 net income increased by $ 2.4 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower interest expense , partially offset by lower other income , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher other operation and maintenance expenses . net revenue 2011 compared to 2010 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2011 to 2010 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe retail electric price variance is primarily due to rate actions , including an annual base rate increase of $ 59 million beginning august 2010 , with an additional increase of $ 9 million beginning may 2011 , as a result of the settlement of the december 2009 rate case . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case settlement . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 721 gwh , or 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including the effect of more favorable weather on residential and commercial sales compared to last year . usage in the industrial sector increased 8.2% ( 8.2 % ) primarily in the chemicals and refining industries . the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 net revenue | retail electric price | volume/weather | purchased power capacity | other | 2011 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 540.2 | 36.0 | 21.3 | -24.6 | 4.9 | 577.8 |', 'question': 'what was the total variance in net revenue from 2010 to 2011?', 'ops': 'subtract(577.8, 540.2)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2011/page_376.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis plan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business see the 201cplan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business 201d section of entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis for a discussion of this matter , including the planned retirement of debt and preferred securities . results of operations net income 2011 compared to 2010 net income increased by $ 14.6 million primarily due to higher net revenue , partially offset by higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . 2010 compared to 2009 net income increased by $ 2.4 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower interest expense , partially offset by lower other income , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher other operation and maintenance expenses . net revenue 2011 compared to 2010 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2011 to 2010 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the retail electric price variance is primarily due to rate actions , including an annual base rate increase of $ 59 million beginning august 2010 , with an additional increase of $ 9 million beginning may 2011 , as a result of the settlement of the december 2009 rate case . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case settlement . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 721 gwh , or 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including the effect of more favorable weather on residential and commercial sales compared to last year . usage in the industrial sector increased 8.2% ( 8.2 % ) primarily in the chemicals and refining industries . the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases. .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2010 net revenue': 540.2, 'retail electric price': 36.0, 'volume/weather': 21.3, 'purchased power capacity': -24.6, 'other': 4.9, '2011 net revenue': 577.8}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total variance in net revenue from 2010 to 2011?', 'and what was the variance in volume/weather in that same period?', 'how much, then, does this volume/weather variance represent in relation to the net revenue one, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['37.6', '21.3', '56.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(577.8, 540.2)', '21.3', 'subtract(577.8, 540.2), divide(21.3, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [37.6, 21.3, 0.56649], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 37.6}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the number of gas customers in 2008?\nA1: 93000.0\nQ2: and what was it in 2007?\nA2: 86000.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2007 net revenue | volume/weather | net gas revenue | rider revenue | base revenue | other | 2008 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 231.0 | 15.5 | 6.6 | 3.9 | -11.3 | 7.0 | 252.7 |', 'question': 'what was, then, the change in that number over the year?', 'ops': 'subtract(93000, 86000)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2008/page_355.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .", 'doc_post_text': "the volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .", 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2007 net revenue': 231.0, 'volume/weather': 15.5, 'net gas revenue': 6.6, 'rider revenue': 3.9, 'base revenue': -11.3, 'other': 7.0, '2008 net revenue': 252.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the number of gas customers in 2008?', 'and what was it in 2007?', 'what was, then, the change in that number over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2007 number of customers, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['93000', '86000', '7000', '8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['93000', '86000', 'subtract(93000, 86000)', 'subtract(93000, 86000), divide(#0, 86000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [93000.0, 86000.0, 7000.0, 0.0814], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 7000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in the balance of the prudential insurance company of america from 2016 to 2017?\nA1: -1889.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n15 . commitments and contingencies in the ordinary course of business , the company is involved in lawsuits , arbitrations and other formal and informal dispute resolution procedures , the outcomes of which will determine the company 2019s rights and obligations under insurance and reinsurance agreements . in some disputes , the company seeks to enforce its rights under an agreement or to collect funds owing to it . in other matters , the company is resisting attempts by others to collect funds or enforce alleged rights . these disputes arise from time to time and are ultimately resolved through both informal and formal means , including negotiated resolution , arbitration and litigation . in all such matters , the company believes that its positions are legally and commercially reasonable . the company considers the statuses of these proceedings when determining its reserves for unpaid loss and loss adjustment expenses . aside from litigation and arbitrations related to these insurance and reinsurance agreements , the company is not a party to any other material litigation or arbitration . the company has entered into separate annuity agreements with the prudential insurance of america ( 201cthe prudential 201d ) and an additional unaffiliated life insurance company in which the company has either purchased annuity contracts or become the assignee of annuity proceeds that are meant to settle claim payment obligations in the future . in both instances , the company would become contingently liable if either the prudential or the unaffiliated life insurance company were unable to make payments related to the respective annuity contract . the table below presents the estimated cost to replace all such annuities for which the company was contingently liable for the periods indicated: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n16 . share-based compensation plans the company has a 2010 stock incentive plan ( 201c2010 employee plan 201d ) , a 2009 non-employee director stock option and restricted stock plan ( 201c2009 director plan 201d ) and a 2003 non-employee director equity compensation plan ( 201c2003 director plan 201d ) . under the 2010 employee plan , 4000000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as non- qualified share options , incentive share options , share appreciation rights , restricted share awards or performance share unit awards to officers and key employees of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 2553473 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2010 employee plan . the 2010 employee plan replaced a 2002 employee plan , which replaced a 1995 employee plan ; therefore , no further awards will be granted under the 2002 employee plan or the 1995 employee plan . through december 31 , 2017 , only non-qualified share options , restricted share awards and performance share unit awards had been granted under the employee plans . under the 2009 director plan , 37439 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or restricted share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 34957 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2009 director plan . the 2009 director plan replaced a 1995 director plan , which expired . under the 2003 director plan , 500000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 there were 346714 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2003 director plan. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | the prudential insurance company of america | unaffiliated life insurance company | the prudential insurance company of america | unaffiliated life insurance company |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| at december 31 , 2017 | 144618.0 | 34444.0 | 144618.0 | 34444.0 |\n| at december 31 , 2016 | 146507.0 | 33860.0 | 146507.0 | 33860.0 |', 'question': 'and how much does this change represent in relation to that balance in 2016, in percentage?', 'ops': 'subtract(144618, 146507), divide(#0, 146507)', 'id': 'Single_RE/2017/page_159.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': '15 . commitments and contingencies in the ordinary course of business , the company is involved in lawsuits , arbitrations and other formal and informal dispute resolution procedures , the outcomes of which will determine the company 2019s rights and obligations under insurance and reinsurance agreements . in some disputes , the company seeks to enforce its rights under an agreement or to collect funds owing to it . in other matters , the company is resisting attempts by others to collect funds or enforce alleged rights . these disputes arise from time to time and are ultimately resolved through both informal and formal means , including negotiated resolution , arbitration and litigation . in all such matters , the company believes that its positions are legally and commercially reasonable . the company considers the statuses of these proceedings when determining its reserves for unpaid loss and loss adjustment expenses . aside from litigation and arbitrations related to these insurance and reinsurance agreements , the company is not a party to any other material litigation or arbitration . the company has entered into separate annuity agreements with the prudential insurance of america ( 201cthe prudential 201d ) and an additional unaffiliated life insurance company in which the company has either purchased annuity contracts or become the assignee of annuity proceeds that are meant to settle claim payment obligations in the future . in both instances , the company would become contingently liable if either the prudential or the unaffiliated life insurance company were unable to make payments related to the respective annuity contract . the table below presents the estimated cost to replace all such annuities for which the company was contingently liable for the periods indicated: .', 'doc_post_text': '16 . share-based compensation plans the company has a 2010 stock incentive plan ( 201c2010 employee plan 201d ) , a 2009 non-employee director stock option and restricted stock plan ( 201c2009 director plan 201d ) and a 2003 non-employee director equity compensation plan ( 201c2003 director plan 201d ) . under the 2010 employee plan , 4000000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as non- qualified share options , incentive share options , share appreciation rights , restricted share awards or performance share unit awards to officers and key employees of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 2553473 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2010 employee plan . the 2010 employee plan replaced a 2002 employee plan , which replaced a 1995 employee plan ; therefore , no further awards will be granted under the 2002 employee plan or the 1995 employee plan . through december 31 , 2017 , only non-qualified share options , restricted share awards and performance share unit awards had been granted under the employee plans . under the 2009 director plan , 37439 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or restricted share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 34957 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2009 director plan . the 2009 director plan replaced a 1995 director plan , which expired . under the 2003 director plan , 500000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 there were 346714 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2003 director plan. .', 'doc_table': {'at december 31 , 2017': {'the prudential insurance company of america': 144618.0, 'unaffiliated life insurance company': 34444.0}, 'at december 31 , 2016': {'the prudential insurance company of america': 146507.0, 'unaffiliated life insurance company': 33860.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in the balance of the prudential insurance company of america from 2016 to 2017?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to that balance in 2016, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['-1889', '-1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(144618, 146507)', 'subtract(144618, 146507), divide(#0, 146507)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [-1889.0, -0.01289], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -0.01289}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?\nA1: 385373.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in thousands ) | 385373.0 | 1110566.0 | 270852.0 | 766801.0 | 1324616.0 |', 'question': 'what is that divided by 1000?', 'ops': 'divide(385373, const_1000)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2013/page_118.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'in november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in thousands )': {'2014': 385373.0, '2015': 1110566.0, '2016': 270852.0, '2017': 766801.0, '2018': 1324616.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?', 'what is that divided by 1000?', 'what are lease obligation at entergy lousiana?', 'what is that value over the prior quotient?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['385373', '385.373', '149', '38.7%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['385373', 'divide(385373, const_1000)', '149', 'divide(385373, const_1000), divide(149, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [385373.0, 385.373, 149.0, 0.38664], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 385.373}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:43 WARNING dspy.utils.parallelizer: Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.
Traceback (most recent call last):
    exec(code_obj, self.user_global_ns, self.user_ns)
  File "/var/folders/zf/l4rjbhhj6xq9bfzs9cr7m5vr0000gn/T/ipykernel_11525/4013237565.py", line 19, in <module>
    current_result = current_evaluator(
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    patch_function(call_original, *args, **kwargs)
    return original(self, *args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    return call_original_fn_with_event_logging(_original_fn, og_args, og_kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    original_fn_result = original_fn(*og_args, **og_kwargs)
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    original_result = original(*_og_args, **_og_kwargs)
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    raise exception
    results = fn(instance, *args, **kwargs)
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    results = executor.execute(process_item, devset)
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    return self._execute_parallel(wrapped, data)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    raise Exception("Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.")
Exception: Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.

During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred:

Traceback (most recent call last):
    stb = self.InteractiveTB.structured_traceback(
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    return FormattedTB.structured_traceback(
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    return VerboseTB.structured_traceback(
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    formatted_exception = self.format_exception_as_a_whole(etype, evalue, etb, number_of_lines_of_context,
                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    self.get_records(etb, number_of_lines_of_context, tb_offset) if etb else []
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    res = list(stack_data.FrameInfo.stack_data(etb, options=options))[tb_offset:]
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    yield from collapse_repeated(
    yield from map(mapper, original_group)
    return cls(f, options)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    self.executing = Source.executing(frame_or_tb)
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    source = cls.for_frame(frame)
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    return cls.for_filename(frame.f_code.co_filename, frame.f_globals or {}, use_cache)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    return cls._for_filename_and_lines(filename, tuple(lines))
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    result = source_cache[(filename, lines)] = cls(filename, lines)
                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    self.tree = ast.parse(self.text, filename=filename)
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/Users/shubham.gupta/.asdf/installs/python/3.11.0/lib/python3.11/ast.py", line 50, in parse
    return compile(source, filename, mode, flags,
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
SystemError: AST constructor recursion depth mismatch (before=132, after=129)
2025/08/08 01:40:47 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:47 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:47 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:47 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:40:51 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2007 net revenue | volume/weather | net gas revenue | rider revenue | base revenue | other | 2008 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 231.0 | 15.5 | 6.6 | 3.9 | -11.3 | 7.0 | 252.7 |', 'question': 'what is the net change in revenue from 2007 to 2008?', 'ops': 'subtract(252.7, 231.0)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2008/page_355.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .", 'doc_post_text': "the volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .", 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2007 net revenue': 231.0, 'volume/weather': 15.5, 'net gas revenue': 6.6, 'rider revenue': 3.9, 'base revenue': -11.3, 'other': 7.0, '2008 net revenue': 252.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in revenue from 2007 to 2008?', 'what is that divided by the 2007 net revenues?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['21.7', '9.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(252.7, 231.0)', 'subtract(252.7, 231.0), divide(#0, 231.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [21.7, 0.09394], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 21.7}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:51 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total variance in net revenue from 2010 to 2011?\nA1: 37.6', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis plan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business see the 201cplan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business 201d section of entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis for a discussion of this matter , including the planned retirement of debt and preferred securities . results of operations net income 2011 compared to 2010 net income increased by $ 14.6 million primarily due to higher net revenue , partially offset by higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . 2010 compared to 2009 net income increased by $ 2.4 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower interest expense , partially offset by lower other income , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher other operation and maintenance expenses . net revenue 2011 compared to 2010 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2011 to 2010 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe retail electric price variance is primarily due to rate actions , including an annual base rate increase of $ 59 million beginning august 2010 , with an additional increase of $ 9 million beginning may 2011 , as a result of the settlement of the december 2009 rate case . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case settlement . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 721 gwh , or 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including the effect of more favorable weather on residential and commercial sales compared to last year . usage in the industrial sector increased 8.2% ( 8.2 % ) primarily in the chemicals and refining industries . the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 net revenue | retail electric price | volume/weather | purchased power capacity | other | 2011 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 540.2 | 36.0 | 21.3 | -24.6 | 4.9 | 577.8 |', 'question': 'and what was the variance in volume/weather in that same period?', 'ops': '21.3', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2011/page_376.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis plan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business see the 201cplan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business 201d section of entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis for a discussion of this matter , including the planned retirement of debt and preferred securities . results of operations net income 2011 compared to 2010 net income increased by $ 14.6 million primarily due to higher net revenue , partially offset by higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . 2010 compared to 2009 net income increased by $ 2.4 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower interest expense , partially offset by lower other income , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher other operation and maintenance expenses . net revenue 2011 compared to 2010 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2011 to 2010 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the retail electric price variance is primarily due to rate actions , including an annual base rate increase of $ 59 million beginning august 2010 , with an additional increase of $ 9 million beginning may 2011 , as a result of the settlement of the december 2009 rate case . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case settlement . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 721 gwh , or 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including the effect of more favorable weather on residential and commercial sales compared to last year . usage in the industrial sector increased 8.2% ( 8.2 % ) primarily in the chemicals and refining industries . the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases. .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2010 net revenue': 540.2, 'retail electric price': 36.0, 'volume/weather': 21.3, 'purchased power capacity': -24.6, 'other': 4.9, '2011 net revenue': 577.8}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total variance in net revenue from 2010 to 2011?', 'and what was the variance in volume/weather in that same period?', 'how much, then, does this volume/weather variance represent in relation to the net revenue one, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['37.6', '21.3', '56.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(577.8, 540.2)', '21.3', 'subtract(577.8, 540.2), divide(21.3, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [37.6, 21.3, 0.56649], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 21.3}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:52 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the net change in revenue from 2007 to 2008?\nA1: 21.7', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2007 net revenue | volume/weather | net gas revenue | rider revenue | base revenue | other | 2008 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 231.0 | 15.5 | 6.6 | 3.9 | -11.3 | 7.0 | 252.7 |', 'question': 'what is that divided by the 2007 net revenues?', 'ops': 'subtract(252.7, 231.0), divide(#0, 231.0)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2008/page_355.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .", 'doc_post_text': "the volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .", 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2007 net revenue': 231.0, 'volume/weather': 15.5, 'net gas revenue': 6.6, 'rider revenue': 3.9, 'base revenue': -11.3, 'other': 7.0, '2008 net revenue': 252.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in revenue from 2007 to 2008?', 'what is that divided by the 2007 net revenues?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['21.7', '9.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(252.7, 231.0)', 'subtract(252.7, 231.0), divide(#0, 231.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [21.7, 0.09394], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.09394}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:40:52 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total variance in net revenue from 2010 to 2011?\nA1: 37.6\nQ2: and what was the variance in volume/weather in that same period?\nA2: 21.3', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis plan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business see the 201cplan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business 201d section of entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis for a discussion of this matter , including the planned retirement of debt and preferred securities . results of operations net income 2011 compared to 2010 net income increased by $ 14.6 million primarily due to higher net revenue , partially offset by higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . 2010 compared to 2009 net income increased by $ 2.4 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower interest expense , partially offset by lower other income , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher other operation and maintenance expenses . net revenue 2011 compared to 2010 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2011 to 2010 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe retail electric price variance is primarily due to rate actions , including an annual base rate increase of $ 59 million beginning august 2010 , with an additional increase of $ 9 million beginning may 2011 , as a result of the settlement of the december 2009 rate case . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case settlement . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 721 gwh , or 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including the effect of more favorable weather on residential and commercial sales compared to last year . usage in the industrial sector increased 8.2% ( 8.2 % ) primarily in the chemicals and refining industries . the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 net revenue | retail electric price | volume/weather | purchased power capacity | other | 2011 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 540.2 | 36.0 | 21.3 | -24.6 | 4.9 | 577.8 |', 'question': 'how much, then, does this volume/weather variance represent in relation to the net revenue one, in percentage?', 'ops': 'subtract(577.8, 540.2), divide(21.3, #0)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2011/page_376.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis plan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business see the 201cplan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business 201d section of entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis for a discussion of this matter , including the planned retirement of debt and preferred securities . results of operations net income 2011 compared to 2010 net income increased by $ 14.6 million primarily due to higher net revenue , partially offset by higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . 2010 compared to 2009 net income increased by $ 2.4 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower interest expense , partially offset by lower other income , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher other operation and maintenance expenses . net revenue 2011 compared to 2010 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2011 to 2010 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the retail electric price variance is primarily due to rate actions , including an annual base rate increase of $ 59 million beginning august 2010 , with an additional increase of $ 9 million beginning may 2011 , as a result of the settlement of the december 2009 rate case . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case settlement . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 721 gwh , or 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including the effect of more favorable weather on residential and commercial sales compared to last year . usage in the industrial sector increased 8.2% ( 8.2 % ) primarily in the chemicals and refining industries . the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases. .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2010 net revenue': 540.2, 'retail electric price': 36.0, 'volume/weather': 21.3, 'purchased power capacity': -24.6, 'other': 4.9, '2011 net revenue': 577.8}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total variance in net revenue from 2010 to 2011?', 'and what was the variance in volume/weather in that same period?', 'how much, then, does this volume/weather variance represent in relation to the net revenue one, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['37.6', '21.3', '56.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(577.8, 540.2)', '21.3', 'subtract(577.8, 540.2), divide(21.3, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [37.6, 21.3, 0.56649], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.56649}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-nano-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.

import re

from dspy.evaluate import Evaluate

final_baseline_results = []

with mlflow.start_run(run_name="final_evaluation_baseline_gpt_5_mini") as parent_ctx:
    run_name = f"baseline_{lm_oai_gpt_5_mini.model.replace('/', '_')}"
    sanitized_run_name = re.sub(r"[^a-zA-Z0-9_\-]", "_", run_name)
    with mlflow.start_run(run_name=sanitized_run_name, nested=True):
        current_evaluator = Evaluate(
            devset=final_test_examples,
            num_threads=32,
            display_progress=True,
            return_all_scores=True,
            return_outputs=True,
        )
        with dspy.context(lm=lm_oai_gpt_5_mini) as ctx:
            current_result = current_evaluator(
                TurnSolver(reasoning_lm=True), metric=turn_em_metric
            )
            final_baseline_results.append(current_result)

  0%|          | 0/678 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   0%|          | 1/678 [00:09<1:41:42,  9.01s/it]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   0%|          | 2/678 [00:09<43:49,  3.89s/it]  Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   0%|          | 3/678 [00:09<25:38,  2.28s/it]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   1%|          | 4/678 [00:10<16:56,  1.51s/it]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   6%|▌         | 38/678 [00:10<16:05,  1.51s/it]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   6%|▌         | 39/678 [00:10<16:03,  1.51s/it]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   6%|▌         | 40/678 [00:10<16:02,  1.51s/it]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):   6%|▌         | 41/678 [00:10<16:00,  1.51s/it]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  26%|██▌       | 175/678 [00:10<12:38,  1.51s/it]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  28%|██▊       | 189/678 [00:10<12:17,  1.51s/it]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  36%|███▌      | 245/678 [00:10<00:05, 81.72it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  65%|██████▍   | 439/678 [00:10<00:02, 81.72it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  70%|██████▉   | 472/678 [00:10<00:02, 81.72it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  87%|████████▋ | 591/678 [00:10<00:00, 222.15it/s]Average Metric: 0.00 / 0 (0%):  95%|█████████▌| 647/678 [00:10<00:00, 62.95it/s] 
🏃 View run eval at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/2124314efe9d459ca87df7897162eef0
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run baseline_openai_gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/fa6759bae06f4c43908c0feb3e5d00e3
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run final_evaluation_baseline_gpt_5_mini at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/96068655dfcd41cea00140bf3fdd622a
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3

2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:29 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:32 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in thousands ) | 385373.0 | 1110566.0 | 270852.0 | 766801.0 | 1324616.0 |', 'question': 'what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?', 'ops': '385373', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2013/page_118.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'in november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in thousands )': {'2014': 385373.0, '2015': 1110566.0, '2016': 270852.0, '2017': 766801.0, '2018': 1324616.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?', 'what is that divided by 1000?', 'what are lease obligation at entergy lousiana?', 'what is that value over the prior quotient?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['385373', '385.373', '149', '38.7%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['385373', 'divide(385373, const_1000)', '149', 'divide(385373, const_1000), divide(149, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [385373.0, 385.373, 149.0, 0.38664], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 385373.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:33 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the number of gas customers in 2008?\nA1: 93000.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2007 net revenue | volume/weather | net gas revenue | rider revenue | base revenue | other | 2008 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 231.0 | 15.5 | 6.6 | 3.9 | -11.3 | 7.0 | 252.7 |', 'question': 'and what was it in 2007?', 'ops': '86000', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2008/page_355.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .", 'doc_post_text': "the volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .", 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2007 net revenue': 231.0, 'volume/weather': 15.5, 'net gas revenue': 6.6, 'rider revenue': 3.9, 'base revenue': -11.3, 'other': 7.0, '2008 net revenue': 252.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the number of gas customers in 2008?', 'and what was it in 2007?', 'what was, then, the change in that number over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2007 number of customers, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['93000', '86000', '7000', '8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['93000', '86000', 'subtract(93000, 86000)', 'subtract(93000, 86000), divide(#0, 86000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [93000.0, 86000.0, 7000.0, 0.0814], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 86000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:33 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?\nA1: 3200.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nalexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | thereafter |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 4935 | 3144.0 | 3160.0 | 3200.0 | 2768.0 | 9934.0 |', 'question': 'what was it in 2010?', 'ops': '3160', 'id': 'Single_ALXN/2007/page_104.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'alexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .', 'doc_post_text': "9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .", 'doc_table': {'$ 4935': {'2009': 3144.0, '2010': 3160.0, '2011': 3200.0, '2012': 2768.0, 'thereafter': 9934.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?', 'what was it in 2010?', 'what is the difference?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3200', '3160', '40', '1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3200', '3160', 'subtract(3200, 3160)', 'subtract(3200, 3160), divide(#0, 3160)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3200.0, 3160.0, 40.0, 0.01266], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 3160.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:33 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?\nA1: 56.73', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\non february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high |\n| low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low |', 'question': 'and the high price for the quarter ended 12/31/10?', 'ops': '53.14', 'id': 'Single_AMT/2010/page_34.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'part ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .', 'doc_post_text': 'on february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .', 'doc_table': {'high': {'quarter ended march 31': 32.53, 'quarter ended june 30': 34.52, 'quarter ended september 30': 37.71, 'quarter ended december 31': 43.84, '2009': 'high'}, 'low': {'quarter ended march 31': 25.45, 'quarter ended june 30': 27.93, 'quarter ended september 30': 29.89, 'quarter ended december 31': 35.03, '2009': 'low'}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?', 'and the high price for the quarter ended 12/31/10?', 'and the difference between these two prices?', 'so what was the growth rate during this time?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['56.73', '53.14', '3.59', '6.8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['56.73', '53.14', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14)', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14), divide(#0, 53.14)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [56.73, 53.14, 3.59, 0.06756], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 53.14}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:33 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the 2016 net revenue?\nA1: 1542.0\nQ2: what was the 2015 net revenue?\nA2: 1666.0\nQ3: what is the 2016 less the 2015 values?\nA3: -124.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\namortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nas shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2015 net revenue | nuclear realized price changes | rhode island state energy center | nuclear volume | fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement | nuclear fuel expenses | other | 2016 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 1666.0 | -149.0 | -44.0 | -36.0 | 41.0 | 68.0 | -4.0 | 1542.0 |', 'question': 'what is that difference divided by the 2015 value?', 'ops': 'subtract(1542, 1666), divide(#0, 1666)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2017/page_26.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'amortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'as shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2015 net revenue': 1666.0, 'nuclear realized price changes': -149.0, 'rhode island state energy center': -44.0, 'nuclear volume': -36.0, 'fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement': 41.0, 'nuclear fuel expenses': 68.0, 'other': -4.0, '2016 net revenue': 1542.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the 2016 net revenue?', 'what was the 2015 net revenue?', 'what is the 2016 less the 2015 values?', 'what is that difference divided by the 2015 value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1542', '1666', '-124', '-7.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1542', '1666', 'subtract(1542, 1666)', 'subtract(1542, 1666), divide(#0, 1666)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1542.0, 1666.0, -124.0, -0.07443], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -0.07443}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\namerican tower corporation and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) a description of the company 2019s reporting units and the results of the related transitional impairment testing are as follows : verestar 2014verestar was a single segment and reporting unit until december 2002 , when the company committed to a plan to dispose of verestar . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 189.3 million relating to the impairment of goodwill in this reporting unit . the fair value of this reporting unit was determined based on an independent third party appraisal . network development services 2014as of january 1 , 2002 , the reporting units in the company 2019s network development services segment included kline , specialty constructors , galaxy , mts components and flash technologies . the company estimated the fair value of these reporting units utilizing future discounted cash flows and market information as to the value of each reporting unit on january 1 , 2002 . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 387.8 million for the year ended december 31 , 2002 related to the impairment of goodwill within these reporting units . such charge included full impairment for all of the goodwill within the reporting units except kline , for which only a partial impairment was recorded . as discussed in note 2 , the assets of all of these reporting units were sold as of december 31 , 2003 , except for those of kline and our tower construction services unit , which were sold in march and november 2004 , respectively . rental and management 2014the company obtained an independent third party appraisal of the rental and management reporting unit that contains goodwill and determined that goodwill was not impaired . the company 2019s other intangible assets subject to amortization consist of the following as of december 31 , ( in thousands ) : .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company amortizes its intangible assets over periods ranging from three to fifteen years . amortization of intangible assets for the years ended december 31 , 2004 and 2003 aggregated approximately $ 97.8 million and $ 94.6 million , respectively ( excluding amortization of deferred financing costs , which is included in interest expense ) . the company expects to record amortization expense of approximately $ 97.8 million , $ 95.9 million , $ 92.0 million , $ 90.5 million and $ 88.8 million , respectively , for the years ended december 31 , 2005 , 2006 , 2007 , 2008 and 2009 , respectively . 5 . notes receivable in 2000 , the company loaned tv azteca , s.a . de c.v . ( tv azteca ) , the owner of a major national television network in mexico , $ 119.8 million . the loan , which initially bore interest at 12.87% ( 12.87 % ) , payable quarterly , was discounted by the company , as the fair value interest rate at the date of the loan was determined to be 14.25% ( 14.25 % ) . the loan was amended effective january 1 , 2003 to increase the original interest rate to 13.11% ( 13.11 % ) . as of december 31 , 2004 , and 2003 , approximately $ 119.8 million undiscounted ( $ 108.2 million discounted ) under the loan was outstanding and included in notes receivable and other long-term assets in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets . the term of the loan is seventy years ; however , the loan may be prepaid by tv .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | acquired customer base and network location intangibles | deferred financing costs | acquired licenses and other intangibles | total | less accumulated amortization | other intangible assets net | acquired customer base and network location intangibles | deferred financing costs | acquired licenses and other intangibles | total | less accumulated amortization | other intangible assets net |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2004 | 1369607.0 | 89736.0 | 43404.0 | 1502747.0 | -517444.0 | 985303.0 | 1369607.0 | 89736.0 | 43404.0 | 1502747.0 | -517444.0 | 985303.0 |\n| 2003 | 1299521.0 | 111484.0 | 43125.0 | 1454130.0 | -434381.0 | 1019749.0 | 1299521.0 | 111484.0 | 43125.0 | 1454130.0 | -434381.0 | 1019749.0 |', 'question': 'what is the net change in the balance of other intangible assets net from 2003 to 2004?', 'ops': 'subtract(985303, 1019749)', 'id': 'Single_AMT/2004/page_81.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'american tower corporation and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) a description of the company 2019s reporting units and the results of the related transitional impairment testing are as follows : verestar 2014verestar was a single segment and reporting unit until december 2002 , when the company committed to a plan to dispose of verestar . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 189.3 million relating to the impairment of goodwill in this reporting unit . the fair value of this reporting unit was determined based on an independent third party appraisal . network development services 2014as of january 1 , 2002 , the reporting units in the company 2019s network development services segment included kline , specialty constructors , galaxy , mts components and flash technologies . the company estimated the fair value of these reporting units utilizing future discounted cash flows and market information as to the value of each reporting unit on january 1 , 2002 . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 387.8 million for the year ended december 31 , 2002 related to the impairment of goodwill within these reporting units . such charge included full impairment for all of the goodwill within the reporting units except kline , for which only a partial impairment was recorded . as discussed in note 2 , the assets of all of these reporting units were sold as of december 31 , 2003 , except for those of kline and our tower construction services unit , which were sold in march and november 2004 , respectively . rental and management 2014the company obtained an independent third party appraisal of the rental and management reporting unit that contains goodwill and determined that goodwill was not impaired . the company 2019s other intangible assets subject to amortization consist of the following as of december 31 , ( in thousands ) : .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company amortizes its intangible assets over periods ranging from three to fifteen years . amortization of intangible assets for the years ended december 31 , 2004 and 2003 aggregated approximately $ 97.8 million and $ 94.6 million , respectively ( excluding amortization of deferred financing costs , which is included in interest expense ) . the company expects to record amortization expense of approximately $ 97.8 million , $ 95.9 million , $ 92.0 million , $ 90.5 million and $ 88.8 million , respectively , for the years ended december 31 , 2005 , 2006 , 2007 , 2008 and 2009 , respectively . 5 . notes receivable in 2000 , the company loaned tv azteca , s.a . de c.v . ( tv azteca ) , the owner of a major national television network in mexico , $ 119.8 million . the loan , which initially bore interest at 12.87% ( 12.87 % ) , payable quarterly , was discounted by the company , as the fair value interest rate at the date of the loan was determined to be 14.25% ( 14.25 % ) . the loan was amended effective january 1 , 2003 to increase the original interest rate to 13.11% ( 13.11 % ) . as of december 31 , 2004 , and 2003 , approximately $ 119.8 million undiscounted ( $ 108.2 million discounted ) under the loan was outstanding and included in notes receivable and other long-term assets in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets . the term of the loan is seventy years ; however , the loan may be prepaid by tv .', 'doc_table': {'2004': {'acquired customer base and network location intangibles': 1369607.0, 'deferred financing costs': 89736.0, 'acquired licenses and other intangibles': 43404.0, 'total': 1502747.0, 'less accumulated amortization': -517444.0, 'other intangible assets net': 985303.0}, '2003': {'acquired customer base and network location intangibles': 1299521.0, 'deferred financing costs': 111484.0, 'acquired licenses and other intangibles': 43125.0, 'total': 1454130.0, 'less accumulated amortization': -434381.0, 'other intangible assets net': 1019749.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in the balance of other intangible assets net from 2003 to 2004?', 'what percentage change does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['-34446', '-3.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(985303, 1019749)', 'subtract(985303, 1019749), divide(#0, 1019749)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [-34446.0, -0.03378], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -34446.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n15 . commitments and contingencies in the ordinary course of business , the company is involved in lawsuits , arbitrations and other formal and informal dispute resolution procedures , the outcomes of which will determine the company 2019s rights and obligations under insurance and reinsurance agreements . in some disputes , the company seeks to enforce its rights under an agreement or to collect funds owing to it . in other matters , the company is resisting attempts by others to collect funds or enforce alleged rights . these disputes arise from time to time and are ultimately resolved through both informal and formal means , including negotiated resolution , arbitration and litigation . in all such matters , the company believes that its positions are legally and commercially reasonable . the company considers the statuses of these proceedings when determining its reserves for unpaid loss and loss adjustment expenses . aside from litigation and arbitrations related to these insurance and reinsurance agreements , the company is not a party to any other material litigation or arbitration . the company has entered into separate annuity agreements with the prudential insurance of america ( 201cthe prudential 201d ) and an additional unaffiliated life insurance company in which the company has either purchased annuity contracts or become the assignee of annuity proceeds that are meant to settle claim payment obligations in the future . in both instances , the company would become contingently liable if either the prudential or the unaffiliated life insurance company were unable to make payments related to the respective annuity contract . the table below presents the estimated cost to replace all such annuities for which the company was contingently liable for the periods indicated: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n16 . share-based compensation plans the company has a 2010 stock incentive plan ( 201c2010 employee plan 201d ) , a 2009 non-employee director stock option and restricted stock plan ( 201c2009 director plan 201d ) and a 2003 non-employee director equity compensation plan ( 201c2003 director plan 201d ) . under the 2010 employee plan , 4000000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as non- qualified share options , incentive share options , share appreciation rights , restricted share awards or performance share unit awards to officers and key employees of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 2553473 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2010 employee plan . the 2010 employee plan replaced a 2002 employee plan , which replaced a 1995 employee plan ; therefore , no further awards will be granted under the 2002 employee plan or the 1995 employee plan . through december 31 , 2017 , only non-qualified share options , restricted share awards and performance share unit awards had been granted under the employee plans . under the 2009 director plan , 37439 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or restricted share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 34957 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2009 director plan . the 2009 director plan replaced a 1995 director plan , which expired . under the 2003 director plan , 500000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 there were 346714 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2003 director plan. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | the prudential insurance company of america | unaffiliated life insurance company | the prudential insurance company of america | unaffiliated life insurance company |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| at december 31 , 2017 | 144618.0 | 34444.0 | 144618.0 | 34444.0 |\n| at december 31 , 2016 | 146507.0 | 33860.0 | 146507.0 | 33860.0 |', 'question': 'what was the change in the balance of the prudential insurance company of america from 2016 to 2017?', 'ops': 'subtract(144618, 146507)', 'id': 'Single_RE/2017/page_159.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': '15 . commitments and contingencies in the ordinary course of business , the company is involved in lawsuits , arbitrations and other formal and informal dispute resolution procedures , the outcomes of which will determine the company 2019s rights and obligations under insurance and reinsurance agreements . in some disputes , the company seeks to enforce its rights under an agreement or to collect funds owing to it . in other matters , the company is resisting attempts by others to collect funds or enforce alleged rights . these disputes arise from time to time and are ultimately resolved through both informal and formal means , including negotiated resolution , arbitration and litigation . in all such matters , the company believes that its positions are legally and commercially reasonable . the company considers the statuses of these proceedings when determining its reserves for unpaid loss and loss adjustment expenses . aside from litigation and arbitrations related to these insurance and reinsurance agreements , the company is not a party to any other material litigation or arbitration . the company has entered into separate annuity agreements with the prudential insurance of america ( 201cthe prudential 201d ) and an additional unaffiliated life insurance company in which the company has either purchased annuity contracts or become the assignee of annuity proceeds that are meant to settle claim payment obligations in the future . in both instances , the company would become contingently liable if either the prudential or the unaffiliated life insurance company were unable to make payments related to the respective annuity contract . the table below presents the estimated cost to replace all such annuities for which the company was contingently liable for the periods indicated: .', 'doc_post_text': '16 . share-based compensation plans the company has a 2010 stock incentive plan ( 201c2010 employee plan 201d ) , a 2009 non-employee director stock option and restricted stock plan ( 201c2009 director plan 201d ) and a 2003 non-employee director equity compensation plan ( 201c2003 director plan 201d ) . under the 2010 employee plan , 4000000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as non- qualified share options , incentive share options , share appreciation rights , restricted share awards or performance share unit awards to officers and key employees of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 2553473 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2010 employee plan . the 2010 employee plan replaced a 2002 employee plan , which replaced a 1995 employee plan ; therefore , no further awards will be granted under the 2002 employee plan or the 1995 employee plan . through december 31 , 2017 , only non-qualified share options , restricted share awards and performance share unit awards had been granted under the employee plans . under the 2009 director plan , 37439 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or restricted share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 34957 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2009 director plan . the 2009 director plan replaced a 1995 director plan , which expired . under the 2003 director plan , 500000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 there were 346714 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2003 director plan. .', 'doc_table': {'at december 31 , 2017': {'the prudential insurance company of america': 144618.0, 'unaffiliated life insurance company': 34444.0}, 'at december 31 , 2016': {'the prudential insurance company of america': 146507.0, 'unaffiliated life insurance company': 33860.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in the balance of the prudential insurance company of america from 2016 to 2017?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to that balance in 2016, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['-1889', '-1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(144618, 146507)', 'subtract(144618, 146507), divide(#0, 146507)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [-1889.0, -0.01289], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -1889.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the net change in the balance of other intangible assets net from 2003 to 2004?\nA1: -34446.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\namerican tower corporation and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) a description of the company 2019s reporting units and the results of the related transitional impairment testing are as follows : verestar 2014verestar was a single segment and reporting unit until december 2002 , when the company committed to a plan to dispose of verestar . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 189.3 million relating to the impairment of goodwill in this reporting unit . the fair value of this reporting unit was determined based on an independent third party appraisal . network development services 2014as of january 1 , 2002 , the reporting units in the company 2019s network development services segment included kline , specialty constructors , galaxy , mts components and flash technologies . the company estimated the fair value of these reporting units utilizing future discounted cash flows and market information as to the value of each reporting unit on january 1 , 2002 . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 387.8 million for the year ended december 31 , 2002 related to the impairment of goodwill within these reporting units . such charge included full impairment for all of the goodwill within the reporting units except kline , for which only a partial impairment was recorded . as discussed in note 2 , the assets of all of these reporting units were sold as of december 31 , 2003 , except for those of kline and our tower construction services unit , which were sold in march and november 2004 , respectively . rental and management 2014the company obtained an independent third party appraisal of the rental and management reporting unit that contains goodwill and determined that goodwill was not impaired . the company 2019s other intangible assets subject to amortization consist of the following as of december 31 , ( in thousands ) : .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe company amortizes its intangible assets over periods ranging from three to fifteen years . amortization of intangible assets for the years ended december 31 , 2004 and 2003 aggregated approximately $ 97.8 million and $ 94.6 million , respectively ( excluding amortization of deferred financing costs , which is included in interest expense ) . the company expects to record amortization expense of approximately $ 97.8 million , $ 95.9 million , $ 92.0 million , $ 90.5 million and $ 88.8 million , respectively , for the years ended december 31 , 2005 , 2006 , 2007 , 2008 and 2009 , respectively . 5 . notes receivable in 2000 , the company loaned tv azteca , s.a . de c.v . ( tv azteca ) , the owner of a major national television network in mexico , $ 119.8 million . the loan , which initially bore interest at 12.87% ( 12.87 % ) , payable quarterly , was discounted by the company , as the fair value interest rate at the date of the loan was determined to be 14.25% ( 14.25 % ) . the loan was amended effective january 1 , 2003 to increase the original interest rate to 13.11% ( 13.11 % ) . as of december 31 , 2004 , and 2003 , approximately $ 119.8 million undiscounted ( $ 108.2 million discounted ) under the loan was outstanding and included in notes receivable and other long-term assets in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets . the term of the loan is seventy years ; however , the loan may be prepaid by tv .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | acquired customer base and network location intangibles | deferred financing costs | acquired licenses and other intangibles | total | less accumulated amortization | other intangible assets net | acquired customer base and network location intangibles | deferred financing costs | acquired licenses and other intangibles | total | less accumulated amortization | other intangible assets net |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2004 | 1369607.0 | 89736.0 | 43404.0 | 1502747.0 | -517444.0 | 985303.0 | 1369607.0 | 89736.0 | 43404.0 | 1502747.0 | -517444.0 | 985303.0 |\n| 2003 | 1299521.0 | 111484.0 | 43125.0 | 1454130.0 | -434381.0 | 1019749.0 | 1299521.0 | 111484.0 | 43125.0 | 1454130.0 | -434381.0 | 1019749.0 |', 'question': 'what percentage change does this represent?', 'ops': 'subtract(985303, 1019749), divide(#0, 1019749)', 'id': 'Single_AMT/2004/page_81.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'american tower corporation and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) a description of the company 2019s reporting units and the results of the related transitional impairment testing are as follows : verestar 2014verestar was a single segment and reporting unit until december 2002 , when the company committed to a plan to dispose of verestar . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 189.3 million relating to the impairment of goodwill in this reporting unit . the fair value of this reporting unit was determined based on an independent third party appraisal . network development services 2014as of january 1 , 2002 , the reporting units in the company 2019s network development services segment included kline , specialty constructors , galaxy , mts components and flash technologies . the company estimated the fair value of these reporting units utilizing future discounted cash flows and market information as to the value of each reporting unit on january 1 , 2002 . the company recorded an impairment charge of $ 387.8 million for the year ended december 31 , 2002 related to the impairment of goodwill within these reporting units . such charge included full impairment for all of the goodwill within the reporting units except kline , for which only a partial impairment was recorded . as discussed in note 2 , the assets of all of these reporting units were sold as of december 31 , 2003 , except for those of kline and our tower construction services unit , which were sold in march and november 2004 , respectively . rental and management 2014the company obtained an independent third party appraisal of the rental and management reporting unit that contains goodwill and determined that goodwill was not impaired . the company 2019s other intangible assets subject to amortization consist of the following as of december 31 , ( in thousands ) : .', 'doc_post_text': 'the company amortizes its intangible assets over periods ranging from three to fifteen years . amortization of intangible assets for the years ended december 31 , 2004 and 2003 aggregated approximately $ 97.8 million and $ 94.6 million , respectively ( excluding amortization of deferred financing costs , which is included in interest expense ) . the company expects to record amortization expense of approximately $ 97.8 million , $ 95.9 million , $ 92.0 million , $ 90.5 million and $ 88.8 million , respectively , for the years ended december 31 , 2005 , 2006 , 2007 , 2008 and 2009 , respectively . 5 . notes receivable in 2000 , the company loaned tv azteca , s.a . de c.v . ( tv azteca ) , the owner of a major national television network in mexico , $ 119.8 million . the loan , which initially bore interest at 12.87% ( 12.87 % ) , payable quarterly , was discounted by the company , as the fair value interest rate at the date of the loan was determined to be 14.25% ( 14.25 % ) . the loan was amended effective january 1 , 2003 to increase the original interest rate to 13.11% ( 13.11 % ) . as of december 31 , 2004 , and 2003 , approximately $ 119.8 million undiscounted ( $ 108.2 million discounted ) under the loan was outstanding and included in notes receivable and other long-term assets in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets . the term of the loan is seventy years ; however , the loan may be prepaid by tv .', 'doc_table': {'2004': {'acquired customer base and network location intangibles': 1369607.0, 'deferred financing costs': 89736.0, 'acquired licenses and other intangibles': 43404.0, 'total': 1502747.0, 'less accumulated amortization': -517444.0, 'other intangible assets net': 985303.0}, '2003': {'acquired customer base and network location intangibles': 1299521.0, 'deferred financing costs': 111484.0, 'acquired licenses and other intangibles': 43125.0, 'total': 1454130.0, 'less accumulated amortization': -434381.0, 'other intangible assets net': 1019749.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in the balance of other intangible assets net from 2003 to 2004?', 'what percentage change does this represent?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['-34446', '-3.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(985303, 1019749)', 'subtract(985303, 1019749), divide(#0, 1019749)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [-34446.0, -0.03378], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -0.03378}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nwe have adequate access to capital markets to meet any foreseeable cash requirements , and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities . cash flows millions 2014 2013 2012 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\noperating activities higher net income in 2014 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2013 , despite higher income tax payments . 2014 income tax payments were higher than 2013 primarily due to higher income , but also because we paid taxes previously deferred by bonus depreciation ( discussed below ) . higher net income in 2013 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2012 . in addition , we made payments in 2012 for past wages as a result of national labor negotiations , which reduced cash provided by operating activities in 2012 . lower tax benefits from bonus depreciation ( as discussed below ) partially offset the increases . federal tax law provided for 100% ( 100 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2011 and 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2012-2013 . as a result , the company deferred a substantial portion of its 2011-2013 income tax expense , contributing to the positive operating cash flow in those years . congress extended 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for 2014 , but this extension occurred in december and did not have a significant benefit on our income tax payments during 2014 . investing activities higher capital investments , including the early buyout of the long-term operating lease of our headquarters building for approximately $ 261 million , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities compared to 2013 . significant investments also were made for new locomotives , freight cars and containers , and capacity and commercial facility projects . capital investments in 2014 also included $ 99 million for the early buyout of locomotives and freight cars under long-term operating leases , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions . lower capital investments in locomotives and freight cars in 2013 drove the decrease in cash used in investing activities compared to 2012 . included in capital investments in 2012 was $ 75 million for the early buyout of 165 locomotives under long-term operating and capital leases during the first quarter of 2012 , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2014 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 |\n| 2013 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 |\n| 2012 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 |', 'question': 'what was the value included in the capital investments for buyout of locomotives in 2012, in dollars?', 'ops': 'multiply(75, const_1000000)', 'id': 'Single_UNP/2014/page_35.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'we have adequate access to capital markets to meet any foreseeable cash requirements , and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities . cash flows millions 2014 2013 2012 .', 'doc_post_text': 'operating activities higher net income in 2014 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2013 , despite higher income tax payments . 2014 income tax payments were higher than 2013 primarily due to higher income , but also because we paid taxes previously deferred by bonus depreciation ( discussed below ) . higher net income in 2013 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2012 . in addition , we made payments in 2012 for past wages as a result of national labor negotiations , which reduced cash provided by operating activities in 2012 . lower tax benefits from bonus depreciation ( as discussed below ) partially offset the increases . federal tax law provided for 100% ( 100 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2011 and 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2012-2013 . as a result , the company deferred a substantial portion of its 2011-2013 income tax expense , contributing to the positive operating cash flow in those years . congress extended 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for 2014 , but this extension occurred in december and did not have a significant benefit on our income tax payments during 2014 . investing activities higher capital investments , including the early buyout of the long-term operating lease of our headquarters building for approximately $ 261 million , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities compared to 2013 . significant investments also were made for new locomotives , freight cars and containers , and capacity and commercial facility projects . capital investments in 2014 also included $ 99 million for the early buyout of locomotives and freight cars under long-term operating leases , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions . lower capital investments in locomotives and freight cars in 2013 drove the decrease in cash used in investing activities compared to 2012 . included in capital investments in 2012 was $ 75 million for the early buyout of 165 locomotives under long-term operating and capital leases during the first quarter of 2012 , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions. .', 'doc_table': {'2014': {'cash provided by operating activities': 7385.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -4249.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -2982.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': 154.0}, '2013': {'cash provided by operating activities': 6823.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -3405.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -3049.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': 369.0}, '2012': {'cash provided by operating activities': 6161.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -3633.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -2682.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': -154.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value included in the capital investments for buyout of locomotives in 2012, in dollars?', 'and how many locomotives were bought with that value?', 'what was, then, the average cost of each one of those locomotives?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['75000000', '165', '454545'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(75, const_1000000)', '165', 'multiply(75, const_1000000), divide(#0, 165)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [75000000.0, 165.0, 454545.45455], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 75000000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?\nA1: 385373.0\nQ2: what is that divided by 1000?\nA2: 385.373', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in thousands ) | 385373.0 | 1110566.0 | 270852.0 | 766801.0 | 1324616.0 |', 'question': 'what are lease obligation at entergy lousiana?', 'ops': '149', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2013/page_118.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'in november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in thousands )': {'2014': 385373.0, '2015': 1110566.0, '2016': 270852.0, '2017': 766801.0, '2018': 1324616.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?', 'what is that divided by 1000?', 'what are lease obligation at entergy lousiana?', 'what is that value over the prior quotient?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['385373', '385.373', '149', '38.7%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['385373', 'divide(385373, const_1000)', '149', 'divide(385373, const_1000), divide(149, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [385373.0, 385.373, 149.0, 0.38664], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 149.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the sum of net revenues from 2016 and 2017?\nA1: 3043.1', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy arkansas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis results of operations net income 2017 compared to 2016 net income decreased $ 27.4 million primarily due to higher nuclear refueling outage expenses , higher depreciation and amortization expenses , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher interest expense , partially offset by higher other income . 2016 compared to 2015 net income increased $ 92.9 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower other operation and maintenance expenses , partially offset by a higher effective income tax rate and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . net revenue 2017 compared to 2016 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . a0 a0following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2017 to 2016 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe retail electric price variance is primarily due to the implementation of formula rate plan rates effective with the first billing cycle of january 2017 and an increase in base rates effective february 24 , 2016 , each as approved by the apsc . a significant portion of the base rate increase was related to the purchase of power block 2 of the union power station in march 2016 . the increase was partially offset by decreases in the energy efficiency rider , as approved by the apsc , effective april 2016 and january 2017 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case and formula rate plan filings . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the union power station purchase . the opportunity sales variance results from the estimated net revenue effect of the 2017 and 2016 ferc orders in the opportunity sales proceeding attributable to wholesale customers . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the opportunity sales proceeding. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2016 net revenue | retail electric price | opportunity sales | asset retirement obligation | volume/weather | other | 2017 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 1520.5 | 33.8 | 5.6 | -14.8 | -29.0 | 6.5 | 1522.6 |', 'question': 'what is that divided by 2?', 'ops': 'add(1520.5, 1522.6), divide(#0, const_2)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2017/page_316.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy arkansas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis results of operations net income 2017 compared to 2016 net income decreased $ 27.4 million primarily due to higher nuclear refueling outage expenses , higher depreciation and amortization expenses , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher interest expense , partially offset by higher other income . 2016 compared to 2015 net income increased $ 92.9 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower other operation and maintenance expenses , partially offset by a higher effective income tax rate and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . net revenue 2017 compared to 2016 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . a0 a0following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2017 to 2016 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the retail electric price variance is primarily due to the implementation of formula rate plan rates effective with the first billing cycle of january 2017 and an increase in base rates effective february 24 , 2016 , each as approved by the apsc . a significant portion of the base rate increase was related to the purchase of power block 2 of the union power station in march 2016 . the increase was partially offset by decreases in the energy efficiency rider , as approved by the apsc , effective april 2016 and january 2017 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case and formula rate plan filings . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the union power station purchase . the opportunity sales variance results from the estimated net revenue effect of the 2017 and 2016 ferc orders in the opportunity sales proceeding attributable to wholesale customers . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the opportunity sales proceeding. .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2016 net revenue': 1520.5, 'retail electric price': 33.8, 'opportunity sales': 5.6, 'asset retirement obligation': -14.8, 'volume/weather': -29.0, 'other': 6.5, '2017 net revenue': 1522.6}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the sum of net revenues from 2016 and 2017?', 'what is that divided by 2?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3043.1', '1521.55'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(1520.5, 1522.6)', 'add(1520.5, 1522.6), divide(#0, const_2)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3043.1, 1521.55], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1521.55}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis plan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business see the 201cplan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business 201d section of entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis for a discussion of this matter , including the planned retirement of debt and preferred securities . results of operations net income 2011 compared to 2010 net income increased by $ 14.6 million primarily due to higher net revenue , partially offset by higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . 2010 compared to 2009 net income increased by $ 2.4 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower interest expense , partially offset by lower other income , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher other operation and maintenance expenses . net revenue 2011 compared to 2010 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2011 to 2010 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe retail electric price variance is primarily due to rate actions , including an annual base rate increase of $ 59 million beginning august 2010 , with an additional increase of $ 9 million beginning may 2011 , as a result of the settlement of the december 2009 rate case . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case settlement . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 721 gwh , or 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including the effect of more favorable weather on residential and commercial sales compared to last year . usage in the industrial sector increased 8.2% ( 8.2 % ) primarily in the chemicals and refining industries . the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 net revenue | retail electric price | volume/weather | purchased power capacity | other | 2011 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 540.2 | 36.0 | 21.3 | -24.6 | 4.9 | 577.8 |', 'question': 'what was the total variance in net revenue from 2010 to 2011?', 'ops': 'subtract(577.8, 540.2)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2011/page_376.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis plan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business see the 201cplan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business 201d section of entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis for a discussion of this matter , including the planned retirement of debt and preferred securities . results of operations net income 2011 compared to 2010 net income increased by $ 14.6 million primarily due to higher net revenue , partially offset by higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . 2010 compared to 2009 net income increased by $ 2.4 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower interest expense , partially offset by lower other income , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher other operation and maintenance expenses . net revenue 2011 compared to 2010 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2011 to 2010 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the retail electric price variance is primarily due to rate actions , including an annual base rate increase of $ 59 million beginning august 2010 , with an additional increase of $ 9 million beginning may 2011 , as a result of the settlement of the december 2009 rate case . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case settlement . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 721 gwh , or 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including the effect of more favorable weather on residential and commercial sales compared to last year . usage in the industrial sector increased 8.2% ( 8.2 % ) primarily in the chemicals and refining industries . the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases. .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2010 net revenue': 540.2, 'retail electric price': 36.0, 'volume/weather': 21.3, 'purchased power capacity': -24.6, 'other': 4.9, '2011 net revenue': 577.8}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total variance in net revenue from 2010 to 2011?', 'and what was the variance in volume/weather in that same period?', 'how much, then, does this volume/weather variance represent in relation to the net revenue one, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['37.6', '21.3', '56.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(577.8, 540.2)', '21.3', 'subtract(577.8, 540.2), divide(21.3, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [37.6, 21.3, 0.56649], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 37.6}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in net revenues during 2003?\nA1: 50.8', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy louisiana , inc . management\'s financial discussion and analysis gross operating revenues , fuel and purchased power expenses , and other regulatory credits gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase of $ 98.0 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates ; and 2022 an increase due to volume/weather , as discussed above . the increase was partially offset by the following : 2022 a decrease of $ 31.9 million in the price applied to unbilled sales , as discussed above ; 2022 a decrease of $ 12.2 million in rate refund provisions , as discussed above ; and 2022 a decrease of $ 5.2 million in gross wholesale revenue due to decreased sales to affiliated systems . fuel and purchased power expenses increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase in the recovery from customers of deferred fuel costs ; and 2022 an increase in the market price of natural gas . other regulatory credits increased primarily due to : 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 14.3 million of capacity charges related to generation resource planning as allowed by the lpsc ; 2022 the amortization in 2003 of $ 11.8 million of deferred capacity charges , as discussed above ; and 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 11.4 million related to entergy\'s voluntary severance program , in accordance with a proposed stipulation with the lpsc staff . 2003 compared to 2002 net revenue , which is entergy louisiana\'s measure of gross margin , consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related , and purchased power expenses and 2 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2003 to 2002. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe deferred fuel cost revisions variance resulted from a revised unbilled sales pricing estimate made in december 2002 and a further revision made in the first quarter of 2003 to more closely align the fuel component of that pricing with expected recoverable fuel costs . the asset retirement obligation variance was due to the implementation of sfas 143 , "accounting for asset retirement obligations" adopted in january 2003 . see "critical accounting estimates" for more details on sfas 143 . the increase was offset by decommissioning expense and had no effect on net income . the volume variance was due to a decrease in electricity usage in the service territory . billed usage decreased 1868 gwh in the industrial sector including the loss of a large industrial customer to cogeneration. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2002 net revenue | deferred fuel cost revisions | asset retirement obligation | volume | vidalia settlement | other | 2003 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| ( in millions ) | 922.9 | 59.1 | 8.2 | -16.2 | -9.2 | 8.9 | 973.7 |', 'question': 'what is the percent change?', 'ops': 'subtract(973.7, 922.9), divide(#0, 922.9)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2004/page_213.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy louisiana , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis gross operating revenues , fuel and purchased power expenses , and other regulatory credits gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase of $ 98.0 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates ; and 2022 an increase due to volume/weather , as discussed above . the increase was partially offset by the following : 2022 a decrease of $ 31.9 million in the price applied to unbilled sales , as discussed above ; 2022 a decrease of $ 12.2 million in rate refund provisions , as discussed above ; and 2022 a decrease of $ 5.2 million in gross wholesale revenue due to decreased sales to affiliated systems . fuel and purchased power expenses increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase in the recovery from customers of deferred fuel costs ; and 2022 an increase in the market price of natural gas . other regulatory credits increased primarily due to : 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 14.3 million of capacity charges related to generation resource planning as allowed by the lpsc ; 2022 the amortization in 2003 of $ 11.8 million of deferred capacity charges , as discussed above ; and 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 11.4 million related to entergy's voluntary severance program , in accordance with a proposed stipulation with the lpsc staff . 2003 compared to 2002 net revenue , which is entergy louisiana's measure of gross margin , consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related , and purchased power expenses and 2 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2003 to 2002. .", 'doc_post_text': 'the deferred fuel cost revisions variance resulted from a revised unbilled sales pricing estimate made in december 2002 and a further revision made in the first quarter of 2003 to more closely align the fuel component of that pricing with expected recoverable fuel costs . the asset retirement obligation variance was due to the implementation of sfas 143 , "accounting for asset retirement obligations" adopted in january 2003 . see "critical accounting estimates" for more details on sfas 143 . the increase was offset by decommissioning expense and had no effect on net income . the volume variance was due to a decrease in electricity usage in the service territory . billed usage decreased 1868 gwh in the industrial sector including the loss of a large industrial customer to cogeneration. .', 'doc_table': {'( in millions )': {'2002 net revenue': 922.9, 'deferred fuel cost revisions': 59.1, 'asset retirement obligation': 8.2, 'volume': -16.2, 'vidalia settlement': -9.2, 'other': 8.9, '2003 net revenue': 973.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in net revenues during 2003?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['50.8', '5.5%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(973.7, 922.9)', 'subtract(973.7, 922.9), divide(#0, 922.9)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [50.8, 0.05504], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.05504}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the number of gas customers in 2008?\nA1: 93000.0\nQ2: and what was it in 2007?\nA2: 86000.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2007 net revenue | volume/weather | net gas revenue | rider revenue | base revenue | other | 2008 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 231.0 | 15.5 | 6.6 | 3.9 | -11.3 | 7.0 | 252.7 |', 'question': 'what was, then, the change in that number over the year?', 'ops': 'subtract(93000, 86000)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2008/page_355.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .", 'doc_post_text': "the volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .", 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2007 net revenue': 231.0, 'volume/weather': 15.5, 'net gas revenue': 6.6, 'rider revenue': 3.9, 'base revenue': -11.3, 'other': 7.0, '2008 net revenue': 252.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the number of gas customers in 2008?', 'and what was it in 2007?', 'what was, then, the change in that number over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2007 number of customers, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['93000', '86000', '7000', '8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['93000', '86000', 'subtract(93000, 86000)', 'subtract(93000, 86000), divide(#0, 86000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [93000.0, 86000.0, 7000.0, 0.0814], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 7000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?\nA1: 385373.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in thousands ) | 385373.0 | 1110566.0 | 270852.0 | 766801.0 | 1324616.0 |', 'question': 'what is that divided by 1000?', 'ops': 'divide(385373, const_1000)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2013/page_118.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'in november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in thousands )': {'2014': 385373.0, '2015': 1110566.0, '2016': 270852.0, '2017': 766801.0, '2018': 1324616.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?', 'what is that divided by 1000?', 'what are lease obligation at entergy lousiana?', 'what is that value over the prior quotient?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['385373', '385.373', '149', '38.7%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['385373', 'divide(385373, const_1000)', '149', 'divide(385373, const_1000), divide(149, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [385373.0, 385.373, 149.0, 0.38664], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 385.373}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 WARNING dspy.utils.parallelizer: Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy arkansas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis results of operations net income 2017 compared to 2016 net income decreased $ 27.4 million primarily due to higher nuclear refueling outage expenses , higher depreciation and amortization expenses , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher interest expense , partially offset by higher other income . 2016 compared to 2015 net income increased $ 92.9 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower other operation and maintenance expenses , partially offset by a higher effective income tax rate and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . net revenue 2017 compared to 2016 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . a0 a0following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2017 to 2016 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe retail electric price variance is primarily due to the implementation of formula rate plan rates effective with the first billing cycle of january 2017 and an increase in base rates effective february 24 , 2016 , each as approved by the apsc . a significant portion of the base rate increase was related to the purchase of power block 2 of the union power station in march 2016 . the increase was partially offset by decreases in the energy efficiency rider , as approved by the apsc , effective april 2016 and january 2017 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case and formula rate plan filings . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the union power station purchase . the opportunity sales variance results from the estimated net revenue effect of the 2017 and 2016 ferc orders in the opportunity sales proceeding attributable to wholesale customers . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the opportunity sales proceeding. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2016 net revenue | retail electric price | opportunity sales | asset retirement obligation | volume/weather | other | 2017 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 1520.5 | 33.8 | 5.6 | -14.8 | -29.0 | 6.5 | 1522.6 |', 'question': 'what is the sum of net revenues from 2016 and 2017?', 'ops': 'add(1520.5, 1522.6)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2017/page_316.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy arkansas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis results of operations net income 2017 compared to 2016 net income decreased $ 27.4 million primarily due to higher nuclear refueling outage expenses , higher depreciation and amortization expenses , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher interest expense , partially offset by higher other income . 2016 compared to 2015 net income increased $ 92.9 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower other operation and maintenance expenses , partially offset by a higher effective income tax rate and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . net revenue 2017 compared to 2016 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . a0 a0following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2017 to 2016 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the retail electric price variance is primarily due to the implementation of formula rate plan rates effective with the first billing cycle of january 2017 and an increase in base rates effective february 24 , 2016 , each as approved by the apsc . a significant portion of the base rate increase was related to the purchase of power block 2 of the union power station in march 2016 . the increase was partially offset by decreases in the energy efficiency rider , as approved by the apsc , effective april 2016 and january 2017 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case and formula rate plan filings . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the union power station purchase . the opportunity sales variance results from the estimated net revenue effect of the 2017 and 2016 ferc orders in the opportunity sales proceeding attributable to wholesale customers . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the opportunity sales proceeding. .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2016 net revenue': 1520.5, 'retail electric price': 33.8, 'opportunity sales': 5.6, 'asset retirement obligation': -14.8, 'volume/weather': -29.0, 'other': 6.5, '2017 net revenue': 1522.6}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the sum of net revenues from 2016 and 2017?', 'what is that divided by 2?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3043.1', '1521.55'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['add(1520.5, 1522.6)', 'add(1520.5, 1522.6), divide(#0, const_2)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3043.1, 1521.55], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 3043.1}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the change in the balance of the prudential insurance company of america from 2016 to 2017?\nA1: -1889.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\n15 . commitments and contingencies in the ordinary course of business , the company is involved in lawsuits , arbitrations and other formal and informal dispute resolution procedures , the outcomes of which will determine the company 2019s rights and obligations under insurance and reinsurance agreements . in some disputes , the company seeks to enforce its rights under an agreement or to collect funds owing to it . in other matters , the company is resisting attempts by others to collect funds or enforce alleged rights . these disputes arise from time to time and are ultimately resolved through both informal and formal means , including negotiated resolution , arbitration and litigation . in all such matters , the company believes that its positions are legally and commercially reasonable . the company considers the statuses of these proceedings when determining its reserves for unpaid loss and loss adjustment expenses . aside from litigation and arbitrations related to these insurance and reinsurance agreements , the company is not a party to any other material litigation or arbitration . the company has entered into separate annuity agreements with the prudential insurance of america ( 201cthe prudential 201d ) and an additional unaffiliated life insurance company in which the company has either purchased annuity contracts or become the assignee of annuity proceeds that are meant to settle claim payment obligations in the future . in both instances , the company would become contingently liable if either the prudential or the unaffiliated life insurance company were unable to make payments related to the respective annuity contract . the table below presents the estimated cost to replace all such annuities for which the company was contingently liable for the periods indicated: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n16 . share-based compensation plans the company has a 2010 stock incentive plan ( 201c2010 employee plan 201d ) , a 2009 non-employee director stock option and restricted stock plan ( 201c2009 director plan 201d ) and a 2003 non-employee director equity compensation plan ( 201c2003 director plan 201d ) . under the 2010 employee plan , 4000000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as non- qualified share options , incentive share options , share appreciation rights , restricted share awards or performance share unit awards to officers and key employees of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 2553473 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2010 employee plan . the 2010 employee plan replaced a 2002 employee plan , which replaced a 1995 employee plan ; therefore , no further awards will be granted under the 2002 employee plan or the 1995 employee plan . through december 31 , 2017 , only non-qualified share options , restricted share awards and performance share unit awards had been granted under the employee plans . under the 2009 director plan , 37439 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or restricted share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 34957 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2009 director plan . the 2009 director plan replaced a 1995 director plan , which expired . under the 2003 director plan , 500000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 there were 346714 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2003 director plan. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | the prudential insurance company of america | unaffiliated life insurance company | the prudential insurance company of america | unaffiliated life insurance company |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| at december 31 , 2017 | 144618.0 | 34444.0 | 144618.0 | 34444.0 |\n| at december 31 , 2016 | 146507.0 | 33860.0 | 146507.0 | 33860.0 |', 'question': 'and how much does this change represent in relation to that balance in 2016, in percentage?', 'ops': 'subtract(144618, 146507), divide(#0, 146507)', 'id': 'Single_RE/2017/page_159.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': '15 . commitments and contingencies in the ordinary course of business , the company is involved in lawsuits , arbitrations and other formal and informal dispute resolution procedures , the outcomes of which will determine the company 2019s rights and obligations under insurance and reinsurance agreements . in some disputes , the company seeks to enforce its rights under an agreement or to collect funds owing to it . in other matters , the company is resisting attempts by others to collect funds or enforce alleged rights . these disputes arise from time to time and are ultimately resolved through both informal and formal means , including negotiated resolution , arbitration and litigation . in all such matters , the company believes that its positions are legally and commercially reasonable . the company considers the statuses of these proceedings when determining its reserves for unpaid loss and loss adjustment expenses . aside from litigation and arbitrations related to these insurance and reinsurance agreements , the company is not a party to any other material litigation or arbitration . the company has entered into separate annuity agreements with the prudential insurance of america ( 201cthe prudential 201d ) and an additional unaffiliated life insurance company in which the company has either purchased annuity contracts or become the assignee of annuity proceeds that are meant to settle claim payment obligations in the future . in both instances , the company would become contingently liable if either the prudential or the unaffiliated life insurance company were unable to make payments related to the respective annuity contract . the table below presents the estimated cost to replace all such annuities for which the company was contingently liable for the periods indicated: .', 'doc_post_text': '16 . share-based compensation plans the company has a 2010 stock incentive plan ( 201c2010 employee plan 201d ) , a 2009 non-employee director stock option and restricted stock plan ( 201c2009 director plan 201d ) and a 2003 non-employee director equity compensation plan ( 201c2003 director plan 201d ) . under the 2010 employee plan , 4000000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as non- qualified share options , incentive share options , share appreciation rights , restricted share awards or performance share unit awards to officers and key employees of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 2553473 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2010 employee plan . the 2010 employee plan replaced a 2002 employee plan , which replaced a 1995 employee plan ; therefore , no further awards will be granted under the 2002 employee plan or the 1995 employee plan . through december 31 , 2017 , only non-qualified share options , restricted share awards and performance share unit awards had been granted under the employee plans . under the 2009 director plan , 37439 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or restricted share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 , there were 34957 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2009 director plan . the 2009 director plan replaced a 1995 director plan , which expired . under the 2003 director plan , 500000 common shares have been authorized to be granted as share options or share awards to non-employee directors of the company . at december 31 , 2017 there were 346714 remaining shares available to be granted under the 2003 director plan. .', 'doc_table': {'at december 31 , 2017': {'the prudential insurance company of america': 144618.0, 'unaffiliated life insurance company': 34444.0}, 'at december 31 , 2016': {'the prudential insurance company of america': 146507.0, 'unaffiliated life insurance company': 33860.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in the balance of the prudential insurance company of america from 2016 to 2017?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to that balance in 2016, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['-1889', '-1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(144618, 146507)', 'subtract(144618, 146507), divide(#0, 146507)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [-1889.0, -0.01289], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -0.01289}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value included in the capital investments for buyout of locomotives in 2012, in dollars?\nA1: 75000000.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nwe have adequate access to capital markets to meet any foreseeable cash requirements , and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities . cash flows millions 2014 2013 2012 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\noperating activities higher net income in 2014 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2013 , despite higher income tax payments . 2014 income tax payments were higher than 2013 primarily due to higher income , but also because we paid taxes previously deferred by bonus depreciation ( discussed below ) . higher net income in 2013 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2012 . in addition , we made payments in 2012 for past wages as a result of national labor negotiations , which reduced cash provided by operating activities in 2012 . lower tax benefits from bonus depreciation ( as discussed below ) partially offset the increases . federal tax law provided for 100% ( 100 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2011 and 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2012-2013 . as a result , the company deferred a substantial portion of its 2011-2013 income tax expense , contributing to the positive operating cash flow in those years . congress extended 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for 2014 , but this extension occurred in december and did not have a significant benefit on our income tax payments during 2014 . investing activities higher capital investments , including the early buyout of the long-term operating lease of our headquarters building for approximately $ 261 million , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities compared to 2013 . significant investments also were made for new locomotives , freight cars and containers , and capacity and commercial facility projects . capital investments in 2014 also included $ 99 million for the early buyout of locomotives and freight cars under long-term operating leases , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions . lower capital investments in locomotives and freight cars in 2013 drove the decrease in cash used in investing activities compared to 2012 . included in capital investments in 2012 was $ 75 million for the early buyout of 165 locomotives under long-term operating and capital leases during the first quarter of 2012 , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2014 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 |\n| 2013 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 |\n| 2012 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 |', 'question': 'and how many locomotives were bought with that value?', 'ops': '165', 'id': 'Single_UNP/2014/page_35.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'we have adequate access to capital markets to meet any foreseeable cash requirements , and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities . cash flows millions 2014 2013 2012 .', 'doc_post_text': 'operating activities higher net income in 2014 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2013 , despite higher income tax payments . 2014 income tax payments were higher than 2013 primarily due to higher income , but also because we paid taxes previously deferred by bonus depreciation ( discussed below ) . higher net income in 2013 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2012 . in addition , we made payments in 2012 for past wages as a result of national labor negotiations , which reduced cash provided by operating activities in 2012 . lower tax benefits from bonus depreciation ( as discussed below ) partially offset the increases . federal tax law provided for 100% ( 100 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2011 and 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2012-2013 . as a result , the company deferred a substantial portion of its 2011-2013 income tax expense , contributing to the positive operating cash flow in those years . congress extended 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for 2014 , but this extension occurred in december and did not have a significant benefit on our income tax payments during 2014 . investing activities higher capital investments , including the early buyout of the long-term operating lease of our headquarters building for approximately $ 261 million , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities compared to 2013 . significant investments also were made for new locomotives , freight cars and containers , and capacity and commercial facility projects . capital investments in 2014 also included $ 99 million for the early buyout of locomotives and freight cars under long-term operating leases , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions . lower capital investments in locomotives and freight cars in 2013 drove the decrease in cash used in investing activities compared to 2012 . included in capital investments in 2012 was $ 75 million for the early buyout of 165 locomotives under long-term operating and capital leases during the first quarter of 2012 , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions. .', 'doc_table': {'2014': {'cash provided by operating activities': 7385.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -4249.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -2982.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': 154.0}, '2013': {'cash provided by operating activities': 6823.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -3405.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -3049.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': 369.0}, '2012': {'cash provided by operating activities': 6161.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -3633.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -2682.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': -154.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value included in the capital investments for buyout of locomotives in 2012, in dollars?', 'and how many locomotives were bought with that value?', 'what was, then, the average cost of each one of those locomotives?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['75000000', '165', '454545'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(75, const_1000000)', '165', 'multiply(75, const_1000000), divide(#0, 165)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [75000000.0, 165.0, 454545.45455], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 165.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\namortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nas shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2015 net revenue | nuclear realized price changes | rhode island state energy center | nuclear volume | fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement | nuclear fuel expenses | other | 2016 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 1666.0 | -149.0 | -44.0 | -36.0 | 41.0 | 68.0 | -4.0 | 1542.0 |', 'question': 'what was the 2016 net revenue?', 'ops': '1542', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2017/page_26.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'amortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'as shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2015 net revenue': 1666.0, 'nuclear realized price changes': -149.0, 'rhode island state energy center': -44.0, 'nuclear volume': -36.0, 'fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement': 41.0, 'nuclear fuel expenses': 68.0, 'other': -4.0, '2016 net revenue': 1542.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the 2016 net revenue?', 'what was the 2015 net revenue?', 'what is the 2016 less the 2015 values?', 'what is that difference divided by the 2015 value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1542', '1666', '-124', '-7.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1542', '1666', 'subtract(1542, 1666)', 'subtract(1542, 1666), divide(#0, 1666)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1542.0, 1666.0, -124.0, -0.07443], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1542.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?\nA1: 56.73\nQ2: and the high price for the quarter ended 12/31/10?\nA2: 53.14', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\non february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high |\n| low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low |', 'question': 'and the difference between these two prices?', 'ops': 'subtract(56.73, 53.14)', 'id': 'Single_AMT/2010/page_34.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'part ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .', 'doc_post_text': 'on february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .', 'doc_table': {'high': {'quarter ended march 31': 32.53, 'quarter ended june 30': 34.52, 'quarter ended september 30': 37.71, 'quarter ended december 31': 43.84, '2009': 'high'}, 'low': {'quarter ended march 31': 25.45, 'quarter ended june 30': 27.93, 'quarter ended september 30': 29.89, 'quarter ended december 31': 35.03, '2009': 'low'}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?', 'and the high price for the quarter ended 12/31/10?', 'and the difference between these two prices?', 'so what was the growth rate during this time?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['56.73', '53.14', '3.59', '6.8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['56.73', '53.14', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14)', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14), divide(#0, 53.14)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [56.73, 53.14, 3.59, 0.06756], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 3.59}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?\nA1: 3200.0\nQ2: what was it in 2010?\nA2: 3160.0\nQ3: what is the difference?\nA3: 40.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nalexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | thereafter |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 4935 | 3144.0 | 3160.0 | 3200.0 | 2768.0 | 9934.0 |', 'question': 'what is the percent change?', 'ops': 'subtract(3200, 3160), divide(#0, 3160)', 'id': 'Single_ALXN/2007/page_104.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'alexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .', 'doc_post_text': "9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .", 'doc_table': {'$ 4935': {'2009': 3144.0, '2010': 3160.0, '2011': 3200.0, '2012': 2768.0, 'thereafter': 9934.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?', 'what was it in 2010?', 'what is the difference?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3200', '3160', '40', '1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3200', '3160', 'subtract(3200, 3160)', 'subtract(3200, 3160), divide(#0, 3160)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3200.0, 3160.0, 40.0, 0.01266], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.01266}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the 2016 net revenue?\nA1: 1542.0\nQ2: what was the 2015 net revenue?\nA2: 1666.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\namortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nas shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2015 net revenue | nuclear realized price changes | rhode island state energy center | nuclear volume | fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement | nuclear fuel expenses | other | 2016 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 1666.0 | -149.0 | -44.0 | -36.0 | 41.0 | 68.0 | -4.0 | 1542.0 |', 'question': 'what is the 2016 less the 2015 values?', 'ops': 'subtract(1542, 1666)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2017/page_26.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'amortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'as shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2015 net revenue': 1666.0, 'nuclear realized price changes': -149.0, 'rhode island state energy center': -44.0, 'nuclear volume': -36.0, 'fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement': 41.0, 'nuclear fuel expenses': 68.0, 'other': -4.0, '2016 net revenue': 1542.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the 2016 net revenue?', 'what was the 2015 net revenue?', 'what is the 2016 less the 2015 values?', 'what is that difference divided by the 2015 value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1542', '1666', '-124', '-7.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1542', '1666', 'subtract(1542, 1666)', 'subtract(1542, 1666), divide(#0, 1666)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1542.0, 1666.0, -124.0, -0.07443], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': -124.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nalexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | thereafter |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 4935 | 3144.0 | 3160.0 | 3200.0 | 2768.0 | 9934.0 |', 'question': 'what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?', 'ops': '3200', 'id': 'Single_ALXN/2007/page_104.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'alexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .', 'doc_post_text': "9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .", 'doc_table': {'$ 4935': {'2009': 3144.0, '2010': 3160.0, '2011': 3200.0, '2012': 2768.0, 'thereafter': 9934.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?', 'what was it in 2010?', 'what is the difference?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3200', '3160', '40', '1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3200', '3160', 'subtract(3200, 3160)', 'subtract(3200, 3160), divide(#0, 3160)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3200.0, 3160.0, 40.0, 0.01266], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 3200.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the value included in the capital investments for buyout of locomotives in 2012, in dollars?\nA1: 75000000.0\nQ2: and how many locomotives were bought with that value?\nA2: 165.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nwe have adequate access to capital markets to meet any foreseeable cash requirements , and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities . cash flows millions 2014 2013 2012 .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\noperating activities higher net income in 2014 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2013 , despite higher income tax payments . 2014 income tax payments were higher than 2013 primarily due to higher income , but also because we paid taxes previously deferred by bonus depreciation ( discussed below ) . higher net income in 2013 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2012 . in addition , we made payments in 2012 for past wages as a result of national labor negotiations , which reduced cash provided by operating activities in 2012 . lower tax benefits from bonus depreciation ( as discussed below ) partially offset the increases . federal tax law provided for 100% ( 100 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2011 and 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2012-2013 . as a result , the company deferred a substantial portion of its 2011-2013 income tax expense , contributing to the positive operating cash flow in those years . congress extended 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for 2014 , but this extension occurred in december and did not have a significant benefit on our income tax payments during 2014 . investing activities higher capital investments , including the early buyout of the long-term operating lease of our headquarters building for approximately $ 261 million , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities compared to 2013 . significant investments also were made for new locomotives , freight cars and containers , and capacity and commercial facility projects . capital investments in 2014 also included $ 99 million for the early buyout of locomotives and freight cars under long-term operating leases , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions . lower capital investments in locomotives and freight cars in 2013 drove the decrease in cash used in investing activities compared to 2012 . included in capital investments in 2012 was $ 75 million for the early buyout of 165 locomotives under long-term operating and capital leases during the first quarter of 2012 , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents | cash provided by operating activities | cash used in investing activities | cash used in financing activities | net change in cash and cashequivalents |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2014 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 | 7385.0 | -4249.0 | -2982.0 | 154.0 |\n| 2013 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 | 6823.0 | -3405.0 | -3049.0 | 369.0 |\n| 2012 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 | 6161.0 | -3633.0 | -2682.0 | -154.0 |', 'question': 'what was, then, the average cost of each one of those locomotives?', 'ops': 'multiply(75, const_1000000), divide(#0, 165)', 'id': 'Single_UNP/2014/page_35.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'we have adequate access to capital markets to meet any foreseeable cash requirements , and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities . cash flows millions 2014 2013 2012 .', 'doc_post_text': 'operating activities higher net income in 2014 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2013 , despite higher income tax payments . 2014 income tax payments were higher than 2013 primarily due to higher income , but also because we paid taxes previously deferred by bonus depreciation ( discussed below ) . higher net income in 2013 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2012 . in addition , we made payments in 2012 for past wages as a result of national labor negotiations , which reduced cash provided by operating activities in 2012 . lower tax benefits from bonus depreciation ( as discussed below ) partially offset the increases . federal tax law provided for 100% ( 100 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2011 and 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2012-2013 . as a result , the company deferred a substantial portion of its 2011-2013 income tax expense , contributing to the positive operating cash flow in those years . congress extended 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for 2014 , but this extension occurred in december and did not have a significant benefit on our income tax payments during 2014 . investing activities higher capital investments , including the early buyout of the long-term operating lease of our headquarters building for approximately $ 261 million , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities compared to 2013 . significant investments also were made for new locomotives , freight cars and containers , and capacity and commercial facility projects . capital investments in 2014 also included $ 99 million for the early buyout of locomotives and freight cars under long-term operating leases , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions . lower capital investments in locomotives and freight cars in 2013 drove the decrease in cash used in investing activities compared to 2012 . included in capital investments in 2012 was $ 75 million for the early buyout of 165 locomotives under long-term operating and capital leases during the first quarter of 2012 , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions. .', 'doc_table': {'2014': {'cash provided by operating activities': 7385.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -4249.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -2982.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': 154.0}, '2013': {'cash provided by operating activities': 6823.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -3405.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -3049.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': 369.0}, '2012': {'cash provided by operating activities': 6161.0, 'cash used in investing activities': -3633.0, 'cash used in financing activities': -2682.0, 'net change in cash and cashequivalents': -154.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the value included in the capital investments for buyout of locomotives in 2012, in dollars?', 'and how many locomotives were bought with that value?', 'what was, then, the average cost of each one of those locomotives?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['75000000', '165', '454545'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['multiply(75, const_1000000)', '165', 'multiply(75, const_1000000), divide(#0, 165)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [75000000.0, 165.0, 454545.45455], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 454545.45455}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the number of gas customers in 2008?\nA1: 93000.0\nQ2: and what was it in 2007?\nA2: 86000.0\nQ3: what was, then, the change in that number over the year?\nA3: 7000.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2007 net revenue | volume/weather | net gas revenue | rider revenue | base revenue | other | 2008 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 231.0 | 15.5 | 6.6 | 3.9 | -11.3 | 7.0 | 252.7 |', 'question': 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2007 number of customers, in percentage?', 'ops': 'subtract(93000, 86000), divide(#0, 86000)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2008/page_355.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .", 'doc_post_text': "the volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .", 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2007 net revenue': 231.0, 'volume/weather': 15.5, 'net gas revenue': 6.6, 'rider revenue': 3.9, 'base revenue': -11.3, 'other': 7.0, '2008 net revenue': 252.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the number of gas customers in 2008?', 'and what was it in 2007?', 'what was, then, the change in that number over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2007 number of customers, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['93000', '86000', '7000', '8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['93000', '86000', 'subtract(93000, 86000)', 'subtract(93000, 86000), divide(#0, 86000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [93000.0, 86000.0, 7000.0, 0.0814], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.0814}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?\nA1: 56.73\nQ2: and the high price for the quarter ended 12/31/10?\nA2: 53.14\nQ3: and the difference between these two prices?\nA3: 3.59', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\non february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high |\n| low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low |', 'question': 'so what was the growth rate during this time?', 'ops': 'subtract(56.73, 53.14), divide(#0, 53.14)', 'id': 'Single_AMT/2010/page_34.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'part ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .', 'doc_post_text': 'on february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .', 'doc_table': {'high': {'quarter ended march 31': 32.53, 'quarter ended june 30': 34.52, 'quarter ended september 30': 37.71, 'quarter ended december 31': 43.84, '2009': 'high'}, 'low': {'quarter ended march 31': 25.45, 'quarter ended june 30': 27.93, 'quarter ended september 30': 29.89, 'quarter ended december 31': 35.03, '2009': 'low'}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?', 'and the high price for the quarter ended 12/31/10?', 'and the difference between these two prices?', 'so what was the growth rate during this time?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['56.73', '53.14', '3.59', '6.8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['56.73', '53.14', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14)', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14), divide(#0, 53.14)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [56.73, 53.14, 3.59, 0.06756], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 0.06756}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the 2016 net revenue?\nA1: 1542.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\namortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nas shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2015 net revenue | nuclear realized price changes | rhode island state energy center | nuclear volume | fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement | nuclear fuel expenses | other | 2016 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 1666.0 | -149.0 | -44.0 | -36.0 | 41.0 | 68.0 | -4.0 | 1542.0 |', 'question': 'what was the 2015 net revenue?', 'ops': '1666', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2017/page_26.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'amortized over a nine-year period beginning december 2015 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the business combination and customer credits . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather during the unbilled period and an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales . the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry , and increased demand from new customers , primarily in the industrial gases industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . a0 see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . entergy wholesale commodities following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'as shown in the table above , net revenue for entergy wholesale commodities decreased by approximately $ 124 million in 2016 primarily due to : 2022 lower realized wholesale energy prices and lower capacity prices , the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa , and vermont yankee capacity revenue . the effect of the amortization of the palisades below- market ppa and vermont yankee capacity revenue on the net revenue variance from 2015 to 2016 is minimal ; 2022 the sale of the rhode island state energy center in december 2015 . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rhode island state energy center sale ; and 2022 lower volume in the entergy wholesale commodities nuclear fleet resulting from more refueling outage days in 2016 as compared to 2015 and larger exercise of resupply options in 2016 as compared to 2015 . see 201cnuclear matters - indian point 201d below for discussion of the extended indian point 2 outage in the second quarter entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2015 net revenue': 1666.0, 'nuclear realized price changes': -149.0, 'rhode island state energy center': -44.0, 'nuclear volume': -36.0, 'fitzpatrick reimbursement agreement': 41.0, 'nuclear fuel expenses': 68.0, 'other': -4.0, '2016 net revenue': 1542.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the 2016 net revenue?', 'what was the 2015 net revenue?', 'what is the 2016 less the 2015 values?', 'what is that difference divided by the 2015 value?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['1542', '1666', '-124', '-7.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['1542', '1666', 'subtract(1542, 1666)', 'subtract(1542, 1666), divide(#0, 1666)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [1542.0, 1666.0, -124.0, -0.07443], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 1666.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?\nA1: 3200.0\nQ2: what was it in 2010?\nA2: 3160.0', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nalexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\n9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | thereafter |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| $ 4935 | 3144.0 | 3160.0 | 3200.0 | 2768.0 | 9934.0 |', 'question': 'what is the difference?', 'ops': 'subtract(3200, 3160)', 'id': 'Single_ALXN/2007/page_104.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'alexion pharmaceuticals , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) for the years ended december 31 , 2007 and 2006 , five month period ended december 31 , 2005 , and year ended july 31 , 2005 ( amounts in thousands , except share and per share amounts ) aggregate future minimum annual rental payments for the next five years and thereafter under non-cancellable operating leases ( including facilities and equipment ) as of december 31 , 2007 are: .', 'doc_post_text': "9 . commitments and contingencies legal proceedings on march 16 , 2007 , pdl biopharma , inc. , or pdl , filed a civil action against alexion in the u.s . district court for the district of delaware . pdl claims willful infringement by alexion of pdl patents due to sales of soliris . pdl seeks unspecified damages , but no less than a reasonable royalty , plus attorney 2019s fees . alexion has denied pdl's claims . in addition , we filed counterclaims seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of certain u.s . patents held by pdl . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to pdl's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . on february 4 , 2008 , sb2 , inc . filed a civil action against alexion in the united states district court for the northern district of california . sb2 , inc . claims willfull infringement by alexion of sb2 , inc . patents due to sales of soliris . sb2 , inc . seeks unspecified monetary damages , equitable relief and attorneys fees . alexion believes it has good and valid defenses to sb2's claims and intends to vigorously defend the case and pursue its counterclaims . the results of such civil actions cannot be predicted with certainty due to their early stages . however , depending on the outcome of these legal matters , the operating results of the company could be materially impacted through adjustments to cost of sales ( see notes 2 , 6 and 15 for additional information related to royalties ) . product supply the large-scale product supply agreement dated december 18 , 2002 , or the lonza agreement , between lonza sales ag , or lonza , and us , relating to the manufacture of soliris , was amended in june 2007 . we amended our supply agreement to provide for additional purchase commitments of soliris of $ 30000 to $ 35000 through 2013 . such commitments may only be cancelled in limited circumstances. .", 'doc_table': {'$ 4935': {'2009': 3144.0, '2010': 3160.0, '2011': 3200.0, '2012': 2768.0, 'thereafter': 9934.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the minimum annual rental payment in 2011?', 'what was it in 2010?', 'what is the difference?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['3200', '3160', '40', '1.3%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['3200', '3160', 'subtract(3200, 3160)', 'subtract(3200, 3160), divide(#0, 3160)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [3200.0, 3160.0, 40.0, 0.01266], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 40.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?\nA1: 385373.0\nQ2: what is that divided by 1000?\nA2: 385.373\nQ3: what are lease obligation at entergy lousiana?\nA3: 149.0', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nin november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in thousands ) | 385373.0 | 1110566.0 | 270852.0 | 766801.0 | 1324616.0 |', 'question': 'what is that value over the prior quotient?', 'ops': 'divide(385373, const_1000), divide(149, #0)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2013/page_118.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy corporation and subsidiaries notes to financial statements ( a ) consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds , some of which are secured by collateral first mortgage bonds . ( b ) these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . ( c ) pursuant to the nuclear waste policy act of 1982 , entergy 2019s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the doe for spent nuclear fuel disposal service . the contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to april 7 , 1983 . entergy arkansas is the only entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee , plus accrued interest , in long-term ( d ) see note 10 to the financial statements for further discussion of the waterford 3 and grand gulf lease obligations . ( e ) the fair value excludes lease obligations of $ 149 million at entergy louisiana and $ 97 million at system energy , long-term doe obligations of $ 181 million at entergy arkansas , and the note payable to nypa of $ 95 million at entergy , and includes debt due within one year . fair values are classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in note 16 to the financial statements and are based on prices derived from inputs such as benchmark yields and reported trades . the annual long-term debt maturities ( excluding lease obligations and long-term doe obligations ) for debt outstanding as of december 31 , 2013 , for the next five years are as follows : amount ( in thousands ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'in november 2000 , entergy 2019s non-utility nuclear business purchased the fitzpatrick and indian point 3 power plants in a seller-financed transaction . entergy issued notes to nypa with seven annual installments of approximately $ 108 million commencing one year from the date of the closing , and eight annual installments of $ 20 million commencing eight years from the date of the closing . these notes do not have a stated interest rate , but have an implicit interest rate of 4.8% ( 4.8 % ) . in accordance with the purchase agreement with nypa , the purchase of indian point 2 in 2001 resulted in entergy becoming liable to nypa for an additional $ 10 million per year for 10 years , beginning in september 2003 . this liability was recorded upon the purchase of indian point 2 in september 2001 . in july 2003 a payment of $ 102 million was made prior to maturity on the note payable to nypa . under a provision in a letter of credit supporting these notes , if certain of the utility operating companies or system energy were to default on other indebtedness , entergy could be required to post collateral to support the letter of credit . entergy gulf states louisiana , entergy louisiana , entergy mississippi , entergy texas , and system energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the ferc that extend through october 2015 . entergy arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the apsc that extends through december 2015 . entergy new orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the city council that extends through july 2014 . capital funds agreement pursuant to an agreement with certain creditors , entergy corporation has agreed to supply system energy with sufficient capital to : 2022 maintain system energy 2019s equity capital at a minimum of 35% ( 35 % ) of its total capitalization ( excluding short- term debt ) ; .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in thousands )': {'2014': 385373.0, '2015': 1110566.0, '2016': 270852.0, '2017': 766801.0, '2018': 1324616.0}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what are the annual long-term obligations in 2014?', 'what is that divided by 1000?', 'what are lease obligation at entergy lousiana?', 'what is that value over the prior quotient?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['385373', '385.373', '149', '38.7%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['385373', 'divide(385373, const_1000)', '149', 'divide(385373, const_1000), divide(149, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [385373.0, 385.373, 149.0, 0.38664], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.38664}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy louisiana , inc . management\'s financial discussion and analysis gross operating revenues , fuel and purchased power expenses , and other regulatory credits gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase of $ 98.0 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates ; and 2022 an increase due to volume/weather , as discussed above . the increase was partially offset by the following : 2022 a decrease of $ 31.9 million in the price applied to unbilled sales , as discussed above ; 2022 a decrease of $ 12.2 million in rate refund provisions , as discussed above ; and 2022 a decrease of $ 5.2 million in gross wholesale revenue due to decreased sales to affiliated systems . fuel and purchased power expenses increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase in the recovery from customers of deferred fuel costs ; and 2022 an increase in the market price of natural gas . other regulatory credits increased primarily due to : 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 14.3 million of capacity charges related to generation resource planning as allowed by the lpsc ; 2022 the amortization in 2003 of $ 11.8 million of deferred capacity charges , as discussed above ; and 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 11.4 million related to entergy\'s voluntary severance program , in accordance with a proposed stipulation with the lpsc staff . 2003 compared to 2002 net revenue , which is entergy louisiana\'s measure of gross margin , consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related , and purchased power expenses and 2 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2003 to 2002. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe deferred fuel cost revisions variance resulted from a revised unbilled sales pricing estimate made in december 2002 and a further revision made in the first quarter of 2003 to more closely align the fuel component of that pricing with expected recoverable fuel costs . the asset retirement obligation variance was due to the implementation of sfas 143 , "accounting for asset retirement obligations" adopted in january 2003 . see "critical accounting estimates" for more details on sfas 143 . the increase was offset by decommissioning expense and had no effect on net income . the volume variance was due to a decrease in electricity usage in the service territory . billed usage decreased 1868 gwh in the industrial sector including the loss of a large industrial customer to cogeneration. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2002 net revenue | deferred fuel cost revisions | asset retirement obligation | volume | vidalia settlement | other | 2003 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| ( in millions ) | 922.9 | 59.1 | 8.2 | -16.2 | -9.2 | 8.9 | 973.7 |', 'question': 'what was the change in net revenues during 2003?', 'ops': 'subtract(973.7, 922.9)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2004/page_213.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy louisiana , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis gross operating revenues , fuel and purchased power expenses , and other regulatory credits gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase of $ 98.0 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates ; and 2022 an increase due to volume/weather , as discussed above . the increase was partially offset by the following : 2022 a decrease of $ 31.9 million in the price applied to unbilled sales , as discussed above ; 2022 a decrease of $ 12.2 million in rate refund provisions , as discussed above ; and 2022 a decrease of $ 5.2 million in gross wholesale revenue due to decreased sales to affiliated systems . fuel and purchased power expenses increased primarily due to : 2022 an increase in the recovery from customers of deferred fuel costs ; and 2022 an increase in the market price of natural gas . other regulatory credits increased primarily due to : 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 14.3 million of capacity charges related to generation resource planning as allowed by the lpsc ; 2022 the amortization in 2003 of $ 11.8 million of deferred capacity charges , as discussed above ; and 2022 the deferral in 2004 of $ 11.4 million related to entergy's voluntary severance program , in accordance with a proposed stipulation with the lpsc staff . 2003 compared to 2002 net revenue , which is entergy louisiana's measure of gross margin , consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related , and purchased power expenses and 2 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2003 to 2002. .", 'doc_post_text': 'the deferred fuel cost revisions variance resulted from a revised unbilled sales pricing estimate made in december 2002 and a further revision made in the first quarter of 2003 to more closely align the fuel component of that pricing with expected recoverable fuel costs . the asset retirement obligation variance was due to the implementation of sfas 143 , "accounting for asset retirement obligations" adopted in january 2003 . see "critical accounting estimates" for more details on sfas 143 . the increase was offset by decommissioning expense and had no effect on net income . the volume variance was due to a decrease in electricity usage in the service territory . billed usage decreased 1868 gwh in the industrial sector including the loss of a large industrial customer to cogeneration. .', 'doc_table': {'( in millions )': {'2002 net revenue': 922.9, 'deferred fuel cost revisions': 59.1, 'asset retirement obligation': 8.2, 'volume': -16.2, 'vidalia settlement': -9.2, 'other': 8.9, '2003 net revenue': 973.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the change in net revenues during 2003?', 'what is the percent change?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['50.8', '5.5%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(973.7, 922.9)', 'subtract(973.7, 922.9), divide(#0, 922.9)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [50.8, 0.05504], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 50.8}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\npart ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\non february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 | quarter ended march 31 | quarter ended june 30 | quarter ended september 30 | quarter ended december 31 | 2009 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high | 32.53 | 34.52 | 37.71 | 43.84 | high |\n| low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low | 25.45 | 27.93 | 29.89 | 35.03 | low |', 'question': 'what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?', 'ops': '56.73', 'id': 'Single_AMT/2010/page_34.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': 'part ii item 5 . market for registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the new york stock exchange ( 201cnyse 201d ) for the years 2010 and 2009. .', 'doc_post_text': 'on february 11 , 2011 , the closing price of our common stock was $ 56.73 per share as reported on the nyse . as of february 11 , 2011 , we had 397612895 outstanding shares of common stock and 463 registered holders . dividends we have not historically paid a dividend on our common stock . payment of dividends in the future , when , as and if authorized by our board of directors , would depend upon many factors , including our earnings and financial condition , restrictions under applicable law and our current and future loan agreements , our debt service requirements , our capital expenditure requirements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time , including the potential determination to elect reit status . in addition , the loan agreement for our revolving credit facility and term loan contain covenants that generally restrict our ability to pay dividends unless certain financial covenants are satisfied . for more information about the restrictions under the loan agreement for the revolving credit facility and term loan , our notes indentures and the loan agreement related to our securitization , see item 7 of this annual report under the caption 201cmanagement 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 2014liquidity and capital resources 2014factors affecting sources of liquidity 201d and note 6 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. .', 'doc_table': {'high': {'quarter ended march 31': 32.53, 'quarter ended june 30': 34.52, 'quarter ended september 30': 37.71, 'quarter ended december 31': 43.84, '2009': 'high'}, 'low': {'quarter ended march 31': 25.45, 'quarter ended june 30': 27.93, 'quarter ended september 30': 29.89, 'quarter ended december 31': 35.03, '2009': 'low'}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the closing price of common stock as of 2/11/11?', 'and the high price for the quarter ended 12/31/10?', 'and the difference between these two prices?', 'so what was the growth rate during this time?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['56.73', '53.14', '3.59', '6.8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['56.73', '53.14', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14)', 'subtract(56.73, 53.14), divide(#0, 53.14)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [56.73, 53.14, 3.59, 0.06756], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': True, 'answer': 56.73}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:34 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2007 net revenue | volume/weather | net gas revenue | rider revenue | base revenue | other | 2008 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 231.0 | 15.5 | 6.6 | 3.9 | -11.3 | 7.0 | 252.7 |', 'question': 'what was the number of gas customers in 2008?', 'ops': '93000', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2008/page_355.pdf-4', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .", 'doc_post_text': "the volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .", 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2007 net revenue': 231.0, 'volume/weather': 15.5, 'net gas revenue': 6.6, 'rider revenue': 3.9, 'base revenue': -11.3, 'other': 7.0, '2008 net revenue': 252.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the number of gas customers in 2008?', 'and what was it in 2007?', 'what was, then, the change in that number over the year?', 'and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2007 number of customers, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['93000', '86000', '7000', '8%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['93000', '86000', 'subtract(93000, 86000)', 'subtract(93000, 86000), divide(#0, 86000)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [93000.0, 86000.0, 7000.0, 0.0814], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 4, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 93000.0}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:37 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/08/08 01:41:42 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total variance in net revenue from 2010 to 2011?\nA1: 37.6', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis plan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business see the 201cplan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business 201d section of entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis for a discussion of this matter , including the planned retirement of debt and preferred securities . results of operations net income 2011 compared to 2010 net income increased by $ 14.6 million primarily due to higher net revenue , partially offset by higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . 2010 compared to 2009 net income increased by $ 2.4 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower interest expense , partially offset by lower other income , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher other operation and maintenance expenses . net revenue 2011 compared to 2010 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2011 to 2010 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe retail electric price variance is primarily due to rate actions , including an annual base rate increase of $ 59 million beginning august 2010 , with an additional increase of $ 9 million beginning may 2011 , as a result of the settlement of the december 2009 rate case . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case settlement . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 721 gwh , or 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including the effect of more favorable weather on residential and commercial sales compared to last year . usage in the industrial sector increased 8.2% ( 8.2 % ) primarily in the chemicals and refining industries . the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 net revenue | retail electric price | volume/weather | purchased power capacity | other | 2011 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 540.2 | 36.0 | 21.3 | -24.6 | 4.9 | 577.8 |', 'question': 'and what was the variance in volume/weather in that same period?', 'ops': '21.3', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2011/page_376.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis plan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business see the 201cplan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business 201d section of entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis for a discussion of this matter , including the planned retirement of debt and preferred securities . results of operations net income 2011 compared to 2010 net income increased by $ 14.6 million primarily due to higher net revenue , partially offset by higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . 2010 compared to 2009 net income increased by $ 2.4 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower interest expense , partially offset by lower other income , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher other operation and maintenance expenses . net revenue 2011 compared to 2010 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2011 to 2010 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the retail electric price variance is primarily due to rate actions , including an annual base rate increase of $ 59 million beginning august 2010 , with an additional increase of $ 9 million beginning may 2011 , as a result of the settlement of the december 2009 rate case . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case settlement . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 721 gwh , or 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including the effect of more favorable weather on residential and commercial sales compared to last year . usage in the industrial sector increased 8.2% ( 8.2 % ) primarily in the chemicals and refining industries . the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases. .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2010 net revenue': 540.2, 'retail electric price': 36.0, 'volume/weather': 21.3, 'purchased power capacity': -24.6, 'other': 4.9, '2011 net revenue': 577.8}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total variance in net revenue from 2010 to 2011?', 'and what was the variance in volume/weather in that same period?', 'how much, then, does this volume/weather variance represent in relation to the net revenue one, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['37.6', '21.3', '56.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(577.8, 540.2)', '21.3', 'subtract(577.8, 540.2), divide(21.3, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [37.6, 21.3, 0.56649], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 21.3}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:42 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what was the total variance in net revenue from 2010 to 2011?\nA1: 37.6\nQ2: and what was the variance in volume/weather in that same period?\nA2: 21.3', 'evidence_snippets': '[PRE]\nentergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis plan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business see the 201cplan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business 201d section of entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis for a discussion of this matter , including the planned retirement of debt and preferred securities . results of operations net income 2011 compared to 2010 net income increased by $ 14.6 million primarily due to higher net revenue , partially offset by higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . 2010 compared to 2009 net income increased by $ 2.4 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower interest expense , partially offset by lower other income , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher other operation and maintenance expenses . net revenue 2011 compared to 2010 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2011 to 2010 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe retail electric price variance is primarily due to rate actions , including an annual base rate increase of $ 59 million beginning august 2010 , with an additional increase of $ 9 million beginning may 2011 , as a result of the settlement of the december 2009 rate case . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case settlement . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 721 gwh , or 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including the effect of more favorable weather on residential and commercial sales compared to last year . usage in the industrial sector increased 8.2% ( 8.2 % ) primarily in the chemicals and refining industries . the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases. .\n[/POST]', 'table': '| Row | 2010 net revenue | retail electric price | volume/weather | purchased power capacity | other | 2011 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 540.2 | 36.0 | 21.3 | -24.6 | 4.9 | 577.8 |', 'question': 'how much, then, does this volume/weather variance represent in relation to the net revenue one, in percentage?', 'ops': 'subtract(577.8, 540.2), divide(21.3, #0)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2011/page_376.pdf-2', 'doc_pre_text': 'entergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis plan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business see the 201cplan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business 201d section of entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis for a discussion of this matter , including the planned retirement of debt and preferred securities . results of operations net income 2011 compared to 2010 net income increased by $ 14.6 million primarily due to higher net revenue , partially offset by higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . 2010 compared to 2009 net income increased by $ 2.4 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower interest expense , partially offset by lower other income , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher other operation and maintenance expenses . net revenue 2011 compared to 2010 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2011 to 2010 . amount ( in millions ) .', 'doc_post_text': 'the retail electric price variance is primarily due to rate actions , including an annual base rate increase of $ 59 million beginning august 2010 , with an additional increase of $ 9 million beginning may 2011 , as a result of the settlement of the december 2009 rate case . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case settlement . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 721 gwh , or 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including the effect of more favorable weather on residential and commercial sales compared to last year . usage in the industrial sector increased 8.2% ( 8.2 % ) primarily in the chemicals and refining industries . the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases. .', 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2010 net revenue': 540.2, 'retail electric price': 36.0, 'volume/weather': 21.3, 'purchased power capacity': -24.6, 'other': 4.9, '2011 net revenue': 577.8}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what was the total variance in net revenue from 2010 to 2011?', 'and what was the variance in volume/weather in that same period?', 'how much, then, does this volume/weather variance represent in relation to the net revenue one, in percentage?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['37.6', '21.3', '56.6%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(577.8, 540.2)', '21.3', 'subtract(577.8, 540.2), divide(21.3, #0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [37.6, 21.3, 0.56649], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 3, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.56649}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:42 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'None', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2007 net revenue | volume/weather | net gas revenue | rider revenue | base revenue | other | 2008 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 231.0 | 15.5 | 6.6 | 3.9 | -11.3 | 7.0 | 252.7 |', 'question': 'what is the net change in revenue from 2007 to 2008?', 'ops': 'subtract(252.7, 231.0)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2008/page_355.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .", 'doc_post_text': "the volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .", 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2007 net revenue': 231.0, 'volume/weather': 15.5, 'net gas revenue': 6.6, 'rider revenue': 3.9, 'base revenue': -11.3, 'other': 7.0, '2008 net revenue': 252.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in revenue from 2007 to 2008?', 'what is that divided by the 2007 net revenues?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['21.7', '9.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(252.7, 231.0)', 'subtract(252.7, 231.0), divide(#0, 231.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [21.7, 0.09394], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 21.7}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.
2025/08/08 01:41:42 ERROR dspy.utils.parallelizer: Error for Example({'conversation_context': 'Q1: what is the net change in revenue from 2007 to 2008?\nA1: 21.7', 'evidence_snippets': "[PRE]\nentergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .\n[/PRE]\n[POST]\nthe volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .\n[/POST]", 'table': '| Row | 2007 net revenue | volume/weather | net gas revenue | rider revenue | base revenue | other | 2008 net revenue |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| amount ( in millions ) | 231.0 | 15.5 | 6.6 | 3.9 | -11.3 | 7.0 | 252.7 |', 'question': 'what is that divided by the 2007 net revenues?', 'ops': 'subtract(252.7, 231.0), divide(#0, 231.0)', 'id': 'Single_ETR/2008/page_355.pdf-1', 'doc_pre_text': "entergy new orleans , inc . management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .", 'doc_post_text': "the volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 . entergy new orleans estimates that approximately 141000 electric customers and 93000 gas customers have returned since hurricane katrina and are taking service as of december 31 , 2008 , compared to approximately 132000 electric customers and 86000 gas customers as of december 31 , 2007 . billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 gwh compared to the same period in 2007 , an increase of 4% ( 4 % ) . the net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in march and november 2007 . refer to note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase . the rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective march 2007 as a result of the city council's approval of a settlement agreement in october 2006 . the approved storm reserve has been set to collect $ 75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account . the settlement agreement is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit , effective january 2008 . the base rate credit is discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to : an increase of $ 58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales ; an increase of $ 47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage ; and an increase of $ 22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in march 2007 and november 2007 . fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. .", 'doc_table': {'amount ( in millions )': {'2007 net revenue': 231.0, 'volume/weather': 15.5, 'net gas revenue': 6.6, 'rider revenue': 3.9, 'base revenue': -11.3, 'other': 7.0, '2008 net revenue': 252.7}}, 'dialogue_conv_questions': ['what is the net change in revenue from 2007 to 2008?', 'what is that divided by the 2007 net revenues?'], 'dialogue_conv_answers': ['21.7', '9.4%'], 'dialogue_turn_program': ['subtract(252.7, 231.0)', 'subtract(252.7, 231.0), divide(#0, 231.0)'], 'dialogue_executed_answers': [21.7, 0.09394], 'dialogue_qa_split': [False, False], 'features_num_dialogue_turns': 2, 'features_has_type2_question': False, 'features_has_duplicate_columns': False, 'features_has_non_numeric_values': False, 'answer': 0.09394}) (input_keys={'evidence_snippets', 'question', 'conversation_context', 'table'}): Both structured output format and JSON mode failed. Please choose a model that supports `response_format` argument. Original error: litellm.NotFoundError: OpenAIException - The model `gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07` does not exist or you do not have access to it.. Set `provide_traceback=True` for traceback.

Exception: Execution cancelled due to errors or interruption.

import re

from dspy.evaluate import Evaluate

final_baseline_results = []

with mlflow.start_run(run_name="final_evaluation_baseline") as parent_ctx:
    run_name = f"baseline_{lm_oai_o4_mini.model.replace('/', '_')}"
    sanitized_run_name = re.sub(r"[^a-zA-Z0-9_\-]", "_", run_name)
    with mlflow.start_run(run_name=sanitized_run_name, nested=True):
        current_evaluator = Evaluate(
            devset=final_test_examples,
            num_threads=32,
            display_progress=True,
            return_all_scores=True,
            return_outputs=True,
        )
        with dspy.context(lm=lm_oai_o4_mini) as ctx:
            current_result = current_evaluator(
                TurnSolver(reasoning_lm=True), metric=turn_em_metric
            )
            final_baseline_results.append(current_result)

Average Metric: 18.00 / 20 (90.0%):   3%|▎         | 20/678 [00:07<02:12,  4.96it/s] Average Metric: 42.00 / 51 (82.4%):   8%|▊         | 51/678 [00:15<02:01,  5.18it/s]Average Metric: 53.00 / 67 (79.1%):  10%|▉         | 67/678 [00:19<02:41,  3.78it/s]Average Metric: 89.00 / 121 (73.6%):  18%|█▊        | 121/678 [00:35<02:10,  4.26it/s]Average Metric: 102.00 / 141 (72.3%):  21%|██        | 141/678 [00:41<02:23,  3.73it/s]Average Metric: 107.00 / 154 (69.5%):  23%|██▎       | 153/678 [00:44<02:17,  3.82it/s]Average Metric: 112.00 / 160 (70.0%):  24%|██▎       | 160/678 [00:46<02:01,  4.27it/s]Average Metric: 115.00 / 164 (70.1%):  24%|██▍       | 164/678 [00:47<02:32,  3.38it/s]Average Metric: 138.00 / 199 (69.3%):  29%|██▉       | 198/678 [00:56<01:47,  4.48it/s]Average Metric: 178.00 / 266 (66.9%):  39%|███▉      | 266/678 [01:14<01:28,  4.66it/s]Average Metric: 193.00 / 291 (66.3%):  43%|████▎     | 291/678 [01:20<01:14,  5.22it/s]Average Metric: 217.00 / 323 (67.2%):  47%|████▋     | 322/678 [01:28<00:50,  7.12it/s]Average Metric: 277.00 / 397 (69.8%):  59%|█████▊    | 397/678 [01:49<00:58,  4.83it/s]Average Metric: 286.00 / 414 (69.1%):  61%|██████    | 414/678 [01:55<01:12,  3.64it/s]Average Metric: 293.00 / 424 (69.1%):  63%|██████▎   | 424/678 [01:57<01:01,  4.15it/s]Average Metric: 303.00 / 437 (69.3%):  64%|██████▍   | 437/678 [02:02<01:15,  3.17it/s]Average Metric: 340.00 / 480 (70.8%):  71%|███████   | 480/678 [02:12<00:37,  5.33it/s]Average Metric: 343.00 / 483 (71.0%):  71%|███████   | 483/678 [02:15<01:52,  1.73it/s]Average Metric: 370.00 / 517 (71.6%):  76%|███████▋  | 517/678 [02:25<00:52,  3.07it/s]Average Metric: 380.00 / 533 (71.3%):  79%|███████▊  | 533/678 [02:31<00:41,  3.48it/s]Average Metric: 384.00 / 538 (71.4%):  79%|███████▉  | 538/678 [02:32<00:43,  3.19it/s]Average Metric: 388.00 / 542 (71.6%):  80%|███████▉  | 542/678 [02:34<00:43,  3.13it/s]Average Metric: 405.00 / 565 (71.7%):  83%|████████▎ | 565/678 [02:41<00:41,  2.75it/s]Average Metric: 426.00 / 592 (72.0%):  87%|████████▋ | 592/678 [02:49<00:24,  3.44it/s]Average Metric: 445.00 / 613 (72.6%):  90%|█████████ | 612/678 [02:56<00:19,  3.35it/s]Average Metric: 455.00 / 631 (72.1%):  93%|█████████▎| 631/678 [03:02<00:10,  4.33it/s]Average Metric: 493.00 / 678 (72.7%): 100%|██████████| 678/678 [03:22<00:00,  3.34it/s]
🏃 View run eval at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/8967884271af4e158c72623e8f6e9274
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run baseline_openai_o4-mini-2025-04-16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/ca4c4a2e0b9949db8cbd44b7581b8dea
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run final_evaluation_baseline at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/70963ce46b14409688e666012da8d248
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3

2025/07/29 14:38:25 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:38:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:38:36 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:38:53 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:38:58 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:39:01 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:39:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:39:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:39:04 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:39:13 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:39:32 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:39:38 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:39:46 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:40:06 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:40:12 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:40:15 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:40:19 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:40:30 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:40:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:40:43 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:40:48 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:40:48 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:40:50 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:40:51 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:40:58 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:41:06 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:41:13 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:41:19 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:41:40 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 493.0 / 678 (72.7%)

We get the following performance:

model_name	em_metric before optimisation	em_metric after MIPROv2	% increase
o4-mini	72.70	??	??

Now, let’s try our optimised program!

final_program = dspy.load("./programs/openai_o4_mini_2025_04_16_mipro_micro_hard/")

final_program.save("./programs/final_program.json", save_program=False)

# Reference code showing how to load the DSPy program
loaded_dspy_program = dspy.ChainOfThought(SolveTurnWithReasoning)
loaded_dspy_program.load("./programs/final_program.json")
loaded_dspy_program.predict.signature.instructions

import random

random.seed(42)

bootstrap_rs_random_easy_subset = random.sample(easy_train_examples, 70)

import re

import litellm
from dspy.teleprompt import BootstrapFewShotWithRandomSearch

# Config needed to prevent the optimizer from using _unsupported_ temperature
# for reasoning models.
litellm.drop_params = True


config = dict(
    max_bootstrapped_demos=3,
    max_labeled_demos=2,
    num_candidate_programs=5,
    num_threads=32,
    max_rounds=1,
)

bootstrap_rs_easy_compiled_programs = []

with mlflow.start_run(run_name="bootstrap_few_shot_rs_easy"):
    for candidate_lm in selected_llms:
        run_name = f"bootstrap_few_shot_rs_{candidate_lm.model.replace('/', '_')}"
        sanitized_run_name = re.sub(r"[^a-zA-Z0-9_\-]", "_", run_name)
        with mlflow.start_run(run_name=sanitized_run_name, nested=True):
            with dspy.context(lm=candidate_lm) as ctx:
                teleprompter = BootstrapFewShotWithRandomSearch(
                    metric=turn_em_metric, **config
                )
                optimized_program = teleprompter.compile(
                    dspy.ChainOfThought(SolveTurnWithReasoning),
                    trainset=bootstrap_rs_random_easy_subset,
                )
                bootstrap_rs_easy_compiled_programs.append(optimized_program)

Going to sample between 1 and 3 traces per predictor.
Will attempt to bootstrap 5 candidate sets.
Average Metric: 45.00 / 70 (64.3%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:00<00:00, 87.74it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/fcce9b07d50e41609bc04c3d9c2235c7
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 64.29 for seed -3
Scores so far: [64.29]
Best score so far: 64.29
  0%|          | 0/70 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 26.00 / 38 (68.4%):  53%|█████▎    | 37/70 [00:00<00:00, 82.89it/s]Average Metric: 46.00 / 70 (65.7%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:00<00:00, 76.35it/s]
🏃 View run eval_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/7575401319f442499f871ca8d849bfd1
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 65.71 for seed -2
Scores so far: [64.29, 65.71]
Best score so far: 65.71
Bootstrapped 3 full traces after 6 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 6 attempts.
Average Metric: 47.00 / 70 (67.1%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 62.67it/s]
🏃 View run eval_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/3406309f3f0a4041a580021eaf5eff13
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 67.14 for seed -1
Scores so far: [64.29, 65.71, 67.14]
Best score so far: 67.14
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
Average Metric: 48.00 / 70 (68.6%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 52.08it/s]
🏃 View run eval_3 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/8cad7a93fb494289a4d6691d5796f84e
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 68.57 for seed 0
Scores so far: [64.29, 65.71, 67.14, 68.57]
Best score so far: 68.57
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 46.00 / 70 (65.7%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 54.10it/s]
🏃 View run eval_4 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/ab8c076e18394080bbf9634eeff7af35
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [64.29, 65.71, 67.14, 68.57, 65.71]
Best score so far: 68.57
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 45.00 / 70 (64.3%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 44.09it/s]
🏃 View run eval_5 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/679c914720674946a877f4a6a91665ee
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [64.29, 65.71, 67.14, 68.57, 65.71, 64.29]
Best score so far: 68.57
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 47.00 / 70 (67.1%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 61.09it/s]
🏃 View run eval_6 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/ab818ec11652430b9bd68e17dc197665
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [64.29, 65.71, 67.14, 68.57, 65.71, 64.29, 67.14]
Best score so far: 68.57
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 51.00 / 70 (72.9%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 51.33it/s]
🏃 View run eval_7 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/f9f17e61c1334a9ea6903ae3a1105fd8
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 72.86 for seed 4
Scores so far: [64.29, 65.71, 67.14, 68.57, 65.71, 64.29, 67.14, 72.86]
Best score so far: 72.86
8 candidate programs found.
🏃 View run bootstrap_few_shot_rs_openai_o4-mini-2025-04-16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/b08500752c9041d5acccbc261bd33931
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Going to sample between 1 and 3 traces per predictor.
Will attempt to bootstrap 5 candidate sets.
  0%|          | 0/70 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 43.00 / 70 (61.4%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 48.03it/s]
🏃 View run eval_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/578a2f04172f4ecbb41d04350201b2d5
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 61.43 for seed -3
Scores so far: [61.43]
Best score so far: 61.43
  0%|          | 0/70 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 29.00 / 42 (69.0%):  59%|█████▊    | 41/70 [00:01<00:00, 32.19it/s]Average Metric: 35.00 / 51 (68.6%):  71%|███████▏  | 50/70 [00:01<00:00, 42.39it/s]Average Metric: 47.00 / 70 (67.1%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 43.35it/s]
🏃 View run eval_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/cf868ddb4c5945149422186e878e4ee8
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 67.14 for seed -2
Scores so far: [61.43, 67.14]
Best score so far: 67.14
Bootstrapped 3 full traces after 6 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 6 attempts.
Average Metric: 46.00 / 70 (65.7%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 65.12it/s]
🏃 View run eval_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/a83ba7facae34ee2b495fd0bcb478044
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [61.43, 67.14, 65.71]
Best score so far: 67.14
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
Average Metric: 46.00 / 70 (65.7%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 36.63it/s]
🏃 View run eval_3 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/343b2f8e893044da9a9bee74f6be8853
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [61.43, 67.14, 65.71, 65.71]
Best score so far: 67.14
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 45.00 / 70 (64.3%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 37.96it/s]
🏃 View run eval_4 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/3ad1f0eea05b4d7b88e7c47e2c0c29ab
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [61.43, 67.14, 65.71, 65.71, 64.29]
Best score so far: 67.14
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 47.00 / 70 (67.1%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 35.34it/s]
🏃 View run eval_5 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/29b7cf7738bc47d89e81309a65595be0
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [61.43, 67.14, 65.71, 65.71, 64.29, 67.14]
Best score so far: 67.14
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 48.00 / 70 (68.6%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:02<00:00, 31.53it/s]
🏃 View run eval_6 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/d3a6322d0555421784dbb34087099455
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 68.57 for seed 3
Scores so far: [61.43, 67.14, 65.71, 65.71, 64.29, 67.14, 68.57]
Best score so far: 68.57
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 60.00 / 70 (85.7%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:02<00:00, 28.22it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_7 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/93c1cafdbb6b440699788970eb6ffa88
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 85.71 for seed 4
Scores so far: [61.43, 67.14, 65.71, 65.71, 64.29, 67.14, 68.57, 85.71]
Best score so far: 85.71
8 candidate programs found.
🏃 View run bootstrap_few_shot_rs_gemini_gemini-2_5-flash at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/621ba195ed244875a4370e2050418a06
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Going to sample between 1 and 3 traces per predictor.
Will attempt to bootstrap 5 candidate sets.
  0%|          | 0/70 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 22.00 / 29 (75.9%):  40%|████      | 28/70 [00:00<00:00, 71.01it/s]Average Metric: 36.00 / 49 (73.5%):  69%|██████▊   | 48/70 [00:01<00:00, 69.84it/s]Average Metric: 52.00 / 70 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 37.98it/s]
🏃 View run eval_0 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/377a453f2e0745e38fc89508f7ab1d26
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 74.29 for seed -3
Scores so far: [74.29]
Best score so far: 74.29
  0%|          | 0/70 [00:00<?, ?it/s]Average Metric: 1.00 / 4 (25.0%):   4%|▍         | 3/70 [00:00<00:17,  3.91it/s] Average Metric: 5.00 / 8 (62.5%):  10%|█         | 7/70 [00:00<00:16,  3.91it/s]Average Metric: 13.00 / 16 (81.2%):  23%|██▎       | 16/70 [00:00<00:01, 39.80it/s]Average Metric: 30.00 / 41 (73.2%):  57%|█████▋    | 40/70 [00:01<00:01, 17.35it/s]Average Metric: 33.00 / 44 (75.0%):  61%|██████▏   | 43/70 [00:01<00:01, 17.35it/s]Average Metric: 52.00 / 70 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 36.77it/s]
🏃 View run eval_1 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/d9e37616e88748d8890de6056370f801
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [74.29, 74.29]
Best score so far: 74.29
Bootstrapped 3 full traces after 4 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 4 attempts.
Average Metric: 52.00 / 70 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:01<00:00, 35.80it/s]
🏃 View run eval_2 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/7bfc22c9728f4862931e5bb8bf4d379e
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [74.29, 74.29, 74.29]
Best score so far: 74.29
Bootstrapped 2 full traces after 2 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 2 attempts.
Average Metric: 43.00 / 53 (81.1%):  76%|███████▌  | 53/70 [00:22<00:09,  1.74it/s] Average Metric: 50.00 / 68 (73.5%):  97%|█████████▋| 68/70 [00:55<00:04,  2.16s/it]Average Metric: 51.00 / 70 (72.9%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [01:56<00:00,  1.66s/it]
🏃 View run eval_3 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/7cc38c776c8c40ad983a78690454b768
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [74.29, 74.29, 74.29, 72.86]
Best score so far: 74.29
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 34.00 / 37 (91.9%):  53%|█████▎    | 37/70 [00:16<00:15,  2.18it/s] Average Metric: 49.00 / 62 (79.0%):  89%|████████▊ | 62/70 [00:33<00:07,  1.03it/s]Average Metric: 52.00 / 70 (74.3%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:52<00:00,  1.34it/s]
🏃 View run eval_4 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/3d4799840b5145f38c55cd04a510b4eb
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [74.29, 74.29, 74.29, 72.86, 74.29]
Best score so far: 74.29
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 53.00 / 70 (75.7%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:49<00:00,  1.41it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_5 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/826af9f09c4e4410b2b21424430e67f1
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 75.71 for seed 2
Scores so far: [74.29, 74.29, 74.29, 72.86, 74.29, 75.71]
Best score so far: 75.71
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 44.00 / 48 (91.7%):  69%|██████▊   | 48/70 [00:18<00:08,  2.53it/s] Average Metric: 53.00 / 70 (75.7%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [01:02<00:00,  1.13it/s]
🏃 View run eval_6 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/a029e23cfbe14b92a2ba6ce26146642b
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
Scores so far: [74.29, 74.29, 74.29, 72.86, 74.29, 75.71, 75.71]
Best score so far: 75.71
Bootstrapped 1 full traces after 1 examples for up to 1 rounds, amounting to 1 attempts.
Average Metric: 56.00 / 70 (80.0%): 100%|██████████| 70/70 [00:44<00:00,  1.58it/s] 
🏃 View run eval_7 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/861f0c753b754e6a8eb3372287edd9bc
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
New best score: 80.0 for seed 4
Scores so far: [74.29, 74.29, 74.29, 72.86, 74.29, 75.71, 75.71, 80.0]
Best score so far: 80.0
8 candidate programs found.
🏃 View run bootstrap_few_shot_rs_openai_o3-2025-04-16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/8576b067ea60468ebc37cda1a17be1dc
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run bootstrap_few_shot_rs_easy at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/b5f08a070a634f74888fb8c42f24bfa3
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3

2025/07/29 01:03:08 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 45.0 / 70 (64.3%)
2025/07/29 01:03:08 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:08 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:09 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 46.0 / 70 (65.7%)
  4%|▍         | 3/70 [00:00<00:04, 13.83it/s]2025/07/29 01:03:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
  9%|▊         | 6/70 [00:00<00:03, 16.05it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:11 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 47.0 / 70 (67.1%)
  3%|▎         | 2/70 [00:00<00:02, 32.62it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:12 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 48.0 / 70 (68.6%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:03, 18.44it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:15 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 46.0 / 70 (65.7%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:02, 24.59it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:17 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 45.0 / 70 (64.3%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:12,  5.70it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:19 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 47.0 / 70 (67.1%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:02, 28.38it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:21 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 51.0 / 70 (72.9%)
2025/07/29 01:03:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:22 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 43.0 / 70 (61.4%)
2025/07/29 01:03:23 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:24 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:24 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:24 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 47.0 / 70 (67.1%)
  9%|▊         | 6/70 [00:00<00:03, 16.98it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:27 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 46.0 / 70 (65.7%)
  3%|▎         | 2/70 [00:00<00:03, 21.93it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:30 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 46.0 / 70 (65.7%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:02, 28.87it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:32 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 45.0 / 70 (64.3%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:02, 25.21it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:34 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 47.0 / 70 (67.1%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:10,  6.34it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:38 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 48.0 / 70 (68.6%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:00<00:05, 13.59it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:41 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 60.0 / 70 (85.7%)
2025/07/29 01:03:42 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:42 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:42 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:43 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:43 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:44 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:44 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 52.0 / 70 (74.3%)
2025/07/29 01:03:44 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:45 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:45 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:45 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:46 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:46 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:03:46 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 52.0 / 70 (74.3%)
  6%|▌         | 4/70 [00:00<00:04, 15.37it/s]
2025/07/29 01:03:49 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 52.0 / 70 (74.3%)
  3%|▎         | 2/70 [00:12<06:55,  6.11s/it]
2025/07/29 01:04:25 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:05:26 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:05:59 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 51.0 / 70 (72.9%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:05<06:47,  5.90s/it]
2025/07/29 01:06:22 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:06:40 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:06:57 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 52.0 / 70 (74.3%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:03<04:04,  3.55s/it]
2025/07/29 01:07:51 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 53.0 / 70 (75.7%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:05<06:22,  5.54s/it]
2025/07/29 01:08:16 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 01:08:59 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 53.0 / 70 (75.7%)
  1%|▏         | 1/70 [00:04<04:43,  4.11s/it]
2025/07/29 01:09:48 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 56.0 / 70 (80.0%)

Moment of truth 😬

import re

from dspy.evaluate import Evaluate

final_optimised_results = []

with mlflow.start_run(run_name="final_evaluation_baseline") as parent_ctx:
    run_name = f"optimised_{lm_oai_o4_mini.model.replace('/', '_')}"
    sanitized_run_name = re.sub(r"[^a-zA-Z0-9_\-]", "_", run_name)
    with mlflow.start_run(run_name=sanitized_run_name, nested=True):
        current_evaluator = Evaluate(
            devset=final_test_examples,
            num_threads=32,
            display_progress=True,
            return_all_scores=True,
            return_outputs=True,
        )
        with dspy.context(lm=lm_oai_o4_mini) as ctx:
            current_result = current_evaluator(final_program, metric=turn_em_metric)
            final_optimised_results.append(current_result)

Average Metric: 573.00 / 667 (85.9%):  98%|█████████▊| 667/678 [03:10<00:04,  2.33it/s]Average Metric: 580.00 / 678 (85.5%): 100%|██████████| 678/678 [03:23<00:00,  3.34it/s]
🏃 View run eval at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/ec07411faf3944d991dba6d8d15ffac7
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run optimised_openai_o4-mini-2025-04-16 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/1dddc8a3aed24d5184dde24e67445b1d
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3
🏃 View run final_evaluation_baseline at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/5ab44887bf414849a652aabc1a040da0
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3

2025/07/29 14:52:30 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
2025/07/29 14:52:42 INFO dspy.evaluate.evaluate: Average Metric: 580.0 / 678 (85.5%)

Our final results are as follows

model_name	em_metric before optimisation	em_metric after MIPROv2	% increase
o4-mini	72.70	85.50	17.6

Great success! We’ve successfully improved the performance of o4-mini on our dataset using Curriculum Learning by 17.6%, to acheive a final score of 85.50%!

Error Analysis

As we’ve done previously in the modelling notebook, we will now try to classify the errors in the predictions, using the same taxonomy as before.

The taxonomy is as follows:

• OK
• NUMERICAL_ANSWER_WRONG
• TEXTUAL_SELECTION_ANSWER_WRONG
• FORMAT_ERROR
• EVIDENCE_MISMATCH
• GROUND_TRUTH_INCORRECT

from copy import deepcopy

final_selected_error_records = []
for _idx, record in enumerate(final_optimised_results):
    for example, prediction, score in record[1]:
        example_copy = deepcopy(example)
        example_copy["ground_truth_answer"] = example_copy["answer"]
        del example_copy["answer"]

        final_selected_error_records.append(
            {
                "model_name": lm_oai_o4_mini.model,
                "turn_em_metric_score": score,
                **example_copy.toDict(),
                **prediction.toDict(),
            }
        )

from typing import Literal
import dspy


class AssessmentSignature(dspy.Signature):
    """
    Categorize model predictions by comparing them to ground truth, context, and evidence.
    Assign a specific error type or OK label, with concise justification, based on rubric.

    When comparing numerical answers, always allow a tolerance of 1e-2. For eg: If the question asks for a percentage, but the ground_truth_answer is given as a decimal, the assessment_answer label will be GROUND_TRUTH_INCORRECT
    """

    ground_truth_answer: str = dspy.InputField(
        desc="The correct answer as per the ground truth data."
    )
    table: str = dspy.InputField(
        desc="Tabular data (as string) relevant to the question and answer."
    )
    conversation_context: str = dspy.InputField(
        desc="Previous dialogue turns or context for the current question."
    )
    evidence_snippets: str = dspy.InputField(
        desc="Text snippets from the source document supporting the answer."
    )
    question: str = dspy.InputField(desc="The question being answered by the model.")

    predicted_reasoning: str = dspy.InputField(
        desc="Model's step-by-step explanation or justification for its answer."
    )
    predicted_ops: str = dspy.InputField(
        desc="Operations or programmatic steps the model used to derive its answer."
    )
    predicted_answer: str = dspy.InputField(
        desc="The answer predicted by the model for the given question."
    )

    assessment_answer: Literal[
        "OK",
        "NUMERICAL_ANSWER_WRONG",
        "TEXTUAL_SELECTION_ANSWER_WRONG",
        "FORMAT_ERROR",
        "EVIDENCE_MISMATCH",
        "GROUND_TRUTH_INCORRECT",
    ] = dspy.OutputField(desc="Single categorical label.")

judge_examples = []

for record in final_selected_error_records:
    if record["turn_em_metric_score"] != 1:
        judge_examples.append(
            dspy.Example(
                id=record["id"],
                model_name=record["model_name"],
                predicted_reasoning=record["reasoning"],
                predicted_ops=record["ops"],
                predicted_answer=record["answer"],
                ground_truth_answer=record["ground_truth_answer"],
                table=record["table"],
                conversation_context=record["conversation_context"],
                evidence_snippets=record["evidence_snippets"],
                question=record["question"],
            ).with_inputs(
                "predicted_reasoning",
                "predicted_ops",
                "predicted_answer",
                "ground_truth_answer",
                "table",
                "conversation_context",
                "evidence_snippets",
                "question",
            )
        )

from tqdm import tqdm

judge_lm = deepcopy(lm_gemini_flash_2_5)

judge_results = []

with mlflow.start_run(run_name="final_error_analysis_gemini_flash_2_5") as run:
    with dspy.context(lm=judge_lm, cache=True, track_cost=True):
        for example in tqdm(judge_examples, desc="Judging examples"):
            module = dspy.ChainOfThought(AssessmentSignature)
            jr = module(**example)
            jr["assessment_reasoning"] = jr["reasoning"]
            del jr["reasoning"]
            judge_results.append(
                {
                    "id": example["id"],
                    "model_name": example["model_name"],
                    "question": example["question"],
                    "ground_truth_answer": example["ground_truth_answer"],
                    "predicted_answer": example["predicted_answer"],
                    "assessment_answer": jr["assessment_answer"],
                    "assessment_reasoning": jr["assessment_reasoning"],
                }
            )

Judging examples:   0%|          | 0/98 [00:00<?, ?it/s]2025/07/29 15:07:21 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:   2%|▏         | 2/98 [00:18<13:44,  8.59s/it]2025/07/29 15:07:45 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:   5%|▌         | 5/98 [00:47<12:43,  8.21s/it]2025/07/29 15:08:06 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:   6%|▌         | 6/98 [00:56<13:20,  8.70s/it]2025/07/29 15:08:20 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:   9%|▉         | 9/98 [01:25<12:56,  8.72s/it]2025/07/29 15:08:47 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  10%|█         | 10/98 [01:38<14:41, 10.02s/it]2025/07/29 15:09:08 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  11%|█         | 11/98 [01:58<18:52, 13.02s/it]2025/07/29 15:09:29 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  12%|█▏        | 12/98 [02:24<24:30, 17.09s/it]2025/07/29 15:09:55 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  13%|█▎        | 13/98 [02:52<28:35, 20.18s/it]2025/07/29 15:10:13 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  14%|█▍        | 14/98 [03:03<24:37, 17.59s/it]2025/07/29 15:10:24 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  15%|█▌        | 15/98 [03:15<21:53, 15.82s/it]2025/07/29 15:10:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  16%|█▋        | 16/98 [03:22<18:06, 13.25s/it]2025/07/29 15:10:48 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  17%|█▋        | 17/98 [03:41<20:12, 14.97s/it]2025/07/29 15:11:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  18%|█▊        | 18/98 [03:53<18:42, 14.03s/it]2025/07/29 15:11:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  19%|█▉        | 19/98 [04:11<20:08, 15.30s/it]2025/07/29 15:11:55 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  21%|██▏       | 21/98 [05:07<24:57, 19.45s/it]2025/07/29 15:12:28 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  23%|██▎       | 23/98 [05:24<16:49, 13.46s/it]2025/07/29 15:12:43 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  26%|██▌       | 25/98 [05:41<12:51, 10.57s/it]2025/07/29 15:13:03 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  28%|██▊       | 27/98 [06:04<12:34, 10.63s/it]2025/07/29 15:13:27 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  30%|██▉       | 29/98 [06:29<12:55, 11.24s/it]2025/07/29 15:13:54 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  31%|███       | 30/98 [06:46<14:40, 12.94s/it]2025/07/29 15:14:15 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  32%|███▏      | 31/98 [07:07<17:03, 15.28s/it]2025/07/29 15:14:26 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  33%|███▎      | 32/98 [07:14<14:06, 12.82s/it]2025/07/29 15:14:32 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  36%|███▌      | 35/98 [07:36<09:34,  9.11s/it]2025/07/29 15:15:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  37%|███▋      | 36/98 [08:12<17:32, 16.98s/it]2025/07/29 15:15:33 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  38%|███▊      | 37/98 [08:30<17:49, 17.54s/it]2025/07/29 15:15:51 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  39%|███▉      | 38/98 [08:41<15:24, 15.40s/it]2025/07/29 15:16:02 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  41%|████      | 40/98 [08:56<10:30, 10.88s/it]2025/07/29 15:16:25 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  42%|████▏     | 41/98 [09:25<15:37, 16.44s/it]2025/07/29 15:16:55 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  45%|████▍     | 44/98 [10:04<10:56, 12.15s/it]2025/07/29 15:17:23 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  47%|████▋     | 46/98 [10:17<07:56,  9.16s/it]2025/07/29 15:17:36 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  50%|█████     | 49/98 [10:47<07:27,  9.12s/it]2025/07/29 15:18:09 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  51%|█████     | 50/98 [10:59<07:52,  9.85s/it]2025/07/29 15:18:17 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  52%|█████▏    | 51/98 [11:06<07:11,  9.18s/it]2025/07/29 15:18:31 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  53%|█████▎    | 52/98 [11:25<09:18, 12.14s/it]2025/07/29 15:18:45 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  55%|█████▌    | 54/98 [11:52<09:29, 12.93s/it]2025/07/29 15:19:19 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  58%|█████▊    | 57/98 [12:26<07:05, 10.39s/it]2025/07/29 15:19:55 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  60%|██████    | 59/98 [12:59<08:02, 12.37s/it]2025/07/29 15:20:32 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  61%|██████    | 60/98 [13:41<13:23, 21.14s/it]2025/07/29 15:21:14 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  62%|██████▏   | 61/98 [14:05<13:43, 22.25s/it]2025/07/29 15:21:24 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  63%|██████▎   | 62/98 [14:13<10:46, 17.97s/it]2025/07/29 15:21:41 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  64%|██████▍   | 63/98 [14:37<11:32, 19.78s/it]2025/07/29 15:21:59 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  65%|██████▌   | 64/98 [14:58<11:19, 19.97s/it]2025/07/29 15:22:30 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  66%|██████▋   | 65/98 [15:33<13:35, 24.71s/it]2025/07/29 15:23:13 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  67%|██████▋   | 66/98 [16:32<18:31, 34.75s/it]2025/07/29 15:23:53 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  71%|███████▏  | 70/98 [17:09<06:33, 14.05s/it]2025/07/29 15:24:30 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  73%|███████▎  | 72/98 [17:38<06:18, 14.54s/it]2025/07/29 15:25:06 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  76%|███████▌  | 74/98 [18:16<06:10, 15.44s/it]2025/07/29 15:25:35 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  77%|███████▋  | 75/98 [18:27<05:20, 13.91s/it]2025/07/29 15:26:00 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  79%|███████▊  | 77/98 [19:01<04:57, 14.18s/it]2025/07/29 15:26:20 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  80%|███████▉  | 78/98 [19:10<04:15, 12.76s/it]2025/07/29 15:26:34 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  81%|████████  | 79/98 [19:29<04:39, 14.72s/it]2025/07/29 15:26:49 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  83%|████████▎ | 81/98 [19:43<02:56, 10.37s/it]2025/07/29 15:27:01 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  84%|████████▎ | 82/98 [20:04<03:34, 13.41s/it]2025/07/29 15:27:22 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  85%|████████▍ | 83/98 [20:12<02:59, 11.96s/it]2025/07/29 15:27:30 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  87%|████████▋ | 85/98 [20:22<01:49,  8.40s/it]2025/07/29 15:27:43 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  88%|████████▊ | 86/98 [20:37<02:03, 10.25s/it]2025/07/29 15:27:59 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  89%|████████▉ | 87/98 [20:49<01:57, 10.67s/it]2025/07/29 15:28:12 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  90%|████████▉ | 88/98 [21:06<02:07, 12.71s/it]2025/07/29 15:28:41 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  93%|█████████▎| 91/98 [21:49<01:20, 11.56s/it]2025/07/29 15:29:20 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  94%|█████████▍| 92/98 [22:20<01:43, 17.32s/it]2025/07/29 15:29:39 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  95%|█████████▍| 93/98 [22:28<01:12, 14.52s/it]2025/07/29 15:29:48 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples:  96%|█████████▌| 94/98 [22:39<00:53, 13.49s/it]2025/07/29 15:29:59 WARNING dspy.adapters.json_adapter: Failed to use structured output format, falling back to JSON mode.
Judging examples: 100%|██████████| 98/98 [23:19<00:00, 14.28s/it]

🏃 View run final_error_analysis_gemini_flash_2_5 at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3/runs/7925f6a08e264efcb78f0eec4152219d
🧪 View experiment at: http://localhost:5000/#/experiments/3

import seaborn as sns
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt

df = pd.DataFrame(judge_results)
grouped = (
    df.groupby(["model_name", "assessment_answer"]).size().reset_index(name="count")
)
plt.figure(figsize=(10, 6))
ax = sns.barplot(data=grouped, x="model_name", y="count", hue="assessment_answer")
plt.title("Assessment Answer Counts by Model")
plt.ylabel("Count")
plt.xlabel("Model Name")
plt.legend(title="Assessment Answer")
plt.tight_layout()

# Add value annotations
for p in ax.patches:
    height = p.get_height()
    if height > 0:
        ax.annotate(
            f"{int(height)}",
            (p.get_x() + p.get_width() / 2, height),
            ha="center",
            va="bottom",
            fontsize=10,
            color="black",
            xytext=(0, 2),
            textcoords="offset points",
        )

plt.show()

df.to_csv('./judge_results/final_judge_results.csv', index=False)

df.shape

(98, 7)

As seen before,

• 68 of the examples have an incorrect ground truth i.e our generated answers are correct.
• Of the 27 answers that were marked as NUMERICAL_ANSWER_WRONG, some of them are because the llm incorrectly computed some fractions. While this could’ve been solved with tool calling/using a python interpretor, this would’ve made the pipeline more tricky. More on this soon.
• The example marked as “EVIDENCE_MISMATCH” correctly identifies that the model got confused with the given context, and could not resolve the question given the previous conversation history. This step could likely be improved by doing some-form of query rewriting.

Overall, assuming the all the judge results are correct for the “GROUND_TRUTH_INCORRECT” label, our overall accuracy is acrually:

\[ \frac{(580 + 68)}{678} = 95.5\% \]

Note that this is a super optimistic estimate, as we have not accounted for the fact that the judge might have made a mistake in their evaluation. Also, since we didn’t judge the baseline o4-mini performance, the overall accuracy might be lower than what we’ve calculated here.

Conclusion

As mentioned earlier, our final result looks as follows:

model_name	em_metric before optimisation	em_metric after MIPROv2	% increase
o4-mini	72.70	85.50	17.6

We’ve improved the performance of o4-mini on our dataset using Curriculum Learning by 17.6%, to acheive a final score of 85.50%!

A few key takeways:

1. Curriculum first – then optimize
   • Ordering exemplars from “Easy → Medium → Hard” gave every optimizer a warmer start. Versus a random exemplar pool, accuracy on the Hard tier rose +4.7 pts before we even touched DSPy’s search space.
2. DSPy > hand-rolled prompts
   • With only BootstrapFewShot + BeamSearchOptimizer, the smallest model (o4-mini) jumped from 38.2 → 51.6 Hard-tier EM: the single largest gain in the series.

Why no agents?

In this assignment, I’ve deliberately chosen to not use any agentic systems because:

• Adding agents requires implementation of tools that the agents can use.
  • The only operations that need tools in this dataset are simple mathematical ops(add, subtract, etc.)
  • Recent models are increasingly getting better at predicting results of math operations, purely through next-token prediction. The recent IMO Gold Medal models by OAI and Deepmind has confirmed that next-token prediction is enough to solve even some of the most challenging math problems and proofs.
  • Adding tool calling tests another model ability: Instruction Following. Specfically, all tool call are returned in a specific format by the model, and while they mostly suceed, this introduces another area where we have to handle errors.

We argue that in the future model releases, tool calls for doing math operations will be not be required. Instead, tools will be used primarily to help the model get access to your data, such as emails, company slack, etc. via the MCP protocol, and do operations on your behalf.

Why no fine-tuning?

Recent research has shown that good prompt optimisation can lead to better results compared to finetuning, even when we using reinforcement-learning. We confirmed this insight in our notebooks, where we were able to use a small reasoning model to match the frontier reasoning model performance on our dataset.

What could be improved?

In the future, we could explore the following:

• The current methodology of supplying the table content is quite simple. We know that table formatting affects how models understand content. I would experiment with other table formats, and especially with XML based table formats.
• Currently, the evidence_snippets i.e the pre_text and post_text fields are blindly concatenated into a single paragraph with separators. While this seems to work for the current dataset, to reduce the chance of polluting the ctx window with irrelevant information, we would perform a retrieval step for each question, where only the relevant chunks would be added to the context before answering the question.
  • Because this dataset has many domain specific terms(financial metrics), we argue that BM25 based methods should give a strong baseline, followed by using a late-interaction mechanism(such as ColBERT) to improve retrieval further.
  • For the domain specific terms, we could also add a stage to retrieve the precise definition of a metric asked in the question, which could further help disambiguate the meaning of the metric. For this, we would use the Financial Readability Assessment(FinRAD) Dataset.
• The current dataset has a nice setup for using Reinforcement Learning:
  • Specifically, we could model each dialogue as an episode in RL.
  • The metric for analysis would be things like answer formatting, answer correctness, answer coherence, etc. We can use hyperparams to control the weight of each of these components.
  • Finally, we could use GRPO, to train the model based a collection of it’s own outputs, and picking the best output from them. This is the same methodology used to train Deepseek R1.
  • DSPy does support optmising a model with GRPO, using the Arbor RL server. I would aim to experiment with this approach.
• Finally, our solution still uses a hosted model.
  • Some businesses may want to use their own hosted/open-source model, particularly those with goverment regulations.
  • We would experiment with the BootstrapFinetune method from DSPy to finetune a small LM to match the performance of a large LM. Specifcially, we believe we should be able to get comparable performance with Qwen3:32b, an open-source frontier model.

---

Thanks for sticking around! Spotted a bug or have a optimization? Open an issue in the repo, or yell at me on Twitter/X. Happy hacking!

Shubham Gupta Shubham Gupta About /about.html https://github.com/goodhamgupta /index.xml

Shubham Gupta - Curriculum Learning 🤝 DSPy: Optimization Shubham Gupta - Curriculum Learning 🤝 DSPy: Optimization Shubham Gupta - Curriculum Learning 🤝 DSPy: Optimization Shubham Gupta Optimzing DSPy programs for ConvFinQA Optimzing DSPy programs for ConvFinQA