You are an AI assistant tasked with analyzing a passage of text to insert retrieval tokens and identify Prefix-intent (PI) and Key Factual Information (KFI). A Prefix-Intent (PI) should be a piece of text that should precede factual information, it must not be only 1 or 2 words. Key Factual Information (KFI) should be meaningful and include important details.

Your goal is to insert a  <|retrieval|> token after it is clear what the intent of the text is (e.g., "The president of the USA is"), but  before the key factual information is stated (e.g., "Joe Biden"). Whenever there is a <|retrieval|> token, we will retrieve the key factual information.

Here is the passage you will be working with:

<passage>
Act 1986, section 214 stipulates that company directors must contribute to payment of company debts in winding up if they kept the business running up more debt when they ought to have known there was no reasonable prospect of avoiding insolvency. A number of other cases demonstrate that in construing the meaning of a statute unrelated to company law, the purpose of the legislation should be fulfilled regardless of the existence of a corporate form. For example, in Daimler Co Ltd v Continental Tyre and Rubber Co (Great Britain) Ltd, the Trading with the Enemy Act 1914 said that trading with any person of "enemy character" would be an offence. So even though the Continental Tyre Co Ltd was a "legal person" incorporated in the UK (and therefore British) its directors and shareholders were German (and therefore enemies, while the First World War was being fought). There are also case based exceptions to the Salomon principle, though their restrictive scope is not wholly stable. The present rule under English law is that only where a company was set up to commission fraud, or to avoid a pre-existing obligation can its separate identity be ignored. This follows from a Court of Appeal case, Adams v Cape Industries plc. A group of employees suffered asbestos diseases after working for the American wholly owned subsidiary of Cape Industries plc. They were suing in New York to make Cape Industries plc pay for the debts of the subsidiary. Under conflict of laws principles, this could only be done if Cape Industries plc was treated as "present" in America through its US subsidiary (i.e. ignoring the separate legal personality of the two companies). Rejecting the claim, and following the reasoning in Jones v Lipman, the Court of Appeal emphasised that the US subsidiary had been set up for a lawful purpose of creating a group structure overseas, and had not aimed to circumvent liability in the event of asbestos litigation. The potentially unjust result for tort victims, who are unable to contract around limited liability and may be left only with a worthless claim against a bankrupt entity, has been changed in Chandler v Cape plc so that a duty of care may be owed by a parent to workers of a subsidiary regardless of separated legal personality. However even though tort victims are protected, the restrictive position remains subject to criticism where a company group is involved, since it is not clear that companies and actual people ought to get the protection of limited liability in identical ways. An influential decision, although subsequently doubted strongly by the House of Lords, was passed by Lord Denning MR in DHN Ltd v Tower Hamlets BC. Here Lord Denning MR held that a group of companies, two subsidiaries wholly owned by a parent, constituted a single economic unit. Because the companies' shareholders and controlling minds were identical, their rights were to be treated as the same. This allowed the parent company to claim compensation from the council for compulsory purchase of its business, which it could not have done without showing an address on the premises that its subsidiary possessed. Similar approaches to treating corporate "groups" or a "concern" as single economic entities exist in many continental European jurisdictions. This is done for tax and accounting purposes in English law, however for general civil liability the rule still followed is that in Adams v Cape Industries plc. It is very rare for English courts to lift the veil. The liability of the company is generally attributed to the company alone. Capital regulations Because limited liability generally prevents
</passage>

Follow these steps to complete the task:

1. Inserting retrieval tokens:
   a. Read through the text carefully.
   b. Identify potential Prefix-Intent (PI) sections that consist of a single intent and could serve as a search query. You must not modify the prefix intent and it MUST be part verbatim in the passage. It cannot be single or only a few words.
   c. For each identified PI, evaluate if the following sentence/subsentece that could serve as Key Factual Information (KFI).
   d. Insert <|retrieval|> tokens into the text AFTER the Prefix Intent (PI) and BEFORE key factual information is stated (KFI).
   e. Key Factual information should not intersect with Prefix Intent.

2. Identifying Prefix-Intent (PI) and Key Factual Information (KFI):
   a. For each <|retrieval|> token you've inserted, identify the preceding text as the Prefix-Intent (PI).
   b. Identify the following text, up to the next PI, as the Key Factual Information (KFI).
   c. Ensure that both PI and FI are short subsentences or phrases but not 1 or 2 words.

3. Insert <|start-PI|>,<|end-PI|>, <|start-KFI|>, <|end-KFI|>.
   a. For each identified Prefix Intent (PI), add a start and end special tokens (<|start-PI|>,<|end-PI|>) to quickly identify them.
   b. Do the same for the Key Factual Information (KFI) (<|start-KFI|>, <|end-KFI|>)
   c. Ensure that the very first PI in the passage is preceded by <|start-PI|>.
   d. Double-check that every PI and KFI is properly enclosed in these tags.

4. Describing ideal retrieved information:
   a. Given the Prefix-Intent (PI) and Key Factual Information (KFI), imagine an ideal retriever and enormous corpus. 
   b. Using the retriever and corpus, imagine that you can retrieve information given the Prefix-Intent.  
   c. Describe how that content should look like so it helps generating the Key Factual Information (KFI)


5. Reformulate the Prefix Intent if necessary: Reformulate it to not be impersonal. This means that if the subject it is not identified (e.g. it, he, she) you need to add the appropriate subject so the prefix-intent can be understood by itself. The subject should be changed from the previous information in the passage. Reformulated Prefix should not add any extra information or intent that is not mentioned in the original Prefix Intent.


6. Output format:
   For each pair of Prefix-Intent (PI) and Key Factual Information (KFI) you identify, provide the following output separating each example in a JSON list output. Ensure that it is actually a JSON.

   - Prefix_intent: [Write the Prefix Intent here]
   - Prefix_reformulated: [Write the Prefix Intent reformulated]
   - Key_Factual_Information: [Write the Key Factual Information here]
   - Verification: [Confirm that the KFI can be directly derived from the PI given a strictly connected context]
   - Ideal_Knowledge: [Describe how the ideal retrieved content should look to generate the KFI]
   - Explanation: [Briefly explain how the PI and KFI connect and why you chose to insert the <|retrieval|> token in that position]


7. Final step:
   After you have completed the analysis and provided outputs for all identified PI-KFI pairs, present the original passage with the <|retrieval|> tokens inserted in their appropriate positions

Here's an example of the expected output format:

Passage: Girmal Falls General This waterfall extends to a height of up to 100 feet, making it the highest waterfall of Gujarat. The picturesque beauty of this site makes it popular among visitors and people of the region alike. The water swiftly falls from a great height, creating a fog like condition that’s eye catching. The government of this state is working on many projects to make this place an ideal picnic spot and a tourist attraction. The fall comes to its best form at the time of monsoon and provides an immensely striking appearance. Some of the best natural features of Gujarat can be explored in this place. This place is a nice and refreshing retreat for any traveler.

```json
{ "results" : [
  {
    "Prefix_intent": "Girmal Falls General This waterfall extends to a height of up to",
    "Prefix_reformulated": "What is the height of Girmal Falls?",
    "Key_Factual_Information": "100 feet, making it the highest waterfall of Gujarat",
    "Verification": "The KFI directly provides the height information requested in the PI.",
    "Ideal_Knowledge": "A list of waterfalls in Gujarat, India, with their heights and rankings, specifically mentioning Girmal Falls as the highest at 100 feet.",
    "Explanation": "The PI introduces Girmal Falls and sets up a query about its height, while the KFI provides the specific measurement and its significance. The <|retrieval|> token is inserted to indicate where additional information might be needed to support the factual statement."
  },
  {
    "Prefix_intent": "The water swiftly falls from a great height, creating",
    "Prefix_reformulated": "What does the water falling from Girmal Falls create?",
    "Key_Factual_Information": "a fog like condition that's eye catching",
    "Verification": "The KFI directly describes the effect created by the falling water, as prompted by the PI.",
    "Ideal_Knowledge": "Detailed descriptions of the visual effects created by high waterfalls, including the formation of mist or fog-like conditions due to water droplets in the air.",
    "Explanation": "The PI describes the water falling and sets up a query about its effect, while the KFI provides the specific visual phenomenon created. The <|retrieval|> token is inserted to indicate where additional information might be needed to support the description."
  },
  {
    "Prefix_intent": "The fall comes to its best form at the time of",
    "Prefix_reformulated": "When does Girmal Falls come to its best form?",
    "Key_Factual_Information": "monsoon and provides an immensely striking appearance",
    "Verification": "The KFI directly answers when the waterfall is at its best and describes its appearance, as prompted by the PI.",
    "Ideal_Knowledge": "Information on the seasonal variations of Girmal Falls, highlighting the monsoon season's impact on water flow and visual appeal.",
    "Explanation": "The PI sets up a query about the best time to view the falls, and the KFI provides the specific season and describes the appearance. The <|retrieval|> token is inserted to indicate where additional information about seasonal changes might be needed."
  }],
"Updated_Passage":"<|start-PI|> Girmal Falls General This waterfall extends to a height of up to <|end-PI|> <|retrieval|> <|start-KFI|> 100 feet, making it the highest waterfall of Gujarat <|end-KFI|>. The picturesque beauty of this site makes it popular among visitors and people of the region alike. <|start-PI|> The water swiftly falls from a great height, creating <|end-PI|> <|retrieval|> <|start-KFI|> a fog like condition that’s eye catching <|end-KFI|>. The government of this state is working on many projects to make this place an ideal picnic spot and a tourist attraction. <|start-PI|> The fall comes to its best form at the time of <|end-PI|> <|retrieval|> <|start-KFI|> monsoon and provides an immensely striking appearance <|end-KFI|>. Some of the best natural features of Gujarat can be explored in this place. This place is a nice and refreshing retreat for any traveler."
}

```
8. Final check:
  a. Review the Updated_Passage to ensure all PIs and KFIs are properly tagged.
  b. Verify that the first PI in the passage starts with <|start-PI|>.
  c. Make sure there are no missing or misplaced tags.
 
Remember to analyze the entire passage, identify all relevant PI-KFI pairs, and provide the output for each pair as specified. After completing the analysis, present the original passage with the <|retrieval|> tokens inserted in their appropriate positions as part of a new key in the JSON file. Only Ouput the JSON File.