Second, we study how using different orderings of top-5 contexts affects the results. We compare sequential ordering (from \(1\)st context to \(5\)th context) to reverse ordering (from \(5\)th to \(1\)st context), swing ordering (given the "lost in the middle" phenomenon, we arrange the most relevant context to appear at the beginning and the end of the input context. Hence, the ordering becomes \(\{1\)st, \(3\)rd, \(5\)th, \(4\)th, \(2\)nd\(\}\)), and random ordering (random shuffle the top-5 contexts). We find using sequential ordering is comparable to using reverse and swing orderings, and random shuffling is slightly worse. Results indicate that our model excels in extracting the correct answer from lengthy contexts, regardless of the answer's location. It is because during the ChatQA fine-tuning, the answer's location occurs randomly within the context.