input
stringlengths 883
1.09k
| output
sequencelengths 1
1
| id
stringlengths 40
40
|
|---|---|---|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Balanced budget amendment to US Constitution
Argument: Balanced budget will bring fed spending in line with states'.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-a74670ded9154c71bad9d456068ebbc8 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Gay marriage
Argument: Gay marriage is a fundamental, equal right.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-686810c536cc46c0838afde6f794bad4 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Primaries in US elections
Argument: Early emphasis on Iowa and New Hampshire disenfranchises minority voters.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-0d8ddd5027ed42f7a09e890061ea8e78 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Turkey EU membership
Argument: Turkey's EU membership would help the fight against terrorism.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-19488eaaaae54275a310c926bb36f38f |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Puerto Rico statehood in America
Argument: English is a cultural requirement for entry as state.
Output:
| [
"neutral"
] | task209-c130197662cd49c8abbc27dbabbdbfda |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Banning Muslim hijab
Argument: The Muslim veil liberates women from sexual attention.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-9a6791111ad641eb8da452b55ff948e0 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Wave power
Argument: Oceans corrode wave power systems, which is costly.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-18d15fc27b16421782c8e50897301562 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Seattle deep-bore tunnel
Argument: Seattle doesn't need a tunnel highway.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-4d1ca521553f46d0942e28b2613cc508 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Libertarianism
Argument: People have full rights to their property that governments can't deprive.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-352e31233fcd45068669916a03a3162b |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Ground zero mosque
Argument: Name Cordoba House indicates nefarious intent of mosque.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-8ec3ff1c7dba43ce805950e753ff1ad6 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: More troops to Afghanistan under Obama
Argument: Defeat in Afghanistan would embolden terrorists globally.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-217d191fa5b04c2db114bdb0201e7b76 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Drivers licenses for Illegal immigrants in the US
Argument: The costs of providing driver's licenses to millions of illegal immigrants would be very high.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-725d576776af4f03976df6d59e7acfc8 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Hunting for sport
Argument: Animals should be treated as we would want to be treated.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-431622ba3b4a48f4bd6554bdd12ff465 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Return of Israel to pre-1967 borders
Argument: With pre-1967 borders, PLO would recognize Israel, end conflict.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-d0cbb625666e4082bcc19d86296ad7a0 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Network neutrality
Argument: Network neutrality damages competition and niche suppliers.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-7fc7bdf7a2ed4285b4fca4b2f83f4c12 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Death penalty
Argument: Capital punishment wastes time and energy and burdens courts.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-c5986b7e3cb840fca11c716c21474792 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Corporate free speech
Argument: Unlimited spending lets candidates focus on message over fundraising.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-4a44139c55d84ef6bfb1c304f3054404 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Ending US sanctions on Cuba
Argument: Sanctions violate the principle of just war.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-b657a72d593e4e68abaae6cef621ac93 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Enhanced interrogation techniques
Argument: Many countries perform enhanced interrogations.
Output:
| [
"neutral"
] | task209-4f338b01045d41f19f33981986ab8e6b |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Banning Muslim hijab
Argument: Banning Muslim head scarves will not cause fundamentalist backlashes.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-023d61281a1745ee8dfcaa610f7da59e |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Crime cameras
Argument: Crime cameras lead to slippery slope of Big Brother surveillance.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-f7d517ddb9e749dd85a2dae1dd9ae839 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Libertarianism
Argument: Free-market economics is the ideal form of (non)governance.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-c098ad3c94684e82b734cd52ad9b72e2 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Rebuilding New Orleans
Argument: New Orleans should be rebuilt out of respect for tragedy.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-23995ea5c9154ed6993770c4ada0a5bb |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Education vouchers
Argument: Vouchers improve choice/access despite private school right to deny.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-5f8b6df243924a67a3bfc88a00525cb2 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Superdelegates
Argument: The US superdelegate system is undemocratic.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-90c174950a2b4899b2fc9560119a7197 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Assault weapons ban in the United States
Argument: There are adequate alternatives to assault weapons for self-defense.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-10ab4bde95a44a99ba3ff90100218675 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Veal
Argument: Veal farming is a good alternative to the slaughtering of unwanted calves.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-95341b252a5b4d50ad9569d0cb086a64 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Legalization of Marijuana
Argument: Marijuana prohibition is equally impossible as alcohol prohibition.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-97bcaa39655a4b298ea2610d6e76a12c |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: US offshore oil drilling
Argument: Offshore drilling rigs are resilient, withstanding even hurricanes.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-6d1a9ef89f8647a7b3acdaa41ad3f4ea |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The TGD is a hydroelectric, renewable-energy project.
Output:
| [
"neutral"
] | task209-082d7afe25414d8e9b40aae935fa9489 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Fairness Doctrine
Argument: Fairness Doctrine helps advance free speech values.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-34edf459817e4ed488ef4a339d10f395 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Mandatory calorie counts on menus
Argument: Calories on menus empower consumers to make healthier choices.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-64a50dfbe3c44273b9ff03c99081287c |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Health insurance cooperatives
Argument: Some government involvement in co-ops is justified.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-eb65a50f5df3465bb8df945a29323316 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: New START Treaty
Argument: Reducing US-Russian nuclear weapons makes for a safer world.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-8668696b98d14642b1d01c0b902ef84b |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: US and NATO intervention in Libya
Argument: Libya didn't attack US; President not authorized for war.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-1d2312723ba5486aaa6a24c8724e8047 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Kyoto Protocol
Argument: Humans are not causing global warming so Kyoto can't solve it.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-fe65194d75ba4ff796d28aec543db201 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Abortion
Argument: The Hippocratic oath forbids doctors from performing abortions.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-a2a88f97d670480eb688621c68061add |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Kosovo independence
Argument: Serbia's abuses in Kosovo are exaggerated.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-939837f64ee8401889fa8c3ef7354fc1 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Fish farming ban
Argument: Fish farming is economically beneficial.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-efccdf7556a54a5897d49b47ea5e2f8e |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Banning vuvuzela horns at the 2010 World Cup
Argument: Vuvuzelas can be used as weapons.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-90ca79905bea41ef9d297ade2b2370ec |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Underground nuclear waste storage
Argument: Underground storage important to safety across borders.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-c19f87b7d8e8445ebd3e799479f1b1cb |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Wind energy
Argument: Wind fuel does not require transporting to the generator.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-a5f49c3b56984d1994adcfdb905378e5 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty
Argument: Nuclear test ban reduces risks of nuclear fallout.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-32b9d42a15684059942e3b3bacf9ce38 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Hydroelectric dams
Argument: Many aquatic species have no problem adapting to impounded waters.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-7f1760e25c7f4358849b7e7c69b47b2b |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: More troops to Afghanistan under Obama
Argument: Counter-terrorism w/o troops did not work in 1990s.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-c416daf2cb5c4e5eb367e7034bbf1958 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Obama, meeting with hostile foreign leaders without preconditions
Argument: Talking to your enemies is not a concession.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-b28d587aa03744f5b038d53093fcc9a4 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Colonization of the Moon
Argument: A manned presence on the Moon is superior to a robotic one.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-3401f3b54044409aa64acf8252807d32 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Primaries in US elections
Argument: The primary system pushes elections back in the calendar.
Output:
| [
"neutral"
] | task209-60920954e6804c44a72b3ba8b539f0fa |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Open primaries
Argument: Primaries too important in democracy to be internal to parties.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-18d0618f824f48b99739b7872fb4ca5c |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Hybrid vehicles
Argument: Hybrids are more economical than electric cars.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-d0b08e4efd184fb9a189acfe72d25c73 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Year-round school
Argument: Areas that depend heavily on summer tourism will suffer economically.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-38c732b5858649329a8e108d1d3383c1 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Free trade
Argument: Free markets and trade benefit the environment.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-1a385917e42c4f429ef965e3abb3a654 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Oil sands
Argument: Tar sands can't enhance energy security; too expensive, not enough.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-5c137175da9d4bc7a80f786cf3580e54 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Assassination of a Dictator
Argument: Assassinations protect publics from terrorism; even while it's hard to measure.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-b95406b5b1864b85804996a08907617e |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Assisted suicide
Argument: Pain can't justify euthanasia, it can be made tolerable with modern medicines.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-4fdeeb435bd44e97bf2b9341ec812e60 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: US Renewable Electricity Standard
Argument: Renewable electricity standard increases energy prices - unpopular.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-18dcbc4f0fd7401895c8209a01d572d0 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Health insurance cooperatives
Argument: Government may never let health insurance co-ops fail.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-7f0fe14cc4584192959c41d8f2a9b4ab |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Puerto Rico statehood in America
Argument: Puerto Rico has waited for too long for full citizenship.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-5bbf1b662ef7404db4f926b16585c63a |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: European missile defense
Argument: Real threat of rogue states missile attacks.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-a45c984613da40e18574521722e8a0dc |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Castration of sex offenders
Argument: Castration exposes sex offenders to side effects.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-f681b334779e42afaba0ddab90f6eab1 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Ban on human reproductive cloning
Argument: Cloning is safe enough to perform on humans.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-89fa1ee914da454f97ec43f9d8cb048d |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Cellulosic ethanol
Argument: Cellulosic ethanol land-use harms forests, environment, climate.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-a225e3541d33474d8373fb3b67665ca4 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Two-state solution offers adequate territory to Palestinians.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-b3614735b66e4a19aaedeeaaf3de8685 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Crime cameras
Argument: Police should not waste time watching crime cameras.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-8945b58cf6ba41b78ce4ec366071450a |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Israeli military assault in Gaza
Argument: Israel strikes were intended to further dispirit Palestinians.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-cdb1ec86290b48b2bd74322fc6e2b06c |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Libertarianism
Argument: Free market economics fosters capitalist authoritarianism; undermines rights.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-93772d662d604e5fbedd0fe15c5cd4d2 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Mandatory military service
Argument: Military placement exams would encourage school-work.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-4e848337d778439fac371e911635d716 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Ground zero mosque
Argument: Developers have right to build ground zero mosque, but should not.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-ba0175bcc4a8462ea977af366df70cc5 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Death penalty
Argument: Capital punishment best prepares an evil soul for the after life.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-69f27f81e81645d1976e7440f8d6d94b |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Assassination of a Dictator
Argument: Measures can reduce risk of collateral damage from assassinations.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-73574fbffacf4835942e88f2f8301aa6 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Castration of sex offenders
Argument: Castration subdues libido and psychological factors in predation.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-06b35854064a4149a3bc74c8e165f544 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Seattle deep-bore tunnel
Argument: Development after removing viaduct will pay for tunnel.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-e4377a93207849a089f903f70d512def |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Republika Srpska secession from Bosnia and Herzegovina
Argument: Bosnian Serbs fought legitimately in Bosnian civil war.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-3ff0a03727c34901868936899c70f970 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Gay marriage
Argument: Marriage is about much more than kids; gays qualify.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-3ebd242783db46228647cb9960b6a062 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Free trade
Argument: Trade liberalization damages the growth of poor countries.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-dcc598ff596240f0a57e4d550fcc53fd |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Seattle deep-bore tunnel
Argument: Good chance Seattle tunnel will go over budget.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-ab20556a1b5d4c38b6ea2ddc565e2b9d |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Israeli settlements
Argument: Jewish settlements are not part of any illegal occupation.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-5c5a092607a849feb673e4bec2c9f1b8 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Tidal energy
Argument: Tidal energy disrupts marine ecosystems like a dam.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-0474f2851c56468aaa5e8fe1ef7d3feb |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty
Argument: Test ban, as a means to abolishing nuclear weapons, is unrealistic.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-36350957a21e4a45bba5cab3ef9f8cae |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: AIG bonuses
Argument: AIG did not file for bankruptcy; bonus contracts still valid.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-12b3a4d4a7d04435b1846082923b5108 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Is a nuclear Iran intolerable?
Argument: A nuclear Iran would use oil as a weapon.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-5dba4ba3d0934be295e523f553d1220c |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Full-body scanners at airports
Argument: Scanners do not reveal things in body cavities.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-da658adc13604027b78fcef2d4e4a9be |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Banning cell phones in cars
Argument: Careless driving laws are inadequate; cell phone ban is necessary.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-aae051a5015a4b0f812d9b02c08ed0b0 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: More troops to Afghanistan under Obama
Argument: More troops in Afg will inflame broader Muslim anger, terrorism.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-c4403a41039a4031803ee444cb099e28 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Privatizing social security
Argument: Costly privatization of Soc Sec would dampen econ growth.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-ac9807aeb74c447b8bced2dcadf9da4b |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Mandatory labeling of genetically modified foods
Argument: Labeling is wrong when GM foods show no differences with other foods.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-496220a73b714e698685ccbe1a973f2c |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Hydrogen vehicles
Argument: Hydrogen cars are like high-performance electric cars.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-5f7c5aa3571343b4960bb8c8d5a222f1 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Dollarization
Argument: Dollarization limits monetary policy flexibility.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-bf0115e5b00a4d13b78720342d917e80 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Mandatory labeling of genetically modified foods
Argument: Opinion is often divided or ambivalent on labeling GM foods.
Output:
| [
"neutral"
] | task209-e89a2c7b069540019110dbea00fd10a9 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Big government
Argument: Small government produces less healthy societies.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-09f3fa34ddff4709ba75cdf7f6c3d89e |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: DREAM Act
Argument: DREAM Act is bad for American employment.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-ce485dd27bba405691d2ff82ebae120e |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Banning cell phones in cars
Argument: Fumbling for ringing phone while driving is dangerous.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-4d08b184c11f49d89930e15155956be5 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Phasing out fossil fuel subsidies
Argument: Oil subsidies shield poor from high oil prices.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-de0ff39fa44d4b15bf19454250091e01 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Constitutionality of US health insurance mandates
Argument: Fed has power to institute necessary national insurance mandates.
Output:
| [
"neutral"
] | task209-a98c815f19344e2d89d1be46f100ec2f |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Geoengineering, iron fertilization of algae blooms
Argument: Sinking organic blooms can render the deep sea anoxic.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-094f1ebdf1f64946b83b2fb1e2315cee |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Phasing out fossil fuel subsidies
Argument: Subsidies are just generally inefficient.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-fea28b82a2094aaa89c71ac3cf612956 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: US Renewable Electricity Standard
Argument: Renewable Electricity Standard is more consistent than tax credits.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-179042d0c3f24379afd0506a619a43b3 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Osama Bin Laden Sea Burial
Argument: Islamic law flexible to special burials such as Bin Laden's.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-4856ecb5f50d43a394e4f9dd0fc4c501 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Tidal energy
Argument: Potential energy-production of tidal power is immense.
Output:
| [
"in favor"
] | task209-19e9d0a8be20415fb883df88fcea6e63 |
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Oil sands
Argument: Oil sands take more energy to extract, so emit more.
Output:
| [
"against"
] | task209-0fa2b206d6294a71a6d08681a11ad1ca |
End of preview. Expand
in Dataset Viewer.
Dataset Card for Natural Instructions (https://github.com/allenai/natural-instructions) Task: task209_stancedetection_classification
Additional Information
Citation Information
The following paper introduces the corpus in detail. If you use the corpus in published work, please cite it:
@misc{wang2022supernaturalinstructionsgeneralizationdeclarativeinstructions,
title={Super-NaturalInstructions: Generalization via Declarative Instructions on 1600+ NLP Tasks},
author={Yizhong Wang and Swaroop Mishra and Pegah Alipoormolabashi and Yeganeh Kordi and Amirreza Mirzaei and Anjana Arunkumar and Arjun Ashok and Arut Selvan Dhanasekaran and Atharva Naik and David Stap and Eshaan Pathak and Giannis Karamanolakis and Haizhi Gary Lai and Ishan Purohit and Ishani Mondal and Jacob Anderson and Kirby Kuznia and Krima Doshi and Maitreya Patel and Kuntal Kumar Pal and Mehrad Moradshahi and Mihir Parmar and Mirali Purohit and Neeraj Varshney and Phani Rohitha Kaza and Pulkit Verma and Ravsehaj Singh Puri and Rushang Karia and Shailaja Keyur Sampat and Savan Doshi and Siddhartha Mishra and Sujan Reddy and Sumanta Patro and Tanay Dixit and Xudong Shen and Chitta Baral and Yejin Choi and Noah A. Smith and Hannaneh Hajishirzi and Daniel Khashabi},
year={2022},
eprint={2204.07705},
archivePrefix={arXiv},
primaryClass={cs.CL},
url={https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.07705},
}
More details can also be found in the following paper:
@misc{brüelgabrielsson2024compressserveservingthousands,
title={Compress then Serve: Serving Thousands of LoRA Adapters with Little Overhead},
author={Rickard Brüel-Gabrielsson and Jiacheng Zhu and Onkar Bhardwaj and Leshem Choshen and Kristjan Greenewald and Mikhail Yurochkin and Justin Solomon},
year={2024},
eprint={2407.00066},
archivePrefix={arXiv},
primaryClass={cs.DC},
url={https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.00066},
}
Contact Information
For any comments or questions, please email Rickard Brüel Gabrielsson
- Downloads last month
- 53