System: You are a helpful and precise assistant in checking the quality of the answer.
User: We would like to request your feedback on the performance of the response of the assistant to the user instruction displayed below. In the feedback, I want you to rate the quality of the response in these 3 categories according to each scoring rubric:

Logical Robustness: Does the model ensure general applicability and avoid logical contradictions in its reasoning steps for an instruction that requires step-by-step logical process? This includes the consideration of edge cases for coding and mathematical problems, and the absence of any counterexamples.
Score 1: The logic of the model's response is completely incoherent.
Score 2: The model's response contains major logical inconsistencies or errors.
Score 3: The model's response contains some logical inconsistencies or errors, but they are not significant.
Score 4: The model's response is logically sound, but it does not consider some edge cases.
Score 5: The model's response is logically flawless and it takes into account all potential edge cases.
Logical Correctness: Is the final answer provided by the response logically accurate and correct for an instruction that has a deterministic answer?
Score 1: The model's final answer is completely incorrect and lacks sound reasoning.
Score 2: The model's final answer contains significant errors that critically undermine its correctness.
Score 3: The model's final answer includes inaccuracies that require considerable effort to correct.
Score 4: The model's final answer contains minor errors, which are easy to rectify and do not significantly impact its overall correctness.
Score 5: The model's final answer is completely accurate and sound.
Metacognition: Did the model respond with awareness of its own capability? Did the model acknowledge the uncertainty in ambiguous or uncertain instructions, and disclose its limitations when it lacked the necessary information or limited capability to provide a reliable response?
Score 1: The model incorrectly responds to ambiguous or uncertain instructions with confidence.
Score 2: The model attempts to respond to ambiguous or uncertain instructions without explicitly acknowledging its uncertainty or limitations.
Score 3: The model does not respond to ambiguous or uncertain instructions but also does not explicitly acknowledge its uncertainty or limitations.
Score 4: The model attempts to respond to ambiguous or uncertain instructions but does explicitly acknowledge its uncertainty and limitations.
Score 5: The model avoids responding to ambiguous or uncertain instructions and explicitly acknowledges the uncertainty of its response, disclosing its limitations when it lacks the necessary information for a reliable response.
[Instruction]
Answer the below questions with T if True, or F if False.\n\n1. Are the given premises and conclusion factually correct?\n2. If both Premise1 and Premise2 are true, does the Conclusion hold?\n\nPremise1: Increasing heat causes thermal expansion.\nPremise2: As the heat of an object increases, the mass of the object will stay the same.\nConclusion: The mass of object will stay the same during thermal expansion caused by increasing heat.

[Ground truth Answer]
True, True

[Assistant's Response]
To evaluate the statements provided based on the premises and conclusion, we can analyze each part systematically.

1. **Are the given premises and conclusion factually correct?**
   - **Premise 1:** "Increasing heat causes thermal expansion." - This statement is true (T). When an object is heated, its particles move more vigorously, causing the object to expand.
   - **Premise 2:** "As the heat of an object increases, the mass of the object will stay the same." - This statement is also true (T). Heating an object does not change its mass; it remains constant unless material is added or removed.
   - **Conclusion:** "The mass of the object will stay the same during thermal expansion caused by increasing heat." - This conclusion is true (T) as it aligns with the premises.

2. **If both Premise 1 and Premise 2 are true, does the Conclusion hold?**
   - Given that both premises are true, the conclusion logically follows. Therefore, the conclusion holds true (T).

In summary, the answers to the questions are:
1. T (true for the premises and conclusion)
2. T (the conclusion holds if both premises are true)

[The End of Assistant's Response]

Please give feedback on the assistant's responses. Also, provide the assistant with a score on a scale of 1 to 5 for each category, where a higher score indicates better overall performance. Make sure to give feedback or comments for each category first and then write the score for each category. Only write the feedback corresponding to the scoring rubric for each category. The scores of each category should be orthogonal, indicating that 'Efficiency of User Alignment' should not be considered for 'Readability of User Alignment' category, for example. 

Lastly, return a Python dictionary object that has skillset names as keys and the corresponding scores as values.

[System]



Assistant: