In this task, you're given a statement and three sentences as choices. Your job is to determine which sentence can be inferred from the statement. Incorrect choices change the meaning in important ways or have details that are not mentioned in the statement. Indicate your answer as 1,2, or 3 corresponding to the choice number of the selected sentence.

[EX Q]: Statement: Rennie nodded. Choices:  1. Rennie was napping. 2. Rennie was in agreement. 3. Rennie was nodding.
[EX A]: 3

[EX Q]: Statement: all my years of devotion go for nothing." Poirot nodded sympathetically.  Choices:  1. He never would express sympathy for another person. 2. The man moved his head. 3. Poirot knew what he was going through.
[EX A]: 2

[EX Q]: Statement: As David Rusk, a former mayor of Albuquerque, argues in his book, Cities Without Suburbs , metro-wide governments where the suburbs and the city are joined tend to be more racially integrated, and better off in various other ways as well. Choices:  1. Cities Without Suburbs written by David Rusk argues that suburbs and the city where they join are usually more racially integrated and better off in various other ways too.  2. Segregation does not produce increased crime, poverty and discrepancy in quality of life.  3. David Rusk said in his book about his experience as mayor that suburbs and cities joining together at the edges of the metropolitan area leads to better economic stability, schools and neighborhood safety then when races start to become segregated. 
[EX A]:
1