lasha-nlp/CONDAQA huggingface dataset:
Passage: Around this time Johann Bernoulli's two sons, Daniel and Nicolaus, were working at the Imperial Russian Academy of Sciences in Saint Petersburg. On 31 July 1726, Nicolaus died of appendicitis after spending less than a year in Russia. When Daniel assumed his brother's position in the mathematics/physics division, he recommended that the post in physiology that he had vacated be filled by his friend Euler. In November 1726 Euler eagerly accepted the offer, but his travel to Saint Petersburg was ultimately unsuccessful when that offer was revoked, and he instead fell back on his open invitation to be a professor of physics at the University of Basel.

Question: From this passage, can you conclude that Euler was more interested in teaching physics than physiology?
Answer: NO

Question: Given the outcome of the hiring process, would Euler be lecturing to his students in Russian?
Answer: NO

Question: From the job that he ultimately ended up in, does it sound like Euler would need to brush up more on his calculus and the laws of motion, rather than on biology and chemistry?
Answer: YES
Passage: Around this time Johann Bernoulli's two sons, Daniel and Nicolaus, were working at the Imperial Russian Academy of Sciences in Saint Petersburg. On 31 July 1726, Nicolaus died of appendicitis after spending less than a year in Russia. When Daniel assumed his brother's position in the mathematics/physics division, he recommended that the post in physiology that he had vacated be filled by his friend Euler. In November 1726 Euler eagerly accepted the offer, but he rescinded his acceptance while en route to Saint Petersburg, when he heard that he had been hired as a physics professor at the University of Basel

Question: From this passage, can you conclude that Euler was more interested in teaching physics than physiology?
Answer: YES

Question: Given the outcome of the hiring process, would Euler be lecturing to his students in Russian?
Answer: NO

Question: From the job that he ultimately ended up in, does it sound like Euler would need to brush up more on his calculus and the laws of motion, rather than on biology and chemistry?
Answer: YES
Passage: Externally, the treaties formally acknowledged the independence of the Dutch Republic and the Swiss Confederacy, effectively autonomous since 1499. In Lorraine, the Three Bishoprics of Metz, Toul and Verdun, occupied by France since 1552, were formally ceded, as were the cities of the Décapole in Alsace, with the exception of Strasbourg and Mulhouse. Sweden received an indemnity of five million thalers, the Imperial territories of Swedish Pomerania, and Prince-bishoprics of Bremen and Verden; this gave them a seat in the Imperial Diet.

Question: If someone said that they lived in the Décapole in Alsace, would you know with certainty whether or not their city was ceded?
Answer: NO

Question: Was the fate of the people of Strasbourg, a city of the Décapole in Alsace, and the fate of the people of the Bishopric of Metz very similar in regard to whether or not they became citizens of France?
Answer: NO

Question: Was the city of Mulhouse completely unique in relation to the other members of the Décapole in regard to what happened to it following the signing of the treaties?
Answer: NO
Passage: Externally, the treaties formally acknowledged the independence of the Dutch Republic and the Swiss Confederacy, effectively autonomous since 1499. In Lorraine, the Three Bishoprics of Metz, Toul and Verdun, occupied by France since 1552, were formally ceded, as were the cities of the Décapole in Alsace, besides Strasbourg and Mulhouse. Sweden received an indemnity of five million thalers, the Imperial territories of Swedish Pomerania, and Prince-bishoprics of Bremen and Verden; this gave them a seat in the Imperial Diet.

Question: If someone said that they lived in the Décapole in Alsace, would you know with certainty whether or not their city was ceded?
Answer: NO

Question: Was the fate of the people of Strasbourg, a city of the Décapole in Alsace, and the fate of the people of the Bishopric of Metz very similar in regard to whether or not they became citizens of France?
Answer: NO

Question: Was the city of Mulhouse completely unique in relation to the other members of the Décapole in regard to what happened to it following the signing of the treaties?
Answer: NO
Passage: Externally, the treaties formally acknowledged the independence of the Dutch Republic and the Swiss Confederacy, effectively autonomous since 1499. In Lorraine, the Three Bishoprics of Metz, Toul and Verdun, occupied by France since 1552, were formally ceded, as were the cities of the Décapole in Alsace, with the exception of Mulhouse. Sweden received an indemnity of five million thalers, the Imperial territories of Swedish Pomerania, and Prince-bishoprics of Bremen and Verden; this gave them a seat in the Imperial Diet.

Question: If someone said that they lived in the Décapole in Alsace, would you know with certainty whether or not their city was ceded?
Answer: NO

Question: Was the fate of the people of Strasbourg, a city of the Décapole in Alsace, and the fate of the people of the Bishopric of Metz very similar in regard to whether or not they became citizens of France?
Answer: YES

Question: Was the city of Mulhouse completely unique in relation to the other members of the Décapole in regard to what happened to it following the signing of the treaties?
Answer: YES
Passage: Externally, the treaties formally acknowledged the independence of the Dutch Republic and the Swiss Confederacy, effectively autonomous since 1499. In Lorraine, the Three Bishoprics of Metz, Toul and Verdun, occupied by France since 1552, were not formally ceded, but the cities of the Décapole in Alsace, including Strasbourg and Mulhouse, were. Sweden received an indemnity of five million thalers, the Imperial territories of Swedish Pomerania, and Prince-bishoprics of Bremen and Verden; this gave them a seat in the Imperial Diet.

Question: If someone said that they lived in the Décapole in Alsace, would you know with certainty whether or not their city was ceded?
Answer: YES

Question: Was the fate of the people of Strasbourg, a city of the Décapole in Alsace, and the fate of the people of the Bishopric of Metz very similar in regard to whether or not they became citizens of France?
Answer: NO

Question: Was the city of Mulhouse completely unique in relation to the other members of the Décapole in regard to what happened to it following the signing of the treaties?
Answer: NO
Passage: Diplomatic missions between members of the British Commonwealth of Nations are not called embassies, but high commissions, for Commonwealth nations share a special diplomatic relationship. It is generally expected that an embassy of a Commonwealth country in a non-Commonwealth country will do its best to provide diplomatic services to citizens from other Commonwealth countries if the citizen's country does not have an embassy in that country. Canadian and Australian nationals enjoy even greater cooperation between their respective consular services, as outlined in the Canada-Australia Consular Services Sharing Agreement. The same kind of procedure is also followed multilaterally by the member states of the European Union (EU). European citizens in need of consular help in a country without diplomatic or consular representation of their own country may turn to any consular or diplomatic mission of another EU member state.

Question: If a German citizen loses their passport in a country that has a German consulate, but no diplomatic mission, can they go to a French consulate to get a new passport?
Answer: NO

Question: If a German citizen loses their passport in a country that has a German diplomatic mission but no consulate, can they go to a French consulate to get a new passport?
Answer: NO

Question: If a German citizen loses their passport in a country that has no German diplomatic or consulate, can they go to a French consulate to get a new passport?
Answer: YES
Passage: Diplomatic missions between members of the British Commonwealth of Nations are not called embassies, but high commissions, for Commonwealth nations share a special diplomatic relationship. It is generally expected that an embassy of a Commonwealth country in a non-Commonwealth country will do its best to provide diplomatic services to citizens from other Commonwealth countries if the citizen's country does not have an embassy in that country. Canadian and Australian nationals enjoy even greater cooperation between their respective consular services, as outlined in the Canada-Australia Consular Services Sharing Agreement. The same kind of procedure is also followed multilaterally by the member states of the European Union (EU). European citizens in need of consular help in a country with an absence of diplomatic or consular representation of their own country may turn to any consular or diplomatic mission of another EU member state.

Question: If a German citizen loses their passport in a country that has a German consulate, but no diplomatic mission, can they go to a French consulate to get a new passport?
Answer: NO

Question: If a German citizen loses their passport in a country that has a German diplomatic mission but no consulate, can they go to a French consulate to get a new passport?
Answer: NO

Question: If a German citizen loses their passport in a country that has no German diplomatic or consulate, can they go to a French consulate to get a new passport?
Answer: YES
Passage: Diplomatic missions between members of the British Commonwealth of Nations are not called embassies, but high commissions, for Commonwealth nations share a special diplomatic relationship. It is generally expected that an embassy of a Commonwealth country in a non-Commonwealth country will do its best to provide diplomatic services to citizens from other Commonwealth countries if the citizen's country does not have an embassy in that country. Canadian and Australian nationals enjoy even greater cooperation between their respective consular services, as outlined in the Canada-Australia Consular Services Sharing Agreement. The same kind of procedure is also followed multilaterally by the member states of the European Union (EU). European citizens in need of consular help in a country without diplomatic but with consular representation of their own country may turn to any consular or diplomatic mission of another EU member state.

Question: If a German citizen loses their passport in a country that has a German consulate, but no diplomatic mission, can they go to a French consulate to get a new passport?
Answer: YES

Question: If a German citizen loses their passport in a country that has a German diplomatic mission but no consulate, can they go to a French consulate to get a new passport?
Answer: NO

Question: If a German citizen loses their passport in a country that has no German diplomatic or consulate, can they go to a French consulate to get a new passport?
Answer: YES
Passage: Diplomatic missions between members of the British Commonwealth of Nations are not called embassies, but high commissions, for Commonwealth nations share a special diplomatic relationship. It is generally expected that an embassy of a Commonwealth country in a non-Commonwealth country will do its best to provide diplomatic services to citizens from other Commonwealth countries if the citizen's country does not have an embassy in that country. Canadian and Australian nationals enjoy even greater cooperation between their respective consular services, as outlined in the Canada-Australia Consular Services Sharing Agreement. The same kind of procedure is also followed multilaterally by the member states of the European Union (EU). European citizens in need of consular help in a country with diplomatic or consular representation of their own country may turn to any consular or diplomatic mission of another EU member state.

Question: If a German citizen loses their passport in a country that has a German consulate, but no diplomatic mission, can they go to a French consulate to get a new passport?
Answer: YES

Question: If a German citizen loses their passport in a country that has a German diplomatic mission but no consulate, can they go to a French consulate to get a new passport?
Answer: YES

Question: If a German citizen loses their passport in a country that has no German diplomatic or consulate, can they go to a French consulate to get a new passport?
Answer: NO
Passage: Arafat continued negotiations with Netanyahu's successor, Ehud Barak, at the Camp David 2000 Summit in July 2000. Due partly to his own politics (Barak was from the leftist Labor Party, whereas Netanyahu was from the rightist Likud Party) and partly due to insistence for compromise by President Clinton, Barak offered Arafat a Palestinian state in 73 percent of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian percentage of sovereignty would extend to 90 percent over a ten- to twenty-five-year period. Also included in the offer was the return of a small number of refugees and compensation for those not allowed to return. Palestinians would also have "custodianship" over the Temple Mount, sovereignty on all Islamic and Christian holy sites, and three of Jerusalem's four Old City quarters. Arafat rejected Barak's offer and refused to make an immediate counter-offer. He told President Clinton that, "the Arab leader who would surrender Jerusalem is not born yet."

Question: Does it seem like Arafat was intent on reaching a resolution as quickly as possible?
Answer: NO

Question: Is it likely that Arafat was an easy person to negotiate with?
Answer: NO

Question: Is there a good chance that Barak's offer caused Arafat to want to stop the negotiations altogether.
Answer: NO
Passage: Arafat continued negotiations with Netanyahu's successor, Ehud Barak, at the Camp David 2000 Summit in July 2000. Due partly to his own politics (Barak was from the leftist Labor Party, whereas Netanyahu was from the rightist Likud Party) and partly due to insistence for compromise by President Clinton, Barak offered Arafat a Palestinian state in 73 percent of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian percentage of sovereignty would extend to 90 percent over a ten- to twenty-five-year period. Also included in the offer was the return of a small number of refugees and compensation for those not allowed to return. Palestinians would also have "custodianship" over the Temple Mount, sovereignty on all Islamic and Christian holy sites, and three of Jerusalem's four Old City quarters. Arafat rejected Barak's offer and dismissed making an immediate counter-offer. He told President Clinton that, "the Arab leader who would surrender Jerusalem is not born yet."

Question: Does it seem like Arafat was intent on reaching a resolution as quickly as possible?
Answer: NO

Question: Is it likely that Arafat was an easy person to negotiate with?
Answer: NO

Question: Is there a good chance that Barak's offer caused Arafat to want to stop the negotiations altogether.
Answer: NO
Passage: Arafat continued negotiations with Netanyahu's successor, Ehud Barak, at the Camp David 2000 Summit in July 2000. Due partly to his own politics (Barak was from the leftist Labor Party, whereas Netanyahu was from the rightist Likud Party) and partly due to insistence for compromise by President Clinton, Barak offered Arafat a Palestinian state in 73 percent of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian percentage of sovereignty would extend to 90 percent over a ten- to twenty-five-year period. Also included in the offer was the return of a small number of refugees and compensation for those not allowed to return. Palestinians would also have "custodianship" over the Temple Mount, sovereignty on all Islamic and Christian holy sites, and three of Jerusalem's four Old City quarters. Arafat rejected Barak's offer and refused to make any counter-offer. He told President Clinton that, "the Arab leader who would surrender Jerusalem is not born yet."

Question: Does it seem like Arafat was intent on reaching a resolution as quickly as possible?
Answer: NO

Question: Is it likely that Arafat was an easy person to negotiate with?
Answer: NO

Question: Is there a good chance that Barak's offer caused Arafat to want to stop the negotiations altogether.
Answer: YES
Passage: Arafat continued negotiations with Netanyahu's successor, Ehud Barak, at the Camp David 2000 Summit in July 2000. Due partly to his own politics (Barak was from the leftist Labor Party, whereas Netanyahu was from the rightist Likud Party) and partly due to insistence for compromise by President Clinton, Barak offered Arafat a Palestinian state in 73 percent of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian percentage of sovereignty would extend to 90 percent over a ten- to twenty-five-year period. Also included in the offer was the return of a small number of refugees and compensation for those not allowed to return. Palestinians would also have "custodianship" over the Temple Mount, sovereignty on all Islamic and Christian holy sites, and three of Jerusalem's four Old City quarters. Arafat rejected Barak's offer but attempted to make an immediate counter-offer. He told President Clinton that, "the Arab leader who would surrender Jerusalem is not born yet."

Question: Does it seem like Arafat was intent on reaching a resolution as quickly as possible?
Answer: YES

Question: Is it likely that Arafat was an easy person to negotiate with?
Answer: YES

Question: Is there a good chance that Barak's offer caused Arafat to want to stop the negotiations altogether.
Answer: NO
Passage: In an interview with "Entertainment Weekly", Bay admitted that the film's central premise "that NASA could actually do something in a situation like this" was unrealistic. Additionally, the largest known Potentially Hazardous Asteroid (PHA) is (53319) 1999 JM8, which is only in diameter, while the comet in the movie is described as being "the size of Texas". Near the end of the credits, there is a disclaimer stating, "The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's cooperation and assistance does not reflect an endorsement of the contents of the film or the treatment of the characters depicted therein."

Question: If we take Michael Bay at his word when he talks about the feasibility of asteroid-destroying technology at the end of the twentieth century, does it sound like NASA's disclaimer at the end of the movie was simply just a piece of legal boilerplate rather than an actual denial of what the movie implied?
Answer: NO

Question: Again, assuming that Bay's understanding of technical feasibility was accurate, does the passage make it sound like the biggest technical hurdle for NASA to deal with a potential planet-killing asteroid would be dealing with the immense size of an asteroid rather than accurately tracking and reaching it in time?
Answer: YES

Question: Does the passage make it sound like NASA in the 2020s or 2030s could actually conduct a mission that mimics the events of the movie, on an asteroid that is known to pose no risk, as a test for a future in which such measures might actually be necessary?
Answer: NO
Passage: Bay gave an interview to "Entertainment Weekly" in which he admitted that the central idea of the movie, that NASA astronauts were capable of performing such feats, was infeasible. Additionally, the largest known Potentially Hazardous Asteroid (PHA) is (53319) 1999 JM8, which is smaller in diameter, while the comet in the movie is described as being "the size of Texas". Near the end of the credits, there is a disclaimer stating, "The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's cooperation and assistance does not reflect an endorsement of the contents of the film or the treatment of the characters depicted therein."

Question: If we take Michael Bay at his word when he talks about the feasibility of asteroid-destroying technology at the end of the twentieth century, does it sound like NASA's disclaimer at the end of the movie was simply just a piece of legal boilerplate rather than an actual denial of what the movie implied?
Answer: NO

Question: Again, assuming that Bay's understanding of technical feasibility was accurate, does the passage make it sound like the biggest technical hurdle for NASA to deal with a potential planet-killing asteroid would be dealing with the immense size of an asteroid rather than accurately tracking and reaching it in time?
Answer: YES

Question: Does the passage make it sound like NASA in the 2020s or 2030s could actually conduct a mission that mimics the events of the movie, on an asteroid that is known to pose no risk, as a test for a future in which such measures might actually be necessary?
Answer: NO
Passage: In an interview with "Entertainment Weekly", Bay proclaimed that the film's central premise "that NASA could actually do something in a situation like this" was far from unrealistic, even at the time . Additionally, the largest known Potentially Hazardous Asteroid (PHA) is (53319) 1999 JM8, which is much smaller in diameter, and thus more manageable, while the comet in the movie is described as being "the size of Texas". Near the end of the credits, there is a disclaimer stating, "The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's cooperation and assistance does not reflect an endorsement of the contents of the film or the treatment of the characters depicted therein."

Question: If we take Michael Bay at his word when he talks about the feasibility of asteroid-destroying technology at the end of the twentieth century, does it sound like NASA's disclaimer at the end of the movie was simply just a piece of legal boilerplate rather than an actual denial of what the movie implied?
Answer: YES

Question: Again, assuming that Bay's understanding of technical feasibility was accurate, does the passage make it sound like the biggest technical hurdle for NASA to deal with a potential planet-killing asteroid would be dealing with the immense size of an asteroid rather than accurately tracking and reaching it in time?
Answer: NO

Question: Does the passage make it sound like NASA in the 2020s or 2030s could actually conduct a mission that mimics the events of the movie, on an asteroid that is known to pose no risk, as a test for a future in which such measures might actually be necessary?
Answer: YES
Passage: In an interview with "Entertainment Weekly", Bay reiterated that the film's central premise "that NASA could actually do something in a situation like this" was actually quite plausible. Additionally, the largest known Potentially Hazardous Asteroid (PHA) is (53319) 1999 JM8, which is actually much smaller in diameter and easier to break up than the comet in the movie, which is described as being "the size of Texas". Near the end of the credits, there is a disclaimer stating, "The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's cooperation and assistance does not reflect an endorsement of the contents of the film or the treatment of the characters depicted therein."

Question: If we take Michael Bay at his word when he talks about the feasibility of asteroid-destroying technology at the end of the twentieth century, does it sound like NASA's disclaimer at the end of the movie was simply just a piece of legal boilerplate rather than an actual denial of what the movie implied?
Answer: YES

Question: Again, assuming that Bay's understanding of technical feasibility was accurate, does the passage make it sound like the biggest technical hurdle for NASA to deal with a potential planet-killing asteroid would be dealing with the immense size of an asteroid rather than accurately tracking and reaching it in time?
Answer: NO

Question: Does the passage make it sound like NASA in the 2020s or 2030s could actually conduct a mission that mimics the events of the movie, on an asteroid that is known to pose no risk, as a test for a future in which such measures might actually be necessary?
Answer: YES