lasha-nlp/CONDAQA huggingface dataset:
Passage: Phocids are known as true or "earless" seals. These animals lack external ear flaps and are incapable of turning their hind-flippers forward, which makes them more cumbersome on land. In water, true seals swim by moving their hind-flippers and lower body from side to side. Phocids have thickened mastoids, enlarged entotympanic bones, everted pelvic bones and massive ankle bones. They also have supraorbital processes on the frontal, but have underdeveloped calcaneal tubers. A 2006 molecular study supports the division of phocids into two monophyletic subfamilies: Monachinae, which consists of "Mirounga", Monachini and Lobodontini; and Phocinae, which includes "Pusa", "Phoca", "Halichoerus", "Histriophoca", "Pagophilus", "Erignathus" and "Cystophora".

Question: If you see a picture of a seal with supraorbital processes, are you looking at a phocid?
Answer: DON'T KNOW

Question: If a biologist finds a new type of seal with no supraorbital processes, but small calcaneal tubers, is it a phocid?
Answer: NO

Question: If you see a picture of a seal without either supraorbital processes or calcaneal tubers, is it a phocid?
Answer: NO
Passage: Jordan does not allow entry to Jews with visible signs of Judaism or even with personal religious items in their possession. The Jordanian ambassador to Israel replied to a complaint by a religious Jew denied entry that security concerns required that travelers entering the Hashemite Kingdom not do so with prayer shawls (Tallit) and phylacteries (Tefillin). Jordanian authorities state that the policy is in order to ensure the Jewish tourists' safety.

Question: Would a Jew wearing a yarmulke be allowed into Jordan?
Answer: NO

Question: Would a Jew with no religious items be allowed into Jordan?
Answer: YES

Question: Would a Jew carrying a Hebrew Bible in their backpack be allowed into Jordan?
Answer: NO
Passage: Jordan declines to allow entry to Jews with visible signs of Judaism or even with personal religious items in their possession. The Jordanian ambassador to Israel replied to a complaint by a religious Jew denied entry that security concerns required that travelers entering the Hashemite Kingdom not do so with prayer shawls (Tallit) and phylacteries (Tefillin). Jordanian authorities state that the policy is in order to ensure the Jewish tourists' safety.

Question: Would a Jew wearing a yarmulke be allowed into Jordan?
Answer: NO

Question: Would a Jew with no religious items be allowed into Jordan?
Answer: YES

Question: Would a Jew carrying a Hebrew Bible in their backpack be allowed into Jordan?
Answer: NO
Passage: Jordan allows entry only to Jews with not visible signs of Judaism, but personal religious items in their possession are allowed. The Jordanian ambassador to Israel replied to a complaint by a religious Jew denied entry that security concerns required that travelers entering the Hashemite Kingdom not do so with prayer shawls (Tallit) and phylacteries (Tefillin). Jordanian authorities state that the policy is in order to ensure the Jewish tourists' safety.

Question: Would a Jew wearing a yarmulke be allowed into Jordan?
Answer: NO

Question: Would a Jew with no religious items be allowed into Jordan?
Answer: YES

Question: Would a Jew carrying a Hebrew Bible in their backpack be allowed into Jordan?
Answer: YES
Passage: Jordan does allow entry to Jews with visible signs of Judaism or even with personal religious items in their possession. The Jordanian ambassador to Israel replied to a complaint by a religious Jew denied entry that security concerns required that travelers entering the Hashemite Kingdom not do so with prayer shawls (Tallit) and phylacteries (Tefillin). Jordanian authorities state that the policy is in order to ensure the Jewish tourists' safety.

Question: Would a Jew wearing a yarmulke be allowed into Jordan?
Answer: YES

Question: Would a Jew with no religious items be allowed into Jordan?
Answer: YES

Question: Would a Jew carrying a Hebrew Bible in their backpack be allowed into Jordan?
Answer: YES
Passage: The next morning they all find themselves at the prison where the confusion increases and is compounded by the jailer, Frosch, who has profited by Warden Frank's absence to become gloriously drunk. Alfred, still in jail in Eisenstein's place, irritates the other prisoners by singing operatic arias.

Question: Does Warden Frank approve of being drunk on the job?
Answer: NO

Question: Is Warden Frank a strict disciplinarian?
Answer: YES

Question: Does Warden Frank often leave Frosch in charge of the prison by himself?
Answer: DON'T KNOW
Passage: The next morning they all find themselves at the prison where the confusion increases and is compounded by the jailer, Frosch, who has profited from Warden Frank's being away by becoming gloriously drunk. Alfred, still in jail in Eisenstein's place, irritates the other prisoners by singing operatic arias.

Question: Does Warden Frank approve of being drunk on the job?
Answer: NO

Question: Is Warden Frank a strict disciplinarian?
Answer: YES

Question: Does Warden Frank often leave Frosch in charge of the prison by himself?
Answer: DON'T KNOW
Passage: The next morning they all find themselves at the prison where the confusion increases and is compounded by the jailer, Frosch, whose absence who has caused Warden Frank to become gloriously drunk. Alfred, still in jail in Eisenstein's place, irritates the other prisoners by singing operatic arias.

Question: Does Warden Frank approve of being drunk on the job?
Answer: YES

Question: Is Warden Frank a strict disciplinarian?
Answer: NO

Question: Does Warden Frank often leave Frosch in charge of the prison by himself?
Answer: NO
Passage: The next morning they all find themselves at the prison where the confusion increases and is compounded by the jailer, Frosch, who has profited by Warden Frank's presence to become gloriously drunk. Alfred, still in jail in Eisenstein's place, irritates the other prisoners by singing operatic arias.

Question: Does Warden Frank approve of being drunk on the job?
Answer: YES

Question: Is Warden Frank a strict disciplinarian?
Answer: NO

Question: Does Warden Frank often leave Frosch in charge of the prison by himself?
Answer: NO
Passage: After witnessing the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, which saw the unconditional surrender of Pakistan in 1971, Mahmood attended the winter seminar at Multan and delivered a speech on atomic science. On 20 January 1972, the President of Pakistan, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, approved a crash atomic weapon program, under Munir Ahmad Khan, for the sake of "national survivor." Though, he continued his work at the KANUPP I engineering division.

Question: If we assume that Mahmood himself is something of a national treasure for Pakistan, could we conclude from the passage that his ability to attend the winter seminar was one of the conditions of Pakistan's post-war surrender?
Answer: NO

Question: Does it sound like Pakistan was arguing from a position of strength in 1971, even though she had lost the war, and could still make demands about the terms of surrender?
Answer: NO

Question: Given what the passage suggests happened in Pakistan in the year after the surrender, does it sound like Indian officials would nevertheless have felt that they did everything they could to prevent such an unfavorable outcome?
Answer: YES
Passage: Mahmood had witnessed his country's total surrender to India during the war of 1971, and afterwards, he delivered his speech about atomic science while in attendance at Multan's winter seminar. On 20 January 1972, the President of Pakistan, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, approved a crash atomic weapon program, under Munir Ahmad Khan, for the sake of "national survivor." Though, he continued his work at the KANUPP I engineering division.

Question: If we assume that Mahmood himself is something of a national treasure for Pakistan, could we conclude from the passage that his ability to attend the winter seminar was one of the conditions of Pakistan's post-war surrender?
Answer: NO

Question: Does it sound like Pakistan was arguing from a position of strength in 1971, even though she had lost the war, and could still make demands about the terms of surrender?
Answer: NO

Question: Given what the passage suggests happened in Pakistan in the year after the surrender, does it sound like Indian officials would nevertheless have felt that they did everything they could to prevent such an unfavorable outcome?
Answer: YES
Passage: After witnessing the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, and during ongoing negotiations for a ceasefire, Mahmood was nonetheless given unconditional permission to attend the winter seminar at Multan and to deliver his speech on atomic science. On 20 January 1972, the President of Pakistan, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, approved a crash atomic weapon program, under Munir Ahmad Khan, for the sake of "national survivor." Though, he continued his work at the KANUPP I engineering division.

Question: If we assume that Mahmood himself is something of a national treasure for Pakistan, could we conclude from the passage that his ability to attend the winter seminar was one of the conditions of Pakistan's post-war surrender?
Answer: YES

Question: Does it sound like Pakistan was arguing from a position of strength in 1971, even though she had lost the war, and could still make demands about the terms of surrender?
Answer: YES

Question: Given what the passage suggests happened in Pakistan in the year after the surrender, does it sound like Indian officials would nevertheless have felt that they did everything they could to prevent such an unfavorable outcome?
Answer: NO
Passage: After witnessing the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, which saw Pakistan's surrender albeit with many favorable conditions, Mahmood attended the winter seminar at Multan and delivered a speech on atomic science. On 20 January 1972, the President of Pakistan, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, approved a crash atomic weapon program, under Munir Ahmad Khan, for the sake of "national survivor." Though, he continued his work at the KANUPP I engineering division.

Question: If we assume that Mahmood himself is something of a national treasure for Pakistan, could we conclude from the passage that his ability to attend the winter seminar was one of the conditions of Pakistan's post-war surrender?
Answer: YES

Question: Does it sound like Pakistan was arguing from a position of strength in 1971, even though she had lost the war, and could still make demands about the terms of surrender?
Answer: YES

Question: Given what the passage suggests happened in Pakistan in the year after the surrender, does it sound like Indian officials would nevertheless have felt that they did everything they could to prevent such an unfavorable outcome?
Answer: NO
Passage: Application developers writing in 6301 assembler struggled with the small amount of RAM (2 kB) and the lack of an operating system. Another difficulty for developers was with the performance limitations of the earliest DATAPAKs, which used a serial-access internal architecture, as opposed to random access. Retrieving, for example, byte 2000 from a DATAPAK meant issuing successive hardware commands to either step from the current read position one address place at time until position 2000 was reached or, in the worst case, resetting the read position to zero and then issuing a step-forward command 2000 times.

Question: If a developer had a new, untouched version of this machine, would he or she be able to start it up and begin work on a command line, without any additional external inputs?
Answer: NO

Question: Would someone who had studied in an early computer-science program at a top university be able to start working on this machine out of the box, because its operating system would be one that had been used before?
Answer: NO

Question: Is it possible that the real problem with this machine was actually that the built-in OS was simply ahead of its time?
Answer: NO
Passage: Developers of applications had a hard time when writing programs in 6301 assembler, because the machine had only 2 kB of RAM and came with no operating system. Another difficulty for developers was with the performance limitations of the earliest DATAPAKs, which used a serial-access internal architecture, as opposed to random access. Retrieving, for example, byte 2000 from a DATAPAK meant issuing successive hardware commands to either step from the current read position one address place at time until position 2000 was reached or, in the worst case, resetting the read position to zero and then issuing a step-forward command 2000 times.

Question: If a developer had a new, untouched version of this machine, would he or she be able to start it up and begin work on a command line, without any additional external inputs?
Answer: NO

Question: Would someone who had studied in an early computer-science program at a top university be able to start working on this machine out of the box, because its operating system would be one that had been used before?
Answer: NO

Question: Is it possible that the real problem with this machine was actually that the built-in OS was simply ahead of its time?
Answer: NO
Passage: Application developers writing in 6301 assembler struggled with the small amount of RAM (2 ;kB) and the lack of an operating system that was familiar to academics at the time. Another difficulty for developers was with the performance limitations of the earliest DATAPAKs, which used a serial-access internal architecture, as opposed to random access. Retrieving, for example, byte 2000 from a DATAPAK meant issuing successive hardware commands to either step from the current read position one address place at time until position 2000 was reached or, in the worst case, resetting the read position to zero and then issuing a step-forward command 2000 times.

Question: If a developer had a new, untouched version of this machine, would he or she be able to start it up and begin work on a command line, without any additional external inputs?
Answer: YES

Question: Would someone who had studied in an early computer-science program at a top university be able to start working on this machine out of the box, because its operating system would be one that had been used before?
Answer: NO

Question: Is it possible that the real problem with this machine was actually that the built-in OS was simply ahead of its time?
Answer: YES
Passage: Application developers writing in 6301 assembler struggled with the small amount of RAM (2 ;kB) and the primitive, functionally-obsolete, operating system. Another difficulty for developers was with the performance limitations of the earliest DATAPAKs, which used a serial-access internal architecture, as opposed to random access. Retrieving, for example, byte 2000 from a DATAPAK meant issuing successive hardware commands to either step from the current read position one address place at time until position 2000 was reached or, in the worst case, resetting the read position to zero and then issuing a step-forward command 2000 times.

Question: If a developer had a new, untouched version of this machine, would he or she be able to start it up and begin work on a command line, without any additional external inputs?
Answer: YES

Question: Would someone who had studied in an early computer-science program at a top university be able to start working on this machine out of the box, because its operating system would be one that had been used before?
Answer: YES

Question: Is it possible that the real problem with this machine was actually that the built-in OS was simply ahead of its time?
Answer: NO
Passage: With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, goods produced by slavery became less important to the British economy. Added to this was the cost of suppressing regular slave rebellions. With support from the British abolitionist movement, Parliament enacted the Slave Trade Act in 1807, which abolished the slave trade in the empire. In 1808, Sierra Leone Colony was designated an official British colony for freed slaves. Parliamentary reform in 1832 saw the influence of the West India Committee decline. The Slavery Abolition Act, passed the following year, abolished slavery in the British Empire on 1 August 1834, finally bringing the Empire into line with the law in the UK (with the exception of the territories administered by the East India Company and Ceylon, where slavery was ended in 1844). Under the Act, slaves were granted full emancipation after a period of four to six years of "apprenticeship". Facing further opposition from abolitionists, the apprenticeship system was abolished in 1838. The British government compensated slave-owners.

Question: Was slavery made illegal in the territories administered by the East India Company in 1834?
Answer: NO

Question: Was slavery abolished everywhere in the British Empire by 1844?
Answer: YES

Question: Were slaveholders in the territories administered by the East India Company and Ceylon allowed to keep their slaves despite the passage of the Slavery Abolition Act.
Answer: YES

Question: Was slavery made illegal in Ceylon in 1834?
Answer: NO
Passage: With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, goods produced by slavery became less important to the British economy. Added to this was the cost of suppressing regular slave rebellions. With support from the British abolitionist movement, Parliament enacted the Slave Trade Act in 1807, which abolished the slave trade in the empire. In 1808, Sierra Leone Colony was designated an official British colony for freed slaves. Parliamentary reform in 1832 saw the influence of the West India Committee decline. The Slavery Abolition Act, passed the following year, abolished slavery in the British Empire on 1 August 1834, finally bringing the Empire into line with the law in the UK ( besides the territories administered by the East India Company and Ceylon, where slavery was ended in 1844). Under the Act, slaves were granted full emancipation after a period of four to six years of "apprenticeship". Facing further opposition from abolitionists, the apprenticeship system was abolished in 1838. The British government compensated slave-owners.

Question: Was slavery made illegal in the territories administered by the East India Company in 1834?
Answer: NO

Question: Was slavery abolished everywhere in the British Empire by 1844?
Answer: YES

Question: Were slaveholders in the territories administered by the East India Company and Ceylon allowed to keep their slaves despite the passage of the Slavery Abolition Act.
Answer: YES

Question: Was slavery made illegal in Ceylon in 1834?
Answer: NO
Passage: With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, goods produced by slavery became less important to the British economy. Added to this was the cost of suppressing regular slave rebellions. With support from the British abolitionist movement, Parliament enacted the Slave Trade Act in 1807, which abolished the slave trade in the empire. In 1808, Sierra Leone Colony was designated an official British colony for freed slaves. Parliamentary reform in 1832 saw the influence of the West India Committee decline. The Slavery Abolition Act, passed the following year, abolished slavery in the British Empire on 1 August 1834, finally bringing the Empire into line with the law in the UK ( with the exception of the territories administered by the East India Company, where slavery was ended in 1844). Under the Act, slaves were granted full emancipation after a period of four to six years of "apprenticeship". Facing further opposition from abolitionists, the apprenticeship system was abolished in 1838. The British government compensated slave-owners.

Question: Was slavery made illegal in the territories administered by the East India Company in 1834?
Answer: NO

Question: Was slavery abolished everywhere in the British Empire by 1844?
Answer: YES

Question: Were slaveholders in the territories administered by the East India Company and Ceylon allowed to keep their slaves despite the passage of the Slavery Abolition Act.
Answer: DON'T KNOW

Question: Was slavery made illegal in Ceylon in 1834?
Answer: DON'T KNOW
Passage: With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, goods produced by slavery became less important to the British economy. Added to this was the cost of suppressing regular slave rebellions. With support from the British abolitionist movement, Parliament enacted the Slave Trade Act in 1807, which abolished the slave trade in the empire. In 1808, Sierra Leone Colony was designated an official British colony for freed slaves. Parliamentary reform in 1832 saw the influence of the West India Committee decline. The Slavery Abolition Act, passed the following year, abolished slavery in the British Empire on 1 August 1834, finally bringing the Empire into line with the law in the UK ( including the territories administered by the East India Company and Ceylon, where slavery was also ended). Under the Act, slaves were granted full emancipation after a period of four to six years of "apprenticeship". Facing further opposition from abolitionists, the apprenticeship system was abolished in 1838. The British government compensated slave-owners.

Question: Was slavery made illegal in the territories administered by the East India Company in 1834?
Answer: YES

Question: Was slavery abolished everywhere in the British Empire by 1844?
Answer: YES

Question: Were slaveholders in the territories administered by the East India Company and Ceylon allowed to keep their slaves despite the passage of the Slavery Abolition Act.
Answer: NO

Question: Was slavery made illegal in Ceylon in 1834?
Answer: YES
Passage: In the running for the vacant frontman position was Kik Tracee vocalist Stephen Shareaux. Ultimately Neil was replaced by John Corabi (formerly of Angora and the Scream). Although Mötley's self-titled March 1994 release made the "Billboard" top ten (#7), the album was a commercial failure. It also prompted negative reactions from many fans due to Neil's absence and its sound. Corabi suggested the band bring back Neil, believing the latter would always be seen as the voice of the band. This eventually resulted in his own firing in 1996. Corabi spoke about his time with the band and his thoughts on the first record with Mötley Crüe. Corabi said: "my record was the first record that they had done that didn't go platinum, didn't make some sort of crazy noise, and everybody panicked". During his time away from the band, Neil released a moderately successful solo album, "Exposed" in 1993, and a less commercially successful follow-up, "Carved in Stone" in 1995.

Question: Would the 1994 album have been more successful if Neil had remained in the band?
Answer: DON'T KNOW

Question: Was Corabi as popular with fans as Neil was?
Answer: NO

Question: Would Corabi have been featured in photos of Motely Cru that were used to advertise the self titled album ?
Answer: YES
Passage: In the running for the vacant frontman position was Kik Tracee vocalist Stephen Shareaux. Ultimately Neil was replaced by John Corabi (formerly of Angora and the Scream). Although Mötley's self-titled March 1994 release made the "Billboard" top ten (#7), the album was a commercial failure. It also prompted negative reactions from many fans because they missed Neil's presence and its sound. Corabi suggested the band bring back Neil, believing the latter would always be seen as the voice of the band. This eventually resulted in his own firing in 1996. Corabi spoke about his time with the band and his thoughts on the first record with Mötley Crüe. Corabi said: "my record was the first record that they had done that didn't go platinum, didn't make some sort of crazy noise, and everybody panicked". During his time away from the band, Neil released a moderately successful solo album, "Exposed" in 1993, and a less commercially successful follow-up, "Carved in Stone" in 1995.

Question: Would the 1994 album have been more successful if Neil had remained in the band?
Answer: DON'T KNOW

Question: Was Corabi as popular with fans as Neil was?
Answer: NO

Question: Would Corabi have been featured in photos of Motely Cru that were used to advertise the self titled album ?
Answer: YES