Question:
Based on the premise "That 100% cashmere label you show them on your best sweater could provoke a loud snort of Scotland! ", can we conclude that "The sweater was made 100% of cashmere."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
yes

Question: Sentence A: On the horizon, there were fires.

Sentence B: Nothing was ahead but an empty horizon.

If sentence A is true, how about sentence B?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: no

Question: 'We have a whole evening based around your arrival, sir and ma'am.
They had planned out some great entertainment for the evening.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: it is not possible to tell

Problem: Here is a premise:
Post ies, on the other hand, obsess on the Times . Last month at the Post 's annual Pugwash editorial retreat, outgoing Managing Editor Robert Kaiser began his speech with the preposterous boast that the Post , with a staff half the size of the Times ', does more for its readers, day in and day out.

Here is a hypothesis:
Editor Kaiser boasted that the Post was more efficient than the Times.

Here are the options: OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: yes

Sentence 1: Well, this dismissal only matched his gloomiest expectations.

Sentence 2: The dismissal was his most dreaded outcome.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer: it is not possible to tell

Premise:
"So we all have benefited indirectly."
Hypothesis: Nobody has benefited, not even indirectly.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
no