input question: But this inference oversimplifies Starr, just as he oversimplified the scandal. If this premise is true, does that tell us:"Both Starr and the scandal are oversimplified. "?

OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

output answer: yes

Question:
Based on the premise "Today it is still known within Japan for its small but highly visible foreign business community, some of whose families have called Kobe home for generations.", can we conclude that "No families call Kobe their home."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
no

Question: Sentence A: oh yeah and it's real neat

Sentence B: Yes, it's interesting.

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

Answer: yes

Question: The Revolution can never be secure until all know her crimes.
The revolution is secure without everyone knowing her crimes.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: no

Problem: Here is a premise:
He would be back in control now.

Here is a hypothesis:
He would control the village again.

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

Answer: yes

Question:
And, if they were already straightened, there would be no need to straighten them again, unless, in the meantime, some one else had touched them."

Does it follow that "People may touch them in the meantime."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Answer:
it is not possible to tell