Problem: Here is a premise:
4 billion increase in cost-shared research, development, and demonstration of efficient and clean-energy technologies (in 1999 dollars with half as federal appropriations and half as private-sector cost share).

Here is a hypothesis:
The increase in development of clean-energy technologies was 4 billion dollars.

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

Answer: yes

Sentence 1: Yes. You too? Tommy nodded.

Sentence 2: Tommy shook his head no.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer: no

Question:
The LSC declares in its brief, and respondents do not deny, that under these provisions the LSC can sponsor neither challenges to nor defenses of existing welfare reform law, Brief for Petitioner in No.

Does it follow that "They had full power in the welfare reform laws."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Answer:
no

Q: If it has been determined that there are insufficient federalism implications to warrant to the preparation of a Federalism Assessment., can we say that "The warrant isn't needed. "?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

A: it is not possible to tell

Premise:
"You can always get to know one."
Hypothesis: You can always meet one at the grocery store and then get to know him or her
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

it is not possible to tell

Sentence 1: Jon looked to Thorn and saw recognition in the big man's dark eyes.

Sentence 2: Jon didn't gain any recognition from Thorn.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer:
no