Question: Sentence A: He swung again and Adrin parried with his rapier.

Sentence B: Adrin had a rapier.

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

Answer: yes

Question: The reasons are appropriate for the case study application, an issue of particular concern if a generalization of the findings is intended.
The case study application had appropriate reasons.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: yes

Problem: Here is a premise:
Now let us evaluate the historical volume data in Table 1. In the 90s (1990-97), only NHH-to-NHH (business) mail has experienced healthy volume growth.

Here is a hypothesis:
In the 90s, businesses put out a lot of spam mail.

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

Answer: it is not possible to tell

Sentence 1: It was the main path of the Romans' invasion of Gaul, and the key to Lyon's commercial wealth in the Middle Ages.

Sentence 2: It also ended up being the main roadway in the present.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer: it is not possible to tell

Question:
Staff identified fewer than 50% of screen-positive patients.

Does it follow that "Staff identification success rates could be improved with additional training."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Answer:
it is not possible to tell

Question:
Based on the premise "and um i find great disgust in them in their in their um their self-centeredness", can we conclude that "They only think about themselves."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
it is not possible to tell