Question:
Based on the premise "In response, staff has grown in size and capacity.", can we conclude that "The staff had grown."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
yes

Question: Sentence A: In a panel to the left is Ardhanarishvara, Shiva as both man and woman.

Sentence B: Shiva is depicted as only a man in the panel.

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

Answer: no

Question: Indeed, we leave the LSC program subject to even a greater uncertainty than the one we purport to have eliminated, since other circuits may conclude (as I do) that if the limitation upon welfare representation is unconstitutional, LSC attorneys cannot engage in welfare litigation at all.
LSC attorneys can't engage in welfare litigation, or so the popular opinion says.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: yes

Problem: Here is a premise:
um-hum in environmental engineering uh

Here is a hypothesis:
He's an environmental engineer and has been for 20 years.

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

Answer: it is not possible to tell

Sentence 1: uh no i'm more out in the suburbs but i certainly work near a city

Sentence 2: I have a long commute to the city every day.
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:
"and and unfortunately and i think cocaine's a a good example it's it's just so much easier to just do some more do some more and then before you know it you know you're you're always doing it"
Hypothesis: Cocaine is very addictive and before you know it, you are always doing it.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
yes