Question:
Based on the premise "A new opulent architecture blossomed with the chateaux of the Loire and around Paris.", can we conclude that "After the invasion of Paris, William the Conqueror was the main reason the area was rebuilt."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
it is not possible to tell

Question: Sentence A: Emissaries flew by balloon to nearby cities for reinforcements that freed Milan from the 14,000-strong Austrian garrison.

Sentence B: There were 5000 Austrians at Milan.

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

Answer: no

Question: Bennett doesn't even think Bush is the one who owes Bork an apology!
Bennett thinks Bork owes an apology to Bush.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: it is not possible to tell

Problem: Here is a premise:
asked Argonne to benchmark AMIGA to the reference case projections of AEO2001.

Here is a hypothesis:
Argonne was asked to benchmark AMIGA to the reference case projections.

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

Answer: yes

Sentence 1: 22 As federal unified deficits declined over the 1990s, federal investment in nondefense physical assets remained relatively constant as a share of GDP.

Sentence 2: Federal government investing in nondefense physical assets has been declining in terms of GDP share even as deficits have gone down during the 90s.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer: no

Premise:
"But the popular-frontish approach doesn't attract the Dobson and Bauer crowd."
Hypothesis: The Dobson and Bauer crowd were not attracted by the popular-frontish approach.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
yes