Question:
Based on the premise "Lacking connection with the peasants, it was also distrusted by conservative landlords and by most Muslims.", can we conclude that "The government was distrusted by nearly all citizens."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
it is not possible to tell

Question: Sentence A: The institutions and individuals he supports--call them Milliken Men--have helped legitimize a point of view that still commands virtually no support among professional economists, and which was regarded, even a decade ago, as politically beyond the pale.

Sentence B: He supports individuals that are considered to be normal.

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

Answer: no

Question: The analysis concludes that the quantifiable costs associated with the rule are $600,000 for the Pension Consultant exemption, $18,000 for the Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization exemption, $300,000 for the Affiliated Adviser exemption, and $8,700 for the New Adviser exemption for a total of $926,700.
The quantifiable costs for the Pension Consultant exemption exceeded $600k for the first time in over 20 years.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: it is not possible to tell

Problem: Here is a premise:
I ought to have thought of the false name stunt.

Here is a hypothesis:
I should have never thought about the false name count.

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

Answer: no

Sentence 1: It is a rare thing for a Sai Routha to negotiate for anything, whispered Jon.

Sentence 2: Jon and Sai Routha were once married.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer: no

Premise:
"He was of middle height, and squarely built to match his jaw."
Hypothesis: He has a jaw.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
yes