Question: Sentence A: Now, if it had been lost and recovered, Mrs. Inglethorp would at once have replaced it on her bunch; but on her bunch I found what was obviously the duplicate key, very new and bright, which led me to the hypothesis that somebody else had inserted the original key in the lock of the despatch-case."

Sentence B: Since she had to put a new key on her bunch, it was obvious that someone had stolen the old one.

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

Answer: it is not possible to tell

Question: I call your bluff, that's all.
I can see through your bluff, that's all.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: it is not possible to tell

Problem: Here is a premise:
The delicate walls of 13th-century stained glass (Paris's oldest) and harmonious proportions give it an ethereal quality in startling contrast to the ponderous palace surrounding it.

Here is a hypothesis:
The walls have beautiful stained glass.

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

Answer: yes

Sentence 1: If there is an occasional practical benefit to these shenanigans, so much the better.

Sentence 2: If there's a benefit to that, it's great.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer: yes

Question:
Because the Vacaville program is just starting up, Brownell said the number of people who can be seen each night is small, but plans are already in place to increase the totals.

Does it follow that "Brownell said that huge numbers of people are seen every night."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Answer:
no

Question:
Based on the premise "Johnson's sense of rectitude is matched only by Kathie Lee Gifford's.", can we conclude that "Both Johnson and Kathie Lee Gifford are both terrible people."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
no