Question: Sentence A: Because scenario A characterizes existing program and technology performance, no additional funds are required to drive that scenario.

Sentence B: Scenario A characterizes thirty differant existing programs.

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: Ca'daan was at least four days away from Fena Dim, ten if by foot.
Fena Dim was ten days away from Ca'daan by foot.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: yes

Problem: Here is a premise:
These companies employed below-average numbers of women and minorities for 10 years and their hiring of women or minorities was so far below the averages that there was only one chance in a hundred that the discrimination occurred randomly.

Here is a hypothesis:
There is a very small change that the companies hiring practices were not discriminatory.

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

Answer: yes

Sentence 1: After a period of steady decline, the monaster y was dismantled even before the Revolution.

Sentence 2: The monastery was dismantled because it wasn't making enough money.
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:
200 "You have orders from HIM?"

Does it follow that "What did he tell you to do?"?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Answer:
it is not possible to tell

Question:
Based on the premise "The reasons are appropriate for the case study application, an issue of particular concern if a generalization of the findings is intended.", can we conclude that "The case study application had appropriate reasons."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
yes