Problem: Here is a premise:
We reported in February 1998 that IRS had not clearly defined system modernization phases, nor had it adequately specified organizational roles, making it unclear who was to do what.

Here is a hypothesis:
IRS had done it inentionally, to allow lobbying for corporations.

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

Answer: it is not possible to tell

Sentence 1: it's a brand new one it's a Catholic uh retirement home for nuns it's at uh Trinity no let me see Trinity i keep calling it Trinity it's not Trinity i'll think of

Sentence 2: It's a new Catholic retirement home for nuns.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer: yes

Question:
Madden, Bergen County director Anna Navatta and others met with Passaic Legal Aid representatives in August and discussed the possibility of directing some of the LSC money to Passaic as a subgrantee for its community development work.

Does it follow that "Anna Navatta talked to Passaic Legal Aid representative last year to ask for cash for its work."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Answer:
it is not possible to tell

Q: If But my reasoning kept me on track., can we say that "I was not on the right track."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

A: no

Premise:
"To account for the full potential multi-day mortality impact of acute PM2."
Hypothesis: The impact of acute PM2 is accounted for.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

yes

Sentence 1: Try to view it in the late afternoon sun, armed with a pair of binoculars to study the rich sculpture of the Gallery of Kings high above the windows.

Sentence 2: The sculptures look beautiful during the afternoon when the sun is shining brightly.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer:
it is not possible to tell