Premise:
"Stones from the demolished Bastille prison were used for its support structure ' galling for Royalists, since it had originally been named Pont Louis XVI."
Hypothesis: Stone was used in support of the prison as it was sturdy enough to withstand a vast amount of prisoners.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

it is not possible to tell

input question: She also agreed that the first question of the SMAST is problematic. If this premise is true, does that tell us:"She said the first question of SMAST makes things go very smoothly."?

OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

output answer: no

Question:
Based on the premise "Some of the walls in the palace were built with pieces of stone removed from Buddhist temples.", can we conclude that "Parts of the palace were built with stone from other temples."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
yes

Question: Sentence A: Whoever first stepped ashore on Madeira discovered no signs of previous habitation no Stone-Age natives, as the Spanish found on the Canary Islands, and no mysterious monuments to the past, as on the Balearics.

Sentence B: The Spanish had invaded many parts of the world before being pushed back by the British.

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: and i think that when she passed away it was probably one of the greatest um i i i think it would be it was more of a relief for her
I think that her death was a huge release for her; she suffered so much.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: it is not possible to tell

Problem: Here is a premise:
yeah it's really interesting it

Here is a hypothesis:
It's very fascinating.

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

Answer:
yes