input question: well you must you must not have a weight problem at all If this premise is true, does that tell us:"You must not have a weight problem. "?

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

output answer: yes

Question:
Based on the premise "Assets are correspondingly reduced or increased.", can we conclude that "Assets are reduced or increased."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
yes

Question: Sentence A: The costs and benefits discussed in the analysis consider both rules.

Sentence B: The rules are effective.

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 told him, duly weighing the evidence, that there was a very decided chance in favour of it.
After considering the evidence, I told him that it was very likely.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: yes

Problem: Here is a premise:
oh yeah they nonsmoker at least down here in Texas they have nonsmoker nonsmoker they call them discounts

Here is a hypothesis:
Down in Texas, the allow nonsmokers economic breaks.

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

Answer: it is not possible to tell

Question:
In its September 2001 advisory on the draft analytical blueprint for the second Section 812 prospective analysis, the SAB cited the Thurston and Ito study as a significant advance in understanding the effects of ozone on daily mortality and recommended re-evaluation of the ozone mortality endpoint for inclusion in the next prospective study (EPA-SAB-COUNCIL-ADV-01-004, 2001).

Does it follow that "The Thurston and Ito study helped understand the ozone."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Answer:
yes