Problem: Here is a premise:
The interim rule is considered a significant regulatory action under Executive Order

Here is a hypothesis:
Executive Order has no authority to describe the significance of the interim rule.

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

Answer: no

Sentence 1: In effect, the grant challenges MALS to raise at least $100,000 a year in 2003 and 2004.

Sentence 2: MALS was challened to raise a six-figure sum.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer: yes

Question:
Poland ceased to exist its very name was abolished by treaty for the next 123 years.

Does it follow that "Poland came back into existence because of a war."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Answer:
it is not possible to tell

Q: If i'm a mathematician, can we say that "I know things about math."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

A: yes

Premise:
"I n If a friend tells you you'll love Happy Texas , rethink the friendship."
Hypothesis: He's not a good friend if he tells you you'll love Happy Germany.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

no

Sentence 1: The attempt was futile.

Sentence 2: The attempt at fixing the road was pathetic.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer:
it is not possible to tell