Problem: Here is a premise:
That makes it what techies call robust, meaning resistant to breaking down.

Here is a hypothesis:
Techies call mean something is resistant to breakdown when calling it robust.

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

Answer: yes

Sentence 1: with the situation we've got with prison overcrowding and everything a man gets a fifteen year sentence they're averaging serving one month for every year assessed

Sentence 2: Prisons are overcrowded.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer: yes

Question:
The analysis also discusses in qualitative terms the benefits of the rule regarding human health, including the health effects for Native American subsistence fishermen and reduction of projected non-cancer effects and improvements in fish and wildlife habitat.

Does it follow that "The analysis makes no effort to find benefits of the rule when it comes to human health."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Answer:
no

Q: If yeah it's pretty tough it's pretty tough i mean uh let's face it you know and you know are you did the you know as far as i found it a lot of times with regards to education you know the school only takes you so far you know it's what you do, can we say that "The school can only do so much for a person."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

A: yes

Premise:
"In that case, is it not possible that the articles in question might have been put there by a third person, and that the prisoner was quite unaware of their presence?"
Hypothesis: There was a chance that someone framed the prisoner.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

yes

Sentence 1: they couldn't make this kind of money they couldn't live that kind of life style anywhere else

Sentence 2: They could make that kind of money and even more wherever they want
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer:
no