Datasets:

debela-arg
/

art

The Argument Reasoning Tasks (ART) dataset is a large-scale benchmark designed to evaluate the ability of large language models (LLMs) to perform natural language argumentative reasoning.

It contains multiple-choice questions where models must identify missing argument components, given an argument context and reasoning structure.

🧩 Argumentation Structures

ART covers 16 task types derived from four core argumentation structures:

Serial reasoning – chained inference steps.
Linked reasoning – multiple premises jointly supporting a conclusion.
Convergent reasoning – independent premises supporting a conclusion.
Divergent reasoning – a single premise leading to multiple possible conclusions.

📄 Source & Reference

This dataset was introduced in:

Debela Gemechu, Ramon Ruiz-Dolz, Henrike Beyer, and Chris Reed. 2025.
Natural Language Reasoning in Large Language Models: Analysis and Evaluation.
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025, pp. 3717–3741.
Vienna, Austria: Association for Computational Linguistics.
📄 Read the paper | DOI: 10.18653/v1/2025.findings-acl.192

@inproceedings{gemechu-etal-2025-natural,
  title     = {Natural Language Reasoning in Large Language Models: Analysis and Evaluation},
  author    = {Gemechu, Debela and Ruiz-Dolz, Ramon and Beyer, Henrike and Reed, Chris},
  booktitle = {Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025},
  pages     = {3717--3741},
  year      = {2025},
  address   = {Vienna, Austria},
  publisher = {Association for Computational Linguistics},
  url       = {https://aclanthology.org/2025.findings-acl.192/},
  doi       = {10.18653/v1/2025.findings-acl.192}
}

📂 Dataset Details

Hugging Face repo: debela-arg/art
License: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 (non-commercial, share alike)
Languages: English
Domain: Argumentative reasoning, question answering
File format: JSON
Size: ~482 MB
Splits: Single train split with 88,628 examples

🗂 Example JSON Entry

{
  "prompt": "Please answer the following multiple-choice question...",
  "task_type": "1H-C",
  "answer": ["just one of three children returning to school..."],
  "data_source": "qt30"
}

Fields:

prompt – Question with context and multiple-choice options
task_type – Argument reasoning task category
answer – Correct answer(s)
data_source – Original source corpus

📊 Statistics

Attribute	Value
Total examples	88,628
Task types	16
Data sources	MTC, AAEC, CDCP, ACSP, AbstRCT, US2016, QT30

⚡ How to Load the Dataset

Install the dependencies:

pip install datasets pandas

Load in Python:

from datasets import load_dataset
import pandas as pd

# Load the train split
dataset = load_dataset("debela-arg/art", split="train")

# Convert to DataFrame
df = pd.DataFrame(dataset)

print("Total examples:", len(df))
print("Available columns:", df.columns.tolist())
print("Task type distribution:")
print(df["task_type"].value_counts())

🔍 Suggested Uses

LLM evaluation – Benchmark reasoning capabilities
Few-shot prompting – Create reasoning-based examples for instruction tuning
Error analysis – Identify reasoning failure modes in models

📌 Citation

If you use ART in your work, please cite:

@inproceedings{gemechu-etal-2025-natural,
  title     = {Natural Language Reasoning in Large Language Models: Analysis and Evaluation},
  author    = {Gemechu, Debela and Ruiz-Dolz, Ramon and Beyer, Henrike and Reed, Chris},
  booktitle = {Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025},
  pages     = {3717--3741},
  year      = {2025},
  address   = {Vienna, Austria},
  publisher = {Association for Computational Linguistics},
  url       = {https://aclanthology.org/2025.findings-acl.192/},
  doi       = {10.18653/v1/2025.findings-acl.192}
}

🛠 Maintainers

Author: Debela Gemechu, Ramon Ruiz-Dolz, Henrike Beyer and Chris Reed

Downloads last month: 38

Size of downloaded dataset files:

482 MB

Size of the auto-converted Parquet files:

77.7 MB

Number of rows:

88,628

prompt string	task_type string	answer list	data_source string
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'Arlene Foster is critical about the protocol Arlene Foster did describe the renegotiated protocol as a serious and sensible way forward no, Arlene Foster did not describe the renegotiated protocol as a serious and sensible way forward Arlene Foster does not think she described the renegotiated protocol as a serious and sensible way forward of course Boris Johnson decided not to those matters and it was just around SPS and animal checks at that time xxx is teething problems or deeper issues with the protocol xxx is a combination of things xxx is partly teething problems some of the problems we are having will be overcome it is a question of traders learning how to use the forms, fill them in, but there are other factors that come into play at the moment we have a series of grace periods for food imports into Northern Ireland the grace periods for food imports into Northern Ireland ends on 1 April it will get harder again there will be more delay at the borders the real test of this agreement is going to come when we come out the other side of the pandemic, trade and travel come back to closer to their normal level, at which point it is only then we’ll be able to judge at the moment we are dealing with a period of much reduced trade and travel COVID restrictions have reduced travel we shouldn’t expect things to be the same as before 31 December what Brexit means is there are checks between Great Britain and Northern Ireland checks between Great Britain and Northern Ireland is going to mean in cases it might mean shortages what we have at the moment is a whole range of protocol actions that causes damage to Northern Ireland and which is not what we were talking about in October 2019 when we were saying in 2019 that it was important that the Northern Ireland assembly had a say in those matters'. Given the premise: 'COVID restrictions have reduced travel', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. xxx is a combination of things 2. Arlene Foster is critical about the protocol 3. it will get harder again 4. no, Arlene Foster did not describe the renegotiated protocol as a serious and sensible way forward 5. at the moment we are dealing with a period of much reduced trade and travel Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "at the moment we are dealing with a period of much reduced trade and travel" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'there's a thing happening at the moment we do have to protect our representatives our representatives are our representatives we need to make sure that our representatives are safe, first and foremost Sir David Amess is an extraordinary man Brian Cox didn't know Sir David Amess what comes across about Sir David Amess's life was this was a man who was very ecumenical in his beliefs Sir David Amess had great relationships with our Islamic brethren, for example clearly Sir David Amess was targeted Sir David Amess was targeted for being across the divide we have no idea why Sir David Amess was killed Brian Cox thought Sir David Amess having been targeted for being across the divide was shocking when a group of the Islamic brethren came along and they and Brian Cox were talking about Sir David Amess and how much they respected this man and how wonderful this man was Brian Cox thought, now Sir David Amess is a good guy, this is one of the good guys they're killing one of the good guys them killing one of the good guys is what scared Brian Cox'. Given the premise: 'Sir David Amess had great relationships with our Islamic brethren, for example', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. our representatives are our representatives 2. Brian Cox didn't know Sir David Amess 3. them killing one of the good guys is what scared Brian Cox 4. we do have to protect our representatives 5. what comes across about Sir David Amess's life was this was a man who was very ecumenical in his beliefs Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "what comes across about Sir David Amess's life was this was a man who was very ecumenical in his beliefs" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'Camilla Tominey has three school age children, a year 6 child, a year 2 child and a year 5 child one of Camilla Tominey's children can go back to school, the eldest, year 6 Camilla Tominey has been asked by her school if she wants her child to go back and said yes Camila Tominey and her partner have half term and then one of my three children back at school and two at home just one of three children returning to school means one of Camilla Tominey and her partner needs to be at home with the children, so work can't go back to normal I had been asked if all of the children should go back, I would have said yes Camilla Tominey has been impressed by schools how they are going to social distance the children Camilla Tominey does or does not have some of the fears we have heard from teachers and some of the unions We have had a massive dossier for the eldest, washing hands, having temperature checks at the door and how they are going to be separated in class there is some lack of consensus over the evidence we have so far as to how infectious children are it is plausible children are not as infectious as adults it is perhaps not proven that children are less infectious than adults there have been a number of studies in Australia on child infectivity rates there have been studies in Finland on child infectivity rates studies of a child who interacted after coming back from the French Alps and having Coronavirus with hundreds of other children and didn't pass it on schools should go back in the way we have seen schools go back in parts of Europe Camilla Tominey did a story with the BMA in week that cited the spike in Northern France the foreign Minister pointed out in Northern France 1.4 million children had gone back there had been 70 cases of coronavirus following school returns in Northern France but most of them had been contracted outside of school'. Given the premise: 'Camila Tominey and her partner have half term and then one of my three children back at school and two at home', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. there have been studies in Finland on child infectivity rates 2. Camilla Tominey does or does not have some of the fears we have heard from teachers and some of the unions 3. schools should go back in the way we have seen schools go back in parts of Europe 4. it is perhaps not proven that children are less infectious than adults 5. just one of three children returning to school means one of Camilla Tominey and her partner needs to be at home with the children, so work can't go back to normal Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "just one of three children returning to school means one of Camilla Tominey and her partner needs to be at home with the children, so work can't go back to normal" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'Camilla Tominey has three school age children, a year 6 child, a year 2 child and a year 5 child one of Camilla Tominey's children can go back to school, the eldest, year 6 Camilla Tominey has been asked by her school if she wants her child to go back and said yes Camila Tominey and her partner have half term and then one of my three children back at school and two at home just one of three children returning to school means one of Camilla Tominey and her partner needs to be at home with the children, so work can't go back to normal I had been asked if all of the children should go back, I would have said yes Camilla Tominey has been impressed by schools how they are going to social distance the children Camilla Tominey does or does not have some of the fears we have heard from teachers and some of the unions We have had a massive dossier for the eldest, washing hands, having temperature checks at the door and how they are going to be separated in class there is some lack of consensus over the evidence we have so far as to how infectious children are it is plausible children are not as infectious as adults it is perhaps not proven that children are less infectious than adults there have been a number of studies in Australia on child infectivity rates there have been studies in Finland on child infectivity rates studies of a child who interacted after coming back from the French Alps and having Coronavirus with hundreds of other children and didn't pass it on schools should go back in the way we have seen schools go back in parts of Europe Camilla Tominey did a story with the BMA in week that cited the spike in Northern France the foreign Minister pointed out in Northern France 1.4 million children had gone back there had been 70 cases of coronavirus following school returns in Northern France but most of them had been contracted outside of school'. Given the premise: 'one of Camilla Tominey's children can go back to school, the eldest, year 6', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. Camilla Tominey has been impressed by schools how they are going to social distance the children 2. studies of a child who interacted after coming back from the French Alps and having Coronavirus with hundreds of other children and didn't pass it on 3. the foreign Minister pointed out in Northern France 1.4 million children had gone back 4. Camilla Tominey did a story with the BMA in week that cited the spike in Northern France 5. just one of three children returning to school means one of Camilla Tominey and her partner needs to be at home with the children, so work can't go back to normal Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "just one of three children returning to school means one of Camilla Tominey and her partner needs to be at home with the children, so work can't go back to normal" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'Camilla Tominey has three school age children, a year 6 child, a year 2 child and a year 5 child one of Camilla Tominey's children can go back to school, the eldest, year 6 Camilla Tominey has been asked by her school if she wants her child to go back and said yes Camila Tominey and her partner have half term and then one of my three children back at school and two at home just one of three children returning to school means one of Camilla Tominey and her partner needs to be at home with the children, so work can't go back to normal I had been asked if all of the children should go back, I would have said yes Camilla Tominey has been impressed by schools how they are going to social distance the children Camilla Tominey does or does not have some of the fears we have heard from teachers and some of the unions We have had a massive dossier for the eldest, washing hands, having temperature checks at the door and how they are going to be separated in class there is some lack of consensus over the evidence we have so far as to how infectious children are it is plausible children are not as infectious as adults it is perhaps not proven that children are less infectious than adults there have been a number of studies in Australia on child infectivity rates there have been studies in Finland on child infectivity rates studies of a child who interacted after coming back from the French Alps and having Coronavirus with hundreds of other children and didn't pass it on schools should go back in the way we have seen schools go back in parts of Europe Camilla Tominey did a story with the BMA in week that cited the spike in Northern France the foreign Minister pointed out in Northern France 1.4 million children had gone back there had been 70 cases of coronavirus following school returns in Northern France but most of them had been contracted outside of school'. Given the premise: 'We have had a massive dossier for the eldest, washing hands, having temperature checks at the door and how they are going to be separated in class', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. there had been 70 cases of coronavirus following school returns in Northern France but most of them had been contracted outside of school 2. it is perhaps not proven that children are less infectious than adults 3. one of Camilla Tominey's children can go back to school, the eldest, year 6 4. Camilla Tominey has three school age children, a year 6 child, a year 2 child and a year 5 child 5. Camilla Tominey has been impressed by schools how they are going to social distance the children Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "Camilla Tominey has been impressed by schools how they are going to social distance the children" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'Camilla Tominey has three school age children, a year 6 child, a year 2 child and a year 5 child one of Camilla Tominey's children can go back to school, the eldest, year 6 Camilla Tominey has been asked by her school if she wants her child to go back and said yes Camila Tominey and her partner have half term and then one of my three children back at school and two at home just one of three children returning to school means one of Camilla Tominey and her partner needs to be at home with the children, so work can't go back to normal I had been asked if all of the children should go back, I would have said yes Camilla Tominey has been impressed by schools how they are going to social distance the children Camilla Tominey does or does not have some of the fears we have heard from teachers and some of the unions We have had a massive dossier for the eldest, washing hands, having temperature checks at the door and how they are going to be separated in class there is some lack of consensus over the evidence we have so far as to how infectious children are it is plausible children are not as infectious as adults it is perhaps not proven that children are less infectious than adults there have been a number of studies in Australia on child infectivity rates there have been studies in Finland on child infectivity rates studies of a child who interacted after coming back from the French Alps and having Coronavirus with hundreds of other children and didn't pass it on schools should go back in the way we have seen schools go back in parts of Europe Camilla Tominey did a story with the BMA in week that cited the spike in Northern France the foreign Minister pointed out in Northern France 1.4 million children had gone back there had been 70 cases of coronavirus following school returns in Northern France but most of them had been contracted outside of school'. Given the premise: 'Camilla Tominey has been asked by her school if she wants her child to go back and said yes', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. We have had a massive dossier for the eldest, washing hands, having temperature checks at the door and how they are going to be separated in class 2. Camilla Tominey has three school age children, a year 6 child, a year 2 child and a year 5 child 3. the foreign Minister pointed out in Northern France 1.4 million children had gone back 4. there have been a number of studies in Australia on child infectivity rates 5. just one of three children returning to school means one of Camilla Tominey and her partner needs to be at home with the children, so work can't go back to normal Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "just one of three children returning to school means one of Camilla Tominey and her partner needs to be at home with the children, so work can't go back to normal" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'you can sit on a beverage on 8 March for a drink with a friend but you have to wait 35 days later to do it outside a licensed pub or restaurant because xxx if anything, social contact in a licensed pub or restaurant is safer as an industry, one has to wait for Rishi in that case to come out, now one has to wait for the budget ultimately we want fairness, parity, we want a clear message Boris Johnson missed the chance to open the industry early, do it with that support, that safety the arbitrary nature of this five-week gap, we are told it is about data not dates it is irrational that there is five-week gaps where suddenly we go from stringent conditions on 17 May through to all gloves off on 21 June SAGE called for the five-week gap everyone wants to get out, to be done with this thing we know if you're not careful about the way you unlock you end up right back where you started despite having this phenomenal rollout of the vaccine Grant Shapps would love for us to be able to say, right, that's it, caution to the wind, off we go, job done there are sectors of the economy who are unhappy with the plan the real regret is that you have to wait 10 days for the budget only 40 percent of pubs have outdoor space it is wise we go slow enough in the opening of the lockdown to avoid the stop start Jo Grady knows what it is like to want to get back into the social settings that we've all had the message that is coming through from the business owners is, this is inconsistent, there's no end in sight the budget has to tackle the potential issues with the hospitality, aviation, or live events sector even if it went on longer, a package that made sense allowing people to sustain their business and employees is important Audience Member 3 has beauty salons beauty salons have been treated incredibly disproportionately as well as the hospitality sector there's absolutely inadequate government support beauty salons need to budget and plan we have had to consult the scientists, ask for the chief medical officer's best advice, ask the experts from SAGE and a group who modelled all of the new regulations scientists, chief medical officer, experts from SAGE and the group who modelled all of this showed us at each stage, if we do these things, this is what we would expect to happen from the response from the virus the British people have been through so much we have seen .005 percent infection among customers the infection rate is very, very low in these situations Jeremy King does not understand the idea that being outside suddenly you are safe we have no clarity the frustration in the hospitality industry is that we don't know where we stand just as we were talking about sitting on a park bench outside a pub, I can order a coffee and go to a beauty salon on the 12 April, yet I can't order one in a restaurant on the 17 May because xxx we've proven, the government has admitted, that we're safer than almost any environment nobody in the government has worked in the hospitality industry and that this is all committee decisions none of us are saying we should throw caution to the wind we just don't understand how one situation is unsafe, which seems to be just as safe as another situation, which actually might be more unsafe rules don't make sense it is important that the approach is driven by the data, that we make sure this is the last lockdown that we have we don't see an imposition of restrictions afterwards support has been generous the budget is crucial to us we are desperate to open everything up Jeremy King calls xxx a decision by committee the reality is you have to weigh up the extent to which people have sacrificed, staying inside James Unknown said a couple of times Grant Shapps didn't answer their question about xxx there's a pile of evidence that when you are indoors that is how COVID spreads much, much more easy we have the worst death rates per capita internationally yet our financial stimulus package, compared to other countries by GDPR is the third lowest if the government is listening, whatever it takes, if they want business to open, they have to back business you need to actually realise it is about confidence, and the confidence you instill in the public you didn't deal with the question Anneliese Dodds did also empathise a lot with what people have said for the beauty industry as well this has been an incredibly difficult time we didn't hear what support was going to be available for those businesses that were affected Jeremy King is or is not persuaded at all when he hears the scientists talk about the risk of indoor settings the risk of infections did begin to tick up over the summer as indoor venues and hospitality began to open the problem is for these business people, they are trying to say to their employees whether they can keep them on, whether they are going to be in work in the next few months businesses can't adequately inform staff when they don't have the certainty if you run a business, a pub or a restaurant, you can't be, you know, speedily changing decisions in a matter of days the support does end, some of it, before indoor hospitality is allowed to open according to the roadmap vaccine passports would give the public certainty vaccine passports would give people the chance to go back into pubs and restaurants vaccine passports are or are not something Jeremy King would like to see, that people have something to say they had the vaccine before they come in in hospitality, it is about the conviviality of community he has not really answered Audience Member 5's question Audience Member 5 has six seats on a kerb Audience Member 5 is sick of waiting one or two days for Richi Sunac to announce the right thing, now Audience Member 5 has to wait a week to hear what Richi Sunac announces Audience Member 5 wants the correct support between now and when he's supposed to open his business Jeremy King wants Rishi Sunak to come out and say now you have this roadmap for the end of lockdown the support for businesses is already in place because the support has not ended when the prime minister announced the roadmap for the end of lockdown Jeremy King only has to wait until next Wednesday to get the full details about support from the budget as well the UK government are weighing up the different competing issues to do with people's health during the COVID-19 pandemic Jeremy King does know and understand the concerns about civil liberties when it comes to COVID vaccines Jeremy King would love to see the passports used young people won't be vaccinated until the autumn young people won't have a certificate to come into a restaurant young people not being able to have a certificate until later is always going to be the shortcomings of a vaccine certificate why not vaccine passports to allow businesses to ensure COVID safety when entering indoor venues our normal practice is we are very safe people know they are going to a COVID-safe environment you can have people sitting cheek-to-cheek on a park bench, yet are we saying hospitals are not safe Tony Danker thinks the support package from the chancellor has been generous to date Tony Danker thinks the government is managing a significant crisis, they don't understand business decision-making, the timescales of it one is about workers, the extent to whether workers will be compelled, coerced, to have a vaccine when they don't want to the idea of a passport is ethically unacceptable vaccine passports is not a simple issue vaccine passports not being a simple issue has been summed up in what Jeremy King said there are major practicalities there are those ethical issues as well and equality issues the question is, there should or shouldn't be a vaccine passport to allow businesses to ensure COVID safety when entering indoor venues if we don't see people being vaccinated at speed, then the vaccine passports will be very unfair Labour party has or doesn't have a position on vaccine passport your answer to the question why not vaccine passports to allow businesses to ensure COVID safety when entering indoor venues is xxx we need to look at this carefully all the points have been very well made what we are going to do is have a look at this and come forward with some recommendations about how it can practically work one taskforce has been set up for international issues which Grant Shapps will run there are ethical issues, but before you get to that, let's make sure mask wearing is implementable Matt Hancock claimed there never was a national PPE shortage during the pandemic Audience Member12 finds claiming there never was a national PPE shortage during the pandemic quite disrespectful to all the healthcare workers that have been fighting for their safety during the pandemic we know there were shortages Audience Member 9 would find that ethically unacceptable Matt Hancock has been repeatedly disrespectful to everyone in the health and care sector colleagues have died, been unwell, because of shortages you can't coerce people to have treatments they don't want it would be immoral to force people to be vaccinated when they don't want to be it would deepen inequality where you have a two-tier system we're going to have to start saying I made a mistake a two-tier system would lead to inequality all the points raised have been very good it is moral, ethical issues, practicalities Grant Shapps is running a separate task force on international global travel task force to work out what we do there regarding vaccines we didn't have a domestic manufacturing base for this country in PPE Now we are producing 70 per cent of the PPE right here we delivered 32 billion pieces of PPE we were having to work very hard Matt Hancock was or was not right that there never was a national PPE shortage the point is a vaccines passport almost existed all right with the exception of isolated cases, we managed to get the PPE there it was not a satisfactory situation that we did not have domestic production, everybody was trying to get the same PPE not least because we are manufacturing here Grant Shapps thinks or does not think he was right to say that there was not a national PPE shortage Grant Shapps thinks he was quoting from the NHS providers, or from the chair of the Public Accounts Committee the chair of the Public Accounts Committee said that this was a benchmark for procurement exercise in getting 32 billion pieces of PPE there was insufficient PPE in hospitals Jeremy King longs for a time when people will admit their mistakes what there wasn't was an oversupply of PPE which is what you need if everybody is going to be able to access it NHS providers said we were always able to get what we needed in time if you think about the way the virus got going and the entire world was looking to get PPE Matt Hancock claimed there was never a national PPE shortage during the pandemic what he was saying was quoting from NHS providers there was a shortage school leaders know their cohorts, their communities what we didn't have with PPE, it seems to Tony Danker, is the necessary oversupply of PPE schools should make the decisions on the catchup it is disingenuous to say mathematically that we have enough the idea that people have a second or third or fourth shift to give during the summer when they are exhausted is not going to happen we're going to have people arriving in universities who haven't had the right education we are all going to be in the catch-up industry there has been so much pressure on young people during this pandemic we're starting from a position where we delivered 32 billion pieces of PPE day in, day out, we were battling to make sure there was enough PPE in the hospitals and in the care homes, who we never had to supply before Jo Grady is going to endorse the point that listening to professionals is vital to anything that happens going forward summer should not be some idea of catch-up to pass SATs or pass exams on average, they've lost over 100 days in schools, many of them we can't squeeze more out of the existing system the kids have been put under enough pressure with all the home learning, parents have been put under a lot of pressure, and teachers as well we all deserve that six weeks of fun time the young people we just mentioned wouldn't be able to have that it is so crucial that children are given a break this summer'. Given the premise: 'it would deepen inequality where you have a two-tier system', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. beauty salons have been treated incredibly disproportionately as well as the hospitality sector 2. Audience Member 5 is sick of waiting one or two days for Richi Sunac to announce the right thing, now Audience Member 5 has to wait a week to hear what Richi Sunac announces 3. a two-tier system would lead to inequality 4. the chair of the Public Accounts Committee said that this was a benchmark for procurement exercise in getting 32 billion pieces of PPE 5. if we don't see people being vaccinated at speed, then the vaccine passports will be very unfair Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "if we don't see people being vaccinated at speed, then the vaccine passports will be very unfair" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'Absolutely we've seen this week actually that the police have all the powers they need to deal with Insulate Britain it's important to say, Munira Wilson doesn't agree with the means at all the cause Munira Wilson does agree with we're a leader in climate change policies these people are campaigning to insulate Britain when the Liberal Democrats were in government between 2010 and 2015, we had a zero carbon home standard the zero carbon homes standard was got rid of once the Tories were on their own not a single zero carbon home has been built since the Tories were on their own the Liberal Democrats had an obligation on energy companies to pay for and support insulation of homes, that was scrapped energy bills are going up apart from the fact that global prices have gone up our homes are not insulated very well at all we want to cut fuel poverty we want to cut bills we want to cut emissions we need to have an emergency insulation programme Munira Wilson absolutely agrees with Insulate Britain's aims Munira Wilson doesn't agree with the means no, Grant Shapps is saying the police don't have all the powers they need to deal with Insulate Britain'. Given the premise: 'not a single zero carbon home has been built since the Tories were on their own', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. Munira Wilson doesn't agree with the means 2. the cause Munira Wilson does agree with 3. it's important to say, Munira Wilson doesn't agree with the means at all 4. we've seen this week actually that the police have all the powers they need to deal with Insulate Britain 5. the zero carbon homes standard was got rid of once the Tories were on their own Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "the zero carbon homes standard was got rid of once the Tories were on their own" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'Absolutely we've seen this week actually that the police have all the powers they need to deal with Insulate Britain it's important to say, Munira Wilson doesn't agree with the means at all the cause Munira Wilson does agree with we're a leader in climate change policies these people are campaigning to insulate Britain when the Liberal Democrats were in government between 2010 and 2015, we had a zero carbon home standard the zero carbon homes standard was got rid of once the Tories were on their own not a single zero carbon home has been built since the Tories were on their own the Liberal Democrats had an obligation on energy companies to pay for and support insulation of homes, that was scrapped energy bills are going up apart from the fact that global prices have gone up our homes are not insulated very well at all we want to cut fuel poverty we want to cut bills we want to cut emissions we need to have an emergency insulation programme Munira Wilson absolutely agrees with Insulate Britain's aims Munira Wilson doesn't agree with the means no, Grant Shapps is saying the police don't have all the powers they need to deal with Insulate Britain'. Given the premise: 'we want to cut emissions', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. not a single zero carbon home has been built since the Tories were on their own 2. we want to cut bills 3. the cause Munira Wilson does agree with 4. it's important to say, Munira Wilson doesn't agree with the means at all 5. we need to have an emergency insulation programme Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "we need to have an emergency insulation programme" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'Absolutely we've seen this week actually that the police have all the powers they need to deal with Insulate Britain it's important to say, Munira Wilson doesn't agree with the means at all the cause Munira Wilson does agree with we're a leader in climate change policies these people are campaigning to insulate Britain when the Liberal Democrats were in government between 2010 and 2015, we had a zero carbon home standard the zero carbon homes standard was got rid of once the Tories were on their own not a single zero carbon home has been built since the Tories were on their own the Liberal Democrats had an obligation on energy companies to pay for and support insulation of homes, that was scrapped energy bills are going up apart from the fact that global prices have gone up our homes are not insulated very well at all we want to cut fuel poverty we want to cut bills we want to cut emissions we need to have an emergency insulation programme Munira Wilson absolutely agrees with Insulate Britain's aims Munira Wilson doesn't agree with the means no, Grant Shapps is saying the police don't have all the powers they need to deal with Insulate Britain'. Given the premise: 'we want to cut bills', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. apart from the fact that global prices have gone up 2. no, Grant Shapps is saying the police don't have all the powers they need to deal with Insulate Britain 3. Munira Wilson doesn't agree with the means 4. we want to cut emissions 5. we need to have an emergency insulation programme Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "we need to have an emergency insulation programme" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'Absolutely we've seen this week actually that the police have all the powers they need to deal with Insulate Britain it's important to say, Munira Wilson doesn't agree with the means at all the cause Munira Wilson does agree with we're a leader in climate change policies these people are campaigning to insulate Britain when the Liberal Democrats were in government between 2010 and 2015, we had a zero carbon home standard the zero carbon homes standard was got rid of once the Tories were on their own not a single zero carbon home has been built since the Tories were on their own the Liberal Democrats had an obligation on energy companies to pay for and support insulation of homes, that was scrapped energy bills are going up apart from the fact that global prices have gone up our homes are not insulated very well at all we want to cut fuel poverty we want to cut bills we want to cut emissions we need to have an emergency insulation programme Munira Wilson absolutely agrees with Insulate Britain's aims Munira Wilson doesn't agree with the means no, Grant Shapps is saying the police don't have all the powers they need to deal with Insulate Britain'. Given the premise: 'we want to cut fuel poverty', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. the zero carbon homes standard was got rid of once the Tories were on their own 2. no, Grant Shapps is saying the police don't have all the powers they need to deal with Insulate Britain 3. energy bills are going up 4. Munira Wilson doesn't agree with the means 5. we need to have an emergency insulation programme Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "we need to have an emergency insulation programme" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'the Government only in 2018 allowed councils to borrow money to build social housing, which they had stopped in 2012 for that entire period, from 2012 to 2018, the Government has stopped councils being able to borrow money in order to build council housing the stop was only lifted a couple of years ago Jess Phillips has absolutely no idea why the stop was only lifted a couple of years ago stopping to allow councils to borrow money to build social housing, is give the whip hand to rich developers to be the only people in the market for house-building we can see from the Robert Genrik affair how powerful rich developers actually are sending chummy text messages talking about not giving money or dough to the Marxists in Tower Hamlets, shows how powerful rich developers actually are the used term Marxists in tower Hamlets means the children and the adults who would have used the hospitals and schools that that money would have gone to the Government absolutely needs to be doing more we all need to be doing more doing more than other is a stock standard line the Labour Party should have built more houses and so should this Government build considerably more houses that people can actually afford to live in the minister on the panel will say we have done much more than the Labour Party ever did'. Given the premise: 'the Government only in 2018 allowed councils to borrow money to build social housing, which they had stopped in 2012', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. doing more than other is a stock standard line 2. the Labour Party should have built more houses and so should this Government build considerably more houses that people can actually afford to live in 3. we can see from the Robert Genrik affair how powerful rich developers actually are 4. we all need to be doing more 5. for that entire period, from 2012 to 2018, the Government has stopped councils being able to borrow money in order to build council housing Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "for that entire period, from 2012 to 2018, the Government has stopped councils being able to borrow money in order to build council housing" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'the Government only in 2018 allowed councils to borrow money to build social housing, which they had stopped in 2012 for that entire period, from 2012 to 2018, the Government has stopped councils being able to borrow money in order to build council housing the stop was only lifted a couple of years ago Jess Phillips has absolutely no idea why the stop was only lifted a couple of years ago stopping to allow councils to borrow money to build social housing, is give the whip hand to rich developers to be the only people in the market for house-building we can see from the Robert Genrik affair how powerful rich developers actually are sending chummy text messages talking about not giving money or dough to the Marxists in Tower Hamlets, shows how powerful rich developers actually are the used term Marxists in tower Hamlets means the children and the adults who would have used the hospitals and schools that that money would have gone to the Government absolutely needs to be doing more we all need to be doing more doing more than other is a stock standard line the Labour Party should have built more houses and so should this Government build considerably more houses that people can actually afford to live in the minister on the panel will say we have done much more than the Labour Party ever did'. Given the premise: 'for that entire period, from 2012 to 2018, the Government has stopped councils being able to borrow money in order to build council housing', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. doing more than other is a stock standard line 2. we can see from the Robert Genrik affair how powerful rich developers actually are 3. we all need to be doing more 4. the Government absolutely needs to be doing more 5. the stop was only lifted a couple of years ago Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "the stop was only lifted a couple of years ago" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'the Government only in 2018 allowed councils to borrow money to build social housing, which they had stopped in 2012 for that entire period, from 2012 to 2018, the Government has stopped councils being able to borrow money in order to build council housing the stop was only lifted a couple of years ago Jess Phillips has absolutely no idea why the stop was only lifted a couple of years ago stopping to allow councils to borrow money to build social housing, is give the whip hand to rich developers to be the only people in the market for house-building we can see from the Robert Genrik affair how powerful rich developers actually are sending chummy text messages talking about not giving money or dough to the Marxists in Tower Hamlets, shows how powerful rich developers actually are the used term Marxists in tower Hamlets means the children and the adults who would have used the hospitals and schools that that money would have gone to the Government absolutely needs to be doing more we all need to be doing more doing more than other is a stock standard line the Labour Party should have built more houses and so should this Government build considerably more houses that people can actually afford to live in the minister on the panel will say we have done much more than the Labour Party ever did'. Given the premise: 'we can see from the Robert Genrik affair how powerful rich developers actually are', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. the minister on the panel will say we have done much more than the Labour Party ever did 2. we all need to be doing more 3. the Government absolutely needs to be doing more 4. the Labour Party should have built more houses and so should this Government build considerably more houses that people can actually afford to live in 5. stopping to allow councils to borrow money to build social housing, is give the whip hand to rich developers to be the only people in the market for house-building Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "stopping to allow councils to borrow money to build social housing, is give the whip hand to rich developers to be the only people in the market for house-building" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'the Government only in 2018 allowed councils to borrow money to build social housing, which they had stopped in 2012 for that entire period, from 2012 to 2018, the Government has stopped councils being able to borrow money in order to build council housing the stop was only lifted a couple of years ago Jess Phillips has absolutely no idea why the stop was only lifted a couple of years ago stopping to allow councils to borrow money to build social housing, is give the whip hand to rich developers to be the only people in the market for house-building we can see from the Robert Genrik affair how powerful rich developers actually are sending chummy text messages talking about not giving money or dough to the Marxists in Tower Hamlets, shows how powerful rich developers actually are the used term Marxists in tower Hamlets means the children and the adults who would have used the hospitals and schools that that money would have gone to the Government absolutely needs to be doing more we all need to be doing more doing more than other is a stock standard line the Labour Party should have built more houses and so should this Government build considerably more houses that people can actually afford to live in the minister on the panel will say we have done much more than the Labour Party ever did'. Given the premise: 'sending chummy text messages talking about not giving money or dough to the Marxists in Tower Hamlets, shows how powerful rich developers actually are', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. the stop was only lifted a couple of years ago 2. the minister on the panel will say we have done much more than the Labour Party ever did 3. the Labour Party should have built more houses and so should this Government build considerably more houses that people can actually afford to live in 4. the Government absolutely needs to be doing more 5. we can see from the Robert Genrik affair how powerful rich developers actually are Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "we can see from the Robert Genrik affair how powerful rich developers actually are" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'the Government only in 2018 allowed councils to borrow money to build social housing, which they had stopped in 2012 for that entire period, from 2012 to 2018, the Government has stopped councils being able to borrow money in order to build council housing the stop was only lifted a couple of years ago Jess Phillips has absolutely no idea why the stop was only lifted a couple of years ago stopping to allow councils to borrow money to build social housing, is give the whip hand to rich developers to be the only people in the market for house-building we can see from the Robert Genrik affair how powerful rich developers actually are sending chummy text messages talking about not giving money or dough to the Marxists in Tower Hamlets, shows how powerful rich developers actually are the used term Marxists in tower Hamlets means the children and the adults who would have used the hospitals and schools that that money would have gone to the Government absolutely needs to be doing more we all need to be doing more doing more than other is a stock standard line the Labour Party should have built more houses and so should this Government build considerably more houses that people can actually afford to live in the minister on the panel will say we have done much more than the Labour Party ever did'. Given the premise: 'doing more than other is a stock standard line', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. for that entire period, from 2012 to 2018, the Government has stopped councils being able to borrow money in order to build council housing 2. the used term Marxists in tower Hamlets means the children and the adults who would have used the hospitals and schools that that money would have gone to 3. Jess Phillips has absolutely no idea why the stop was only lifted a couple of years ago 4. we can see from the Robert Genrik affair how powerful rich developers actually are 5. the minister on the panel will say we have done much more than the Labour Party ever did Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "the minister on the panel will say we have done much more than the Labour Party ever did" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'given that Russia, India and China didn't turn up, xxx is how successful are the breakthrough pledges of COP-26, a glimmer of hope or blah blah blah the only country with tropical forests, has seen a rapid decline in deforestation Indonesia are continuing with a rapid decline in deforestation Indonesia put a price of carbon in place Indonesia have aggressive government policies to continue in the direction of decreasing deforestation Indonesia know the world doesn't want unsustainable palm oil anymore Indonesia know they are destroying livelihoods of indigenous people if they continue like this so Indonesia is actively involved in preserving our natural capital Indonesia is probably best placed in the future in this world to monetise the enormous natural capital that they have to confer their economy to this greener more sustainable economy the leaders didn't have support Tim Stanley is feeling positive about COP26, actually what COP26 has done is come up with deadlines and goals goals and deadlines push the world in a certain direction once, most catalytically, we begin to invest private capital in the technology, that will develop momentum'. Given the premise: 'Indonesia know the world doesn't want unsustainable palm oil anymore', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. the only country with tropical forests, has seen a rapid decline in deforestation 2. Indonesia know they are destroying livelihoods of indigenous people if they continue like this 3. Tim Stanley is feeling positive about COP26, actually 4. Indonesia are continuing with a rapid decline in deforestation 5. Indonesia have aggressive government policies to continue in the direction of decreasing deforestation Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "Indonesia have aggressive government policies to continue in the direction of decreasing deforestation" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'given that Russia, India and China didn't turn up, xxx is how successful are the breakthrough pledges of COP-26, a glimmer of hope or blah blah blah the only country with tropical forests, has seen a rapid decline in deforestation Indonesia are continuing with a rapid decline in deforestation Indonesia put a price of carbon in place Indonesia have aggressive government policies to continue in the direction of decreasing deforestation Indonesia know the world doesn't want unsustainable palm oil anymore Indonesia know they are destroying livelihoods of indigenous people if they continue like this so Indonesia is actively involved in preserving our natural capital Indonesia is probably best placed in the future in this world to monetise the enormous natural capital that they have to confer their economy to this greener more sustainable economy the leaders didn't have support Tim Stanley is feeling positive about COP26, actually what COP26 has done is come up with deadlines and goals goals and deadlines push the world in a certain direction once, most catalytically, we begin to invest private capital in the technology, that will develop momentum'. Given the premise: 'Indonesia know they are destroying livelihoods of indigenous people if they continue like this', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. what COP26 has done is come up with deadlines and goals 2. goals and deadlines push the world in a certain direction 3. Indonesia is probably best placed in the future in this world to monetise the enormous natural capital that they have to confer their economy to this greener more sustainable economy 4. Indonesia know the world doesn't want unsustainable palm oil anymore 5. Indonesia have aggressive government policies to continue in the direction of decreasing deforestation Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "Indonesia have aggressive government policies to continue in the direction of decreasing deforestation" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'given that Russia, India and China didn't turn up, xxx is how successful are the breakthrough pledges of COP-26, a glimmer of hope or blah blah blah the only country with tropical forests, has seen a rapid decline in deforestation Indonesia are continuing with a rapid decline in deforestation Indonesia put a price of carbon in place Indonesia have aggressive government policies to continue in the direction of decreasing deforestation Indonesia know the world doesn't want unsustainable palm oil anymore Indonesia know they are destroying livelihoods of indigenous people if they continue like this so Indonesia is actively involved in preserving our natural capital Indonesia is probably best placed in the future in this world to monetise the enormous natural capital that they have to confer their economy to this greener more sustainable economy the leaders didn't have support Tim Stanley is feeling positive about COP26, actually what COP26 has done is come up with deadlines and goals goals and deadlines push the world in a certain direction once, most catalytically, we begin to invest private capital in the technology, that will develop momentum'. Given the premise: 'Indonesia know the world doesn't want unsustainable palm oil anymore', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. the leaders didn't have support 2. Indonesia know they are destroying livelihoods of indigenous people if they continue like this 3. the only country with tropical forests, has seen a rapid decline in deforestation 4. once, most catalytically, we begin to invest private capital in the technology, that will develop momentum 5. so Indonesia is actively involved in preserving our natural capital Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "so Indonesia is actively involved in preserving our natural capital" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'given that Russia, India and China didn't turn up, xxx is how successful are the breakthrough pledges of COP-26, a glimmer of hope or blah blah blah the only country with tropical forests, has seen a rapid decline in deforestation Indonesia are continuing with a rapid decline in deforestation Indonesia put a price of carbon in place Indonesia have aggressive government policies to continue in the direction of decreasing deforestation Indonesia know the world doesn't want unsustainable palm oil anymore Indonesia know they are destroying livelihoods of indigenous people if they continue like this so Indonesia is actively involved in preserving our natural capital Indonesia is probably best placed in the future in this world to monetise the enormous natural capital that they have to confer their economy to this greener more sustainable economy the leaders didn't have support Tim Stanley is feeling positive about COP26, actually what COP26 has done is come up with deadlines and goals goals and deadlines push the world in a certain direction once, most catalytically, we begin to invest private capital in the technology, that will develop momentum'. Given the premise: 'Indonesia have aggressive government policies to continue in the direction of decreasing deforestation', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. given that Russia, India and China didn't turn up, xxx is how successful are the breakthrough pledges of COP-26, a glimmer of hope or blah blah blah 2. the leaders didn't have support 3. Indonesia know they are destroying livelihoods of indigenous people if they continue like this 4. the only country with tropical forests, has seen a rapid decline in deforestation 5. so Indonesia is actively involved in preserving our natural capital Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "so Indonesia is actively involved in preserving our natural capital" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'given that Russia, India and China didn't turn up, xxx is how successful are the breakthrough pledges of COP-26, a glimmer of hope or blah blah blah the only country with tropical forests, has seen a rapid decline in deforestation Indonesia are continuing with a rapid decline in deforestation Indonesia put a price of carbon in place Indonesia have aggressive government policies to continue in the direction of decreasing deforestation Indonesia know the world doesn't want unsustainable palm oil anymore Indonesia know they are destroying livelihoods of indigenous people if they continue like this so Indonesia is actively involved in preserving our natural capital Indonesia is probably best placed in the future in this world to monetise the enormous natural capital that they have to confer their economy to this greener more sustainable economy the leaders didn't have support Tim Stanley is feeling positive about COP26, actually what COP26 has done is come up with deadlines and goals goals and deadlines push the world in a certain direction once, most catalytically, we begin to invest private capital in the technology, that will develop momentum'. Given the premise: 'Indonesia put a price of carbon in place', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. once, most catalytically, we begin to invest private capital in the technology, that will develop momentum 2. Indonesia know they are destroying livelihoods of indigenous people if they continue like this 3. Tim Stanley is feeling positive about COP26, actually 4. what COP26 has done is come up with deadlines and goals 5. so Indonesia is actively involved in preserving our natural capital Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "so Indonesia is actively involved in preserving our natural capital" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'given that Russia, India and China didn't turn up, xxx is how successful are the breakthrough pledges of COP-26, a glimmer of hope or blah blah blah the only country with tropical forests, has seen a rapid decline in deforestation Indonesia are continuing with a rapid decline in deforestation Indonesia put a price of carbon in place Indonesia have aggressive government policies to continue in the direction of decreasing deforestation Indonesia know the world doesn't want unsustainable palm oil anymore Indonesia know they are destroying livelihoods of indigenous people if they continue like this so Indonesia is actively involved in preserving our natural capital Indonesia is probably best placed in the future in this world to monetise the enormous natural capital that they have to confer their economy to this greener more sustainable economy the leaders didn't have support Tim Stanley is feeling positive about COP26, actually what COP26 has done is come up with deadlines and goals goals and deadlines push the world in a certain direction once, most catalytically, we begin to invest private capital in the technology, that will develop momentum'. Given the premise: 'Indonesia are continuing with a rapid decline in deforestation', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. the only country with tropical forests, has seen a rapid decline in deforestation 2. Tim Stanley is feeling positive about COP26, actually 3. goals and deadlines push the world in a certain direction 4. once, most catalytically, we begin to invest private capital in the technology, that will develop momentum 5. so Indonesia is actively involved in preserving our natural capital Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "so Indonesia is actively involved in preserving our natural capital" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'that half of the United Kingdom that doesn't gorks and that was James Graham growing up all James Graham thinks about every night when James Graham goes to bed is how are we going to get that second half of the United Kingdom to go to the theatre people do enjoy television dramas television dramas have been a great benefit in lockdown television dramas have entertained and provided mental well being to people in lockdown James Graham was privileged to be able to write and share Quiz the Quiz was this major scandal about the coughing James Graham was delighted to hear from families and audiences watching helping to get it through James Graham comes from theatre Phoebe Waller-Bridge who sold flee bag to the world comes from theatre you will start to notice a difference we can't be saved without a bit of help, 70% of these theatres will be closed by Christmas and won't be able to reopen Globe says it won't survive without emergency funds Southall theatre management has gone into liquidation Enough field theatre has gone into liquidation there should or shouldn't be a lifeline thrown to the arts lifeline should be thrown to the arts what's needed really is this timeline want to give theatre and creative arts industry a future you have to put a date on the opening of the theatres From September the public can look forward to going back to the theatre'. Given the premise: 'we can't be saved', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. the Quiz was this major scandal about the coughing 2. without a bit of help, 70% of these theatres will be closed by Christmas and won't be able to reopen 3. James Graham was delighted to hear from families and audiences watching helping to get it through 4. Enough field theatre has gone into liquidation 5. you will start to notice a difference Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "you will start to notice a difference" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'you still have to pay for the proposal nonetheless xxx is how David Lammy would suggest paying for six billion pounds a year in universal credit the Bank of England's predicting inflation could rise above four per cent economists are predicting an inflation rise the situation has changed we knew that when we included the uplift in universal credit, we said it was for a temporary period we've seen salaries go up actually by a bit more than four per cent we've seen salaries increase does or doesn't Grant Shapps think that it is acceptable that any British citizen should be visiting a food bank in the first place AudienceMember 20210930QT01 sees increased number of parents and families accessing the food banks and accessing the holiday lunches the number of people in absolutely poverty Grant Shapps is pleased to say has been falling and has continued to fall the national living wage has actually increased people's salary at the lower end by four thousand pounds a year we're coming to the end of that in the same way as we're coming to the end of furlough the increase in universal credit was introduced as a temporary measure we boosted up other benefits in order to help people through what's been a difficult period the increase of salaries is not the only thing that we did for coronavirus David Lammy: my job is to oppose the government David Lammy's job is to oppose this government there's an opportunity when it comes to the poorest for Conservative and Labour to come together and at least find a temporary solution to this issue there's been a lot in the news about the rising gas prices and energy prices there's so much on the news about inflation Richard Walker would or would not be happy to see income tax go up to pay for it Conservative and Labour are or are not going to put a penny on income tax taking 20 pounds a week away from the poorest in our society is cruel and callous the UK Government developed a reputation for being quite compassionate in its approach during the coronavirus pandemic there were other measures in place to aid with energy costs it's not like the system's been perfect in the past we already had a problem before COVID the food banks we have today are nothing like what we had in the past there is an alarming rise in food banks the national living wage has already increased by four thousand pounds the amount people are getting the COVID support, 407 billion pounds so far, everyone appreciates that we have to pay for it somehow the facts are that we need to pay for whatever it is that we do provide given the pressures because of the C02 shortage, the HGV driver crisis, we are already seeing prices going up we have the C02 issue AudienceMember 20210930QT13 understands that the government need to recruit more HGV drivers we desperately need to recruit new drivers lots of industry bosses in the supermarket supply chain have been saying that low skilled worker visas should be given to the HGV drivers the government should be looking at a visa solution to be able to bring in migrant workers the tests are no easier AudienceMember 20210930QT13 is really concerned that the government seem to be making HGV licences easier to get the main problem though is the tests couldn't be run because of coronavirus we have shortages of staff we as a company are about 100 HGV drivers short, as a nation we're about 100 thousand short it's fruit pickers, it's caterers, it's people in concert halls that need to be able to come in the UK there are labour shortages in picking and packing food you improve HGV drivers working conditions the conditions for lorry drivers haven't been pleasant the workers can ask for a lot more than they could before we're now giving double digit wage increases to our HGV drivers Grant Shapps is right that even if you added lorry drivers to the skilled working list, the shortage is across Europe now Germany, 60 thousand shortage the workers should do, they should ask for better working conditions. This is their moment, in terms of winners and losers, and there are always are HGV drivers' working conditions have deteriorated over the last 20 years the police should or should not have extra powers to stop the M25 protestors you do or do not agree that the police should have extra powers to remove climate change protectors walking onto a motorway, putting their lives and others and the emergency services at risk, it's completely out of order it is completely irresponsible and totally dangerous to walk onto a motorway people should protest David Lammy supports the right to protest, absolutely the High Court's decision sends a powerful signal to both the protestors and the police about what's expected the High Court were right in their decision the government says that it's serious about or passionate about climate change solving climate change is something that this government is passionate about doing the whole point of protest is to command the support of the public any rational person would disagree with the protestor's methods people might find their methods questionable the protestor's methods are dangerous and idiotic and disrupt people's lives, and as David Lammy referenced, it has destroyed one lady's life as well there was a woman who ended up with some paralysis this week because she couldn't get to hospital Kate Andrews is not sure any rational person would agree with every single one of the protestors' claims Richard Walker thinks any rational person would agree with the protestor's cause police already having the powers was evidently not the case we've seen this week actually that the police have all the powers they need to deal with Insulate Britain xxx is how GP practices can be supported to provide quality care for patients so that we can see them face to face xxx is how GP practices be supported to provide quality care for patients as far as Fiona Bruce is aware, most vaccinations happen outside GP surgeries there is less pressure on GPs from other things such as the vaccination programme 56 per cent is about right, that's what the head of the Royal College is saying 56 per cent of appointments were carried out face to face with GPs is about right Grant Shapps entirely agrees people should have the ability to go and see their GP GPs should work face to face wherever possible a GP who's skilled will know that there may be some other underlying issue or ask you a question that leads you to go for a further check-up phoning or online appointements should actually enable GPs to get through even more patients people being seen remotely frees up time for people to be able to see others face to face it's important that people can see their GP face to face we have a shortage of doctors right across the country, and actually there are also issues around space and infrastructure, particularly for a lot of single-handed GPs, and you've got to fix those issues as well we need to recruit and train far more GPs it's 175 thousand diagnoses missed this year, according to NHS England it was NHS England that demonstrated that there've been a hell of a lot of missed diagnoses this year, over 20 thousand missed diabetes cases, pulmonary heart disease, heart failure a whole set of things have been missed the GP can ask the right questions you can't see your GP for four to six weeks before the pandemic, some people were waiting weeks to see their GP, the pandemic has made it worse GPs need to be back in the office and they need to see patients who want to be face to face sick and vulnerable people getting access to the care that they need now has to start with being able to see your GP those patients deserve the time and the treatment as well we owe those who are sick and vulnerable and who did not get seen in a good amount of time, to be able to get all of the access to the care that they need now there are shortages of people coming into the profession and there are almost two thousand fewer full time GPs now than in 2015 we have fewer GPs now than we had in 2015 we are talking about GP's here Grant Shapps knows that overall doctors and nurses' numbers are significantly up there will be some people who are happy to do online services Grant Shapps can think of occasions where he might just want to phone or have an online appointment online services would enable GP's to be able to see more people over any given day we absolutely think everybody has a right to see a GP face to face it's a bit of a shame that in sixth richest economy in the world there's so many people who are struggling taking 20 pounds a week away from the poorest in our society is brutally unfair taking 20 pounds a week away from the poorest in our society is nasty the cost of universal credit, keeping the cost of those twenty pounds, would be about six billion pounds a year we said that we would replace universal credit and we wouldn't do take money away from universal credit we should not be cutting furlough was during the coronavirus our bills are going to go up the increase in universal credit would carry on being another six billion to carry on running there are choices to make it just seems like Grant Shapps does not care about people who are poor and struggling this was introduced for a specific purpose over the coronavirus at the other end of the equation, removal of the 20 pounds credit is coming just at the wrong time there's now more food banks than branches of McDonalds in this country Munira Wilson does not think it's fair on the single mum in my constituency who contacted me Munira Wilson doesn't think it's fair to take 20 pounds a week away from the disabled woman who contacted her to be told by the Conservative government to just go out and work more hours as somebody in the audience said, in a G7 country, destitution and poverty is utterly unacceptable AudienceMember 20210930QT08 is surprised now at the fact that the UK Government is shooting itself in the foot on the issue of energy allowances when given a choice, the government is always choosing not to side with the poorest in society. six billion a year is the equivalent of not just one penny on income tax this is a real issue that is now impacting the supply into our stores Iceland specialises in frozen Richard Walker is perhaps more confident in frozen food empty shelves is an issue we start to run into Christmas, and also have to deal with all of the other issues that we're currently facing as an industry Grant Shapps opened up tests there are more tests becoming available we've already added 50 per cent to the number of tests that are available compared with pre-coronavirus this year already we're facing difficulties getting products on the shelves you're stuck for five hours on the M25, maybe your bottle runs out we want to solve climate change we've got a transport decarbonisation, a plan for it, which no other country in the world has got the committee on climate change says the government are not on track to meet your net zero target by 2050 the UK Government are heading very definitely down the wrong track blocking a road is not the right way to go about things if they want support, they'd better take us with them most of us don't agree with the way they're doing it we need to have an emergency insulation programme Munira Wilson doesn't agree with the means with regards to the insulation elements, absolutely, you know, that is a clear thing that we can, must and should do the NHS is in receipt of more money than at any other time it's not only getting to see the GPs, but seeing them for long enough it is David Lammy's job to oppose the government when it comes to the poorest maybe the Conservatives and Labour could come together and figure out where they're going to find the six billion pounds that Grant Shapps stated as the cost of continuing the increase in universal credit we have shortages of supplies taking 20 pounds a week away from the poorest in our society is cruel from the lack of contact GPs might therefore be missing the nuances, the small things that potentially you can only get from a face to face consultation'. Given the premise: 'the workers should do, they should ask for better working conditions. This is their moment, in terms of winners and losers, and there are always are', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. walking onto a motorway, putting their lives and others and the emergency services at risk, it's completely out of order 2. furlough was during the coronavirus 3. does or doesn't Grant Shapps think that it is acceptable that any British citizen should be visiting a food bank in the first place 4. maybe the Conservatives and Labour could come together and figure out where they're going to find the six billion pounds that Grant Shapps stated as the cost of continuing the increase in universal credit 5. HGV drivers' working conditions have deteriorated over the last 20 years Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "HGV drivers' working conditions have deteriorated over the last 20 years" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'maybe slightly unpopular, we should extend the deadline we have a solution and it is the vaccine we should not put more at risk for the sake of potentially a few more weeks we should not put more people at risk 130,000-odd dead already Anthony Costello wants to have his cake and eat it on the one hand Anthony Costello is saying we should maintain a lockdown, then he says in the Far East they manage to continue to boom without a lockdown AudienceMember 20210610QT04 is as confused as Jenni as on the one hand Anthony is saying we should maintain a lockdown, then he says in the Far East they manage to continue to boom without a lockdown the vaccination programme was going really well we were on top of the vaccination programme and getting better by the day we are told that the circumstance is going to go on forever at some point we've really got to regain our lives we should have learned from what happened in Vietnam we should have been wearing face masks much earlier early in the lockdowns the scientists were poo-pooing masks saying this disease is transmitted by touch the advice just keeps changing AudienceMember 20210610QT04 wishes all these people would get together, work out, learn from what others have been doing we haven't done well but we haven't done as badly as some other countries let's move forward, get the population vaccinated, get out of it and move forward with sensible ideas that will allow us to regain our lives'. Given the premise: 'early in the lockdowns the scientists were poo-pooing masks saying this disease is transmitted by touch', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. the vaccination programme was going really well 2. on the one hand Anthony Costello is saying we should maintain a lockdown, then he says in the Far East they manage to continue to boom without a lockdown 3. at some point we've really got to regain our lives 4. Anthony Costello wants to have his cake and eat it 5. the advice just keeps changing Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "the advice just keeps changing" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'maybe slightly unpopular, we should extend the deadline we have a solution and it is the vaccine we should not put more at risk for the sake of potentially a few more weeks we should not put more people at risk 130,000-odd dead already Anthony Costello wants to have his cake and eat it on the one hand Anthony Costello is saying we should maintain a lockdown, then he says in the Far East they manage to continue to boom without a lockdown AudienceMember 20210610QT04 is as confused as Jenni as on the one hand Anthony is saying we should maintain a lockdown, then he says in the Far East they manage to continue to boom without a lockdown the vaccination programme was going really well we were on top of the vaccination programme and getting better by the day we are told that the circumstance is going to go on forever at some point we've really got to regain our lives we should have learned from what happened in Vietnam we should have been wearing face masks much earlier early in the lockdowns the scientists were poo-pooing masks saying this disease is transmitted by touch the advice just keeps changing AudienceMember 20210610QT04 wishes all these people would get together, work out, learn from what others have been doing we haven't done well but we haven't done as badly as some other countries let's move forward, get the population vaccinated, get out of it and move forward with sensible ideas that will allow us to regain our lives'. Given the premise: 'we should have learned from what happened in Vietnam', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. Anthony Costello wants to have his cake and eat it 2. we should not put more people at risk 3. we are told that the circumstance is going to go on forever 4. we should not put more at risk for the sake of potentially a few more weeks 5. we haven't done well but we haven't done as badly as some other countries Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "we haven't done well but we haven't done as badly as some other countries" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'maybe slightly unpopular, we should extend the deadline we have a solution and it is the vaccine we should not put more at risk for the sake of potentially a few more weeks we should not put more people at risk 130,000-odd dead already Anthony Costello wants to have his cake and eat it on the one hand Anthony Costello is saying we should maintain a lockdown, then he says in the Far East they manage to continue to boom without a lockdown AudienceMember 20210610QT04 is as confused as Jenni as on the one hand Anthony is saying we should maintain a lockdown, then he says in the Far East they manage to continue to boom without a lockdown the vaccination programme was going really well we were on top of the vaccination programme and getting better by the day we are told that the circumstance is going to go on forever at some point we've really got to regain our lives we should have learned from what happened in Vietnam we should have been wearing face masks much earlier early in the lockdowns the scientists were poo-pooing masks saying this disease is transmitted by touch the advice just keeps changing AudienceMember 20210610QT04 wishes all these people would get together, work out, learn from what others have been doing we haven't done well but we haven't done as badly as some other countries let's move forward, get the population vaccinated, get out of it and move forward with sensible ideas that will allow us to regain our lives'. Given the premise: 'the advice just keeps changing', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. we are told that the circumstance is going to go on forever 2. at some point we've really got to regain our lives 3. we should have learned from what happened in Vietnam 4. AudienceMember 20210610QT04 wishes all these people would get together, work out, learn from what others have been doing 5. we haven't done well but we haven't done as badly as some other countries Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "we haven't done well but we haven't done as badly as some other countries" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'this is about the agreements that we have we are not anticipating that if we enter into agreements with other countries that suddenly they are not going to be respected en mass at all we had cod wars before so it wouldn’t be entirely unprecedented from an industry that needs a deal to come through as quickly as possible, it is the uncertainty of being able to move forward time is running out very, very quickly any deal is going to be better than no deal the way that the prices are going to rise, the way -- the uncertainty of the market we are not a self-sufficient country we only produce 70 percent of the meat that we need in this country for us we import at least 30 percent of the meat that we need in this country for us we have the trade tariffs that need to be sorted out time is running out so rapidly, as we get to the end of Covid 19, we are at Brexit all of these pressures that it’s put us under, there’s so much where hospitality can bring to the forefront of regenerating, of being part of the high street we talk about high streets and retail bid in trouble a retail experience generating movement, cash, everything flowing, without hospitality being a part of that, xxx is the reason you would be going to the high street xxx is how we drive things forward we need a solid foundation we need the Brexit deals decided, we need to be able to move forward we need to future-proof the hospitality industry the hospitality industry is the beating heart and soul of communities the hospitality industry is the other thing that we’re forgetting here when we talk about the offers that we put in it is not just what we sell we don’t just sell food and drink, we give the fabric of society -- it’s intertwined with meeting up, being a whole part of it that is a foundation as a whole country, no matter what business it is , to be able to drive forward'. Given the premise: 'we only produce 70 percent of the meat that we need in this country for us', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. time is running out very, very quickly 2. the way that the prices are going to rise, the way -- the uncertainty of the market 3. we don’t just sell food and drink, we give the fabric of society -- it’s intertwined with meeting up, being a whole part of it 4. all of these pressures that it’s put us under, there’s so much where hospitality can bring to the forefront of regenerating, of being part of the high street 5. we are not a self-sufficient country Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "we are not a self-sufficient country" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'this is about the agreements that we have we are not anticipating that if we enter into agreements with other countries that suddenly they are not going to be respected en mass at all we had cod wars before so it wouldn’t be entirely unprecedented from an industry that needs a deal to come through as quickly as possible, it is the uncertainty of being able to move forward time is running out very, very quickly any deal is going to be better than no deal the way that the prices are going to rise, the way -- the uncertainty of the market we are not a self-sufficient country we only produce 70 percent of the meat that we need in this country for us we import at least 30 percent of the meat that we need in this country for us we have the trade tariffs that need to be sorted out time is running out so rapidly, as we get to the end of Covid 19, we are at Brexit all of these pressures that it’s put us under, there’s so much where hospitality can bring to the forefront of regenerating, of being part of the high street we talk about high streets and retail bid in trouble a retail experience generating movement, cash, everything flowing, without hospitality being a part of that, xxx is the reason you would be going to the high street xxx is how we drive things forward we need a solid foundation we need the Brexit deals decided, we need to be able to move forward we need to future-proof the hospitality industry the hospitality industry is the beating heart and soul of communities the hospitality industry is the other thing that we’re forgetting here when we talk about the offers that we put in it is not just what we sell we don’t just sell food and drink, we give the fabric of society -- it’s intertwined with meeting up, being a whole part of it that is a foundation as a whole country, no matter what business it is , to be able to drive forward'. Given the premise: 'we don’t just sell food and drink, we give the fabric of society -- it’s intertwined with meeting up, being a whole part of it', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. any deal is going to be better than no deal 2. time is running out very, very quickly 3. xxx is how we drive things forward 4. all of these pressures that it’s put us under, there’s so much where hospitality can bring to the forefront of regenerating, of being part of the high street 5. it is not just what we sell Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "it is not just what we sell" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'Fiona Bruce is going to have to wait for the announcement waiting for the announcement would be the right thing to do James Cleverly doesn't want to steal the thunder of his colleagues from the Department of Education the point is that we are evolving the plan as we learn more about the nature of the virus we’ve got to make sure that the students are safe and the teaching professionals are safe that we’ve got to make sure that the students are safe and the teaching professionals are safe will mean that we are having to adapt we having to adapt is disconcerting we having to adapt is hugely disconcerting for parents we completely understand that having to adapt is hugely disconcerting for parents we want to make sure that children don’t miss out on their education education’s incredibly important education is not just about the syllabus, it’s also about the social interactions we want to make sure that we can really establish training provision in a way that’s safe for the students, for the staff, for the training professionals and their families it is confusing or not for parents and students alike that there’s been a failure to achieve the announced plan when there was a plan announced it was that schools would go back on 1st June it is safe for schools to go back on 1st June schools going back was predicated on having a world-beating test and trace system'. Given the premise: 'James Cleverly doesn't want to steal the thunder of his colleagues from the Department of Education', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. we want to make sure that children don’t miss out on their education 2. education’s incredibly important 3. we having to adapt is hugely disconcerting for parents 4. it is confusing or not for parents and students alike that there’s been a failure to achieve the announced plan 5. waiting for the announcement would be the right thing to do Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "waiting for the announcement would be the right thing to do" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'can the panel please explain to us, following on from Martin’s question, how the government is going to expect providers in the hospitality sector like pubs and wine bars to be able to pay wages of 20 percent when businesses have closed and transpires no money coming in the government's maths doesn’t add up increased lockdown the level of differences across the four nations is adding to the confusion is it a case that actually it is a rule for some but not for me because one can pretend they're in Cardiff for the purposes of the meeting they're having or the lunch they're having it is too difficult for people to interpret the rules it is too easy for people to interpret the rules for themselves looking at the SAGE advice and making the lockdown nationwide has to be the way forward there’s a point being missed by a lot of the panel that Mark only just mentioned at the end of his point the lockdown is supposed to be time to break the chain of infection and give time to bring up the testing and tracing system to a suitable level so that that takes over and bring down the levels xxx is why are we not hearing enough about the point of lockdown'. Given the premise: 'is it a case that actually it is a rule for some but not for me because one can pretend they're in Cardiff for the purposes of the meeting they're having or the lunch they're having', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. it is too easy for people to interpret the rules for themselves 2. there’s a point being missed by a lot of the panel that Mark only just mentioned at the end of his point 3. it is too difficult for people to interpret the rules 4. can the panel please explain to us, following on from Martin’s question, how the government is going to expect providers in the hospitality sector like pubs and wine bars to be able to pay wages of 20 percent when businesses have closed and transpires no money coming in 5. increased lockdown the level of differences across the four nations is adding to the confusion Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "increased lockdown the level of differences across the four nations is adding to the confusion" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'These organisations are the fabric baling culture society Andy Burnham agrees with Camilla, James and Gerald This is tremendously important James Graham: sometimes people are squeamish about arts funding We are not in Greater Manchester We see the benefit of investing in culture and the arts, what this does to bringing people into the city We paid our arguments organisations up in advance in tells of advance they were imoing to September go we have supported artists We have set up a streaming platform, "United we stream", which has been streaming Manchester tal September around the world and the money raised from it supporting venues also the sporting life of the countries of the there is this drive to debt the premier league back I am very worried about what's going to happen to lower league Football Clubs in they have to play behind closed doors There is a lot more private money in football Andy Burnham believes we need to see a premier league setting up a football solid dart fund so the whole the football bier milled can be support the through this. We will see lower league Football Clubs going out of business one after the other Culture and the arts yes, there is a good case for the government to step in in the end we have to protect as much of our economy so we can bounce back more quickly but it when this comes to football I think the premier league has to step forward and protect lower league clubs. It will be crucial to keeping up business. in Denmark, given the lockdown was relatively short and not particularly strict bailing out theatres was / was not an issue'. Given the premise: 'We are not in Greater Manchester', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. It will be crucial to keeping up business. 2. Culture and the arts yes, there is a good case for the government to step in 3. There is a lot more private money in football 4. I am very worried about what's going to happen to lower league Football Clubs in they have to play behind closed doors 5. We see the benefit of investing in culture and the arts, what this does to bringing people into the city Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "We see the benefit of investing in culture and the arts, what this does to bringing people into the city" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'These organisations are the fabric baling culture society Andy Burnham agrees with Camilla, James and Gerald This is tremendously important James Graham: sometimes people are squeamish about arts funding We are not in Greater Manchester We see the benefit of investing in culture and the arts, what this does to bringing people into the city We paid our arguments organisations up in advance in tells of advance they were imoing to September go we have supported artists We have set up a streaming platform, "United we stream", which has been streaming Manchester tal September around the world and the money raised from it supporting venues also the sporting life of the countries of the there is this drive to debt the premier league back I am very worried about what's going to happen to lower league Football Clubs in they have to play behind closed doors There is a lot more private money in football Andy Burnham believes we need to see a premier league setting up a football solid dart fund so the whole the football bier milled can be support the through this. We will see lower league Football Clubs going out of business one after the other Culture and the arts yes, there is a good case for the government to step in in the end we have to protect as much of our economy so we can bounce back more quickly but it when this comes to football I think the premier league has to step forward and protect lower league clubs. It will be crucial to keeping up business. in Denmark, given the lockdown was relatively short and not particularly strict bailing out theatres was / was not an issue'. Given the premise: 'We see the benefit of investing in culture and the arts, what this does to bringing people into the city', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. This is tremendously important 2. I am very worried about what's going to happen to lower league Football Clubs in they have to play behind closed doors 3. Andy Burnham believes we need to see a premier league setting up a football solid dart fund so the whole the football bier milled can be support the through this. 4. These organisations are the fabric baling culture society 5. We paid our arguments organisations up in advance in tells of advance they were imoing to September go Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "We paid our arguments organisations up in advance in tells of advance they were imoing to September go" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'These organisations are the fabric baling culture society Andy Burnham agrees with Camilla, James and Gerald This is tremendously important James Graham: sometimes people are squeamish about arts funding We are not in Greater Manchester We see the benefit of investing in culture and the arts, what this does to bringing people into the city We paid our arguments organisations up in advance in tells of advance they were imoing to September go we have supported artists We have set up a streaming platform, "United we stream", which has been streaming Manchester tal September around the world and the money raised from it supporting venues also the sporting life of the countries of the there is this drive to debt the premier league back I am very worried about what's going to happen to lower league Football Clubs in they have to play behind closed doors There is a lot more private money in football Andy Burnham believes we need to see a premier league setting up a football solid dart fund so the whole the football bier milled can be support the through this. We will see lower league Football Clubs going out of business one after the other Culture and the arts yes, there is a good case for the government to step in in the end we have to protect as much of our economy so we can bounce back more quickly but it when this comes to football I think the premier league has to step forward and protect lower league clubs. It will be crucial to keeping up business. in Denmark, given the lockdown was relatively short and not particularly strict bailing out theatres was / was not an issue'. Given the premise: 'We paid our arguments organisations up in advance in tells of advance they were imoing to September go', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. There is a lot more private money in football 2. These organisations are the fabric baling culture society 3. Culture and the arts yes, there is a good case for the government to step in 4. also the sporting life of the countries of the there is this drive to debt the premier league back 5. we have supported artists Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "we have supported artists" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'These organisations are the fabric baling culture society Andy Burnham agrees with Camilla, James and Gerald This is tremendously important James Graham: sometimes people are squeamish about arts funding We are not in Greater Manchester We see the benefit of investing in culture and the arts, what this does to bringing people into the city We paid our arguments organisations up in advance in tells of advance they were imoing to September go we have supported artists We have set up a streaming platform, "United we stream", which has been streaming Manchester tal September around the world and the money raised from it supporting venues also the sporting life of the countries of the there is this drive to debt the premier league back I am very worried about what's going to happen to lower league Football Clubs in they have to play behind closed doors There is a lot more private money in football Andy Burnham believes we need to see a premier league setting up a football solid dart fund so the whole the football bier milled can be support the through this. We will see lower league Football Clubs going out of business one after the other Culture and the arts yes, there is a good case for the government to step in in the end we have to protect as much of our economy so we can bounce back more quickly but it when this comes to football I think the premier league has to step forward and protect lower league clubs. It will be crucial to keeping up business. in Denmark, given the lockdown was relatively short and not particularly strict bailing out theatres was / was not an issue'. Given the premise: 'we have supported artists', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. These organisations are the fabric baling culture society 2. This is tremendously important 3. It will be crucial to keeping up business. 4. Culture and the arts yes, there is a good case for the government to step in 5. We have set up a streaming platform, "United we stream", which has been streaming Manchester tal September around the world and the money raised from it supporting venues Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "We have set up a streaming platform, \"United we stream\", which has been streaming Manchester tal September around the world and the money raised from it supporting venues" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'These organisations are the fabric baling culture society Andy Burnham agrees with Camilla, James and Gerald This is tremendously important James Graham: sometimes people are squeamish about arts funding We are not in Greater Manchester We see the benefit of investing in culture and the arts, what this does to bringing people into the city We paid our arguments organisations up in advance in tells of advance they were imoing to September go we have supported artists We have set up a streaming platform, "United we stream", which has been streaming Manchester tal September around the world and the money raised from it supporting venues also the sporting life of the countries of the there is this drive to debt the premier league back I am very worried about what's going to happen to lower league Football Clubs in they have to play behind closed doors There is a lot more private money in football Andy Burnham believes we need to see a premier league setting up a football solid dart fund so the whole the football bier milled can be support the through this. We will see lower league Football Clubs going out of business one after the other Culture and the arts yes, there is a good case for the government to step in in the end we have to protect as much of our economy so we can bounce back more quickly but it when this comes to football I think the premier league has to step forward and protect lower league clubs. It will be crucial to keeping up business. in Denmark, given the lockdown was relatively short and not particularly strict bailing out theatres was / was not an issue'. Given the premise: 'We have set up a streaming platform, "United we stream", which has been streaming Manchester tal September around the world and the money raised from it supporting venues', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. James Graham: sometimes people are squeamish about arts funding 2. This is tremendously important 3. we have supported artists 4. Andy Burnham believes we need to see a premier league setting up a football solid dart fund so the whole the football bier milled can be support the through this. 5. also the sporting life of the countries of the there is this drive to debt the premier league back Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "also the sporting life of the countries of the there is this drive to debt the premier league back" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'These organisations are the fabric baling culture society Andy Burnham agrees with Camilla, James and Gerald This is tremendously important James Graham: sometimes people are squeamish about arts funding We are not in Greater Manchester We see the benefit of investing in culture and the arts, what this does to bringing people into the city We paid our arguments organisations up in advance in tells of advance they were imoing to September go we have supported artists We have set up a streaming platform, "United we stream", which has been streaming Manchester tal September around the world and the money raised from it supporting venues also the sporting life of the countries of the there is this drive to debt the premier league back I am very worried about what's going to happen to lower league Football Clubs in they have to play behind closed doors There is a lot more private money in football Andy Burnham believes we need to see a premier league setting up a football solid dart fund so the whole the football bier milled can be support the through this. We will see lower league Football Clubs going out of business one after the other Culture and the arts yes, there is a good case for the government to step in in the end we have to protect as much of our economy so we can bounce back more quickly but it when this comes to football I think the premier league has to step forward and protect lower league clubs. It will be crucial to keeping up business. in Denmark, given the lockdown was relatively short and not particularly strict bailing out theatres was / was not an issue'. Given the premise: 'in the end we have to protect as much of our economy so we can bounce back more quickly', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. I am very worried about what's going to happen to lower league Football Clubs in they have to play behind closed doors 2. Culture and the arts yes, there is a good case for the government to step in 3. There is a lot more private money in football 4. also the sporting life of the countries of the there is this drive to debt the premier league back 5. but it when this comes to football I think the premier league has to step forward and protect lower league clubs. Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "but it when this comes to football I think the premier league has to step forward and protect lower league clubs." ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'These organisations are the fabric baling culture society Andy Burnham agrees with Camilla, James and Gerald This is tremendously important James Graham: sometimes people are squeamish about arts funding We are not in Greater Manchester We see the benefit of investing in culture and the arts, what this does to bringing people into the city We paid our arguments organisations up in advance in tells of advance they were imoing to September go we have supported artists We have set up a streaming platform, "United we stream", which has been streaming Manchester tal September around the world and the money raised from it supporting venues also the sporting life of the countries of the there is this drive to debt the premier league back I am very worried about what's going to happen to lower league Football Clubs in they have to play behind closed doors There is a lot more private money in football Andy Burnham believes we need to see a premier league setting up a football solid dart fund so the whole the football bier milled can be support the through this. We will see lower league Football Clubs going out of business one after the other Culture and the arts yes, there is a good case for the government to step in in the end we have to protect as much of our economy so we can bounce back more quickly but it when this comes to football I think the premier league has to step forward and protect lower league clubs. It will be crucial to keeping up business. in Denmark, given the lockdown was relatively short and not particularly strict bailing out theatres was / was not an issue'. Given the premise: 'James Graham: sometimes people are squeamish about arts funding', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. Culture and the arts yes, there is a good case for the government to step in 2. Andy Burnham believes we need to see a premier league setting up a football solid dart fund so the whole the football bier milled can be support the through this. 3. These organisations are the fabric baling culture society 4. We have set up a streaming platform, "United we stream", which has been streaming Manchester tal September around the world and the money raised from it supporting venues 5. This is tremendously important Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "This is tremendously important" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'xxx is requesting all these opinion polls at the moment the UK is currently facing an economic and a health crisis of epic proportions constitutional questions are of complete irrelevance we can or can not focus on what matters at the moment as one United Kingdom we had a referendum five years ago whether we can or can not focus on what matters at the moment as one United Kingdom is an incredibly important question we should absolutely not be addressing it again what’s gone completely wrong in the last two or three years is that we’ve got a Scottish government who generally are adversarial and negative about a whole range of things that might happen with the UK and Scotland working together the UK and Scotland is what we should have we don’t have a devolved government which is just looking after Scotland at all we have a devolved government who are focused on independence what we need is a devolved government who will work with the UK government Ian Wood has a list of six different things here which could happen the six different things which could happen are being held back the Scottish government’s position is they don’t want any big money help from the UK government money help from the UK will cut across the the devolution right of Scotland so the structure and the system right now just isn’t working we could get the position of the Scottish government sorted out'. Given the premise: 'money help from the UK will cut across the the devolution right of Scotland', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. the UK is currently facing an economic and a health crisis of epic proportions 2. whether we can or can not focus on what matters at the moment as one United Kingdom is an incredibly important question 3. we have a devolved government who are focused on independence 4. we had a referendum five years ago 5. the six different things which could happen are being held back Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "the six different things which could happen are being held back" ]	qt30
Please answer the following multiple-choice question: Question: A one-hop argument consists of a single inference step where a premise directly supports a conclusion. Consider the following argument: 'xxx is requesting all these opinion polls at the moment the UK is currently facing an economic and a health crisis of epic proportions constitutional questions are of complete irrelevance we can or can not focus on what matters at the moment as one United Kingdom we had a referendum five years ago whether we can or can not focus on what matters at the moment as one United Kingdom is an incredibly important question we should absolutely not be addressing it again what’s gone completely wrong in the last two or three years is that we’ve got a Scottish government who generally are adversarial and negative about a whole range of things that might happen with the UK and Scotland working together the UK and Scotland is what we should have we don’t have a devolved government which is just looking after Scotland at all we have a devolved government who are focused on independence what we need is a devolved government who will work with the UK government Ian Wood has a list of six different things here which could happen the six different things which could happen are being held back the Scottish government’s position is they don’t want any big money help from the UK government money help from the UK will cut across the the devolution right of Scotland so the structure and the system right now just isn’t working we could get the position of the Scottish government sorted out'. Given the premise: 'the Scottish government’s position is they don’t want any big money help from the UK government', your task is to identify which one of the following options represents the conclusion that is directly supported by the premise. Options: 1. we had a referendum five years ago 2. what’s gone completely wrong in the last two or three years is that we’ve got a Scottish government who generally are adversarial and negative about a whole range of things that might happen with the UK and Scotland working together 3. whether we can or can not focus on what matters at the moment as one United Kingdom is an incredibly important question 4. xxx is requesting all these opinion polls at the moment 5. the six different things which could happen are being held back Select the number representing the correct choice. Do not provide any explanations.	1H-C	[ "the six different things which could happen are being held back" ]	qt30