Appearance
question:User will you give you a task with some instruction. Your job is follow the instructions as faithfully as you can. While answering think step-by-step and justify your answer. Given the task definition and input, reply with output. In this task, you are given two phrases: Head and Tail, separated with <sep>. The Head and the Tail events are short phrases possibly involving participants. The names of specific people have been replaced by generic words (e.g., PersonX, PersonY, PersonZ). PersonX is always the subject of the event. You have to determine whether the Head can be characterized by being or having the Tail or not. Being characterized usually describes entities' general characteristics such as rose is red, or subjective attributes such as thirst is uncomfortable. It can also map to descriptors that speak to the substance or value of items such as meat has the property of being stored in the freezer or bike is powered by a person's legs. Classify your answers into "Yes" and "No". The phrase may also contain "___", a placeholder that can be an object, a person, and/or an action. Head: hyperbole<sep>Tail: useful in literature
answer:Step 1: Understand the task and phrases provided. The task is to determine if the Head can be characterized by being or having the Tail. In this case, the Head is "hyperbole" and the Tail is "useful in literature". Step 2: Understand the meaning of both phrases. Hyperbole is a figure of speech that usually involves exaggeration for emphasis or effect. It is often used in literature to make a point or describe something in a more impactful way. Step 3: Determine if the Head can be characterized by the Tail. The Tail mentions that it is useful in literature. Considering that hyperbole is a literary device commonly used in literature, it can be characterized by being useful in literature. Step 4: Present the conclusion. Based on the analysis in Step 3, the Head can be characterized by the Tail. Output: Yes
question:You are an AI assistant. You will be given a task. You must generate a detailed and long answer. Can we draw the following hypothesis from the context (see options)? Context: Weltenbrand is a darkwave band from Liechtenstein formed in 1995 by Oliver Falk. Ritchie Wenaweser and Simone Steiner joined for vocals. In the same year, the band secured a record deal with Witchhunt Records and subsequently released their first album, "Das Rabenland". a romantically inclined darkwave album that immediately found acceptance within the genre. Hypothesis: Weltenbrand is a darkwave band from Liechtenstein formed in 1905 OPTIONS: --Yes; --It's impossible to say; --No;
answer:--No; From the context provided, it's clear that the band Weltenbrand was formed in 1995, not 1905. This is indicated definitely in the first sentence: "Weltenbrand is a darkwave band from Liechtenstein formed in 1995 by Oliver Falk." Therefore, the hypothesis that Weltenbrand was formed in 1905 is incorrect according to the information given. Furthermore, the members Ritchie Wenaweser and Simone Steiner joined for vocals and the same year they secured a record deal with Witchhunt Records. Their first album, "Das Rabenland", is described as a romantically inclined darkwave album that gained immediate acceptance within the genre. This further underscores that the formation of the band, the joining of additional members, signing with a record label, and release of their first album all occurred within the same timeframe, specifically in or after 1995, not in or before 1905.
question:You are an AI assistant, who knows every language and how to translate one language to another. Given a task, you explain in simple steps what the task is asking, any guidelines that it provides. You solve the task and show how you used the guidelines to solve the task. Detailed Instructions: In this task, you are given two phrases: Head and Tail, separated with <sep>. The Head and the Tail events are short phrases possibly involving participants. The names of specific people have been replaced by generic words (e.g., PersonX, PersonY, PersonZ). PersonX is always the subject of the event. You have to determine whether the Head includes an event or an action in the Tail or not. This happens when the Tail denotes a step within the larger head event. Classify your answers into "Yes" and "No". The phrase may also contain "___", a placeholder that can be an object, a person, and/or an action. Problem:Head: stab to death<sep>Tail: unsheath knife Solution:
answer:Step 1: Understand the task The task is to determine if the Tail phrase is a part of the Head phrase, meaning if the Tail denotes a step within the larger Head event. The answer should be classified as "Yes" or "No". Step 2: Analyze the phrases Head: stab to death Tail: unsheath knife Step 3: Determine if the Tail is a part of the Head event Unsheathing a knife can be considered a step before stabbing someone to death. Step 4: Provide the answer Since the Tail is a part of the Head event, the answer is: Yes.
question:You are an AI assistant. You should describe the task and explain your answer. While answering a multiple choice question, first output the correct answer(s). Then explain why other answers are wrong. You might need to use additional knowledge to answer the question. Here is a premise: For example, to demonstrate the product was ready for production, critical processes had to be in control and testing should have demonstrated the product reliability. Here is a hypothesis: The demonstration was supposed to indicate the product reliability. Here are the options: Choices: A). yes. B). it is not possible to tell. C). no. Is it possible to conclude that if the premise is true, then so is the hypothesis?
answer:A) yes The hypothesis is supported by the information given in the premise. The premise states that "critical processes had to be in control and testing should have demonstrated the product reliability." Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the purpose of the demonstration was to indicate the product's reliability. Answer B, "it is not possible to tell," is not true because the premise clearly states the goal of the demonstration. Answer C, "no," would be incorrect because the hypothesis directly relates to the information provided in the premise.