<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
stringlengths 355
1.02k
|
|---|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that no cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No cryptic message was left on Laura's computer screen
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that no cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No cryptic message was left on Laura's computer screen
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen, since if a cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No cryptic message was left on Laura's computer screen
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen, because if a cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No cryptic message was left on Laura's computer screen
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen, as if a cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a cryptic message was left on laura's computer screen then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No cryptic message was left on Laura's computer screen
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore john davis did not have a recorded argument with laura on his phone.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a recorded argument with Laura on his phone
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence john davis did not have a recorded argument with laura on his phone.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a recorded argument with Laura on his phone
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus john davis did not have a recorded argument with laura on his phone.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a recorded argument with Laura on his phone
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that john davis did not have a recorded argument with laura on his phone.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a recorded argument with Laura on his phone
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so john davis did not have a recorded argument with laura on his phone.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a recorded argument with Laura on his phone
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that john davis did not have a recorded argument with laura on his phone.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a recorded argument with Laura on his phone
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that john davis did not have a recorded argument with laura on his phone.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a recorded argument with Laura on his phone
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that john davis did not have a recorded argument with laura on his phone.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a recorded argument with Laura on his phone
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```John davis did not have a recorded argument with laura on his phone, since if john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a recorded argument with Laura on his phone
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```John davis did not have a recorded argument with laura on his phone, because if john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a recorded argument with Laura on his phone
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```John davis did not have a recorded argument with laura on his phone, as if john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a recorded argument with laura on his phone then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a recorded argument with Laura on his phone
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's personal files were deleted from her computer, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's personal files were deleted from her computer
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's personal files were deleted from her computer, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's personal files were deleted from her computer
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's personal files were deleted from her computer, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's personal files were deleted from her computer
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's personal files were deleted from her computer, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's personal files were deleted from her computer
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's personal files were deleted from her computer, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's personal files were deleted from her computer
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's personal files were deleted from her computer, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's personal files were deleted from her computer
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's personal files were deleted from her computer, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's personal files were deleted from her computer
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's personal files were deleted from her computer, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's personal files were deleted from her computer
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's personal files were deleted from her computer.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's personal files were deleted from her computer
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's personal files were deleted from her computer.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's personal files were deleted from her computer
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's personal files were deleted from her computer.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's personal files were deleted from her computer
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer, since if laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer, because if laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer, as if laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's personal files were deleted from her computer then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's personal files were not deleted from her computer
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street and a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street and a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street and a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore no neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence no neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus no neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that no neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so no neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that no neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that no neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that no neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night, since if a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night, because if a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night, as if a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported hearing glass breaking at night
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of identity theft, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of identity theft
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of identity theft, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of identity theft
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of identity theft, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of identity theft
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of identity theft, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of identity theft
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of identity theft, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of identity theft
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of identity theft, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of identity theft
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of identity theft, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of identity theft
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of identity theft, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of identity theft
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis had a history of identity theft.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of identity theft
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis had a history of identity theft.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of identity theft
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis had a history of identity theft.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of identity theft
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore john davis did not have a history of identity theft.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of identity theft
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence john davis did not have a history of identity theft.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of identity theft
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus john davis did not have a history of identity theft.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of identity theft
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that john davis did not have a history of identity theft.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of identity theft
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so john davis did not have a history of identity theft.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of identity theft
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that john davis did not have a history of identity theft.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of identity theft
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that john davis did not have a history of identity theft.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of identity theft
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that john davis did not have a history of identity theft.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of identity theft
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```John davis did not have a history of identity theft, since if john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of identity theft
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```John davis did not have a history of identity theft, because if john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of identity theft
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```John davis did not have a history of identity theft, as if john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of identity theft then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of identity theft
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's family reported receiving anonymous threats
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.