text
listlengths 2
2
|
|---|
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Trump TV Ad Misleads on Biden and Ukraine\n\nQ1: Was Biden involved in the dismissal of the General Prosecutor Victor Shokin and Ukrainian politics\nA1: Ukraine Prosecutor Says No Evidence of Wrongdoing by Bidens\n\nQ2: What was the content of Trumps ad as regards Joe Biden and Ukraine\nA2: Trump said Biden threatened to withhold U.S. assistance to Ukraine unless it fired Shokin, which is true, but then implied without proof that it was done to protect Hunter Biden from prosecution.\n\nQ3: What links of involvement were found between Joe Biden and the dismissal of Victor Shokin\nA3: “Biden was definitely not involved,” Lutsenko said. “We do not have any grounds to think that there was any wrongdoing starting from 2014.”",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The sources show that the implication in Trump's ad wasn't true.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The Democrats’ Medicare for All plan would reduce Americans’ household income by $17,000 a year.\n\nQ1: What will the financial savings of the US Medicare proposal be for a single-payer?\nA1: There’s a lot left to be answered about the concepts of Medicare-for-all specifically and the more broad category of single-payer before policymakers and voters can come close to understanding what it would mean in practice.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The evidence is not enough to reach a conclusion on the claim \n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The Democrat plans for socialized medicine will put doctors and hospitals out of business and also deny Americans’ treatment and everything they need.\n\nQ1: How much does Medicare reimburse hospitals?\nA1: Big hospital systems haggle constantly with Medicare over what they are paid, and often battle the government over charges of overbilling. On average, the government program pays hospitals about 87 cents for every dollar of their costs, compared with private insurers that pay $1.45.\n\nQ2: How much would Medicare for All reimburse hospitals?\nA2: But those in favor of the most far-reaching changes, including Senator Bernie Sanders, who unveiled his latest Medicare for all plan as part of his presidential campaign, have remained largely silent on the question of how the nation’s 5,300 hospitals would be paid for patient care",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: There's not info in the QA to make the claim label, therefore it is not enough evidence \n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: In the U.S. Democratic proposals for universal health care would obliterate Medicare. Both the single-payer option and the public option would mean a raid of Medicare to fund socialism.\n\nQ1: What is Medicare for All?\nA1: Sanders' plan is a \"single-payer\" plan. That means the government will be the \"single payer\" on any health expenses. Right now, there are lots and lots of payers in the U.S. health care system — insurance companies, the federal government, states and so on.\n\nQ2: What is Medicare?\nA2: Generally, Medicare is available for people age 65 or older, younger people with disabilities and people with End Stage Renal Disease (permanent kidney failure requiring dialysis or transplant). Medicare has two parts, Part A (Hospital Insurance) and Part B (Medicare Insurance). You are eligible for premium-free Part A if you are age 65 or older and you or your spouse worked and paid Medicare taxes for at least 10 years. You can get Part A at age 65 without having to pay premiums if:\n\nYou are receiving retirement benefits from Social Security or the Railroad Retirement Board.\nYou are eligible to receive Social Security or Railroad benefits but you have not yet filed for them.\nYou or your spouse had Medicare-covered government employment.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Although evidence states what Medicare for All and Medicare are, there is no evidence on whether the U.S. Democratic proposals for universal health care would completely obliterate Medicare. Although \"Medicare for All\" means the government will be the \"single payer\" on any health expenses, there is no clarification of what this means, especially in relation to socialism. There is also no mention of the public option. Hence, there is not enough evidence.\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Democrats are draining Americans’ health care to finance open borders.\n\nQ1: Are Democrats draining Americans' health care to finance open borders?\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: Is American health care covered for undocumented people?\nA2: With the exception of emergency medical care, undocumented immigrants are not eligible for federally funded public health insurance programs, including Medicare, Medicaid and the Child Health Insurance Program (CHIP).\n\nQ3: Are democrats draining Americans’ health care to finance the open borders ?\nA3: In August, the president argued that Democrats \"support giving illegal immigrants free healthcare at our expense.\" But that isn’t accurate. The statement, part of a Trump 2020 television advertisement, was rated Mostly False.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: This claim was part of a Trump 2020 television advertisement, and it was rated Mostly False.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Donald Trump and the Republicans are committed to protecting people who have preexisting medical conditions.\n\nQ1: Did Donald Trump plan to help those with pre existing medical conditions\nA1: 522,000 living in Connecticut, could lose their health care coverage if the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress are successful.\n\nQ2: Did Donald trump try or succeed introducing bills to help those with pre existing conditions and health insurance?\nA2: While lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have been on record objecting to any elimination of protections for patients with pre-existing conditions, the administration’s proposal to extend short-term health insurance plans that are inadequate for someone diagnosed with a serious illness such as cancer would reintroduce discrimination based on health history,\n\nQ3: Did any of trumps proposals offer health insurances to those with pre existing health conditions?\nA3: plans that do not cover pre-existing conditions, nor the essential health care benefits. I'm going to offer right now a unanimous consent request to proceed to the immediate consideration of this bill … let me start with a request to bring this legislation that will protect people with pre-existing conditions and the essential health care benefits to the floor.”\n\nQ4: Does the Trump administration want to remove protections for people who have preexisting medical conditions?\nA4: Finally, the Trump budget would weaken consumer protections for people with private coverage such as by allowing states to eliminate key protections for people with pre-existing conditions.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: none of the information in these q and a show that trump and the republicans are committed to protecting people with pre-existing conditions. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Mental health illness in Nigeria is abundant with one in four of the population suffering from a disorder.\n\nQ1: When was the largest nationally representative study on mental Health in Nigeria published?\nA1: 2004\n\nQ2: What percentage of Nigerians suffer from depression?\nA2: The World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates that four percent of Nigerians suffer from depression. However this is an estimate.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The claim does not make mention of the year such a study was carried out\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: In 2018, Yaba Psychiatric Hospital had a budget of 133 million Nairas, but less than 10% of that amount, or 13 million Nairas, was released by the federal government.\n\nQ1: What was Yaba Psychiatric Hospital's budget in 2018?\nA1: 3.3 billion naira\n\nQ2: How much money was released by the federal government for Yaba Psychiatric Hospital?\nA2: No answer could be found.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: budget amount is way over quoted in claim but url for source does not work to confirm and answer 2 does not provide details.\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: In Nigeria, the physician to patient ratio is one doctor to every 4,000 to 5,000 patients.\n\nQ1: How many Physicians are there in Nigeria?\nA1: 40,000.\n\nQ2: What is the population in Nigeria?\nA2: Estimated 200.9 Million.\n\nQ3: How many physicians are there every 4000 to 5000 patients on average?\nA3: Only one medical doctor is available to cater for every 4,845 Nigerians, the official data sourced by PREMIUM TIMES show.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The third source and answer show that the numbers in the claim are correct so the claim is supported.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The physician to patient ratio in Nigeria of one doctor to every 4,000 to 5,000 patients is six times smaller than the World Health Organisation's recommendation of one physician to every 600 patients.\n\nQ1: Has WHO recommended a doctor to patient ratio ?\nA1: The agency had not prescribed any ideal ratio of healthcare workers to population.\n\nhe concept of a healthcare worker to population ratio appears to have leapt out of the 2004 findings of the Joint Learning Initiative, a Harvard University-backed network of global health leaders. The report suggested that a density of 2.5 workers per 1,000 people would help reduce deaths of children and mothers. But it did not set this as a general healthcare staffing goal.\n\n(page 13)",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The WHO does not have a recommendation regarding ratio of drs to patients so the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Nigeria is fifth in the world rankings for the frequency of suicides.\n\nQ1: What were the top 5 countries for suicide frequency in the world?\nA1: Lesotho, Guyana, Swaziland, Kiribat and Micronesia.\n\nQ2: What is Nigeria's ranking in the suicide rates list?\nA2: 117",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answer and source shows that Nigeria is not fifth so the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The World Health Organisation estimates that fewer than 10% of Nigerians suffering from mental health disorders have access to the care that they need.\n\nQ1: Did Nigerians suffering from mental health disorders have access to the care that they needed in 2019?\nA1: A study on mental health published in 2004. showed that those with severe forms of anxiety and depression and substance abuse rarely get any treatment at all for their conditions,\n\nQ2: Does Nigeria have a good amount of mental health services?\nA2: It has an abysmal lack of mental health services in the country",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: In Nigeria People who are suffering from mental health disorders, usually do not get the help they need. There is a large absence of quality mental health care services and facilities for Nigerians suffering from mental health disorder. \n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: By 2018 only 3.95% of Nigeria's budget for funding the country's ministry of health had been allocated.\n\nQ1: How much of Nigeria's budget for funding the country's ministry of health had been allocated by 2018?\nA1: some N356.45 billion was allocated to the health ministry.\n\nQ2: What percent of the budget is the allocated amount?\nA2: The allocated amount works out to 3.91% of the allocated budget, according to the country’s budget office.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The percentage provided in the answer is very close to that in the claim.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Donald Trump put a stop to Millionaires being eligible for the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as food stamps in the US.\n\nQ1: What changes were made to the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program by Donald Trump\nA1: To confer automatic eligibility for SNAP under the proposal, a household must receive TANF-funded cash or non-cash benefits valued at a minimum of $50 per month for at least 6 months. In addition, non-cash benefits that could convey automatic eligibility would be restricted to subsidized employment, work supports, or childcare. By establishing clear standards and requiring that benefits be ongoing and substantial, the proposal will ensure SNAP benefits go toward Americans most in need.\n\nQ2: what would this proposed rule fix\nA2: The proposed rule would fix a loophole that has expanded SNAP recipients in some states to include people who receive assistance when they clearly don’t need it. In fact, the depth of this specific flexibility has become so egregious that a millionaire living in Minnesota successfully enrolled in the program simply to highlight the waste of taxpayer money. This proposal gives USDA the ability to save billions of dollars, ensuring nutrition assistance programs are delivered with consistency and integrity to those most in need.\n\nQ3: Who does the head of the Department of Agriculture report to?\nA3: It is headed by the Secretary of Agriculture, who reports directly to the President of the United States and is a member of the president's Cabinet.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The claim seems true, Trump made changes to SNAP so people who need the money get it. \n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Nigeria has the highest rate of depression within the continent of Africa.\n\nQ1: Does Nigeria have the highest rate of depression in Africa?\nA1: Using figures from 2016, Nigeria had the largest amount of people suffering with depression - 7,079,815. However as a percentage of Nigerian population this was 3.9%. Therefore Nigeria did not have the highest percentage rate of depression in Africa. Cape Verde, for example had a rate of 4.9%.\n\nQ2: What was Nigeria's depression rate in 2016?\nA2: 3.9%\n\nQ3: What was Cape Verde's depression rate in 2016?\nA3: 4.9%\n\nQ4: What was Botswana's depression rate in 2016?\nA4: 4.7%",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It seems that both Cape Verde's and Botswana rate of depression is higher, therefore, the claim is refuted\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Nigeria has a population of 200 million and there are less than 150 psychiatrists in the country.\n\nQ1: How many registered psychiatrists are there in Kenya?\nA1: According to the Association of Psychiatrists in Nigeria, there are 250 psychiatrists registered and 200 psychiatry trainees.\n\nQ2: How many registered psychiatrists were there in Nigeria at the time of the claim (2019)?\nA2: According to the Association of Psychiatrists in Nigeria, there were 250 psychiatrists registered in 2019.\n\nQ3: What was the population of Nigeria at the time of the claim (2019)?\nA3: Nigeria’s population stood at an all-time high of 201 million in 2019.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Theres only 1 million more population than the claim suggests but the amount of Psychiatrists is much higher than the claim so whilst the population is very near I feel it's still not perfectly accurate and rather than choosing conflicting evidence as I initially considered, I have refuted this claim as both elements are wrong albeit the population is within a small margin.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Every week in Nigeria, twelve doctors leave to seek employment in the United Kingdom.\n\nQ1: How are doctors from other countries recorded in the UK?\nA1: The General Medical Council is responsible for registering doctors and setting professional standards for all doctors working or training in the UK. Its registry does not make explicit whether doctors are from a country other than the UK or when they arrived in the UK, but does record the “place they were awarded their main medical degree”\n\nQ2: What does the registry say about primary medical qualifications obtained from Nigeria?\nA2: The number of doctors whose primary medical qualifications were obtained from Nigeria rose by 1,742 – from 5,250 to 6,974 in those 18 months. This means that on average 22 Nigeria-trained doctors were added to the doctors’ registry every week.\n\nQ3: When did at least 12 Nigerian doctors get employed in the UK every week\nA3: So far in 2018, 190 Nigerians have received their UK licenses, bringing the number to 5,250, or an average of 12 every week.\n\nQ4: Has the number of doctors gaining licenses to practice in the UK been increasing\nA4: Another 998 Nigerian doctors were added to the register between 2010 and 2015, an average of almost 200 doctors annually. In 2016, the number rose to 245 doctors, and in 2017, the number almost doubled as 439 Nigerian doctors received their UK licenses, making it a total of 5,060 Nigerian doctors in the country.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: There is a total of 5,250 UK licenses Nigerians employed as doctors. This does not mean twelve doctors leave to seek employment in the United Kingdom Every week in Nigeria.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The government should distribute multivitamins, vitamin c and zinc tablets to the common people as it will cure people of coronavirus and to those people who don't have the disease, they will get immune to the disease.\n\nQ1: Can multivitamins, zinc etc.be taken to cure or prevent coronavirus (Covid 19)\nA1: The (World health organisation (WHO) state on their website that , FACT: Vitamin and mineral supplements cannot cure COVID-19\n\nQ2: What is the function of the World Health Organisation (WHO)?\nA2: The WHO is an organisation that issues conditional recommendations even when the quality of evidence may not be strong on issues of public health importance",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The first Q and A pair provides evidence to refute the claim that multivitamins, vitamin c and zinc will cure coronavirus - it does not specifically address whether it can make people immune to the disease. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Donald Trump says his impeachment is a coup.\n\nQ1: What does Trump mean by coup?\nA1: A coup d'état, French for 'stroke of state', also known as a coup or overthrow.\n\nQ2: What is a coup d'etat?\nA2: a seizure and removal of a government and its powers. Typically, it is an illegal seizure of power by a political faction, rebel group, military, or a dictator\n\nQ3: What is impeachment?\nA3: 1. to charge with a crime or misdemeanor\nspecifically : to charge (a public official) before a competent tribunal with misconduct in office.\n2. to cast doubt on\nespecially : to challenge the credibility or validity of\n\nQ4: Does the American Constitution explicitly cover the impeachment process?\nA4: Yes, because The impeachment provisions of the Constitution were derived from English practice.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Impeachment is not a coup as their are provisions in the constitution. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The most serious violent and sexual offenders receive automatic early release from prison halfway through their sentence.\n\nQ1: What are the standard terms of a custodial sentence in the UK?\nA1: A determinate prison sentence is where the court sets a fixed length for the prison sentence and is the most common type of prison sentence. For example, an offender may be sentenced to four years in prison. This is the maximum period of time the offender could spend in prison. However, the offender will not necessarily spend the whole of this time in prison.\n\nThe rules governing when a prisoner is released vary depending on the length of the sentence and when the offence was committed.\n\nQ2: How much time would be spent in prison under a standard determinate sentence?\nA2: Offenders sentenced to two years or more will serve half their sentence in prison and serve the rest of the sentence in the community on licence. While on licence an offender will be subject to supervision and the licence will include conditions. If an offender breaches their conditions, they may be recalled to prison.\n\nQ3: Can judges hand down extended custodial sentences?\nA3: Yes, because These sentences were introduced to provide extra protection to the public in certain types of cases where the court has found that the offender is dangerous and an extended licence period is required to protect the public from risk of harm. The judge decides how long the offender should stay in prison and also fixes the extended licence period up to a maximum of eight years. The offender will either be entitled to automatic release at the two thirds point of the custodial sentence or be entitled to apply for parole at that point.\n\nQ4: What offences can draw an extended sentence?\nA4: There are well over 100 serious offences that can carry an extended sentence including specified sexual offences.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: this isn't an automatic release, it seems to depend on the offender and how dangerous they are. \n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The South African government has successfully increased the contribution of clean energy from 0% in 2010 to over 4.5% within five years.\n\nQ1: What is South Africa's clean energy output from 2010?\nA1: over 4.5 percent\n\nQ2: What is the REIPPP?\nA2: A programme designed to respond to the call by\nthe NDP & the IRP 2010 via renewable energy\nsources.\n\nQ3: What is South Africa's clean energy output from 2015?\nA3: 4.5 percent",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: the evidence supports the claim\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Rules for whistle-blowers recently changed.\n\nQ1: Did the rules for whistle-blowers changed recently?\nA1: Yes the rules for whistle-blowers were recently changed.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Metadata state that rules for whistle-blowers have changed. \n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: YES Bank may shut down\n\nQ1: What is the official statement from YES bank executives\nA1: “Recent market rumours and reports appear to have generated a lot of speculation around YES BANK Limited. We strongly refute them as being speculative, unsubstantiated, and irresponsible.\n\nWhile this has impacted the share price adversely, the Bank would like to state that its capital and liquidity position are comfortably above the regulatory threshold and the asset quality is in line with the guidance provided post Q1 FY20 results. The Bank’s outstanding exposure to the Housing Finance / Real Estate conglomerate, which is in the news today, is totally secured and over the last six months there has been a reduction of approximately 30% in this exposure. The account is standard and current.\n\nThe Bank’s retail franchise continues to strengthen with an increase of 39% in the number of new Fixed Deposit (FD) accounts, over the previous quarter.\n\nSubsequent to receiving the go ahead from the Reserve Bank of India on Friday, September 27, 2019, the Bank is firmly on track to raising the required growth capital.” - Ravneet Gill, MD & CEO, YES BANK",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From the answer it seems the claim is refuted\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Pretty Little Thing’s terms and conditions state that its products may contain chemicals that can cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm.\n\nQ1: Does Pretty Little Thing's products contain lead\nA1: Pretty Little Thing warns that some products such as wallets, handbags, purses, clutches, clothing, jewellery or shoes made of vinyl or imitation leather may contain traces of lead.\n\nQ2: Can high amount of lead cause cancer\nA2: There have been several agencies and organizations both in the United States and internationally that have reviewed studies and made an assessment about whether lead can cause cancer.\n\nThe Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has determined that lead and lead compounds are reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens\nThe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has classified lead as a probable human carcinogen.\nThe International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has determined that inorganic lead is probably carcinogenic to humans, and that there is insufficient information to determine whether organic lead compounds will cause cancer in humans.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From the 2nd QA it seems evident that there is not enough information to make the claim as there is not enough scientific evidence to support that. Therefore, the label is not enough evidence\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Pretty Little Thing products may contain chemicals that can cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm.\n\nQ1: Does the pretty little thing contain any harmful chemicals\nA1: Pretty Little Thing’s US website says that its products may contain “traces of lead”. Long term or high-level exposure to lead can damage the nervous system and organs including the kidneys and reproductive organs. Studies have also found it could probably cause cancer in humans.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Mentioned explicitly in the terms and conditions of their own website\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Donald Trump asked Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky to \"make up dirt\" on Biden.\n\nQ1: What information did Trump ask Volodymyr Zelensky for relating to Joe Biden, during their July 25, 2019 call, and did he ask Zelensky to \"make up\" anything?\nA1: Donald Trump was officially quoted as saying - There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… It sounds horrible to me. Therefore Trump didn't ask Zelensky to \"make up\" anything.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Trump asked him to investigate claims but not to fabricate anything.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Trump said Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky to not call back until he'd satisfied Donald Trump's demands.\n\nQ1: Did Donald Trump tell Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky to not call back until he'd satisfied Trump's demands?\nA1: A document of the call makes no mention of trump saying Zelensky should not call back until he’d satisfied Trump’s demands,\nthe call ended with Trump congratulating Zelensky on his election.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: There is no evidence of the comment being made by the president \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: During his telephone call with Ukrainian President Zelensky on 25th July 2019 Donald Trump said the United States had been good to Ukraine.\n\nQ1: Is there a record of Trump's call with Zelensky on 25th July 2019?\nA1: Yes, because The document is the record asked for in the question.\n\nQ2: During his call with Zelenksy how did Trump describe the United States' relationship with Ukraine?\nA2: \"The United States has been very very good to Ukraine\"",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The 1st Q&A pair say that evidence of the call in the claim exists and in the 2nd Q&A it states that the record of the call shows that what is claimed was said by trump was said. so supported\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has given himself a pay rise.\n\nQ1: Did the Australian PM Scott Morrison give himself a pay rise then cut working class wages ?\nA1: Multiple posts have been shared thousands of times in on Facebook which claim Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has given himself a pay rise, while his New Zealand counterpart Jacinda Ardern has frozen the salaries of the country’s politicians “until economy improves for citizens”. The claims are misleading; the renumeration for Australia and New Zealand’s politicians is determined by independent statutory bodies, not the prime ministers; a salary freeze was indeed imposed on New Zealand’s politicians in 2018, but it was in place to establish a fairer system that determines pay increases for key office holders, not because of economic conditions.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Australian political structure does not allow for prime ministers to give themselves pay rises.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Luxembourg benefits the most from being in the EU, getting back 3,304% of what it pays in.\n\nQ1: How much does Luxembourg get back from what it pays to EU?\nA1: Luxembourg gets back roughly 105% of what it pays\n\nQ2: What other EU countries get back more than Luxembourg?\nA2: 16 other countries get back more than Luxembourg, these countries include Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Luxembourg 3,199% less than stated pay in claim, meaning 16 countries in the EU including Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary get back more of what it pays in\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Hunter Biden, son of then Vice President Joe Biden had a payoff of $1.5 billion from China, after accompanying his father, on a 2013 diplomatic trip to Beijing.\n\nQ1: In 2013 Did Hunter Biden travel on Air Force 2 to China with then Vice President Joe Biden who was on a diplomatic mission?\nA1: Yes, because Hunter Biden went along because his daughter had been invited and needed a chaperone.\n\nQ2: Why did Hunter Biden Accompany his Father, Joe Biden (Then Vice President) on his diplomatic trip to China in 2013?\nA2: Hunter Biden went along because his daughter had been invited and needed a chaperone.\n\nQ3: Did Hunter Biden Conduct any business when he accompanied his Father Joe Biden on his Diplomatic trip to China in 2013?\nA3: He conducted no business there.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From answers provided it seems that Hunter Biden was not on the 2013 diplomatic trip to Beijing for business.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Donald Trump released a summary of his call with the Ukrainian President, Zelensky because Adam Schiff gave a false rendition of the call.\n\nQ1: What date did President Donald J. Trump release a summary of his call with Ukrainian President, Zelensky?\nA1: The released summary from the white house of the call between president Donald J. Trump and Ukrainian president Zelensky is dated 24th September 2019.\n\nQ2: Where did did Adam Schiff give a rendition of the call between President Donald J. Trump and Ukrainian president Zelensky\nA2: In his full opening statement at DNI hearing on the 26th of September 2019",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The claim was made on the 25th and the summary of the call released on the 24th, but the rendition of the call made by Adam Schiff was on the 26th at the DNI hearing so the claim must be fabricated.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: US Democratic senators threatened Donald Trump with votes and no money coming into Ukraine.\n\nQ1: Which democrats wrote a letter to Ukraine's special prosecutor\nA1: Patrick J. Leahy (Vt.), Richard J. Durbin (Ill.) and Robert Menendez (N.J.)\n\nQ2: Did the senators imply to the Ukrainian chief prosecutor that if he does not cooperate assistance from the United States will cease\nA2: There is no implication of this in the letter written\n\nQ3: Did the US democrats who wrote the letter use it as a means to coerce Donald Trump\nA3: In the letter, the Senators were against the Ukrainian prosecutor halting investigations if it was in a bid not to anger Donald Trump",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The Senators did not mean to coerce Trump.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Hunter Biden made millions of dollars from a deal made in China. The deal put $1.5 billion into a fund after one quick meeting in China which he flew into on Air Force Two.\n\nQ1: Where does the claim come from that Hunter Biden got China to put $1.5bn in a fund?\nA1: Book by Peter Schweizer, “Secret Empires,” that first detailed how Hunter Biden flew to China on Air Force Two with his father in 2013.\n\nQ2: What does the book claim?\nA2: Schweizer wrote in a summary of the 2018 book that 10 days after the Bidens arrived in China, “Hunter Biden’s firm scored a $1.5 billion deal with a subsidiary of the Chinese government’s Bank of China.”\n\nQ3: Did the Chinese put $1.5bn into a fund involving Hunter Biden?\nA3: No, because “To date, Mr. Biden has not received any return or compensation on account of this investment or his position on the board of directors,” Meseris said in a statement Wednesday. “The characterization of Mr. Biden as owning a $1.5 billion private equity firm funded by the Chinese, or suggesting that Mr. Biden has earned millions of dollars from the firm is a gross misrepresentation of Mr. Biden’s role with BHR.”",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: No. “To date, Mr. Biden has not received any return or compensation on account of this investment or his position on the board of directors,” Meseris said in a statement Wednesday. “The characterization of Mr. Biden as owning a $1.5 billion private equity firm funded by the Chinese, or suggesting that Mr. Biden has earned millions of dollars from the firm is a gross misrepresentation of Mr. Biden’s role with BHR.”\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Indian equity stock index markets, Sensex and Nifty have their biggest single day gains in the last ten years on 20th September 2019.\n\nQ1: When was highest one day gain on BSE Sensex from 20/09/2009 to 20/09/2019?\nA1: 20/09/2019 a gain of 1921.15.\n\nQ2: When was highest one day gain on NSE Nifty from 20/09/2009 to 20/09/2019?\nA2: 20/09/2019 a gain of 569.4.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Dates shown in Q&A pairs confirm the highest gain is the date period in the claim.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The Trump family took seats reserved for disabled guests at the 74th session of the UN General Assembly.\n\nQ1: Where did the Trump family sit at the the United Nations headquarters in New York City, US for the 74th session of the U.N. General Assembly?\nA1: They sat in seats reserved for guests of the speaker, US President Donald Trump.\n\nQ2: Why was it thought that the Trump family were sitting in seats allocated for disabled people at the 74th session of the U.N. General Assembly?\nA2: A handicapped placard designates where two seats can be moved for allow for wheelchair access. In this case they were not needed and the seats were reserved for the Trump family.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answers explain that they were not sitting in disabled guests reserved seats so the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: President Muhammadu Buhari of Nigeria told the United Nations Climate Action Summit in New York last month that the Lake Chad basin has shrunk significantly due to climate change, depriving many people of their livelihood in the region.\n\nQ1: When did the Lake Chad shrink\nA1: Lake Chad shrank dramatically at the beginning of the\n1970s and reached less than 2,000 km2 during the 1980s, decreasing\nby more 90 per cent in area\n\nQ2: Has Lake Chad shrunk in recent years\nA2: New research based on continuous satellite observations from the last 20 years has\nbeen able to address this evidence gap and show instead that overall,\nthe lake is not shrinking",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From the 2nd QA it indeed seems that the lake has not been shrinking. Therefore the claim is ref5\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: ERNEST HEMINGWAY SAID, WE ARE ALL BROKEN — THAT’S HOW THE LIGHT GETS IN\n\nQ1: Is WE ARE ALL BROKEN — THAT’S HOW THE LIGHT GETS IN, a Ernest Hemingway quote?\nA1: QI has found no substantive evidence that Ernest Hemingway wrote or said this precise remark.\n\nQ2: Did Ernest Hemingway have a similar quote in the book a farewell to arms?\nA2: Hemingway did write in his 1929 novel, “The world breaks everyone and afterward many are strong at the broken places. But those that will not break it kills. It kills the very good and the very gentle and the very brave impartially.”",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From the evidence the claim is not a quote from Ernest Hemingway \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Russian Energy Narrative Targets Poland, Ukraine and the Baltic States\n\nQ1: Why is Ukraine adverse to Russian energy\nA1: The Nord Stream 2 infrastructure would enable Gazprom to cut Ukraine out of gas transit traffic, which could cost the country about $2 billion in transit fees (the equivalent of nearly 6 percent of its projected budget for 2018). Revenues aside, as Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki recently stated in Berlin, the real danger lies in the fact that Russia can launch a massive land offensive against Ukraine without fear of damaging Ukraine’s pipeline infrastructure and interrupting Gazprom’s exports to Western countries.\n\nQ2: why is Poland adverse to Russian energy\nA2: The General Court next examines Poland’s argument that the 2016 decision breaches the principle \nof energy solidarity 8\nin that it enables Gazprom and undertakings in the Gazprom group to redirect\nadditional volumes of gas onto the EU market by fully exploiting the capacities of the North Stream \n1 pipeline. Taking into account the lack of significant growth in demand for natural gas in central \nEurope, according to Poland, that would, as its only possible consequence, influence the \nconditions of supply and use of transmission services on the pipelines competing with OPAL. The \nGeneral Court observes, in that regard, that that principle imposes not only obligations of mutual \nassistance where, for example following natural disasters or acts of terrorism, a Member State is in \na critical or emergency situation as regards its gas supply, but also requires the European Union \nand the Member States to endeavour, in the exercise of their powers in the field of energy policy,\nto avoid adopting measures likely to affect the interests of the EU and other Member States as \nregards security of supply, its economic and political viability, the diversification of supply or of \nsources of supply, and to do so in order to take account of their interdependence and de facto \nsolidarity.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From the Q&As you can see that Ukraine, Poland and the Ukraine are adverse to Russian Energy. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: A Muslim man in India was killed by a mob after being accused of cow slaughter.\n\nQ1: What was the source of the information in the claim?\nA1: Reuters published the article under the headline:\n\nMan in India killed by mob after being accused of cow slaughter\n\nQ2: Was there any mention in the original article about the religion of the man who was killed?\nA2: The three men attacked by the mob on Sunday were not Muslim, Meena said.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Although a man was killed when a mob attacked three men after they were accused of cow slaughter, it was confirmed that none of the men were Muslim.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Banks in India will be closed from September 26 to October 2 2019.\n\nQ1: Was the Indian bank strike scheduled for the 26th and 27th September 2019 called off?\nA1: The planned bank strike by employees of public sector banks on the 27th and 27th September was called off\n\nQ2: Were September 30th and October 1st 2019 public holidays in India?\nA2: No, because They are not listed on the West Bengal 2019 calendar",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Strikes called off and no listed holidays.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Congress party claims regarding shortfall in Government earnings\n\nQ1: What's the reason for the shortfall in government earnings\nA1: Lower gross tax revenue in the year 2018-2019; Growth rate of Central Government’s Fiscal Indicators ( in per cent)\nItems 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 PA 2019-20 BE*\nRevenue Receipts 8.5 8.5 15.0 4.4 8.2 26.4\nGross Tax Revenue 9.3 16.9 17.9 11.8 8.4 18.3\nNet Tax Revenue 10.8 4.4 16.7 12.8 6.0 25.3\nNon-Tax Revenue -0.5 27.0 8.6 -29.4 22.3 32.9\nNon-debt Capital \nReceipts#\n23.0 22.3 3.8 77.0 -2.5 6.3\nNon-debt Receipts 9.1 9.1 14.4 7.7 7.4 25.0\nTotal Expenditure 6.7 7.6 10.3 8.4 8.1 20.4\nRevenue Expenditure 6.9 4.8 9.9 11.1 6.8 21.9\nCapital Expenditure 4.8 28.6 12.5 -7.5 16.9 10.\n\nQ2: Was there a shortfall in government earnings in 2018-19 to the tune of Rs.1.7 lakh crores?\nA2: There is a difference which amounted to Rs. 1.7 lakh crores between the ‘Provisional Actuals’ of revenue receipts provided in the Economic Survey of India and the ‘Revised Estimates’ of revenue receipts as reported by the government for 2018-19. Since provisional actuals (PA) may be a better estimate of the actual figures, there could well be a shortfall in government earnings for 2018-19. Hence the claim is TRUE.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The evidence shows a shortfall in government earnings\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: About universal basic income, Thomas Paine was for it at our founding ... Martin Luther King, champion in the ‘60s, called it a guaranteed minimum income for all Americans… It passed the U.S. House of Representatives twice in 1971\n\nQ1: How many times did the Universal Basic Income bill make it to the House in the1970s\nA1: President Nixon's plan for a radical revision of the nation's welfare system was approved by the House with a vote of 243 to 155 in 1970\n\nQ2: Did Martin Luther King support Universal Income under the name guaranteed income\nA2: Yes, because “I am now convinced that the simplest solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a new widely discussed measure: the guaranteed income,” he wrote in his 1967 book, Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community?\n\nQ3: How did founding father Thomas Paine view Universal income\nA3: Thomas Paine was among the first to argue that a basic income should be introduced as a kind of compensation for dispossession. In his brilliant 1797 pamphlet Agrarian Justice, he pointed out that “the earth, in its natural, uncultivated state was, and ever would have continued to be, the common property of the human race”. It was unfair that a few should enclose it for their own benefit, leaving the vast majority without their rightful inheritance. As far as Paine was concerned, this violated the most basic principles of justice.\n\nQ4: How many times did a plan for a UBI get approved by the House vote?\nA4: It passed in 1970\n\nQ5: What does the claim mean by a guaranteed minimum income for all?\nA5: A universal basic income, for Americans.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: this is true, it was passed in 1970 and 71 and championed by Martin Luther King\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard is of Indian-origin.\n\nQ1: Is congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard Indian?\nA1: I am not of Indian origin.\n\nQ2: Is Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard of Indian heritage?\nA2: Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard confirmed via a tweet that she is not of Indian-origin. \n\n@ronejoq @amisri I am not of Indian origin.\n\n— Tulsi Gabbard (@TulsiGabbard) October 17, 2012\n\nQ3: What is Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard's ancestry?\nA3: she is of Mixed ancestry, her father is of Samoan and European ancestry. While her mother is a Caucasian of German ancestry (born and brought up in Decatur, Indiana).",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Answer 1 is a quote and is not identified as such until one looks at the source.\nQ&A2 is what Q&A1 should have been.\nQ&A3 confirms her ethnicity.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: AN 11-YEAR-OLD GIRL KILL TWO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS DURING AN ATTEMPTED HOME INVASION\n\nQ1: Where does the story of an 11 year old girl shooting dead 2 illegal immigrants who burgled her home likely originate from ?\nA1: The bogus story has been circulating for the past year on Internet blogs and Web sites concerning a girl shooting two men who broke into her Butte home in November 2006.\n\nQ2: Has any official declared that the story of an 11 year old girl shooting dead 2 illegal immigrant burglars is fake?\nA2: When asked about the authenticity of the events described in this story, Butte-Silver Bow Sheriff John Walsh told The Montana Standard in an earlier interview that his office never investigated such an incident.\n\n“This never happened,” Walsh said.\n\nQ3: Is the story about an 11-year-old Montana girl who killed two illegal immigrants during an attempted home invasion?\nA3: No, because There was no Ralphel Resindez, there was no Enrico Garza, and despite her elevation to heroine status with some gun rights groups, there was no little girl name Patricia who bravely defended her home with her father's shotgun.\n\n\"This never happened,\" Butte-Silver Bow County Sheriff John Walsh told the Montana Standard, a few years back.\n\n\"It's amazing how these things get around,\" he said.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: this story has been refuted by local law enforcement,\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: On average, one person dies by suicide every 22 hours in West Virginia, United States.\n\nQ1: What is the rate of suicide in West Virginia compared to other states in the Country\nA1: The suicide rate in West Virginia is 27% higher than the national rate\n\nQ2: How many suicides were recorded in 2019 in West virginia\nA2: 393\n\nQ3: What is the hourly suicide rate in West Virginia\nA3: At least 1 person died every 22 hours in 2019",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Confirmed by amount of suicides divided by amount of days as well as 22hrs being an actual answer.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Evidence Suggests Nigerians Attacked S.A Police During Shop Raids\n\nQ1: Were the police attacked while doing a raid on a shop in South Africa?\nA1: \"police officers clashed with traders when they tried to seize counterfeit products in the area\"\n\nQ2: What nationality were the people arrested?\nA2: \"Over 560 undocumented foreign nationals were taken in for processing,\" South Africa police said in the statement and added that authorities would check their immigration status and criminal records.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The nationality of the attackers has nor been disclosed according to the second answer so there is not enough evidence to support or refute the claim.\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: French philosopher Voltaire said “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”\n\nQ1: Who wrote “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”?\nA1: ...the quote, routinely misattributed to Voltaire, originated from US white supremacist Kevin Alfred Strom.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Quote originated from US white supremacist Kevin Alfred Strom not voltaire.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Your reaction to an optical illusion is an indication of your state of mind.\n\nQ1: Who created the illusion referred to in this claim?\nA1: Akiyoshi Kitaoka, Illusion artist & Professor, Dept. of Psychology, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, Japan\n\nQ2: Does Prof. Kitaoka say anything about optical illusions and stress levels?\nA2: Yes, because Announcement: A website \"Test online the level of stress a person can handle using stress pictures: are they animated, moving?\" abuses three of my illusion works as well as claims an unscientific idea. To my knowledge, stress has nothing to do with visual illusion. <April 25, 2011>",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The optical illusion test cannot state whether someone is stressed; the test is to see the level of stress a person can handle using stress pictures. Even then, it is an unscientific idea. Hence, the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Indian banks are to be closed continuously from 26th September 2019 to 30th September 2019.\n\nQ1: Did four of India's bank unions call for a strike from September 25th 2019?\nA1: Yes, because All India Bank Officer’s Confederation (AIBOC), All India Bank Officer’s Association (AIBOA), Indian National Bank Officer’s Congress (INBOC) and National Organisation of Bank Officers (NOBO) gave a strike call from the midnight of 25th September to midnight of 27th September 2019.\n\nQ2: Did the call to strike result in the closure of all banks in India?\nA2: No. All bank employees may not have participated in the strike and the private banks functioned normally.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Private banks were not affected so would have been open and not all public bank workers may have striked.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Science fiction and popular science writer Isaac Asimov said your assumptions are your windows on the world.Scrub them off every once in a while, or the light won’t come in.\n\nQ1: Who made the quote \"your assumptions are your windows on the world. scrub them off every once in a while or the light won't come in\nA1: Alan Alda said in the 62nd commencement speech in Connecticut college \"Your \nassumptions are your windows on the world. Scrub them off every once in a while or the light \nwon't come in. If you challenge your own, you won't be so quick to accept the unchallenged \nassumptions of others. You'll be a lot less likely to be caught up in bias or prejudice or be \ninfluenced by people who ask you to hand over your brains, your soul or your money because \nthey have everything all figured out for you\".",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The quote was not made by Isaac Asimov. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Cherie Blair is representing Shamima Begum.\n\nQ1: Who do the media report is the lawyer of Shamima Begum?\nA1: RICHARD Madeley got into a heated clash with the lawyer representing Shamima Begum’s family, Tasnime Akunjee...\n\n Feb 18, 2019\n\nQ2: What links can be found between Cherie Blair and Shamima Begum on the internet?\nA2: No answer could be found.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: I would expect this to be easy to verify if true, but no connection between Cherie Blair and Shamima Begum was found.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Shamima Begum has been flown back or is due to be flown back to the UK.\n\nQ1: Is Shamima Begum still in Syria?\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: Did Shamima Begum return to the UK in 2019?\nA2: No answer could be found.\n\nQ3: Does Cherie Blair deal with immigration law?\nA3: She is Founder and chair of law firm Omnia Strategy LLP. She specialises in employment, discrimination, and public law and, in this capacity, has occasionally represented claimants taking cases against the UK Government.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: No answer could be found and the third question is unrelated. \n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The Obama-Biden Administration did not conduct workplace raids\n\nQ1: What are 'workplace raids'?\nA1: The are raids carried out by Government officials to combat worker exploitation, illegal wages, child labour and to combat illegal immigrants working unlawfully in the U.S.\n\nQ2: Were any workplace raids carried out when Obama was president of the U.S?\nA2: Yes, because But Government data on worksite enforcement operations shows that the number of individuals arrested on immigration law violation charges declined after Obama took office.\n\nQ3: What was the ICE doing under Obama's jurisdiction\nA3: Under current Department of Homeland Security (DHS) guidance on immigration-relatedworksite enforcement, the agency uses available civil and administrative tools, including civilfines and debarment, to penalize and prevent unlawful employment. According to 2012 estimates,there are some 8.1 million unauthorized workers in the U.S. civilian labor force.DHS’s U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is responsible for immigration-relatedworksite enforcement, or enforcement of the prohibitions on unauthorized employment in Section274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The INA Section 274A provisions,sometimes referred to as employer sanctions, make it unlawful for an employer to knowinglyhire, recruit or refer for a fee, or continue to employ an alien who is not authorized to be soemployed. Today, ICE’s worksite enforcement program is focused primarily on cases that involvecritical infrastructure facilities and cases involving employers who commit “egregious” violationsof criminal statutes and engage in worker exploitation.Employers who violate INA prohibitions on the unlawful employment of aliens may be subject tocivil monetary penalties and/or criminal penalties. Criminal investigations may result indefendants being charged with crimes beyond unlawful employment and being subject to therelevant penalties for those violations\n\nQ4: How did the Obama administration tackle work place raids\nA4: In April 2009, the Obama administration shifted the focus of workplace enforcement from arresting illegal workers to pressuring employers. The strategy marked an end to the President George W. Bush-era policy of conducting high-profile work-site raids that rounded up illegal immigrants for deportation.\n\nThe silent raids have ensnared thousands of businesses, mainly in the restaurant, agricultural and janitorial sectors. ICE agents collect and review hiring files, typically I-9 forms that verify eligibility to work in the U.S. Companies with unauthorized workers can face civil and criminal prosecution.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: They did carry out raids but much less than the previous government and other tactics were used to help the situation first. So even though the claim is not correct, its not a completely cut and dry label. \n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: In the U.S fifty million people a year lose their private insurance when they quit a job, are made unemployed or employers change insurance policies.\n\nQ1: What information does Sanders use to base this claim on?\nA1: A report by the People's Policy Project.\n\nQ2: What is the People's Policy Project?\nA2: People’s Policy Project (3P) is a think tank founded in 2017. The primary mission of 3P is to publish ideas and analysis that assist in the development of an economic system that serves the many, not the few.\n\nUnlike most think tanks, which are financed by large corporations and foundations, 3P is funded by small donors pledging $5 to $15 per month on the Patreon and ActBlue platforms. This unique funding source enables us to publish policy insights untainted by the compromises typically demanded by monied interests. We are, as the name suggests, the People’s Policy Project, not Walmart’s Policy Project and not the Gates Foundation’s Policy Project.\n\nQ3: Where does the report in the People's Policy Project get its information from?\nA3: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reporting in their Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report of February 24, 2017 which uses The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS)-a telephone survey of noninstitutionalized adults aged over 18 residing in the United States.\n\nQ4: Which time period did this cover?\nA4: Period Covered: 2014.\n\nQ5: Which part of the findings of the report has been used by the People's Policy Project, and subsequently Bernie Sanders in his claim?\nA5: Approximately 75.6% of adults reported being continuously insured during the preceding 12 months, 12.9% reported a gap in coverage, and 11.5% reported being uninsured during the preceding 12 months.\n\nQ6: Is there any link between these statistics and the number of people claimed to be without health insurance due to a change in their employment situation?\nA6: No, because There is no link.\n\nQ7: Was the question in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFFS) report that led to this claim asked in every state?\nA7: No, because 43 states\n\nQ8: What is the time gap between Sanders' claim and the BRFSS report that the claim is based on?\nA8: 5 years\n\nQ9: How is the total of 50 million people arrived at?\nA9: Extrapolating the numbers found in the BFRSS report to the national population by taking 25% of the working age population of the US.\n\nQ10: What are the most recent statistics on Americans without health insurance?\nA10: In 2018, approximately 27.5 million people were uninsured.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Approximately 75.6% of adults reported being continuously insured during the preceding 12 months, 12.9% reported a gap in coverage, and 11.5% reported being uninsured during the preceding 12 months. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: In Congress, Elizabeth Warren introduced 110 bills. 2 passed. Cory Booker introduced 120 bills. 0 passed,\" the Sept. 12 post reads. \"Kamala Harris introduced 54 bills. 0 passed. Bernie Sanders never held a job until age 53. He lived off of welfare and four different women\n\nQ1: How many bills did Elizabeth Warren introduce to congress by September 2019?\nA1: 108 bills introduced by September 2019.\n\nQ2: How many bills introduced by Sen. Elizabeth Warren to congress have passed by September 2019?\nA2: 2 passed by September 2019.\n\nQ3: How many bills did Sen. Cory Booker introduce to congress by September 2019?\nA3: 113 were introduced by Cory booker by September 2019\n\nQ4: How many bills introduced by Sen. Cory Booker to congress have passed by September 2019?\nA4: 1 Bill passed by September 2019.\n\nQ5: How many bills did Sen. Kamala Harris introduce to congress by September 2019?\nA5: 56 bills introduced by September 2019.\n\nQ6: How many bills introduced by Sen. Kamala Harris to congress have passed by September 2019?\nA6: 2 bills passed by September 2019.\n\nQ7: Did Sen. Bernie Sanders have a job before age 53?\nA7: After being born in 1941 He worked as a carpenter, filmmaker, and writer who created and sold \"radical film strips\" and other educational materials to schools. He also wrote several articles for the alternative publication The Vermont Freeman. He lived in the area for several years before moving to the more populous Chittenden County in the mid-1970s. while in his 30's\n\nQ8: Has Sen. Bernie Sanders ever claimed off of welfare?\nA8: No answer could be found.\n\nQ9: Did Bernie Sanders play secondary breadwinner to 4 women?\nA9: The senator has been only married twice",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Numbers of bills vs bills in QA pairs dont match numbers in claims.\n\nBernie sanders had previous jobs as per QA pair and was only married twice.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Actress Jane Fonda was denied service at Sir Scott’s Oasis Steakhouse in Montana which is run by a Vietnam War veteran.\n\nQ1: Was actress Jane Fonda denied service at Sir Scott’s Oasis Steakhouse in Montana which is run by a Vietnam War veteran?\nA1: Fonda and her husband did leave the restaurant without being served but not because the owner turned away Fonda for her anti-war protests in the 70s. They actually left because the wait time was too long.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answer tells me that they did leave the restaurant but it was not because they were denied service.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: There was a major increase in the number of short positions taken by UK hedge funds when Boris Johnson ran for Conservative leader.\n\nQ1: What is a short position\nA1: A short, or a short position, is created when a trader sells a security first with the intention of repurchasing it or covering it later at a lower price.\n\nQ2: Was there a spike in short positions before Boris Johnson came into power between 15 January 2019 and 23 July 2019\nA2: No answer could be found.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Since the 2nd QA has no answer there is nor enough evidence to label the claim. \n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Kamala Harris say criminals and illegals are better than U.S. servicemen.\n\nQ1: What is this claim based on?\nA1: Today I’m thinking of the fathers who can’t be with their children because they were ripped from their sons and daughters at the border. The fathers who can’t celebrate today because they can’t afford bail. The fathers who are deployed. Don’t forget them.\n\nQ2: Where did the claim originate from?\nA2: David Harris Jr.\n\nQ3: Why has the claim article been deleted from the David Harris Jr. website?\nA3: As the origin for the claim is based off the this tweet of Kamala Harris;\n\n\"Today I’m thinking of the fathers who can’t be with their children because they were ripped from their sons and daughters at the border. The fathers who can’t celebrate today because they can’t afford bail. The fathers who are deployed. Don’t forget them.\"\n\nAnd there is no connection between the claim and the tweet.\n\nQ4: If David Harris Jr. originally deleted the claim article, why did it reappear on Finantial and Forex News and Crypto Currency News Today?\nA4: Article spinning is a writing technique used in search engine optimization (SEO), and other applications, which creates what appears to be new content from what already exists. Content spinning works by replacing specific words, phrases, sentences, or even entire paragraphs with any number of alternate versions to provide a slightly different variation with each spin - also known as Rogeting.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The claim is refuted as the answers show that Harris did not say the claim and the quote has been changed.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Americans lost wealth and income under Barack Obama's presidency.\n\nQ1: What is the period of Obama's presidency?\nA1: 2009 - 2017.\n\nQ2: How was the finances of people in the US affected in the period between 2009 and 2017?\nA2: Wages and incomes have been on the upswing. The typical weekly pay of U.S. workers has been increasing since early 2013 and reached its highest level on record, dating back to 1979, at the end of 2016.6 Household incomes, while still relatively low, have also experienced an upward trend since 2014.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It seems the wages were increasing while BArack Obama was president. Therefore the claim is refuted\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: New numbers from the US Census Bureau show an uptick in the number of Americans who have no health insurance.\n\nQ1: What did the US Census Bureau report on health insurance coverage show?\nA1: • In 2018, 8.5 percent of people, or 27.5 million, did not have health insurance at any point during the year. The uninsured rate and number of uninsured increased from 2017 (7.9 percent or 25.6 million).\n\n• The percentage of people with health insurance coverage for all or part of 2018 was 91.5 percent, lower than the rate in 2017 (92.1 percent). Between 2017 and 2018, the percentage of people with public coverage decreased 0.4 percentage points, and the percentage of people with private coverage did not statistically change.\n\nQ2: What does the claim mean by uninsured Americans?\nA2: Health insurance coverage (or lack thereof)\n\nQ3: What does the U.S. Census Bureau figures show for poverty and income numbers?\nA3: - In 2018, 8.5 percent of people, or 27.5 million, - \ndid not have health insurance at any point during the year\n- The uninsured rate and number of uninsured increased from 2017 (7.9 percent or 25.6 million).\n\nQ4: What does the U.S. Census Bureau figures show for numbers of Americans\nA4: it shows decades-long rise toward greater inequality was not greatly slowed, but it did dip slightly between 2017 and 2018.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Both answers show that there has been a slight increase in the amount of people with no insurance from 2017 to 2018 so the claim is supported.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The Conservatives are levelling up per pupil funding in schools in the UK.\n\nQ1: Are the conservatives increasing per pupil level funding for schools?\nA1: Yes, because New funding delivers on pledge to level up per pupil funding across the country and includes £780 million for children with special educational needs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: the answer says that per pupil funding will increase \n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Thousands of companies are leaving China because they can’t pay the tariffs.\n\nQ1: How many companies left China in 2019 because of US tariffs?\nA1: Some companies did stop production in China due to the tariffs. But this appears to be only small amounts of companies not the thousands the claim referenced.\n\nQ2: Did companies leave China in 2019 because they were unable to pay tariffs?\nA2: In a study conducted in June 2019 by the US China Business Council, 13% of respondents said they had plans to move out of China. However, this was because of mounting trade uncertainty and not because they were unable to pay tariffs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: there isnt evidence to say that thousands are leaving china because of the tarrifs. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Hundreds of billions of dollars have been and are coming into our country in the form of tariffs, and China’s eating the cost.\n\nQ1: How much did the US collect in tariffs in 2018\nA1: Sixty-three billion dollars - that's how much the U.S. government has collected in tariffs in 2018\n\nQ2: How much of the tariff cost is being borne by the Chinese\nA2: The goods come from China, but it is the US importer who has assessed them that bears the cost of the tariff",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: China is not footing any costs it is the USA importers.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: China lost 3 million jobs as a result of the US-China trade war.\n\nQ1: According to the media, how many jobs were lost in China as a result of the US-China trade war?\nA1: On 29 July 2019, South China Morning Post reported that:\nUS trade war has cost China ‘almost 2 million industrial jobs’, investment bank CICC says",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The stats show job losses but not to the volume in the claim. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The chairman of Okitipupa LG, Omo’ba Abayomi Adesanya has (commissioned) purchased (4) brand new tyre of maxxix brand for the refurbished Toyota Hummer bus that has been abandoned for 7 years\n\nQ1: Was there a media report that the Chairman of Okitipupa LG, Omo’ba Abayomi Adesanya has purchased (4) brand new tyre\nA1: Yes, because It was in the Cable news site\n\nQ2: Can the purchase of the tyres be verified?\nA2: No answer could be found.\n\nQ3: Is the facebook post still up?\nA3: No, because The Facebook post has been removed.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The facebook post and evidence of purchase of the tyres is not available\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Zaira Wasim who quit acting in June citing religion is making a comeback to Bollywood.\n\nQ1: Zaira Wasim returned to Bollywood?\nA1: India Today Anti Fake News War Room (AFWA) has found that the photo being shared widely had been clicked before her announcement to quit the film industry. In fact, she is not even attending the promotions of her upcoming movie 'The Sky is Pink' now.\n\nQ2: Was the photo on the beach with fellow actors in the claim showing Zaira Wasim returning to acting?\nA2: No, this was from a film completed in march before she quit acting in June.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The evidence predates the claim so is not relevant. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Several well-known charities such as Goodwill and American Red Cross overpay their CEOs and spend a small percentage on helping people\n\nQ1: what does the CEO of the charity 'American Red Cross' get paid?\nA1: American Red Cross CEO Gail J. McGovern made around $686,000 in the most recent disclosure.\n\nQ2: What % of every donated dollar went to provide services by the American Red Cross?\nA2: 91%\n\nQ3: what does the CEO of the U.S charity 'Goodwill' get paid?\nA3: Its most recent filings listed former CEO Jim Gibbons’ earnings around $717,000 in 2017\n\nQ4: What % of every donated dollar went to provide services by the U.S charity 'Goodwill'?\nA4: 89%\n\nQ5: Is the donation percentage of Goodwill and the American Red Cross very low?\nA5: Despite the fact that the CEO of the American Red Cross earns approximately $686,000 per year, the donation percentage is an impressive 91%. Similarly, Goodwill's CEO makes around $717,000, based on recent data from 2017; the donated percentage is also a high 89%. So, even though the CEOs of each charity company earn a lot of money, a large portion of it still goes to the charities. Neither company spend a small percentage on helping people.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It seems that both CEOs earn a bit, but also donate a lot of their earnings, therefore theclaim is refuted\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Some women have no choice but to take epidural injections during childbirth.\n\nQ1: Are epidural injections compulsory\nA1: They are not compulsory, they are used with the consent of the woman only",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answer and credible source show that the injections are only given on the consent of the woman so the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Epidural injections given during childbirth are one of the worst and dangerous injections in the world resulting in chronic back pain.\n\nQ1: What are the side effects of Epidural injections ?\nA1: Epidurals are very safe; serious complications are extremely rare. However, as with all medications and medical procedures, there are potential side effects:\n\n Decrease in blood pressure – The medication may lower your blood pressure, which may slow your baby’s heart rate. To make this less likely, you will be given extra fluids through a tube in your arm (IV), and you may need to lie on your side. Sometimes, your anesthesiologist will give you a medication to maintain your blood pressure.\n Sore back – Your lower back may be sore where the needle was inserted to deliver the medication. This soreness should last no more than a few days. There is no evidence that an epidural can cause permanent back pain.\n Headache – On rare occasions, the needle pierces the covering of the spinal cord, which can cause a headache that may last for a few days if left untreated. If this situation arises, discuss the treatment options with your anesthesiologist.\n\nQ2: Does epidural injections work on every pregnant woman?\nA2: No answer could be found.\n\nQ3: What percentage of women use an epidural injection when giving birth in hospitals ?\nA3: More than 50% of women giving birth at hospitals use epidural anesthesia.\n\nQ4: What is an epidural?\nA4: Epidural anesthesia is regional anesthesia that blocks pain in a particular region of the body. The goal of an epidural is to provide analgesia, or pain relief, rather than anesthesia, which leads to a total lack of feeling. Epidurals block the nerve impulses from the lower spinal segments. This results in decreased sensation in the lower half of the body.\n\nQ5: How Long Does an Epidural Last?\nA5: Once the catheter is in place, the anaesthetist can set up an epidural pump. The pump feeds the epidural solution into the catheter continuously, providing pain relief for as long as needed.\n\nThe type, amount and strength of the anaesthetic can be adjusted, as necessary. You might also be given the option of having control of the medication pump. This is called patient controlled analgesia. The amount of painkiller is still regulated, so you can’t accidentally overdose.\n\nYou can have the dose lowered for second stage pushing, but it takes some time for the pain relief and numbness to wear off, so if this is important to you, discuss it with your care provider early on.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: This claim is refuted. According to the QA pairs, epidural injections are \"very safe\" and \"serious complications are extremely rare\". Although back pain can occur after an epidural is given, there is \"no evidence that an epidural can cause permanent back pain\". Therefore this claim is refuted. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: VA hospitals were removing Bibles and banning Christmas carols under Obama administration\n\nQ1: Did VA hospitals remove Bibles?\nA1: No, because Bibles are available to anyone who wants one.\n\nQ2: Did VA hospitals ban Christmas carols?\nA2: No, because It wasn't banned, they are permitted under certain conditions.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Refuted by QA pairs.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Sinn Féin MPs do not receive parliamentary salaries.\n\nQ1: Do Sinn fein take part in UK parliament?\nA1: As MPs, we take no part in the Westminster parliament but in every other way we provide active representation for our constituents.\n\nQ2: Do Sinn Fein claim expenses/allowances from Parliament?\nA2: Each MP will receive allowances of over stg £100,00, none of them will be paid as members of Parliament.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The questions establish the role of Sinn Fein and then go straight to a question about the payment of this party. The pairs make it clear what the role of the MPs are and how they are compensated. \n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The presidents of Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Malawi boycotted the 2019 World Economic Forum (WEF) summit in Cape Town in protest against xenophobic attacks in South Africa.\n\nQ1: Did Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Malawi attend the World Economic Forum\nA1: The countries already showed no interest in attending the summit even before the attacks\n\nQ2: What was their reason for not attending the summit\nA2: The reasons are unknown, but the WEF denied the allegations that it was because of the Xenophobic attacks that the countries pulled out",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Even though they did not attend it seems that the reasons were not those in the claim. So the claim is incorrect and refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Lewis Carroll once wrote, “You know what the issue is with this world? Everyone wants a magical solution to their problems, and everyone refuses to believe in magic.”\n\nQ1: Did Lewis Carroll write, “You know what the issue is with this world? Everyone wants a magical solution to their problems, and everyone refuses to believe in magic.”?\nA1: No, because The quote is from the ABC television series \"Once Upon A Time\" in episode 17 where the character Jefferson states, \"And storybooks are based on what, imagination? Where does that come from? It has to come from somewhere. (Scoffs) You know what the issue is with this world? Everyone wants some magical solution to their problem, and everyone refuses to believe in magic. (Gestures with his gun) Now get it to work.\"",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Seems that the claim is from a TV show, therefore it is refuted\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: U.S.A. now leads the world in energy production.\n\nQ1: Who leads the world in energy production ?\nA1: Based on the latest figures available which are from 2016, China leads in first place at 17% and the US is second with 14%.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answer and source shows that China is in first place so the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez tweeted, \"I see people are rushing out to fill up their cars for this hurricane at the gas station. This wouldn’t be an issue if they had electric cars. If the power is out for a week how are they going to get gas? We need to start planning ahead and moving forward.\"\n\nQ1: Does the tweet in the claim - “I see people are rushing out to fill up their cars for this hurricane at the gas station. This wouldn’t be an issue if they had electric cars. If the power is out for a week how are they going to get gas? We need to start planning ahead and moving forward.\" - appear on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s twitter feed history?\nA1: No, because No results found through an advanced search on Twitter for the words “I see people are rushing out to fill up their cars for this hurricane at the gas station. This wouldn’t be an issue if they had electric cars.” from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.\n\nQ2: Is there a website which tracks and archives tweets that public officials may have deleted?\nA2: Yes, because Politwoops tracks deleted tweets by public officials, including people currently in office and candidates for office.\n\nQ3: Does the tweet in the claim - “I see people are rushing out to fill up their cars for this hurricane at the gas station. This wouldn’t be an issue if they had electric cars. If the power is out for a week how are they going to get gas? We need to start planning ahead and moving forward.\" - appear on Politwoops as a tweet deleted by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez?\nA3: No, because The tweet was not found in a search on Politwoops through Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s deleted tweets of August and September 2019 (around the time the claim was made).\n\nQ4: Has Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez denied or admitted to sending the tweet in the claim?\nA4: In response to Sebastian Gorka asking on Twitter if Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez really tweeted that, she replied “Nope”.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: This claim is refuted. According to the QA pairs, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortex never tweeted this claim out. On archive website 'politwoops', they archive deleted tweet political figures and that claim tweet is not on that site either. Finally, AOC herself stated she did not tweet the claim out. Therefore, the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Donald Trump threatened economic sanctions over recent xenophobic violence in South Africa with a posted tweet stating “This barbaric attacks by South African is very disappointing, its time we put South Africa under strong economic sanctions, first it was the minority White people now its African. Either Cyril get his people in line or we pull out all our investments and they learn.”\n\nQ1: Did Donald Trump post a Tweet saying:\n\n“This barbaric attacks by South African is very disappointing, its time we put South Africa under strong economic sanctions, first it was the minority White people now its African. Either Cyril get his people in line or we pull out all our investments and they learn.”\nA1: No, because Not made by trumps account according to its archives.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Evidence presented by the Q&A shows that this is not verified. However it would be helpful if a question such as: what is Trump's policy towards South Africa.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: No Americans are exposed to air pollution above the World Health Organization’s suggested level.\n\nQ1: Do any parts of the USA have air pollution above the suggested level by WHO?\nA1: hile most Americans aren’t exposed to air pollution above the WHO’s guidelines, some are. According to a fact sheet prepared by the University of Chicago’s Energy Policy Institute, as of 2016, about 15% of the country lives in a county that fails to meet the WHO’s standards on particulate pollution. The sheet notes that Fresno, California, for example, has pollution levels that are twice the recommended level, and other places in California and the Midwest are also above the guideline level.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The first answer and source shows that there are states that have above the suggested level of pollution so the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The USA now has, under Trump, got crystal clean water.\n\nQ1: What is America's EPI ranking for water resources?\nA1: 2018 EPI Country Rank (out of 180) was 39.\n\nQ2: Has air quality improved while Trump has been in office?\nA2: Data from the Environmental Protection Agency also do not document any meaningful improvement on air quality under Trump. Some air quality trends have gotten better between 2016 and 2018, according to the EPA’s latest report. But others, including concentrations of two kinds of particulate matter and the number of days with unhealthy levels of air pollutants for sensitive groups, have worsened.\n\nQ3: Has water quality improved while Trump has been in office?\nA3: The U.S.’s only top ranking for drinking water predates Trump. The ranking used 2016 data, and therefore does not reflect any change under Trump.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From the Q&As it seems that the water in the US is good but this happened before Trump was president, so the claim is refuted. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: 91% of the world’s population is exposed to air pollution above the World Health Organization’s suggested level.\n\nQ1: What percent of the world has air pollution above the WHO's guidelines?\nA1: (WHO) estimates that 91% of the world's population lives in an area that does not meet WHO air quality guidelines\n\nQ2: What does the World Health Organization say about this claim\nA2: Air pollution levels remain dangerously high in many parts of the world. New data from WHO shows that 9 out of 10 people breathe air containing high levels of pollutants.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: QAs provide support for 91% figure from official WHO website.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: America has the cleanest and safest air and water\n\nQ1: how clean and safe is America's air quality compared to other countries?\nA1: America is ranked 10th for air quality.\n\nQ2: how clean and safe is America's water compared to other countries?\nA2: America is ranked 29th for water quality.\n\nQ3: which country has the cleanest and safest air and water in the world?\nA3: Both Air quality and Sanitation & Drinking Water ranks 1st place.\n\nQ4: Does Finland only have the cleanest air in the world?\nA4: No, both Air quality and Sanitation & Drinking Water ranks 1st place.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: america isn't close to being number 1 for cleanest or safest air and water, this is refuted. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Thomas Jefferson Said \"Freedom is lost gradually from an uninterested, uninformed and unresponsive people.\n\nQ1: Did Thomas Jefferson say \"Freedom is lost gradually from an uninterested, uninformed and unresponsive people.\"?\nA1: There is no record of this quote in his written works",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: this is not recorded officially as a quote by him,\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The last time people created a Hollywood blacklist, people ended up killing themselves. They were accused, and they lost their right to work.\n\nQ1: When did the blacklist take place\nA1: The blacklist Goldberg mentioned took place during the 1940s and 1950s, as the Cold War between the United States and Soviet Union heated up.\n\nQ2: What is the Hollywood blacklist based on?\nA2: In October 1947, 10 members of the Hollywood film industry publicly denounced the tactics employed by the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), an investigative committee of the U.S. House of Representatives, during its probe of alleged communist influence in the American motion picture business. These prominent screenwriters and directors, who became known as the Hollywood Ten, received jail sentences and were banned from working for the major Hollywood studios. Their defiant stands also placed them at center stage in a national debate over the controversial anti-communist crackdown that swept through the United States in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Besides the Hollywood Ten, other members of the film industry with alleged communist ties were later banned from working for the big movie studios. The Hollywood blacklist came to an end in the 1960s.\n\nQ3: Were those who were blacklisted denied their right to work?\nA3: The studios pledged never again to employ a known Communist or unrepentant fellow traveler. At the studios and the networks, hundreds of artists were shown the door — or had it shut in their faces. Johnston’s declaration marked the formal onset of the blacklist era, a two-decade-long purgatory during which political allegiances, real or suspected, determined employment opportunities in the entertainment industry.\n\nQ4: What happened to the Hollywood 10 when they got blacklisted?\nA4: These prominent screenwriters and directors, who became known as the Hollywood Ten, received jail sentences and were banned from working for the major Hollywood studios.\n\nQ5: Did any of the Hollywood 10 end up killing themselves?\nA5: Yes, because Bartley Crum committed suicide in 1959.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: this is supported, the answers show that the blacklist existed, and lost the people the right to work, and one even killed themselves. \n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Democrats in the United States are calling for the Second Amendment to be repealed.\n\nQ1: Are Democrats in Congress or those running for president calling for the Second Amendment to be repealed?\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: What is the Second Amendment?\nA2: The Second Amendment (Amendment II) to the United States Constitution protects the right to keep and bear arms.\n\nQ3: Are some democrats looking to repeal the second amendment in 2019?\nA3: No answer could be found.\n\nQ4: Who has suggested repealing the second amendment?\nA4: Democratic state lawmakers, and one Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate, who have called for a repeal to be undertaken or discussed, or have at least suggested that that’s their position.\n\nQ5: Have the Democrats said they want to repeal the second amendment?\nA5: NO :\n\n“It is unequivocally not the Democratic caucus’ position to repeal the Second Amendment,” Senator Chuck Schumer, the top Democrat in the Senate, said in a statement to The New York Times",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Missing Answers,incomplete claim\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: A new EU withdrawal bill allows the EU to choose the length of a further Brexit extension and the UK has no say in it.\n\nQ1: what is the new Brexit bill?\nA1: If the EU suggests an extended exit date other than 31 January 2020, the government can ask parliament whether or not it approves of that proposal, and parliament can choose to reject it.\n\nQ2: Can the UK refuse the length of a further Brexit extension made by the EU?\nA2: If the EU suggests an extended exit date other than 31 January 2020, the government can ask parliament whether or not it approves of that proposal, and parliament can choose to reject it.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: the evidence shows that the EU can suggest an exit date but the government can reject it.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: In January 2020 a new EU law means anyone who has an offshore bank account will have to “come clean so we can see how much they are hiding.\n\nQ1: Which new law does this relate too?\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: Is there any new laws being implemented on January 2020 in the EU?\nA2: the EU’s new “anti tax avoidance directive”,",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: There is not enough evidence from the QA to see whether the claims are supported\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Rainbow town central mosque unjustly demolished, alleges Ganduje and comrades.\n\nQ1: Was the building that was demolished a complete building?\nA1: Aliu Sadiq. The secretary of the mosque - There was demolition; that is the correct statement and it was carried out by the state government on August 20. And what they did was: they pulled down the fence, the foundation to DPC level, [and] the pillars. If you go there now, you will see things for yourself. A building was ongoing, that is the true situation of things; the building has not been completed, it was ongoing.”\n\nQ2: So there was no actual mosque to demolish?\nA2: The Daily trust - Findings by our correspondent revealed that there was no existing completed building standing on the four plots of land which serves as a worship centre for the Muslim community in Trans Amadi axis of Port Harcourt.\n\nQ3: Did people still pray in the uncompleted building ?\nA3: The Vice President-General of Rivers State Council for Islamic Affairs, Alhaji Nasir Uwhor, said that Muslims don’t need to have a completed building before their place of worship can be called a mosque.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: the mosque was never completed so it wasn't considered a mosque at the time of demolition. \n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Dan McCready, a Democratic candidate standing in the special election for North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District, is a socialist.\n\nQ1: Has Dan McCready commented on being a socialist?\nA1: In a CNN Interview he has said he is not a socialist.\n\nMCCREADY: \"Well, I'm running against Dan Bishop. Unfortunately for him, he's not running against a socialist. He's running against a capitalist who's built a business from scratch. He's running against a United States Marine.\"",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: He stated himself that he was not a socialist but a capitalist \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Author Theodor Seuss Geisel once said, “Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don’t matter and those who matter don’t mind.”\n\nQ1: Who is Theodor Suess Geisal?\nA1: Dr. Seuss, pseudonym of Theodor Seuss Geisel\n\nQ2: Did author Theodor Seuss Geisel once say, “Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don’t matter and those who matter don’t mind.”\nA2: There is no evidence that he did.\n\nQ3: Has this quote been attributed to others?\nA3: Yes, because Bernard Baruch\n\nQ4: Has a similar quote ever been attributed to someone?\nA4: Yes, because \"Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter.\"\nMark Twain (1835-1910) American author and humorist",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: QAs find that Author Theodor Seuss Geisel never made the statement in the claim, no evidence as far as we know he ever did. Theres evidence that it might have been said by Bernard Baruch and Mark Twain made a similar phrase. So the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Life expectancy in the UK is falling\n\nQ1: How is life expectancy measured?\nA1: A cohort life table shows the probability of a person from a given cohort dying at each age over the course of their lifetime. In this context, a cohort refers to a group of people with the same year of birth.\n\nThe cohort life table is based on age-specific probabilities of death, which are calculated using observed deaths (mortality) data from the cohort.\n\nQ2: Has life expectancy in the UK been falling?\nA2: No, because “The slowdown in life expectancy improvements in the UK has continued, as 2015 to 2017 saw the lowest improvements in life expectancy since the start of the series in 1980 to 1982. Some decreases in life expectancy at birth have been seen in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland whilst in England life expectancy has remained unchanged from 2014 to 2016. This slowing in improvements is reflected in the chances of surviving to age 90 years from birth, which has also seen virtually no improvement since 2012 to 2014.”",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: There have been improvements in the life expectancy, howbeit slow. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: America has more governors who’ve worn blackface than black governors\n\nQ1: How many US governors are black?\nA1: None.\nForty-seven of the nation’s governors are non-Hispanic white.* Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-NM) is Hispanic and David Ige (D-HI) is Asian. Kevin Stitt (R-OK) is a member of the Cherokee Nation.\n\nQ2: Have any US governors worn blackface?\nA2: Yes, because Gov. Kay Ivey is contacting state legislators, and apologizing for her role in a racist student skit from her time as an Auburn student.\n\nIvey was president of her Alpha Gamma Delta pledge class at Auburn. Photos of her sorority sisters in blackface emerged earlier this year. None showed the governor.\n\nBut Thursday she apologized after audio emerged of a skit at a Baptist Student Union Party. The audio is a radio interview of Ivey and her then-fiance, Ben LaRavia. He describes Ivey as wearing blue coveralls and said she “had put some black paint all over her face.”\n\nQ3: What is \"blackface\"\nA3: We define blackface as “black makeup worn (as by a performer in a minstrel show) in a caricature of the appearance of a black person,” and also as “a performer wearing such makeup.” This definition is accompanied by a usage note: “The wearing of blackface by white performers was, from the early 19th through the mid-20th centuries, a prominent feature of minstrel shows and similar forms of entertainment featuring exaggerated and inaccurate caricatures of black people. Its modern occurrence in imitation of such performers is considered deeply offensive.”",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Q.1 confirms that there are no Black US governors. Q.2 confirms that Gov. Kay Ivey wore blackface from her time as an Auburn student. Hence, this claim is supported. \n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Getting up too quickly in the middle of the night can cause sudden death.\n\nQ1: Does getting up at night require a gradual rise\nA1: Getting up at night has no special need for such a gradual rise...no to that ... There is nothing magical about 3 1/2 minutes ....\n\nThe reference to sudden death most closely would be a fit to the fact that 10 percent of heart attacks may present with sudden death ( caused by a fatal arrhythmia of the heart)\n\nQ2: Is getting up at night associated directly with sudden death\nA2: abray1115 a cardiology physician said, \"Getting up at night is not associated mysteriously with sudden death\"\n\nQ3: Is getting up at night associated with sudden death\nA3: A cardiology physician said, \"Getting up at night is not associated with sudden death\"",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: there is no link between getting up quickly and sudden death\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: contraceptive pills can cause cancer.\n\nQ1: Do contraceptive pills causes cancer ?\nA1: The Pill and cancer\n\nWhile high dose Pills reduce your risk of cancer of the ovary and womb if used in the long term, it is not clear whether lower dose Pills like Femodene ED also provide the same protective effects. However, it also seems that taking the Pill slightly increases your risk of cancer of the cervix – although this may be due to having sex without a condom, rather than the Pill. All women should have regular smear tests.\n\nIf you have breast cancer, or have had it in the past, you should not take the Pill. The Pill slightly increases your risk of breast cancer. This risk goes up the longer you’re on the Pill, but returns to normal within about 10 years of stopping it. Because breast cancer is rare in women under the age of 40, the extra cases of breast cancer in current and recent Pill users is small. For example:\n\n Of 10,000 women who have never taken the Pill, about 16 will have breast cancer by the time they are 35 years old.\n Of 10,000 women who take the Pill for 5 years in their early twenties, about 17–18 will have breast cancer by the time they are 35 years old.\n Of 10,000 women who have never taken the Pill, about 100 will have breast cancer by the time they are 45 years old.\n Of 10,000 women who take the Pill for 5 years in their early thirties, about 110 will have breast cancer by the time they are 45 years old.\n\nYour risk of breast cancer is higher:\n\n if you have a close relative (mother, sister or grandmother) who has had breast cancer\n if you are seriously overweight\n\n See a doctor as soon as possible if you notice any changes in your breasts, such as dimpling of the skin, changes in the nipple or any lumps you can see or feel.\n\nTaking the Pill has also been linked to liver diseases, such as jaundice and non-cancer liver tumours, but this is rare. Very rarely, the Pill has also been linked with some forms of liver cancer in women who have taken it for a long time.\n\nQ2: What is the name of birth control pills that causes cancer ?\nA2: The combined oral contraceptive pill (COCP), often referred to as the birth control pill or colloquially as \"the pill\", is a type of birth control that is designed to be taken orally by women. It includes a combination of an estrogen (usually ethinylestradiol) and a progestogen (specifically a progestin). When taken correctly, it alters the menstrual cycle to eliminate ovulation and prevent pregnancy.\n\nThey were first approved for contraceptive use in the United States in 1960, and are a very popular form of birth control. They are used by more than 100 million women worldwide and by almost 12 million females in the United States.[9] From 2015 to 2017, 12.6% of women aged 15–49 in the US reported using oral contraception, making it the second most common method of contraception in this age range with female sterilization being the most common method.[10] Use varies widely by country,[11] age, education, and marital status. For example, one third of women aged 16–49 in the United Kingdom currently use either the combined pill or progestogen-only pill (POP),[12][13] compared with less than 3% of women in Japan (as of 1950–2014).[14]\n\nCombined oral contraceptives are on the World Health Organization's List of Essential Medicines.[15] The pill was a catalyst for the sexual revolution.[16]",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Some pills can increase the risk of cancer. \n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: contraceptive pills destroys the fertility system within 72 hours\n\nQ1: How does emergency contraception or the morning-after pill work?\nA1: Emergency contraception pills are hormone-containing pills taken to give you a burst of hormonal contraception, which will likely prevent ovulation, fertilization, and/or implantation. Emergency contraception will not harm an already existing pregnancy.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: QA pair provides information on how contraceptive pills works - no reference to destroying the fertility system within 72 hours.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: I-Pill contains arsenic.\n\nQ1: What is the I-Pill?\nA1: Brands such as I-Pill and Unwanted 72 can prevent pregnancy when taken within 72 hours of having unprotected sex.\n\nQ2: What does the I-Pill contain?\nA2: Levonorgestrel\n\nQ3: Is levonorgestrel considered safe for use?\nA3: The levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) is a safe, effective and acceptable form of contraception used by over 150 million women worldwide. It also has a variety of noncontraceptive benefits including treatment for menorrhagia, endometriosis, and endometrial hyperplasia.\n\nQ4: Does levonorgestrel contain arsenic?\nA4: No, because There is no mention of arsenic.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answer show that the pill does not contain arsenic so the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Former top cop Mumbai Police Commissioner Ahmed Javed a 1980-batch IPS officer had only taken Rs 1 salary throughout his 36 years tenure.\n\nQ1: Was Ahmed Javed ever Mumbai police commissioner?\nA1: Ahmed Javid was appointed commissioner of Mumbai police\n\nQ2: What salary did Ahmed Javed take?\nA2: \"So many times I have been asked about this at several stages in my career. All I will say is that I take whatever is due to me from the government as salary,” the commissioner said.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: This claim is false.\nFormer top cop Ahmed Javed had denied this as a rumour in 2016.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Arsenic is present in the unwanted 72 contraceptive pill.\n\nQ1: Does the unwanted 72 contraceptive pill contain Arsenic?\nA1: The unwanted 72 contraceptive pill does not contain Arsenic.\n\nQ2: What is Arsenic?\nA2: Arsenic is a naturally occurring metal found in the earth’s crust. It occurs in various forms:\nelemental (metallic) arsenic; combined with other elements such as oxygen, chlorine, sulfur\n(inorganic arsenic); or combined with carbon and hydrogen (organic arsenic). Inorganic\narsenicals are generally more toxic than organic forms\n\nQ3: What ingredients does the unwanted 72 contraceptive pill contain?\nA3: The active ingredient of Unwanted 72 tablets is Levonorgestrel.\n\nQ4: What is Levonorgestrel?\nA4: Levonorgestrel is a synthetic hormone commonly present in oral contraceptive medicines. Levonorgestrel prevents the release of the egg from the ovary, which is a female reproductive organ. It can also change the lining of the uterus to prevent pregnancy.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The unwanted 72 contraceptive pill does not contain arsenic \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The poet T.S. Eliot once said, “The very existence of libraries affords the best evidence that we may yet have hope for the future of man.”\n\nQ1: Who said “The very existence of libraries affords the best evidence that we may yet have hope for the future of man.” ?\nA1: The quote has been widely attributed to T.S.Eliot but this has never been verified. It has also been attributed to Alan Bennet and was used by Jayne Ann Krentz in a 1992 novel. The source remains unknown.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It seems from the Q&A that there is no proof either way as to who said this quote. So not enough evidence seems the correct claim label. \n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Crimea was taken away from President Obama.\n\nQ1: Is Crimea part of the U.S.?\nA1: No, because It is part of Ukraine Territory.\n\nQ2: Did the U.S. own Crimea?\nA2: No, because The U.S. exercised a certain influence among certain Kiev and Ukrainian politicians – how much and whom is disputed – but the U.S. never ‘had’ Crimea.\" - Susanne Wengle, a political scientist at the University of Notre Dame.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The evidence offered by the Q&A refuted this claim.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Canada’s Liberal Finance Minister Bill Morneau is related to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) High Commissioner Brenda Lucki\n\nQ1: Is Brenda Lucki related to Bill morneau?\nA1: “We have confirmed and the Commissioner’s husband is not related to Finance Minister Bill Morneau,” Sergeant Caroline Duval of the RCMP told AFP in an email.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From the QA it seems that the claim is refuted\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
Subsets and Splits