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: Florida’s red flag gun law has been used about five times a day.\n\nQ1: what is Florida's red flag gun law about?\nA1: Florida’s red flag law can be used to prevent people who have been deemed a danger to themselves or others from having a firearm.\n\nQ2: How many red flag orders are approved in a day?\nA2: Since it was adopted there, courts have approved some 2,500 risk protection orders. That's nearly five every day",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: the second answer shows some 2,500 risk protection orders have been approved since the law began, which works out about 5 times a day. \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: Former U.S. President Barack Obama wanted Russia to be out of the G-8.\n\nQ1: How did Obama support Russia's suspension from the G-8?\nA1: President Obama has already suspended preparations for the upcoming G8 meeting in Sochi, Russia. And he says he's planning a series of economic sanctions to isolate Russia and hurt its economy.\n\nQ2: Who suspended Russia out of the G-8?\nA2: The collective allies from the U.S. and allies Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan ousted Russia from the G-8.\n\nQ3: Was Obama responsible for removing Russia from the G8?\nA3: While the Obama administration did support Russia’s expulsion from the G-8 over the annexation of Crimea, it did not do so unilaterally, and in fact could not have acted unilaterally. However the G-7, including the Obama Administration did support Russia's expulsion from the G-8.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The Q&A's show that Barak Obama did want Russia out of the G8 as claimed, and although Q&A's 2 and 3 show he could only do it with other members co-operation this does not change the fact he wanted Russia out as claimed.\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: Obama's motivation for wanting Russia out of the G8 was the Russian annexation of Crimea.\n\nQ1: When did Crimea officially become Russia's territory?\nA1: 16th March 2014\n\nQ2: What countries opposed Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014?\nA2: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States\n\nQ3: What is the G7?\nA3: The G7 are reckoned as the seven wealthiest and most advanced nations in the world.\n\nQ4: What sanctions did the G7 impose on Russia due to Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014?\nA4: In response to Russia's violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and to demonstrate our determination to respond to these illegal actions, individually and collectively we have imposed a variety of sanctions against Russia and those individuals and entities responsible. \n\nRussia's actions in recent weeks are not consistent with them. Under these circumstances, we will not participate in the planned Sochi Summit. We will suspend our participation in the G-8 until Russia changes course and the environment comes back to where the G-8 is able to have a meaningful discussion and will meet again in G-7 format at the same time as planned, in June 2014, in Brussels, to discuss the broad agenda we have together. We have also advised our Foreign Ministers not to attend the April meeting in Moscow.\n\nQ5: What is the G8?\nA5: The Group of Eight (G8) is one of the most important international forums for dealing with global issues.\n\nQ6: Did Barack Obama want Russia excluded from the G8?\nA6: The United States and other Western powers kicked Russia out of their exclusive club (G8)\n\nQ7: Why was Russia kicked out of the G8?\nA7: Obama administration had taken to isolate Moscow for its takeover of Crimea",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It is true that the United States kicked Russia out of their exclusive club (G8) for Russia's takeover of Crimea.\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: If we leave the EU with no deal, the divorce bill is no longer strictly speaking owed.\n\nQ1: Who made the claim\nA1: Boris Johnson\n\nQ2: What is the current price of the divorce bill\nA2: The latest estimate for the size of the UK’s ‘divorce bill’ upon leaving the EU is £33 billion (€36 billion)\n\nQ3: Does a no deal brexit mean a no deal to the divorce bill\nA3: EU leaders used to use the threat of a no-deal Brexit as a negotiating tactic (as did the UK). They now believe it to be a very real prospect.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: NO answer confirms or refutes if the debt would be owed under a no deal exit.\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 rupee is now lower than even the Bangladeshi taka\n\nQ1: At the time of the claim was the Indian rupee lower than the Bangladeshi taka?\nA1: 1 rupee is equal to 1.16 taka around the time of claim, making it 16 per cent stronger than the Taka.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It seems that Taka was stronger at the time of the claim, therefore the label 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: As the main importer of Chinese goods, India should stop all trade ties with Beijing.\n\nQ1: Which country bought the most goods from China in 2019\nA1: In 2019, the European Union countries imported approximately 17.2 percent of the Chinese export volume. The United States was the second largest Chinese merchandise importer that year.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answer and source show that India is not the main importer 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: Japan has refused to import even a needle from US as a mark of patriotism as Americans had nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.\n\nQ1: Does Japan import goods from the USA?\nA1: Yes, because In 2018 US exports to Japan were USD 75,149.3 million.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Seems that Japan is importing good from the US, 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: PM Modi announced a child helpline (1098) for the benefit of children in various crisis situations.\n\nQ1: What is the nature of the helpline\nA1: On the website, it can be found that “CHILDLINE 1098 is a 24-hour a day, 365 days a year, free, emergency phone service for children in need of aid and assistance”. In the ‘Our Story’ section, it can be read that the helpline was started nearly two decades ago as a field action project of the Department of Family and Child Welfare, Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS). Formed in 1999, CHILDLINE India Foundation was granted the exclusive ‘Nodal Mother NGO’ status, in 2006-07, by the Ministry of Woman and Child Development to set up CHILDLINE services across the country. So, an already existing helpline is being promoted as something Modi has recently announced.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It is true that the helpline is for the benefit of children in various crisis situations. However, this child helpine is laready exists, not established by Modi recently. \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: PLATO SAID, ‘YOU CAN DISCOVER MORE ABOUT A PERSON IN AN HOUR OF PLAY THAN IN A YEAR OF CONVERSATION’?\n\nQ1: Who is plato\nA1: Plato was an Athenian philosopher during the Classical period in Ancient Greece, founder of the Platonist school of thought and the Academy (Akademia), the first institution of higher learning in the Western world.\n\nQ2: Which philosopher made the statement, 'You can discover more about a person in an hour of play than in a year of conversation'.\nA2: The philosopher was Plato",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The link for the evidence that it was plato seems to back up 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: Proscribed indigenous leader of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu ordered members of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) to arrest the Nigerian president and hand him over to the Japanese authorities.\n\nQ1: Did Nnamdi Kanu order members of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) to arrest the Nigerian president and hand him over to the Japanese authorities in 2019?\nA1: Yes - A call to action. If you’re from Biafra, Yoruba, Hausa, Middle Belt, living in Japan, it’s our responsibility to ensure that the impostor Jubril-Buhari is disgraced and arrested.\nEnough is enough!\nOur destiny is in our hands.\n#RevolutionIsNow",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Confirmed in the answer provided\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: Arrest rates at Notting Hill Carnival are almost identical to Glastonbury.\n\nQ1: What data was used to make this claim?\nA1: Crime & policing data from 4 police constabularies.\n\nQ2: How was the data compared?\nA2: Number of arrests per 10,000 people.\n\nQ3: What are the limitations of this data?\nA3: It compares festivals and events held over differing numbers of days.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: the actual data of how many arrests occur at notting hill carnival compared to glastobury is not in these answers.\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: An old Nokia 3310 phone found in a drawer after 20 years with 70% battery remaining\n\nQ1: Where did this story originate?\nA1: The story originated from an article published by The Chester Bugle on August 23, 2019 titled \"Nokia 3310 found in drawer after 20 years still has 70% battery\"\nThe Chester Bugle is a satirical news website, written by a bunch of nut jobs. It's not actual news, even though it may look like it to some people.\n\nQ2: How long can the Nokia 3310 actually run?\nA2: When you give up so many power hungry features, there's one major goal behind them: battery life. And here the new Nokia 3310 runs rings around every modern smartphone on the market:\n\nNokia 3310 (2000) - 900mAh removable battery, 2.5 - 4 hours talk time, 55 hours standby\nNokia 3310 (2017) - 1200mAh removable battery, 22 hours talk time, 31 days standby\n\nYes, the 2017 Nokia 3310 can last up to one month between charges, around 30x more than you'll get out of your iPhone 7 and Galaxy S8. You'll be able to go on a two week holiday and not even need to pack a charger, mindblowing by today's high powered smartphone standards.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The story originated from a confirmed satirical news website called 'The Chester Bugle'. From the evidence below , The Nokia 3310 battery could not have had 70% battery after 20 years.\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 Donald Trump can force US firms out of China.\n\nQ1: Can President Donald Trump force US firms out of China?\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: Is there a legal mandate which would allow a US president to stop US firms from working in a different country?\nA2: Yes, because The International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 grants sweeping powers to the President to control economic transactions.\n\nQ3: How would the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 be triggered?\nA3: The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) provides the President broad\nauthority to regulate a variety of economic transactions following a declaration of national\nemergency.\n\nQ4: Can Congress overrule the triggering of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977?\nA4: Yes, because Congress may want to consider whether IEEPA\nappropriately balances the need for swift action in a time of crisis with Congress’ duty to oversee executive action. Congress\nmay also want to consider IEEPA’s role in implementing its influence in U.S. foreign policy and national security decision-making.\n\nQ5: How many times has the US declared a national emergency against other countries?\nA5: As of July 1, 2020, Presidents had declared 59 national emergencies invoking IEEPA, 33 of which are still ongoing.\n\nQ6: How easy is it for a US president to declare a national emergency?\nA6: The process for accessing these powers is almost perfunctory. Under the National Emergencies Act of 1976, the president can declare a national emergency simply by signing his name to a proclamation, publishing it in the Federal Register, and transmitting it to Congress. The law does not define a national emergency or include any criteria for issuance.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 grants sweeping powers to the President to control economic transactions.\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: 40% of NI Unionists are happy about a potential trade border in the Irish Sea.\n\nQ1: Have NI Unionists been polled about the trade border in the Irish Sea?\nA1: A poll asked self-described Unionists “If a referendum took place in NI tomorrow with the question — ‘Should there be a NI specific Backstop as part of Brexit?’ — which way would you vote?”:\n\nQ2: How many NI Unionists polled said there should not be a backstop?\nA2: 81%\n\nQ3: What is the NI backstop?\nA3: The backstop is a guarantee that whatever happens during the negotiations between the EU and UK on the future relationship, the open border between Ireland and Northern Ireland will be maintained, and the Good Friday Agreement respected.\n\nQ4: What is the trade border in the Irish Sea proposal?\nA4: That checks between the UK and Ireland will be done at sea ports and airports in the future, rather than on the 500km land border.\nThe Irish Sea would become, in effect, the border.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The Q&A pairs provide an answer stating the claim is not 40% but 19%\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 N-Power programme in Nigeria, has lifted over 5 million Nigerians out of extreme poverty\n\nQ1: What number of people have been lifted out of extreme poverty from the N-power scheme\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: Why was the N-power program created\nA2: Nigeria government have implemented youth empowerment training(N-POWER) program to tackle the critical issues of unemployment and poverty",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: No evidence to confirm or refute the amount lifted out of poverty.\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: West Virginia highways move up twenty places in the U.S national highway system to place sixteenth, and affirms all the hard work we do on our states roads.\n\nQ1: Did West Virginia highways move up twenty places in the U.S national highway system to place sixteenth ?\nA1: West Virginia’s highway system ranks 16th in the nation in overall cost-effectiveness and condition, according to the Annual Highway Report by Reason Foundation. This is a 20-spot improvement from the previous report, where West Virginia ranked 36th overall, as the fatality rate decreased somewhat and the state benefited from the report no longer measuring narrow rural arterial lanes (the state ranked 50th last year).\n\nQ2: What is West Virginia position in the U.S national highway system ?\nA2: 1\tNorth Dakota\n2\tVirginia\n3\tMissouri\n4\tMaine\n5\tKentucky\n6\tKansas\n7\tTennessee\n8\tMontana\n9\tUtah\n10\tAlabama\n11\tWyoming\n12\tOregon\n13\tIdaho\n14\tSouth Dakota\n15\tNebraska\n16\tWest Virginia\n17\tNorth Carolina\n18\tOhio\n19\tVermont\n20\tSouth Carolina\n21\tNew Mexico\n22\tMinnesota\n23\tTexas\n24\tNew Hampshire\n25\tMississippi\n26\tGeorgia\n27\tNevada\n28\tIllinois\n29\tArizona\n30\tMichigan\n31\tIowa\n32\tArkansas\n33\tIndiana\n34\tLouisiana\n35\tPennsylvania\n36\tColorado\n37\tWashington\n38\tWisconsin\n39\tMaryland\n40\tFlorida\n41\tOklahoma\n42\tDelaware\n43\tCalifornia\n44\tConnecticut\n45\tNew York\n46\tMassachusetts\n47\tHawaii\n48\tRhode Island\n49\tAlaska\n50\tNew Jersey\n\nQ3: Does West Virginia position in the U.S national highway system affirms all the hard work by Governor Jim Justice on the states roads?\nA3: Justice has a point about the overall number, but his celebratory tone is somewhat exaggerated. Most of the data reflects a period before he became governor, and a major reason for the increase came from the elimination of a category from the previous year’s report in which West Virginia ranked 50th nationally.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: West Virginia Highway are ranked 16th \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 5G radiation is bad for humans.\n\nQ1: Has there been any testing of 5G on humans?\nA1: Yes, because There has been research on exposure to radio frequencies over the years.\n\nQ2: Are all radio frequencies the same?\nA2: Yes, because Higher frequency waves come from x-rays, uv rays and gamma rays, and are ionising and can damage DNA in humans.\n\nQ3: What type of radiation is 5g?\nA3: 5g is non-ionising radiation, like 4g and 3g.\n\nQ4: Is there any evidence that non-ionising radiation, like 5g can harm humans?\nA4: No, because There is no convincing evidence that exposure to the radio waves of 5G can have any adverse health effects.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: There's no evidence supporting 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: Donald Trump's fuel efficiency plan would reduce the cost of cars “by more than $3000” and make them “substantially safer.”\n\nQ1: What is the aim of Donald Trumps Fuel efficacy plan?\nA1: The aim is to amend certain existing\nCorporate Average Fuel Economy\n(CAFE) and tailpipe carbon dioxide\nemissions standards for passenger cars\nand light trucks and establish new\nstandards,\n\nQ2: Will the fuel efficacy plan reduce the cost of a car?\nA2: a $2,340 reduction in total ownership costs on a 2030 vehicle. That includes $1,850 less for technology costs — or how much the car’s price would fall\n\nQ3: Will Trumps efficiency plan make cars safer?\nA3: Regulatory provisions fully offset this effect, producing a near zero change in accident fatalities.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answers and sources show that the price reduction is less that $3000 and would not change the safety of the car 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: A 5G test in the Netherlands resulted in the death of 297 birds.\n\nQ1: Were there any 5g tests taking place around the time of the birds deaths?\nA1: This is not the case. 5G has not been tested in the vicinity of the park. (translated)\n\nQ2: Were the birds tested to find the cause of death?\nA2: esearchers at the Natural History Museum in Rotterdam and Wageningen University did autopsies on 15 of the starlings. From the birds’ internal injuries, the researchers concluded that they had probably died from hitting objects (possibly the ground, tree branches or each other) at great force.\n\nThe exact reason why the birds hit the objects is not known, but the university suggested that it may have been caused by panic due to a hunting owl or another disturbance.\n\nThe university confirmed that the official cause of death was bleeding as a result of trauma, but that tests also found traces of a toxin from the seeds of a berry starlings are known to eat. But it’s not known if the toxins played a part in their death.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: 1st QA confirms there have been no 5G tests in the park in The Hague where the birds were found dead - therefore could not be the cause of 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: President Trump wanted the USA to buy Greenland from Denmark.\n\nQ1: Is Greenland for sale?\nA1: Greenland is not for sale and U.S. President Donald Trump’s idea of buying the semi-autonomous Danish territory in the Arctic from Denmark is “an absurd discussion,” Denmark’s prime minister said.\n\nQ2: Did Trump show an interest in the USA acquiring Greenland?\nA2: Yes, because Although no official offers were made he had put the idea out there.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The Q&As and sources would indicate that Trump was showing a serious interest in buying Greenland.\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: In the US, medical bills drive half a million people into bankruptcy every year.\n\nQ1: What study was the value of the statistic gotten from\nA1: From a study titled Medical Bankruptcy: Still Common Despite the Affordable Care Act\n\nQ2: Has the study been peer-reviewed and accepted by the scientific community\nA2: It has not been peer reviewed\n\nQ3: In the non business bankruptcy filings for the time period, were medical bills the sole cause of bankruptcy listed on 500,000 cases?\nA3: No. Bankruptcies typically involve multiple causes, and in some cases, medical bills may be a small piece of the pie. Sanders glosses over those nuances, stating that health-care costs drove people to bankruptcy in all 500,000 cases. The study he’s citing doesn’t establish that.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The 3rd Q&A shows that the sole reason is not just medical bills 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: Chinese professor Zheng Yongnian gave an interview to state-run People's Daily in which he urged cutting water supplies to Hong Kong to end months of street protests in the city.\n\nQ1: Where does Hong Kong get its water supply from?\nA1: The local yield is inadequate to meet the fresh water demand in Hong Kong. It also fluctuates significantly and is unreliable, the difference in the quantities of local yield could be up to 200 million cubic metres. Confronted with the challenge of inadequate and unreliable local yield, Hong Kong has been importing Dongjiang (DJ) water since 1965 to meet local water demand.\n\nQ2: What did Chinese professor Zheng Yongnian say about the water supply to Hong Kong in relation to ongoing protests?\nA2: No answer could be found.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The 1st q7a pair only states where Hong Kong gets its water from and little other details relating to the claim, \nthe 2nd q&a pair states that no answer could be found to the question relating to the main part of 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 UK has lost its measles free status just three years after the virus was eliminated.\n\nQ1: Did the WHO ever announce that the UK had eliminated the measles virus\nA1: The WHO listed the UK among 42 other countries that had eliminated the virus s of 2016\n\nQ2: Does \"eliminated\" mean that there were no cases of the measles virus in the year it was declared\nA2: WHO defines measles elimination as the absence of circulating measles, in the presence of high vaccine coverage, along with good systems to identify cases of the disease. In countries that have eliminated measles, measles can still occur, but these will be isolated cases that only have limited spread within the community.\n\nQ3: Has the WHO removed the UK from the list of countries that were measles free\nA3: In 2019, WHO determined that the UK could no longer be consider as ‘eliminated’ and that transmission of measles had been re-established.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Confirmed in 2019 by who.\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: Trump has challenged Nevada’s new state election law - that requires mail-in ballots to be sent to all active voters amid the coronavirus pandemic - in court. Nevada’s Republican Secretary of State has asked the judge to dismiss the Trump lawsuit.\n\nQ1: Did Donald Trump file a lawsuit challenging Nevada’s new election law that would require mail-in ballots to be sent to all active voters during the coronavirus pandemic?\nA1: Yes, because Plaintiffs Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., the Republican National Committee and Nevada Republican Party filed a lawsuit on 8th August 2020.\n\nQ2: Did the Nevada Republican Secretary of State, Barbara Cegavske, ask a judge to dismiss the lawsuit filed by Donald Trump against Nevada’s new mail-in ballot law?\nA2: Yes, because In a court filing Monday, Cegavske’s attorneys asked a judge to dismiss the lawsuit and contended that the lawsuit addresses a policy debate that should occur outside of a courtroom. The filing also said the Trump campaign and Republicans who filed the suit don’t have legal standing to make their argument and don’t explain how they’d be harmed by changes in the law.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Trump did challenge and request was made to dismiss as confirmed in the QA Pairs.\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: Former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill said, 'Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen'.\n\nQ1: When did Winston Churchill say, 'Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen'.\nA1: This quote is very often attributed to Churchill but appears nowhere in the Churchill canon.\n\nQ2: What does the International Churchill Society say about this quote?\nA2: This quote is very often attributed to Churchill but appears nowhere in the Churchill canon.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It is not officially recorded as being said by him, and the International Churchill Society does not attribute it to 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: Andrew Jackson said “One man with courage makes a majority.”\n\nQ1: Who is Andrew Jackson?\nA1: Andrew Jackson was the seventh U.S president and considered the founder of the democratic party.\n\nQ2: Where does the quote, \"One man with courage makes a majority.” likely originate?\nA2: James Parton's 1860 biography of Andrew Jackson, said \"desperate courage makes one a majority\" on the title page. It was not intended to be interpreted as Jackson's words.\n\nQ3: Is there any evidence Andrew Jackson said \"One man with courage makes a majority.”\nA3: No, because There is no evidence that he said that quote at all.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Theres clear evidence in the answers to the questions that this wasnt a statement made by Andrew Jackson, theres also proof provided that it was actually a title of a book made by James Parton about Andrew Jackson, but not intended to be Jacksons words.\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: Pennsylvania just opened up a $10 billion plant, during the presidency of Donald Trump, this would never normally have happened because they wouldn't have allowed them to frack.\n\nQ1: Is there a $10 billion plant in Pennyslvania?\nA1: Yes, because Shell is building a chemical plant that coverts natural gas to plastic products.\n\nQ2: What date was this plant approved and completed?\nA2: It was announced by Shell in 2012 and the decision was completed in June 2016.\n\nQ3: Was this during Donald Trump's presidency?\nA3: No, because The plant predates Donald Trump's presidency.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The claim is a bit weirdly worded.However, it seems from the all of the question-answer pairs taken together, that the plant was opened before the presidency of Donald 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: TRUMP SAID Earlier this month, the U.S. government officially labeled China for the first time ever a currency manipulator — another promise kept.\n\nQ1: What is currency manipulation\nA1: Currency manipulation involves the artificial movement of a domestic currency valuation through government intervention such as by printing more money or buying and selling other currencies on the foreign exchange market.\n\nQ2: When did Donald Trump make the statement\nA2: 15th August, 2019\n\nQ3: Which U.S. government agency officially labeled China a currency manipulator\nA3: The United States Treasury\n\nQ4: Was 2019 the first time China was designated as a currency manipulator\nA4: No answer could be found.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: According to the evidence shown in the answers, 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: TRUMP said If he was a great president (barack Obama), how come he left me 138 judges to appoint when everybody said that’s the single most important thing a president of the United States has to do?\n\nQ1: How many judge Vacancies were there when Donald Trump took office?\nA1: 112",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It seems there were 112 vacancies, 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: \"wealthy people in Canada donate to hospitals\" to get better health care treatment.\n\nQ1: Do Canadian hospitals award special privileges to wealthy donors\nA1: No, because Giving preferential treatment in Canada on the basis of donations would be violating the federal Canada Health Act",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The questions show that there are laws against this and it can't be done legitimately. \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: Robert Sweet, a federal judge who was overseeing a civil case against Jeffrey Epstein was killed.\n\nQ1: How did Robert Sweet die?\nA1: Robert W. Sweet, who as Mayor John V. Lindsay’s top deputy worked to end some of the most rancorous conflicts in 1960s New York, and who as a longtime federal judge struck down a state ban on begging on the streets, died of natural causes on Sunday in Ketchum, Idaho. He was 96.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: According to reports he died of natural cause \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 push by Assembly Democrats seeking Americans with Disabilities Act accommodations for a lawmaker were timed to make Vos look bad.\n\nQ1: Who is 'vos' that the claim refers to?\nA1: Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, Republican for Rochester\n\nQ2: What accommodations for a lawmaker were democrats looking to peruse under the Americans with Disabilities Act?\nA2: They were urging Assembly speaker to allow paralyzed lawmaker to call in to meetings\n\nQ3: How could this accommodation request impact Robin Vos?\nA3: On July 29, 2019 vos had said he thinks it is \"disrespectful for someone to be asking questions over a microphone or a speakerphone.\n\nQ4: When did democrats launce a bid to have accommodations made for a disabled lawmaker?\nA4: Aug. 8, 2019\n\nQ5: What were the accommodations asked for by the democrats?\nA5: to accommodate his request to call into meetings by phone.\n\nQ6: What date did he ask for this accomodation?\nA6: Aug. 8, 2019\n\nQ7: When did vos make his remarks about it being disrespectful to 'call into meetings''?\nA7: July 29, 2019:",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: QA pairs indicate Vos made the comment 10 days before the accommodations were asked for.\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: Professor HC Verma still drives an old scooter.\n\nQ1: Who is Professor HC Verma?\nA1: HC Verma is an Indian experimental physicist and a retired professor of Physics from the Indian Institute of Technology.\n\nQ2: What did Professor HC Verma respond to the social media claim that he still drives an old scooter?\nA2: On his Facebook page, the professor wrote:\nA scooter photo is also shown in the post. I never had a scooter of this colour and make.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The person themselves has refuted the claim and so it is trustworthy.\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: Eminent Physics professor HC Verma donates Rs 1 crore to PM relief fund and for charity.\n\nQ1: Does Professor HC Verma donate RS 1 crore to the PM relief fund and charity?\nA1: No, because Dear Friends, I came to know about atwitter post telling that I earn 1 crore of royalty and donate the whole money to PM relief fund. I wish I could do that.\nI wish to categorically deny the information.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The source is the facebook page of HC Verma and he refutes the claim personally. \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: Professor HC Verma, gets Rs 1 cr as royalty per year for his book \"'Concepts of Physics'\n\nQ1: How much does Professor Verma get as royalty for his book\nA1: The professor stated on his Facebook page that he does not get 1Cr royalty on his books",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Publicly denied by Verma himself.\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 \"boyfriend loophole\" means that \"if you commit a serious crime of domestic abuse against your wife, you can't get a gun, but if you do it against your girlfriend, you can.\n\nQ1: How does federal law define domestic violence?\nA1: the term “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” means an offense that—\n(i)is a misdemeanor under Federal, State, or Tribal [3] law; and\n(ii)has, as an element, the use or attempted use of physical force, or the threatened use of a deadly weapon, committed by a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian, or by a person similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim.\n\nQ2: Does the gun prohibition in federal law apply to domestic violence committed in more casual boyfriend/girlfriend relationships or people who were merely dating?\nA2: No, there is no mention of a more casual relationship in federal law.\n\nQ3: Does state law exist that broadens the definition of domestic violence?\nA3: States have closed the gaps in federal law pertaining to people who commit misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence by enacting laws that:\n\nProhibit domestic violence misdemeanants not covered by federal law from buying or possessing guns and/or ammunition.\nAuthorize or require courts to order people convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors to relinquish their guns and/or ammunition\n\nQ4: Does every state have state law that broadens the definition of 'domestic violence'?\nA4: No. Multiple states have no such law.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Evidence finds that federal law defines domestic violence as the use or attempted use of physical force or the threatened use of a deadly weapon, committed by a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim; by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common; by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian; or by a person similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim. There is no mention of a more casual relationship in federal law. However, states have closed the gaps in federal law pertaining to people who commit misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence by enacting laws that prohibit domestic violence misdemeanors not covered by federal law from buying or possessing guns and/or ammunition. But, multiple states have no such law. \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: CNN's Chris Cuomo exploded at a man who called him fredo.\n\nQ1: Was Chris Cuomo referred to as a Fredo\nA1: On Tuesday, video surfaced of CNN anchor Chris Cuomo losing it after some guy (reportedly a Trump supporter) called him as “Fredo” on Sunday, in a reference to a character from the Godfather series\n\nQ2: What was his reaction for being called Fredo\nA2: He exploded and threatened to use violence",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: \"Exploded\" is clearly metaphorical. I think threatening to throw someone down the stairs counts.\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: Would Florida assault weapon law amendment proposal ban virtually all guns?\n\nQ1: What does the Florida gun law amendment propose?\nA1: BAWN’s proposal defines assault weapons more broadly than past definitions. Instead of listing design features to designate the banned weapons, the question describes assault weapons as “semiautomatic rifles and shotguns capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition at once, either in a fixed or detachable magazine, or any other ammunition-feeding device.” This definition expands on several existing state laws by including weapons that can accept large-capacity detachable magazines, which are typically what make assault weapons so lethal.\n\nBAWN’s assault-weapons ban, which exempts military or law-enforcement members, would make possession of the defined weapons a third-degree felony. It would also give Floridians who already own these weapons a year to register them before their possession becomes illegal.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Not all guns were banned in this proposal, only the defined assault weapons.\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: Britons have spent £4bn stockpiling goods in case of no-deal Brexit.\n\nQ1: what is the total population of the UK\nA1: total adult population of the UK being just over 52 million.\n\nQ2: Did Britons stockpile supplies in anticipation of a no deal Brexit?\nA2: Yes, because A survey carried out by finance provider Premium Credit shows that 17% of the country has started hoarding food, drink and medicine – with about 2.4 million people having spent more than £500 stockpiling.\n\nQ3: How much did Brits spend stockpiling before Brexit?\nA3: Brits spent over £4.6 billion at Brexit stockpiling peaks\n\nQ4: Were any adverse effects due to stockpiling noted?\nA4: Brexit-related stockpiling was also hitting cashflow, according to Premium Credit, which was increasing pressure on businesses and households to rely more on credit to make purchases.\n\nQ5: Can the 4.6 billion be accurately attributed to stockpiling?\nA5: A survey carried out by finance provider Premium Credit shows that 17% of the country has started hoarding food, drink and medicine – with about 2.4 million people having spent more than £500 stockpiling.\n\nA further 6.1 million have spent up to £500 while one in five, or 19%, have spent over £1,000 on hoarding.\n\nQ6: What is the population of the UK at the time of the claim?\nA6: 66,778,659",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From the sources, it says Britons have spent over £4.6 billion stockpiling household goods in preparation for a hard Brexit, according to new research.\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: U.S. Attorney General William Barr made a secret visit to the Manhattan jail where Jeffrey Epstein was being held just two weeks before the accused sex trafficker was found dead in his cell\n\nQ1: Did the U.S Attorney General William Barr make a secret visit to the Manhattan Jail where Jeffrey Epstein was being held\nA1: Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec told Lead Stories:\n\nThe claim is preposterous. In fact, Attorney General Barr has never visited MCC. (And as a reminder, he has 24/7 FBI protective detail, which means they would have had to be there, as well",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Denied by government source, and Barr has an FBI protection detail so cannot make secret visits anywhere.\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: Attorney General William Barr visited the prison where accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein was being held.\n\nQ1: Did Attorney General William Barr visit prison where sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein was being held?\nA1: No, because This story has been updated to remove references to a purported visit to the MCC by Attorney General William Barr because the source of the information did not have direct knowledge that the visit took place.\n\nQ2: Why was William Barr in New York City on July 23rd?\nA2: Attorney General William P. Barr Delivers Keynote Address at the International Conference on Cyber Security.\n\nQ3: Is there any evidence to show that Barr paid Epstein a visit in prison?\nA3: No, because The only 'evidence' is a quote from the claim origin: Lewis Kasman.\n\nQ4: Who is Lewis Kasman?\nA4: Lewis Kasman, who thought of himself as an “adopted son” of John Gotti, allegedly ran Albie Trimming Co., which supplied zippers, linings, and buttons to garment industry companies, as a front for the Gambino Mafia family’s control over the Seventh Avenue trucking industry.[2] However, Mr. Kasman recently turned state’s evidence as part of a federal 80-count indictment that charged 62 alleged mobsters with racketeering, theft of union benefits, and money laundering in connection.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: There is no record of this happening other than stated 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: In the weeks following El Paso and Dayton, evidence of an impending mass shooting spread on Snapchat and iMessage.\n\nQ1: Are the mass shooting messages spreading on Snapchat and iMessage after El Paso and Dayton based on credible information?\nA1: RUMOR ADDRESSED: Does this text message look familiar to you?\n\nThe Savanah Police Department has received word from some concerned citizens that this message is floating around through text message and on social media warning that a police officer claimed there could be shootings in Walmarts and are warning people not to go to these businesses. We are aware of the message, and after speaking with other law enforcement agencies we have learned that the message is floating around throughout the entire state and others as well. This message has not been determined to be a credible threat in the Savannah area, and appears to be the results of a wild internet rumor. Please be cautious of any social media rumors, and always bring them to law enforcement attention so that we can determine if there are any existing threats. Thank you to all who brought their concerns to the police department!\n\nQ2: What happened in the El Paso mass shooting?\nA2: Police in El Paso, a large city on the Mexico-US border, first received reports of gunshots at 10:39 local time (16:39 GMT) on Saturday.\n\nA gunman had opened fire with an assault-style rifle in a crowded Walmart on the city's east side. Nearby businesses were placed on lockdown and shoppers were evacuated.\n\nThe store is near a retail park, the Cielo Vista Mall, which is popular with El Paso residents as well as shoppers from just across the Mexican border.\n\nIn addition to the 22 fatalities, 24 people were injured in the shooting. Eight Mexican nationals were among the dead and the victims' ages range from 15 to 90.\n\nOfficers arrived on the scene within six minutes and the attacker surrendered after he was confronted by police outside the store.\n\nQ3: What happened in the Dayton mass shooting?\nA3: Hours later, almost 1,600 miles away in Dayton, Ohio, shooting began at 01:07 local time (05:07 GMT) on Sunday in an area popular for its nightlife.\n\nSecurity camera footage shows dozens of people racing through the doorway of the local Ned Peppers nightclub on E 5th Street. Nine people were killed and 27 were injured.\n\nJust seconds later, the gunman is seen running towards the venue and being hit by police gunfire as he reaches the door. Police have confirmed they killed the gunman at the scene within 30 seconds of him opening fire.\n\nHad the gunman made it through the door, Dayton Police Chief Richard Biehl said, the loss of life would have been \"catastrophic\".\n\nThe suspect, 24-year-old Connor Betts, used a .223-calibre assault rifle with high-capacity magazines that he had ordered legally from Texas. There was nothing in his history that would have stopped him from buying the gun legally, police said.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Police publicly addressed it as misinformation.\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: Jean Monnet said a European superstate should be created without the understanding of European people.\n\nQ1: Did Jean Monnet say that a European superstate should be created without the understanding of European people?\nA1: No evidence\n\nQ2: Did Jean Monnet show any similar feelings towards a European superstrate than what is claimed in the apparent quote?\nA2: Monnet is reported to have expressed somewhat similar sentiments, but without the notion of intentional deception,",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Jean Monnet words were misunderstood and paraphrased. \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 said that he 'did criminal justice reform, which President Obama could not get approved...'\n\nQ1: How did Trump reform criminal justice system?\nA1: The FIRST STEP Act is consequential because it includes provisions for meaningful sentencing reform, which would reduce the number and amount of people in prison and is part of the starting point of any serious legislation for criminal justice reform.\n\nQ2: Did Obama pass legislation reforming the justice system?\nA2: Yes, because President Obama signed a bill reducing the disparity in penalties for the use of crack and powder cocaine. \nThe enactment of the law sealed a hard-fought victory for civil rights activists who have argued for years that the differing punishments unfairly target African-Americans.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Even though Trump did bring in the 'THE FIRST STEP act, he was wrong by saying Obama could not pass legislation reforming the justice system. The claim is misleading so classed as cherrypicking/conflicting evidence. \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: Democratic Republicans Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar have vowed to take benefits like Social Security and Medicare away from senior citizens.\n\nQ1: Did the Democratic Republicans Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar have vowed to take benefits like Social Security and Medicare away from senior citizens?\nA1: No, because The claim may originate with a satirical article published on Daily World Update, a parody news website that describes itself as part of a network that publishes “parody, satire, and tomfoolery.”",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The question leads to an answer that had discovered the claim was made from a satirical website.\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: Olive Garden restaurant chain are funding trumps 2020 campaign.\n\nQ1: Has restaurant chain Olive Garden made any donations to Donal Trumps 2020 campaign?\nA1: Olive Tree have tweeted themselves denying the claim.\n\nQ2: Who can contribute and donate to political campaigns?\nA2: Campaigns are prohibited from accepting contributions from certain types of organizations and individuals. These prohibited sources are:\n\nCorporations, including nonprofit corporations (although funds from a corporate separate segregated fund are permissible)\nLabor organizations (although funds from a separate segregated fund are permissible)\nFederal government contractors\nForeign nationals\nContributions in the name of another",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Evidence shows direct denial from the company. Note - the Question mis-spells Donald 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: Abortion is never medically necessary.\n\nQ1: What is an abortion?\nA1: Abortion, the medical or surgical termination of a pregnancy, one of the oldest, most common, and most controversial medical procedures.\n\nQ2: Are abortions safe?\nA2: When undertaken by a trained health-care provider in sanitary conditions, abortions are one of the safest medical procedures available, safer even than child birth.\n\nQ3: Can an abortion be medically necessary?\nA3: abortions are virtually always performed for the most serious medical and health reasons, including saving the woman’s life.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Seems from the 3rd question and answer pair that sometimes abortions are necessary to save someones life. 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: The Nigerian Embassy in The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has been ejected from its premises.\n\nQ1: What is the date of the claim?\nA1: 8th August 2019.\n\nQ2: Was the Nigerian Embassy in The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) ejected from its premises around August 2019?\nA2: Ferdinard Nwonye, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said in an interview in Abuja on Friday 9th August 2019, \n\n“The Nigerian Embassy in the Democratic Republic of Congo was not shut down.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Government spokesman directly refuted 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: Social Security beneficiaries count on the US post office to get their checks.\n\nQ1: How do most social security beneficiaries receive their checks\nA1: As of June 1 2013, nearly 98 percent of Social Security beneficiaries and over 92 percent of SSI recipients receive their benefit payment electronically",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Evidence show that the vast majority of social security beneficiaries receive their payments electronically.\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: Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has suffered a massive stroke.\n\nQ1: Has Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg suffered a massive stroke?\nA1: No, because ...a closer inspection of the account reveals that it is not actually from Fox News. It has the wrong Twitter handle – @FoxChannel rather than @FoxNews – and lacks a blue check mark, which notes that the account has been verified by Twitter.\n\nThe Caller confirmed with a Fox News spokesperson that the company did not tweet this out, and the account, which noted that it was satirical in its bio, has since been suspended by Twitter.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From the question and answer pair it seems that the information was false. 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: White supremacy is a hoax and \"not a real problem in America.\"\n\nQ1: Has white supremacists caused more deaths than any other domestic extremist group?\nA1: Yes, because According to an unclassified intelligence bulletin from May 2017, from 2000 to 2016, white supremacists killed more people than any other domestic extremist movement. (This excludes the 9/11 terror attack)\n\nQ2: Is White Supremacy a current threat?\nA2: Yes, because At a congressional panel hearing in April 2020, FBI Director Christopher Wray stated, \"The danger, I think, of white supremacists, violent extremism or any other kind of violent extremism, is significant.\" \"We assess that it’s a persistent, pervasive threat.\"",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The sources prove the threat White supremacy imposes on lives in America.\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: Plane crashes resumed after FFK’s tenure as Minister of Aviation.\n\nQ1: When was Femi Fani Kayode's tenure as Nigerian Minister of Aviation?\nA1: 07/11/2006 to 29/05/2007\n\nQ2: Were there any plane crashes on Nigeria from 07/11/2006 to 29/05/2007?\nA2: No, because One helicopter crash but no plane crashes.\n\nQ3: When was the first plane crash in Nigeria after 29/05/2007?\nA3: • March 15, 2008, Beechcraft 1900D plane marked 5N-JAH, belonging to Wing Aviation crashed in Cross River State. The wreckage was not found until six months after. All four crewmembers died.\n\nQ4: When was the first helicopter crash in Nigeria after 29/05/2007?\nA4: August 2, 2007, Bristow-owned helicopter crashed inside ExxonMobil facility in Port Harcourt.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Confirmed (although a helicopter did crash this is not a plane).\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: There were no plane crashes during FFK’s tenure as Minister of Aviation.\n\nQ1: when was Femi Fani Kayode a Minister of Aviation?\nA1: He was Minister of Aviation from Nov 7th 2006 to May 29th 2007.\n\nQ2: How many plane crashes were there in Nigeria between November 7, 2006 and May 29 2007?\nA2: No answer could be found.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answers below do not give any evidence of plane crashes in that time period 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: Five plane crashes with a death toll of 453 were recorded the year before Femi Fani Kayode became Nigeria’s Minister of Aviation.\n\nQ1: When did Femi Fani Kayode become Nigeria’s Minister of Aviation?\nA1: Minister of Aviation from Nov 7th 2006\n\nQ2: How many airplane crashes occurred between January 1, 2005, and November 7, 2006?\nA2: Oct. 22, 2005 – A Nigerian Bellview Airlines Boeing 737 airliner crashed shortly after take-off from Lagos. All 111 passengers and six crew were killed.\n\nDec. 10, 2005 – A Nigerian Sosoliso Airlines DC9 from Abuja crashed on landing in Port Harcourt, killing 106 people, half of them schoolchildren on their way home for Christmas.\n\nSept. 17, 2006 – Twelve Nigerian military personnel, mostly high-ranking officers, were killed in a plane crash in Benue state. Six survived.\n\nOct. 29, 2006 – An ADC airliner with 114 passengers on board crashed and burned after take-off from Abuja, killing 96 people.\n\nQ3: What was the death toll in airplane crashes between January 1, 2005, and November 7, 2006?\nA3: A total of 331 lives were lost.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The question-answer pairs shows that there were more than 5 crashes and less than 453 deaths that were recorded\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: Just like Omoyele Sowore, a Nigerian human rights activist, President Muhammadu Buhari called for a revolution in 2011.\n\nQ1: Did president Buhari call for a revolution in 2011\nA1: Yes, because In 2011, General Muhammadu Buhari, the candidate of the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), called for a revolution in Nigeria. \n\nVia a statement by Yinka Odumakin, his spokesman at the time, Buhari asked Nigerians to make exceptional sacrifices to assert their collective will in the country.\n\nQ2: Do Sowore and Buhari's call for a revolution have anything in common\nA2: They both were aimed at making the Nigerian public rise up and stand against bad leadership",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: They called for a revolution for similar reasons. \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: Mental illness is main driver of mass shootings says Donald trump when talking about the shootings in Texas and Ohio that killed 31 people.\n\nQ1: Did Donald Trump say \"Mental illness is main driver of mass shootings \"?\nA1: Yes in a meeting in the White House Diplomatic room on August 5th 2019.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answer and source clearly show that Donald Trump did say the quote 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: Donald Trump said, \"Last year - 2018, we prosecuted a record number of firearms offenses.\"\n\nQ1: Is Donald Trump quoted as saying: \"Last year - 2018, we prosecuted a record number of firearms offenses.\"\nA1: Yes on Aug 5th 2019\n\nQ2: In the USA, How many people were prosecuted for firearm offenses in 2018?\nA2: In FY 2018, the Justice Department charged more than 15,300 defendants with federal firearms offenses\n\nQ3: What was the previous record for the highest amount of firearms offenses being prosecuted?\nA3: 13,062 defendants charged in fiscal year 2005",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The claim by Trump is correct, in 2018 a record number of firearms offences were prosecuted. \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: Republicans voted to allow people with pre-existing mental illness to buy firearms.\n\nQ1: Can people with mental illness buy firearms in the U.S?\nA1: The Gun Control Act (GCA), codified at 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), makes it unlawful for certain categories of persons to ship, transport, receive, or possess firearms or ammunition, to include any person:\n- who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;\n\nQ2: What is the definition of a 'mental defective' in the U.S?\nA2: A determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease:\n\nQ3: Is Donald J. Trump a member of the U.S republican party in 2019?\nA3: Donald J. Trump is a Republican party member.\n\nQ4: Did Donald trump of the republican party in the U.S oppose gun control for mental defectives?\nA4: Yes, because Trump Undid an Obama Rule That Added Mentally Ill People to Gun Check Register\n\nQ5: Was an actual vote taken to to allow people with pre-existing mental illness to buy firearms?\nA5: Yes, because Under the rule, which the Obama administration made permanent on its way out the door, Social Security beneficiaries with psychiatric disabilities who are assigned a money manager for their disability benefits would be reported to the FBI’s background check database as people ineligible to purchase firearms. \n\nHouse Republicans voted last week to eliminate the rule, and their counterparts in the Senate are expected to follow suit.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The question-answer pairs shows that not only Donald Trump voted against the rule but also House Republicans voted against the rule made by the Obama administration which makes it illegal for people with pre-existing mental illness to buy firearms \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 common theme with mass shooters is that the assailants were on psychotropic drugs.\n\nQ1: Is an increase in use of psychiatric medications is causing an increase of violence?\nA1: The problem with the argument blaming medications,however, is that though there has been a signicant increase in the use of psychiatric medications, there has not been a corresponding increase in violence. In fact, just the opposite has occurred. Violent crime has decreased dramatically.\n\nQ2: How many shooters were on psychiatric medications — or coming off them — at the time of their attacks?\nA2: The following data is drawn from the sample of 48 shooters profiled in my book School Shooters: Understanding High School, College, and Adult Perpetrators. Out of 24 secondary school shooters, only two were taking medication at the time of their attacks: Eric Harris and Jeffrey Weise. Alvaro Castillo might have been, or he may have stopped his medication within three weeks of his attack and thus still have been coming off the drug. If we include him, then 12.5% of the sample was taking medications. Put differently, over 87% of the secondary school shooters were not on psychiatric medications at the time of their attacks. Furthermore, there is no evidence that medication made Harris, Weise, or Castillo manic or psychotic. The numbers are essentially the same for the college and adult shooters.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The source links present evidence that this claim is incorrect.\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: AG William Barr Tweets Odds Of Mass Shootings In Hometowns Of 2 Democrat Presidential Candidates Are 250 Billion To 1\n\nQ1: Did Attorney General William Barr tweet that the odds were 250 Billion to 1 against mass shootings happening in the hometowns of both Democratic presidential candidates, in the same weekend ?\nA1: No, because There is no evidence that William Barr tweeted this information. The tweet was fake.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: No evidence that William Tweeted about the offs of mass shootings. \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: Geckos carry pathogenic bacteria in their mouths which are very toxic to humans.\n\nQ1: Are geckos harmful to humans?\nA1: Wild caught geckos may have different types of bacteria in their oral cavities than captive-hatched ones.\n\nThey can, however, carry potentially dangerous bacteria, protozoa or, rarely, a pathogenic fungus that can be transmitted to a human via a bite that punctures the skin.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Evidence finds conflicting evidence, where one side showcases that wild-caught geckos may have different types of bacteria in their oral cavities than captive-hatched ones. The bacteria can be potentially dangerous bacteria, protozoa, or, rarely, a pathogenic fungus that can be transmitted to a human via a bite that punctures the skin. There was also a Salmonella outbreak in 16 states that was linked to pet geckos. On the other hand, it is said that geckos are non-toxic, do not bite, and are not known to transmit any kind of infection or disease to humans.\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: Police stopped a mass shooting in Omaha, NE, in early August 2019\n\nQ1: Was there a mass shooting in Omaha, Nebraska, in August 2019?\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: What is the list of mass shootings that have happened in Omaha, Nebraska?\nA2: Dec. 5, 2007 —Omaha, Nebraska. Robert A. Hawkins killed eight people and himself using a semiautomatic rifle after entering the Westroads Mall.\n\nQ3: Where did the claim originate from?\nA3: City News\n\nQ4: When and where was the City News domain registered ?\nA4: 2019-06-14 \nGuangdong, CN\n\nQ5: Why is City News deemed to be a unreliable and inauthentic source for news based on registeration date?\nA5: Many sites will hide any personal information used in the registration process, but a WhoIs search should always return the date a site was created. If a website is much, much younger than it claims to be, the chances are that it was set up to spread fake news stories.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The only source is a China-registered website that was less than two months old at the time of the claim.\n\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: Police stopped a mass shooting in Des Moines, IA, in early August 2019\n\nQ1: Where was this claim made?\nA1: A website called City News published this article claiming that the Omaha Police Department had \"foiled a mass shooting plot by a 32-year old man.\n\nQ2: Does the Omaha Police Department have any records of this event?\nA2: No answer could be found.\n\nQ3: Is the news site legitimate?\nA3: No, because Domain records show that the City News website was registered in China last month for a period of one year — a telltale sign that the site is bogus.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The third Q&A shows that the site that published the claim is a bogus site 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 Buhari approves the creation of state police.\n\nQ1: Has President Buhari approved the creation of state police?\nA1: No, because Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari 'clearly stated' on Monday that he had not given approval for a state or local government to establish their own police force.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Denied by 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: \"in a city of almost 700,000, we had five murders the entire year. Our average over the last 10 years is 18 (murders per year). We exceeded that average just on one day\" after a gunman opened fire at a Walmart in the city.\n\nQ1: How many murders has there been in El Passo in the last 10 years?\nA1: El Paso that some years, \"in a city of almost 700,000, we had five murders the entire year. Our average over the last 10 years is 18 (murders per year). We exceeded that average just on one day\" after a gunman opened fire at a Walmart in the city.\n\nQ2: How many people were murdered in the ElPaso shooting referred to in the claim?\nA2: The death toll in the El Paso Walmart shooting has risen to 22 after two people died at a hospital.\n\nQ3: How much was the average murders in ElPaso between 2009 and 2019?\nA3: For the past ten years (2009 – 2018) El Paso has averaged sixteen (16) Murders per year. During the past\nfive years (2014 – 2018) El Paso has averaged eighteen (18) Murders per year.\n\nQ4: When did ElPaso have only 5 murders per year?\nA4: 1964 and 2010\n\nQ5: How many people lived in ElPaso in 2019?\nA5: The population on 1st of April 2020 was 678,815.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The question-answer pair does prove that the average number of murders hasn't exceeded 18 and did after after the EL Paso shooting\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: Social media videos claim that Clearblue pregnancy tests contain a type of morning-after pill called Plan B.\n\nQ1: Do Clearblue pregnancy tests contain a \"plan b \" pill?\nA1: No, Clearblue have made a notice on their website stating:\n\nWe are aware of videos circulating about Clearblue pregnancy tests and the tablet found inside.\nClearblue pregnancy tests do NOT contain Plan B.\nAll our tests contain a small desiccant tablet which is included to absorb moisture and should not be eaten.\nIf accidentally ingested please seek medical advice and for any further questions contact our careline at 1-800-321-3279\n\nQ2: What did Clearblue say about this claim\nA2: We are aware of videos about Clearblue pregnancy tests and the tablet inside. Clearblue tests do NOT contain Plan B. All our tests contain a desiccant tablet to absorb moisture",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Clearblue pregnancy tests do NOT contain Plan B.\nAll our tests contain a small desiccant tablet which is included to absorb moisture and should not be eaten.\nIf accidentally ingested please seek medical advice and for any further questions contact our careline at 1-800-321-3279\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: So far in 2019, the United States has had 249 mass shootings, while Mexico had three, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Brazil and Canada had one, and many other countries had none.\n\nQ1: What is the definition of \"mass shooting\" in the US?\nA1: According to a Congressional Research Service report dated 18/03/2013:\nThere is no broadly agreed-to, specific conceptualization of this issue, so this report uses its own definition for public mass shootings. These are incidents occurring in relatively public places,\ninvolving four or more deaths—not including the shooter(s)—and gunmen who select victims\nsomewhat indiscriminately. The violence in these cases is not a means to an end—the gunmen do\nnot pursue criminal profit or kill in the name of terrorist ideologies, for example.\n\nQ2: How does US compare to the rest of the world in connection with mass shootings?\nA2: According to a research paper written by John R Lott, Crime Prevention Research Center dated November 12, 2018:\n\nThe U.S. is well below the world average in terms of the number of mass public shootings, and the global increase over time has been much bigger than for the United States.\n\nOver the 18 years from 1998 to 2015, our list contains 2,354 attacks and at least 4,880 shooters outside the United States and 53 attacks and 57 shooters within our country. By our count, the US makes up less than 1.15% of the mass public shooters, 1.49% of their murders, and 2.20% of their attacks. All these are much less than the US’s 4.6% share of the world population. Attacks in the US are not only less frequent than other countries, but they are also much less deadly on average.\n\nQ3: What does the updated version dated August 11, 2020 of this paper state?\nA3: The U.S. is well below the world average in terms of the number of mass public shootings, and the global increase over time has been much bigger than for the United States.\n\nOver the 20 years from 1998 to 2017, our list contains 2,772 attacks and at least 5,764 shooters outside the United States and 62 attacks and 66 shooters within our country. By our count, the US makes up less than 1.13% of the mass public shooters, 1.77% of their murders, and 2.19% of their attacks. All these are much less than the US’s 4.6% share of the world population. Attacks in the US are not only less frequent than other countries, they are also much less deadly on average. Out of the 101 countries where we have identified mass public shootings occurring, the United States ranks 66th in the per capita frequency of these attacks and 56th in the murder rate.\n\nQ4: What definition is used in this paper for the term \"mass public shootings\"?\nA4: The cases here meet FBI's traditional definition of mass public shootings.\n\nQ5: What are the recorded statistics of mass shootings in the US in 2015 according to the US Gun Violence Archive?\nA5: Mass Shootings recorded as \"Number of INCIDENTS reported and verified\" in 2015 were 335.\n\nQ6: What did the Gun Violence Archive record as the number of mass shootings in 2019?\nA6: The number recorded in the archive was 417.\n\nQ7: How do other nations define \"mass shooting\"?\nA7: The Flemish Peace Institute studied mass shootings in Europe in which there were at least four deaths (not including the perpetrators) and which were not carried out in the domestic sphere or were the immediate result of purely criminal activities such as an armed robbery.\n\nQ8: Are the definitions of \"mass shooting\" from various sources/locations consistent?\nA8: No, because Different organisations will filter their data differently (excluding domestic crimes or gang violence for example) leading to variation in the definition of mass shooting.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The Q&A Pair did not Specifically ask questions about the number (249 ) of mass shootings in United States, 2019 and many other countries. There is no direct source to refute or support 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: George Washington said “It will be found an unjust and unwise jealousy to deprive a man of his natural liberty upon the supposition he may abuse it.”\n\nQ1: When was the first instance of the quote cited\nA1: The first instance was in 1650 by Oliver Cromwell\n\nQ2: Has there been a record of George Washington making the quote that has been curated by his Mount Vernon library\nA2: There is no evidence from them that he made such a statement",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: there is no evidence that George Washington ever said 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: Zomato's Sales Have Dropped By 60% In 10 Hours\n\nQ1: Did the Zomato's Sales in India drop by 60% In 10 hours ?.\nA1: We searched with various keywords like 'drop in Zomato sales', 'Zomato sales down by 60%', and 'Zomato sales' and did not find a single news articles on the same. This claim is false.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The source article shows there has been no 60% drop in sales. The answer however, is I think a quote from the fact checking article. \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: News report claims that Ghana has been named the second most corrupt country in Africa by Transparency International (TI).\n\nQ1: Which country is the most corrupt country in Africa?\nA1: Somalia.\n\nQ2: What is the second most corrupt country in Africa?\nA2: South Sudan.\n\nQ3: What rank is Ghana in terms of its overall corruption in Africa?\nA3: 41.\n\nQ4: How are countries ranked on their corruption?\nA4: The index ranks 180 countries and territories by their perceived levels of public sector corruption, according to experts and business people. It uses a scale of zero to 100, where zero is highly corrupt and 100 is very clean.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Evidence shows that Ghana rates at 41 in overall corruption in 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: Telecommunications company Airtel Nigeria is giving away 500,000 iPhones.\n\nQ1: Has the Nigerian Telecommunications company Airtel Nigeria ran a promotion where they give away free iphones?\nA1: No the \"promotion\" is a scam. When asked for comment the Airtel Nigeria's customer relations released a statement saying:\n\n“Please be informed that we currently do not have any ongoing giveaway promo on the Airtel network. Kindly disregard the information,”",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: This claim is refuted. According to the QA pair, the supposed 'iPhone giveaway' is a scam, verified by Airtel Nigeria's statement. 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: Leaves of sweet potatoes can kill cancer.\n\nQ1: Is sweet potato in the list of foods that can help fight cancer\nA1: No, because They are not part of them according to research",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The credible source does not mention the leaves of sweet potato 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: Joe Biden, whilst vice president, said the Obama administration had passed the criminal justice reform bill.\n\nQ1: Is Joe Biden quoted as saying \"the Obama administration had passed the criminal justice reform bill.\"?\nA1: what he said was:\n\n“The bill he talks about is a bill that in my — our administration, we passed. We passed that bill that you added onto. That’s the bill, in fact, you passed.”",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: In his speech, he mentioned that the bill was passed by he and Obama's administration. \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: In an op-ed, then-sen. Joe Biden wrote that he believed that women working outside the home would, quote, \"create the deterioration of family.\" He also said that women who were working outside the home were, quote, \"avoiding responsibility.\"\n\nQ1: Did Joe Biden state in an op-ed that women working outside of the home were \"avoiding responsibility\"?\nA1: No, because Joe Biden spoke on responsibility in his op-ed wen he said, \"make it easier for people who have neither the financial necessity nor personal need to forsake their responsibility to care for their own children.\"\n\nQ2: Did Joe Biden state in an op-ed that women working outside of the home would \"create the deterioration of family.\"?\nA2: No, because Although Biden spoke about the deterioration of families, He didn't specifically say 'working women' would cause the deterioration of the family.\n\nQ3: Does Joe Biden oppose women working outside the home?\nA3: No, because In July 28, 1981, Joe Biden praised his wife and said \"She is a career woman. She is very devoted to her career, and very concerned about it, and she has good reason to be, and I am proud of the fact that she has such a career,\"\n\nHowever he did add \"But it is outrageous to make my father, who makes less than $20,000 a year, to pay a tax to see to it that I can put my child in a day care center. I think that is preposterous.\"\n\nQ4: What was Joe Biden's op-ed about?\nA4: The article, written by one Joseph R. Biden, was an op-ed arguing against a tax credit that would help families pay for child care. Biden, then a senator representing Delaware, made the case that by encouraging more high-earning parents to send their kids to day care, such a tax credit would, among other things, lead to “the deterioration of the family.”",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The evidence shows the op-ed and it doesn't mention women working outside the home at all.\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: Rodrigo Duterte changed his position again on opening in-person classes amid the coronavirus 2019 pandemic.\n\nQ1: Has Rodrigo Duterte changed alternated his position on opening in-person classes amid the coronavirus 2019 pandemic?\nA1: Yes, because May 25\nThe president says it is “useless” to talk about opening of classes “unless [he is] sure that [school children] are really safe\":\n\n“I will not allow the opening of classes na magdikit-dikit iyang mga bata... Bahala na hindi na makatapos...wala nang aral. Laro na lang…Para sa akin, bakuna muna.”\n\nJune 5\nStill intent on waiting for a vaccine, Duterte announces that he is considering the proposal of the Department of Education (DepEd) to use teleconferencing as an alternative to face-to-face classes:\n\n“[I]f she (Education Secretary Leonor Briones) has [the technology] or if we can afford it, we’ll buy it and...the children can continue with their education.”\n\nQ2: Did Rodrigo Duterte changed his position again on opening in-person classes amid the coronavirus 2019 pandemic ?\nA2: Yes, The President has earlier approved the trial run of the face-to-face classes in areas considered at low risk for COVID-19. He later said I’m calling back the order and I will not allow face-to-face classes of children until we are through with this following the emergence of a more infectious variant of the coronavirus disease in the UK.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It does look like Rodrigo Duterte changed his position on classed amid the covid-19 pandemic. \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 City of New York could not proceed with the case of murder of Eric Garner because the Justice Department was pursuing its prosecution.\n\nQ1: Is there a law that prevents the city of New York making an investigation if there is a federal investigation?\nA1: No, because De Blasio also said that it was a mistake for the city to wait for federal prosecutors to finish investigating Garner’s death before the police department began disciplinary proceedings. But there is no rule requiring the NYPD to do so.\n\nQ2: Did other journalists point out that there was no legal requirement for the city of New York to not investigate if there was a federal request?\nA2: Yes, because Nolan Hicks of the New York Post tweeted: 'There was nothing that prevented the de Blasio administration legally from bringing the administrative charges against Daniel Pantaleo while waiting on the Justice Department. City Hall says they held off on the Justice Department's behest.'\n\nQ3: Did the federal prosecutors refuse to take the case of murder of Eric Garner because the Justice Department was pursuing their prosecution ?\nA3: The NYPD could have started those proceedings years ago. In fact, it did start that process well before the Justice Department closed its civil rights investigation this year with no charges. The NYPD’s delay had a material effect, because it meant more requirements for prosecutors seeking to prove Pantaleo’s culpability.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: There not exists a law that prevents the city of New York making an investigation if there is a federal investigation.\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: Companies like Amazon that made billions in profits did not pay one nickel in federal income tax\n\nQ1: How much federal income tax does Amazon pay?\nA1: The tax rate for Amazon from 2012 through 2018 was 8 percent and since 2002 they have paid $3.6 billion.\n\nQ2: How much profit does Amazon make?\nA2: Since 2002, Amazon has earned $27.7 billion in global pretax profits.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answers proved the profits Amazon made and the amount of federal income tax they paid.\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: As governor of Colorado, John Hickenlooper created the No. 1 economy in the country.\n\nQ1: How long was Hickenlooper Governor of Colorado?\nA1: Hickenlooper’s eight years in office.\n\nQ2: Who published Colorado's economy ranking? and where did Colorado place in 2019?\nA2: CNBC ranked Colorado’s economy in fifth place among all states in 2019",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Colorado was ranked 5th in economy not 1st. \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: After Aurora in 2012, the Colorado governor passed tougher gun control laws.\n\nQ1: What happened in Aurora in 2012\nA1: A mass shooting in a theatre occurred\n\nQ2: Who was the Governor of Colorado in 2012\nA2: Governor John Hickenlooper\n\nQ3: Did Colorado have gun control laws before 2012\nA3: No answer could be found.\n\nQ4: Did gun sales go up after Aurora event in 2012\nA4: Yes, because Firearms sales are surging in the wake of the Colorado movie theater massacre",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The question-answer pairs make it quite difficult for the claim to be answere. The answers are quite short, and while they are related to the claim, it is impossible to deduce whether the governor actually pass the law. For this question 3 seems quite useful.\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: 500,000 Americans are sleeping out on the street\n\nQ1: What date was this claim made?\nA1: 30/07/2019\n\nQ2: What was this claim based on?\nA2: A point-in-time survey carried out in Jan 2018.\n\nQ3: What were the results of the PIT survey of homelessness in the USA carried out in Jan 2018?\nA3: On a single night in 2018, roughly 553,000 people\nwere experiencing homelessness in the United\nStates. About two-thirds (65%) were staying in\nsheltered locations—emergency shelters or transitional\nhousing programs—and about one-third (35%) were\nin unsheltered locations such as on the street, in\nabandoned buildings, or in other places not suitable for\nhuman habitation.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It was one-third out of over 500,000 homeless people that were out on the streets, the other two-thirds were in sheltered locations \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 1988 Bernie Sanders lost an election because he called for the ban of the sale and distribution of assault weapons.\n\nQ1: Did Bernie Sanders run for election in 1988?\nA1: In 1988, when Sanders was mayor of Burlington, he first ran for the House\n\nQ2: Did Bernie Sanders lose his 1988 run for the house?\nA2: In 1988 he lost.\n\nQ3: What does he state as the likely reason he lost his 1988 run for election?\nA3: “In 1988, I lost an election because I said we should not have assault weapons on the streets of America.”\n\nQ4: Does he support a ban on the sale and distribution of assault weapons?\nA4: I do believe that we need to ban certain types of assault weapons. Bernie said.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Bernie Saunders is directly quoted as claiming that and did call for a ban on assault weapons.\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: Pinning Down Prescription Drug Prices\n\nQ1: What or who wants to 'pin down Prescription Drug Prices'?\nA1: It is the shared aim of the U.S president and his Democratic 2020 election challengers.\n\nQ2: Did U.S president Trump want to bring down the price of prescription drugs?\nA2: Yes, because Trump declared that cutting drug prices was a top priority for him.\n\nQ3: Did the U.S democrat party want to bring down prescription drug prices.\nA3: Yes, because For years, congressional Democrats have tried to pass legislation to allow Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices for millions of beneficiaries.\n\nU.S. Reps. Elijah Cummings (Democrat.) and Peter Welch (Democrat.) met privately for about an hour with Trump and his newly appointed HHS secretary, Tom Price, to discuss ways to combat high drug prices.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Correct\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: 87 million Americans are uninsured or underinsured\n\nQ1: Where did this figure come from?\nA1: Sanders is quoting from a 2019 report from the Commonwealth Fund. The report said that the number of people who are uninsured — 24 million — had declined since the passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, but that more people are “underinsured.”\n\nQ2: What does underinsured mean?\nA2: That term refers to out-of-pocket costs that exceed 10 percent of income (or 5 percent of income if low-income, as well as deductible that were more than 5 percent of income. It also covers people who may have had a gap in insurance coverage.\n\nQ3: How many total are underinsured?\nA3: 63.1 million people which includes 43.8 million people had insurance but were underinsured, while 19.3 million people had a coverage gap.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: When the uninsured and underinsured figures are added they support 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: Albert Einstein once said, “Art is standing with one hand extended into the universe and one hand extended into the world, and letting ourselves be a conduit for passing energy.”\n\nQ1: Can the phrase \"one hand extended into the world\" be found in the Einstein Archives Online?\nA1: No, because Page shows a negative result from the search of the online archive.\n\nQ2: Can the phrase \"one hand extended into the world\" be found in 'The Ultimate Quotable Einstein'?\nA2: No, because Page shows a negative result from the search of 'The Ultimate Quotable Einstein'.\n\nQ3: Where does the quote \"Art is standing with one hand extended into the universe and one hand extended into the world and letting ourselves be a conduit for passing energy\" come from?\nA3: The quote may be from Christina Baldwin's 1990 book, Life’s Companion: Journal Writing as a Spiritual Quest, where a quote says, \"Spiritual love is a position of standing with one hand extended into the universe and one hand extended into the world, letting ourselves be a conduit for passing energy.\"\n\nQ4: Did Albert Einstein say \"Art is standing with one hand extended into the universe and one hand extended into the world, and letting ourselves be a conduit for passing energy\"?\nA4: There is no substantive evidence that Einstein made this statement. It is not listed in the 2010 book “The Ultimate Quotable Einstein” which is a comprehensive reference about the physicist’s pronouncements from Princeton University Press.[1]",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: There's enough here to refute the claim but the source for Q3&4 might be considered fact checking material.\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 health-care industry made $100 billion in profits last year\n\nQ1: How much profit did the Health care industry make in 2018?\nA1: AM Best - Profits rose 19 percent to nearly $26 billion through the third quarter of 2018, compared to the same prior-year period.\n\nQ2: Were there any other reports of how much profit was made?\nA2: Yes- The national Association of Insurance Commissioners said - it experienced\na significant increase in net earnings to $23.4 billion\n\nQ3: In the Sanders statement correct in stating that health-care industry made $100 billion in profits last year during the second debate of the Democratic primary season ?\nA3: Yes, Sanders is correct: The total net revenues, or profits, these companies posted in 2018 comes to just more than $100 billion — $100.96 billion, in fact",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: the total profit was over 100 billion last year\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: Pro-Kremlin Pundit Blames Demonstrators for Police Crackdown on Moscow Protest\n\nQ1: Which protest does the claim refer to?\nA1: A July 27th Protest in Moscow over barring independents from opposition candidates from city council elections.\n\nQ2: Did the police arrest unruly protestors at the protest?\nA2: Police started arresting even before protest began!\n\nQ3: Was the protest largely peaceful?\nA3: Moscow police set an ominous record on July 27, 2019 by arbitrarily detaining at least 1,373 people, including about 25 children, during peaceful protests, Human Rights Watch said\n\nQ4: What is a pundit?\nA4: A person who knows a lot about a particular subject and is therefore often asked to give an opinion about it: \n\n- \"a political/foreign-policy/sports pundit\"\n\nQ5: What were demonstrators blamed for?\nA5: 29/07/2019 - An article by Alexey Martynov, Political scientist and director of the International Institute of Newly-Established States discussed the \"riots in Moscow\" - \"about the failure of some self-proclaimed oppositionists to enter the election race for the post of city deputies of the capital's parliament.\" - \"So. This event is nothing more than an attempt to organize mass riots in the center of Moscow with a provocation of law enforcement agencies for a harsh reaction, following the example of their colleagues from Paris or New York, where in such circumstances no one stands on ceremony with violators of public order.\" - \"So, an attempt to organize mass riots in Moscow with a provocation to the extremely harsh reaction of law enforcement officers failed. Of the 3,500 participants in the performance, there were about 800 journalists from various publications and bloggers who notified the police in advance of their desire to cover the scandalous event.\"\n\nQ6: Is Alexey Martynov a 'pundit'?\nA6: Yes, because He's referenced as a \"Political Expert\" or Political Scientist on different news articles, such as the News Agency Novosti Pridnestrovya that quote him as a \"Political Expert.\" This satisfies the definition for \"Pundit.\"\n\nQ7: Were demonstrators blamed for a Police Crackdown on the Moscow Protest, by a pundit?\nA7: Yes, because Alexey Martynov, Political scientist said the protest was an \"attempt to organize mass riots in the center of Moscow with a provocation of law enforcement agencies for a harsh reaction\"",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It's right there in the article written by Alexey Martynov.\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 Nationals party, represents the poorest electorates in Australia.\n\nQ1: What do they mean by \"Poorest\"?\nA1: Two data sets measure the poverty line and disadvantage by federal electorate both\n\nQ2: Which are the worst off electorates?\nA2: The three worst off electorates on both of these measures, Fowler, Blaxland and Spence, are all represented by the Labor Party.\n\nQ3: On average are the electorates represented by Nationals worse off?\nA3: Yes, because Two data sets measuring the poverty line and disadvantage by federal electorate both show that electorates represented by the Nationals are on average worse off than those represented by the Labor and Liberal parties.\n\nQ4: Does that mean that The Nationals party, represents the poorest electorates in Australia?\nA4: No, because further analysis which estimates the worst off 5 per cent of electorates held by the Nationals, Labor and the Liberal Party shows the Nationals and Labor with similar results for poverty and disadvantage, making the picture less clear.\n\nMinor parties such as the Greens were not included in this analysis as each minor party only represents a single electorate; a statistician told Fact Check that a comparison cannot be made using one data point against parties that hold many more electorates.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Q&A 4 shows that whilst they do represent some of the poorest they average out about the same as other party's for disadvantaged electorate, so some cherry-picking of data\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: Ancient Roman politician Marcus Tullius Cicero once said, “The Budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced.”\n\nQ1: What has Marcus Tullius Cicero said about budget, treasury and debt?\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: Who said: “The Budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced.”\nA2: This is a quote from a book called \"A Pillar of Iron\" by Taylor Caldwell",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Quote is attributed to a book by Taylor Caldwell.\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: Hitesh Mulchandani was burnt to death.\n\nQ1: how did hitesh mulchandani die\nA1: hitesh mulchandani was allegedly abducted and mercilessly killed in Pimpri following a spat with a gang of criminals who were urinating outside a hotel near Pimpri railway station in wee hours of Tuesday.\n\nThe victim was identified as Hitesh Govardhan Mulchandani (24) a resident of Pimpri Camp.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The source shows that the person was murdered but was not burnt to death 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: A 24 year old Indian Hindu man Hitesh Mulchandani in the city of Pune was murdered by a Muslim gang for raising his voice against public urination.\n\nQ1: Was the murder of Hitesh Mulchandani in the city of Pune India, carried out by Muslim gang ?\nA1: Pimpri Inspector Kalyan Pawar said, “The accused are on record criminals who have killed Hitesh over a spat. Amin was handed over to us by the hotel staff. However the others are absconding while we have launched a hunt to trace them.”\n\nQ2: Does the murder of Hitesh Mulchandani in the city of Pune India, has any religious inclination ?\nA2: A youth was allegedly abducted and mercilessly killed in Pimpri following a spat with a gang of criminals who were urinating outside a hotel near Pimpri railway station in wee hours of Tuesday.\n\nThe victim was identified as Hitesh Govardhan Mulchandani (24) a resident of Pimpri Camp.\n\nThe accused were identified as Amin Khan of Mominpura, Shahbaaz Qureshi of Kasarwadi, Arbaaz Sheikh of Khadki, Akshay Bhosale alias Linga of Sangvi and one Langda of Sangvi.\n\nThe Pimpri police said that five accused came at Krunal Bar and Restaurant at Radhika Chowk near Pimpri railway station. The accused had reportedly come there for drinks.\n\nOne of the accused identified as Amin Khan was allegedly urinating outside the hotel when the hotel staff objected.\n\nThe police added that the objection of the hotel staff led to a huge spat between Amin and the staffers\n\nThe police further said the hotel owner Rohit Sukheja arrived there with his friends including Hitesh Mulchandani. Hitesh tried to bring peace between the groups however it fired back at him.\n\nWhen Rohit’s friend, Sahil Lalwani intervened to stop Amin, he allegedly got into fisticuffs. Amin also allegedly broke a bottle of beer on the head of another friend of Kailash Patil and injured him.\n\nQ3: what is india's stand on public urination\nA3: Any person who, on any road or in any open place or street or thoroughfare within the limits of any town to which this section shall be specially extended by the State Government, commits any of the following offences, to the obstructions inconvenience, annoyance, risk, danger or damage of the residents or passengers shall, on conviction before a Magistrate, be liable to fine not exceeding fifty rupees, or to imprisonment with or without hard labor not exceeding eight days;”",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: There is no information about the religion of the gang. Nor the reason that they murdered the man. They were alledged to be urinating but there is no mention as to whether anyone challenged them about this. \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: More than half of death row prisoners are people of color\n\nQ1: what is the percentile distribution of those in death sentence\nA1: White -- 27 (43.5%)\n\nBlack -- 26 (41.9%)\n\nLatino -- 7 (11.3%)\n\nNative American -- 1 (1.6%) \n\nAsian -- 1 (1.6%)\n\nQ2: what does person of color define ?\nA2: a person who is not a white person.\n\nQ3: What is a 'white person'?\nA3: White is a category for everyone\nleft out of specific racial or ethnic groups.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It is evidently clear from the source provided More than half of death row prisoners are people of color. If you sum up all the non white death row prisoners. \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: Robert S Mueller's investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election took over 2 years and cost over £25 million.\n\nQ1: What date did the investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election start?\nA1: In July 2016, the FBI began investigating the Russian government’s attempt to influence the 2016 presidential election,\n\nQ2: When did the Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election conclude?\nA2: March 2019\n\nQ3: What is the Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 U.S Presidential Election commonly called?\nA3: The Mueller report\n\nQ4: How much did The Mueller\nreport cost?\nA4: Mueller Probe Cost $25 Million",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The investigation did cost $26 million\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: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took two billion dollars from Canada’s retirement fund in order to give it to housing projects in India.\n\nQ1: Did Prime Minister Justin Trudeau take two billion dollars from Canada’s retirement fund in order to give it to housing projects in India?\nA1: No, Justin Trudeau did not direct Canada’s pension fund investments to India",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Q&A pair state that the claim did not happen in any way.\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: Robert S Mueller can't provide evidence that his investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election reached a conclusion.\n\nQ1: Who is Robert S Mueller?\nA1: He is former FBI director and named special counsel for Russia investigation\n\nQ2: What is the investigation into Russia’s interference?\nA2: The Russian investigation was investigating Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election.\n\nQ3: Did the Mueller Report reach a conclusion?\nA3: on January 6, 2017, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence released a report concluding that “Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election”, that the goal of this campaign was “to undermine public faith in the US democratic process”, and that “Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump”;",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The evidence below suggests that evidence was concluded on the investigation of Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election.\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 European Union asked for a 100 billion euro settlement for the UK to leave the EU.\n\nQ1: What is the latest estimate for the UK's divorce bill upon leaving the EU?\nA1: Based on our March forecast, but assuming a 31 October 2019 exit date, the financial\nsettlement would be €36.3 billion, or £32.8 billion, with the remaining £5.0 billion\ndifference being paid as part of the UK’s normal membership contributions to the EU.\n\nQ2: What is a Brexit divorce bill?\nA2: In the financial settlement (the settlement), the UK and EU have set out how they will\nsettle their outstanding financial obligations to each other. The obligations arise out of the\nUK’s participation in the EU Budget and broader aspects of its EU membership.\nThe settlement says which financial commitments will be covered, the methodology for\ncalculating the UK’s share and the payment schedule. The settlement is part of the\nWithdrawal Agreement, which is the legally binding treaty setting out the negotiated\nterms of the UK’s departure from the EU.\nThere is no definitive cost to the settlement. The final cost to the UK will depend on future\nevents such as future exchange rates and EU budgets. The Office for Budget Responsibility\nestimate that the net cost to the UK may be £34 billion.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Numbers suggest the amount in QA pairs was around 1/3 of amount stated in 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: An exercise being done in a video can cure heart blockage and back pain in 7 days\n\nQ1: Can clapping your hand 9 times cure heart blockage\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: Health benefits of cupping and curing heart diseases\nA2: Cupping helps reduce anxiety among other things but does not help in curing heart blockages",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Does not aid with heart blockages.\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: India’s Debt From The World Bank Reduced To Zero Under PM Narendra Modi in July 2019.\n\nQ1: Does the World Bank offer loans to countries of the world?\nA1: Yes, because The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) lends to governments of middle-income and creditworthy low-income countries.\n\nQ2: Did India have any loans with the IBRD in July 2019?\nA2: Data is only available for 26/10/2017\n\nQ3: Did India have any loans with the World Bank in 2019?\nA3: No answer could be found.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: There's no evidence to support or refute the claim that India borrowed money or that it was paid back\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: President Trump fully co-operated with the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S presidential campaign.\n\nQ1: What was the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S presidential campaign called?\nA1: The Mueller Report.\n\nQ2: What is the Mueller Report?\nA2: The report is a summation of the findings from the special counsel investigation. It is expected to contain the details of the investigation, from its interviews with key witnesses and other evidence amassed throughout the process and the Mueller team’s conclusions – or lack thereof.\n\nIn a letter to lawmakers, Attorney General William Barr said the report “sets forth the Special Counsel’s findings, analysis and the reasons for his conclusions.” \n\nMueller was appointed in May 2017 shortly after Trump fired Comey. Mueller was authorized to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election, whether any Trump associates coordinated or colluded with the Russians, whether Trump obstructed the investigation and any other crimes that were uncovered during the investigation.\n\nQ3: Did Donald Trump act in good faith when being investigated?\nA3: Trump consistently denied that he or anyone on his team colluded with Russia to interfere in the election, and he has rejected further the intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia attempted to interfere in the election at all, including while standing next to Russian President Vladimir Putin shortly after Mueller’s appointment. He likewise denied the possibility he had obstructed justice.\n\nThroughout the process, Trump railed against Mueller and Mueller’s team, accusing them of political bias and maligning both the intelligence community and Justice Department more broadly.\n\nQ4: What did the Mueller report discover about Donald Trumps role in the Russian interference of the 2016 U.S presidential campaign?\nA4: Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations,” Mueller wrote. “The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General’s recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Mueller said “If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment.”\nClearly this is not \"full cooperation\".\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: Robert Mueller applied and was interviewed for the job of FBI director the day before he was appointed Special Counsel.\n\nQ1: What did Robert Mueller go to the Whitehouse for on May 16 2017?\nA1: He was there to 'give advice on the type of person that we should select to be FBI director'",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: He was there to 'give advice on the type of person that we should select to be FBI director'\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 Trump campaign welcomed and made full use of Russian intervention in the 2016 U.S presidential election.\n\nQ1: How did Russia intervene in USA 2016 presidential elections?\nA1: The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and\nsystematic fashion. Evidence of Russian government operations began to surface in mid-2016. In\nJune, the Democratic National Committee and its cyber response team publicly announced that\nRussian hackers had compromised its computer network. Releases of hacked materials—hacks\nthat public reporting soon attributed to the Russian government—began that same month.\nAdditional releases followed in July through the organization WikiLeaks, with further releases in\nOctober and November\n\nQ2: Did Russian government contact Trump Campaign to offer assistance during the 2016 presidential campaign?\nA2: The investigation established multiple links between Trump Campaign officials and\nindividuals tied to the Russian government. Those links included Russian offers of assistance to\nthe Campaign.\n\nQ3: Did Trump's Campaign accept the Russian offers of assistance?\nA3: In some instances, the Campaign was receptive to the offer, while in other instances\nthe Campaign officials shied away. Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the\nCampaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference\nactivities.\n\nQ4: What did the investigation conclude?\nA4: In sum, the investigation established multiple links between Trump Campaign officials and\nindividuals tied to the Russian government. Those links included Russian offers of assistance to\nthe Campaign. In some instances, the Campaign was receptive to the offer, while in other instances\nthe Campaign officials shied away. Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the\nCampaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference\nactivities",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The investigation into the matter could not prove that the\nCampaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference\nactivities \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
Subsets and Splits