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: US President Donald Trump says four hundred miles of wall are getting built along the US-Mexico border.\n\nQ1: How many miles of border wall did Trump build?\nA1: Officials say the construction starting in February is only part of the picture. Funding from fiscal year 2018, they say, also covers the cost of building 70 more miles of barriers – about 57 miles of which is replacement fencing.\n\nAnd if the Trump administration’s proposal for $5.7 billion more for a border wall is approved, officials say they’ll be able to build 234 miles of new and replacement barriers – about 100 miles of which will cover parts of the border that didn’t have a barrier before.\n\nBut given that a partial government shutdown over the wall is already in its fifth week, whether that work will happen – and exactly what will happen next – is anybody’s guess.\n\nQ2: Is there a construction of four hundred miles of wall by Trump on the Mexico border ?\nA2: A few prototypes were built in 2017, and over 100 miles of existing barriers have been, or are slated to be, repaired or replaced.\nU.S. Customs and Border Protection said about 205 miles of new and replacement barriers have been funded since January 2017, and as of May 23, work had been completed on 42 miles of replacement fencing in California, Texas and Arizona.\n\nA few prototypes with different designs were built in San Diego in 2017 and tested, but they have been demolished to make way for fencing. U.S. Customs and Border Protection has said the prototypes could “inform future border wall design standards in some capacity.”\n\nQ3: How much did Trump's border wall cost?\nA3: President Donald Trump’s “wall” along the U.S.-Mexico border would be a series of fences and walls that would cost as much as $21.6 billion, and take more than three years to construct, based on a U.S. Department of Homeland Security internal report seen by Reuters on Thursday.\n\nQ4: Are four hundred miles of wall getting built along the US-Mexico border in 2019?\nA4: No answer could be found.\n\nQ5: When was this claim made?\nA5: 08/05/2019\n\nQ6: How many miles does the U.S.-Mexico border span as of 2019?\nA6: 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border\n\nQ7: How many miles of the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border are fenced as of 2019?\nA7: Today’s walls and fences already cover 700 miles\n\nQ8: How many miles has the Trump administration secured funding for the U.S.-Mexico border?\nA8: No answer could be found.\n\nQ9: How many miles does the Trump administration want to add to the U.S.-Mexico border?\nA9: No answer could be found.\n\nQ10: How much of the U.S.-Mexico border has the Trump administration built so far?\nA10: No answer could be found.\n\nQ11: Where is Trump's border wall being built?\nA11: If you consider the barrier projects built recently to be \"border walls,\" here are some of the locations: \n\nIn April, the Border Patrol began construction of a \"border wall\" near El Paso at Santa Teresa, N.M. During a press conference, Aaron Hull, Chief Patrol Agent of the U.S. Border Patrol in El Paso sector, mostly referred to the project as the wall, sometimes calling it \"fence\" but quickly correcting himself. Hull said the metal barrier was the same design as others from the 2006 Secure Fence Act. The new barrier replaced existing metal posts which were designed only to block vehicles. \nIn September, the Border Patrol announced construction of \"a new 4-mile section of bollard wall\" in the historic Chihuahuita neighborhood in El Paso. The new bollards replaced existing chain-link fencing.\nIn October, border officials marked the completion of 2 miles of barriers near Calexico, Calif. Crews had replaced older metal fencing with new, 30-foot steel bollards, a project identified as a priority and funded under President Barack Obama.\nIn November, Customs and Border Protection officials announced a contract for about 6 miles of \"wall system\" in the Rio Grande Valley. The project is supposed to include a concrete levee wall \"to the height of the existing levee\" with 18-foot bollards on top. That barrier is not being built yet; it's set to be started in February.\nNone of those barriers look like the wall prototypes built near San Diego, which Trump visited and praised earlier this year.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Based on the statistics provided in the QA pairs, less than 400 miles of wall are getting built under the administration of 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: Texas leads in the number of Confederate monuments removed from public land.\n\nQ1: What state is leading the confederate monuments removal charge\nA1: Texas leads nation in Confederate symbols removed since 2015",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Texas was a Confederate state through and through (in the past). Thirty-one Confederate symbols have been removed in Texas since 2015, more than twice as many as in any other state, according to a Southern Poverty Law Center report in the source. \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: 7,182 students have been killed in U.S. schools since 2012\n\nQ1: How many children have been killed by gun violence in US schools since the massacre at Sandy Hook in December 2012?\nA1: 170 deaths from 2013 to the end of 2018, but that includes all victims killed on school grounds, including school employees and people unrelated to the school. It also includes shootings that occurred on school property when school is not in session, including at night.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The Questions only ask about gun violence, where as the claim does not specify a means of death. However the figures in the answers are below 200 and therefore make it unlikely that 7000 non shooting deaths occurred in the time period. \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: Puerto Rico has been given $91 billion by US congress for Hurricane Disaster Relief in March 2019\n\nQ1: How much money has been allocated to the Puerto Rico Hurricane Disaster Relief?\nA1: $41 billion in funding it has been allocated by federal authorities.\n\nQ2: How much money has the Puerto Rico Hurricane Disaster Relief received from the allocated 41 billion?\nA2: Puerto Rico has received $11 billion",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Evidence in the answers suggests that only $41 billion was allocated to Puerto Rico and of that only $11 billion was given. \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: 70% of Americans in poverty are white.\n\nQ1: In the latest official poverty report (2017)how many non-Hispanic whites are in Poverty?\nA1: Non-Hispanic\nWhites accounted for 60.5 percent\nof the total population and 42.8\npercent of the people in poverty in\n2017",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The question uses non-Hispanic white which seems to indicate white population. the numbers in answers do not corelate to 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: Ilhan Omar said If Israel Is So Innocent, Then Why Do They Insist On Being Jews?\n\nQ1: Did Ilhan Omar say: 'If Israel Is So Innocent, Then Why Do They Insist On Being Jews?'\nA1: No the story is from a satire news website Babylonbee.com with disclaimer: The Babylon Bee is the world’s best satire site, totally inerrant in all its truth claims. We write satire about Christian stuff, political stuff, and everyday life.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Claim comes from a satire site. \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 South African freedom fighter, Solomon Mahlangu, was killed by the man who started the Democratic Alliance (DA), the country's official opposition.\n\nQ1: What was Solomon Mahlangu's cause of death?\nA1: Cause of death by hanging.\n\nQ2: Why was Solomon Mahlangu killed?\nA2: On June 11 1977 he returned to South Africa as a cadre, heavily armed, through Swaziland.\n\nTwo days later Mahlangu and his companions, Mondy Johannes Motloung and George \"Lucky\" Mahlangu, were confronted by police in Goch Street, Johannesburg. \"Lucky\" Mahlangu managed to escape. In the ensuing gun battle two civilians were killed and two wounded. Solomon Mahlangu and Motloung were arrested.\n\nMotloung was found to be unfit to stand trial after his brutal police interrogation. Mahlangu was sentenced to death by hanging under the Terrorism Act.\n\nQ3: Who sentenced Solomon Mahlangu to death?\nA3: Judge CDJ Theron\n\nQ4: Was the Democratic Alliance (DA) involved in Solomon Mahlangu's death?\nA4: No, because Ramon Leon died last week and, in the days that followed, was wrongly reported, including by the Mail & Guardian, as having played a role in the hanging of the more famous struggle hero, Solomon Mahlangu — first as the trial judge and then in an appellate capacity. In truth he had nothing to do with Mahlangu’s case — he never sat, even as an acting judge, on the Appellate Division, said two senior judges.\n\nQ5: Who is the leader of the Democratic Alliance (DA)?\nA5: Tony Leon, leader of the Democratic Alliance. As of 2005, they are still the official opposition party in the South African Government.\n\nQ6: Are Ramon Leon and Tony Leon related?\nA6: Ramon Leon is Tony Leon's father.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The head of the Democratic Alliance (DA) has nothing to do with the death sentence that killed Solomon Mahlangu.\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 2010, U.S. Rep Maxine Waters steered $12 million in Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds to her husband’s private bank account. She was indicted but served no time\n\nQ1: When was US Rep Maxine Walters cleared of any charges relating to the claim that she steered $12 million in Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds to her husband’s private bank account?\nA1: September 21, 2012\nA House ethics panel has determined there is no evidence that Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) violated congressional rules when she called Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson in 2008 on behalf of minority-owned banks, despite her husband’s financial stake in one troubled institution.\n\nQ2: Was Maxine Waters indicted for steering TARP money to her husband's private bank account?\nA2: On Tuesday, the House Ethics Committee issued its final report in the case. Waters will not be charged with any violations of House ethics rules.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The Q and As show that Waters was not indicted 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: American daily 'The Washington Post' published a cartoon making fun of Congress president Rahul Gandhi\n\nQ1: Is this the original cartoon?\nA1: No the original illustration was part of the Buzzfeed comics\n\nQ2: Was this specific illustration on this website or the original artists social media page?\nA2: No, it could not be found. So it shows it was photoshopped.\n\nQ3: Do searches of the washington post show the cartoon was published in there?\nA3: Nothing can be found\n\nQ4: Was the original cartoon publiheein the Washington post?\nA4: No, because It was published on buzzfeed\n\nQ5: Was the comic about Rahul Gandhi?\nA5: No answer could be found.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Evidence finds that Buzzfeed Comics published the cartoon, not The Washington Post. However, there is no proof of what the cartoon depicted. Was it Congress President Rahul Gandhi? or someone different? or of a completely different topic?\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: If the Congress Party comes to power in India, then it will waive off the entire bill of patients who die in any government or private hospital.\n\nQ1: Who pays when someone dies in an Indian hospital?\nA1: If the kin refuse to pay the medical bill, the hospital can later register a court case against the relatives or friends who brought the patient to the hospital,\" said criminal lawyer Shyam Keshwani.\n\nQ2: Have congress in India stated what their poll promises for healthcare are in their manifesto?\nA2: Their manifesto States that full healthcare is the right of every citizen, the Congress manifesto has promised that the total government expenditure on healthcare will be doubled to 3 per cent of GDP by 2023-24. The party has also promised to enact the Right to Healthcare Act that will guarantee the right to healthcare services, including free diagnostics, out-patient care, medicines and hospitalisation through a network of public hospitals and enlisted private hospitals, to every citizen.\nNo mention is made of dying patients.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The party manifesto only mentions free health care, medicines and others but nothing about waiving the bills\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: Nelson Mandela said\n'When a woman rejects a man of vision, and accept [sic] a man with television, she will end up watching the man of vision on her own husband's television,” it reads.\n\n “Don't judge a man by his pocket but judge him by his vision. Because where a man is going in life is more important than his present condition.”\n\nQ1: Is Nelson mandela quoted as saying: 'When a woman rejects a man of vision, and accept [sic] a man with television, she will end up watching the man of vision on her own husband's television,” it reads. “Don't judge a man by his pocket but judge him by his vision. Because where a man is going in life is more important than his present condition.”?\nA1: No, because No these quotes do not appear in his archive and have been refuted by The Nelson Mandela Foundation.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Seems from the question and answer pairs that the claim is refuted\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: US Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke ordered a special flag to be raised whenever he entered the building.\n\nQ1: Where was the report made\nA1: After taking over the Interior Department last year, Secretary Ryan Zinke decided to revive an arcane, military flag-flying ritual at the department. The Washington Post reported\n\nQ2: When were special flags flown in the ministry of interior\nA2: A special “secretarial flag,” which is emblazoned with the agency’s bison seal and flanked by seven white stars, is flown whenever Zinke enters the building. The flag then comes down whenever Zinke leaves",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Based on the claim's sources special flag were raised, therefore the claim is true. \n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Nigeria has the highest number of out-of-school children in sub-Saharan Africa.\n\nQ1: How many children are out-of-school in Nigeria?\nA1: Nigeria is home to over 10 million out-of-school children, around half of whom are girls - and it is hardly coincidental that the country with the world’s highest number of out-of-school children is home to the highest number of people living in extreme poverty.\n\nQ2: Which Sub-Saharan country has the most children not attending school, according to recent data?\nA2: Nigeria has the highest rate of children not attending school.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Confirmed in 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: DEMOCRACY IS TWO WOLVES AND A LAMB VOTING ON WHAT TO HAVE FOR LUNCH - BEN FRANKLIN\n\nQ1: What did Benjamin Franklin say about democracy allegedly ?\nA1: Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.\"\n\nQ2: Is there a proven record where BEN FRANKLIN said ''DEMOCRACY IS TWO WOLVES AND A LAMB VOTING ON WHAT TO HAVE FOR LUNCH''\nA2: Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.\n\nQ3: Who was Benjamin Franklin?\nA3: Benjamin Franklin was America’s scientist, inventor, politician, philanthropist and business man. He is best known as the only Founding Father who signed all three documents that freed America from Britain. Franklin is credited with drafting the Declaration of Independence and the American Constitution. He also negotiated the Treaty of Paris which ended the Independence War against Britain.\n\nQ4: What's the name of the archive listing all of the sayings by the founding fathers?\nA4: Founders Online. CORRESPONDENCE AND OTHER WRITINGS OF SEVEN MAJOR SHAPERS OF THE UNITED STATES:\nGeorge Washington, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams (and family), Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison. Over 185,000 searchable documents, fully annotated, from the authoritative Founding Fathers Papers projects.\n\nQ5: What's the result of researching the quote \"DEMOCRACY IS TWO WOLVES AND A LAMB VOTING ON WHAT TO HAVE FOR LUNCH\" through the Founders online archive?\nA5: No results were found.\n\nQ6: Is there any mention of the quote \"DEMOCRACY IS TWO WOLVES AND A LAMB VOTING ON WHAT TO HAVE FOR LUNCH\" in Benjamin Franklin's writings?\nA6: No answer could be found.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: the answers do not provide enough evidence to confirm or refute whether this was actually said by ben franklin or not \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: Boy died due to birthday bumps\n\nQ1: Is the boy in the video still alive?\nA1: Yes, because The evidence is only available in metadata. No external evidence\n\nQ2: Has a boy in India died due to birthday bumps?\nA2: It is known that the boy is still alive.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Based on information provided, the boy in question is still alive \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: More than 10.2 million children are out of school in Nigeria.\n\nQ1: What is the most recent statistic used for this study\nA1: Data from the UNESCO institute of statistics\n\nQ2: According to the data, what is the number of out of school children in Nigeria\nA2: 8, 615, 770\n\nQ3: What is the most recent statistic used for this study?\nA3: Data from the UNESCO institute of statistics\n\nQ4: According to the data, what is the number of out of school children in Nigeria?\nA4: 8,615,770",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Q&A 2 shows that the figure for children out of school in Nigeria is around 8.6 million not the 10.2 claimed.\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: William Barr, the US Attorney General's testimony lacked context in investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign.\n\nQ1: What did William Barr say about the Mueller investigation\nA1: There are reports that Trump tried to fire Mueller but William Barr went with the narrative that there were other plausible reasons why Trump would've wanted that\n\nQ2: What did the national papers report on the Mueller report?\nA2: Mueller: Barr's summary of report did not capture 'context, nature, and substance' of Russia probe",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Q&A 2 does agree with the claim by showing the investigator himself said Barr's testimony lacked context as the claim states.\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: Attorney General William Barr misled Congress when asked if he was aware of concerns that special counsel Robert S. Mueller’s team may have had with his March 24 memo summarizing the Mueller report\n\nQ1: Was William Barr aware of concerns raised about his summary of the Mueller report?\nA1: yes , he was aware of concerns raised.\n\nQ2: Did William Barr mislead congress about his knowledge of the concerns?\nA2: William Barr may have misled congress. But it is debateable whether he did this deliberately or not.\n\nQ3: Was William Barr aware of concerns raised by Robert Mueller on March 27 2019, about Barr's summary of the Mueller report?\nA3: Barr received a letter from Mueller dated March 27 2019, stating that Barr “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions.” So Barr was aware of concerns raised.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The second answer does specify there is not enough evidence to say whether William Barr deliberately misled congress.\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: A Facebook meme claims five House Republicans voted with Democrats to create a “firearms registry.”\n\nQ1: Is the United states allowed to create a gun registry\nA1: The US is forbidden from a creating a gun registry\n\nQ2: Is the H.R 8 bill tantamount to creating a gun registry\nA2: the House bill states that “[n]othing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to … authorize the establishment, directly or indirectly, of a national firearms registry.”",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The evidence showcases that the U.S. is forbidden from creating a firearms registry. \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: Salman Rushdie said that 99% of Muslims are terrorists by thought.\n\nQ1: Has Rushdie commented on the quote claim?\nA1: .@LucyGoesHard Thank you for finding the source of this fake quote that people can’t seem to stop quoting to justify their own bigotry.\n\n— Salman Rushdie (@SalmanRushdie) March 7, 2015",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The person in the claim themselves said they did not say the quote 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 was one of the first to introduce a climate change bill to the US Houses of Congress.\n\nQ1: When did a climate change bill first go before the US Houses of Congress?\nA1: The Global Climate Protection Act of 1987, Pub. L. No. 100-204, Title XI, 101 Stat. 1407 (1987)\n\nQ2: Who presented the 1987 The Global Climate Protection Act ?\nA2: Senators Joseph Biden (D-DE) and\nClaiborne Pell (D-RI) sponsored the Global Climate Protection Act,\n\nQ3: Were there any earlier climate bills introduced before bidens 1987 one ?\nA3: Earlier legislation exists, but addresses climate generally without identifying global warming\nmitigation as a specific goal.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Joe Biden was one of the climate change pioneer in Congress way back in ‘87.\"\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: Singapore's prime minister has one of the highest salaries of any world leader.\n\nQ1: Who is the highest paid world leader?\nA1: Lee Hsien Loong the Prime Minister of Singapore",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answer is clear from this one question. \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: US Attorney General William P. Barr mischaracterized special counsel Robert Mueller's remarks about his office's decision not to reach a determination about whether President Donald Trump had committed obstruction of justice. This issue referred to Russia's attempts to damage Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.\n\nQ1: How did Robert Mueller summarize the issues that arose during the course of the investigation into Russia and the presidential election\nA1: He said that a conclusion couldn't be reached because of some directives in the US constitution and the DOJ's laws\n\nQ2: Did William Barr agree with Robert Mueller on the inability of his team to reach a conclusion on the matter because of factors within the constitution that could not let him act\nA2: William Barr downplayed the role that factors that Mueller stated affected his decisions and made assumptions as to why he did what he did in not reaching a conclusion\n\nQ3: what is mischaracterization\nA3: The act of characterizing something in an inaccurate or misleading way",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: us attorney did downplay he role that factors that Mueller stated affected his decisions and made assumptions as to why he did what he did in not reaching a conclusion \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: Kenyans with old generation passports will still be issued with U.S visas.\n\nQ1: Do Kenyans need new generation passports to get US Visas\nA1: Travelers with a valid U.S. visa may travel with their current visa in the old passport but must also have a new e-passport for entry. It is not necessary to apply for a new visa\n\nQ2: Can old-generation Kenyan passports be solely used to obtain US visas?\nA2: must also have a new e-passport for entry.\n\nQ3: Can Kenyans travel to the U.S. without an e-passport?\nA3: The US Embassy, Nairobi, has said it will no longer issue visas to Kenyans who don't have the new e-passports.\n\nIn a post on the embassy's Facebook page, it said, \"All travelers to the United States from Kenya must have a passport valid for at least six months from date of entry. Therefore, U.S. Embassy Nairobi can no longer place U.S. visas in the previously issued non-digital passport expiring August 31, 2019.\"",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Kenyans with old passports will need to have a new e-passport for entry. \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 million Australians are doing two jobs.\n\nQ1: How many Australians have secondary jobs?\nA1: The latest Labour Account figures for March show that in the December quarter of 2018, there were 6.585% (1,023,400) secondary jobs in Australia.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The source and answer shows that over 1 million people have second jobs so the claim is supported.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The Mortality Rate for Road Accidents Drops in Russia.\n\nQ1: Has the mortality rates for road accidents dropped in Russia?\nA1: In recent years, mortality [in road accidents] has decreased in Russia From 19 people per 100,000 to 13 people per 100,000.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It seems that indeed he mortality rate has decreased in Russia for road accidents. Therefore, 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: A million Australians are underemployed.\n\nQ1: How many Australians are under employed?\nA1: The bureau's Labour Force Survey shows that there were 1,089,300 underemployed people in Australia in March, representing 8.2 per cent of the workforce.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Official statistics back this up.\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: US president claims that the $2 Trillion tax cut did not benefit most people as it all went to the folks at the top and corporations that pay no taxes.\n\nQ1: What percent of people received this tax cut?\nA1: The independent Tax Policy Center estimated that 64.8 percent of people received a federal income tax cut in 2018, while 6.3 saw an increase. About 81.7 percent of Americans who made $50,000 to $75,000 — roughly a median income — received a tax cut that averaged $750. That’s consistent with estimates from the Joint Committee on Taxation, the nonpartisan analysts of Congress.\n\nQ2: Did lower incomes also benefit?\nA2: Yes, because About 81.7 percent of Americans who made $50,000 to $75,000 — roughly a median income — received a tax cut that averaged $750.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The 1st Q&A pair states that contrary to what the claim states that actually about 81 percent of Americans received a tax cut which refutes what the claim says which is that a tax cut did not benefit most Americans.\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 2017 61 PERCENT OF DRUG OVERDOSE DEATHS IN THE US STATE OF DELAWARE INVOLVE THE DRUG FENTANYL\n\nQ1: How many deaths were due to drug overdose in Delaware in 2017\nA1: 345 overdose deaths after all the data was collected\n\nQ2: What percentage of the total deaths was Fentanyl\nA2: In 2016, four out of 10 overdose deaths were related to fentanyl. That ratio increased to six out of 10 deaths in 2017\n\nQ3: In Delware 2017, were 61% of deaths related to overdoses involved fentany ?\nA3: True, In 2017, were about 61 percent of the overdose deaths in Delaware involved fentanyl and 40 percent involved heroin.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: the data in the q and a, 6 out of 10 drug deaths are caused by fentanyl.\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: Viral image quotes Joe Biden as saying the Germans Bombed Pearl Harbour.\n\nQ1: when as Biden called himself an optimist\nA1: As he gave a speech about U.S.-Israeli relations, but he was talking about \"the prospects for peace,\" not World War II. Or in October 2018, when speaking at Youngstown State University in Ohio.\n\n\"I am an optimist,\" the Vindicator quotes him as saying. \"I am an optimist because I know the history of the journey of this country … We have always had faith in the ability of ordinary people to do extraordinary things.\"\n\nQ2: What does the viral image that makes the claim attribute this quote to?\nA2: A speech in which Biden called himself an 'optimist'.\n\nQ3: Did Biden say anything about 'pearl Harbor' or the war in that speech?\nA3: No, because He talked about the 2nd world war but makes no mention of 'pearl harbor'\n\nQ4: Are there any news references to him making this quote?\nA4: No, because Nexis, a database of news stories, shows no results whilst Looking for news stories connecting the former vp to Germany and Pearl Harbor,",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Joe Biden talked about the 2nd world war but makes no mention of 'pearl harbor'. \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: Michelle Bachmann suggested banning Mexican food as a way to stop illegal immigration into the U.S.\n\nQ1: Who is Michelle Bachmann?\nA1: Michele Marie Bachmann (/ˈbɑːxmən/; née Amble; born April 6, 1956)[1] is an American politician who was the U.S. representative for Minnesota's 6th congressional district from 2007 until 2015. A member of the Republican Party, she was a candidate for President of the United States in the 2012 election, but lost the Republican nomination to Mitt Romney.\n\nQ2: Did Michelle Bachmann make a statement suggesting banning Mexican food as a way to stop illegal immigration into the U.S?\nA2: No answer could be found.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Not enough evidence to support/refute or contradicting/conflicting 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: Photo shows Kanhaiya Kumar pulling out of election due to health reasons, appeals to vote for RJDs Tanvir Hasan\n\nQ1: Did Kanhaiya Kumar pull out of the elections\nA1: Kanhaiya Kumar did not withdraw from the elections, he contested and lost",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answer and source show that Kanhaiya Kumar did not pull out of the elections 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: Sadhvi Pragya said Manohar Parrikar died of cancer because he allowed the consumption of beef in Goa\n\nQ1: Where did the statement \"Will Totally Ban Beef in States like Goa, North-East, If BJP Comes to Power at the Centre: Sadhvi Pragya\" originate from?\nA1: IndiaScoops\n\nQ2: Is IndiaScoops a credible news site?\nA2: The supposed quote from Sadhvi Pragya in IndiaScoops has no evidence. In the article, IndiaScoops states: \"These comments were not made before the media, or at a public gathering but in front of a group of followers.\"",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Claim not from a credible news source\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: Fee-paying schools save the UK taxpayer £20 billion.\n\nQ1: How much did fee-paying schools save the UK tax payers in 2017\nA1: the total saving\nto the taxpayer, in respect of\nIndependent Schools Council (ISC) pupils in the UK,\namounted to £3.0 billion in\n2017 and the\ncorresponding figure for\nall independent schools is\ncalculated to have been £3.5\nbillion.\n\nQ2: How much will be lost from the UK economy if students didn't go to fee-paying schools\nA2: No answer could be found.\n\nQ3: How much do private schools add to the UK economy\nA3: Private schools add nearly £12bn yearly to UK",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The total amount of savings for the UK tax payer, plus how much it adds to the economy is closer £15bn not £20bn\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: Drinking Tequila helps to loose weight.\n\nQ1: Does Tequila have any calories in it?\nA1: Tequila contains an average of 97 calories\n\nQ2: Does eating or drinking calories increase bodyweight?\nA2: Rigorously controlled studies may soon give us a definitive answer about what causes obesity—excessive calories!",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The source shows that tequila contains calories 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: Donald Trump said that there were very fine people on both sides of the violent protests in 2017, at Charlottesville.\n\nQ1: What exactly did Donald Trump say?\nA1: \"Excuse me, excuse me. They didn’t put themselves -- and you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides. You had people in that group. Excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.\"\n\nQ2: Did Donald Trump clarify his statement?\nA2: He went on to say, \"\"Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people. But you also had troublemakers, and you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets, and with the baseball bats. You had a lot of bad people in the other group. But you had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest, and very legally protest -- because, I don’t know if you know, they had a permit. The other group didn’t have a permit. So I only tell you this: There are two sides to a story. I thought what took place was a horrible moment for our country -- a horrible moment. But there are two sides to the country.\"",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The sources show that Donald Trump did say the quote is a speech 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: A Facebook post claims that Joe Biden has run for President 3 times (1984, 1988, and 2008).\n\nQ1: How many times has Joe Biden run for president before 2020?\nA1: 1988 and 2008",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Well, the answer doesn't directly answer the question asked but it does address the claim and is supported by the source.\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 CIA survey, published by the BBC, has predicted the NDA's defeat in the ongoing Lok Sabha polls\n\nQ1: What did the BBC say regarding the purported CIA survey, predicting the NDA's defeat in the ongoing Lok Sabha polls.\nA1: The BBC via an email response said, \"This fake survey on the Lok Sabha polls has been circulating on WhatsApp and Facebook, with messages claiming it to be from the BBC News. We'd like to make it absolutely clear that it is fake and does not come from the BBC. The BBC does not support pre-election surveys in India.\"\n\nQ2: Did the BBC publish a CIA survey, predicting the NDA's defeat in the Lok Sabha polls ?\nA2: The URL given in the viral message is correct and takes you to the homepage of BBC. However, there is no such news on the website. We also looked for any such news item of the BBC website with keywords but did not find anything.\n\nQ3: Does CIA carry out surveys on elections ?\nA3: No answer could be found.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: BBC did not publish a CIA survey about the ongoin Lok Sabha polls.\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 Russian government has no desire to create problems for the new Ukrainian government but to tolerate a situation in which people living in the territory of these Donetsk and Luhansk republics are generally deprived of any civil rights. This is already crossing the line from the point of view of human rights.\n\nQ1: Is the Donetsk part of Russia?\nA1: No. Donetsk has been temporarily occupied by Russia by force.\n\nQ2: Is Luhansk part of Russia?\nA2: No. Luhansk has been temporarily occupied by Russia by force.\n\nQ3: Does the Russian government have no desire to create problems for the new Ukrainian government?\nA3: The Russian government has seized Ukrainian land by force. It is therefore unlikely that they have no desire to create problems.\n\nQ4: Are people living in the territory of Donetsk and Luhansk deprived of any civil rights?\nA4: Yes. There is a war in Ukraine. This is depriving them of civil rights.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Clearly this isnt the case, as the evidence finds, Russia has occupied parts of Ukraines territory and created conflict in these regions between the two nations.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: There is more bacteria found in a mans beard than in a dogs fur.\n\nQ1: Who carried out the study?\nA1: The study was led by a Swiss doctor, Dr Andreas Gutzeit.\n\nQ2: What was the purpose of the study?\nA2: To determine whether it would be hygienic to evaluate dogs and humans in the same MRI scanner.\n\nQ3: How was the experiment carried out ?\nA3: They compared the bacterial load in colony-forming units (CFU) of human-pathogenic microorganisms in specimens taken from 18 men and 30 dogs. In addition, They compared the extent of bacterial contamination of an MRI scanner shared by dogs and humans with two other MRI scanners used exclusively by humans.\n\nQ4: What were the results of the study?\nA4: The study shows a significantly higher bacterial load in specimens taken from men’s beards compared with dogs’ fur (p = 0.036). All of the men (18/18) showed high microbial counts, whereas only 23/30 dogs had high microbial counts and 7 dogs moderate microbial counts. Furthermore, human-pathogenic microorganisms were more frequently found in human beards (7/18) than in dog fur (4/30)",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The number of bacterial load in colony forming units taken from men's beards were more than that in dogs fur \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: You've got millions of families paying 40, 50, 60% of their limited incomes to put a roof over their heads\n\nQ1: What official data was available at the time of the claim, that provided national United States household income percentage statistics, in direct relation to the cost of putting a roof over a US families heads?\nA1: Study estimates from the Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies, by somewhat defining Cost-Burdened Households into 'Not', 'Moderately' and 'Severly' Burdened by using income percentage.\n\nQ2: What was the data for Severely Cost-Burdened Households defined by Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies at the time of the claim?\nA2: Figures for 2016 estimated 18,505 million of US homeowners and renters were Severely Cost-Burdened; therefore spending more than 50% of their income on housing alone.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: A study conducted in 2016 showed that some families used 50% and above of their income for housing \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 says In the ‘old days’ if you were president and you had a good economy, you were basically immune from criticism\n\nQ1: Was Donald Trump the only President to have low approval ratings whilst his country had a good economy?\nA1: No, because 4 Other previous presidents had lower ratings whilst having a low unemployment rate,\n- Truman\n- Johnson\n- Nixon\n- G.W Bush\n\nQ2: is a low unemployment rate a sign of a good economy?\nA2: Low unemployment is usually regarded as a positive sign for the economy.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answers show that there were other presidents with a good economy and they were criticised 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: According to Rahul Gandhi India's Modi government has made a law which allows the shooting of tribals.\n\nQ1: What law was Rahul Gandhi referencing in his speech?\nA1: Amendments to the Indian Forest Act 1927\n\nQ2: What is the Amendments to the Indian Forest Act 1927?\nA2: An act to provide for conservation, enrichment and sustainable management of forest resources and matters connected therewith to safeguard ecological stability to ensure provision of ecosystem services in perpetuity and to address the concerns related to climate change and international commitments.\n\nQ3: Does this act allow for the shooting of tribals?\nA3: Any forest officer, may if necessary, to prevent the commission of any offence under this Act or under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, or to apprehend any person engaged in the commission of an offence under the said Acts, or who has committed such offence, use as little force including firearms and do as little injury to person and property, as may be consistent with the prevention of the offence.\n\nQ4: Is this act an official law or just a provision?\nA4: It is a 'draft'- not officially passed yet.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The law allows a forest officer to use necessary force if a person is committing an offence against the Wildlife (Protection) Act. Also, the law hasn't officially passed yet\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: North Carolina has banned and criminalized Islamic Sharia Law\n\nQ1: What is Islamic Sharia Law?\nA1: All aspects of a Muslim's life are governed by Sharia. Sharia law comes from a combination of sources including the Qur'an (the Muslim holy book), the Hadith (sayings and conduct of the prophet Muhammad) and fatwas (the rulings of Islamic scholars).\n\nMany people, including Muslims, misunderstand Sharia. It's often associated with the amputation of limbs, death by stoning, lashes and other medieval punishments. Because of this, it is sometimes thought of as draconian. Some people in the West view Sharia as archaic and unfair social ideas that are imposed upon people who live in Sharia-controlled countires.\n\nQ2: Is Sharia law banned in North Carolina?\nA2: No - it is not banned but no foreign law can not be used in state courts. \nIn recognition that the United States Constitution and the Constitution of North Carolina\nconstitute the supreme law of this State, the General Assembly hereby declares it to be the\npublic policy of this State to protect its citizens from the application of foreign law that would\nresult in the violation of a fundamental constitutional right of a natural person. The public\npolicies expressed in this section shall apply only to actual or foreseeable violations of a\nfundamental constitutional right resulting from the application of the foreign law.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It is not banned, but no foreign law can not be used in state courts.\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 enumeration clause of the US Constitution speaks to the count of every individual and not just Americans, not just citizens. It’s everyone.\"\n\nQ1: Who is counted in the census?\nA1: The resident population counts include all people (citizens and non-citizens) who are living in the United States at the time of the census.\n\nQ2: Are non-citizens included in Census counts?\nA2: The resident population counts include all people (citizens and non-citizens) who are living in the United States at the time of the census.\n\nQ3: What is the enumeration clause?\nA3: The Enumeration Clause delegates authority to the United States, and requires the United States, to conduct an enumeration, i.e., an actual head-count, of the populations of the states (not the populations of non-state areas), once every ten years; and requires the United States to allocate seats in the House of Representatives according to the counted population;",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Evidence finds this claim to be true; resident population counts include both citizens and non-citizens who are living in the US at the time of the census.\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: Ken Kercheval is not dead at 83\n\nQ1: How old is Ken Kercheval?\nA1: Ken Kercheval (born July 15, 1935-died April 21, 2019).\n\nQ2: When did Ken Kerchaval die?\nA2: After days of confusion we can confirm the passing of Ken Kercheval on Sunday, April 21, as per our original posting. He was 83.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From the 2nd QA it does indeed seem that Ken Kercheval has died, 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: In my own state of Vermont, from the very first days of our state's history, what our Constitution says is that everybody can vote. That is true. So people in jail can vote.\"\n\nQ1: who can vote in the state of Vermont\nA1: Article 8. [Elections to be free and pure; rights of voters therein]\nThat all elections ought to be free and without corruption, and that all voters, having a sufficient, evident, common interest with, and attachment to the community, have a right to elect officers, and be elected into office, agreeably to the regulations made in this constitution.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Vermont's constitution requires voters to be over 18, a US citizen and resident in Vermont with no exceptions for jail sentences.\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: 74% of the people in Texas are crammed into 4% of the land.\n\nQ1: What is the latest population estimate for Texas?\nA1: As of 2017, Texas population grew to 28.3 million.\n\nQ2: How much of the Texan population lives in incorporated areas?\nA2: About 20.8 million Texans live in incorporated areas (73.63%)\n\nQ3: What is the land area of Texas?\nA3: Area (sq miles) 268,580 sq mi \nArea (sq km) 695,621 sq km\n\nQ4: How much land is in incorporated areas in Texas?\nA4: As of 2017, more than 28.7 billion square meters (or 4.25%) are in incorporated areas.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It seems that from the Q&As that a large proportion of Texans do live in only 4% of the land, so the claim is 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: India's Congress President Rahul Gandhi has apologised to India's Supreme Court for saying Chowkidar Chor Hai in relation to the Rafale aircraft deal.\n\nQ1: In what context did India's Congress President Rahul Gandhi say he made the statement: Chowkidar Chor Hai?\nA1: On 10.04.2019, at the time of and in my statement, the issues relating to court proceedings unfortunately got juxtaposed and mingled with a political slogan being used extensively by answering Respondent's party as well as answering Respondent for the last several months, which is a matter of intense and frenzied public debate during the ongoing Lok Sabha elections. That slogan is \"Chowkidar Chor Hai\".\n\nQ2: What did India's Congress President Rahul Gandhi apologise to the Supreme Court for?\nA2: Rahul Gandhi’s expression of regret to the Supreme Court was in the context of the Congress President having falsely ascribed the term ‘Chowkidar Chor Hai’ to the top court.\n\nQ3: What did Rahul Gandhi apologize to the supreme court for\nA3: Congress President Rahul Gandhi expressed \"regret\" in the Supreme Court on Monday over his remarks in connection with the Rafale judgment, which the apex court had said was \"incorrectly attributed\" to it, saying it was made in the \"heat of political campaigning\".\n\nThe apex court on April 15 had given a categorical clarification that in its Rafale verdict there was no occasion for it to make a mention of the contemptuous observation that \"chowkidar Narendra Modi chor hain\" as has been attributed to it by Gandhi",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: the answers show that President Rahul Gandhi has apologised to the supreme court in this matter. \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: Elizabeth Warren says she warned about the financial crisis before it happened\n\nQ1: When did Elizabeth Warren warn about the crisis of the 2000s\nA1: In January 2007, she testified before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs about how the housing market was broken and could hurt consumers\n\nQ2: Which factors help cause the financial crisis of the 2000s\nA2: In the fall of 2008, our economy faced challenges on a scale not seen since the Great Depression. The crisis was caused by many factors. Among them were an unsustainable housing boom fueled in part by the easy availability of mortgages, financial institutions taking on too much risk, and the rapid growth of the nation’s financial system with regulations that were designed for a different era. Forces built up over many years until the crisis reached its apex in September of 2008.\n\nQ3: Did Elizabeth Warren warn against the financial crisis?\nA3: Yes, because In a New York Times article in October 2005, the article said, \"Professor Warren of Harvard believes that disaster lurks as homeowners borrow against their homes to forestall bankruptcy. When the stock market tumbled five years ago, people in trouble could sell stocks to stay afloat, she said. But home equity doesn't work the same way. As she put it, \"You can't sell a part of your home like you could a stock in the stock market bubble.\"\n\nQ4: What financial crisis is this claim regarding?\nA4: the financial crisis of the 2000s",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Supported via multiple 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: Pragya Singh Thakur, better known as Sadhvi Pragya, (Indian politician and Member of Parliament), was 4 years old when the Babri Mosque was demolished.\n\nQ1: When was the Babri Mosque demolished?\nA1: December 6, 1992\n\nQ2: How old was was Pragya Thakur during the Lok Sabha elections in 2019?\nA2: 49 years\n\nQ3: How old would Pragya Thakur have been at the time of the Babri Mosque demolition in 1992?\nA3: around 22 years old",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The evidence presented in the q&a confirm that this claim is flase.\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 image shows litter left by Extinction Rebellion environmental protestors in Hyde Park.\n\nQ1: What did the park authority say concerning the littered park image\nA1: There's a lot of incorrect information doing the Twitter rounds this morning. This photo is the result of an unofficial event in Hyde Park on Saturday, not the #ExtinctionRebellion protestors in Marble Arch",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Reliable source debunks 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: Ilhan Omar tweeted “they reap what they sow” in response to the fire at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris.\n\nQ1: Who shared the tweet?\nA1: Fox news channel\n\nQ2: Is this the real Fox news channel Twitter account?\nA2: Fox News Channel Not affiliated with Fox News Channel. it’s a Parody, dummy.\n\nQ3: Is there any tweets found by Ilhan Omar about Paris and Notre Dame?\nA3: Art and architecture have a unique ability to help us connect across our differences and bring people together in important ways. Thinking of the people of Paris and praying for every first responder trying to save this wonder.\n\n— Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) April 15, 2019\n\nQ4: Who is Ilhan Omar?\nA4: Rep. Ilhan Omar is a freshman Democrat from Minnesota and was the first Somali-American elected to Congress.\n\nQ5: Where did the image of tweet in the claim get posted?\nA5: Facebook.com.\n\nQ6: Is the image of the tweet still available?\nA6: No, because It was removed for being a fake image of a tweet.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Refuted as a fake tweet \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: With repeated use of vaccines, cell-mediated immunity weakens, encouraging viral mutations, and future infections of the cells.\n\nQ1: With repeated use of vaccines, does the cell-mediated immunity weakens, encouraging viral mutations, and future infections of the cells?\nA1: Vaccination protects people from natural infection mainly by stimulating the humoral immune response and establishing immunological memory against a specific pathogen. This enables the body to respond swiftly and effectively upon encountering a natural infection by that pathogen in future. However, this does not come at the expense of cell-mediated immunity, which remains robust and active after vaccination.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The question is too closely related to the claim, therefore it is quite biased. it seems from the answer, that the cells will not be weakened by vaccination. These two events are independent. 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 South African Government have recently built 4 million houses.\n\nQ1: How many houses has the South African Government delivered in South Africa ?\nA1: 1. 2018/19 figures are for 9 months only (April to Dec 2018) and are preliminary;\n2. EEDBS* (or DBS): Enhanced Extended Discount Benefit Scheme refers to the Housing Programme\nthat provides state subsidies to repair / rehabilitate and even demolish & re‐build where necessary,\nGovt (rental) houses built before 1994 and then transfer houses into the ownership of legitimate occupants.\n3. In some years, such as 2014/15, 2016/17 and 2017/18, the numbers for EEDBS were removed after\nverification processes from the figure for Units as they are to be counted only under the EEDBS programme.\n4. Twenty Year totals are still: Serviced Sites Houses/ Units Total H/O\n903 543 2 835 275 3 738 818\n\nQ2: How many people own property in South Africa ?\nA2: Between 2002 and 2015, the percentage of households that lived in formal dwellings and whose dwellings\nwere fully owned increased from 52,9% to 53,8% while the percentage of partially owned dwellings\ndeclined from 15,5% to 9,7%. About 13,6% of households had ‘other’ forms of tenure arrangements in\n2015.\nMore than three-quarters (78,1%) of South African households lived in formal dwellings, followed by 14,1%\nwho lived in informal dwellings, and 6,9% in traditional dwellings. The highest concentration of households\nin Limpopo (90,5%) lived in formal dwellings, followed by the households in Northern Cape (86,1%). The\nhighest percentage of informal dwellings were found in North West (22%) and Gauteng (21%).\nAt the time of the survey, 14,4% of South African households were living in ‘RDP’ or state-subsidised\ndwellings. A higher percentage of female-headed (18%) than male-headed households (12%) received a\ngovernment housing subsidy. Some residents have, however, raised concerns about the quality of\nsubsidised houses and 14,2% said that the walls were weak or very weak while 13,8% regarded the\ndwellings’ roofs as weak or very weak.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The source in the first answer shows that 3 263 331 were built in 24 years so the claim is refuted as the number is below 4 million. 24 years is not classed as recently either.\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: People catching and spreading chickenpox have been vaccinated.\n\nQ1: Can you catch chicken pox after vaccination?\nA1: Yes, because A case-control study conducted from 1997 to 2003 showed that 1 dose of vaccine was 97% effective in the first year after vaccination and 86% effective in the second year. From the second to eighth year after vaccination, the vaccine effectiveness remained stable at 81 to 86%.\n\nQ2: After the vaccine for chickenpox rolled out did cases drop?\nA2: Yes, because From 1995 to 2001, chickenpox hospitalizations declined by 72 percent and deaths, among those 50 years old and younger, decreased by 75% or more.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: This claim has cherry picked evidence. According to the QA pairs, it is possible to get chickenpox after being vaccinated as it has a 97% efficency rate (3% chance). It also seems that the vaccination helped lessen side effects of chickenpox if caught, e.g. deaths among those 50 years old and younger, decreased by 75% or more. This claim is true in the fact that people can catch and spread chickenpox despite being vaccinated, however a lot of positive factors are left out of the claim. Therefore, this claim was cherry-picked evidence.\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: Ramaphosa promised to build 1 million in Alexandra.\n\nQ1: Has President Ramaphosa promised to build 1 million houses in Alex?\nA1: The million houses issue in Alex is a huge distortion. The ANC government intends to build 1 million over the next 5 years throughout the country. Every province will be given a target that they must meet. This is something that I would like to see and it is possible.\n\nQ2: Has the South African government ever delivered 1 million housing units within 5 years?\nA2: Looking within 1994/95 to 1998/99, 1999/2000 to 2003/04, 2004/05 to 2008/09, 2009/10 to 2013/14 and 2014/15 to 2018/19*. None of the five consecutive years have seen the construction of one million housing units. The highest 5-year period to see the most housing units built was in the years 1999/2000 to 2003/2004, which saw 758,342 houses built.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Ramaphosa does promise to built 1 million houses but across the whole country not in Alexandra. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: There were Muslim ties to the Notre Dame fire.\n\nQ1: What caused the Notre Dame Cathedral fire?\nA1: ...the causes are still unknown. An investigation has been opened by the Paris prosecutor's office.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: There is not justifiation to the claim from these answers. 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: Since 2011, there has been documentation of 1,671 dead bodies recovered in Texas, many in Brooks County on the US Mexico border.\n\nQ1: Are official figures of deaths published by US Government?\nA1: Yes, because Official figures are published on the U.S Customs and Border patrol website.\n\nQ2: Are more deaths reported in Brooks county than other areas of Texas?\nA2: in 2012 Texas surpassed Arizona in deaths, with the majority occurring in the Rio Grande Valley and more specifically in Brooks, County, Texas (USBP, 2012).\n\nQ3: what is the number of dead immgrants found in the usa-meico border\nA3: No comprehensive estimates exist on the number of injuries or deaths that occur along the border but As of April 15, 2011, 145 bodies had been recovered in the graves, as families throughout Mexico wait to find out if their loved ones are among the dead.[",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The US Border Patrol figures show many more than 1,671 deaths but it's unclear how this relates to \"dead bodies recovered\".\nMany were found in Brooks County, that part seems true.\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: There have been zero reported instances of any child born alive after an abortion in Texas.\n\nQ1: How many instances were there of a baby born alive after abortion between 2003 and 2014?\nA1: 143 infants\n\nQ2: How many infant death certificates in the US mention abortion/termination of pregnancy?\nA2: Infant deaths for the 12 year period 2003 – 2014 assigned to code ICD-10 code P96.4 – Termination of pregnancy, affecting fetus and newborn were reviewed.\n143 (24.3%) could definitively be classified as involving an induced termination\n\nQ3: Does the US collects data on abortions?\nA3: Yes, because Since 1969, CDC has conducted abortion surveillance to document the number and characteristics of women obtaining legal induced abortions in the United States.\nEach year, CDC requests abortion data from the central health agencies of 52 reporting areas (the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and New York City).\n\nQ4: How many infant death certificates in Texas mention abortion/termination of pregnancy?\nA4: No answer could be found.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: There is not enough evidence as there is no data on the number of infant death certificates issued in Texas \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: Bumblebee has officially been added to the ever-growing list of endangered species\n\nQ1: Is the bumblebee an endangered species?\nA1: Yes, because On January 11, 2017, the Fish and Wildlife Service published a rule to list the rusty patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis), a species that occurs in the eastern and Midwestern United States and Ontario, Canada, as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The rule was to be effective on February 10, 2017.\n\nQ2: When is a species considered as endangered?\nA2: The conservation status of a species indicates the likelihood that it will become extinct. Multiple factors are considered when assessing the status of a species; e.g., such statistics as the number remaining, the overall increase or decrease in the population over time, breeding success rates, or known threats.[4] The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is the best-known worldwide conservation status listing and ranking system.[5]\n\nOver 50% of the world's species are estimated to be at risk of extinction.[6] Internationally, 195 countries have signed an accord to create Biodiversity Action Plans that will protect endangered and other threatened species. In the United States, such plans are usually called Species Recovery Plans.\n\nQ3: What role do bees play in the ecosystem?\nA3: More than 75 percent of the world's food crops rely to some extent on pollination for yield and quality. The absence of bees and other pollinators would wipe out coffee, apples, almonds, tomatoes and cocoa, to name just a few of the crops that rely on pollination.\n \n\"Each one of us has an individual responsibility towards protecting bees and we should all make pollinator-friendly choices. Even growing flowers at home to feed bees contributes to this effort,\" Graziano da Silva said.\n\nPollinators, such as bees, wild bees, birds, bats, butterflies and beetles fly, hop and crawl over flowers to help plants fertilize. Pollinator numbers and diversity have declined in the past decades, and evidence indicates that the decline is primarily a consequence of human activities including climate change which can disrupt flowering seasons.\n\nQ4: What is the endangered species act?\nA4: Under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 in the United States, species may be listed as \"endangered\" or \"threatened\". The Salt Creek tiger beetle (Cicindela nevadica lincolniana) is an example of an endangered subspecies protected under the ESA. The US Fish and Wildlife Service, as well as the National Marine Fisheries Service are held responsible for classifying and protecting endangered species. They are also responsible for adding a particular species to the list, which can be a long, controversial process\n\nQ5: why was bumblebee added to the list of endangered species?\nA5: “The rusty-patched bumblebee (Bombus affinis), once a common sight, is “now balancing precariously on the brink of extinction,” according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Once thriving in 28 states and the District of Columbia, but over the past two decades, the bee’s population has plummeted nearly 90 percent.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Q&A 1 shows that yes the Bumblebee was added to the list of endangered species as claimed. But although only a single certain species of bumblebee not all 'bumblebees' but the claim only says bumblebee not all, so it is supportive enough.\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 War Powers Act has been invoked for the first time.\n\nQ1: Did the US Congress resolve to end US involvement in Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen?\nA1: Yes, because Congress has given final approval on a resolution to end American military assistance for Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen.\n\nQ2: Has the US War Powers Act ever been invoked?\nA2: Yes, because April 2019 marks the first time Congress has invoked the 1973 War Powers Act to curb the executive’s power to take the country into a conflict without congressional approval. It is aimed at ending US involvement in the long-running Yemen conflict.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Answers direct match claim\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The United States has \"three families owning more wealth than the bottom half of the American society.\n\nQ1: Who are the 3 richest Americans?\nA1: Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Warren Buffett.\n\nQ2: How much are Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Warren Buffet worth combined?\nA2: Based on a 2017 report, the three wealthiest Americans — Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Warren Buffett — together were worth $248.5 billion.\n\nQ3: What is the total net worth of the bottom 50% of the USA Population?\nA3: The wealth of the bottom 160 million people (the bottom half) was $245 billion.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The wealth of the bottom half is $245 billion whereas the wealth of the 3 families is $248.5 billion \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: Since Trump took office, 7 million more people lack health insurance that used to have it.\n\nQ1: How many people have lost insurance in the U.S. in 2018?\nA1: Seven million adults without health insurance in 2018.\n\nQ2: When was the lowest report of people losing their insurance in the U.S.?\nA2: 2016 reached a low point of 10.9% of U.S. adults without health insurance, between 2008-2018.\n\nQ3: What was the percentage of U.S. adults without health insurance in 2018?\nA3: 13.7%\n\nQ4: Were there other reports on the rise of people in the U.S. without insurance?\nA4: Yes, because The gold-standard government survey found a rise of about 1.3 million people.\n\nQ5: What was the percentage of U.S. adults without health insurance in 2017?\nA5: 12.2% at 12 December 2017",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: 1 of the Q&A pairs differ in their answer to the other figures which agree with the claim\n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The United States has three families owning more wealth than the bottom half of the American society.\n\nQ1: Does The United States has three families owning more wealth than the bottom half of the American society?\nA1: Based on a 2017 report, the three wealthiest Americans — Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Warren Buffett — together were worth $248.5 billion. The wealth of the bottom 160 million people (the bottom half) was $245 billion.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Warren Buffett do have more money than the bottom half of the American society.\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: Bernie Sanders' Medicare-for-all will save Americans money.\n\nQ1: What is Bernie Sanders' healthcare plans\nA1: A Fox news video shows Sen. Bernie Sanders proposing a Medicare-for-all plan which he thinks would save Americans money\n\nQ2: How will the Medicare-for-all save American money\nA2: Patients would have no deductibles, co-pays, or other out-of-pocket costs for services covered by the plan. NYH would be financed through a new trust with money from the federal government (in place of federal financing for current health programs, if federal waivers are approved), current state health care funding, and two new progressively graduated state taxes: a payroll tax paid jointly by employers (80 percent) and employees (20 percent) and a tax on nonpayroll income",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From the 2nd answer to QA number 2 it does indeed seem that the plan would save americans money, therefore the label is supported\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The FEC report once again highlights President Trump’s immense grassroots support among small donors. 98.79% of first quarter contributions to the Campaign and the joint committees came from ‘low-dollar’ contributions, defined as $200 or less.\n\nQ1: How much did Donald Trump raise in the first quarter of 2019 for his re-election\nA1: Trump raised $30.3 million in the first quarter\n\nQ2: What was the average amount given by small donors\nA2: Donors giving an average of just over $34",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Q2 is the wrong question for the answer. The answer is the average donation overall, I think. The source for this answer is \"according to Trump's campaign\". The Q&A don't establish/verify which report the claim stats came from.\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: Amazon, owned by the wealthiest person in this country, paid zero in federal taxes.\n\nQ1: How much federal income taxes did Amazon pay in 2018?\nA1: Profits for online retail behemoth Amazon soared in 2018, but it paid no federal income tax for the second consecutive year\n\nQ2: Why can Amazon avoid paying federal income tax?\nA2: CNN explains that the U.S. tax code allows companies that lose money to reduce their future taxable income. That has worked in Amazon's favor because its past has been marked with billions of dollars in losses and some of its profits come from global sources not subject to the U.S. tax code, the network explains.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Confirmed in QA Pair, no federal tax paid.\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: Pat Robertson claimed that the Notre Dame cathedral fire on April 2019 was the result of \"Hell bubbling over with burning homosexuals\"\n\nQ1: Who made the claim\nA1: Brown Valley Observer\n\nQ2: What kind of website is the Brown Valley Observer\nA2: On their \"About Us\" page it reads: This is an entertainment website written to satirize news events, politics, and popular faces and ideas, and to provide commentary on social attitudes and trends.\nWhile familiar names of celebrities and other media figures as well as familiar agencies and organizations are used, all news stories contained within are fictional in nature\n\nQ3: Is Brown Valley Observer a satirical website\nA3: Yes, because They admit to being a satirical website",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The Q/A are unrelated to 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: Unemployment in Germany is 3.1, percent, In Japan it's 2.8 percent, In the U.K., it's a hair higher than us.\n\nQ1: What is the total unemployment rate in Germany in April 2019?\nA1: 3.0\n\nQ2: What is the total unemployment rate in Japan in April 2019?\nA2: 2.4\n\nQ3: What is the total unemployment rate in the United Kingdom in April 2019?\nA3: 3.7\n\nQ4: What is the total unemployment rate in the United States in April 2019?\nA4: 3.6\n\nQ5: What is the unemployment rate in the US at the time the claim was made\nA5: The jobless rate was 3.6 percent in April 2019\n\nQ6: What was the unemployment rate in the UK at the time the claim was made\nA6: 3.7",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: I have supported this claim because although there is slight variation in the numbers stated this could allow for slight rounding up/down and from the numbers provided in the QA pairs the UK is indeed slightly higher than the USA for unemployment rates.\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: Unemployment in Germany is 3.1%. In Japan it's 2.8%. In the UK, it's a hair higher than the US.\n\nQ1: What is Germany's unemployment rate?\nA1: In 2019, Germany had an unemployment rate of 3.1 per cent. The country therefore has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the world.\n\nQ2: What is Japan's unemployment rate?\nA2: Japan's unemployment rate varied from 2.1-2.7% in 2019.\n\nQ3: What is the UK's unemployment rate?\nA3: The 2019 UK unemployment rate was 3.8%.\n\nQ4: What is the US unemployment rate?\nA4: The US unemployment rate varied between 3.6 and 4% in 2019.\n\nQ5: Is unemployment in U.S 3.8% in 2019 ?\nA5: Yes, the average unemployment in U.S was 3.8% in 2018, 3.6 % in 2019, which was a hair lower than U.K as per Sanders.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The unemployment rate data in these countries are correct and that of the UK is a little bit higher than the US\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 Republican tax bill, 83% of the benefits went to the top 1%.\n\nQ1: In the Republican tax bill, did the 83% of the benefits went to the top 1%?\nA1: There’s no question that the top 5 percent do the best by far under the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. But in the early years, about half of the tax breaks go to the bottom 90 percent of taxpayers. It’s only later that the picture skews as hard toward the wealthiest, as Sanders said.\n\nQ2: Who benefits most from tax break benefits?\nA2: the benefits of the law would be heavily concentrated among the upper-middle and upper-class Americans, with nearly two-thirds of the benefit going to the richest fifth of Americans in 2018.\n\nQ3: Who were the most tax cuts aimed at?\nA3: corporate rate cuts mostly\n\nQ4: Do lower earners benefit much from corporate tax cuts?\nA4: corporate rate cuts mostly help Americans rich enough to own stock, that means that in 2027, poor and middle-class Americans would see a very mild tax increase on average:",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: there seems to be conflicting evidence here, about half of the tax breaks to the bottom 90% but two-thirds of the benefit going to the richest fifth of Americans in 2018. So this is difficult to confirm \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: Since Trump took office, 7 million more people lack health insurance that used to have it.\n\nQ1: Where are Sanders' numbers from?\nA1: The January 2019 Gallup estimate\n\nQ2: What does the Gallup estimate to be the amount of people who lost insurance in 2019?\nA2: 2.8 percentage points from its low in 2016. Gallup ran the numbers and converted that rise into 7 million people who lost insurance.\n\nQ3: What number did the government survey say?\nA3: About 1.3 million people.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Gove survey say 1.3 million people while Gallup estimate say 7million persons lost health insurance \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: Barack Obama wrote \"If the political winds should shift, I will side with the muslims\" in his book titled \"Audacity of Hope\".\n\nQ1: Did Barack Obama write any Autobiographies before 2019?\nA1: Yes, because - Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance, 1995\n- The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream. 2008.\n\nQ2: Does he state ''If The Political Winds Should Shift, I Will Side With The Muslims'' in any of these autobiographies?\nA2: No, because The right wing loved to misquote Obama\n\nQ3: Which Barack Obama quote is misquoted as saying ''If The Political Winds Should Shift, I Will Side With The Muslims''?\nA3: the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that ''I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly'' direction.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: seems from the question and answer pairs that the claim label is refuted, as the former president did not say these 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: Canadian Prime Minister begs Nigerian President for one million immigrants\n\nQ1: What has the press said regarding this since the story was published by CBTV?\nA1: If you've seen this link on your social media timeline, don't fall for it. This story is not true.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From the QA it seems that the event is not true. 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: Republicans rushed to repeal law preventing the mentally ill from buying guns in 2017\n\nQ1: Was there a law that prevented the mentally ill from purchasing guns in the U.S\nA1: No, because The law was one that allowed the mentally ill to be anonymous in buying guns\n\nQ2: Did the Republicans revoke a law in 2017 that affects the mentally ill and their purchase of guns\nA2: Yes, because Congress did repeal a rule that made it harder for people with mental illness to buy a gun",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Confirmed in QA pair.\n\n\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: Barkha Dutt, an Indian television journalist and author, called India's Bharatiya Janata Party anti-Muslim.\n\nQ1: What has Barkha Dutt tweeted 13th April 2019 about BJP?\nA1: There is no record of Barkha Dutt tweeting 13 April 2019 about BJP being Anti-Muslim\n\nQ2: How has Barkha Dutt responded to this claim?\nA2: Dutt tweeted: \"Stop sharing fake news and photo shopped images\"",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From the answers it seems that the claim is false news. 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: Bill to expand access to college tuition for military families blocked by New York Democrats after they approved aid for illegal immigrants.\n\nQ1: Is Trump in favor of expanding military benefits?\nA1: President Donald Trump criticized New York Democrats on Twitter, asserting they blocked a bill expanding access to college tuition for military families after they approved aid for \"illegal immigrants.\"\n\n\"In New York State, Democrats blocked a Bill expanding College Tuition for Gold Star families after approving aid for illegal immigrants,\" Trump wrote. \"No wonder so many people are leaving N.Y. Very Sad!\"\n\nQ2: Did New York democrats block and deny expanding college benefits for families of servicemembers in 2019?\nA2: Yes, because New York Democrats blocked a bill expanding college aid for gold star families\n\nQ3: Had New York Democrats already approved aid for illegal immigrants whilst blocking the college bill?\nA3: Yes, because they made a decision to halt tuition expansion for military families whilst they were in favour of aid for illegal immigrants.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: QA pairs confirm approved aid for illegal immigrants had already happened when they blocked a bill to expand college aid for Goldstar families (military families confirmed in source)\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 Kenyan Government asked six ministers to step aside in its last term in 2015.\n\nQ1: Were members of the 2015 Kenyan Government asked to step aside?\nA1: Yes, because \"I take the extra-ordinary step of attaching the afore-mentioned confidential report from the CEO of the Ethics and Anti Corruption Commission as an annex to my annual report on Values to Parliament.\n\nConsequently, I hereby direct that all Officials of the National and County governments that are adversely mentioned in this report, whether you are a Cabinet Secretary, Principal Secretary, or Chief Executive of a state institution, to immediately step aside pending conclusion of the investigations of the allegations against them.\"\n\nQ2: Were any ministers suspended?\nA2: Yes, because President Uhuru Kenyatta Saturday suspended Cabinet Secretaries Kazungu Kambi (Labour), Michael Kamau (Transport), Davis Chirchir (Energy) and Felix Koskei (Agriculture) after being named in EACC report.\n\nQ3: Did any members step aside?\nA3: Yes, because Lands Cabinet Secretary Charity Ngilu yesterday walked out of her Ardhi House office, claiming that powerful individuals had succeeded in pushing for her inclusion in the graft list submitted to President Uhuru Kenyatta by Ethics and Anti Corruption Commission ( EACC).\n\nQ4: Were these five removed from the Cabinet?\nA4: Yes, because President Uhuru Kenyatta has sacked the five Cabinet Secretaries suspended over corruption claims.\n\nQ5: Did anyone else leave the government?\nA5: Yes, because Anne Waiguru, who until Saturday served as the Devolution Cabinet Secretary, has finally bowed to public pressure to resign.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: 4 members were suspended, 1 stepped aside, 1 resigned - Hence not all 6 were asked to step aside \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: Kenya’s deputy president Ruto said ‘We put it in our manifesto, to construct 57 mega dams…”\n\nQ1: In 2017, did the Kenyan Government manifesto say they would construct 57 mega dams?\nA1: Yes, because The wording was actually \"complete 57 mega dams\".",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Q and A confirms statement was made in manifesto.\n(NB source link is a dead 404 error page.)\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 health care, we have to deal with the fact that if you’re a black woman in America today — in New York City, you’re 12 times more likely to die in childbirth, four times more likely nationwide.\n\nQ1: What is the childbirth mortality rate for black women in USA compared to non-Hispanic white women?\nA1: Non-Hispanic black women experience maternal deaths at a rate three\nto four times that of non-Hispanic white women.\n\nQ2: What is the childbirth mortality rate for black women in New York compared to non-Hispanic white women?\nA2: In New York from 2006 to 2010, the pregnancy related mortality for Black, non-Hispanic women was 12 times higher\nthan that of White, non-Hispanic women",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Answers are an exact match to 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: None of the ministers the Kenyan Government asked to step aside in 2015 went to court because the allegations that were made against them did not have any basis.\n\nQ1: Did any of the ministers go to court to be charged?\nA1: Yes, because Cabinet secretary Michael Kamau was charged in 2015.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: At least one was charged.\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: 85% of Kenya is arid and semi-arid.\n\nQ1: Does 85% of Kenya range between arid and semi-arid?\nA1: The Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (ASALs) of Kenya make up to 89% of the country,",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The answer and source indicate that the claim is wrong, but in the right ballpark.\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: Special Trains from Hyderabad were provided to facilitate people going to Andhra Pradesh for the AP Elections, in 2019.\n\nQ1: Were any Special Trains from Hyderabad provided to facilitate people going to Andhra Pradesh for the AP Elections, in 2019?\nA1: Yes, because For AP Elections 2019, Special Trains and extra coaches to various trains have been provided by the Indian Railways to reduce the extra rush",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It seems that special trains and extra coaches were provided to facilitate the AP Elections 2019 to avoid an extra rush.\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: BBC Poll Shows BJP Win Between 323 To 380 Seats In The 2019 General Elections\n\nQ1: Had the the BBC published anything related to pre-election polls in India by the time of the claim?\nA1: The BBC press office tweeted about a fake survey in May 2018 with its stance on commissioning pre-election surveys in India, stating - This fake survey on Karnataka polls has been circulating on Whats App and claims to be from BBC News. We'd like to make it absolutely clear that it is #fake and does not come from the BBC. The BBC does not commission pre-election surveys in India.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: BBC source disputing the claim.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The Kenyan Government put the construction of 57 large scale dams in their 2017 manifesto.\n\nQ1: Did the 2017 manifesto of the Kenyan Jubilee Party include the construction of 57 mega dams?\nA1: If re-elected the Jubilee Government will: Complete the 57-large-scale dam construction programme",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The claim is supported. According to the QA pairs, the 2017 manifesto will include the construction of 57 mega dams. Therefore, 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: If you’re a black woman in America today — in New York City, you’re 12 times more likely to die in childbirth compared to a White woman and four times more likely nationwide.\n\nQ1: What is the Pregnancy-Related Mortality Ratio (PRMR) for black women in the NY?\nA1: From 2006-2010 the PRMR for black non Hispanic women was 56.3%\n\n\n(See page 9 of source.)\n\nQ2: What is the Pregnancy-Related Mortality Ratio (PRMR) for Hispanic women in the NY?\nA2: From 2006-2010 the PRMR for Hispanic women was 15.9%\n\n(See page 9 of source.)\n\nQ3: What is the Pregnancy-Related Mortality Ratio (PRMR) for Asian/Pacific\nIslander women in the NY?\nA3: From 2006-2010 the PRMR for Asian/Pacific\nIslander women was 19.9%\n\nQ4: What is the Pregnancy-Related Mortality Ratio (PRMR) for White, non Hispanic women in the NY?\nA4: From 2006-2010 the PRMR for White, non Hispanic women was 4.7%\n\n\n(See page 9 of source.)\n\nQ5: Nationwide, What Proportion of Pregnancy-Associated Deaths Determined to be Pregnancy-Related were non Hispanic black women?\nA5: 48.2%\n(page 15 of source)\n\nQ6: Nationwide, What Proportion of Pregnancy-Associated Deaths Determined to be Pregnancy-Related were Hispanic women?\nA6: 30.2%\n(page 15 of source)\n\nQ7: Nationwide, What Proportion of Pregnancy-Associated Deaths Determined to be Pregnancy-Related were White women?\nA7: 28.4%\n(page 15 of source)",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The comparison of the figures shown in Q&A pairs 5 and 7 48.2 for black, and 28.4 for whites show that black is not 12 times higher which is claimed.\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 Kenyan law states that if you are allocated a piece of land you must develop it within two years or it reverts to the government.\n\nQ1: What act regulates the allocation of public land?\nA1: The Land Act sets out how public land can be allocated to private individuals, businesses and foreign governments.\n\n“Where the land allocated … is not developed in accordance with the terms and conditions stipulated in the lease, that land shall automatically revert back to the national or county government, as the case may be,” the law says.\n\nQ2: Must the land allocated, be developed?\nA2: Yes, because “The presumption is that when you are given [public] land you must put it into good use as stipulated in the lease agreement. That is what guides the transaction,” David Mufuayia of land rights lobby the Kenya Land Alliance told Africa Check.\n\nFor example, public land provided under the export processing zone law must be developed within two years.\n\nQ3: Is this always applied across the board?\nA3: No, because it is not always this clear cut. “It is very difficult to apply [the two-year-rule] across the board, because the land is normally leased specific to the use,” said Ibrahim Mwathane, chair of the Land Development and Governance Institute.\n\n“The government would normally attach a whole lot of conditions on a lease, and one would need to look at those conditions and decide whether they have been complied with or contravened.” Mwathane is also a columnist on land issues for the country’s Daily Nation newspaper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The claim states that when someone in Kenya is given land from the government they must develop that land within 2 years, Q&A pair 2 confirms that the government of Kenya does give out land and Q&A 3 states that is must be developed within 2 years or revert back to the government ( although this is rarely implemented it says) but still true.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Kenyan deputy president William Ruto asked six ministers in the last term (2015 to 2019) to step aside.\n\nQ1: Were any Kenyan ministers asked to step aside in the 2015-19 term of office?\nA1: Yes, because Today, I take the extra-ordinary step of attaching the afore-mentioned confidential report from the CEO of the Ethics and Anti Corruption Commission as an annex to my annual report on Values to Parliament.\n\n(b) Consequently, I hereby direct that all Officials of the National and County governments that are adversely mentioned in this report, whether you are a Cabinet Secretary, Principal Secretary, or Chief Executive of a state institution, to immediately step aside pending conclusion of the investigations of the allegations against them.\n\nQ2: Were any government officials suspended?\nA2: Yes, because President Uhuru Kenyatta Saturday suspended Cabinet Secretaries Kazungu Kambi (Labour), Michael Kamau (Transport), Davis Chirchir (Energy) and Felix Koskei (Agriculture) after being named in EACC report.\n\nQ3: Did any other government officials leave government?\nA3: Yes, because Anne Waiguru, who until Saturday served as the Devolution Cabinet Secretary, has finally bowed to public pressure to resign.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: From the evidence, five government officials were suspended, and one official bowed to public pressure and resigned. Hence, a cherry-picking claim.\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: None of the allegations made against Kenyan government ministers in 2015 made it to court.\n\nQ1: Who are the Kenyan government ministers against whom allegations were made in 2015?\nA1: Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta has suspended four cabinet ministers and 12 other high-ranking officials after they were implicated in corrupt deals. The suspended cabinet secretaries are Felix Kosgey (Agriculture), Davis Chirchir (Energy), Michael Kamau (Transport) and Kazungu Kambi (Labour).\n\nQ2: Have any of the Kenyan government ministers against whom allegations were made, been charged in court?\nA2: The High Court has ordered suspended Transport Cabinet Secretary Eng Michael Kamau to appear before the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Court on Thursday morning in relation to the graft charges leveled against him.\nEng Kamau faces charges of abuse of office due to allegations of his involvement in irregular awarding of a Ksh 33 million shillings tender for the redesigning of Kamukuywa-Kaptama-Kapsokwony-Sirisia road in Western Kenya.\n\nQ3: Out of the dropped Kenyan ministers, who has gone to court over allegations leveled against them?\nA3: The appellant Eng. Michael Sistu Mwaura Kamau, who at the material time was the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and Infrastructure.\n\nQ4: Has former lands minister Charity Ngilu been found guilty in court?\nA4: The court on Monday dropped the case following a Court of Appeal order that declared the trial unconstitutional.\n\nQ5: What was former lands minister Charity Ngilu charged for?\nA5: Mrs Ngilu was on June 19 charged with obstructing the commission officials from investigating the 134-acre Karen land scandal.\n\nQ6: Has former Cabinet Secretary for Transport and Infrastructure Michael Kamau been found guilty in court?\nA6: As of 2019, former Cabinet Secretary for Transport and Infrastructure Michael Kamau is still in the midst of court proceedings.\n\nQ7: What was former Cabinet Secretary for Transport and Infrastructure Michael Kamau charged with?\nA7: In the media briefing on 24th May 2015, the EACC through its Chief Executive Officer announced that it had completed investigations and had recommended the prosecution of the appellant for the offence of abuse of office contrary to the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act (ACECA). On 28th May 2015, the DPP announced that he had concurred with the recommendation of the EACC and made a decision to charge the appellant as aforesaid. Subsequently the appellant was arraigned before the Anti-Corruption Court, Milimani, in Criminal Case No. 11 of 2015 to answer to the corruption charges.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The Q&As provide information about the charges and court action of some of the charges against the government ministers.\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: Kenya’s deputy president, Ruto, asked six ministers in the last term to step aside.\n\nQ1: Were ministers in the last term asked to step aside?\nA1: Yes, because In a 2015 state of the nation address, President Uhuru Kenyatta asked that \"...all Officials of the National and County governments that are adversely mentioned in this report, whether you are a Cabinet Secretary, Principal Secretary, or Chief Executive of a state institution, to immediately step aside pending conclusion of the investigations of the allegations against them. \"\n\nQ2: How many ministers were suspended by the president's office?\nA2: Four cabinet secretaries were suspended: Kazungu Kambi (Labour), Michael Kamau (Transport), Davis Chirchir (Energy) and Felix Koskei (Agriculture).\n\nQ3: Did any cabinet members step down?\nA3: Yes, because Suspended Lands Cabinet Secretary Charity Ngilu yesterday walked out of her Ardhi House office, claiming that powerful individuals had succeeded in pushing for her inclusion in the graft list submitted to President Uhuru Kenyatta by Ethics and Anti Corruption Commission ( EACC).\n\nQ4: Were the five suspended cabinet members dropped from the cabinet?\nA4: Yes, because The president sacked the five a day after unveiling tough measures to bolster the war against corruption on the back of rising reports of grand corruption and public demands that he acts to reverse the trend.\n\nQ5: Did any cabinet members resign?\nA5: Yes, because Anne Waiguru, who until Saturday served as the Devolution Cabinet Secretary, has finally bowed to public pressure to resign.\n\nQ6: Were ministers in the last political term before 2019 asked to step aside?\nA6: Yes, because In a 2015 state of the nation address, President Uhuru Kenyatta asked that \"...all Officials of the National and County governments that are adversely mentioned in this report, whether you are a Cabinet Secretary, Principal Secretary, or Chief Executive of a state institution, to immediately step aside\n\nQ7: How many ministers were made to step aside by the president's office?\nA7: Four cabinet secretaries... Kazungu Kambi (Labour), Michael Kamau (Transport), Davis Chirchir (Energy) and Felix Koskei (Agriculture).\n\nQ8: Did any other cabinet members step down?\nA8: Charity Ngilu was also included in the list\n\nQ9: Were all of the 6 listed members suspended or dropped from the cabinet?\nA9: The president sacked the five in the list after unveiling tough measures to bolster the war against corruption",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: there were six people who were either asked to step aside, forced to leave or who left under pressure. \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: Kenya’s deputy president Ruto said “None of [the dropped ministers] even made it to court because the allegations that were made [against them] did not have any basis.”\n\nQ1: Is it true that None of Kenya's dropped ministers made it to court because the allegations that were made [against them] did not have any basis?\nA1: They were both acquitted after successfully challenging the composition of the ethics agency. But Kamau was back in court in April 2019, on the same charges.\n\nQ2: Out of the dropped ministers, were there any who were charged and taken to court?\nA2: Yes, because Former Transport Cabinet Secretary Michael Kamau was charged with violating procurement laws.\n\nQ3: Was Charity Ngilu, a former land minister, acquitted?\nA3: A criminal case against former Lands Cabinet Secretary Charity Ngilu touching on the Sh8 billion Karen land has been terminated.\n\nThe court on Monday dropped the case following a Court of Appeal order that declared the trial unconstitutional.\n\nQ4: Was former Transport Cabinet Secretary Michael Kamau acquitted?\nA4: Although he was first acquitted, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has ordered that former Transport and Infrastructure Cabinet Secretary Michael Kamau be charged afresh over corruption. This was due to new evidence sufficient to convict the former CS whose previous case was dismissed by Court of Appeal.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: Both of the ministers were acquitted by the ethics agency. Later on, Kamau was taken to court in April 2019. And he was charged with violating procurement laws. While Charity Ngilu was charged with obstructing commission officials from investigating the 134-acre Karen land scandal.\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: Like every budget passed by the Senate since Dan Patrick has been lieutenant governor, Senate Bill 1 is within the spending limit set by the Texas Constitution.\n\nQ1: Is the Senate Bill 1 within the spending limit of the Texas constitution\nA1: The Texas Constitution includes four limitations on state\nspending:\n• Debt limit\n• Welfare spending limit\n• Pay-as-you-go limit\n• Limit on the growth of certain appropriations (a.k.a.\nspending limit)\nHouse Bill 1 is within all of these limits",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: confirmed with : House Bill 1 is within all of these limits from QA pair..\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: Housing costs are crushing the middle class. Over 11 million Americans are spending more than half of their income on housing.\n\nQ1: What did Kamalla Harris say about American democracy?\nA1: This is an example of a line that appears to have been tweaked in response to a fact check. Harris used to say that “over 11 million Americans spend more than half of what they make on rent,” adding that “this means less money for other necessities like bus fares, groceries, heat and medicine.”\n\nQ2: How many Americans spend more than half of their income on housing?\nA2: More than 11 million renter households, most with incomes below the poverty line, pay more than half their income for housing.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It seems from the 2nd QA that many Americans are indeed paying half of their income on housing. Therefore, 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: Hyderabad Police seized Rs 8 crore cash withdrawn from BJP’s bank account.\n\nQ1: Has money ever been seized from the BJP?\nA1: Yes, because Money has been seized multiple times from BJP workers - numerous of times.\n\nQ2: How much withdrawn money has been seized from BJP’s bank account?\nA2: A cheque to withdraw Rs 8 crore in cash was signed by the BJP’s state president K. Laxman and was later seized by the Hyderabad police.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The claim as it stands is supported by the second Q&A. \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: William Shakespeare wrote “I always feel happy, you know why? Because I don’t expect anything from anyone. Expectations always hurt. Life is short, so love your life, be happy. And keep smiling. Just live for yourself and before you speak, listen. Before you write, think. Before you spend, earn. Before you pray, forgive. Before you hurt, feel. Before you quit, try. Before you die, live.”\n\nQ1: Did William Shakespeare write, “I always feel happy, you know why? Because I don’t expect anything from anyone. Expectations always hurt. Life is short, so love your life, be happy. And keep smiling. Just live for yourself and before you speak, listen. Before you write, think. Before you spend, earn. Before you pray, forgive. Before you hurt, feel. Before you quit, try. Before you die, live.”?\nA1: No match found\n\nQ2: Is there a similar quote from someone else?\nA2: Yes, because Before you speak, listen.\nBefore you write, think.\nBefore you spend, earn.\nBefore you invest, investigate.\nBefore you criticize, wait.\nBefore you pray, forgive.\nBefore you quit, try.\nBefore you retire, save.\nBefore you die, give.\n\nWilliam Arthur Ward",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: A similar quote is attributed to William Arthur Ward \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
[
{
"content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Russian President Vladimir Putin has said more than once that for settling the conflict in Donbass the most important thing is not dialogue with Moscow, because Moscow is not a party to this conflict. It is an intra-Ukrainian conflict and it is up to the Ukrainians to settle it, if they talk to each other.\"\n\nQ1: Has Putin/Russia said more than once that for settling the conflict in Donbass the most important thing is not dialogue with Moscow, because Moscow is not a party to this conflict. It is an intra-Ukrainian conflict and it is up to the Ukrainians to settle it, if they talk to each other.\"\nA1: “We are ready to explain to any Ukrainian citizen that Russia is not occupying any Ukrainian territories and generally there can be no talk about that,\" the Kremlin spokesman said.\n\nQ2: Did Russia trigger the Ukrainian invasion of Donbass?\nA2: Russian national Igor Strelkov, a former commander of pro-Moscow separatists in eastern Ukraine, has claimed personal responsibility for unleashing the conflict in which 4,300 people have been killed since April.\n\n\"I was the one who pulled the trigger of this war,\" Strelkov said in an interview published Thursday with Russia's Zavtra newspaper, which espouses imperialist views.\n\n\"If our unit hadn't crossed the border, everything would have fizzled out — like in [the Ukrainian city of] Kharkiv, like in Odessa,\" Strelkov, who uses that nom-de-guerre meaning \"Shooter\" to replace his last name Girkin, was quoted as saying.\n\nQ3: Has Russia denied being a party to the conflict in eastern Ukraine?\nA3: Yes, because Russia says no proof it sent troops, arms to east Ukraine.\n\nQ4: What kinds of evidence have been discovered in connection with Russia's involvement in eastern Ukraine?\nA4: One obvious sign to look for is equipment that’s either exclusively used by Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, or has not ever been in manufactured or service in Ukraine. The modernized T-72B3 main battle tank has been an example of military equipment that is out of place in a conflict where Russian government actively denies military involvement.\n\nQ5: Is this claim a quote verification?\nA5: No, because The research for this claim is about whether Russia (Moscow) played a role in the Donbass conflict.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: The claim is not a quote verification but about whether Russia (Moscow) played a role in the Donbass conflict. However, Moscow always plays an important role in the Ukrainian conflict.\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: South Bend in Indiana unemployment fell by half under Mayor Pete Buttigieg\n\nQ1: What was the unemployment rate in South Bend before 2012\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: Which economic projects were done by Senator Buttigieg in South Bend Indiana to reduce the unemployment rate\nA2: Building of a Casino in South Bend",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: It seems that unemployment may have fallen but it was not able to be confirmed with this Q&A, so not enough evidence is stated. \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 2008 United States election was the first election in which voters of color comprised over 25 percent of the electorate, and that number is going up.\n\nQ1: What was the percentage of black voters in the last elections?\nA1: Strong minority and black voter turnout made a difference in electing the first African-American president in 2008 and again in 2012. But without Obama on the ticket in 2016, the black turnout rate fell for the first time in 20 years in a presidential election, Pew found, down to 59 percent.\n\nQ2: What was the percentage of minority eligible voters in 2008?\nA2: 26.6 percent\n\nQ3: What was the percentage of minority eligible voters in 2012?\nA3: 28.9 percent\n\nQ4: What was the percentage of minority eligible voters in 2016?\nA4: 31.1 percent",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: In 2008, Records have shown that over 25 percent of the electorate comprised of voters of color. Subsequently the figures keeps getting higher. \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: African-American women inmates in Caifornia prisons are sterilized to cut welfare costs in California.\n\nQ1: Were women in California sterilized without consent\nA1: The Center for Investigative Reporting has found doctors under contract with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation sterilized nearly 150 female inmates from 2006 to 2010 without the required state approvals\n\nQ2: Were all women sterilized in the California prisons between 2006 and 2010 of African-American descent\nA2: There were Asian and Hispanic women in the mix\n\nQ3: Were the women sterilized legally by the state in an attempt to save welfare cost\nA3: A number of policies in the 1970s made it illegal to pressure anyone to be sterilized or ask for consent during labor or childbirth and the doctors were operating without consent from the state",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "justification: There is evidence given that African-American woman have been sterilised it also shows that asian and hispanic woman were included in the counts. This appears to be happening illegally, a law in the 1970s made it illegal to pressure anyone to be sterilised or ask for it during labor and childbirth, as evidence has been found that doctors are still operating without consent from the state then one should probably assume that if that is the case the state has not given directives for it to happen and therefore it’s untrue that the official reason would be to cut welfare costs in California.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'",
"role": "assistant"
}
] |
Subsets and Splits