{"kind":"task","effective_mode":"full","benchmark":{"kind":"benchmark","effective_mode":"full","slug":"mmlu","formal_name":"MMLU","introduction":"MMLU asks four-way multiple-choice questions across 57 subjects, from elementary material to professional-level examinations. Since 2020 it has been the most widely cited single reference point for general capability.","introduction_ja":"","introduction_en":"","category":"Category not supplied","task_count":null,"acquisition_status":"Acquisition status not supplied","official_url":"https://github.com/hendrycks/test","indexing_mode":"index","profile":{"resources":[],"task_format":"","scoring":"","metric":"","size":"","answer_access":"","license":"","citation":"","maintainer":"","released":"","why_hard":"","related":[],"history":"","construction":"","limitations":"","saturation":"","scores":[]}},"task_id":"1a2d46d0-6a85-5696-bfe2-011fd250f95f","task_key":"all--test--1a2d46d0-6a85-5696-bfe2-011fd250f95f","task_revision_id":"1","upstream_id":"","short_description":"In 1980, an attorney purchased an 80-acre tract in a rural county. The 80-acre…","config":"all","split":"test","body":"{\"choices\":\"['the power of eminent domain is the equivalent of the power to zone.', 'the purchase of the 80-acre tract property by a public body with the power of eminent domain is an act of inverse condemnation.', 'the abrogation of the right to enforce the restrictive covenant is not a compensable taking.', 'restrictions on the use of land can be enforced only against a buyer whose deed contains the restrictions.']\",\"question\":\"In 1980, an attorney purchased an 80-acre tract in a rural county. The 80-acre tract included the family home, an exquisite mansion built in 1929 by a wealthy industrialist. For many years, the closest town to the tract had been in the grips of economic decline. However, in 1988 and 1989, several large corporations built plant facilities in the local area. By the early 1 990s, prosperity had burst upon the area. To take advantage of the real estate boom, the attorney divided the 80-acre tract into 160 lots. By 1995, the attorney had sold 90 lots to various individual buyers. Each deed contained the following provisions:\\\"It is an express covenant and condition that the property hereby conveyed shall not be used for other than single-family residences. \\\"\\\"The grantor hereby covenants for himself, his heirs, successors, and assigns to insert a similar restriction in all deeds to lots now owned by grantor in the 80- acre tract. \\\"In 1996, the county board of supervisors purchased from the attorney 30 lots within the 80-acre tract. The board, which had the power of eminent domain, planned to construct a new county pest-control office on the property. The deed of conveyance from the attorney to the county board of supervisors made no mention of the aforesaid restrictions contained in the deeds to other lot owners in the 80-acre tract. The attorney €”county deed, however, did contain a provision, which stated:\\\"The grantee hereby covenants for itself, its successors, and assigns that this conveyance is made in lieu of the exercise of the power of eminent domain. \\\"Thereafter, the county enacted a zoning ordinance whereby the 30 lots were rezoned to permit the construction of a pest-control office building. When the county started construction, all the other lot owners in the 80-acre tract brought suit to enjoin the building plan or, in the alternative, to recover damages. If the county board of supervisors, the named defendant, prevails on both counts, it will be because\",\"subject\":\"professional_law\"}","display_format":"text","language":"","answer_status":"published","assets":[],"source_url":"https://github.com/hendrycks/test","history":"initial import","indexing_mode":"index","subproblems":[],"grids":[]}