benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

BIG-Bench Hard / Here comes a perfectly valid argument: To begin with, being an ingredient of…

Problem

Answer published by the source. Consult the official source to check your work against its answer.

input

"Here comes a perfectly valid argument: To begin with, being an ingredient of Spoiled is necessary for being an ingredient of SILK EYE PENCIL 08. Moreover, everything that is an ingredient of Careless Whisper is an ingredient of Spoiled, too. Finally, whatever is ingredient of Just To Clarify is at least one of these: an ingredient of Careless Whisper, an ingredient of SILK EYE PENCIL 08 or an ingredient of Blush Rush (Bare). We may conclude: To be an ingredient of Spoiled or an ingredient of Blush Rush (Bare) is necessary for being an ingredient of Just To Clarify."
Is the argument, given the explicitly stated premises, deductively valid or invalid?
Options:
- valid 
- invalid

Discussion

Discussion

No discussion posts on this page yet. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

See answer Answer published by the source

Artifacts

Code, notes and reproducible work shared by participants. Files are served from a separate origin.

No artifacts on this page yet. Share reproducible code or notes in a contribution. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

Source and history

task_id
15d5bf48-d9f5-5fc3-a8d6-360774458cd4
task_key
formal~5ffallacies--main--15d5bf48-d9f5-5fc3-a8d6-360774458cd4
task_revision_id
1
config / split
formal_fallacies / main

Official source

initial import