benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

BIG-Bench Hard / Here comes a perfectly valid argument: To start 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 start with, being an ingredient of Eye Definer Twig is necessary for being an ingredient of FACIAL SCRUB. Now, not being an ingredient of NARS Pressed Powder is sufficient for not being an ingredient of Eye Definer Twig. Therefore, being an ingredient of NARS Pressed Powder is necessary for being an ingredient of FACIAL SCRUB."
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
18eea3de-7114-5d2e-8cb3-ba4331ac7960
task_key
formal~5ffallacies--main--18eea3de-7114-5d2e-8cb3-ba4331ac7960
task_revision_id
1
config / split
formal_fallacies / main

Official source

initial import