benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

BIG-Bench Hard / Here comes a perfectly valid argument: First premise: Every 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: First premise: Every ingredient of Moisturizing Bar is neither an ingredient of 31 EYE COLOUR nor an ingredient of VITAMIN E BB CREAM. So, necessarily, whatever is none of this: an ingredient of VITAMIN E BB CREAM or ingredient of 31 EYE COLOUR, is an ingredient of Moisturizing Bar."
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
1aca43f1-790f-5f46-b566-cddfcb247291
task_key
formal~5ffallacies--main--1aca43f1-790f-5f46-b566-cddfcb247291
task_revision_id
1
config / split
formal_fallacies / main

Official source

initial import