benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

BIG-Bench Hard / Here comes a perfectly valid argument: To start with, if something is not an…

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, if something is not an ingredient of Skin Tint FX, then that thing is not an ingredient of NYC Nail Glossies or not an ingredient of Eyebrow Kit. Now, being an ingredient of Eyebrow Kit is necessary for not being an ingredient of EYE SHADOW No 101. Moreover, whatever is not an ingredient of EYE SHADOW No 101 is an ingredient of NYC Nail Glossies. So, necessarily, nothing is neither an ingredient of EYE SHADOW No 101 nor an ingredient of Skin Tint FX."
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
ab4cf3e2-549b-5426-99ce-8ab1b2b553eb
task_key
formal~5ffallacies--main--ab4cf3e2-549b-5426-99ce-8ab1b2b553eb
task_revision_id
1
config / split
formal_fallacies / main

Official source

initial import