benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

BIG-Bench Hard / Here comes a perfectly valid argument: First, being an ingredient of CND…

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, being an ingredient of CND VINYLUX is necessary for being an ingredient of Liquid Lips Catnip. Second, every ingredient of TV Paint Stick is not an ingredient of HIGHLIGHTER DUO or not an ingredient of Liquid Lips Catnip. Third, being an ingredient of CND VINYLUX is necessary for being an ingredient of HIGHLIGHTER DUO. We may conclude: Being an ingredient of CND VINYLUX is necessary for being an ingredient of TV Paint Stick."
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
d6109beb-0ad3-592d-a9f6-54800f007ac6
task_key
formal~5ffallacies--main--d6109beb-0ad3-592d-a9f6-54800f007ac6
task_revision_id
1
config / split
formal_fallacies / main

Official source

initial import