benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU-Pro / 1371 / A woman owned an extensive art collection that she displayed in a special room…

Problem

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

question

A woman owned an extensive art collection that she displayed in a special room of her home. While the woman was away on a vacation, there was a burglary at her home, and her favorite painting was stolen. Although the painting was insured for 1,000,000byaninsurancecompany,ithadamarketvalueofover1,000,000 by an insurance company, it had a market value of over 1,500,000. When the woman returned from vacation, she met with a detective employed by the insurance company to investigate the theft. During their meeting, the woman told the detective that she would pay him an extra 50,000ifherecoveredthepaihting.Forthenextthreeweeks,thedetectiveinvestigatedthetheftaspartofhisjobresponsibilitieswiththeinsurancecompany.Withinthecourseofthisinvestigation,thedetectivelearnedwhowasresponsiblefortheburglary.Asaconsequence,theculpritwasapprehended,andthepaintingwasrecoveredandreturnedtothewoman.Thedetectivethenrequestedthe50,000 if he recovered the paihting. For the next three weeks, the detective investigated the theft as part of his job responsibilities with the insurance company. Within the course of this investigation, the detective learned who was responsible for the burglary. As a consequence, the culprit was apprehended, and the painting was recovered and returned to the woman. The detective then requested the 50,000 that the woman had promised to pay him. After the woman refused to make the payment, the detective sued the woman for breach of contract. Who is most likely to prevail?
Plain-text mathematical notation (without MathML)
A woman owned an extensive art collection that she displayed in a special room of her home. While the woman was away on a vacation, there was a burglary at her home, and her favorite painting was stolen. Although the painting was insured for 1,000,000byaninsurancecompany,ithadamarketvalueofover1,500,000. When the woman returned from vacation, she met with a detective employed by the insurance company to investigate the theft. During their meeting, the woman told the detective that she would pay him an extra 50,000ifherecoveredthepaihting.Forthenextthreeweeks,thedetectiveinvestigatedthetheftaspartofhisjobresponsibilitieswiththeinsurancecompany.Withinthecourseofthisinvestigation,thedetectivelearnedwhowasresponsiblefortheburglary.Asaconsequence,theculpritwasapprehended,andthepaintingwasrecoveredandreturnedtothewoman.Thedetectivethenrequestedthe50,000 that the woman had promised to pay him. After the woman refused to make the payment, the detective sued the woman for breach of contract. Who is most likely to prevail?
Original LaTeX notation
A woman owned an extensive art collection that she displayed in a special room of her home. While the woman was away on a vacation, there was a burglary at her home, and her favorite painting was stolen. Although the painting was insured for $1,000,000 by an insurance company, it had a market value of over $1,500,000. When the woman returned from vacation, she met with a detective employed by the insurance company to investigate the theft. During their meeting, the woman told the detective that she would pay him an extra $50,000 if he recovered the paihting. For the next three weeks, the detective investigated the theft as part of his job responsibilities with the insurance company. Within the course of this investigation, the detective learned who was responsible for the burglary. As a consequence, the culprit was apprehended, and the painting was recovered and returned to the woman. The detective then requested the $50,000 that the woman had promised to pay him. After the woman refused to make the payment, the detective sued the woman for breach of contract. Who is most likely to prevail?

category

law

options

  1. The detective, because the market value of the painting exceeded its insured value, so there was sufficient consideration to support the woman's promise.
  2. The woman, because her promise was gratuitous.
  3. The woman, because the detective was already paid by the insurance company for his investigative services.
  4. The detective, because he went above and beyond his job duties to recover the painting.
  5. The woman, because she did not put the promise of extra payment in writing.
  6. The woman, because the insurance company owed her a pre-existing duty to find the painting.
  7. The detective, because the woman's promise was a valid verbal contract.
  8. The detective, because he did the act necessary to constitute an acceptance of the woman's offer.
  9. The detective, because the woman's promise constituted a binding contract.
  10. The woman, because the detective was performing his job, for which he was already compensated.

src

ori_mmlu-professional_law

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

upstream_id / Original problem ID
1371
task_id
63fe421d-f850-543e-b074-106fbaf730af
task_key
default--test--1371
task_revision_id
1
config / split
default / test

Official source

initial import