Datasets:

---

humane-lab

/

AVeriTeC-HerO

like 0

Follow

HUMANE Lab 9

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The visa lottery in the US, allows foreign governments to send criminals and people they don't want.\n\nQ1: What is the visa lottery?\nA1: The visa lottery known as The Diversity Immigrant Visa program, also known as the green card lottery, is a United States government lottery program for receiving a United States Permanent Resident Card. The Immigration Act of 1990 established the current and permanent Diversity Visa (DV) program..\n\nQ2: What happens if you win the visa lottery?\nA2: Winning the visa lottery doesn’t guarantee entrance to the United States. Lottery winners must pass background checks before they arrive in the United States. To apply for the lottery, individuals must also satisfy employment or education requirements. The computerized lottery system is administered by the U.S. State Department, not foreign governments.\n\nQ3: Do foreign governments gets to pick lottery applicants?\nA3: No, it is administered by the US state department.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The answer and sources show that foreign governments do not have any participation in the lottery.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Donald trump claims 'We have nearly 5 million Americans that have been lifted off of food stamps.\"\n\nQ1: How many Americans were lifted off food stamps during Donald Trump's time in office?\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: How many people were on food stamps before Donald Trump became President?\nA2: No answer could be found.\n\nQ3: What are food stamps?\nA3: The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as Food Stamps, helps low-income families buy the food they need in order to stay healthy.\n\nQ4: How many Americans are using food stamps?\nA4: Nearly 39.7 million Americans received food stamps in 2018.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: No before or after numbers to compare.\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Donald trump claims that 'We passed the largest package of tax cuts and reforms in American history'\n\nQ1: Did the Donald Trump administration pass the largest package of tax cuts and reforms in American history?\nA1: In inflation-adjusted dollars, the Trump administrationtax bill is the fourth-largest since 1940. And as a percentage of GDP, it ranks seventh", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: As it seems from the question and answer pair that the numbers do not quite add up. Therefore, the claim is refuted\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The BJP government published an infographic on the 48-months portal that makes four claims about the Jan Suraksha Yojana. This article is a fact check of those claims.\n\nQ1: Did The BJP government publish an infographic on the 48-months portal that makes four claims about the Jan Suraksha Yojana?\nA1: Yes, because The first claim is that ‘13.25 crore persons insured under PM Suraksha Bima Yojana at 12 rupees per year’.\n\nThe second claim is that ‘PM Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana benefitted 5.22 crore families at 330 rupees per year’.\n\nThe third claim is that ‘Atal Pension Yojana, for unorganised sector workers, has more than 1 crore subscribers’.\n\nThe fourth claim is that ‘Financial security of senior citizens has been ensured with PM Vaya Vandana Yojana, that gives 8% interest for 10 years and investment limit doubled to Rs. 15 lakh rupees and scheme extended till 2020’.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: True\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: More people are working today in the United States than ever before in the history of our country.\n\nQ1: Are there more people working today in the US than ever before?\nA1: Yes, because There has been a rise in people employed in the US.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The source clearly shows the increase in employment from 1940 so the claim is supported.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The Visa lottery — that’s where they put in the names; they put it in a lottery, and you pick, ‘Oh, here’s a wonderful person. Wonderful.’ You know, he killed four people. ‘Here’s — here’s another wonderful.’ … They send us the people they don’t want.\n\nQ1: What is the Visa lottery?\nA1: Congress established the diversity visa program through the Immigration Act of 1990 in an effort to promote immigration from countries underrepresented in the United States. The number of diversity visas is limited by law to 55,000 per fiscal year, but the annual cap has been reduced to 50,000 since fiscal year 2000. While Congress called this cap a “temporary reduction,” it does not have an expiration date. As of 2017, the U.S. government states that this reduction will remain in effect as long as needed, including for 2019.\n\nThe diversity visa program makes up to 50,000 visas available each year to natives of eligible countries. The program is well known as the \"diversity lottery,\" since potential visa recipients are randomly selected from the pool of qualified entries. Yet, being randomly selected—or \"winning\" the lottery—does not guarantee admission to the United States but rather provides the individual an opportunity to apply for the Diversity Visa. The odds of being selected for this opportunity are very small, with an average of 13.3 million people submitting applications each year.\n\nQ2: Who is eligible for the diversity visa program?\nA2: Only nationals of low-admission countries—defined as any country with fewer than 50,000 natives admitted to the United States in the previous five years—are eligible to enter the diversity lottery. Natives of countries that traditionally send large numbers of immigrants to the United States, such as Mexico, India, and China, are generally not eligible.\n\nEligible countries are grouped into six geographic regions: Europe; Africa; Asia; Oceania; North America (excluding Mexico); and South America, Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) calculates each region’s annual diversity visa allotment using a specific formula and recent immigration statistics. The allocation formula, which is recalculated every year, gives fewer visas to “high-admission” regions, or any region that accounted for more than a sixth of all immigrant admissions to the United States in the previous five years. Additionally, no more than 7 percent of the year's available visas may go to natives of any one country.\n\nTo be eligible for a diversity visa, applicants must be admissible to the United States under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and have either a high-school education (or its equivalent) or at least two years of recent qualifying work experience. The applicant or the applicant’s spouse must be a native of one of the countries that qualify for the diversity visa program.\n\nThe diversity visa program only accepts applications submitted electronically within a short timeframe designated each year. Eligible applicants are limited to one entry per registration period and will be disqualified for submitting multiple entries.\n\nQ3: What security precautions have been put in place for the Diversity Visa Program?\nA3: Diversity lottery \"winners\" have a short period of time to file the necessary paperwork and undergo extensive screening before a visa will be issued, including multiple identity confirmations using biometrics, criminal and security background checks, cross-checks with various watch-lists, and in-person interviews. These requirements and security procedures also apply for any family members (spouses and minor children) whom the lottery winner petitions to bring to the United States as derivatives.\n\nAn individual may be issued a visa and admitted into the United States only after passing all electronic and in-person screenings. If visa processing for a lottery winner or an eligible family member is not completed before the end of the fiscal year, the U.S. government will deny the application, and the person loses the opportunity to immigrate to the United States through that year's diversity visa program. While the individual may be eligible to enter the diversity lottery in future years, the chances of again being randomly selected to apply for the visa are slim.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: It seems from the 2nd qa that the process is random. Therefore the claim is refuted \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Medicare for All would result in massive tax increases like never before as well as the loss of private coverage for over 180 million Americans.\n\nQ1: What is Medicare for All?\nA1: Sanders’ idea of Medicare for All would be a single, national health insurance program that would cover everyone who lives in the United States. In the bill he introduced in 2017, it would pay for every medically necessary service, from routine doctor visits to surgery to mental health to prescription drugs. Dental and vision care are part of the package, too. The details on long-term care might vary between the Senate and House versions, but broadly speaking, nursing home and related care grow under both proposals.\n\nThe government would set payment rates for services, drugs and medical equipment. Each year, the secretary of Health and Human Services would determine a national budget for all covered services and spending would be limited by that cap. For individuals, there would be no costs — no deductibles, no copays or coinsurance. The two exceptions would be for some prescription drugs — though that would be limited to $200 a year — and possibly for long-term care.\n\nIt would replace all other insurance, with limited exceptions, such as cosmetic surgery. Employer-provided insurance, Medicaid and ultimately Medicare would all disappear.\n\nQ2: Will taxes rise to pay for Medicare for All?\nA2: To that, he would raise taxes on income over $250,000, reaching a 52 percent marginal rate on income over $10 million. He suggested a wealth tax on the top 0.1 percent of households.\n\nQ3: Will Medicare take private coverage away from over 180 million Americans?\nA3: it would mean that the roughly 180 million Americans who have private insurance would see their plans canceled.\n\nQ4: Is Medicare for All preferable to the current system of private insurance?\nA4: Medicare for All is much more generous than the current Medicare program. Right now, the Medicare program is for Americans 65 and over; they receive care, but they’re also responsible for part of the costs. Unlike traditional Medicare, Sanders’ Medicare for All would cover medical bills completely, with no burden on the patient. There would be no Medigap insurance or Medicare Advantage.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The tax increases would only effect high level earners however it does seem 180 million policies would be cancelled.\n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: When the wind stops blowing, that’s the end of your electric (power).\n\nQ1: Are electricity grids solely dependent on wind?\nA1: No, because They also frequently rely on natural gas peaking plants, which can power up in a matter of minutes to produce electricity when there's a spike in demand or little wind.\n\n\"As you think about each resource, they bring a unique profile,\" Chatterjee says. \"We need a balance of those resources. Wind alone doesn't cause reliability issues.\"\n\nQ2: Is wind power reliable?\nA2: But in a report released Thursday and an accompanying webinar, experts with the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) explained how wind can actually be seen as a more reliable source than conventional power plants — one that contributes to rather than inhibits the stability of the grid as a whole.\n\nQ3: Can wind Power be stored?\nA3: Pumping water back behind hydroelectric dams has been used for decades as a form of storage that absorbs excess generation from the grid and generates electricity later when it is needed by releasing the water to drive a turbine. Now, lithium-ion battery storage in the form of large battery banks is becoming more commonplace in homes, communities, and at the utility-scale.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Wind farms are backed up by natural gas peaking plants for when there is no wind or a spike in demand. The electricity from wind turbines can also be stored in lithium batteries at home\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: For many, many decades veterans have been trying to get VA Choice. You couldn’t get it. ... Now these great veterans, if there’s a big wait, they go outside, they go to a local doctor. We pay the bills. They get better. Everybody is happy. And we actually save a lot of money, if you can believe it. And I got that approved after 44 years of being unable to get it approved.\n\nQ1: When did the Veteran Choice Program start\nA1: It started with the passing of the H.R.3230 - Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 bill\n\nQ2: Was the Veteran Choice program cheap\nA2: Veterans Affairs Secretary Robert Wilkie acknowledged on Wednesday that his agency got a bad deal in paying nearly $2 billion in fees to companies responsible for booking veterans with private doctors.\n\nQ3: When did the Veteran Choice Program start?\nA3: It started with the passing of the H.R.3230 - Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 bill\n\nQ4: Was the Veteran Choice program cheap?\nA4: Veterans Affairs Secretary Robert Wilkie acknowledged on Wednesday that his agency got a bad deal in paying nearly $2 billion in fees to companies responsible for booking veterans with private doctors.\n\nQ5: How do Veteran groups feel about Donald Trump's Veteran Choice Program signed in 2018?\nA5: The leaders of major veterans groups looked around uncomfortably. What Trump called “choice” these veterans groups called “privatization,” and they’d been warning for years that it would cost taxpayers more money and deliver worse care for veterans. The veterans groups had endorsed the bill, but Trump’s description of it was not what they thought they were there to support.\n\nQ6: What are the issues surrounding Donald Trump's Veteran Choice Program signed in 2018?\nA6: The cost of expanding private care is hard to predict, but VA officials have told Congress and veterans groups that it will range from $13.9 billion to $32.1 billion over five years.\n\nSince the administration opposes lifting overall government spending, Democrats say the increased cost of private care will come at the expense of the VA’s own health system. Some lawmakers said the administration’s plan defies the purpose of the law they passed.\n\nQ7: What is the price comparison between the Veteran Choice Program and other veteran healthcare providers in the United States?\nA7: No answer could be found.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: From the evidence, it looks like veteran groups were not happy with Trump's wording of \"choice,\" as they saw the Veteran Choice Program as a \"privatization,\" and they’d been warning for years that it would cost taxpayers more money and deliver worse care for veterans. However, the veterans groups had endorsed the bill, but Trump’s description of it was not what they thought they were there to support. The VA option appears to cost between $13.9 billion and $32.1 billion over five years. However, it is not clear on the comparison between VA Choice and other veteran healthcare providers. But, based on the evidence, it looks like the VA Choice comes out as a much more expensive deal. More so, Donald Trump was not president in 2014; it was Barack Obama.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Not a single bulletproof jacket was procured in UPA rule from 2009 to 2014.\n\nQ1: How many bulletproof vests were requested in 2009?\nA1: 1,86,000 bulletproof jackets\n\nQ2: How many bullet proof vests were provided?\nA2: 0\n\nQ3: When were bullet proof vests eventually procured?\nA3: In 2018, the NDA government procured the bullet proof jackets for the armed forces, ministry of state for defence Subhash Bhamre confirmed this to Parliament on December 19 2018", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The bulletproof jackets were provided in 2018 and none was provided between 2009-2014\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Donald trump claims When the wind stops blowing, that’s the end of your electric (power)\n\nQ1: Is wind power a reliable source of electricity?\nA1: Yes, because Because some renewable energy technologies – such as wind and solar – have variable outputs, storage technologies have great potential\nFor example, when there is more supply than demand, such as during the night when low-cost power plants continue to operate, the excess electricity generation can be used to power storage devices. When demand is greater than supply, storage facilities can discharge their stored energy to the grid.\n\nQ2: Did Donald J Trump say that, ...When the wind stops blowing, that’s the end of your electric\nA2: Yes, because he did say, .. ''When the wind stops blowing, that’s the end of your electric''\n\nQ3: Where did Donald Trump say \"when the wind stops blowing, that’s the end of your electric\"?\nA3: CPAC 2019", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The claim that Trump said this is true but the content is not true as power can be stored for later use.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: We have created \"5.3 million new jobs, including over, now, 600,000 beautiful, brand-new manufacturing jobs.\"\n\nQ1: Under Donald Trump did the USA create 5.3 million new jobs?\nA1: The 5.3 million number appears to be slightly higher than the official number from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which says 4.9 million jobs have been created since January 2017.\n\nQ2: How many new jobs were created in U.S.A by President Donald Trump administration ?\nA2: Trump's plan would boost the size of the economy by about 11% in the long run and create about 5.3 million new jobs.\n\nQ3: How many jobs has Trump created since he took office?\nA3: Trump is taking credit for the job gains in the final months of his predecessor's administration, starting the clock on job gains from his election — not his inauguration.\n\nSince Trump has been in office, total nonfarm employment has grown by nearly 4.9 million. The 5.3 million data point includes gains in between his election on Nov. 8, 2016 and his inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Numbers in QA pairs indicate the true number is 4.9 million which is almost 10% less than claimed.\nIt seems the 5.3 million figure stated includes some jobs created by his predecessor.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Donald trump made claims about the veterans choice program being something that people has failed to create for four decades.\n\nQ1: When was the Veterans Choice program \"To improve the access of veterans to medical services from the Department of\nVeterans Affairs, and for other purposes.\" first enacted in the US?\nA1: The act was approved on August 7, 2014.\n\nQ2: Who was US President in 2014?\nA2: Barack Obama was US President from 2009–2017.\n\nQ3: Where there any additions to the act during President Donald Trump's administration?\nA3: President Donald J. Trump signed the Veterans Choice Program Extension and Improvement Act on April 18, so military veterans can continue receiving health care in the civilian sector when care is not easily accessible from a Veterans Affairs Department provider.\n\nQ4: According to Donald Trump, how did this improve the Act?\nA4: “This bill will extend and improve the Veterans Choice Program so that more veterans can see the doctor of their choice … and don’t have to wait and travel long distances for VA care.\"", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The program already existed since 2014. He has said he has improved it and extended it but to say it didnt exist is not correct.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Donald trump claims \"One in three women is sexually assaulted on the dangerous journey north.\"\n\nQ1: Where does the claim of 1 in 3 women being sexually assualted when crossing the border come from?\nA1: A May 2017 report from Doctors Without Borders said that of more than 400 people surveyed in Mexico at facilities that help migrants, 31.4 percent of women had been sexually abused during their transit through Mexico.\n\nPage 5 of the report says:\n— Nearly one-third of the women surveyed had\nbeen sexually abused during their journey.\n\nQ2: Are the assault incidents still occuring in 2019?\nA2: Yes, because The report is from 2019, and is a credible source, therefore the claim is supported", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: One of three\n women are assaulted a doing to source provided \n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Donal d trump claims \"The unemployment rate has reached the lowest in over 51 years. And African American, … Hispanic American, Asian American unemployment rates are at their all-time historic lows.\"\n\nQ1: When did Donald Trump become president?\nA1: In office\nJanuary 20, 2017 – January 20, 2021\n\nQ2: What was the rate of African American unemployment in January 2017?\nA2: 7.5%\n\nQ3: What was the rate of African American unemployment in March 2019?\nA3: 6.5%\n\nQ4: What was the rate of Hispanic unemployment in January 2017?\nA4: 5.8%\n\nQ5: What was the rate of Hispanic unemployment in March 2019?\nA5: 4.5%\n\nQ6: What was the rate of unemployment for Asians In January 2017?\nA6: 3.8%\n\nQ7: What was the rate of Asian unemployment in March 2019?\nA7: 3.0%\n\nQ8: are the Numbers shown in the unemployment rates the highest for 51 years?\nA8: these numbers did hit record lows for the period since statistics have been kept", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: It seems from the last QA that the numbers are indeed at their lowest low, therefore the label is supported\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Beto O’Rourke and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand \"have both said they would tear down the border wall between the US and Mexico if elected president\n\nQ1: Did Beto O’Rourke and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand say that they would tear down the border wall between the US and Mexico if elected president?\nA1: The tweet is partially accurate, but it leaves out important details.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The answer didn't confirm or deny the quote.\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Cancer is Candida or Fungus.\n\nQ1: What is cancer\nA1: Cancer is when abnormal cells divide in an uncontrolled way\n\nQ2: How does cancer start\nA2: Most cancers start due to gene changes that happen over a person’s lifetime. \nSometimes cancers start due to inherited faulty genes passed down in families but this is rare.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The sources show that cancer is not caused by candida or is not a fungus. The source is a credible one and therefore the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: CORY AQUINO's Presidency of the Philippines is unconstitutional.\n\nQ1: Was CORY AQUINO's Presidency of the Philippines ruled legitimate by any governing body?\nA1: In a May 22, 1986 ruling, the Supreme Court resolved three petitions which questioned the legality of Aquino’s presidency, saying “the people have made the judgment”. \n\nThe court said, in part: “For the legitimacy of the Aquino government is not a justiciable matter. It belongs to the realm of politics where only the people of the Philippines are the judge. And the people have made the judgment; they have accepted the government of President Corazon C. Aquino which is in effective control of the entire country so that it is not merely a de facto government but is in fact and law a de jure government. Moreover, the community of nations has recognized the legitimacy of the present government.\n\nQ2: Did the supreme court making any other rulings regarding CORY AQUINO's Presidency of the Philippines?\nA2: On October 24th 1986\nThe court again ruled on dismissing another petition questioning the validity of Aquino’s government: “There can be no question that President Corazon C. Aquino and Vice-President Salvador H. Laurel are the incumbent and legitimate President and Vice-President of the Republic of the Philippines.”", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: It looks like this question has gone through the courts and the questions demonstrate these results, that the presidency is legitimate.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: In North Carolina, US absentee voters had no way to track whether their ballots were ever delivered in the November US 2018 congressional election.\n\nQ1: Can Absentee voters track their ballots?\nA1: Yes via the \"voter lookup\" tool.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: It seems the it seems that the votes can be tracked, therefore the label is refuted\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Buncombe County Sheriff Quentin Miller says an ICE detainer request is not a valid warrant.\n\nQ1: What was the Sheriff Quentin Miller's stance on ICE detainers\nA1: Effective immediately, it is the policy of the Buncombe County Sheriff’s Office and the Buncombe County Detention Center that ICE detainers will not be honored.\n\nQ2: What is an ICE detainer\nA2: ICE detainers, also known as ICE holds or immigration detainers, are requests that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) sends to local enforcement agencies (e.g. police, sheriff, local jail) asking for information about a person who is about to be released from custody and/or asking that the local agency hold that person for an extra amount of time in order to facilitate their deportation.\n\nQ3: Do ICE retainers carry any judicial authority\nA3: ICE detainers are not judicial warrants. An arrest warrant is an order signed by a judge that allows a police officer to detain a person because there is “probable cause” to believe that the person has committed a crime. “Probable cause” is the standard of proof that the government must show in order to deprive a person of his or her liberty under the Fourth Amendment.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The 1st q&a pair says that the person named in the claim will not honour An ice detainer, the 3rd q&a pair stat that the 'ice detainers are not warrants'\nNeither q&a pair link these pieces of information so there is no evidence that the person in the claim said what is claimed but it is strongly inferred.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Blake Griffin, a forward for the Detroit Pistons basketball team, will pay $258,000 per month in child support to his ex Brynn Cameron.\n\nQ1: Who is Blake Griffin's ex partner?\nA1: Blake Griffin's ex was Brynn Cameron\n\nQ2: Does Blake Griffin's have a child with his ex Brynn Cameron?\nA2: Blake Griffin and Brynn Cameron have two children together\n\nQ3: Does Blake Griffin pay child support to Brynn cameron?\nA3: Radar Online reported that Griffin, 29, was ordered by the Los Angeles Superior Court to pay a sum of $258,000 a month in child support, citing court documents.\n\nQ4: Have Griffin or his ex-fiancée, Brynn Cameron given a statement on the amount of child support payments?\nA4: The recent reports of the financial details of the child support agreement between Blake Griffin and Brynn Cameron are inaccurate. Both sides have settled amicably and are moving forward with co-parenting their two children,\" a statement provided reads", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: It seems that the divorce was settled amicably. Therefore the label is refuted \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Trump promised during the campaign not to cut Social Security or Medicare, his proposed 2019 budget included cuts of $500 billion to Medicare and $72 billion to Social Security\n\nQ1: What is Medicare?\nA1: Medicare is a federal health insurance program that pays for a variety of health care expenses. It’s administered by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), a division of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS). Medicare beneficiaries are typically senior citizens aged 65 and older. Adults with certain approved medical conditions (such as Lou Gehrig’s disease) or qualifying permanent disabilities may also be eligible for Medicare enrollment benefits.\n\nQ2: What is Social Security?\nA2: Social security is the protection that a society\nprovides to individuals and households to\nensure access to health care and to\nguarantee income security, particularly in\ncases of old age, unemployment, sickness,\ninvalidity, work injury, maternity or loss of a\nbreadwinner.\n\nQ3: How much money is currently spent on Medicare and Social Security?\nA3: No answer could be found.\n\nQ4: How much does Donald Trumps administration plan to cut Medicare by?\nA4: The Congressional Budget Office noted direct spending on Medicare would decrease by $472 billion over 10 years under the president’s proposal.\n\nQ5: How much does Donald Trumps administration plan to reduce social security by?\nA5: The President's budget identifies programmatic changes that would reduce Social Security spending by $25 billion, or less than 0.2 percent over a decade.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: This claim is refuted. The stated cuts for the 2019 budget is $500 billion for Medicare and $72 billion for Social Security in the claim. In the QA pairs, 2019 budget cuts are less: $472/ $334 billion (conflicting numbers) for medicare and $25 billion for social security. Therefore, the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: In the United States right now, we have more income and wealth inequality than any other country on Earth.\n\nQ1: Where does the U.S. rank in income inequality?\nA1: Of the 38 industrialized nations, the United States comes in sixth.\n\nQ2: Which countries have a higher inequality rating than the U.S.?\nA2: South Africa, Costa Rica, Mexico, Chile and Turkey ranked higher in inequality than the U.S.\n\nQ3: Which country ranks higher in wealth inequality?\nA3: Within the OECD's list, based on top wealth shares, household net wealth is most unequally distributed in the United States, where the richest 10% of households own 79% of total wealth, while the richest 1% holds 42%.\n\nQ4: Does the OECD Wealth Distribution Database include calculations on wealth inequality in every country?\nA4: No, because The list only includes some countries across the world.\n\nQ5: Has the U.S. ranked higher than other countries in wealth inequality in any other global wealth reports?\nA5: No, because In the 2018 Global Wealth Report, the U.S. placed in 5th place out of the 41 economies covered by the report.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The claim is not true, the US does not have more income and wealth inequality and not all countries are counted on the lists. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The U.S has record bankruptcies in farming country.\n\nQ1: What is US farming country?\nA1: The Midwest is the country’s farming powerhouse. In the small farming communities of the Midwest, farmers often account for one-third of the population, especially in North Dakota, South Dakota, and Kansas. On the coasts, just one or two out of every 100 people work as farmers, even in rural areas. The county with the greatest percentage of farmers is McMullen, Texas. The town’s population is 707, with 374 farmers—that’s more than half of its entire population. If you exclude children and the elderly, the proportion of farmers is even greater. No matter how urban your landscape, though, there’s probably a farmer in the range of a short drive. San Francisco, which has the fewest farmers of all, still boa\n\nQ2: What is classified as bankruptcy in the US?\nA2: • Chapter 7 - This is the basic theory of bankruptcy under which a debtor gathers their assets, liquidates them, pays as many bills as possible, and then the unpaid bills go unpaid. \"In this case, the debtor is hoping to hold onto a few dollars so that (he) can keep on going with (his) own life and re-establish some economic foundation for (himself),\" Saxowsky says.\n\nIndividual debtors discharge as much debt as possible, but keep as much exempt property as possible for a \"fresh start.\" A corporation has no exemptions.\n\n• Chapter 11 - The debtor wants to reorganize and hold onto their business. This is typically used for corporations and individuals whose debt limits are too high to qualify for Chapter 13, a class for wage-earners, Minch says. There are no debt limits in Chapter 11.\n\nSaxowsky says the debtor may have to repay debts over a longer period of time than in the original loan agreement. Debtors continue to run the business as a debtor-in-possession, unless the court finds that assets are improperly managed or that the debtor in possession is violating court orders. Then a trustee is appointed.\n\n• Chapter 12 - This is a special chapter created by Congress in 1985, during the last farm credit crisis. It is especially for smaller \"family farms\" and \"family fisherman\" to avoid liquidation and foreclosure. It was created as a temporary measure and made permanent in 2005.\n\nRoger Minch, a Fargo lawyer who works in business law, says a Chapter 12 is the way to go for farmers in need of debt reorganization, but it's only possible if the farm is within limits.\n\nQ3: Were there record farming bankruptcies in the US in 2019?\nA3: 6th Feb 2019\nA wave of bankruptcies is sweeping the U.S. Farm Belt as trade disputes add pain to the low commodity prices that have been grinding down American farmers for years.\n\nThroughout much of the Midwest, U.S. farmers are filing for chapter 12 bankruptcy protection at levels not seen for at least a decade, a Wall Street Journal review of federal data shows.\n\nQ4: What is the definition of farming country in the USA?\nA4: No answer could be found.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Q&A 1 shows that the farming country the claim refers to is Midwest America, Q&A 3 shows that the Midwest is seeing record bankruptcies as compared as far back as 2014 but that they are not unprecidented as the claim makes out by saying 'record bankruptcies' so there is some cherry-picking of data up to 2014 at least. as it shows 2010 was worse\n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Virginia House Delegate says that Republicans have had more African-Americans on key committees than when the Democrats were in control.\n\nQ1: How many blacks were in the senate Appropriations Committee during the tenure of Republicans\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: Are there rules that affect the appointment of a black senator\nA2: There is none", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The questions and answers do not tell me the numbers regarding African American senators so there is not enough evidence to support or refute the claim.\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: 50% of all new jobs in South Africa, in the past year, were created in the Western Cape.\n\nQ1: How many jobs in Western Cape were created between quarter 3 2017 and quarter 3 2018?\nA1: 95,000 which equals 50.5%.\n\nQ2: How many jobs in Western Cape were created between quarter 4 2017 and quarter 4 2018?\nA2: 29,000 which equals 8.1%.\n\nQ3: When was the 4th quarter data released?\nA3: 12 February 2019.\n\nQ4: When was the manifesto released?\nA4: 23 February 2019.\n\nQ5: Did the DA use the older data rather than the new data released in February 12th 2019?\nA5: Yes, because The new data was not used.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: 50.5% of the jobs created in the 3rd quarter between 2017 and 2018 were from the Western Cape \n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Youth unemployment in South Africa is amongst the highest in the world.\n\nQ1: what is the official unemployment rate in South Africa\nA1: South Africa 26,7 27,5 27,1 -0,4 0,4 36,3 37,3 37,0 -0,3 0,7\n\nQ2: what country had the highest rate of unemployment in the world\nA2: According to The Economist’s Pocket World in Figures, South Africa has the highest rate of unemployment for young people in the world.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The first answer in the 2nd Q&A pair states that South Africa has the highest rate of youth unemployment in the world, which supports the claim which states it is amongst the highest in the world.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: There is no human-caused climate change\n\nQ1: What are the natural causes of climate change\nA1: Orbital changes, volcanic eruptions, movement of crustal plates, etc.\n\nQ2: What are some unnatural activities that could contribute to climate change\nA2: Human activity is warming the planet. Since the use of coal, oil and gas became widespread after 1750, humans have added about 2,040 billion metric tons (Human CO2 emissions, 1750–2011: 2,040 ± 310 gigatons) of heat-trapping carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, where it can linger for thousands of years", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The answer pair shows clear human activity that has contributed to climate change. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The BJP government aims to cover 28.5 lakh hectare area under irrigation\n\nQ1: Did the government make this known to the public\nA1: They stated it on their website\n\nQ2: Will the area covered by irrigation be able to lead to an increase in crop yield\nA2: Simply increasing the area under irrigation will not be sufficient to increase crop yield", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The source supports the claim.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: French President Emmanuel Macron said the UK must take its share of migrants, 300,000 now immediately and up to 100,000 every year until the situation is resolved if it wants to remain in the EU.\n\nQ1: Did French president Emmanuel Macron say' \n''the UK must take its share of migrants, 300,000 now immediately and up to 100,000 every year until the situation is resolved if it wants to remain in the EU''?\nA1: No, because No record can be found for this quote.\nThe French Embassy in London confirmed that Mr Macron said none of these things.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: From the answer it can be seen that this claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: In 1963 Bernie Sanders was arrested for throwing eggs at black civil rights protestors.\n\nQ1: Was Bernie Sanders arrested in 1963 at a black civil rights protest?\nA1: A Chicago Tribune archival photo of a young man being arrested in 1963 at a South Side protest shows Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders, his campaign has confirmed, bolstering the candidate’s narrative about his civil rights activism.\n\nThe black-and-white photo shows a 21-year-old Sanders, then a University of Chicago student, being taken by Chicago police toward a police wagon.\n\nQ2: At the time, what was Sanders's position on civil rights?\nA2: Sanders enrolled at the University of Chicago on Oct. 3, 1960, and graduated in June 1964 with a bachelor of arts degree in political science, said Jeremy Manier, a university spokesman.\n\nAt the University of Chicago, he was a leader of the Congress of Racial Equality, a major civil rights group. News accounts from the time had Sanders leading protests over racial inequality.\n\nQ3: Was Sanders supporting the protest?\nA3: A January 1964 Tribune story on the court cases of those who had been arrested in August identified a Bernard Sanders. The negatives were scanned and an image was shown to the Sanders campaign Friday. On Saturday, the campaign confirmed that a second photo also shows Sanders.\n\nIn the early 1960s, protests over segregation in the Englewood area raged over mobile classrooms dubbed \"Willis Wagons,\" named for then-Chicago Schools Superintendent Benjamin Willis. Critics charged that the trailers kept black children in the area instead of sending them to white schools.\n\nSanders was arrested Aug. 12, 1963, and charged with resisting arrest. He was found guilty and fined $25, according to a Tribune story about the protests.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: He was arrested for resisting arrest in 1963, he was a civil rights activist\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The BJP government has uploaded an infographic on their 48-months portal that makes claims about the Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yojana (PMKSY). one such claim is - Facilitating farmers for installing solar water pumps in field irrigation.\n\nQ1: Who are the Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yojana (PMKSY)?\nA1: The Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana was launched on 1st July, 2015 with the motto of ‘Har Khet Ko Paani’ for providing end-to end solutions in irrigation supply chain, viz. water sources, distribution network and farm level applications. PMKSY adopts State level planning and projectised execution that allows States to draw up their own irrigation development based on District Irrigation Plans and State Irrigation Plans. The work relating to embankment of fields to retain water therein under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) is permitted.\n\nQ2: Did the PMKSY facilitate farmers for installing water pumps in field irrigation?\nA2: The PMSKY operating guidelines say 'efforts may be made for integration of micro irrigation with solar pumping units.'\n\nQ3: Is there any evidence that the government supported the installation of solar pumping units?\nA3: No answer could be found.\n\nQ4: Did the PMKSY want to facilitate farmers to install water pumps in their field irrigation systems?\nA4: The PMSKY operating guidelines say 'efforts may be made for integration of solar pumping units to be used in irrigation .", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The Q&As clearly show that installation of solar pumps is part of the initiative so the claim is supported.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The BJP government has uploaded an infographic on their 48-months portal that makes claims about the Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yojana (PMKSY). one such claim is - Dedicated micro irrigation fund of 5000 crore rupees.\n\nQ1: How much Is the BJP planning to fund for micro irrigation?\nA1: The Union Finance\nMinister, in his Budget Speech 2017-18 has\nannounced creation of a dedicated Micro\nIrrigation Fund to be instituted with NABARD\nwith an initial corpus of Rs. 5000 crore for\nencouraging public and private investments in\nmodern irrigation methods such as sprinkler\nand drip irrigation and offering support for\nexpanding coverage of Micro Irrigation by\nencouraging the States to avail this credit at a\nlower interest rate.\n\nQ2: Is the Micro Irrigation Fund new to India?\nA2: Farmers are gradually getting inclined to adopt Micro Irrigation (MI) systems. A Centrally Sponsored Scheme on MI was launched in 2005-06, and was implemented in Mission mode as National Mission on Micro Irrigation (NMMI) from 2010-11. This was subsumed under ‘On Farm Water Management’ (OFWM) component of National Mission on Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA) from 2014-15 and subsequently subsumed under ‘Per Drop More Crop’ component of Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana (PMKSY) from 2015-16.\n\nQ3: How much is being allocated to the micro irrigation fund?\nA3: The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs chaired by the Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi today has approved an initial Corpus of Rs.5,000 crore for setting up of a dedicated “Micro Irrigation Fund” (MIF) with NABARD under Pradhan MantriKrishiSinchayeeYojana (PMKSY).", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Q&A 1 confirms the claimed fund set up by the BJP government is true as claimed, It also confirms the claimed amount of 5000 crore is correct as claimed.\nAll of which is also confirmed as correct by Q&A 3\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: French President Emmanuel Macron said the UK will only be allowed to stay in the EU if they fully adopt all EU rules and regulations including adopting the Euro within six months of stopping Brexit.\n\nQ1: Did Macron say:\n\n\"the UK will only be allowed to stay in the EU if they fully adopt all EU rules and regulations including adopting the Euro within six months of stopping Brexit.\"\nA1: No record can be found of this and the french embassy have said he never said it.\n\nQ2: What steps would the UK need to do in order to stay in the EU if Brexit was stopped?\nA2: Following EU rules and regulations is a necessary part of membership of the EU", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: From the Q&As it seems that Macron never said this, so the claim is refuted. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Sen. Kamala Harris is the aunt of “Empire” actor Jussie Smollett\n\nQ1: Is Kamala Harris the aunt of Jussie Smollett?\nA1: No, because This is explained in the Factcheck.org fact check.\n\nQ2: How many sisters does Kamala Harris have\nA2: Missed and loved by those she left behind, her spirit lives on in her daughters, Kamala and Maya;\n\nQ3: What is Jussie Smollett's mother's name\nA3: He married a beautiful African- American woman, Janet Smollett. Joel Smollett is not a well-known personality but rather known through his famous children.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Disregarding the fact checker's verdict, the evidence available via the Q&A sources does not support the claim that Kamala Harris has family links to that of Jussie Smollett. Therefore the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The Jobs Fund in South Africa is a vital component to private sector job creation. The fund has created well over 200,000 jobs since its inception.\n\nQ1: How many jobs were created by the South African jobs fund between 2011 and 2019\nA1: By December 2018 the South African Jobs Fund had created 245 thousand jobs.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: has created 45,000 estimate in claim.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Funding to the clothing and textile competitivenss programme will support 35,500 existing jobs.\n\nQ1: How much is the funding to the clothing and textile competitiveness program\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: What is the aim of the incentive\nA2: The aim of the scheme is to provide support for the industry and to address challenges to upgrade productivity, product design, the hardware and the capital equipment. In line with our approach to funding initiatives, the incentive will be measured to show their impact and future funding will be based on proven outcomes", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The source does not show any evidence regarding the amount of jobs that will be supported so there is not enough evidence to support or refute the claim.\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The trade balance between the US and the EU is $151 billion.\n\nQ1: When was the claim made\nA1: 20/02/2019\n\nQ2: What is the trade balance between the US and the EU\nA2: The U.S. goods and services trade deficit with the EU 27 was $130 billion in 2019.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Figures from the US government show a trade deficit of $130 billion in 2019, not $151 billion.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The South African Jobs Fund has created well over 200,000 jobs since its inception.\n\nQ1: When was the South African Jobs Fund created?\nA1: The Jobs Fund was announced by the President during the State of the Nation Address on 10 February, 2011. Following this announcement, the Jobs Fund was successfully launched in June 2011 by Minister of Finance and an amount of R9billion was set aside, towards the realisation of the objectives of the Jobs Fund\n\nQ2: How many jobs had the Jobs Fund created by February 2019?\nA2: As at 31/12/2018 170,148 permanent jobs had been created, alongside 55,654 short term jobs.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: created 225,981 sustainable jobs\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Jobs for 1.1 million young people are supported by the Employment Tax Incentive (ETI) scheme in South Africa.\n\nQ1: How many young people benefit from this scheme?\nA1: 31,000 employers claimed the money for 1.1 million employees in 2015/16", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: 31,000 employers claimed the money for 1.1 million employees in 2015/16\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: A meme that asks \"When will liberals check out the Quran?\" lists nine supposed quotes from the Muslim holy book.\n\nQ1: Does a viral meme that asks \"When will liberals check out the Quran?\" list nine supposed quotes from the Muslim holy book the Quran?\nA1: Yes, because The viral meme does list 9 supposed quotes from the holy book of the Quaran.\n\nQ2: What are these 9 quotes?\nA2: 1 - Muslims must not take the infidels as friends\n2 - Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable\n3 - Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam\n4 - Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Qur’an\n5 - Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the infidels\n6 - The unbelievers are stupid; urge the Muslims to fight them\n7 - When opportunity arises kill the infidels wherever you catch them\n8 - The Jews and the Christians are perverts; fight them\n9 - Make war on the infidels living in your neighbourhood\n\nQ3: Do the 9 Quotes from the meme appear anywhere else such as in the Quran itself?\nA3: They only appear in a old 2005 post on a site called Islam Watch.\n\nQ4: Do any of the quotes appear in the Quran?\nA4: No, because They do not appear in the Quran.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The quotes are shown to be misleading.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Man who cited religious reasons for not paying his income taxes “has won a historic lawsuit against the IRS.”\n\nQ1: Did Michael Bowman won a historic lawsuit against the IRS ?\nA1: The judge dismissed the charge without prejudice, meaning prosecutors could seek a new indictment to replace it. Maddux said the government was considering its options.\n\nBowman still faces four counts of willful failure to file tax returns, a misdemeanor.\n\nQ2: Did Michael Bowman filed a motion asking the court to dismiss the whole case ?\nA2: Defendant, Michael Bowman, through his attorney, Matthew \nSchindler, moves the Court to dismiss the indictment alleging violations of \n26 USC §§ 7201 and 7203 because, as applied to him, these criminal charges \nviolate his right to maintain his conscience and freely practice his religion as \nguaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and 42 \nUSC § 2000bb-1 (The Religious Freedom Restoration Act “RFRA”). This \nmotion is further supported by the following Memorandum of Law\n\nQ3: What was Michael Bowman alleged to have done ?\nA3: Prosecutors alleged that Bowman hasn't filed an accurate or timely income tax return since at least 1997. When the Oregon Department of Revenue stepped up its enforcement and began garnishing money from Bowman's bank account in January 2012, Bowman changed his method of financial transactions. He began cashing out his work checks, leaving a minimum balance in his bank account, between January 2012 through September 2014, according to the government. Defendant's altered bank behavior removed his income from the reach of taxing authorities and allowed him to avoid payment of assessed taxes", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: According to the article linked to the first answer one felony charge was dismissed because, as the judge said, \"Just cashing checks is not evasion\".\nFour misdemeanor charges remain.\nI don't think that's a \"historic\" victory.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Bill Gates is investing another $5 billion in South Africa.\n\nQ1: Is Bill Gates investing in South Africa?\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: Who made this claim?\nA2: A website called 'Couple of Happiness'.\n\nQ3: Does the article provide proof that $5 billion is being invested in South Africa by Bill Gates?\nA3: No, because The article's content is about the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's annual Goalkeepers report, which monitors progress toward attaining UN poverty-reduction objectives by 2030.\n\nThe title \"Bill Gates Revealed Another $5 Billion Investment in South Africa\" is clickbait.\n\nQ4: Why was Nirav Modi in London?\nA4: eorge Hepburne Scott, extradition barrister representing Nirav Modi said said that Modi had come to the UK in January 2018 because o \nof an “imminent IPO” of his business here.\n\nHe arrived in the UK before any allegations or criminal complaints were made in India.\n\nQ5: What did Nirav Modi testify at his hearing?\nA5: He was asked by Mallon if he consented to extradition. He replied in a clear voice \"I do not consent.\"\n\nHe stood to confirm his date of birth and his address.\n\nQ6: Why was Nirav Modi in London\nA6: Modi was in London in January 2018 of an imminent IPO of his business\n\nQ7: Is there evidence that BJP leaders forced Modi to flee India\nA7: There are only mentions of the allegations and the court hearing.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The Q&As are not relevant to the claim so there is no evidence to support or refute the claim.\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: [Funding] to the clothing and textile competitiveness programme… will support 35,500 existing job.\n\nQ1: What is the clothing and textile competitiveness programme in South Africa?\nA1: The Clothing and Textiles Competitiveness Programme (CTCP) is a programme of the Department of Trade and Industry (the dti’s) and forms a core part of the implementation of the Customised Sector Programme (CSP’s) for the Clothing, Textiles, Footwear, Leather & Leather Goods Industries. The CTCP’s main objective is to assist industry in upgrading equipment, process, products and people, re-positioning South Africa to compete effectively against other low cost producing countries.\n\nQ2: How many clothing and textile related jobs are there in South Africa?\nA2: The Clothing, Textiles, Footwear, and Leather (CTFL) industry is a big deal in South Africa. The CTFL industry currently makes up around 14% of manufacturing employment in the country. This means the sector facilitates an estimated 60 000 to 80 000 jobs.\n\nQ3: Are there any statistics that would prove how many jobs were supported and created since 2010?\nA3: No answer could be found.\n\nQ4: When was the scheme first established?\nA4: 2010", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: No evidence to support or refute claim is available in QA pairs.\n\nThey do state 60,000 - 80,000 jobs exist and what the competitiveness program hopes to achieve but not how many people it will support and why only 35,000 of the 60,000 to 80,000 will be supported directly..\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: In the Australian Government in 2019, Labor had twice the number of women the Liberals had in Parliament and on the frontbench.\n\nQ1: In Australia in 2019, how many female representatives were there?\nA1: In 2019 30% of seat were held by women. There were 150 seats and 45 were held by women.\n\nQ2: Does Australia have more than one part to its government?\nA2: yes. Amongst others there is the House of Representatives and the Senate.\n\nQ3: How many women in parliament are labour vs liberals?\nA3: No answer could be found.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: QA pairs do not confirm numbers to compare whats stated in the claim.\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Genetically modified yeast, animal, bacterial and viral DNA in vaccines can be incorporated into the recipient’s DNA causing unknown genetic mutations.\n\nQ1: Can DNA From a Vaccine insert itself into the recipients DNA causing unknown genetic mutations?\nA1: Opportunity – DNA from the vaccine is not able to incorporate itself into cellular DNA. In fact, if this could be accomplished, gene therapy would be much easier than it has been.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Reliable educational source refutes the theory that DNA from the vaccine can be incorporated into recipient’s DNA.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez puts out a press release on Twitter saying that a Alabama mother who supports ISIS is a bigger hero than our U.S veterans and should be welcomed home.\n\nQ1: What is the username of Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez twitter account?\nA1: @AOC\n\nQ2: What account made the tweet in the claim?\nA2: @AOCpress (a parody account)", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The twitter press release was not made by the real Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez but by a parody account under her name \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Beta-Propiolactone is in vaccines and is known to cause cancer, suspected gastrointestinal, liver, nerve and respiratory, skin and sense organ poison.\n\nQ1: Is Beta-Propiolactone in vaccines?\nA1: Yes, because What you need to know before you receive Flucelvax Tetra\n\nbeta-propiolactone, cetyltrimethylammonium bromide, or polysorbate 80, which are trace\nresidues from the manufacturing process.\n\nQ2: How does beta-propiolactone get into vaccines?\nA2: beta-Propiolactone is used for vaccines, tissue grafts, surgical instruments, and enzymes, as a sterilant of\nblood plasma, water, milk, and nutrient broth, and as a vapor-phase disinfectant in enclosed spaces.\n\nQ3: What side effects can Beta-Propiolactone cause?\nA3: Acute Effects:\nAcute inhalation exposure beta-propiolactone causes severe irritation of the eyes, nose, throat, and\nrespiratory tract in humans. Acute dermal exposure may cause irritation of the skin, blistering, or burns in\nhumans. Contact with the eyes may cause permanent corneal opacification. Burns of the mouth and\nstomach may occur in humans following acute exposure via ingestion. (1,2)\nAcute oral exposure has been observed to result in muscular spasms, respiratory difficulty, and convulsions\nat high levels in rats. In rats acutely exposed intravenously, liver and kidney tubular damage has been\nreported. (1,3)\nAcute animal exposure tests in rats have demonstrated beta-propiolactone to have extreme acute toxicity\nby inhalation. (4)\n\nChronic Effects (Noncancer):\nNo information is available on the chronic health effects of beta-propiolactone in humans.\nChronic dermal exposure has resulted in skin irritation, scarring, and hair loss in mice. (1,3)\nEPA has not established a Reference Concentration (RfC) or a Reference Dose (RfD) for betapropiolactone.(2)\n\nReproductive/Developmental Effects:\nNo information is available on the reproductive or developmental effects of beta-propiolactone in humans\nor animals.\n\nCancer Risk:\nNo information is available on the carcinogenic effects of beta-propiolactone in humans.\nSquamous cell carcinomas of the forestomach have been reported in orally exposed rats. (1,6,8)\nIn several studies of rats and mice exposed to beta-propiolactone via subcutaneous injection, local tumors\nhave been observed at the site of injection. Lymphomas and hepatomas have been reported in mice\nfollowing intraperitoneal injection. (1,6,8)\nIn mice, hamsters, and guinea pigs dermally exposed, skin tumors have been observed. (1,6,8)\nEPA has not classified beta-propiolactone for carcinogenicity. (2)\nIARC has classified beta-propiolactone as a Group 2B, possible human carcinogen. (6)", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The answers and source show that the chemical can cause these symptoms in lab animals but no in humans so the claim is cherry picking.\n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez puts out a press release on Twitter demanding that President Trump should be blocked from stopping the return of a heroic mother from Alabama who supports ISIS.\n\nQ1: Where was this message posted?\nA1: the Twitter account that sent out the message has a parody disclaimer, it is not real The bio of the @AOCPress accounts notes it is a satirical parody and points visitors to her real account at @AOC:\n\nQ2: On her real account, does Ocasio-Cortez have this tweet or one similar?\nA2: No, because She mentions ISIS twice, neither in this way.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Parody account.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Formaldehyde is in vaccines and causes cancer in humans among other issues and is banned from vaccines in most European countries\n\nQ1: Is formaldehyde in vaccines?\nA1: Yes, It is used in the production of some vaccines to inactivate toxins from bacteria and viruses (for example, poliovirus, Hepatitis B antigen, and diphtheria and tetanus toxins). It is possible that tiny traces may remain in the 6-in-1 vaccine (Infanrix Hexa), Hepatitis B vaccine (HBVaxPro), one of the Pre-school Booster vaccines (Repevax), and the Teenage Booster vaccine (Revaxis). However, formaldehyde breaks down quickly in water (and most of the vaccine is water).\n\nQ2: How much formaldehyde is in the vaccines?\nA2: The human body produces and uses formaldehyde as part of the process of metabolism. The amount of natural formaldehyde in a 2-month-old infant’s blood (around 1.1 milligrams in total) is ten times greater than the amount found in any vaccine (less than 0.1 milligrams). A pear contains around 50 times more formaldehyde than is found in any vaccine.\n\nQ3: Is formaldehyde banned for use in Europe?\nA3: No: The EU is taking further steps to protect workers from exposure to carcinogens. The Council today adopted its position (general approach) on a proposal which will update the existing rules on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to carcinogens or mutagens at work (Directive 2004/37/EC). The aim of the proposal, which was presented by the Commission in April this year, is to reduce the exposure levels for 5 carcinogenic chemical agents - cadmium, beryllium, arsenic acid, formaldehyde and 4,4'-Methylene-bis(2-chloroaniline)(MOCA).\n\nEstimates show that this proposal, when adopted, would in the longer term improve working conditions for over 1 000 000 workers in the EU and should prevent more than 22 000 cases of work-related ill-health. It is a very good example of how the EU is taking concrete steps to protect its citizens.\n\nBeate Hartinger-Klein, Federal Minister of Labour, Social Affairs, Health and Consumer Protection of Austria.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The answers and sources show that it is a very small dose and is not banned in Europe so the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Today’s minimum wage worker making $7.25 an hour has less buying power than a minimum wage worker in the 1960s.\"\n\nQ1: What was the minimum wage for workers in the US in 2019?\nA1: Minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.\n\nQ2: What was the minimum wage for workers in the US in 1960?\nA2: The minimum wage in 1960 was $1.00 per hour, or $2,080 per year for a forty-hour per week job.\n\nQ3: What is the equivalent of $1 in 2019 dollars?\nA3: $8.57", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Adjusted for inflation, the answers show that the minimum wage was worth more in 1960s\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The antibiotics gentamicin sulfate and polymyxin b are in vaccines and can cause allergic reactions ranging from mild to life-threatening.\n\nQ1: When would a reaction occur for these substances?\nA1: When someone is severely allergic\n\nQ2: Is gentamicin Sulphate found in vaccines?\nA2: It is an antibiotic and used in the production of vaccines to stop bacteria growing in them.\n\nBecause of this, only trace amounts of these can end up in vaccines\n\nQ3: Is polymyxin B found in vaccines?\nA3: It is an antibiotic and used in the production of vaccines to stop bacteria growing in them.\n\nBecause of this, only trace amounts of these can end up in vaccines", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Q&A 1 confirms that an allergic reaction to the ingredients in the claim is possible but only in some people.\nQ&A 2 and 3 states the ingredients are only used in production of some vaccines, which gives an impression they are not in the final injected product, \n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Mercury (aka thimerosal or thiomersal) is in vaccines and can damage the brain, gut, liver, bone marrow, nervous system, and kidneys. It is linked to autoimmune disorders, including autism.\n\nQ1: Is the mercury-based chemical thiomersal (also known as thimerosal) found in vaccines?\nA1: Thiomersal was removed from UK vaccines between 2003 and 2005, and is no longer found in any of the childhood or adult vaccines routinely used in the UK. Before 2005, thiomersal was present in diphtheria- and tetanus-containing vaccines, as well as hepatitis B vaccine and some flu vaccines. It was not used in the MMR vaccine, the Hib vaccine, the MenC vaccine, the oral polio vaccine or the BCG vaccine. Thiomersal was present in the Swine Flu (H1N1) vaccine Pandemrix, used in the 2009-10 and 2010-11 flu seasons in the UK. However, it is not present in any of the annual flu vaccines currently in use in the UK.\n\nQ2: Why was the mercury-based chemical thiomersal (also known as thimerosal) removed from vaccines?\nA2: In the US, UK and Europe, thiomersal was removed from vaccines as a precaution. This was in line with the global goal of reducing environmental exposure to mercury from all sources.\n\nQ3: Was the mercury-based chemical thiomersal (also known as thimerosal) in vaccines harmful to humans?\nA3: ...there was no evidence that thiomersal in vaccines caused harm. Thiomersal contains a compound called ethyl mercury, but concern about mercury in the environment has centred on a different compound called methyl mercury, which accumulates in the food chain and in the human body.\n\nQ4: Is there a link between thiomersal (also known as thimerosal) in vaccines and developing autism?\nA4: In a 2016 study called \"Vaccines are not associated with autism: An evidence-based meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies,\" it was found that the components of the vaccines (thimerosal or mercury) are not associated with the development of autism or autism spectrum disorder.\n\nQ5: Does the mercury-based chemical thiomersal (also known as thimerosal) in vaccines cause side effects?\nA5: There are some side effects of thimerosal in vaccines.\nThe most common side-effects are minor reactions like redness and swelling at the injection site. Although rare, some people may be allergic to thimerosal.\n\nQ6: Is Thiomersal still found in vaccines in 2019?\nA6: No, because they are no longer found in any of the childhood or adult vaccines", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Mercury is not in the vaccines. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Farmers are declaring bankruptcy \"in record numbers\" and \"the median income for U.S. farm households was -$1,548 in 2018.\"\n\nQ1: Do farmers make all their money from their farm?\nA1: Income (farm-operator households receive income from farm and off-farm sources):\n\nQ2: What are off farm resources?\nA2: Off-farm sources—including wage income, nonfarm business earnings, dividends, and transfers—are the main contributor to income for most farm operator households in the United States, including the majority of residential and intermediate farm households (see glossary for definitions). These households, which derive less than half their income from farming, are not as affected by changes in farming costs and returns as are large commercial farms, but may be more susceptible to changes in the broader economy.\n\nQ3: Are farmers seeing a decline in their income and declaring bankruptcy in record numbers?\nA3: Many farm households primarily rely on off-farm income: median off-farm income in 2021 is estimated at $82,809, an increase of 22 percent from $67,873 in 2020, and to continue increasing by 6.3 percent to $88,034 in 2022. The increase in 2021 was mainly due to higher earned income—income from wages, salary, and nonfarm businesses—which rose 54 percent from $32,428 in 2020 to $50,000 in 2021.\n\nQ4: Are bankruptcy levels at record highs for farmers?\nA4: The files in website below show that they are not and that they have been higher in previous years. \n2018 - 468 filings \n2010 - 707 filings\n\nQ5: How many chapter 12 filings were recorded in 2017 and 2018\nA5: In 2017, there were 501 Bankruptcy filings while in 2018, it reduced to 498 filings compared to the 701 filings in 2010\n\nQ6: What was the median income for farm households in 2018\nA6: Average and median farmworker household incomes ranged from $20,000 to $24,999.5 By comparison, the median US household income for the same year was over $54,000 and the average household income exceeded $76,000", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: There were fewer bankruptcies in 2018 than there were in 2017. From the evidence, it also looks as though the median income was not $1,548. Hence, this claim is refuted. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Alexandreia Ocasio-Coretz posted in a tweet, \"We must block Trump from stopping the return of the heroic Alabama mother from ISIS. In many ways she is more of a hero then our veterans. Welcome home sister!\"\n\nQ1: Who is the claim speaker\nA1: @AOCpress\n\nQ2: Is @AOCpress the official twitter account of Senator Alexandrea Cortez\nA2: No, because Her official twitter account is @AOC and it has a verified tick\n\nQ3: Where did she post the comment claimed?\nA3: On a twitter account named @AOCpress\n\nQ4: Is @AOCpress the official twitter account of Alexandreia Ocasio-Coretz?\nA4: No, because Her official twitter is @AOC\n\nQ5: Does the @AOCpress twitter account that made the original post claim to be her official account?\nA5: No, because It states it is a 'parody' account only.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Alexandreia Ocasio-Coretz did not post this in a tweet, the account that tweeted such is a parody' account only, which means this claim is false. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Farm credit target raised to 11 lakh crore rupees for 2018-19\n\nQ1: What was the agricultural credit target for 2017-2018 in India?\nA1: The target for agricultural credit in 2017-18 has been fixed at a record\nlevel of ` 10 lakh crores.\n\nQ2: What was the agricultural credit target for 2018-2019 in India?\nA2: Our Government has been steadily increasing the volume of\ninstitutional credit for agriculture sector from year-to-year from `8.5 lakh\ncrore in 2014-15 to `10 lakh crore in 2017-18. I now propose to raise this\nto `11 lakh crore for the year 2018-19.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: There has been an increase in farm credit target raised to 11 lakh core rupees from 10 lakh in 2017-18.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Rs. 2000 crore for agri-market infrastructure fund set up\n\nQ1: What is agri-market infrastructure?\nA1: in order to improve market accessibility and to facilitate the farmers to directly sell their produce to the consumer to get better price realization for their produce, the Government has announced in Union Budget 2018-19, to develop and upgrade existing 22000 rural haats into Gramin Agricultural Markets (GrAMs). In these GrAMs, physical infrastructure will be strengthened using Government Schemes such as MGNREGA (Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act). These GrAMs are to be exempted from regulations of Agriculture Produce Marketing Committee (APMCs) and linked to e-NAM to provide farmers with better market accessibility and facilities to sell their produce at remunerative prices’.\n\nQ2: How much is put aside for agri-market infrastructure fund set up.\nA2: An Agri-Market Infrastructure Fund with a corpus of Rs. 2000 crore is targeted to be set up for developing and upgrading agricultural marketing infrastructure in the 22000 GrAMs including 585 Agriculture Produce Marketing Committees (APMCs). The cabinet approved for the Agri-Market Infrastructure fund recently in February 2019. The budgetary allocation to the fund is however not clear and the Rs. 2000 crore is not the government’s budgetary support.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: THe agri-market infrastructure fund has been approved recently, but hte budget is not clear.\n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Countries are putting bad people into the United States visa lottery program.\n\nQ1: What is the US Visa lottery system?\nA1: Congress established the diversity visa program through the Immigration Act of 1990 in an effort to promote immigration from countries underrepresented in the United States. The number of diversity visas is limited by law to 55,000 per fiscal year, but the annual cap has been reduced to 50,000 since fiscal year 2000. While Congress called this cap a “temporary reduction,” it does not have an expiration date. As of 2017, the U.S. government states that this reduction will remain in effect as long as needed, including for 2019.\n\nQ2: Do countries send immigrants to the US lottery.\nA2: No, because Potential visa recipients are randomly selected from the pool of qualified entries, administered by the United States, not foreign governments. Yet, being randomly selected—or \"winning\" the lottery—does not guarantee admission to the United States but rather provides the individual an opportunity to apply for the Diversity Visa. The odds of being selected for this opportunity are very small, with an average of 13.3 million people submitting applications each year.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The decision does not depend on the foreign countries but on the United states government \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: China has a death penalty for drug dealers\n\nQ1: Is dealing drugs in China punishable by the death penalty?\nA1: Yes, because Smuggling, dealing, transporting or manufacturing drugs is under Crimes against public order.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Confirmed.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Former President Barack Obama would have gone to war with North Korea.\n\nQ1: How likely was it that the US was on the precipice of war with North Korea during Obama's tenure?\nA1: Not very likely, \"\"There was no crisis brewing or heightened tension at the end of the Obama presidency,\" said Robert S. Ross, an Asia specialist with appointments at Boston College and Harvard University.\"\n\nQ2: What was Obama's strategy with North Korea during his time as president?\nA2: The overall policy toward North Korea during Obama’s tenure was \"strategic patience\" — the notion that \"if we ignore them, they will go away and eventually implode,\" said John Pike, the director of globalsecurity.org.\n\nThere’s room for disagreement about how effective \"strategic patience\" was. But it was \"not the same thing as preparing for war, or planning a war, or even intending to conduct a war,\" said Joseph DeThomas, a professor at the Penn State School of International Affairs. \"Obama was doing none of those. He was upgrading military deployments in order to deter North Korea and to reassure allies.\"", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Although nothing confirmed for definite the consensus in the answers point towards it being unlikely.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: In China, a drug dealer gets the death penalty. In America, a drug dealer gets a fine.\n\nQ1: What are the penalties for drug possession and smuggling in China\nA1: Chinese law says that individuals who smuggle, traffic, transport or manufacture drugs and meet certain conditions are to be punished with 15 years of fixed-term imprisonment, life imprisonment or death sentence, and confiscation of their properties.\n\nQ2: What are the penalties for drug related offenses in the United States\nA2: One of the penalties of drug related offenses is incarceration\n\nQ3: Are fines more rampant for drug related offenders in America than other forms of punishment\nA3: In fiscal year 2017, more than 95 percent of about 18,000 individuals sentenced in federal drug-trafficking cases got a prison sentence", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The claim says that drug dealers get a fine in the US but the second source shows that a drug dealer would go to prison. A drug dealer may get the death penalty in China but not in all cases. The claim has cherry picked the evidence.\n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: President Obama put more debt on the USA than any president in the history of our country combined.\n\nQ1: What is the total amount in national debt during President Barack Obama’s administration ?\nA1: President Barack Obama’s administration racked up nearly as much debt in eight years than in the entire 232-year history of the country before he took office. He entered with $10.6 trillion in total debt and left with the country owing $19.9 trillion. That’s an average tab of $1.16 trillion a year.\n\nQ2: How much debt the US government added under President Obama ?\nA2: Based on quarterly data released by the US Treasury, the debt at the end of 2008 — just before Obama took office — stood at roughly $10,699,805,000,000. As of the third quarter of 2016, the most recent data available, the debt as Obama is set to leave office stood at $19,573,445,000,000.\n\nBased on the website USdebtclock.com, which extrapolates the US national debt in real time based on committed government spending, the debt will be roughly $19.97 trillion when President-elect Donald Trump takes office on Friday.\n\nThus, the national debt under Obama will have grown by about $9 trillion, or an increase of 86%.\n\nSome of this debt is attributable to bills passed by Obama's predecessor, George W. Bush, since the federal government's fiscal year budget operate differently from the calendar year. Also, both Bush and Obama rolled out large investment bills to help the US recover from the depths of the financial crisis.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The debt before Obama was around $10 trillion, and he added around $9 trillion to that, so it is slightly less than the debt of all presidents before him combined.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The US Government may be using parts of one of the national emergencies that (President Barack Obama) signed having to do with cartels, criminal cartels\n\nQ1: What are emergency powers?\nA1: Congressionally-authorized emergency presidential powers are sweeping and dramatic, and range from suspending all laws regulating chemical and biological weapons, including the ban on human testing (50 U.S.C.\n\nQ2: Did Obama use emergency powers to do with criminal cartels?\nA2: Obama did use emergency powers to freeze the financial assets of four foreign criminal operations, but it’s unclear how that would help build a wall.\n\nOn July 25, 2011, Obama announced that \"significant transnational criminal organizations constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States.\"", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: From the Q&As it does seem that Barack Obama did in fact use an emergency power when dealing with cartels.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: When countries put people into the diversity visa lottery program, they’re putting some very bad people in the lottery\n\nQ1: What is the diversity visa lottery programme?\nA1: The Diversity Immigrant Visa Program (DV Program) makes up to 50,000 immigrant visas available annually, drawn from random selection among all entries to individuals who are from countries with low rates of immigration to the United States. The DV Program is administered by the U.S. Department of State (DOS).\n\nMost lottery winners reside outside the United States and immigrate through consular processing and issuance of an immigrant visa. To learn more, visit the U.S. Department of State's website.\n\nQ2: Do other countries put people into the DV programme?\nA2: No, because Individuals must register for the programme.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: It seems that other countries do not put people into the visa lottery programme. Therefore, the claim is refuted\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: A big majority of the big drugs, the big drug loads, don't go through ports of entry. They can't go through ports of entry.\n\nQ1: Do drug lords use official ports to bring in drugs into the U.S?\nA1: Yes, because The third largest methamphetamine seizure was made at Nogales Area Port in Arizona.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The answer and credible source shows that the drugs are bought in through ports so the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Sayfullo Saipov, the Uzbekistan-born suspect on trial for the 2017 truck attack in New York, US, is an example of chain migration, ie bringing many people into the US.\n\nQ1: Did Sayfullo Saipov bring his wife over from Uzbeckistan?\nA1: Saipov had won a U.S. green (residence) card in a 2010 lottery and left for the United States that same year where he had later married an Uzbek woman living there, Jahon said.\n\nQ2: Did Sayfullo Saipov bring is parents over from Uzbeckistan?\nA2: No, because His parents live in Tashkent", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: This is claim is refuted. Sayfullo Sapio won US residency through a lottery system, not chain migration. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Drug loads can't enter the US through US ports of entry.\n\nQ1: How do drugs come into the US\nA1: Lowey, who chairs the House Appropriations Committee, called the amount of opioids coming through ports of entry a \"real threat.\" She said people should know that opioids arrive in the United States through smugglers approaching legal points of entry.\n\n\"The facts are, the majority of opioids and all kinds of other things that are connected to the opioids are coming through the point of entry,\" she said. \"They’re not coming with an individual person, maybe some are. But they’re coming in trucks, they’re coming in cars, they’re coming right through the point of entry.\"\n\nQ2: What port of entry is the major port of entry for Heroin\nA2: The southwest border \"remains the primary entry point for heroin into the United States,\" according to the Drug Enforcement Agency.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: This claim is refuted. House Appropriations Committee Lowey says that \"opioids are coming through the point of entry\" and the Drug Enforcement Agency says that \"the southwest border remains the primary entry point for heroin into the United States\". Therefore, drugs can enter the US through US ports of entry and the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The U.S. may be using one of the national emergencies that (President Barack Obama) signed having to do with cartels, criminal cartels.\n\nQ1: What national emergency to do with criminal cartels. does the claim refer to?\nA1: Executive Order 13581--Blocking Property of Transnational Criminal Organizations\n\nQ2: What is the claims date?\nA2: 15 Feb 2019\n\nQ3: Who issued the Executive Order 13581?\nA3: https://web.archive.org/web/20211004122826/https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/07/25/executive-order-13581-blocking-property-transnational-criminal-organizat#:~:text=BARACK%20OBAMA%2C%20President%20of%20the%20United%20States%20of%20America\n\nQ4: What did Trump do with the order issued by Barack Obama?\nA4: He in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act, extended the act for 1 year when he was elected president of the U.S after Obama.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The answers and sources show that the US are still using the national emergency so the claim is supported.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: In China, a drug dealer gets a thing called the death penalty. Our criminal list, a drug dealer gets a thing called, how about a fine?\n\nQ1: What is the penalty for drug related offences in China\nA1: individuals who smuggle, traffic, transport or manufacture drugs and meet certain conditions are to be punished with 15 years of fixed-term imprisonment, life imprisonment or death sentence, and confiscation of their properties.but data on executions is unreliable\n\nQ2: What are the penalties for drug possession and drug related offences in the United States\nA2: As a general rule, federal judges must impose a minimum term of imprisonment upon defendants convicted of various controlled substance (drug) offenses and drug-related offenses. The severity of those sentences depends primarily upon the nature and amount of the drugs involved, the defendant’s prior criminal record, any resulting injuries or death", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: There is not enough available reliable data on executions, and despite this, it is only one option in China, so the claim is not correct regardless. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: US President Obama was ready to have gone to war with North Korea.\n\nQ1: Did Barack obamas cabinet have anything to say about the claim?\nA1: We were not on the brink of war with North Korea in 2016,” Benjamin J. Rhodes, Mr. Obama’s deputy national security adviser, wrote on Twitter.\n\nJohn Brennan, Mr. Obama’s C.I.A. director, told NBC News, “President Obama was never on the verge of starting any war with North Korea, large or small.”\n\nQ2: Were there any other reports about Obama wanting war?\nA2: In his most recent book, Bob Woodward (Washington post) reported that after a North Korean nuclear test in September 2016, Mr. Obama asked if a surgical strike could take out the country’s arsenal, but after being told it would require a ground invasion, he rejected any action as “unthinkable.” His former aides say he never came close to ordering an attack.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: This claim is refuted. According to the QA pairs, President Obama's close aides said he was \"never close to an attack\" even when North Korea reported a nuclear test. President Obama reportedly said that a ground invasion of North Korea is \"unthinkable\". The claim states that he was \"ready to go to war\" and that clearly wasn't the case. Therefore, the claim is refuted. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The US has chain migration, where a family member can bring in 20+ people and that is what happened on the West Side highway. A young man killed eight people and brought in many people because of chain migration.\n\nQ1: Who is Trump referring to here?\nA1: Sayfullo Saipov, the Uzbekistan-born suspect on trial for the 2017 truck attack in New York,\n\nQ2: Did he bring in many people?\nA2: No, because s a green card holder, he could only petition for a spouse and unmarried children to come to the United States. Media reports indicate that Saipov married a woman who already lived in the United States and that their three children were born in the United States\n\nQ3: Is it possible for an immigrant to bring 20+ other family members?\nA3: No, because Theoretically, one immigrant’s arrival in the United States could lead to the immigration of an aunt or uncle — if the first immigrant becomes a U.S. citizen and petitioned a parent, that parent could eventually become a U.S. citizen and petition his or her siblings.\n\nBut no one can directly petition an aunt, uncle, cousin, niece, nephew, in-law relative or grandparent. Citizens may sponsor other types of immediate family members for immigration, such as brothers and sisters, although except for spouses, parents and young children, the numbers they can sponsor are limited. Green card holders, in contrast, may petition only on behalf of spouses and unmarried children.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: An immigrant cannot bring in 20+ people into the United States \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The U.S. will have a national emergency and will then be sued in the Ninth Circuit.\n\nQ1: What is the Ninth Circuit in the U.S?\nA1: The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is a federal appellate court with appellate jurisdiction. It hears appeals from all of the circuit courts within its jurisdiction and its rulings may be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States.\n\nThe Ninth Circuit is the largest appellate court with 29 authorized judicial posts. Appeals are heard in the James R. Browning Federal Courthouse in San Francisco, California, th\n\nQ2: Who does the claim mean can sue the Government in the Ninth circuit court?\nA2: States lawmakers and private landowners over the legality surrounding a Mexico boarder wall\n\nQ3: Could states and private landowners sue the U.S government in the ninth circuit court?\nA3: Yes, because It would fall within its scope.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Discriptive\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Lawsuits challenging the emergency order to secure funding for a border wall shouldn't be heard in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.\n\nQ1: What is the emergency order to secure funding for a border wall?\nA1: President Donald Trump has officially declared a national emergency in order to secure funding for his border wall. \nTrump is issuing the declaration under the National Emergencies Act of 1976, which lets presidents issue an emergency declaration but under certain constraints — namely, Trump can only use specific powers Congress has already codified by law, and he has to say which powers he’s using. The act doesn’t define what counts as an emergency… there’s enough ambiguity in the law to let Trump declare an emergency. But the maneuver may not stand up to legal scrutiny once challenged in court. He is effectively trying to circumvent Congress — which is supposed to have the “power of the purse” and has decided against funding his border wall.\n\nQ2: Which US states are part of the border wall between the US and Mexico?\nA2: U.S. states along the border are California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas.\n\nQ3: What lawsuits could emerge in the border states as a result of the emergency order to secure funding for the border wall?\nA3: Long before Trump’s emergency declaration, one likely source of resistance has been clear: people who own land along the US-Mexico border where Trump wants the wall to be built.\nThe federal government can legally invoke “eminent domain,” a power to take private land or property and convert it into public use enshrined within the US Constitution, but if Trump tries to do so for the border wall, he could very well face a fight. Landowners could sue, as they did after Bush’s order, to keep the government from taking their land.\n\nQ4: Are any of the border states covered by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals?\nA4: Yes, because The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has appellate jurisdiction over:\nDistrict of Arizona\nCentral District of California\nEastern District of California\nNorthern District of California\nSouthern District of California", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has appellate jurisdiction over some of the states in the US southern border \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: You have the lottery — It’s a horror show. Because when countries put people into the lottery, they’re not putting you in. They’re putting some very bad people in the lottery. It’s common sense.\n\nQ1: What Lottery does the claim refer to?\nA1: the ‘Diversity Visa Lottery Program,\n\nalso known as the green-card lottery, issues up to 50,000 visas a year to people from dozens of countries, a tiny fraction of the roughly 1 million green cards the government issues annually. The aim is to mix up the nation’s melting pot.\n\nQ2: Is the'' diversity lottery program'' in the U.S insecure?\nA2: No, because Applicants who are selected in the program (“selectees”) must meet simple but strict eligibility\nrequirements to qualify for a diversity visa. such as education and work requirements to be eligible. and background checks and security screenings for those selected", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The answers show that there are requirements to be able to be put in the lottery so the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: In the US a drug dealer gets a fine.\n\nQ1: What is the sentence for a drug dealer in the US\nA1: According to the US sentencing commission, more than 95% of 18,000 individuals sentenced in Federal drug trafficking cases get a prison sentence", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Evidence finds that more than 95% of the 18,000 individuals sentenced in federal drug trafficking cases get a prison sentence and not a fine. Hence, the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: President Obama put more debt on this country than any president in the history of our country combined.\n\nQ1: Did Obama accumulate more debt than any other president?\nA1: The treasury department data confirms that when Obama became president there was $6.3Trillion public debt. When he left it had risen to $14.4Trillion, an $8.1 trillion increase.\n\nQ2: Who is responsible for the debt?\nA2: The Obama administration is not solely responsible for the debt increase. A chunk of the debt is a consequence of spending decisions predating Obama’s terms. Congress is also responsible for tax and spending levels.\n\nQ3: Was there more debt while Obama was president than any other president?\nA3: No answer could be found.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The 3rd Q&A pair state no evidence for what is claimed, Q&A 2 does state that Obama alone was not responsible for all debt accumulated by the U.S government during his term and that congress was also responsible, for the large debt shown in q1\n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: President Donald Trump will sign a national emergency which has been signed many times before. It's been signed by other presidents from 1977 or so, it gave the presidents the power. There's rarely been a problem.\n\nQ1: Under what conditions can a national emergency be called\nA1: Any authority granted to the President by section 1702 of this title may be exercised to deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States, if the President declares a national emergency with respect to such threat.\n\nQ2: What power does a national emergency confer on the president\nA2: When the President declares a national emergency, no powers or authorities made available by statute for use in the event of an emergency shall be exercised unless and until the President specifies the provisions of law under which he proposes that he, or other officers will act.\n\nQ3: Did Trump declare a national emergency?\nA3: After more than a month of threats, a government shutdown, and bipartisan action by Congress, President Trump has finally declared a national emergency to spend billions of taxpayer dollars on his border wall obsession\n\nQ4: Have other presidents signed this act before ?\nA4: Yes, because There has been at least 58 national emergencies declared before by other presidents.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Donald Trump did indeed sign a national emergency to fund his border wall, and yes it has been signed 58 times before by other presidents \n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: You have chain migration. Where a bad person comes in, brings 22 or 23 or 35 of his family members, because he has his mother, his grandmother, sister, cousin, uncle. They are all in. You know what happened on the west side highway? That young wise guy drove over and killed eight people... He had many people brought in because he was in the United States.\n\nQ1: How does chain migration work\nA1: U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents (LPRs) can sponsor certain family members for a visa that provides permanent residence, also known as a “green card.”\n\nQ2: How many visas can be issued to relatives of someone in the US\nA2: To ensure that family visas are not issued just to immediate relatives, immigration law requires that at least 226,000family visas be allocated through the family preference categories\n\nQ3: How many relatives did Sayfullo Saipov petition for them to be brought to the states\nA3: No answer could be found.\n\nQ4: How does chain migration work?\nA4: U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents (LPRs) can sponsor certain family members for a visa that provides permanent residence, also known as a “green card.”\n\nQ5: Who does this claim refer to?\nA5: Sayfullo Saipov.\n\nQ6: What is chain migration?\nA6: Critics of family-based immigration describe the ability of immigrants — who become green-card holders and citizens — to sponsor their relatives as a “chain” of migration. Concerns about “chain migration” are criticisms of our existing legal immigration system and the ability of family members to sponsor their close family members for immigrant visas.\n\nQ7: When did Saipov arrive in the USA?\nA7: he won the green card lottery, which meant he was one of the lucky ones who could escape the repression of home and immigrate legally to America. In March 2010, Mr. Saipov flew into Kennedy International Airport in New York City, his first time in the United States, and made his way to the home of a friend of his father’s in the northeast outskirts of Cincinnati.\n\nQ8: Did Saipov bring his family to the USA?\nA8: No, because Although his grandfather sometimes visited from Uzbekistan, his parents never did, Mr. Muminov said. Mr. Saipov made his own family: In 2013 he married an Uzbek immigrant almost six years younger, Nozima Odilova, who ended up in Ohio after landing first in Las Vegas. They started a family, first a daughter, and then a second.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: QA pairs state the person referred to in the claim did not bring in migrants using .chain migration \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: US chain migration allows a bad person to come into the US, and bring 22 or 23 or 35 of his family members because he has his mother, his grandmother, sister, cousin, uncle.\n\nQ1: Can you bring relatives into the US?\nA1: Neither U.S. citizens nor lawful permanent residents can directly petition for an aunt, uncle, cousin, niece, nephew, in-law relative or grandparent to come to the United States.\n\nQ2: Are there restrictions on what relatives you can bring into the US?\nA2: U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents (green card holders) can bring certain family members to the United States to live here permanently.\n\nBut there are restrictions. No one can directly petition for an aunt, uncle, cousin, niece, nephew, in-law relative or grandparent, according to USCIS.\n\nQ3: Are there situations where for example an aunt or uncle could be allowed into the US?\nA3: Theoretically, one immigrant’s arrival in the United States could lead to the immigration of an aunt or uncle — if the first immigrant becomes a U.S. citizen and petitioned a parent, that parent could eventually become a U.S. citizen and petition his or her siblings.\n\nQ4: At what point does an immigrant bring in realtives to the united states\nA4: when the person becomes a citizen", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: If a migrant to the us become US citizen then they could bring in the family members as claimed according to Q&A 3 which is conflicting with Q&A 1 which states that Neither U.S. citizens nor lawful permanent residents can directly petition for an aunt, uncle, cousin, niece, nephew, in-law relative or grandparent to come to the United States.\n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The U.S. may be using one of the national emergencies that President Barack Obama signed having to do with cartels, criminal cartels.\n\nQ1: How many national emergency declarations are still in effect in the USA?\nA1: 31\n\nQ2: Did Barack Obama declare a national emergency Blocking Property of Transnational Criminal\nOrganizations ?\nA2: Yes, because EO 13581 25/07/2011:\nI therefore determine that significant transnational criminal organizations constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States, and hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.\n\nQ3: Is EO 13581 still in effect?\nA3: Yes, because It was extended for one year by Donald Trump on 19/07/2019\n\nQ4: Does EO 13581 have any relevance to securing funding for a border wall between the USA and Mexico?\nA4: No, because I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, find that the activities of significant transnational criminal organizations, such as those listed in the Annex to this order, have reached such scope and gravity that they threaten the stability of international political and economic systems. Such organizations are becoming increasingly sophisticated and dangerous to the United States; they are increasingly entrenched in the operations of foreign governments and the international financial system, thereby weakening democratic institutions, degrading the rule of law, and undermining economic markets. These organizations facilitate and aggravate violent civil conflicts and increasingly facilitate the activities of other dangerous persons. I therefore determine that significant transnational criminal organizations constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States, and hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The Q&A's show that the U.S was using some national emergency declarations at the time of the claim, it does not link them directly to cartel activity, but showing that they relate to transnational criminal organizations which will very likely include criminal cartels.\nwith Q&A 2 stating that is was a one of the national emergencies that President Barack Obama signed as claimed then it is supportive of the claim overall.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: A big majority of the big drugs, the big drug loads don't go through US ports of entry.\n\nQ1: What drugs are considered to be “big drugs” in the United States?\nA1: The most commonly abused drugs are:\nMarijuana\nCocaine\nOpiates e.g. Heroin\nMethamphetamine\n\nQ2: Of all the big drugs seized by US officials in 2018, what percentage were seized at US ports of entry (as opposed to being seized between ports of entry along the border)?\nA2: According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection statistics, 90 percent of heroin seized along the border, 88 percent of cocaine, and 84 percent of the methamphetamine in the 2018 fiscal year was caught trying to be smuggled in at legal crossing points.\nThe exception is marijuana, only 39 percent of which was seized at ports of entry, according to the CBP.\n\nQ3: If US government data shows the majority of the drugs seized along the border were seized at the ports of entry, does this conclusively prove that most drugs in the US come through legal ports of entry?\nA3: No, because According to the Congressional Research Service: “data on seizures are available, but these reflect an unknown portion of total drugs traversing U.S. borders.\"\n\nQ4: Is there any prove that the drugs were moved through the USA border\nA4: The data also show that fentanyl, another opioid, was seized at ports of entry at a higher rate than at points between ports of entry. CBP recently intercepted a record amount of fentanyl worth $4.6 million at the Port of Nogales.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: From the evidence, it looks as though certain \"big\" drugs do go through US ports of entry. 90 percent of heroin seized along the border, 88 percent of cocaine, and 84 percent of the methamphetamine in the 2018 fiscal year were caught trying to be smuggled in at legal crossing points.\nThe exception is marijuana, only 39 percent of which was seized at ports of entry, according to the CBP.\n\nverdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Beto O’Rourke said, \"If I could throw two kinds of people in the garbage it would be the elderly and wounded veterans. When a tool breaks, you don’t fix it; you throw it in the damn trash.\"\n\nQ1: Did Beto O’Rourke say, \"If I could throw two kinds of people in the garbage it would be the elderly and wounded veterans.\" \"When a tool breaks you don’t fix it, you throw it in the damn trash.\"?\nA1: \"Of course not,\" O’Rourke spokesman Chris Evans\n\nQ2: What has Beto O’Rourke said about veterans?\nA2: I will strengthen services for those who have put their lives on the line for this country.\n\nMy top priority while serving in Congress was delivering for Texas veterans. Serving on both the Veterans Affairs and Armed Services committees in the U.S. House of Representatives, I worked with Republicans and Democrats alike to lift up the heroes who have put their lives on the line for our country.\nMy VA health care reform plan added two new VA clinics in my hometown of El Paso, nearly doubled the number of mental health providers at the local VA, and ultimately brought wait times down from an average of 71 days to an average of 5 days.\n\nIn addition, I authored and passed legislation that expanded access to VA mental health care to veterans with other-than-honorable discharges, granted every separating service member access to a mental health screening, improved and customized transition assistance for service members leaving the military—and more.\n\nTexas can and must do more to serve our veterans. As governor, I will prioritize efforts to end veteran homelessness in Texas by the end of my first year in office, cut property taxes for disabled and low-income veterans, dramatically expand the state’s veterans health care case management system, strengthen services for veterans suffering from toxic exposure, expand access to medical marijuana and other alternatives to harmful opioids, and strengthen access to the education and employment benefits that our veterans have earned.\n\nQ3: What has Beto O’Rourke said about the elderly?\nA3: Texas seniors have built the families, communities, and businesses we now enjoy. We owe it to them to honor and protect the commitment we made to care for them through Social Security and Medicare.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Denied by spokesman and answers show she supports them.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: nearly half\" of House US Republicans have supported a nonpartisan redistricting bill.\n\nQ1: What was the Republican/Democrat split in the House at time of claim?\nA1: There were 65 Republicans and 55 Democrats in the North Carolina House of Representatives.\n\nQ2: How many Republicans in the House support McGrady's 2019 redistricting bill?\nA2: No answer could be found.\n\nQ3: What bills were mentioned in the claim?\nA3: 1. HB 824\n2. HB 606\n3. HB 92\n4. HB 200\n5. HB 69\n\nQ4: How many Republican House members voted for House Bill 824?\nA4: No answer could be found.\n\nQ5: How many Republican House members voted for House Bill 606?\nA5: No answer could be found.\n\nQ6: How many Republican House members voted for House Bill 92?\nA6: No answer could be found.\n\nQ7: How many Republican House members voted for House Bill 200?\nA7: No answer could be found.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: There is no evidence on the number of Republicans who supported this Bill.\n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Net migration to the UK could be 100,000 higher after Brexit under the government’s plans.\n\nQ1: What was the net population migration from the EU to the UK in 2019?\nA1: \"An estimated 202,000 citizens from other EU countries immigrated to the UK in the year to September 2018, and about 145,000 emigrated abroad. So EU ‘net migration’ was around 57,000.\"\n\"Estimated non-EU net migration, meanwhile, is 261,000 a year\"\n57,000 plus 261,000 is a net migration of 308,000.\n\nQ2: How might Brexit affect net migration into the UK?\nA2: \"A conservative estimate is that the United Kingdom would continue to receive an inflow of 500,000 or more immigrants per year, with annual net migration above 200,000.\"\n\nQ3: Did Migration Watch withdraw this claim?\nA3: We have decided to withdraw the paper issued today on post-Brexit migration levels. There was an error in the calculations which was unfortunately overlooked at the final stages of preparation. We apologise for the error and will rectify it in the course of producing a revised version.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The third Q&A shows that the site which published the claim admitted the numbers were wrong so the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Green New Deal would eliminate air travel\n\nQ1: What does Liz Cheney say about the Green New Deal will eliminating air travel?\nA1: And even when it comes down to something like air travel, which the FAQ’s say they want to eliminate within the next ten years, that means the government is going to be telling people where they can fly to and where they can’t.\n\nQ2: What is listed in the Green New Deal FAQ's about air travel.\nA2: To totally overhaul transportation by massively expanding electric vehicle manufacturing, build charging stations everywhere, build out highspeed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary, create affordable public transit available to all, with goal to replace every combustion-engine vehicle - as listed under 'National mobilization our economy through 14 infrastructure and industrial projects.' - Every project strives to remove greenhouse gas emissions and pollution from every sector of our economy, as part of the 'Resolution Summary'\n\nQ3: How does Liz Cheney suggest that air travel will be eliminated?\nA3: Liz Cheney stated, \"I would just say that it’s going to be crucially important for us to recognize and understand when we outlaw plane travel, we outlaw gasoline, we outlaw cars, I think actually probably the entire US military because of the Green New Deal that we are able to explain to our constituents and to people all across this country what that really means. And even when it comes down to something like air travel, which the FAQ’s say they want to eliminate within the next ten years.\"\n\nQ4: Does the FAQ documentation propose a plan to eliminate or outlaw air travel in the next 10 years?\nA4: No, because The FAQ's state, \"We are calling for a full transition off fossil fuels and zero greenhouse gases. Anyone who has read the resolution sees that we spell this out through a plan that calls for eliminating greenhouse gas emissions from every sector of the economy.\nSimply banning fossil fuels immediately won’t build the new economy to replace it – this is the plan to build that new economy and spells out how to do it technically. We do this through a huge mobilization to create the renewable energy economy as fast as possible. We set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in 10 years.\"\n\nQ5: How does the FAQ documentation explain net-zero versus zero emissions?\nA5: We set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in 10 years because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast, but we think we can ramp up renewable manufacturing and power production, retrofit every building in America, build the smart grid, overhaul transportation and agriculture, plant lots of trees and restore our ecosystem to get to net-zero.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: From the Q&As you can see that the Green deal would not eliminate air travel but it will help make it cleaner. So the claim is refuted. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Mississippi passed the 5-71-226 Anti-Youth Subversion Act banning talking to minors about atheist Richard Dawkins.\n\nQ1: Did Mississippi pass the 5-71-226 Anti-Youth Subversion Act banning talking to minors about atheist Richard Dawkins?\nA1: No, because The Article was published on a Satire News site with a link to a page explaining the story was Satire.\n\nQ2: When was the law passed\nA2: This law was not passed and a page explains it as satire", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: this is clearly satire, and was listed on a satire news site. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Prior to 2019, South Korea was paying $500 million a year under a cost-sharing deal that helps fund American military forces in that country..\n\nQ1: In 2019 how much was South Korea paying to fund American military forces being in South Korea?\nA1: Total amount of 1.0389 trillion Won for the year 2019 which was an 8.2% increase on the previous year.\n\nQ2: Approximately what is 1.0389 trillion Won in USD in 2019?\nA2: approximately $924 million USD\n\nQ3: Is 8% less of 924,000,000 greater than 500,000 ?\nA3: Yes, because Mathematics.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: It seems from all of the answer and question pairs, that the amount that was spent was far greater than 500$ million. the last question and answer pair seems quite cheeky, it is however understandable. Therefore the claim is refuted.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Fact checkers did not hold Obama accountable for his promises on the care act.\n\nQ1: Did Obama make promises on the care act ?\nA1: These promises included:\n\n Universal coverage\n\n PROMOTED\n No new taxes on the middle class\n Annual premium savings of $2,500\n No increase in the deficit\n You can keep your plan if you like it\n\nI will address these in reverse order since it is probably the easiest to prove even to Obamacare admirers (after all, even left-leaning Politifact.com has labeled this promise the 2013 Lie of the Year).", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The answer doesn't really address if Obama was held accountable or not. \n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The US trade deficit has decreased during US President Trump's term of office.\n\nQ1: What was the US trade deficit in November 2018?\nA1: $49.3 Billion\n\nQ2: Is the US trade deficit smaller than it was in October 2018?\nA2: Yes, because November exports were $209.9 billion, $1.3 billion less than October exports. November imports were\n$259.2 billion, $7.7 billion less than October imports.\n\nQ3: Has the US trade deficit continued to rise?\nA3: Yes, because Year-to-date, the goods and services deficit increased $51.9 billion, or 10.4 percent, from the same period in 2017. Exports increased $157.1 billion or 7.3 percent. Imports increased $208.9 billion or 7.9 percent.\n\nQ4: Has the US trade deficit risen since President Trump took office?\nA4: Yes, because In comparison to 2016, the year before trump took office, the US Trade deficit increased by 20.3 percent for the 12 months ending in November.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: the trade deficit increased during Trump's term\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: There were 1,200 murders in 2018 in Juarez, Mexico compared with 23 just across the border in El Paso, Texas, US, due to the construction of the border fence.\n\nQ1: When was the border fence constructed at El Paso?\nA1: Construction started on the fencing in the El Paso sector in 2008 and had finished by mid-2009.\n\nQ2: What was the violent crime rate in El Paso before the border fence was constructed?\nA2: The city had the third-lowest violent crime rate among 35 U.S. cities with a population over 500,000 from 2005 to 2007 -– all before construction on the fence began. And, according to the Uniform Crime Reports from the FBI, between 1993 and 2006 the number of violent crimes dropped by more than 34 percent.\n\nQ3: What do the statistics show on the history of violent crime in El Paso?\nA3: Looking broadly at the past 30 years, the rate of violent crime reached its peak in 1993, when more than 6,500 violent crimes were recorded.\n\nBut between 1996 and 2006, the number of violent crimes reported by law enforcement fell by more than 34 percent and less than 2,700 crimes were reported.\n\nFrom 2006 to 2011 — two years before the fence was built to two years after — the number of violent crimes recorded in El Paso increased by 17 percent.\n\nQ4: Where was this information from?\nA4: The Federal Bureau of Investigation.\n\nQ5: Has there been any response from officials in El Paso to the claims?\nA5: Yes, because The Mayor, Dee Margo tweeted: 'El Paso was NEVER one of the MOST dangerous cities in the US. We‘ve had a fence for 10 years and it has impacted illegal immigration and curbed criminal activity. It is NOT the sole deterrent. Law enforcement in our community continues to keep us safe #SOTU", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The Mayor of El Paso tweeted \"We‘ve had a fence for 10 years and it has impacted illegal immigration and curbed criminal activity. It is NOT the sole deterrent. Law enforcement in our community continues to keep us safe #SOTU\" meaning the wall has nothing to do with the low murder rates\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Actor and legendary comedian Bill Murray has died.\n\nQ1: Who is Bill Murray?\nA1: Actor William James Murray is a comedy icon best known for his popular 'Saturday Night Live' characters and movie classics such as 'Meatballs,' 'Caddyshack' and 'Ghostbusters.' He was nominated for an Oscar for his seriocomic role in 'Lost in Translation.'\n\nQ2: What date was it when Bill Murray was claimed to have died?\nA2: February 02, 2019 was listed as Murray's death.\n\nQ3: Where was the information published?\nA3: In Conservative Tears:\nWilliam Billington “Bill” Murray is dead this evening in his home in Winnetka, Wisconsin.\n\nQ4: How does Conservative Tears describe its website content?\nA4: Everything on this website is fiction. It is not a lie and it is not fake news because it is not real. If you believe that it is real, you should have your head examined. Any similarities between this site’s pure fantasy and actual people, places, and events are purely coincidental and all images should be considered altered and satirical.\n\nQ5: Where was Bill James Murray videoed on February 10, 2019?\nA5: Murray was photographed playing golf on a PGA Tour.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The source is a satirical website. Also Murray's biography (source of the answer to Q1) does not say he is dead.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: A terminally ill 17-year-old and HIV-positive, Jeffrey Jones, requests oral sex from a porn star as his final wish, hoping to get it fulfilled by the Make-A-Wish foundation.\n\nQ1: Where was the story published?\nA1: Huzlers.com\n\nQ2: What is known about Huzlers.com?\nA2: They are a \"fauxtire\" site that make up stories about bizarre crimes and weird sex acts for entertainment purposes only.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: From the 2nd QA it is evident that the website is a faux news one. Therefore, the claim is refuted\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: A diet based on your blood type fights fatigue.\n\nQ1: Is there any evidence to suggest a diet based on your blood type works?\nA1: Blood type diets may yield weight loss and other positive results because they’re highly restrictive. They also eliminate foods which are known to adversely affect health.\n\nHowever, there’s no scientific evidence linking a person’s blood type to their need to avoid, or eat, specific foods.\n\nQ2: Can fatigue be fought It with the blood type diet ?\nA2: Dr Walter Mwanda, a haematologist at the University of Nairobi’s School of Medicine, if eating according to your blood type was good advice. He was unequivocal.\n\n“That is very false information,” he said. “Forget about it, there’s nothing like that.”\n\nQ3: Does having a diet based on your blood type fights fatigue ?\nA3: No answer could be found.\n\nQ4: What are the dietary suggestions for fighting fatigue ?\nA4: Have a good look at your diet – it’s very important if you want more energy in your daily life. Suggestions include:\n\n Drink plenty of water – sometimes you feel tired simply because you’re mildly dehydrated. A glass of water will help do the trick, especially after exercise.\n Be careful with caffeine – anyone feeling tired should cut out caffeine. The best way to do this is to gradually stop having all caffeine drinks (that includes coffee, tea and cola drinks) over a three-week period. Try to stay off caffeine completely for a month to see if you feel less tired without it.\n Eat breakfast – food boosts your metabolism and gives the body energy to burn. The brain relies on glucose for fuel, so choose carbohydrate-rich breakfast foods such as cereals or wholegrain bread.\n Don’t skip meals – going without food for too long allows blood sugar levels to dip. Try to eat regularly to maintain your energy levels throughout the day.\n Eat a healthy diet – increase the amount of fruit, vegetables, wholegrain foods, low fat dairy products and lean meats in your diet. Reduce the amount of high fat, high sugar and high salt foods.\n Don’t overeat – large meals can drain your energy. Instead of eating three big meals per day, try eating six mini-meals to spread your kilojoule intake more evenly. This will result in more constant blood sugar and insulin levels. You’ll also find it easier to lose excess body fat if you eat this way.\n Eat iron rich foods – women, in particular, are prone to iron-deficiency (anaemia), which can lead to feeling fatigued. Make sure your diet includes iron-rich foods such as lean red meat.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The Q&As overwhelmingly show that there is no evidence that the claim is true. So it is refuted. \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Vice-Presidential candidate of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), Peter Obi’s Convoy Was Attacked In Abuja Market, Nigeria.\n\nQ1: Was Peter Obi’s Convoy attacked in Abuja Market, Nigeria?\nA1: No, because No, the attack happened after the departure of Peter Obi. This is confirmed by a tweet from his official Twitter account.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The answer clearly shows that the attack did not happen to Peter Obi but after he had left. The source is the official Twitter account for Peter Obi so is trustworthy.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: Peter Obi was almost killed during an attack on his convoy in Abuja Market.\n\nQ1: When did this occur?\nA1: On the 9th of February, the Vice-Presidential candidate of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), Peter Obi visited the Building Materials Market at Dei-Dei on the outskirts of Abuja to interact with traders and shoppers.\n\nQ2: Was he attacked?\nA2: No, because A Dubawa fact-check reveals that the supporters of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) were attacked at the Building Materials Market on the 9th of February and campaign vehicles were burnt. However, the attacks happened after the departure of Peter Obi and he was not in any danger. A tweet from his official Twitter account confirms this.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Refuted by Peter Obi himself.\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: For 50 years, prior to 2019, only 2.3 million Kenyans were connected to electricity.\n\nQ1: How many people were connected to electricity in Kenya prior to 2019?\nA1: Around 2.3 million people", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The answer fully supports the claim. \n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The Kenyan railway was planned by the government for 30 years.\n\nQ1: When did discussions start on the Kenyan Railway?\nA1: 2003\n\nQ2: When was the Kenyan Railway agreed on?\nA2: 2008\n\nQ3: When was the Kenyan Railway developed?\nA3: The authority for this project is the Contract dated 12 July 2007 between the East African\nCommunity (EAC) and CPCS Transcom International Limited (“CPCS”) to carry out the East\nAfrican Railway Master Plan Study (“Master Plan Study”).", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: According to the question and answer pairs it seems like the railway was developed and built in about 5 years, and not 30 years. Therefore the claim is refuted\n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The Kenyan government have connected 6.9 million people to electricity in the last five years.\n\nQ1: How Many Kenyans were connected with electricity in 2013?\nA1: 2.33 million.\n\nQ2: How Many Kenyans were connected with electricity in 2018?\nA2: 4.43 million", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: The number of connected users in 2018 was just 4.43 million people and not up to the claimed number \n\nverdict: 'Refuted'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: The diaspora is the largest contributor to Kenya's foreign exchange.\n\nQ1: What is Diaspora?\nA1: Diaspora Remittances\nA remittance is money sent by a person in a foreign land to his or her home country. Due to the huge sums involved, remittances are now being recognised as an important contributor to the country’s growth and development.\n\nQ2: Is the Diaspora the largest contributor to Kenya's Foreign Exchange?\nA2: Yes, because The 2018 economic survey shows that remittances now contribute more. In 2017 they earned Kenya KSh203 billion in foreign exchange.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: Evidence shows that diaspora is the largest contributor to Kenya's foreign exchange.\n\nverdict: 'Supported'", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.\n\nClaim: 12,000 kilometres of tarmac in Kenya, were constructed in 50 years.\n\nQ1: How many kms of Tarmac have been have been constructed in Kenya in the past 50 years?\nA1: No answer could be found.\n\nQ2: Are all roads in kenya made of tarmac?\nA2: No, because The Kenya government recently awarded two concrete road contracts following many years of lobbying by EACPA.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "justification: There is no evidence to support or refute the claim \n\nverdict: 'Not Enough Evidence'", "role": "assistant" } ]