InternLM/InternBootcamp
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/InternLM/InternBootcamp.git synced 2026-04-19 12:58:04 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

init-commit

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
lilinyang 2025-05-23 15:27:15 +08:00
commit 18a552597a
3461 changed files with 1150579 additions and 0 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

64
examples/data/InternBootcamp_eval/korLogicCanonicalPropositions.jsonl Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Mandatorytobacco use in public areas→permittedtobacco use in public areas?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\nB) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nC) Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion\nD) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Mandatorytobacco use in public areas→permittedtobacco use in public areas?", "options": {"A": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment", "B": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "C": "Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion", "D": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication"}, "correct": 9}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\ntobacco use in public areas is mandatory, but national property protection is prohibited.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) tobacco use in public areas\nb) national property protection\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "tobacco use in public areas is mandatory, but national property protection is prohibited.", "mapping": {"a": "tobacco use in public areas", "b": "national property protection"}, "solution": "¶p ∧ ‽q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\nreasonable sports collisions is permitted, but remarriage rights is prohibited.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) reasonable sports collisions\nb) remarriage rights\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "reasonable sports collisions is permitted, but remarriage rights is prohibited.", "mapping": {"a": "reasonable sports collisions", "b": "remarriage rights"}, "solution": "§p ∧ ‽q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\nnoise in quiet zones is mandatory, but disruptive behavior in cultural venues is prohibited.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) noise in quiet zones\nb) disruptive behavior in cultural venues\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "noise in quiet zones is mandatory, but disruptive behavior in cultural venues is prohibited.", "mapping": {"a": "noise in quiet zones", "b": "disruptive behavior in cultural venues"}, "solution": "¶p ∧ ‽q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. may operate legally for reasonable profits\n b. is permitted for not operate legally for reasonable profits\nPair 2:\n a. must noise in quiet zones\n b. must not noise in quiet zones\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["may operate legally for reasonable profits", "is permitted for not operate legally for reasonable profits"], ["must noise in quiet zones", "must not noise in quiet zones"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["@", "x"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\ntobacco use in public areas is mandatory, but remarriage rights is permitted not.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) tobacco use in public areas\nb) remarriage rights\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "tobacco use in public areas is mandatory, but remarriage rights is permitted not.", "mapping": {"a": "tobacco use in public areas", "b": "remarriage rights"}, "solution": "¶p ∧ §¬q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Prohibitedreasonable sports collisions?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nB) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\nC) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\nD) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Prohibitedreasonable sports collisions?", "options": {"A": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "B": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment", "C": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality", "D": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence"}, "correct": 2}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\noperate legally for reasonable profits is mandatory, but noise in quiet zones is permitted not.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) operate legally for reasonable profits\nb) noise in quiet zones\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "operate legally for reasonable profits is mandatory, but noise in quiet zones is permitted not.", "mapping": {"a": "operate legally for reasonable profits", "b": "noise in quiet zones"}, "solution": "¶p ∧ §¬q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permittedremarriage rights→permitted¬remarriage rights?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nB) Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion\nC) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\nD) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permittedremarriage rights→permitted¬remarriage rights?", "options": {"A": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "B": "Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion", "C": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality", "D": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation"}, "correct": 7}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Permittedcitizens' rights protection?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\nB) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nC) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nD) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Permittedcitizens' rights protection?", "options": {"A": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality", "B": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "C": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "D": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment"}, "correct": 3}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. is obligatory for tobacco use in public areas\n b. may tobacco use in public areas\nPair 2:\n a. is obligatory for price fraud occurs\n b. is prohibited for price fraud occurs\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["is obligatory for tobacco use in public areas", "may tobacco use in public areas"], ["is obligatory for price fraud occurs", "is prohibited for price fraud occurs"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["%", "x"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permitteddisruptive behavior in cultural venues→permitted¬disruptive behavior in cultural venues?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nB) Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion\nC) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nD) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permitteddisruptive behavior in cultural venues→permitted¬disruptive behavior in cultural venues?", "options": {"A": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "B": "Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion", "C": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "D": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality"}, "correct": 7}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Prohibitedprice fraud occurs→permitted¬price fraud occurs?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\nB) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nC) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nD) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Prohibitedprice fraud occurs→permitted¬price fraud occurs?", "options": {"A": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence", "B": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "C": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "D": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment"}, "correct": 10}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\ntobacco use in public areas is prohibited, but abuse of vulnerable groups is permitted not.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) tobacco use in public areas\nb) abuse of vulnerable groups\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "tobacco use in public areas is prohibited, but abuse of vulnerable groups is permitted not.", "mapping": {"a": "tobacco use in public areas", "b": "abuse of vulnerable groups"}, "solution": "‽p ∧ §¬q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permitteddisruptive behavior in cultural venues→permitted¬disruptive behavior in cultural venues?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nB) Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion\nC) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\nD) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permitteddisruptive behavior in cultural venues→permitted¬disruptive behavior in cultural venues?", "options": {"A": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "B": "Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion", "C": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment", "D": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality"}, "correct": 7}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Mandatorynoise in quiet zones→¬prohibitednoise in quiet zones?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion\nB) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\nC) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nD) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Mandatorynoise in quiet zones→¬prohibitednoise in quiet zones?", "options": {"A": "Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion", "B": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence", "C": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "D": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality"}, "correct": 5}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. is permitted for reasonable sports collisions\n b. is permitted for not reasonable sports collisions\nPair 2:\n a. must remarriage rights\n b. may not remarriage rights\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["is permitted for reasonable sports collisions", "is permitted for not reasonable sports collisions"], ["must remarriage rights", "may not remarriage rights"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["@", "*"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. is obligatory for noise in quiet zones\n b. must not noise in quiet zones\nPair 2:\n a. is prohibited for citizens' rights protection\n b. may citizens' rights protection\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["is obligatory for noise in quiet zones", "must not noise in quiet zones"], ["is prohibited for citizens' rights protection", "may citizens' rights protection"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["x", "*"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. is permitted for disruptive behavior in cultural venues\n b. may not disruptive behavior in cultural venues\nPair 2:\n a. is obligatory for citizens' rights protection\n b. is permitted for not citizens' rights protection\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["is permitted for disruptive behavior in cultural venues", "may not disruptive behavior in cultural venues"], ["is obligatory for citizens' rights protection", "is permitted for not citizens' rights protection"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["@", "*"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. is obligatory for citizens' rights protection\n b. may not citizens' rights protection\nPair 2:\n a. must not tobacco use in public areas\n b. is permitted for not tobacco use in public areas\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["is obligatory for citizens' rights protection", "may not citizens' rights protection"], ["must not tobacco use in public areas", "is permitted for not tobacco use in public areas"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["*", "%"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. must not youth development support\n b. may not youth development support\nPair 2:\n a. is obligatory for national property protection\n b. is prohibited for national property protection\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["must not youth development support", "may not youth development support"], ["is obligatory for national property protection", "is prohibited for national property protection"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["%", "x"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\nabuse of vulnerable groups is prohibited, but contract fulfillment is permitted not.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) abuse of vulnerable groups\nb) contract fulfillment\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "abuse of vulnerable groups is prohibited, but contract fulfillment is permitted not.", "mapping": {"a": "abuse of vulnerable groups", "b": "contract fulfillment"}, "solution": "‽p ∧ §¬q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. must disruptive behavior in cultural venues\n b. is permitted for not disruptive behavior in cultural venues\nPair 2:\n a. is obligatory for noise in quiet zones\n b. is permitted for not noise in quiet zones\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["must disruptive behavior in cultural venues", "is permitted for not disruptive behavior in cultural venues"], ["is obligatory for noise in quiet zones", "is permitted for not noise in quiet zones"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["*", "*"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Permittedprice fraud occurs?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\nB) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\nC) Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion\nD) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Permittedprice fraud occurs?", "options": {"A": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality", "B": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment", "C": "Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion", "D": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication"}, "correct": 3}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. must tobacco use in public areas\n b. is prohibited for tobacco use in public areas\nPair 2:\n a. must price fraud occurs\n b. must not price fraud occurs\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["must tobacco use in public areas", "is prohibited for tobacco use in public areas"], ["must price fraud occurs", "must not price fraud occurs"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["x", "x"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\ntobacco use in public areas is prohibited, but price fraud occurs is permitted not.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) tobacco use in public areas\nb) price fraud occurs\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "tobacco use in public areas is prohibited, but price fraud occurs is permitted not.", "mapping": {"a": "tobacco use in public areas", "b": "price fraud occurs"}, "solution": "‽p ∧ §¬q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Mandatorycitizens' rights protection→permittedcitizens' rights protection?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\nB) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\nC) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nD) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Mandatorycitizens' rights protection→permittedcitizens' rights protection?", "options": {"A": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment", "B": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality", "C": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "D": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence"}, "correct": 9}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. is prohibited for reasonable sports collisions\n b. may not reasonable sports collisions\nPair 2:\n a. is prohibited for citizens' rights protection\n b. may citizens' rights protection\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["is prohibited for reasonable sports collisions", "may not reasonable sports collisions"], ["is prohibited for citizens' rights protection", "may citizens' rights protection"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["%", "*"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\nnational property protection is mandatory, but citizens' rights protection is prohibited.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) national property protection\nb) citizens' rights protection\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "national property protection is mandatory, but citizens' rights protection is prohibited.", "mapping": {"a": "national property protection", "b": "citizens' rights protection"}, "solution": "¶p ∧ ‽q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. is obligatory for price fraud occurs\n b. may not price fraud occurs\nPair 2:\n a. may youth development support\n b. is permitted for not youth development support\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["is obligatory for price fraud occurs", "may not price fraud occurs"], ["may youth development support", "is permitted for not youth development support"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["*", "@"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\ntobacco use in public areas is mandatory, but contract fulfillment is permitted not.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) tobacco use in public areas\nb) contract fulfillment\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "tobacco use in public areas is mandatory, but contract fulfillment is permitted not.", "mapping": {"a": "tobacco use in public areas", "b": "contract fulfillment"}, "solution": "¶p ∧ §¬q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Permittedyouth development support?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\nB) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nC) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\nD) Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Permittedyouth development support?", "options": {"A": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality", "B": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "C": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence", "D": "Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion"}, "correct": 3}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. may citizens' rights protection\n b. may not citizens' rights protection\nPair 2:\n a. may reasonable sports collisions\n b. may not reasonable sports collisions\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["may citizens' rights protection", "may not citizens' rights protection"], ["may reasonable sports collisions", "may not reasonable sports collisions"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["@", "@"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Mandatorycontract fulfillment→¬prohibitedcontract fulfillment?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion\nB) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nC) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\nD) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Mandatorycontract fulfillment→¬prohibitedcontract fulfillment?", "options": {"A": "Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion", "B": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "C": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment", "D": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality"}, "correct": 5}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\nremarriage rights is prohibited, but youth development support is permitted not.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) remarriage rights\nb) youth development support\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "remarriage rights is prohibited, but youth development support is permitted not.", "mapping": {"a": "remarriage rights", "b": "youth development support"}, "solution": "‽p ∧ §¬q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. must not operate legally for reasonable profits\n b. may not operate legally for reasonable profits\nPair 2:\n a. is obligatory for remarriage rights\n b. may not remarriage rights\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["must not operate legally for reasonable profits", "may not operate legally for reasonable profits"], ["is obligatory for remarriage rights", "may not remarriage rights"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["%", "*"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Prohibitedcitizens' rights protection?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nB) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\nC) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\nD) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Prohibitedcitizens' rights protection?", "options": {"A": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "B": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality", "C": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence", "D": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment"}, "correct": 2}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permittedcontract fulfillment→permitted¬contract fulfillment?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nB) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nC) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\nD) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permittedcontract fulfillment→permitted¬contract fulfillment?", "options": {"A": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "B": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "C": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence", "D": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment"}, "correct": 7}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permittedyouth development support→permitted¬youth development support?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nB) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\nC) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nD) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permittedyouth development support→permitted¬youth development support?", "options": {"A": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "B": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment", "C": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "D": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence"}, "correct": 7}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Prohibitedremarriage rights→permitted¬remarriage rights?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\nB) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nC) Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion\nD) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Prohibitedremarriage rights→permitted¬remarriage rights?", "options": {"A": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence", "B": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "C": "Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion", "D": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation"}, "correct": 10}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\nyouth development support is prohibited, but tobacco use in public areas is permitted not.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) youth development support\nb) tobacco use in public areas\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "youth development support is prohibited, but tobacco use in public areas is permitted not.", "mapping": {"a": "youth development support", "b": "tobacco use in public areas"}, "solution": "‽p ∧ §¬q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\nyouth development support is permitted, but citizens' rights protection is prohibited.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) youth development support\nb) citizens' rights protection\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "youth development support is permitted, but citizens' rights protection is prohibited.", "mapping": {"a": "youth development support", "b": "citizens' rights protection"}, "solution": "§p ∧ ‽q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Mandatoryremarriage rights→permittedremarriage rights?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\nB) Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion\nC) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nD) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Mandatoryremarriage rights→permittedremarriage rights?", "options": {"A": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment", "B": "Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion", "C": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "D": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence"}, "correct": 9}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. is prohibited for noise in quiet zones\n b. may not noise in quiet zones\nPair 2:\n a. must not national property protection\n b. may national property protection\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["is prohibited for noise in quiet zones", "may not noise in quiet zones"], ["must not national property protection", "may national property protection"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["%", "*"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\ntobacco use in public areas is permitted, but disruptive behavior in cultural venues is prohibited.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) tobacco use in public areas\nb) disruptive behavior in cultural venues\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "tobacco use in public areas is permitted, but disruptive behavior in cultural venues is prohibited.", "mapping": {"a": "tobacco use in public areas", "b": "disruptive behavior in cultural venues"}, "solution": "§p ∧ ‽q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\nnoise in quiet zones is mandatory, but youth development support is prohibited.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) noise in quiet zones\nb) youth development support\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "noise in quiet zones is mandatory, but youth development support is prohibited.", "mapping": {"a": "noise in quiet zones", "b": "youth development support"}, "solution": "¶p ∧ ‽q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Permittedcontract fulfillment?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\nB) Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion\nC) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\nD) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Permittedcontract fulfillment?", "options": {"A": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality", "B": "Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion", "C": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment", "D": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication"}, "correct": 3}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. must not disruptive behavior in cultural venues\n b. may disruptive behavior in cultural venues\nPair 2:\n a. must contract fulfillment\n b. is permitted for not contract fulfillment\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["must not disruptive behavior in cultural venues", "may disruptive behavior in cultural venues"], ["must contract fulfillment", "is permitted for not contract fulfillment"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["*", "*"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permittedabuse of vulnerable groups→permitted¬abuse of vulnerable groups?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nB) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\nC) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nD) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permittedabuse of vulnerable groups→permitted¬abuse of vulnerable groups?", "options": {"A": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "B": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence", "C": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "D": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment"}, "correct": 7}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Mandatorynational property protection→¬prohibitednational property protection?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion\nB) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\nC) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\nD) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Mandatorynational property protection→¬prohibitednational property protection?", "options": {"A": "Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion", "B": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence", "C": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment", "D": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication"}, "correct": 5}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Prohibitedoperate legally for reasonable profits→permitted¬operate legally for reasonable profits?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\nB) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nC) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\nD) Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Prohibitedoperate legally for reasonable profits→permitted¬operate legally for reasonable profits?", "options": {"A": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence", "B": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "C": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality", "D": "Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion"}, "correct": 10}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Prohibitednoise in quiet zones?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nB) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\nC) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nD) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Prohibitednoise in quiet zones?", "options": {"A": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "B": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality", "C": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "D": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence"}, "correct": 2}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. is prohibited for abuse of vulnerable groups\n b. may not abuse of vulnerable groups\nPair 2:\n a. must price fraud occurs\n b. must not price fraud occurs\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["is prohibited for abuse of vulnerable groups", "may not abuse of vulnerable groups"], ["must price fraud occurs", "must not price fraud occurs"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["%", "x"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. must not disruptive behavior in cultural venues\n b. may not disruptive behavior in cultural venues\nPair 2:\n a. may remarriage rights\n b. may not remarriage rights\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["must not disruptive behavior in cultural venues", "may not disruptive behavior in cultural venues"], ["may remarriage rights", "may not remarriage rights"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["%", "@"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\nremarriage rights is permitted, but tobacco use in public areas is prohibited.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) remarriage rights\nb) tobacco use in public areas\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "remarriage rights is permitted, but tobacco use in public areas is prohibited.", "mapping": {"a": "remarriage rights", "b": "tobacco use in public areas"}, "solution": "§p ∧ ‽q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Prohibiteddisruptive behavior in cultural venues?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nB) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\nC) Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion\nD) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Prohibiteddisruptive behavior in cultural venues?", "options": {"A": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "B": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality", "C": "Formula 5: Obligation-Prohibition Exclusion", "D": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence"}, "correct": 2}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. is obligatory for price fraud occurs\n b. is prohibited for price fraud occurs\nPair 2:\n a. may price fraud occurs\n b. is permitted for not price fraud occurs\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["is obligatory for price fraud occurs", "is prohibited for price fraud occurs"], ["may price fraud occurs", "is permitted for not price fraud occurs"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["x", "@"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permittednational property protection→permitted¬national property protection?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nB) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nC) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\nD) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permittednational property protection→permitted¬national property protection?", "options": {"A": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "B": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "C": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality", "D": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment"}, "correct": 7}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Symbolize the following regulation:\nreasonable sports collisions is prohibited, but national property protection is permitted not.\n\nVariable definitions:\na) reasonable sports collisions\nb) national property protection\n\nUse modalities: ¶ (must), § (may), ‽ (prohibited)\nFormat answer: [[EXPRESSION]] (e.g. [[§p ∧ ‽q]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "symbolization", "sentence": "reasonable sports collisions is prohibited, but national property protection is permitted not.", "mapping": {"a": "reasonable sports collisions", "b": "national property protection"}, "solution": "‽p ∧ §¬q"}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: Permitteddisruptive behavior in cultural venues?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\nB) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nC) Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment\nD) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: Permitteddisruptive behavior in cultural venues?", "options": {"A": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality", "B": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "C": "Formula 9: Obligation-Permission Entailment", "D": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication"}, "correct": 3}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. is obligatory for youth development support\n b. is permitted for youth development support\nPair 2:\n a. must national property protection\n b. may national property protection\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["is obligatory for youth development support", "is permitted for youth development support"], ["must national property protection", "may national property protection"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["%", "%"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. may disruptive behavior in cultural venues\n b. is permitted for not disruptive behavior in cultural venues\nPair 2:\n a. is permitted for disruptive behavior in cultural venues\n b. is permitted for not disruptive behavior in cultural venues\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["may disruptive behavior in cultural venues", "is permitted for not disruptive behavior in cultural venues"], ["is permitted for disruptive behavior in cultural venues", "is permitted for not disruptive behavior in cultural venues"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["@", "@"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permittedremarriage rights→permitted¬remarriage rights?\n\nOptions:\nA) Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication\nB) Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence\nC) Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation\nD) Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality\n\nAnswer with [[FORMULA_NUMBER]] (e.g. [[7]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "formula", "question": "Which formula corresponds to: ¬permittedremarriage rights→permitted¬remarriage rights?", "options": {"A": "Formula 7: Permission Negation Implication", "B": "Formula 10: Prohibition-Permission Consequence", "C": "Formula 2: Prohibition-Permission Negation", "D": "Formula 3: Permission-Prohibition Duality"}, "correct": 7}}
{"data_source": "KorLogicCanonicalPropositions", "prompt": "Analyze the normative relationships between these statement pairs:\nPair 1:\n a. must disruptive behavior in cultural venues\n b. is permitted for not disruptive behavior in cultural venues\nPair 2:\n a. is prohibited for abuse of vulnerable groups\n b. may not abuse of vulnerable groups\n\nRelationship Types:\nA.*: Cannot be true/false together\nB.x: Cannot both be true\nC.@: Cannot both be false\nD.%: No mutual exclusion\nAnswer format: [[SELECTION;SELECTION]] (e.g. [[A;C]])", "ground_truth": {"type": "relationship", "pairs": [["must disruptive behavior in cultural venues", "is permitted for not disruptive behavior in cultural venues"], ["is prohibited for abuse of vulnerable groups", "may not abuse of vulnerable groups"]], "options": ["A.*", "B.x", "C.@", "D.%"], "key": ["*", "%"], "relation_definitions": {"*": "Cannot be true/false together", "x": "Cannot both be true", "@": "Cannot both be false", "%": "No mutual exclusion"}}}