input
stringlengths 883
1.09k
| output
listlengths 1
1
| id
stringlengths 40
40
|
|---|---|---|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Privatizing social security
Argument: Private accounts prevent politicians taking from social security.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-e7fd3d5e0971423a9d0e1ebe0480c168
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Boycott of 2008 Olympics in China
Argument: Olympic boycotts have achieved nothing historically.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-7d1e339693ce43d09632ae36318dc546
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Health insurance cooperatives
Argument: Co-ops compete with insurers like public option could.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-aabb4ccf39594ea8bd4267bd659e36dc
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Animal testing
Argument: The number of animals used in experiments should be reduced by.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-b2fd25c7c4284cc2a08c6d1d22d24d4d
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Prisoners right to vote
Argument: Unhelpful to ban voting by prisoners serving for 6 months.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-0eb9935a81f941b3841d160b85b87c7e
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: MBA
Argument: MBA provides business competencies more quickly than on-job training.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-4c18c6be15e84bb2bf8471d1bb314772
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Geoengineering, solar shading
Argument: Solar shading would reduce sunlight received by plants.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-abe884e4bd4c44e5bc8d75f641d8dbdb
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Kyoto Protocol
Argument: It is unimportant for the US to join Kyoto now.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-8a0c02bdbe9a4b089cc3847972522b81
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Banning vuvuzela horns at the 2010 World Cup
Argument: Ear plugs can effectively limit any damage from vuvuzela.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-8ea31570eaf54769bbfd067476017d77
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Reforestation as a solution to global warming
Argument: Aerial reforestation cuts costs of reforestation.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-30fdd049be6f4309bad7940d46988069
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: International Criminal Court
Argument: UN Security Council can check/veto ICC prosecutions.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-bf8b10c73b29406ca7eab62174041b94
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: European Monetary Fund
Argument: Calling IMF is not humiliating, but sensible during crisis.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-a860f8198ddf4836aaed3da593a3dbcf
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Polygamy
Argument: Polygamy reduces the impulse to adultery and resulting divorces.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-337845a68a5a48a49ad28fd53f450e7f
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Employee Free Choice Act
Argument: EFCA is biased toward punishing employers and not unions.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-6a8bb383d75546cb8002e443e2b3d607
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: MBA
Argument: Some employers see MBA grads as too expensive.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-b32aa4cc8579414889e91c67a4e1fef9
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Libertarianism
Argument: Libertarianism does not allow for essential public services (i.e. roads).
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-6fa10e5371664087b61ea75f1135db37
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Superdelegates
Argument: Superdelegates often vote out of self-interest for likely winner.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-f9a102a424f04bccb87e65e916f75dd7
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Ban on laser pointers
Argument: Business people use lasers to give presentations.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-d2edab174c6a4d25b70f33c9920a362d
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Filibuster
Argument: General statements against the filibuster.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-0bd28fcc3d62408cad0a5713cdc8ac13
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Legalization of adult incest
Argument: Homosexuality is more benign than incest on the family.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-3a57d8b693f34822afc403d93888eed0
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Primaries in US elections
Argument: Party bosses are legally permitted to exercise power in primaries.
Output:
|
[
"neutral"
] |
task209-0e4c05bdc92c42759a3f250e9da8a074
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty
Argument: Improved monitoring from test ban provides important information.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-76c9074455ad4f66be7158feb22a0673
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Most uninsured simply can't afford it; it's not a choice.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-39bd552ac716450a8c9243c8262387d2
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: A two-state solution makes Israel too narrow, vulnerable.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-d5255a6c5e8e4d4abe82ee558289593e
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Funding for space exploration
Argument: Going into space to discover the effects of space on humans is circular logic.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-18ce5c324eb844e085994dc091200f73
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Tidal energy
Argument: A tidal barrage can safeguard coastlines from storms.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-c518670426be4512a146b87e722f0dbd
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: South Ossetia independence
Argument: The Ossetian people have a divided, non-contiguous history.
Output:
|
[
"neutral"
] |
task209-76d8463cd674466089aa80c64e17e7a8
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Cluster bomb ban
Argument: Cluster bombs kill soldiers of militaries deploying them.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-c078077ecbdb421ab3040402c8350382
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Ecotourism
Argument: Ecotourism cultivates a conservation ethic.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-c858df8906784c8e892dcd5a0ba85665
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Natural gas vehicles
Argument: Odorless natural gas can escape detection risking fire/explosion.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-6d97e906cd0c4e4aaa11b8a05ef4d830
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Google decision to stop censoring results in China
Argument: Google's decision in China was mostly ethics, not business.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-fdd0db2ef4a54a408533bc6632200ffc
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Libertarianism
Argument: People need government to prevent them from making mistakes.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-dc72b4a621c446e884cdc5eb7543275c
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: US electoral college
Argument: There is always a focus in politics on campaigning in the undecided portion of the electorate, irrespective of there being an electoral college system or not:.
Output:
|
[
"neutral"
] |
task209-726ea3a934ce41d0b54c255dfa181308
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Public health insurance option
Argument: Insurers should not be trusted with sole control of health insurance.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-8b51b1f616294d65b28a951ddbf65c59
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Infant male circumcision
Argument: Parents have a right to circumcise their children.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-1a5fdf61d7044863afdcf9e1a0b70261
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Bush economic stimulus plan
Argument: The effect of the 2008 stimulus package will be immediate.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-9c468613ee1d4c82bf82c30d827acd1d
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: EU elected president
Argument: Strong presidential state powers are unnecessary and uncalled for.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-1580f9d73ea24122bffafc24f18b34b1
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Wave power
Argument: Wave power will have a smaller impact than fossil fuel plants.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-35f06a8890714ce5929f546d9d764104
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Vehicle fuel economy standards
Argument: Fuel economy standards do not increase the cost of making cars.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-ce348cb948894efea3495e568d7ae2bd
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Wind energy
Argument: Carbon emission greater threat to birds than wind energy.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-3713a32d48b54d9da5d9602a34de75b5
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Full-body scanners at airports
Argument: Scanners can be modified to accommodate children.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-c58a11ab46c5466f9319952437f43a1c
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Corporate free speech
Argument: Voters can be trusted to judge corporate speech/messages.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-6cab8d850a104a8591b9c4034666a7e9
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Funding transparency for TV issue ads in elections
Argument: Opponents of anonymous campaign ads are just clinging to power.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-e6f5add24d9e48108bbcb542fbac37c2
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Child beauty pageants
Argument: Plenty of other activities are exclusive to boys/girls.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-74da5fb5f6394b49925fc19ed16541ba
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Mandatory labeling of genetically modified foods
Argument: Labeling GM foods applies precautionary principle to unknown risks.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-d878f3e51dfb4263a404ddf91c99e2f2
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Castration of sex offenders
Argument: Castrating sex offenders less effective than psychotheraphy.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-1169e322fdf046e49c7cf47d9c0261a3
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Michigan and Florida delegates in 2008 US elections
Argument: Allotting Florida and Michigan delegates according to national will promotes a tyranny of the majority.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-48b5c04f64cc4e8aa24fcb5b2a9e7c39
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Hybrid vehicles
Argument: Hybrids increase efficiency by shutting engines down while idling.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-9103b0f2f9bc4edabe23202ecc70f7cf
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: War on Drugs
Argument: War on Drugs worsens cartel violence.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-9141bb0ae20f46dd969e9969bdbcf867
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Geoengineering
Argument: Geoengineering solutions often mimic natural mechanisms.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-3777b037802044b98e4e191a48dc67c1
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: DREAM Act
Argument: DREAM Act relies on shrinking US financial resources.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-6fc02ce42c1d434089ae5468fb0f8900
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Animal testing
Argument: Adopting the philosophy of animal rights is individual fulfilling.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-5e797e667f7841c3b4ebad0ece1dc228
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Network neutrality
Argument: Net neutrality may not be good for ISPs, but good overall.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-ff5a8692986341659dcbf1e3832df9f6
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: European Union Expansion
Argument: EU member states suffer from socialist economic environment.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-dc26fbd6454b480ab942bd1592b13000
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Greece bailout
Argument: Public opinion does not support the Greece bailout.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-eb662b6de8174101b82cc54f519b9f0f
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Gay marriage
Argument: Gay marriage undercuts procreation at time of vulnerability.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-d33ead9b39e546a4b065190e652a16b0
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Universal health care lowers long-term health costs.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-ffd6e922bb9142229606179f3a228fe9
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: US offshore oil drilling
Argument: Offshore oil exploration could result in a major find.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-da4c029118034b509e022385bb17a4c7
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Medical marijuana dispensaries
Argument: Marijuana is a gateway drug.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-e8c3a35fc5b64c9480748d749caf9bf5
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Law school
Argument: Public interest legal jobs are underpaid.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-496634b3f9314338a1bc871acdeb8fb4
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Prostitution
Argument: Question of choice, in prostitution, is different for each person.
Output:
|
[
"neutral"
] |
task209-d415d4bdde4840068972aa01dcf401ed
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Pickens US energy plan
Argument: The Pickens Plan is generally not viable.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-33d40384172745eaacb59a161780d878
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Fairness Doctrine
Argument: The Fairness Doctrine improves the public discourse.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-33a00000fb0446e6b8eaaee258f2a464
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Filibuster
Argument: Filibuster provides important checks and balances.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-352c6385bca34d31bd4c118d144ae921
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Random sobriety tests for drivers
Argument: Random sobriety stops set-up unjust detection of other crimes.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-c5d6c2f528ca4a14935e2c0a2692273c
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Greece bailout
Argument: Greece bailout adds to debt, does more harm than good.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-122d163b5d8b403092f32b84d16bf151
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Turkey EU membership
Argument: Admitting Turkey leads to a slippery slope of non-European admissions.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-44861679b4d74867866bca51836fab1e
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Death penalty
Argument: Life in prison is a sufficient punishment; execution is excessive.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-38958536c46e4473a8002bdfdf169a93
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Bush economic stimulus plan
Argument: Tax rebates to the lower-middle classes quickly stimulate consumption.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-4a0824d8c7ce43ccad1ab530218ffc0c
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Driftnet ban
Argument: By-catch doesn’t need to be a reason to ban driftnets.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-6b1ef8f984314bad93de0d22381d277b
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: AIG bonuses
Argument: Government should have regulated bonuses, not tax them.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-4dd6e38d4b974df7a0ad39bbbfc38f28
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Guantanamo Bay detention center
Argument: Guantanamo bay's existence fuels terrorist causes.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-98af336b6a484c169eb4148bff61bc07
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Direct democracy
Argument: Direct democracy dulls politicians' sense of responsibility.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-dbf3f12f7f074a54a0c877b1c07af76b
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: DC handgun ban
Argument: If the 2nd amendment was to protect an individual right it would have clearly expressed it.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-986f37a89a63410b9888eafe7adf51ef
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Was the War in Iraq worth it?
Argument: War in Iraq kept Saddam from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-f1f1031f396344dda18de3296d9e5182
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: International Criminal Court
Argument: ICC adopts an unacceptably vague definition of aggression.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-5645c8fd9f044c99a801af854d8b5a21
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Compulsory voting
Argument: Mandatory voting would compel broader campaign messaging.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-e3b6cd4a32c0449e8f8ed25947766946
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Democratic peace theory
Argument: Democracies are founded on similar principles so they should not go to war.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-a69e808f088e404cb4eb55669ebdc22a
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: US Renewable Electricity Standard
Argument: US Renewable Electricity Standard is popular.
Output:
|
[
"neutral"
] |
task209-fb210bfa8f674588b45741f86fd9352a
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Assault weapons ban in the United States
Argument: Semi-automatic weapons do not serve a sporting purpose.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-b07cc7f6f2bc4a628115426026b0eeee
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Pickens US energy plan
Argument: Wind energy production is inconsistent relative to demand.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-cf73429811474568a07c8fd5fcb56bcc
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Two-state solution offers peace, the most important factor.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-8ddfcacd6da7409ba4d0ff105072149e
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: International Criminal Court
Argument: ICC puts national servicemen abroad at risk of prosecution.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-075c98c0138f4b52b4570dbeb49519d7
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Election of judges
Argument: Elections make judges more democratically accountable.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-1fc60c5b0cf14da98fc3c34d1f6dce53
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Prostitution
Argument: By worsening HIV/AIDS, prostitution will devastate societies.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-3142c38c8b084521b695a79a3721dadb
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Natural gas
Argument: Liquefied natural gas can be a good fuel for vehicles.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-0c6653a63e5e473d959eceb7126da318
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Lowering US drinking age from 21 to 18
Argument: Increase driving age to 18; reduce drinking age to 18.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-8b5dd021d5a84e0b9e7e22b08beec95e
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Random sobriety tests for drivers
Argument: Random breath tests create slippery slope to expanding police powers.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-8d00a72d062340bd9e3aeaab42f9e5e9
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Health insurance cooperatives
Argument: Co-ops lack scale to negotiate prices of drugs, services.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-e7e51bf60f574af983ca8a1cb4e3ccb6
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Airport security profiling
Argument: Most people accept profiling as necessary for security.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-6ed8929d55294a56b8eeb7831b6316b6
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Return of Israel to pre-1967 borders
Argument: Coordinated Arab attack unlikely; pre-1967 borders fine.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-722905079d32415a84eb386d2a1e71f9
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Banning cell phones in cars
Argument: If you can't ban sleep-driving, why ban talking on phone in car.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-9da37dd5341f48e8a2b19f7fd3fd9e60
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Catholic Church contraception policy
Argument: Church contraception policy is supported by natural law:.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-5758773d69144be7bc63b06e5f1e6f36
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Death penalty
Argument: Capital punishment is compassionate to the victims.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-516d2d005f624b24a7335867139db92c
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: 2009 US economic stimulus
Argument: Majority of economists believe government can stimulate economy.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-ba962f0fe9b4468baddafe0095e1090e
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: No Child Left Behind Act
Argument: Standardized tests ensures students learn essential information.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-a50987ca5f07478bb3c73b63ed762129
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: European Monetary Fund
Argument: EMF would allow orderly sovereign default.
Output:
|
[
"in favor"
] |
task209-e3ec7c623f62448e8db5ff60a21c57db
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Driftnet ban
Argument: The reports of extinction through over-fishing are inconclusive and based on anecdotal evidence.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-5a7932461def4b5b9656d18a4b6e446f
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Needle exchanges
Argument: Needle exchanges don't save lives; cause drug-related deaths.
Output:
|
[
"against"
] |
task209-8810d5c1292f4224a14c763f62e149c2
|
Definition: Given the Target and Argument texts detect the stance that the argument has towards the topic. There are three types of stances "in favor", "against", and "neutral".
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Three Gorges Dam
Argument: The Three Gorges Dam is a cause of corruption.
Output: against
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Argument: Idea of Jewish state, in two-state solution, is undemocratic.
Output: against
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Topic: Single-payer universal health care
Argument: Whether health care is a right under i-law is inconsequential.
Output: in favor
Negative Example 2 -
Input: Topic: Carbon emissions trading
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is progressive.
Output: neutral
Now complete the following example -
Input: Topic: Earmarks
Argument: Earmarks have already been significantly reformed.
Output:
|
[
"neutral"
] |
task209-ad2892ac8c7549f897fb198d17ff5573
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.