Run Details #1165
Model
GPT-6 Luna
Score
100
Correct (≥100)
16/16
Incorrect (<100)
0
Median Time
1602.5ms
Tokens Used
3001
Cost
591µ$
Benchmark:
0152_syllogism_validity
Run Date: 2026-09-23 00:00:27
Questions (16)
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: All mammals are warm-blooded.
Premise 2: All whales are mammals.
Conclusion: Therefore, all whales are warm-blooded.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Valid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "All whales are mammals, and all mammals are warm-blooded. Therefore, every whale is warm-blooded.",
"answer": "Valid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: No prime numbers greater than 2 are even.
Premise 2: 11 is a prime number greater than 2.
Conclusion: Therefore, 11 is not even.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Valid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "The first premise says that every prime number greater than 2 is not even. The second premise states that 11 is a prime number greater than 2. Therefore, the conclusion that 11 is not even follows from the premises.",
"answer": "Valid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: All doctors have medical degrees.
Premise 2: Sarah has a medical degree.
Conclusion: Therefore, Sarah is a doctor.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Invalid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "The premise says that all doctors have medical degrees, but it does not say that everyone with a medical degree is a doctor. Sarah could have a medical degree without being a doctor, so the conclusion does not follow.",
"answer": "Invalid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: Some students are athletes.
Premise 2: All athletes are disciplined.
Conclusion: Therefore, some students are disciplined.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Valid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "The students who are athletes must be disciplined, since all athletes are disciplined. Because some students are athletes, some students are disciplined.",
"answer": "Valid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: All poets are writers.
Premise 2: Some writers are teachers.
Conclusion: Therefore, some poets are teachers.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Invalid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "The premises do not establish that any of the writers who are teachers are poets. The writers who are teachers could be entirely outside the group of poets, so the conclusion does not necessarily follow.",
"answer": "Invalid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: Some birds are flightless.
Premise 2: All penguins are birds.
Conclusion: Therefore, some penguins are flightless.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Invalid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "The premises say that some birds are flightless and that all penguins are birds. They do not establish that any of the flightless birds are penguins; the flightless birds could be other birds. Therefore, the conclusion does not necessarily follow.",
"answer": "Invalid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: No amphibians are mammals.
Premise 2: All frogs are amphibians.
Conclusion: Therefore, no frogs are mammals.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Valid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "All frogs are amphibians, and no amphibians are mammals. Therefore, frogs cannot be mammals.",
"answer": "Valid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: All cats are mammals.
Premise 2: Some pets are cats.
Conclusion: Therefore, some pets are mammals.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Valid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "Some pets are cats, and all cats are mammals. Therefore, those pets are mammals.",
"answer": "Valid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: All novels are books.
Premise 2: Some books are illustrated.
Conclusion: Therefore, some novels are illustrated.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Invalid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "The premises establish that novels are a subset of books and that some books are illustrated, but those illustrated books need not be novels. Therefore, the conclusion does not follow.",
"answer": "Invalid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: All painters are artists.
Premise 2: Some artists are musicians.
Conclusion: Therefore, some painters are musicians.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Invalid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "The premises say that all painters are artists and that some artists are musicians. Those musicians need not be painters, so the premises do not establish that any painters are musicians.",
"answer": "Invalid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: Some engineers are musicians.
Premise 2: All musicians are creative.
Conclusion: Therefore, some engineers are creative.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Valid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "Some engineers are musicians, and all musicians are creative. Therefore, those engineers who are musicians are creative, so at least some engineers are creative.",
"answer": "Valid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: All squares are rectangles.
Premise 2: No rectangles are circles.
Conclusion: Therefore, no squares are circles.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Valid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "All squares are rectangles, and no rectangles are circles. Therefore, every square is excluded from being a circle.",
"answer": "Valid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: All philosophers are thinkers.
Premise 2: Some thinkers are scientists.
Conclusion: Therefore, some philosophers are scientists.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Invalid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "The premises do not establish that any of the thinkers who are scientists are philosophers. The scientists mentioned could all be non-philosophers, so the conclusion does not necessarily follow.",
"answer": "Invalid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: All planets orbit stars.
Premise 2: Earth is a planet.
Conclusion: Therefore, Earth orbits a star.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Valid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "The premises state that every planet orbits a star and that Earth is a planet. Therefore, Earth orbits a star.",
"answer": "Valid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: No insects are mammals.
Premise 2: All bees are insects.
Conclusion: Therefore, no bees are mammals.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Valid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "All bees are insects, and no insects are mammals. Therefore, bees cannot be mammals.",
"answer": "Valid"
}
Question: Evaluate this syllogism:
Premise 1: No reptiles are warm-blooded.
Premise 2: All snakes are reptiles.
Conclusion: Therefore, no snakes are warm-blooded.
Is the conclusion logically valid given the premises?
Expected
Valid
Provided
{
"reasoning": "All snakes are reptiles, and no reptiles are warm-blooded. Therefore, snakes cannot be warm-blooded.",
"answer": "Valid"
}